First question to Henrik re-Knightsbridge University

If the sole point was to hear about a DL dissertation from an unaccredited institution, don’t you think that point has been made (over and over again)? I don’t recall anyone exhibiting scorn over your work. Can you point to an example? The only point that was made was that however excellent your work may be, it does not change the fact that your degree was awarded by a blatant degree mill.

Could you please cite your source? I am always interested in authoritative references that defy all the others. Moreover, the definition you have now provided does not jibe with your previous usage.

The last we heard, Henrik said that things were too hot for him and he was going out to get ice cream.

 

As you well know Mark facts never get in the way of opinion here. The more you ask people to prove their statements the more they give you ideas instead. Obviously your own direct experience should carry more weight than indirect information from a WEB source. Not that I really care one way or the other what people take in school, but I do care about good solid evidence in proving a point. Anything else is just talk, and that's cheap. Your point has been well made and is convincing, in my opinion.

 

I really don't recall this happening. All I recall is a few jokes about killing and eating the Teal Duck (or whatever it is).

For the umpteenth time (approximately), a good dissertation written by someone from an institution does not mean that the institution is good. What defines the validity of an institution is the very worst or the very minimum graduation requirements.

For example, plcscott and RJT say that they have over 120 units total and a diploma from K-W, that does not mean that they have a real degree though because the minimum credits from K-W is about 21. This 21 credits is far below the standard 120 credits and it is beyond ridiculous to argue that 99 credits of a Bachelor's degree is "fluff".

 

Nice try at playing the role of agent provocateur, James. Unfortunately, I think you’ll find that Mark and I probably agree much more than we disagree on most topics discussed on this forum. In fact, on this very issue I don’t believe there is sharp disagreement. First, I have not contradicted Mark’s personal experience. I understand both the American and European educational systems, having been educated under both. Moreover, my wife has taken both her O-levels and A-levels.

My point was that that Humanities offerings are what differentiate legitimate higher education institutions (specifically at the undergraduate level) from vocational schools. Although I was referring primarily to U.S. schools, I believe Mark misunderstood my statement to mean that a particular program had to include Humanities in order to be legitimate, and offered the English system as an example. When I pointed out that the institutions he cited as examples not only offered, but also excelled in the Humanities, he, of course, agreed. At this point, I believe we were simply comparing apples and oranges.

The comment I believe Mark took exception to was that under the British system Humanities are covered at the “high school” level. He correctly pointed out that the last two years are spent in preparation for the A-levels. What Mark failed to mention, however, is that many students do not go on to the last two years of secondary school (although I’m sure the vast majority of those attending Perse do). Perhaps I should have been more specific and stated that under the English system breadth ends with the GCSE or General Certificate of Secondary Education (the old O-levels) after five years of secondary school (at about 16 years of age). The students that continue typically spend the Lower Sixth studying four or five A-levels then narrow it down to two or three in the Upper Sixth (a few over-achievers take more). Therefore, there might be some disagreement on what actually corresponds to “high school” level, but the English generally tend to believe that the A-levels are more on a par with lower-division US college courses. This has been the subject of much debate on this forum.

Another thing that should be taken into account is that European educational systems (and the Japanese as well) have strong trade and vocational programs. Unlike the United States, it is accepted that university admission is very competitive and that not everyone will be afforded the opportunity to attend. Moreover, competition for the top schools is extremely fierce, and that is the reason for my statement that if you simply passed your A-levels (and nothing else) you would need luck to get in to a top school (accompanied by the appropriate sarcastic or rolleyes smilie), as many other factors influence the admission decision. It's possible that Mark may have misunderstood my comment, and interpreted it to mean that I was disputing his assertion that the last two years of secondary school are dedicated exclusively to the A-levels.

Contrary to your assertion, James, the Web site I quoted from was not ”indirect information from a WEB source.” First, the Web site in question (if you had taken the time to read my post) was nothing less than Oxford’s own entrance requirements (it can be found here). Second, the information quoted was not offered to refute what Mark said, but instead to complement it with the addition of the fact that there are some A-levels that are not essential or recommended for admission to a specific program that the university considers “helpful” and may increase your chances for acceptance.

Lastly, let me share a few quotes from the prospectus of a British secondary school that has a superb record of placing its students in top universities in England and around the world. As you will see, they value the Humanities, breadth, and a well-rounded education.

• We are also very proud of providing a rounded education for our pupils in which drama, music, sport and a host of other activities are valued as much as academic success. School colours are awarded for music and drama, as well as for sporting achievement.
  
  Our aim is to offer a traditional academic curriculum which delays specialization, offers a real breadth of education and contains a strong personal and education programme.

So once again, I’m sorry to disappoint you, James, but I do not think you will be successful in what now appears to be your raison d'être on this forum: fomenting flame wars.

 

Gus,

These exchanges are just getting too long-winded, considering how you do not agree with the way I comport myself, and cannot understand the language that I am using.

Take an example. I apologise for having deliberately riled you. You accept, yet then tell me how you think your questions have been given 'short shrift'.

Let me make two things as clear here as I can in English:

1) You previously complained about my answers not being short enough!

2) If you ask questions, any questions, you cannot blindly assume that you have the right to a response that fits a particular pattern or uses a particular vernacular or style that suits you. Indeed, you cannot assume entitlement to a response in the first place. If you ask questions of me, and I answer, in the same language, it is not my problem that you apparently do not understand. I have seen nobody else complain that my points are incomprehensible.

As for reading old posts here, that's all good and fine, and I have. However, I have a day-job, and there are a goodly few such posts. Referring to old threads as forming the basis for your levelling opinion and judgement against me is not very useful. Take what I say for what it says, don't compare it with what someone else said aeons ago (this re your talk of Les Snell). I do not read your posts in the context of someone elses.

Whether you like sarcasm or not, I do not really care. However, it is not for you to say that I am not to use sarcasm. And I can certainly not acknowledge your claim that I have used sarcasm instead of a truthful answer. Your claim in this regard is just nonsense.

Did I say that 'the receiver [bears] the sole responsibility to ensure a message is understood'? I think not. I am writing you in English. You are writing me in English. Immodestly, I will assess that my English is fairly adequate. If you do not understand, however, rather than refer to 'a lower-level communications course', perhaps you should spend more time considering a higher-level English course.

As for your use of the word 'educator', this has nothing to do with 'purveying education'. The functions of purveying and providing are separate functions. The academic work also has nothing to do with the oversight except where as parts of relevant committees. As for self-validation, look it up.

I cannot see how my answers can damn me. Or the lack thereof (I wish you'd make up your mind which). I can see how you can wish to damn me, and that you keep wanting to justify doing so. As long as I do not agree with the damnation, however, it makes, as they say in Blighty, sod-all difference.

As for my argument about the link between accreditation and income streams, it is interesting that none of the 'accreditation-or-bust' characters ever have any other answer than 'but you're in it for the money, too!!!!'. This is not a charity. It was never claimed to be one. What is the basis for seeking accreditation, however, if not to seek further funding? The answer to that one is not 'but you want money too'.

The listing of someone or other as a 'full professor' - I do wonder what in your world constitutes a 'full professor' - as faculty, even if they are not directly involved with students, is hardly as unusual as you seem to think. Makes for an interesting opinion, though.

I am not implying that questions from those not interested in enrolling with KU are irrelevant. What I am saying is that those not directly interested in enrolling with KU have no business casting judgement on those who are.

My intention in participating in this forum is definitely not nor was it ever to bang the KU drum. Quite the opposite, I am aware that stirring the hornets could land a sting or two. And I certainly do not expect our potential candidates to even know of the existence of this forum, the readership of which must be very limited. Talking about violation of terms of service is just silly. Anyway, I am of the impression that such judgements of purpose and content are not yours to make, and so perhaps you could just mind the content of your own posts.

As you will note, I have reduced the scope of this post from the previous monsters. Repeatedly saying 'I don't agree' is hardly going to make us agree any further.

Henrik

 

Gus posted:

QUOTE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by kf5k
Keep up the good work, I don't think a glove has landed on you yet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps the reason that no gloves have landed on him is that no one has thrown a punch; injuries, if any, have been self-inflicted.

In my opinion, the greatest damage to Knightsbridge University's credibility and claim to legitimacy on this forum are due to Henrik’s propensity to avoid any direct questions. He chooses instead to only answer those questions that allow him to pontificate at length and deliver a subtle (albeit insubstantial and unconvincing) sales pitch. Questions such as the following do not require any thought nor should they be that difficult to answer.

Is Knightsbridge University still incorporated in Antigua and Barbuda, or is it now a new and different Denmark-based corporation?

Can or does Knightsbridge University enroll students residing in Denmark?"
UNQUOTE

Gus,

Do spare me the 'he's on a sales pitch routine', if I was that much of a marketeer I'd be spamming the heck out of you by now, whilst drowning you in banner ads, inflight magazine ads, and whatever other nuisance you can think of. Oh, wait a minute, that's what Phoenix get up to, isn't it Odd how they don't seem to have found out what a great sales and marketing medium this forum is. And if you really have solid feelings about that sort of thing, remove the link from your own sig-line to your own site and associated pop-up advertising.

Despite your obvious propensity for acridity paired with a sense of deserving (say, that's rather mellisonant, don't you think?) I shall be happy to respond to your actual questions. The manner in which I respond, however, is not for you to decide.

KU is not registered for corporate purposes in A&B.
KU is registered for corporate purposes in Denmark.
KU can enrol students residing in Denmark.
Ku has not in its current incarnation enrolled students residing in Denmark.

I am sure that even you will appreciate this.


Henrik

 

James gave hope:

QUOTE
"Yes, but you must consider the number of punches thrown. Who could take on this many questions, most of which were intended to prove KU a mill and Henrik a fraud. He has held up well, better than most. Typical of this forum, guilty till proven innocent. Each question tinged with negative connotation, and filled with innuendo. ( Tell me do you still beat your wife) ? As a change why not have just a few general questions about KU and what and how it does things, instead of the constant cross examination, can't be very pleasant for Henrik, some civility please."
UNQUOTE

James,

Thank you. It is as much what is said as what is implied and inferred that requires attention. Sometimes answers become a bit circuitous, but this simply means that some things are not black or white.

As for beating my wife, I haven't really thought about it, but am still considering giving up smack.

Civility is such a nice thing, and one that most people recognise when they meet it.

Now, dash off to mother's place, birthday girl and all that, forgiveness is hard come by when Sonny doesn't oblige.


Henrik

 

Henrik (you ignorant slut ), do you really believe that the same suave patent answers you provide the naïve prospective students of Knightsbridge University (in hopes that they will send you their hard earned money) would withstand the scrutiny of the members of DegrreeInfo? I know your sole reason for posting on this forum is to troll for marks, I mean, students, but c’mon! Members of this forum include the most knowledgeable people on the planet concerning distance education.

I could dissect the numerous sarcastic innuendos, red herrings, non-sequiturs, ad hominem attacks, contradictions and overall sleazy lies in your recent post, but what would be the point? Those with an IQ above that of a toilet seat already know you for who you are (based on nothing more except your own posts). We have a saying here in America: “Give ‘em enough rope…”

 

Perhaps the most basic question that can be asked about Knightsbridge concerns its legal basis as a university.

I'm unfamiliar with Danish law. Does corporate registration in Denmark include degree-granting powers?

Or must a Danish corporation receive some kind of additional authorization before it can legally grant degrees? If a separate authorization is necessary, does Knightsbridge have that necessary authorization? If it does, who granted it?

This is not an unreasonable question. If anyone asked it of a California approved university, for example, that institution could point to its BPPVE approval and to the applicable California Education Code sections.

What legally empowers Knightsbridge to grant its degrees?

 

Bill Huffman shared:

QUOTE
"KU sells "turn-key" universities, complete with adjunct professors. I believe that this is but an example of the facts now known about KU. Up to 150 courses are for sale. Is there a school catalog available?

http://www.knightsbridgeuniversity.com/turnkey.html

Henrik is a most delightful addition to our little community. I have enjoyed his posts. However in my opinion he has not yet helped the cause of KU because he has not yet directly responded to any request that could potentially shed light on the nature of KU.

e.g.,
Is there a list of dissertations from KU that is publically accessible?
Can people (colleges) request copies of these dissertations?
Has any accredited college ever requested a copy of a KU dissertation?
Can Denmark residents enroll at KU?
Other questions that I've probably forgotten (but I would be willing to reread this thread and list them all if anyone was interested)"
UNQUOTE

Bill,

Most pleased to have delighted you. This saves me sending you my photo!

Let me re-visit the 'turn-key college' concept. 'College' is the active word. Not 'university'. We're talking about graduate and postgraduate level courses, that may lead, should the resulting institution so choose, to graduate and post-graduate certificates and diplomas.

If local jurisdiction allows, there is nothing to keep the incumbent from upgrading these courses to degree level. In many cases all that's needed is another couple of modules and a dissertation.

If I had a shoe-shop and this was all about shoes, there would be no problem, would there?

As for your questions, most of which I do not think I've seen before, and thus have not previously been occasioned to address:

a) There is no list of dissertations/theses available. This, in fact, is a bone of contention here, and one that has been gnawed on several occasions. More than likely there will be such a list made available. This, and a few other things that we wish to do, requries manpower, however, and so additional cost.
b) Individuals and organisations with a proper reason can request the loan of such documents. Such bodies would usually be sponsoring parties or colleagues. Their knowledge of the document would have come directly from the author.
c) This I think I've answered elsewhere? In my recollection, we've had 'a handful' such requests, but I cannot be any more specific, unfortunately, details would be in specific individual files. Now, if only afford a full-time librarian were in the budget.
d) Yes, Danish residents are free to enroll with KU.

I hope this will add to your delight as I prepare tonight's feast. Pizza and fizzy drinks. Hooray for the steel lining of children's stomachs.

Oh, and lest I forget, I may revisit (From 'Wimpinator 4 - Rise of the Live-Yeast Carrot Buns').


Henrik


__________________

 

Henrik, I'll take you at your word that I could possibly be even more delighted with your photo.

Shoe shops are different. But to continue to use your analogy, let's say that a promise was made that a turn-key shoe shop was available for sale, including all required employees. I question whether or not such a promise could in fact be reasonably met.

The part of the KU turn-key offer that looks highly suspect to me is the list of adjunct professors. I also would like to point out a criticism that's potentially relevant to this discussion. I seem to recall a criticism of KU that a list of adjunct professors seems to be advertised that includes many people that have never actually worked for KU. This would seem to indicate the possibility of deception, if not dishonesty? Selling such a list as part of a turn-key operation would seem to be very encouraging to fraudulent behavior?

 

Whilst some of Gus Sainz latest post may well have represented 'tongue in cheek' mentality, it is without doubt the most obnoxious/rudest/ignorant/destructive piece I have ever had the displeasure to read. The post strongly endorses the view that some Senior members of DegreeInfo are not remotely interested in distance learning.
His comments do absolutely nothing for the DegreeInfo cause or for distance learning, and, as I mentioned in a previous post, people like Gus could never have had any serious involvement in DL. Just imagine a new student having to read/listen to comments such as those from Gus Sainz?!

 

What can I say? I guess you don’t read much? Moreover, I presume you are either unfamiliar or not a fan of Dan Akroyd and SNL. In your view, is Henrik the only one allowed to employ sarcasm?

How do you figure? What in my post would lead you to that conclusion?

Sorry to disappoint you, but as usual, you are wrong. Have you ever posted any helpful information concerning DL on this forum? If so, I must have missed it. (Your attempts to convince others than a blatant degree is a viable choice don’t really count as they can’t really be considered helpful.)

Yes sir! Imagine a new student considering enrolling in Knightsbridge University reading my post and then actually reading everything Henrik has posted to see what the brouhaha is all about. With so many legitimate alternatives, only the seriously addled would continue to consider KU an ethical or feasible option.

Moreover, Dr. Quack, I have no idea why you are so upset. Henrik is on record stating that he occasionally succumbs to the desire to rile me. I am sure that he is not disappointed to find out he may occasionally succeed. However, as the saying goes, “Be careful what you wish for…”

 

I believe that I owe everyone following this thread an apology for distracting Henrik from the better questions (like Bill's and Gus's). My only defense is that I really am enjoying Henrik's posts. Sorry again and I'm looking forward to Henrik's next gem.

 

Yep. Readin' one right now, in fact.

Other than promoting attending degree mills, is there anything else?

 

Both Gus & Rich again endorse my thinking quite nicely - which is that they both have little to offer DegreeInfo members, except abuse. They get even worse when someone gives them a tune-up.
Both really need to read "How to Win ....". (But in suggesting that I appreciate that I'm really sinking to their gutter level of debate)
There is little wonder that everyone in the USA needs to be armed! In 'paradise' we still only really need to protect ourselves from low flying mallards.

 

This is the most hypocritical thing I’ve read in a long time. I challenge you, Dr. Quack, to point out a single post of yours on this forum that is eloquent or helpful.

You assume too much (vis-à-vis friends and influence). Do you really believe that slamming Americans will bolster your case? You can’t be that naïve and ignorant. Then again, you do have the (degree mill) credentials that attest to that fact, don’t you?

 

Sorry Gus, I didn't think you were an American. All the American's I know have charm, personality, charisma, are polite, constructive, helpful, respectful, and so on! And none of them would ever recite the blatant garbage that you keep pouring out.
Apart from my comments about yourself all my posts have been constructive. I suggest you read them and attempt to digest what they say. (That's another constructive suggestion!)
I've also now arrived at the conclusion that you must have been the reason behind the departure of my country cousin Peter French. I must ask Peter next time I'm talking to him.
'Dr Duck in Paradise'

 

Educated people do not engage in stereotypes.

That Peter left is hardly a demerit to this forum. Of course, the opposite could be a consideration. (But I'm just kidding, of course.) At any rate, perhaps your conjecture regarding the subject should be constrained by the notion that "Dr. Dr." French has never been at a loss for words, and could certainly explain it himself. I doubt seriously he would attribute it to anything Gus (or anyone else) had to say.

 

So, Dr. Quack, what nationality would you have me be? In your view what nationality is completely devoid of the laudable characteristics you are now (after slamming them) attributing to Americans?

Let’s see, Dr. Quack. You have never, ever, posted anything relevant to distance learning. Your first and second posts touted the benefits of a degree mill. Your third post slammed DegreeInfo, and suggested that it should change to suit your needs:

POST 3
I THINK A BROWN TEAL FORUM WOULD BE NICE, INSTEAD OF LOTS OF ACCREDITED V UNACCREDITED.

Your fourth post is typical all of the rest that followed: nothing but personal attacks.

POST 4
TO UNCLE J - BROWN TEAL (WHICH WERE HISTORICALLY CALLED - THE BROWN DUCK) DON'T QUACK.
WES GRADY - HAS OBVIOUSLY HAD LESSONS IN RUDENESS FROM THE GREAT RC?
SADLY, ONLY THREE RESPONDENTS HAVE APPRECIATED THE POINT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO DISCUSS.

POST 5
DRWETSCH HAS ALSO HAD LESSONS FROM RC?

POST 6
GUS SAINZ CERTAINLY NEEDS TO READ THE MANUAL!

POST 7
I SEE THAT RC IS NOT CONTRIBUTING TO 'DEGREEINFO' ANYMORE, BUT I SEE HE IS STILL POSTING ON OTHER DL SITES; WHERE HE HAS ALSO UPSET MANY CONTRIBUTORS.

Etc., etc., etc.

Once again, I challenged you to produce a single post of yours on this forum that is relevant and helpful to those interested in distance education. The simple fact is, you can’t.

Given a choice between you or Frenchie, I’ll take Frenchie any day. At least Frenchie, when comprehensible, made relevant contributions to this forum.