My professor has a degree mill

And if John bear recommended it?

 

Another Thought About Unaccredited Degrees

During the summer of 1995, I began looking for a graduate program. I was working full time and wanted to attempt a degree by distance learning. I wasn't sure where to begin -- how to select a school. At a local bookstore, the clerk told me that one John Bear is the reigning expert in distance education. It was then I bought my first copy of Bear's Guide.

For those of you who remember that edition, it divided schools into several categories. One of the categories included schools that Dr. Bear felt were unaccredited but good options. Among them was Southwest University. Armed with that recommendation, I spent a few thousand dollars and pursued a Master of Business Administration from said university. I completed the program in 1997.

I do not consider the effort illegitimate. However, I do recall feeling quite horrible when I read on the Oregon's Office of Degree Authorization that my degree would not be accepted in that state. Again, I made a legitimate effort and did quite a bit of work in that program. While I've gone on to other graduate education, should I expect that someone lurking in the shadows will come out saying, "he earned an unaccredited degree" at some time?

Peter French raises an interesting point. At one point, many of these schools were considered legitimate. Further, what makes any of us think that we are better at uncovering inappropriate faculty placements that the accreditors?

 

Re: And if John bear recommended it?

 

Re: Re: My professor has a degree mill

I think that apart from RF Valve's particular difficulty, broader issues have been raised in the course of this thread. One of the obvious ones is the suggestion that only graduates of RA schools (or "GAAP" schools, or "equivalent" schools) should be allowed to teach at the university level, at least in RA schools.

Provided that "equivalent" is interpreted liberally, I would certainly agree. But if this demand is interpreted mechanically and literally, then I vehemently disagree.

Obvious questions arise: Should the NTPS graduate be prohibited from teaching? Should Berne graduates be hired instead? How is "GAAP" equivalence determined? What about TRACS or DETC? What about individuals with lots of experience in their field, who then got a state-approved doctorate mid-career? Should the experience count? Would Sir Patrick Moore, with no degree at all, be forbidden from teaching? What if Bill Gates or Steve Jobs wanted to teach a business class?

I'm not denying that there is an issue here. There is, and it's important. But it isn't clear cut or easy. (Real problems seldom are.)

I think that's why universities have the freedom to choose their own faculty, subject to accreditor review. Applicants are allowed to bring more than a diploma to the table.

Students obviously should take an interest in their own education. But if that interest becomes pressure to suppress hiring flexibility, then something important is lost.

 

Re: Re: And if John bear recommended it?

I raise you 4 Pol Pots, 3 Bin Ladens, 2 Josef Stalin's and a Aspersion in a pear tree.

 

Is this an RA institution? The Chair's Ph.D. is also from CPU. Oh, this is getting good! What will the regulars say now? I'm on the edge of my seat.

I know, "Report the whole dagon school to the chief RA people".

"How about a lynching on the court house steps?"

 

In regard to the issue of students potentially preventing the hiring of certain faculty from teaching in a school, it is within students' rights to have a say as to how certain hirings may effect the perception and viability of their RA degrees.

The perception of distance learning credentials is not at a point of univeral acceptance. Students are taking sufficient risks in acquiring their degrees nontraditionally and do not need the additional burden of worrying how unaccredited faculty may be reflected in the value and perception of their degrees. This is'nt a problem until it becomes one, and students' should take as firm a position as necessary to ensure the viability of their investment.

Obviously if one of the RA schools costing thirty-fifty thousand dollars a year wishes to grant full scholarships to all their students obviously they have the right to hire who they wish. However, to expect students who are paying full tuition to accept the implicit risks in having questionable faculty teach in their schools is absolutely unacceptable.

We are not talking about the Eric Ercikson types who are brilliant individuals and who only possess a B.A. degree and nothing else. Personally I would prefer such talented individuals without any formal educational credentials than one who presents him/herself as being a faculty member with an unaccredited degree within the context of a RA educational institution. The issue here is appropriate modeling of academic scholarship that in the majority of cases is not reflected by faculty with unaccredited doctoral degrees.

 

I believe that "her" is referring to the instructor of the course, not the chair. It wouldn't make much sense to refer to the same person as both "him" and "her" within the same sentence.

 

Valve's sentence could have used some work.

Him = the chair
Her = the prof in question

A better phrasing could have been. "Her Phd was from CPU, in addition to her masters."

Since I am correcting someone, I know that I have made a spelling or grammatical error somewhere.

As you must know the chair graduated 499 out of a class of 500 at the University of Phoenix.

 

Bill Dayson said:

"How is "GAAP" equivalence determined? What about TRACS or DETC? What about individuals with lots of experience in their field, who then got a state-approved doctorate mid-career?"

**************************************************

North: As I understand Simon's (?) quote from the RA accreditor the agency specifies recognized accreditation and therefore TRACS, ATS, DETC, etc. would constitute recognized accreditation and therefore a prof with a degree accredited by one of these agencies would seem be acceptable.

****************************************************
Simon said:

"We are not talking about the Eric Ercikson types who are brilliant individuals and who only possess a B.A. degree and nothing else. Personally I would prefer such talented individuals without any formal educational credentials than one who presents him/herself as being a faculty member with an unaccredited degree within the context of a RA educational institution. The issue here is appropriate modeling of academic scholarship that in the majority of cases is not reflected by faculty with unaccredited doctoral degrees."

****************************************************

I agree with Simon here. I would much rather see a prof with no pretense of some unrecognized degree but great intellect, wisdom, and experience. An unaccredited degree as a credential in general leads to many questions about the person who obtained it (were you unable intellectually to complete an accredited degree, were you lazy, not savvy enough to know the difference, deceptive). These may not be fair characterizations but they come to mind.

Not exactly related but Pastor Osteen (the Gen X son of the late Osteen Sr) at Lakewood Mega church in Houston is a very gifted speaker. I thought when I saw him on TV that he had graduated from a Southern Baptist Seminary. His education apparently does *NOT* consist of a seminary degree and he stated that openly during one of his sermons. He felt God's call to him after his father's death and responded. Another example is Hank Hanegraaf (Christian Research Institute) who also does not have a theological degree but has educated himself. Both of these men professionally rely on their expertise as a credential. Neither felt it necessary to whip out an unaccredited theological degree to make the public feel like they had an academic degree to bolster their perceived expertise. I respect this far more than say TD Jakes who is gifted in his own way and then suddenly showed up with a DMin (not an honorary degree) from who knows where on top of his high school diploma.

North

 

Sorry for the confusion, I meant the instructor has a PhD from CPU. The main issue is that she taught previously at several RA universities and this kind of helped to overlook her credentials, she also has a big list of publications but I haven't check if they are "real" too.

 

When unaccredited degrees have come to light, what we have seen in the past (particularly at the community college level) is that the individual is listed and promoted as having a doctorate, but they actually pay him or her commensurate with their highest RA degree. Other institutions have simply removed any references to the unaccredited degrees from the faculty listings (whether that was accompanied by a decrease in pay is unknown). Still other institutions have terminated the individual in question; however, whether this was due to the unaccredited degree itself or its misrepresentation (or other misrepresentations) is also unknown.

It is rare for a regionally accredited institution to retain an individual, if his or her highest RA credential is a Bachelor’s degree, but it does happen (Capella comes to mind). I do believe, however, that it is the height of hypocrisy for an institution to deny students admittance to graduate programs because of unaccredited degrees, yet hire faculty with those same credentials.

 

Since I mentioned Jakes I thought I would put the link to his site with his education.
http://www.tdjakes.org/quickfacts.html

Understand, that although Jake's theology is not my cup of tea I have a tremendous amount of respect for his accomplishments as a business man and Christian leader. Nonetheless in keeping with Simon's issue why not simply rely on your expertise (knowledge & hands on) to speak for you. Far more effective. We might think somewhat less of Erickson had he been walking around with unaccredited doctorates puffing up his credentials as if the facts did not speak for themselves.

North

 

On a personal note, I have always found it remarkable how liberal some posters become with their expressions of accessiblity to unaccredited faculty when they are not personally affected or paying the tuition of those affected. It reminds me of the dialogue between two individuals to the effect "I heard that you are unemployed. Well, it's only a recession. WHAT, I lost my job, thats a depression!

Then there are those posters who due to their obtaining an unaccredited degree push forth the doctrine that students who insist on accredited faculty in an RA program are engaging in lynchings, murder, mayhem, heinous acts aginst humanity and so on. The rationale for my hyperbole is based on the fact that such protestations emanate from the personal realization that "OOPs, I made a bigggg mistake" and now "I want to rationalize my error by making unaccredited degrees appear to be a viable vehicle on par with accredited degrees."

I am not judging those who verbalize these positions. However, it is important for them to realize that their motives are not entirely selfless

 

Simon, I have come to respect your thinking as I've read your posts over the past several months. This time, however, I think you're making a hasty generalization. To assume that all who cry foul when those with unaccredited degrees are disparaged are doing so because they realize they "made a bigggg mistake" is not reasoning I expect from an objective and systematic thinker.

Let me make my position straight. I would not advocate that anyone pursue an unaccredited degree. I do not take this position because unaccredited schools cannot produce quality students. However, if one is going to spend money, then make an investment that's not likely to be called into question.

Regionally accredited schools are required to have a certain percentage of their faculty with earned doctorates. It is entirely acceptable then that institutions may have individuals without earned doctorates. As for where the faculty member earned their credentials, I think all of this comes under review when the accreditors review the institution. Why does it seem like there is an assumption that unless the faculty member's degree is earned from a regionally accredited institution, (s)he is not an appropriate person to teach at an accredited school? Clearly, those in the hiring decision at the university in question do not share that opinion. And ultimately, the accreditors will determine if it is a problem or not. That said, since a person has publicly stated where the degree was earned, why engage in trying to make the person's credential a matter of public debate?

 

We've covered the "my prof has a non RA degree" and if we are really lucky maybe she gets canned.

Let's cover the rest:

My prof cannot speak a coherent sentence in English.

My prof is a Marxist, who is teaching economic quackery.

My prof's view of history is at odds with anything I have ever read or heard.

My prof gave almost a failing average in my class.

All the above happened to me and quess what. I made it through a couple programs. What one prof does or doesn't do or is or isn't doesn't make a bit of difference. If one is looking for teaching perfection, in a distance ed course of all things, they're going to be disappointed. I probably had 6 or 8 profs in 5 years of school that were truly talented. The rest were so much mush.

Time to grow up guys. Regionally accredited and duly certified cry babies.

 

Re: TD Jakes

So North, any idea where Jakes got his degree? I mean, man, that's pretty vague, you know, to just post "Doctorate of Ministry."

Quite frankly, in view of Jakes posting where he got his business degree, it's almost blatant deception--in this case the degree being unaccredited yet its origins kept hidden. this makes the whole thing suspicious. Scary, unless, of course, it was just . . . an oversite . . . in not stating the degree's origin. It's possible--and I hope that this is not it--that Jakes is not just hiding the degree's origin but is not even going to defend it, even if it were a mistake in that it isn't accredited.

Whatever!

Starkman

 

My wife tells me of a Women's Studies professor she once had ...

A certain member of the class took great offense that this professor wore a dress that exposed her armpits ... and God Forbid, this particular professor, being from Europe, had never felt the need to shave her armpits.

The student who took exception to this handed around a petition for the other students in the class to sign. I don't know how many of my wife's fellow students felt compelled to add their name to the list of those who could not follow their classes because of this particular professor's sin ... I know my wife didn't sign.

 

Wow, talk about completely missing the point... Or is this just pure flamebait?