Ireland's Chief Science Advisor has bogus degree

Your points are well taken. Some of you have been busy informing on these places. I heard a news interview this evening on Irish TV that the Government Body HETAC (Higher Education and Training Awards Council) has called on the government to crack down on such places. See the following article in the Irish Independent (front page Monday 14th November):
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1505977&issue_id=13271
(you can subscribe for free).

Back to McSweeney:
Heard John Bear on Irish radio tonight. He was excellent. You can hear his amusing interview by picking the 14th November show from the following link. The item on 10th November is also amusing:
http://www.rte.ie/news/57live.html

You can see an interview with McSweeney himself here:
http://dynamic.rte.ie/av/2090504.smil

One of the reporters suggests that academic snobbery is behind those who feel that, despite his talents, he is not fit to serve in his capacity any more. I'm sure there is some of that but they forget that the man is expected to advise on PhD-level research in science.

I understand there will be a decision this week.
(PS Sorry no dynamic links for webpages but I notice it tends to screw up the longer ones)

 

Government science adviser resists calls to step down

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sg-VAwP5LHV5YsgdL11Zs5FWAE.asp

Cheers,

George

 

While doing some web surfing, I found that Susan Stafford, the hostess on Wheel of Fortune before Vanna White, holds a doctorate in clinical psychology from....you guessed it, Pacific Western Univeristy.

The link to the news item is here:
http://www.pe.com/localnews/desert/stories/PE_News_Local_D_dspot14.1db25f5d.html

Subscription required, and not very interesting otherwise. (The article was about her getting a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. That's kind of a "Who's Who" deal, where the award is negotiated in advance.)

 

McSweeney is leaving his post

Sent to me from Ireland:

Also this:

 

Shuffle, shuffle, it's the FF waltz.

 

I loved this news item... Ironically, by "offering" instruction in so many disciplines PWU seems a bit like a "wheel of fortune". ;-)

Dave

 

There are a few subtle references to her Pacific Western PhD at her web site. Warning: if you want to check it out, turn down the volume on your speakers first.

 

No doubt. Zan Fir is truly the master of the Pan flute...

Dave

 

That would be Gheorghe Zamfir, who at least is a real whatever he is.*

*My late uncle, Asher Traianescu, used to say that there was nothing the matter with a panpipe player that a bucket of frozen mamaliga, swung briskly, couldn't fix permanently.

 

More movement stories

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=162652516&p=y6z653zzz

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10003938.shtml

Cheers,

George

 

http://pwunews.com/

This is all big news for PWU. I wonder why no write up in school newsletter?

 

Thanks, Unk. You're correct. So much for my failing memory of a David Letterman sketch...

Dave

 

So, B said "so you want me to resign... never - I am certainly as worthy as anyone to be called 'Dr'".

Then they said "ok we'll sack you". B said "My contract and the ad said nothing about having to have a doctorate... ". "If you think i'm going quietly you must be joking" and I'll sue.

Okay "how about another job with the same terms and conditions, we'll stop calling you Doctor and hopefully we will not have to explain how we failed to spot this prior to you appointment?"

On the other hand, many of us academics know he has been good at his job so perhaps this humiliation is enough to ensure that others think twice and yet he can still contribute. I wonder what you all think.

Btw: Congratulations to John Bear for keeping everyone honest.

 

Here's my 2 cents. I have read many cases of individuals with 'questionable' qualifications. Either they have sought to obtain them through alternative pathways (eg PWU, CPU etc), or they have claimed degrees they never had. Unfortunately, for many of the cases, the individuals who have done this have been damn good at their jobs. And the result? They lose their jobs, credibility and sometimes family. Why does society care so much about this? And why do they do it in the first place? Credentialism, screening theory, fraud, lying, deceit? Are they villains or victims of societal pressures? I seek to explore them all in my resesearch, but doubt I will come up with a magical answer. But it needs to be addressed.

Cheers,

George

 

George

Many of these schools were routinely listed with accredited schools as options for DL degrees in the 80's and 90's. You could also use them to sit for licensing exams. I don't think we should be surprised to learn that people actually earned degrees from schools like CPU,PWU etc.

Dan

 

Exactly my point. I know of at least 2 people who worked hard for their CPU degrees. Does CPU=PWU=timebomb? For some, yes. For others, no. Is there an exact answer on how these people should, or deserve to be treated based on their choice of alternative program? We keep debating the same topic over and over and over again.

Cheers,

George

 

"Worked hard?" They did, oh yes, and everyone else did not? So what if they did work hard? Aren't they supposed to, anyway? Is "working hard" a proxy for legitimacy, rigor and quality?

Not to jump on you at all, Sir George, but this is one statement that I see too many times, often not from the likes of you but from millists, shills, co-conspirators and "graduates" of many fake "U" 's. The assertion really is utterly meaningless and without merit. Having worked hard on your degree is no guarantee of its acceptability, rigor, or high standards.

So what if one worked hard on one's degree, especially if it is an unaccredited degree?

Does that mean that it MUST be widely accepted because the earner "worked hard?" What constitutes "working hard," anyway? What does one say to the SRU "grad" who says s/he worked hard for his/her degree? Or the Athenaeum U enrollee?

KW"U" enrollees say this all the time....... "I worked hard for my degree." Yeah, right. The insinuation is that they (the unaccrediteds) worked or work harder than the RAs or NAs or PAs, and thus their degrees or programs are/were of equal or better academic rigor -- and should be equally acceptable?

Balderdash, I say!

Working hard, especially as a statement made by the "worker" (and not a disinterested observer) is an unproven or unprovable assertion, uninteresting and devoid of any objectivity or markers of legitimacy or quality.

So Newbies, watch out for such empty boasts or declarations.

But please, do not fault Sir George for it.

The mythology popularizers and fakesters known as millists and shills, are the ones who own this "I worked hard for my unaccredited degree" slogan. Their bluff needs to be called, each and every time they use the phrase.

Thanks.

 

If I understand you correctly, you're stating that self-reported "hard work" is not a valid measure of academic rigor. Did I understand your point? Perhaps it could be one of several measures though, as reports of easy academic endeavors seem negatively correlated with academic rigor. Hard work should be one of several measures of academic rigor, in my view.

Dave

 

Yes, but .......

Dave Wagner:

"........ you're stating that self-reported "hard work" is not a valid measure of academic rigor.........?"

Me:

Yes, precisely. I will be glad to see "hard work" documentary or citation evidence, from any RA or NA or PA accreditation requirements document anywhere.

Dave Wagner:

"....... Perhaps it could be one of several measures though, ........."


Me:

I agree wholeheatedly (via using a scientifically-protocoled study).

Dave Wagner:

".....as reports of easy academic endeavors seem negatively correlated with academic rigor."

Me:

If I am reading your statement correctly, you may be saying what I, too, am implying, which is that no documented or known statistically significant correlation exists between unaccredited enrollees or graduates who "worked hard" (their own words) and their "degrees being of high (objectively recognized) academic rigor."

If not, then I may not be understanding what you meant with this partial statement. Forgive me if i am quoting you partially out of context. I would appreciate being provided with some published citations or references to the contrary or shedding some additional light on this (partial) statement.

Thanks.

Thanks.

 

Re: Yes, but .......

Hi. I meant that self-reports of "hard work" are a perfectly valid measure of academic rigor, but not the only measure, in my opinion, which supports George's original assertion that you might be challenging. If the burden of proof is on the party seeking relief, then you might want to provide some citations to support your elaboration of George's point... An idea.

Dave