Kennedy-Western Faculty to Present at DL Conference

That's why I was careful to word it legitimate questions; that is, questions brought up by the content of the presentation.

 

I wrote:

"Valuable work being done at a questioned school can do a great deal to improve its reputation. If a non-accredited university is generating real scholarship, then the accreditation issue recedes a little."

I don't know who you are quoting, but I think that the remark is overstated and I certainly would't agree with it in every case.

But more to the point, I don't understand the relevance of somebody saying something different than what I said. There's always going to be somebody saying something different than me. That's the human condition.

But what are they doing?

They aren't presenting the results of research conducted under K-W auspices. They aren't reporting the findings of K-W scholarship. Tey aren't contributing to those kind of conversations at all.

Instead, they are making a presentation showcasing what they apparently want people to think is K-W's new course delivery and design.

That's why I said that the presentation looks to me more like marketing than scholarship. Obviously I haven't heard what the K-W people have to say, and hopefully Tony Pina can attend and report back on it.

I was thinking more along the lines of academic departments participating in the intellectual lives of their disciplines.

To take an extreme example, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory is currently only NY Regents approved. They recently rolled out a Ph.D. program after 100 years as a non-degree-granting research institution. But despite their current lack of RA, I don't think that CSHL will encounter any doubts.

Why? The Cold Spring Harbor Symposia. Thousands of scientific papers. Multiple Nobel Prizes. The fact that James Watson (of 'Watson and Crick' DNA fame) was their longtime president. Everybody in molecular biology is already familiar with who Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory are. RA is almost unnecessary for a school like that.

But what if CSHL didn't produce any work in molecular biology at all, and just made a single conference presentation touting their new class design, after a long history of questionable practices? Would that presentation really advance the credibility of their scientific doctorates?

If K-W wants to grant credible-but-unaccredited advanced degrees in things like engineering, it probably needs to think about presenting some K-W work at engineering and applied science conferences. And it probably needs to start participating in collaborative projects with scholars at other schools and making some valuable contributions to the field. The rest of the discipline needs to be able to have the confidence that something is actually happening at K-W besides marketing and sales.

 

To the list I must also add Dr. George Gollin, who has an exeptional knowledge of the major players in the underworld of diploma mills. I had the pleasure of spending an hour in Dr. Gollin's office today (I was at the U. of Illinois for a conference)..a very gracious man (and my first face-to-face encounter with a fellow Degreeinfo regular.

Tony

 

I have just looked over a copy of the final program. Apparently, Ms. Swanson & Ms. Meister-Emerich are not delivering a presentation per se, but are participating in this conference's version of a "poster session", which is a demonstration area where people can go to view and ask questions about the course.

At the request of my colleagues here, I'll visit their display and report what I observe.

Tony

 

Ya pays yer money and ya gets yer booth....

 

avoiding a complicated confrontation

It's safer for K-W: a sharp question from the audience can be followed by even sharper (and more revealing) questions when a speaker is known to be presenting a controversial subject. Imagine how an exchange concerning Lt. Cmdr. Gelzer's testimony might unfold! So a poster presentation lets the K-W participants deal with individual, rather than massed, challenges.

 

So these people are not going to present any sort of scholarly research or really anything of the sort. They're going to sit on a couple of folding chairs, behind a folding table, beneath a banner and hand out brochures to anyone who will take one. There will be a computer set up and interested passersby will be able to see Pysch 101 as it has been designed for this demonstration. In my neck of the woods they call this a "dog and pony show." Then, just as Learner has stated (above) they will proudly post on their website that they made a "major presentation of their 'state of the art' educational technology" or some other similar crap, at this conference. Good call Learner. Beyond all that I'd like to say that I'm glad that Quinn is posting again and that while I respect his knowledge, abilities and accomplishments, I think that he made a bit of a rushed judgement in this case.
This school is nothing but nothing.
Jack
(I's also like to say thanks to Tony and acknowledge my respect and confidence in his judgement of such matters)

 

From the Conference Program:

"Asynchronous delivery of an open-entry course"

Andree Swanson, Kennedy-Western University
Keren Meister-Emerich Kennedy-Western University

This is an example of one course, out of 500 courses offered, which demonstrates the delivery model used by Kennedy-Western University. Courses are designed using a modular format, which includes multiple self-assessment opportunities. Offered as open-entry, a student may be the only one taking the course at a given time or may be one of many enrolled at the same time. The model allows for anytime, any pace, and any place learning.



Tony

 

Thanks, Dr. Pina, for posting this information from the conference brochure.

KW"U" must think that they can state or market anything to anyone because no one has access to what they do (or do not do). Maybe that is why they act so secretively.

LOL.

"(KW) Courses are designed using a modular format, ......."

- How can this be true if students buy a textbook, read the textbook (or the Index and glossary, LOL), then take an open-book exam whenever they want to? No chapter-by-chapter design, no required section-by-section completion timetable, no reviews, no online teaching, no nothing! Where are the modules? What does "modular format" mean?

"....... which includes multiple self-assessment opportunities."

- Multiple self-assessment opportunities? Where? It is documented that "students" may take a practice test before they take the one open-book test. Where are the "multiple self-assessment opportunities?" Besides, what good is "multiple self-assessments" without the necessary instructor or even web-based, well-directed guidance, frequent or occasional faculty review and feedback on the learner's work, with corrective/remedial actions and advice, if necessary? 'Tis as good as .... nothing!

"........open-entry, a student may be the only one taking the course at a given time ........." So? What good is that if the "student" is entirely on his or her own (and, as amply documented, can complete 40 percent of a Masters degree requirement after a mere 16 hours of work? LOL!).

"The model allows for anytime, any pace, and any place learning.

- Wow! What a great innovation by KW"U"! (never before heard of in legitimate, accredited, DL-land! Let's hear the applause!

LOL.

Seriously, does this marketing of naught, nihility, nix, nothing, actually sway anyone to enroll? (tsk, tsk, ....... Yes, of course, it does! ...... unfortunately).

Thanks.

 

One of my colleagues at Northeastern is also participating in the Course Design Showcase, demonstrating her "hybrid" (part online, part face-to-face) Intro to French course. It appears that Kenndey-Western's course will be among some illustrious company, as the list of other showcase participants below illustrates.

Each presenter (or team) will get 45 minutes to display the course. Five courses are displayed at a time. A total of 40 courses will be displayed throughout the conference. K-W's session is Thursday, August 4 at 11:15-12:00. Here is a partial list of the institutions:

University of Minnesota
Penn State
University of Maryland University College
University of California-Davis
California State University-Sacramento
Northeastern Illinois University
University of Wisconsin
University of Illinois
Indiana University
Iowa State University
University of Cincinnati
Mississippi State University
University of West Florida
University of Tennessee
University of North Dakota
DePaul University
Thomas Edison State College

Since the concurrent sessions and confernce forums are also happening at the same time as the course design showcases, I will not be able to see all 40 displays. However, in response to my colleagues at Degreeinfo, I will make it a priority to check out K-W's display and some others. I am eager to see how they compare.

Tony Piña, Ed.D.
Northeastern Illinois University

 

Thanks, Dr. Piña, for this information.

ALL of the above are properly accredited, legitimate, high-quality, world class US universities.

The unaccredited and un-wonderful "school," KW"U", clearly does not belong in this august company!

Someone please post the contact information re: who we can contact/write to/send a protest to.

We must do our part to ensure that this travesty (of KW"U" an unaccredited entity marketing itself by masquerading among properly accredited universities at a national DL conference) is not repeated ever again.

Or else,in fairness, this DL conference needs to be open for participation also by the likes of SR"U" and Monroe "University".

Thanks.

 

As promised, I am reporting my observation of the Course Showcase presented by Andrée Swanson, Dean of Business, and Keren Meister-Emerich, Adjunct Faculty, Kennedy-Western University, at the 2005 Distance Teaching & Learning Conference in Madison, Wisconsin.

The Course Showcase was one of 12 concurrent sessions held at the conference (the other 11 sessions were more formal presentations or workshops). Five laptop stations were set up to demonstrate a course that had been developed by the presenters. Since a colleague of mine was presenting her hybrid (part-online) French course, I was in the room during the entire session.

Ms. Swanson took the lead in demonstrating Kennedy-Western’s course. She was very open to questions and candid about the school’s operation and lack of accreditation. She stated that some people referred to all unaccredited schools as diploma mills, but that Kennedy-Western did not deserve that label, since KW require students to complete coursework, rather than just awarding degrees for no work.

Ms. Swanson used the Blackboard Course Management System during her presentation. Since I supervise the Blackboard Administrator and technical support staff at my university, I am very familiar with this system.

Ms. Swanson brought up a list of KW courses that she was currently “teaching”--I put this in quotes because she stated that KW faculty do not actually teach courses, nor do they normally interact with students. Students may enroll in a course at any time (unbeknownst to the faculty member) and will have not contact whatsoever with the faculty member, unless the student decides to initiate a request for assistance if he or she is experiencing a problem with the course. There is no time limit for when students must complete a course—they can take as long as they wish. KW faculty, according to Ms. Swanson, are paid primarily to develop new courses, rather than interact with students. The presenters claimed that KW currently has over 500 courses in its catalogue. Ms. Swanson showed a list of about two dozen courses in Blackboard that she was currently “teaching” (facilitating) at the time—quite a workload for a Dean!

Although Ms. Swanson claimed that each course covers the same amount of material as a typical 3-4 unit course at an accredited university, those who viewed her presentation displayed skepticism—especially in light of her statements that: 1) courses include neither assignments nor any in-course assessments. Students do not turn anything in to the faculty for evaluation; 2)
100% of a student’s course grade is based on a final exam which is open book and not proctored (unless the student requests a proctor which, surprisingly, does not occur very often); 3) When Ms. Swanson actually launched a couple of KW courses in Blackboard, only the course announcements page was displayed. The navigation bar/buttons leading to the actual course content were not visible.

When it was asked, “Where was the rest of the course? She claimed that she had a connection problem and that the buttons weren’t displaying, so she could not really show the whole course (which was the point of the presentation to begin with). Those of us who have developed courses in Blackboard were not convinced, since we know that instructors can make any (or all) of their course buttons visible or invisible by using the program’s control panel. In addition, three of the other four presenters in the room (including my colleague ten feet away) were using Blackboard and had no trouble whatsoever displaying their entire courses.

There were, perhaps, over a thousand people who attended this conference, but I saw no more than ten people (including myself) who visited the Kennedy-Western display for any length of time. After speaking informally with those who viewed KW’s showcase, I received the distinct impression that they were all less than impressed, especially when compared to the other showcases by Northeastern Illinois, Penn State, Iowa State and West Florida.

At the end of the session, I went over to talk with my colleague and left one man to visit with the KW presenters. Interestingly, they invited the gentleman to have his picture taken at their display. I wonder if we will see that picture on the KW website? Had I stuck around, maybe I might have ended up there as well

When I asked another faculty colleague (a noted author of distance learning texts) about Kennedy-Western’s presence at the conference, she stated, “Well, they are highly visible in the distance learning arena. I think that it is good that people get a chance to see what they actually do and compare it to what we are doing.” Given the tepid response that I observed, I think that my colleague was right. Since I have had less experience with Kennedy-Western than others on Degreeinfo, I found this to be a fascinating experience.

 

The K-W model of signing up, studying on one's own, then writing a final exam with little or no faculty involvement beyond developing course materials is actually a pretty good description of the old U of London external LL.B. and LL.M. programs. I do not think K-W can be seriously faulted on that basis alone.

I should also mention that this system does not work for ME. I have decided to transfer my registration to the new, much more interactive and much more EXPENSE new program. But it HAS worked for thousands of U of L external students.

I wish I could make up my mind about K-W. I have heard all of the arguments, am aware of the long history of the school and its relations with state governments and such. I know that some VERY knowledgeable contributors to this forum label K-W as an out-and-out diploma mill.

Certainly, at the bachelor's level in engineering, K-W's requirements make me queasy.

But then I am reminded of their approach to dissertation doctorates; as I understand it, every K-W doctoral student has to research and write a dissertation to the satisfaction of three R/A Ph.D.s in the field. That just doesn't SOUND like a mill to me. A substandard school, perhaps, but then I have SERIOUS doubts about DETC's doctorate pilot project so I might well end up considering an ACCREDITED D.B.A. program to be substandard.

I just don't know. I would never earn a K-W degree, but I am uncomfortable in making a blanket condemnation of all K-W graduates.

 

I have to assume the UoL programs are/were not based on unproctored, open-book exams. It isn't the manner of study that is the problem, it is the manner of measurement.

Another problem, beyond the scope of this discussion, is K-W's millish propensity for awarding gobs of experiential credit for undocumented experiences.

It is clear that Kennedy-Western wasn't there to impress anyone, or even to educate anyone. They were there to be there, allowing them to state to anyone/everyone that they were there. It is another example of their desire to look like a real school without actually acting like one. In politics, this is called a "photo op." In distance education, is is merely another deception by the most visible of academic magicians. (Except K-W hopes you go away really believing the lady got sawed in half! )

 

No, U of London examinations are NOT proctored; but they ARE carefully "invigilated".

But how do you get around that Ph.D. process? It just doesn't SMELL millish...

 

Who selects the comittee? How is the comittee supervised? What outside agencies check on quality (in terms of process and products)?

It boils down to what one's definition of a school is. K-W does enough to keep its operators out of prison, but is it enough to escape the label "diploma mill"? Depends on how you define it, I guess.

 

This is an excellent report, Dr. Piña!

Thanks for sharing with us your detailed observations from the DL conference. Hopefully, it will engender serious discussion - and as far as I am concerned, contribute to the full exposure of some of the remarkably under-handed and millish business and educational practices at the unaccredited entity known as KW"U."

.

"...to the satisfaction of three R/A Ph.D.s in the field.....!" Since when? If true, it must be a fairly recent development! Nosborne, as of about a year ago, this is just plain incorrect! No three R/A Ph.D.s are/were required. All that is/was required is one KW faculty "reviewer."

There is no such "PhD process" at KW"U" as you surmise above. The process that was in place - again, as of about a year ago - is/was the same for all KW enrollees at all levels - Bachelors, Masters, or Ph.Ds. This is/was the process: A KW"U" enrollee for any degree, including a PhD, chooses a final paper topic, writes a proposal/final paper, and submits it to ONE (only one!) Faculty advisor, for review/approval. KW"U"'s final paper page requirements are/were as follows: 50 pages for BA/BS; 100 pages for MA/MS; and 150 pages for Ph.D.

No big strain there! I know of many students who can write a 50-page double-spaced paper in one night!

I am in possession of authoritative information on this point. Two of my students in my UMUC classes are former KW"U" enrolless. They disenrolled last year and successfully got their money back from KW"U" for, in their own words, "false advertising and making false claims and guarantees about KW"U" "courses" being as rigorous as similar courses at other properly-accredited universities.

Stories also abound, among those in the know, about the wide variety of quality that existed and could be seen in samples of KW"U" dissertations and Bachelors'/Masters' final papers that are made available on KW's intranet website for students to view. One of my students complained of a PhD dissertation she saw and downloaded that had typos (typos!) and other errors on the front page of the paper! - no telling what would pertain inside the paper itself.

Three required faculty reviewers would have caught that little "problem." Obviously, the one assigned faculty reviewer could conceivably have missed that one or slept through it. Note that the student writer of this paper did graduate and received his/her KW"U" Ph.D. - because only the final papers of "KW"U" "graduates" can be sampled on the website.

More on this later, hopefully.

Thanks again, Dr. Piña. The nature of this KWE wannabe-"university" begins (actually, continues) to unravel.

Thanks.

 

No, not at all. I agree with you. I do not believe that anyone is or should issue a blanket condemnation of all KW graduates. It is the millish and almost-millish practices of the "school," and hence the efficacy of the awarded degrees, that are in question - and righly so.

Then again, ........ there is the oft-cited argument about enrollees at some questionable, unaccredited entities or outright mills being willing co-conspirators ...........," knowing full well what they are/were doing or getting.

Thanks.

 

It would appear that I've been misinformed about the "three Ph.D.s" business.

Well, as I said, I would never pursue a K-W degree and I doubt if I'd ever hire anyone else who claimed one.

 

Thanks for the report, Dr. Piña. (I finally found the tilde on my keyboard!)

Haven't Kennedy-Western's apologists used the quality of the university's faculty as one of its biggest selling points? Ms. Swanson pretty effectively blew that out of the water. She eliminated quality of instruction as well.

It kind of sounds like she did K-W more harm than good.