How Japan Views Non-Traditional Education, including Union & CCU

Re: soaring porkers time

It would be very good if we could dispense with the generalities. It's difficult for individuals to act as a category. This thread appears to be civil and informative. No need to incite.

 

supersonic bacon

I stand by my statements based on observation of at least two crabby people on this thread.

I stand by my observation of the bizarre need felt by many CCU grads to pick a fight --openly or subtly--on this forum when virtually everybody on this forum has applauded CCU's newly minted accreditation. I guess it's not wanting to take yes for an answer. I really don't know. Maybe Dr Levicoff is right. It is beginning to affect my previously good opinion of CCU. I start to wonder what's wrong with a school that gives rise to this nearly universal behavior pattern displayed here by its students and graduates.

Given the untrue and blanket categorizations in which you join elsewhere, not to mention the relentless denunciation of one Union grad in particular, the access of highmindedness is truly elevating. But the comparisons stand.

Who's inciting? You make ad hominem insinuations, but no one is supposed to notice? Apparently you are already incited--and generalizing. I don't need to do anything toward that end. You are managing just fine on your own. You began this thread with a disingenuous "I post this not to inflame." If flaming were not your intent, no disclaimer would have been necessary.

 

generality aloft atop a winged shoat

JALT >>> "Japan"

 

Just wanted to state that I am not a CCU graduate in fact my Degree is RA, granted not a familiar college but RA none the less. As for my prior post I will ask Mr. Douglas to forgive the post, I am new to this board. I appreciate that he can criticize the college he chose, didn't know this beforehand. I didn't have an overall picture. But it stemmed more from reading various threads on this board. We tend to look down on people willing to take the step forward or devalue the their achievements because they didn't decide to choose our route. I think instead we should be applauding their effort to attain an education and progress farther, wether it be at work or in life. College is what you make of it, I've seen some people that graduated from respectable organizations, and wonder to myself if they bought their degree. The point is they are willing to put the work forth to achieve their goals, no matter what the accreditation. Instead of outright buying a degree. Reading these threads with an open mind sometimes you can see all point of views. We should all do this more often, including myself, I didn't do that earlier. People wander onto this forum for help in acheiving the things some of us already have. That should be the purpose of this forum, not propogating our own specific idea, but all ways to achieve them.

 

to be honest I appreciate Unions PHD program. As long as one achieves the end that the university wants you to. Then why not? We shouldn't put strict limitations, saying every PHD program has to have this, or this, and this. If you acheive the intent of that program, than that program is a good program. that doesn't mean it should be some simplistic thing. I agree that there should be some sort of dissertation, but a meaningful one.

 

Mr DeLeon: Thank you for your clarifications and your current thoughtful posts. I believe you get my point: no one is looking down on CCU's accreditation. No one here condemns any legitimate, academically responsible, quality-controlled (that almost but *not* always means RA or NA or "foreign GAAP"), financially honest degree process. I am one of the insisters on that "not always."

Some processes are more standard than others; the less standard, often the less utility--but not necessarily the less *intrinsic* worth to the student (I'd say utility is a form of extrinsic worth). Because there are some limits on utility of NA degrees--rightly or wrongly--and severe limits on the utility of (responsible) unaccredited degrees, that fact has been mentioned here and will continue to be mentioned here.

The bottom line is that if a person chooses a degree process with impaired utility, that's a fact of life that student or graduate will have to live with.

Some people (not yourself, in light of your most recent posts) like to trash the messengers that bring this middling news. Some folks like to trash the messengers that bring the bad news of a school's illegitimacy, dishonesty, or academic worthlessness.

What bothers me about this is that newcomers to this board might read the disingenuous and self-serving rationalizations made by proponents of less-than-wonderful schools and construe them as either factually solid or representative of opinion on this board, when in plain fact they are neither.

Where I suspect you and I may disagree is on the extent of latitude that can exist within, say, the PhD process and still have a legitimate PhD. I suspect I might disagree with other posters in a different direction as well. That's a topic for another thread, perhaps, but surely not for this one.

Welcome aboard.

Janko Preotul

 

You seem very sensitive. And something of a mystic, being able to read people's minds. Why don't you post something of educational use, like the article that initiated this thread about non-traditional education, instead of glomming onto other threads and trying to incite an argument. Your opinion of one school or another is of little interest.

 

Re: supersonic bacon

Ironically, it was the comment that made it a flame. The article itself was innocuous, and certainly didn't contain any negative references to Union like Rod inferred. ("Based on this kind of information, I would have to agree with both Rich and Steve in not recommending Union for doctoral studies especially since they are still having problems with their doctoral programs.")

He posts a 6-year old article that doesn't say anything negative about Union, then says that kind of information would dissuade him from enrolling. If he'd just posted it, no one would have drawn the conclusion he offered.

 

Cap'n, the low-level radar is oinking again.

As J. Budziszewski once put it, I have "a well-calibrated baloney meter."

THUD!

I didn't think they could really fly...

 

If you guys weren't so defensive, we wouldn't have a problem. There's some good stuff in that article and it is one of the best summary descriptions of the non-traditional education market I've read. I couldn't find anything in it to disagree with. And I think it still applies.

 

Funny, I didn't disagree with any of it, either. But perhaps that's because I actually read it. Your initial post in this thread, including the conclusive comment at the end, makes it appear you didn't.

 

Good, then we agree. My conclusive comment was also in agreement with your own.

The rest is just attitude.