Degree Mill Shilling?

Mr Kirkland

I think I agree with almost every point in your post:
1. RA/NA/SA/UnA all have a place in our society. Most(non-RA) I would never recommend nor endorse but if some one wants to throw cash at a substandard school that is their choice.

2. Corporate education is certainly legitimate but I am not sure it fits in our discussion.

3. The only point I would likely disagree with is about making assumptions concerning unaccredited schools. If they are unwilling to submit to the standards the vast majority of schools submit to, it is their responsibility to prove they are legitimate.

 

Do you really think it is proper to refer to academic research you disagree with in that tone and with that kind of language? Have you actually read any the research you are summarily dismissing? Have you read ANY Ph.D. level research of ANY kind? Or, are you just trying to provoke people?

 

It's a "piece of crap" simply because you disagree with it?

Sir, may I suggest that deciding on what you believe the truth to be by your emotional reaction is a technique fraught with error. It also makes it very difficult to convince anyone of anything using this technique (with the possible exception of your immediate family) especially when people are predisposed to decide differently than what you believe.

You have failed utterly to convince anyone of anything on this forum, at least as far as I can tell. You have failed for a number of reasons. Your arguments are poorly thought out, poorly researched, unsupported by the evidence, and poorly presented. (If I correctly understand what it is that you're arguing then IMHO your arguments are also incorrect.) You don't seem to respond directly and thoughtfully when questions are put to you or points are raised. (The question asking you to explain your statements about biased research is but one example.) These are the real reasons that you have failed to convince anyone of anything. It has nothing to do with conspiracies, or advertising money or any other of the rationalizations that you've stated.

You will probably consider this post a flame but I promise that it is not. I'm just trying to explain as matter of factly as possible your situation on this forum, at least how I perceive it.

 

So is mine.

I pretty much agree with that too.

I don't distinguish between 'state-approved' and 'simply licensed and unaccredited'. I consider 'state approved' to be generally synonymous with 'state licensed' and with legally operating 'unaccredited'.

Given that modification, I certainly agree that these kind of schools do contain some gems. But as you say, they need to be treated on a case-by-case basis. That's why I favor looking closely at individual schools.

I disgree with the tendency on Degreeinfo, indulged in by both "sides", to make vague, general and inevitably inconclusive arguments about the state approved category (particularly California's) as a whole, as if all state-approved schools share essential characteristics and can be understood the same way.

One of the schools that most interests me right now isn't accredited, isn't state approved, doesn't grant degrees or certifications, doesn't offer university credit (and its fees are voluntary donations).

So yeah, I think that we can get way too wrapped up in this degree-title/accreditation thing and lose sight of what is, to some of us at least, the whole point of the exercise.

I obviously agree with that.

Or more accurately, I sort of agree with it. Non-accredited schools:

A. Lack the external quality assurance that gives accredited schools a basic level of credibility. And...

B. The fact that most non-accedited schools out there aren't very credible means that the probability is good that an unknown non-accredited school is probably pretty lame too.

That means that it is rational to approach unknown non-accedited schools with defeasible skepticism. By that I mean an initial skepticism that can be defeated by credible evidence presented in the school's favor. That's one of the motivations for my Google searches.

I agree with you again.

 

Does anyone really think an MBA from the RA Keller Graduate School is more likely to be accepted for admission to an elite doctoral program that one from DETC accredited Cardean?

Both would be obsticles to overcome but I'd rather take my chances with Cardean.

And how many MBA graduates (or any holders of Masters degrees in any discipline) even apply to doctoral programs? My guess would be less than a tenth of one percent.

And as far as employers, my guess is that few (and Rich correct me if I'm wrong) know anything about accreditation. RA vs. DETC vs. World Association.

And in looking for law degrees, would a degree from a foreign school have more utility than a degree from US based Concord University?

 

Randy Miller: "And how many MBA graduates (or any holders of Masters degrees in any discipline) even apply to doctoral programs? My guess would be less than a tenth of one percent."

John Bear: A quick visit to www.chronicle.com, almanac edition yielded these numbers:

Bachelor's degrees awarded 2002: 1,244,000
Master's degrees awarded 2002; 468,000
Doctorates awarded (not medical) 2002: 45,000

If the numbers remained roughly consistent year to year (and they do), and if the attrition rate in doctoral programs is 50% (probably somewhat higher), then it seems safe to suggest that 19% of Master's graduates go on for doctorates. If the attrition rate is 2/3rds, then the number rises to 29%.

This suggests Randy may be way off in his guess: 1/10 of 1% versus 20%.

 

BizStats indicates there are now about 5 million corporations in the U.S. comprising over $17 trillion in revenue. www.BizStats.com

The Delaware State Corporation website indicates that Delaware alone has 300,000 corporations and 200,000 limited liability cos./partnerships which comprise 50% of all publicly traded corps in U.S. and also includes 58% of Fortune 500 companies.

Sample size does matter....

 

I assume that the point Randy was making was that MBA's are less likely to go on to a doctorate than other disciplines. I would also guess that it would be less. (0.1% might be a little low though?) Other counter examples might be history and anthropology that might be on the higher side of the average since the best chance for a job in those fields of study would probably be teaching.

 

I agree with your post. This last sentence is very important.

Some people have argued that if an unaccredited school is operating legally then it must be okay. This is a very dangerous, short sighted, and plain incorrect position to take. I'll give three reasons.

1. It may appear legal but one must keep in mind that in the degree mill business the goal is to appear legal even if your not legal. It is the nature of fraud. The criminal is trying to deceive their victim.

2. The historical perspective also indicates great danger in assuming that if it appears legal then it must be okay. Most degree mills (all?) that have proven to be fraudulent in a court of law appeared on the surface to be operating legally.

3. Multiple states have passed laws that make the use of most unaccredited degrees illegal to use within their state. It appears that this is a growing trend. I suspect that more states will be passing similar laws in the future.

 

Re: Re: A question for Mr. kf5k

There we have it: the non-answer answer. My research project, vetted by experts in the field of nontraditional higher education, other doctoral-level faculty members, peers, the assistant dean, and the dean, is "biased" because I am. James comes to this conclusion without even reading it. Amazing perception! (Not to mention that is fits the very definition of prejudice, a distinct form of that "bias" he accuses me of. How can he wriggle free from his own label?)

I loved this one: "Douglas is biased and would do any study to prove his own views." Then why did the results come out surprisingly in favor of the very schools James argues for? But James doesn't know that because (a) he hasn't read it and (b) he has ignored posts by be that actually support his points.

James doesn't even offer a reason why John's survey (a simple instrument hardly susceptible to bias) isn't balanced. He just lumps it in because the results disagree with his wishes.

James includes the DETC survey in his "bias sweep," but doesn't justify his comment at all. He just asks more questions, ignoring the answers he's already gotten. Amazing.

BTW, n=267. How many did you want? And why? (I'm dying to hear the justification for a particular sample size; I just love reading about statistical analysis.)

 

You haven't even read it, but you've already decided this. Others, who are actually qualified to judge this, disagree. That says it all.

Talk about "biased."

 

Actually, there were significant differences to be found when employers were asked to rate those three agencies. When not provided a description of each:

NCA vs. DETC: NCA higher
NCA vs. WAUC: NCA higher
DETC vs. WAUC: No significant difference


When descriptions of each were provided:

NCA vs. DETC: NCA higher
NCA vs. WAUC: NCA higher
DETC vs. WAUC: DETC higher

That they found DETC accreditation about as acceptable as WAUC accreditation is interesting. That it would change after descriptions were provided for each is also interesting. (To me, anyway.) The value of fake accreditation appears evident.

 

Re: Re: Re: A question for Mr. kf5k

When you did your extensive study of degree acceptability, DETC, State Approved, what did the following have to say about their business requirements?
Sears
Wal-Mart
K-Mart
Target
Home Depot
Toys-R-Us
Food Giant
Family Dollar Store
Lowe's
Ace Hardware
Orkin Pest Control
Pizza Hut
Insurance Companies
Security Companies
Pest Control
Motels
Hotels
Resraunts
Building Supply
Industrial Suppliers and Manfacturers
and the practices of the 50 states, their counties, cities.
And all of the millions of businesses that exist in America. You in fact didn't do any study that covers degree accceptability in the broad base of American business. Businesses hire and fire every day and you have no knowledge of why they do what they do or even how. To even begin saying you understand what the business people accept or reject would take years of research and millions of dollars.

What do the RA/DL schools in Bears' Guide 15th edition say about their acceptance of DETC degrees?
[Schools Like]
Oral Roberts University
Walden University
UOP University of Phoenix
Capella University
and the rest of the RA/DL schools/programs listed in the guide. You spent a dime and claim to know what it feels like to spend a million dollars. You are an expert in self inflation and nothing more. Your statements that State Approved degrees are all but useless is nothing but opinion, and comments about DETC are absurd. You have not the slightest idea what the businesses of America want.You drive past hundreds of businesses every week not having the slightest idea what they require of their employees. You don't even know the names of the companies you claim to understand.

 

Question

When was the last comprehensive DETC credit acceptance study completed? If it was in 2000, it may be somewhat dated.

If I am in the right section, on page 43 of the BEARS' guide, I read it to be 2000 and presented to admissions officers in 2001.

While accurate, it could be dated information.

My assertion is only that with RA being the standard, DETC may be gaining some additional acceptance in today's dynamic world.

 

As far as elite doctoral programs (I'm assuming you mean business doctoral programs), neither would probably carry much weight. However, that really isn't the issue. One could say the same thing about a BA from excelsior or TESC or COSC as opposed to a DETC school when applying to Harvard Medical School or Stanford Law School. At the elite level, one moves beyond regional accreditation (which is a minimal prerequisite), to the quality of the school (obviously, this is assuming the two canidates have similar GPA, Test Scores, etc).

Simply because neither of the schools carry much weight doesn't mean that they are equal. If both you and I would get our asses kicked if either of us played one one one basketball with Micheal Jordon, that doesn't mean that we are both of equal skill. You may be a much better player than me, but we both suck against Micheal Jordon.

The issue is really at what point is the Keller degree accepted for doctoral programs when the Cardean degree isn't, and whether that point even exists. Maybe as you get to the tier 2 and 3 doctoral programs the Keller MBA is accepted and the Cardean isn't. Maybe they are accepted at equal rates. Maybe Cardean is accepted at a Higher rate. I can't proclaim to know.

Perhaps a better formulation of the question would be "what percentage of doctoral programs accept the Keller degree and What percentage accept the Cardean degree?"

Jon

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: A question for Mr. kf5k

I didn't make a single assertion about a single company.

Do you have any evidence to refute what I've said?

I don't believe I've ever said unaccredited degrees are "all but useless." In fact, I've tried to make it clear that many employers accept them. But you conveniently ignore that.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

Re: Question

Possibly. No one's measured it since DETC did (other than John's survey, which was different in scope and target audience). I would imagine DETC will again someday.

 

I've been an alumnus of Excelsior's predecessor for 24 years. In that time, I've read numerous examples of graduates who've gone on to medical and law schools. Here's a small list of schools (not just medical and law, BTW), offered by Excelsior, of schools that have accepted their graduates:

Nice List

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: A question for Mr. kf5k

James, whenever survey results are posted on the news that you happen to be unhappy about, do you rant and rave that it is a bogus survey because they didn't ask the question to your family or your neighbor? Do you understand what a survey even is? Do you believe that a survey must always ask every single individual in a population the questions before it can be considered valid? Do you understand what stand deviation means? Do you ever go back and reread your posts a few days after your emotional frenzy has worn off?

 

While checking job openings in newspapers and on the internet,
I've come across requirements that state that applicants' bachelors degrees must be from accredited universities / colleges.

However, the requirements do not say that graduate degrees need to be from accredited universities (even if a graduate degree is a requirement for the job.)

Thank you.
Working 1
CBM, MBA, BS, BA, AAS, AAS, AA