Degree Mill Shilling?

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

You make no assertion because you have no idea what the businesess of America do. I "AGREE" 100% that [MANY] employers accept State Approved degrees. I also know, as do you, that in the general population State Approved is received almost the same as accredited, and as for DETC or RA/DL the average person or the educated wouldn't know the difference between accredited schools. It would be only at the very highest levels that special recruiters know what DETC/ RA/DL programs are, and if they like them, apparently many don't. If you are going to hold to what you've just said-- Many employers- and not back to little utility, this war can be closed, as far as I'm concerned. State Approved schools have utility and value- DETC more-RA/DL most. I refer to DL schools and am not discussing the very top tier B&M's which stand by themselves, and meet the needs of a different consumer.

 

Sorry Scott, I misunderstood your post. I see now that you were talking about grammer and spelling. Sorry again.

I side with you on that point, in that I don't worry about that much for my own posts (I don't bother with spell checkers.) and if I were to mention it regarding someone else's error I would probably have a more glaring error in my own post. On the other hand I think the point is that if someone is defending the supposedly great education they received at a degree mill and their posts are hardly literate then it would seem to be an ironically valid point to mention.

 

You mis-state my arguments, you utterly misunderstand the field, you have a clear-cut agenda and a stake in this. I have no stake. My research supported some of my ideas, but it challenged others. You've called me "biased," which is tantamount to calling me a liar and a cheat. Well, you are a little bug with an attitude. When you have done something--anything--substantial in this field, feel free to check back in with me. Until then, I think you've had enough.

 

James, I'm impressed. You made a very coherent post (although breaking it into a few paragraphs would have helped tremendously) and I feel quite certain that I understand your position well enough to be absolutely certain that you are flat out wrong.

You are lost in context, my dear frenzied co-member. You have confused the context of the field of academic opportunities and options changing across decades. You have confused the context of someone being associated with the start up of a school and what that school does decades later. You have confused the context of the general statement with an exception to the general statement. You also seem to be confusing a.e.d. libelous posts with the truth. Most important of all and common for you to do, you have confused the context of reality with the ideas that are floating around in your head. (e.g., I've never seen Dr. Douglas say that there is no potential value in an unaccredited degree. I have seen him say the exact opposite!)

I do appreciate your clearly stated intention in the last sentence to defend academic fraud. The schools on your list are not the worst that you have defended. I do note that you left K-W off the list. This is a scam that you really seem to enjoy defending. I can't even excuse you for being in denial since you never even attended K-W. You simply saw a degree mill being bad mouthed and had to jump to the rescue.

 

No conspiracy. On those infrequent occasions when Gus gets carried away in his criticism of others, I just like to provide another perspective.

I really don't do it very often.

 

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

Please provide proof for your assertion above. Your proof should not be based on personal experience because that is not proof.


Thank you.




Tom Nixon

 

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

Does that mean that you would actually give up your roll of Defender of Fraud? What about all that stuff you said about K-W? Who is going to defend the frauds if you give up? Didn't you just blast Dr. Bear for not jumping up and defending people? Now you're saying that you're going to do the same and be a hypocrite and no longer defend K-W?

 

Take a look at this message: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3EB3E871.7EB38818%40ursa.net

John Bear says that he stands by the integrity of the degrees issued during his tenure at the unaccredited schools he was involved with. He continues: "I truly have no reason to doubt the integrity of work done after my tenure. Unlike Saint Regis, the students at Columbia Pacific, Fairfax, and Greenwich worked over significant periods of time under the direction of real faculty, nearly all of them with doctorates from regionally accredited schools."

Furthermore, he has said here: "the very first expert witness job I ever did was in [...] Wilkes-Barre [...] on behalf of a Columbia Pacific graduate whose degree was rejected by the school board. Would I testify on their behalf again? For degrees earned before 1996, yes."

Have you ever travelled to another state to defend someone's degree? Who is doing more to defend those students, John Bear or you?

Defending the past does not require recommending now! Which degree would you recommend: a degree that you might win a court case about, or a degree that wouldn't require you to go to court in the first place?

 

How many degree mill pence are there in a degree mill shilling?

 

Randy was off but not by so much. In the MBA area (Business and Marketing) the totals from the same report were 116,475 Masters degrees vs. 1,180 doctoral degrees or roughly 1.0%. This is still a higher number than I would have guessed.