Just a tad pissed off

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Jack Tracey, Aug 11, 2001.

Loading...
  1. Bill Highsmith

    Bill Highsmith New Member

    No, that is so obvious that I assumed and still assume that you were going somewhere else with your statement, although I'm not sure where. 3200 out of 3500 will be worse than the top 300 institutions if only because they have one less copy of Grapes of Wrath in their library.

    There are approximately 5900 universities in 166 countries, the U.S. having more than half of them and the U.S. and India having 2/3 of them. With that distribution, all the other 165 countries together don't have 3500 institutions.

    So, just how meaningful is your statement? Why don't you explain exactly what you meant in view of these statistics?

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that a country that has:
    --35 times more institutions and,
    --7 times more institutions per capita

    has a different philosophy of education, one that will be reflected in the institutions.

    Supporting evidence: http://geowww.uibk.ac.at/univ/index.html (world institutions) http://www.eto.org.uk/eustats/educate.htm (3% U.K. enrollment)

    The ETO page has some interesting information: the U.K. has nearly the lowest enrollment figures (per capita) in Europe; only Sweden and Germany were lower. I think that speaks to the points I was making earlier about access to further education in the U.K.

    In summary, here are some of the unanswered issues:

    a) the British Council did not mention how many "prestigious institutions" were "equal" to the U.K.'s 100. Was it 1 or 1000?

    b) your academic straw man did not talk about the middle 3300 institutions in the U.S. either. What did he mean in view of the statistics above? Was he happily in agreement with you considering the statistics above or was he only in technical agreement...the U.S. has 3400 more institutions; some of them must be worse. (I.e., how Clintonesque are you being in your report about the straw man?)

    c) as several have asked, did you actually have a point to your statement, in view of the above statistics? If so, what were you trying to say? You couldn't have been talking about degree mills; you've dismissed that already. You couldn't have been talking about the mere majority of institutions that the U.S. enjoys; that point is too obvious, as you alluded to in the quoted bit.
     
  2. Caballero Lacaye

    Caballero Lacaye New Member

     
  3. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    The figure for the US may be too high. I believe that there are upwards of 1500 RA colleges and universities at bachelors level or above. Add in a few hundred schools accredited by other recognized accreditors (DETC, ACICS, AABC, TRACS, NASAD, AACST etc.) and you are approaching 2000. Then add about 1200 community colleges and you have your 3000.

    To get a comparable figure for the UK you would have to add in a hundred higher education colleges plus a large number of further education colleges. So the UK figure is probably well above 300, and the Canadian and Australian figures would grow proportionately as well.

    Lets accept your 300 figure for the UK, Australia and Canada. And lets restrict the American population to the roughly 1500 RA senior colleges. Now add the populations of the UK, CA and AU. That's about 100 million. The US is approaching 300 million. So if you adjust for type of institution and for population, what started out as a 10/1 differential is reduced to about a 2/1 per-capita advantage for the US.

    Now consider the fact that the US has a large class of small liberal arts colleges of a sort that are virtually unknown in the UK, Australia or Canada. That fact alone probably accounts for most of the 2/1 differential. We simply have a larger number of smaller schools.

    If we were talking about RA senior colleges, that 1200 would be about 80% of them.

    What I find scandalous is your often repeated but never substantiated suggestion that most of America's smaller private liberal arts colleges are academically inferior and should be avoided.
     
  4. Gus Sainz

    Gus Sainz New Member

    …and your post contributes what? The cacophony of your fierce backpedaling eclipses anything you are trying to once again obfuscate.

    The only reason it would be obvious you plagiarized an external source was that it far exceeded the level of intellectualism and eloquence you normally exhibit. Moreover, I did not search for your sources; instead I happened upon Barrington’s accreditation while researching another matter altogether. Being plagued by a memory that forgets very little of what I hear, see or read, I came back to DegreeInfo and searched for the post that had what I considered amazingly similar wording. I was quite surprised to see that Barrington University’s Web page had been quoted verbatim without attribution. A little more research revealed that the individual posting as Lewchuk has a history of plagiarism and quoting without attribution.

    As to what it has to do with the issue, here is the relevance. One of your many claims is that the educational system in the United States (and RA in particular) is inferior. The obvious inference is that you are the product of a far superior educational system. Yet even the lowest tier regionally accredited educational institution in this country would have zero tolerance for the kind of academic and intellectual dishonesty you have repeatedly exhibited. No one ever assumes that anything written is the material of anyone except the author unless he or she indicates otherwise. You plagiarized, once again, and got caught, and nothing you can say or do will change that fact. False humility and self-deprecation only enhances your image as a fraud and a cad. Exposing the intellectual and academic dishonesty (not to mention hypocrisy) of someone who is professing to be the product of a superior educational system goes right to the heart your so-called issue.

    Moreover, as you have offered absolutely no evidence to back up your claims (and assert such claims as fact instead of opinion) the only possible corroboration you could offer are your credentials, education, knowledge, ethics, morals, honesty and credibility. When asked to provide any kind of evidence or explanation, you plagiarized an institution that definitely passes GAAS (as the originator of the acronym I refuse to let you commandeer it for your nefarious purposes), and quoted, without attribution, an author, who (if you had not omitted the two lines that followed the text you plagiarized), would have expressed a viewpoint diametrically opposed to the one you were trying to espouse. By virtue of the fact that you have repeatedly plagiarized others, quoted individuals completely out of context, and omitted statements that perverted the true intent of the author being quoted (without attribution), you have proven yourself to be severely deficient in the requisite areas to establish credibility. And that, my dear sir, is precisely the issue.

    Gus Sainz
     
  5. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    Gus, that is very sweet but truly flattery will get you knowwhere.

     
  6. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    In summary, here are some of the unanswered issues:

    a) the British Council did not mention how many "prestigious institutions" were "equal" to the U.K.'s 100. Was it 1 or 1000?

    Finally a comment that is not about me... a meaningful statement about the issue at hand... what a treat, perhaps now we can make some progress.

    Lets say, for the sake of arguement, that there are 1000 RA Unis offering graduate degrees (probably low but for arguments sake)... lets say that 99% are considered "prestigious" and "rigorous" by the BC (probably ridiculously low but for arguments sake). That means that there are 10 schools that are not equivalent to British (and generally accepted American) standards.

    Now lets say that we all agree that the benefits of the great diversity found within the US system and the values of institutional freedom, etc., is far greater than the cost of having 10 "below standard" schools.

    However 1 very important fact/issue remains... RA guarantees only a very basic level of academic rigor which is below that of the UK and, in our example, the majority of the schools in the US. Therefore, if one desires an education with the academic rigour which is required in the UK and, in our example, the majority of the United States... one must go further than RA or else you may inadvertedly attend one of the 10 schools which are not equivalent, in the belief that you are getting an education of generally accepted standards.

    Now these 10 schools serve an educational function, otherwise they would not be RA, however we should not be so blind or ignorant as to believe that they are equivalent to the degrees earned in the Uk and, in our example, the majority of the United States.


    your academic straw man did not talk about the middle 3300 institutions in the U.S. either. What did he mean in view of the statistics above? Was he happily in agreement with you considering the statistics above or was he only in technical agreement...the U.S. has 3400 more institutions; some of them must be worse. (I.e., how Clintonesque are you being in your report about the straw man?)

    I know you may find this amazing but I actually had more important things to discuss over dinner with my friend than interogating him on exactly which schools he considers where and exactly why.
     
  7. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Ken,

    Let's not bring the former US president into this discussion, you may offend the registered Democrats on the board.

    Russell
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Ken,

    Let's not bring the former US president into this discussion, you may offend the registered Democrats on the board.

    Russell
     
  9. Gus Sainz

    Gus Sainz New Member

    This is not an issue. The British Council simply did not state how many “prestigious” institutions were “equal” to the U.K’s (your use of quotation marks are extremely appropriate as the terms are highly subjective and biased). Is it even up to them to decide, or does each institution do so on a case-by-case basis (as in the U.S.)? I sincerely doubt the BC maintains any kind of list, or even publishes any hard and fast rules.

    Here you are setting up a completely hypothetical situation (and by your own admission, solely for the sake or argument), but your tone indicates that you meant to say that if the BC considered 99% of the schools "prestigious" and "rigorous" that would be a ridiculously high, not low, estimate. The fallacy occurs when you claim that 10 schools would not be the equivalent to British, and more importantly, American generally accepted standards. If all 1000 schools are RA, then all 1000 schools meet generally accepted American standards. Like it or not Lewchuk, RA is the standard in the United Sates. Your premise is false from the start.

    While we could all possibly agree that one of the great benefits of the American educational system is its great diversity, once again, if your hypothetical 10 schools are RA they cannot, by definition, be below standard. Like it or not Lewchuk, RA is the standard in the United Sates. If you are trying to say that if one were to rank 1000 schools, the top 1% would be ranked 1 through 10, and the bottom 1% would be ranked 991 to 1000, well… DUH! But which school placed where would depend on the ranking criteria, and lends itself to subjectivity and manipulation. And even if one was to use the same criteria, the same university may place differently from year to year—witness the U.S. News and World Report ratings. Moreover, how would one define criteria such as “prestigious” and “rigorous”? If the criteria is not defined and quantified, and no research or data exists, all we are left with is a subjective and biased opinion.

    And what’s your point? If we were to rank (by whatever criteria you choose), say, 300 British institutions of higher learning, would we have a 300-place tie for number 1? Does every single one have the same “prestige” or “rigor”? Who would be responsible for carrying such an incredible feat of standardization? Does every student graduate knowing and thinking the exact same things? (I mean, besides the fact that all British universities are superior. [​IMG])

    No Lewchuk, no “fact/issue” can remain, if one did not exist in the first place. Where is your evidence that RA guarantees a level of academic rigor below that of the UK? On what are you basing that opinion? The number of Nobel Prize winners? The number of applications from foreign students? The number of patents issued? What? Once again, without objective, quantitative and verifiable criteria (not a hypothetical example created by you to ineptly bolster your opinion), this is not an issue, it is simply your opinion—a blustering, biased opinion taken solely to foment argument, but an opinion nonetheless—and hence, not an issue.

    Statistics? Statistics? What statistics??? By “statistics above” you are referring to your own hypothetical scenario? First it was a hypothetical situation, then you elevated it to a “fact/issue”, now finally it has become a “statistic”—all without a shred of data or evidence, all on your say so alone. It truly becomes impossible to have an intelligent discussion if one party considers his own opinions as facts, and views his own hypothetical scenarios as “statistics”. You might as well have started the discussion by stating, “let’s say, for the sake of argument, that I am omnipotent and infallible…” [​IMG]

    The only fact that remains is this: The British (the BC, at least) consider their educational system superior (what a surprise! [​IMG]), and Lewchuk agrees with them (he actually takes it one step further and states that the U.S. has the worst schools in the world). While we could write to the BC and asks them on what they base this assertion, they do not post here, and Lewchuk does. So, Lewchuk, on what do you base these opinions? Do you have any evidence, or are you simply blindly accepting and appropriating the BC’s assertions? Do you even know what criteria they used to make such a claim? What if they define “prestigious” as an institution that only accepts or hires the “right” kind of people?

    You have now graduated from misappropriating the words and ideas of others to actually manufacturing “facts” and “statistics” to support your claims. If you, sir, are the product of the British educational system, you not only do them a disservice by advertising that fact, by your actions, you also prove all of your assertions the superiority of the British system to be wrong.

    You have, however, quite inadvertently, brought to light another very important issue, one that I have considered for some time. Does the isolation and lack of academic discourse in distance education programs that lack any kind of residency (or make up for it with intense instructor and student-to-student interactions through other technological means) create a deficiency in properly formulating and backing-up ideas and arguments, and therefore renders the student ill-prepared bringing about consensus in real-world situations and hence any position of leadership or management? Perhaps we should start a new thread to discuss it.

    Gus Sainz
     
  10. Gus Sainz

    Gus Sainz New Member

    Make that, "...in bringing bout consensus..."
     
  11. Gus Sainz

    Gus Sainz New Member

    Or better still "...in bringing about consensus..."

    Sorry; I'll go get some more coffee, now. [​IMG]
     
  12. Bill Highsmith

    Bill Highsmith New Member

    So...you're basically saying that the U.S. can service more than twice the percentage of its population with prestigious education than can the U.K. (The math: 100/60MM < 990/280MM.) It seems that any educational service beyond that is already in the gravy region. This doesn't seem so bad, now that you've explained it. I guess the U.S. can service some of the under-served students from the U.K.
    I asked if you knew what he meant. If you don't know what he meant, what value was there in quoting him?
     
  13. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    OK Gus, you win... your strong and persuasive arguments have converted me... I was wrong to consider the educated opinions of others, the British Council, the United Nations, Economic theory... thank you Gus, you have shown me the way... yes, American schools are the best and may God bless America, Amen!

    O
     
  14. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member


    Lewchuk, you are entitled to your opinion. I accept your opinion even though it disagrees with mine. I'm still unclear as to exactly what is inferior about the RA system or the lower tier schools within that system. My experience seems to indicate otherwise. But even that is okay. I'll just assume that I was unable to communicate my question or maybe missed your answer.
     
  15. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Well Ken, you'll notice the key word is "opinions". If you're now saying that your statement that the US has the majority of the world's worst schools was your *opinion*, then I'll accept that. I'll also disagree vigorously, but I can accept it.

    My problem was that you tried to state it as fact, complete with your assertion that there was "plenty" of evidence to support it. We all know now that you were simply trying to bluff us, an attempt which has miserably failed. At the very least, I would venture to say, you'll never try to pull that one again.

    Bruce
     
  16. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    You are right Bruce. The next time I encounter a RA school with ridiculous low curriculum and assessment standards I will tell myself... "I must be confused for no RA school could have low standards". And the next time I hear an academic refer to how Canadian schools have higher standards than American schools because they adhere to British standards... I will say, something like "he doesn't really exist", or "he must hate America", or "he is confused". The next time I read that some body like the British Council or the United Nations comment upon the lack of academic rigor... I will say, "they are promoting their interests and are bias against America". And the next time I study the impact of the market mechanism upon the delivery of goods I will say, "that doesn't apply to education".

    I really must thank you for showing me the light Bruce for it will make my life so much easier... I used to carefully examine the schools/programs I taught and studied at... now I only have to worry about RA.

    Incidently, to anyone I might have convinced to look beyond RA to examine the quality of a program... I apologize, for I have come to realize that it is a waste of time. All you need to do is listen to the Regional Accreditors... and Bruce.

    Oh yes, God Bless America, Amen.

     
  17. Bill Highsmith

    Bill Highsmith New Member

    A Modest Proposal:
    By the way, it is very hard for ME OF ALL PEOPLE to be modest, but I propose the following compromise language for the Hands Across the Pond Conference on Education (this thread):

    1) The top 100 U.K. universities (which is to say, all of them) are equal to the top 100 U.S. universities.

    2) The next 1 to 500 U.S. universities, depending on who(m) you ask, might be equal to the top 100 U.K. universities.

    3) The next 500 U.S. univerities might be equal to the top 100 U.K universities, but some are more equal than others.

    4) The next 2000 U.S. universities
    a) are equal to each other,
    b) are equal to the previous 500 U.S. universities, but some are less equal than others.
    c) will not be compared to the top 100 U.K. universities for the sake of trans-pond peace because 1/3 of the world's total programs should not be compared to the top 100 U.K. programmes on general principle. (Exception: the top 2000 universities within 500 km of Greenwich, England may be compared to the top 100 universities in the U.K.)
    d) the next 500 U.S. RA universities will not be compared to anything. These are specialty schools for disciplines like blind tree felling, indoor elk hunting, and lounge singing for which there is no U.K. equivalent.

    5) the British Council are neither geniuses nor twits

    6) the RA bodies are neither geniuses nor twits. However, the six RA bodies could kick the British Council's collective hinder in basketball, name the time and place. The British Council acknowledges this fact, but would like to bring up the topic of "bridge whist" at the next assembly meeting.

    7) And whatever you do, don't mention the war.

    Peace.
     
  18. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Two very profound observations, Ken. On the first you are correct, i.e., standards being defined as degree millish. RA provides a basic standard of academic quality which all RA schools must maintain. On the second, may He bless America--as well as her northern neighbors.

    Russell
     
  19. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Once again, you try to change the subject to fit your needs. I mentioned nothing about RA, British standards, Canadian schools, etc. The one and only thing I have questioned you about in this thread is for you to produce evidence that you say you have that validates your assertion that the US has the majority of the world's worst schools. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. You can blow all the smoke you want to, but that is all I've asked you to do.

    And, it's become obvious to even the most casual observer that you can't do it. Not that you don't want to, but you can't, because no such evidence exists, period.

    Make all the wise cracks you want Ken, it's clear that you've been caught with your pants down on this one.

    Bruce
     
  20. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    It seemed clear to me that Ken was expressing an opinion. What is still unclear to me is exactly what it is that is supposed to be inferior about the inferior schools. I'm guessing that Ken felt that the students were not required to prove a sufficient grasp of the required studies. It also seemed to have something to do with private schools rather than government run?
     

Share This Page