Kennedy Western University - How would you evaluate?

NO! NO! NO! You are stating a falsehood. K-W does not offer credit for prior learning. This is what a legitimate University does. K-W gives credit simply because you have a resume. Additional credits can be had by stating you have attended some conferences. There is absolutely no attempt, zero, nada, to equate any experience a person has had with learning or knowledge acquired from that experience. This fundamental practice is exactly what keeps K-W in the bogus category.

How do I know? I paid my application fee and sent a resume and a list of conferences attended. No mention whatsoever of any specific activities at these conferences. Could have spent all my time in the Tiki-Tiki-lounge. K-W didn’t care. They were very quick to award me all the credits I needed for an Executive MBA with just 4 courses remaining and a final paper.

Don’t let anyone tell you, or don’t kid yourself if you think there is any legitimate assessment going on in awarding credit for prior learning at K-W. The process is as bogus as a three dollar bill.

 

Huh? You said in a previous post:

"In the eyes of all but a few DegreeInfo members Kennedy Western is a perfectly creditable university."

The first choice in the poll was "Kennedy Western is a perfectly creditable university."

6% of the respondents support your statement. 20% saw some credibility in KW and 74% says KW has virtually no credibility. How can this be "In the eyes of all but a few..."?

Have you been taking lessons in spin doctoring from Bill Clinton?

Regards - Andy

 

A persons experience history, in the form of a resume, is a legal document - as our good friends John Davy and Frank Abnagale found out. The fact that you don't have to go to great lengths to prove to the K-W people that the experience and qualifications claimed in a resume are genuine is really quite irrelavent, until you become legally challenged! The onus is nowadays clearly on the individual to complete a resume in a truthful manner. The day has gone where you can BS your way through a resume and get away with it for any great length of time.

 

LOL (I am laughing a lot these days)
Are you serious?????? Please???

This doesn't even deserve a response, but I couldn't resist.

 

This sort of pathetic reply is the key reason why only a pathetic number of members responded to the K-W poll - and why only a few different members ever post on DegreeInfo, as the abuse they suffer at the hands of self-styled 'experts' is totally unacceptable.
I would politely suggest that many so-called Senior Members should be reduced to Student Members, paticularly when they make no contribution to the thread, or have nothing of any significance to offer!

 

First off, you need not get away with it for "any great length of time". A very short length of time is all that is needed with K-W. While you may be found out eventually in the business world, you will never be found out by K-W because they do absolutely no checking. You seem to resist acknowledging this critical responsibility of a legitimate university.

Also, you keep confusing experience with learning or knowledge. We have all had the pleasure of working with or for a person that has had many years experience and but has very little knowledge. You see, this is what an institution of higher learning does. They assess what one knows not simply what one experiences. A university is responsible for having policies in place that do not rely on the good nature of an individual to tell the truth. They are in place to ensure and verify that what a person claims they know is in fact true. A resume may be 100% accurate in detailing what a person has experienced. It is 0% accurate in demonstrating a person’s knowledge.

Take just 30 seconds to consider how legitimate universities assesses knowledge and learning based on a persons experience then compare to K-W. There is nothing to compare because there is no assessment attempted by K-W.

As long as you insist on avoiding this critical difference, you will continue to be successful in kidding yourself.

 

This one statement tells all about the K-W apologist mindset. It is in fact the pinnacle of relevance as it is the responsibility of the institution to assess and verify that the credit they are granting is supported by the learning and knowledge claimed. This is not left to the whim and good nature of an individual. There are legitimate processes in place by many, many universities that are designed to assure that any credit granted is tied to specific and demonstrable prior learning. The institution performs this function. It is the responsibility of the institution to perform this function. That you would even imagine that "...you don't have to go to great lengths to prove to the K-W people that the experience and qualifications claimed in a resume are genuine is really quite irrelevant..." tells all and indicates there is not real debate here. Your argument is much like those that insist we never landed on the moon or that the holocaust never happened. It is an argument based on the irrational. Legitimate universities are expected to follow clear and documented procedures in assessing knowledge and assigning credit. K-W is academically bankrupt in this.

 

I assume you had other things you also sent to K-W besides these conferences, certificates, diplomas, work experience. The entire package you sent should be included to accurately see what they do, and how they are lacking in their evaluation process. What was the content of the rest of the resume?

 

Your assumption would be incorrect. I sent no diplomas, no certificates, nothing that could be reasonably used to assess knowledge or prior learning.

I sent exactly this:

A one and a half page resume

I filled out the online application form that asks if you attended any conferences or seminars. I indicated 10 of these, as I was told to do by the K-W advisor, and none of them listed any actual activities I took part in in those conferences.

That is it. Nothing more. The complete picture right there. About a week after submitting, I received a call from the K-W advisor with the "good news", as she put it. I was awarded enough credits for "prior learning" to have to take just four courses and a final paper to "earn" the legal K-W Executive MBA. Keep in mind that a quick review of half a dozen lower tier, plain Jane universities requires between 12 and 16 courses for an EMBA. But why go through all that mess of actually taking courses or demonstrating equivalent knowledge when there is the legal K-W just waiting to offer eight graduate courses were of credit for a resume?

I did exactly as I was instructed and I won the jackpot of available credit. Anyone that is sending in a portfolio of information and documents and even remotely believes anyone looks at it, much less cares about it, is living in the land of K-W make believe.

This is legal and wonderful K-W assessment process.

 

I felt it not fleasable to vote as I know nothing of K-W other than what is found in this and a few other threads.

 

As you have said, they can't be checking anything in a 1 1/2 page application form, and I gather from your comments that no transcript would have to be sent later from the previous schools. This evaluation process, as described, is bankrupt.

 

I am by no means a K-W apologist and I have had considerable experience in the field of recognition of prior learning and experience.
From what PaulC tells us I believe we can assume that, like John & Frank, his resume was ficticious? or at least he had a guilty
conscience over what he submitted to K-W.

 

I don't understand what you mean by, "From what PaulC tells us I believe we can assume that, like John & Frank, his resume was ficticious? or at least he had a guilty conscience over what he submitted to K-W."

My effort was strictly from a research perspective. I have never had nor will I have any interest in K-W as a supplier of courses or degrees. There is no situation here that would call for feelings, guilt or otherwise. I don't know what you are saying here.

I had read many opinions regarding K-W and read the K-W literature, and while my assumptions regarding the legitimacy of K-W were pretty well formed after this, I had no specific and validated data to support my assumption.

I decided to get the answer the only way a researcher can, which is to conduct actual research. Something often lost through the opinions and assumptions found within the confines of this forum.

I called K-W and spoke with "my" advisor (read: K-W sales rep). I asked about the assessment processes in order to find out how many credits or courses I could get waived through prior experience. My advisor asked me to send in my resume and fill out the online application and to "make sure" I included at least ten references to attending conferences or workshops.

I sent in a thoroughly accurate and truthful, albeit abbreviated, one and a half page resume and I filled out the information online as directed by "my" advisor.

As I have previously posted, a week later "my" advisor called me to tell me I had been awarded the full possible credits towards an Executive MBA. All that was left for me to do was pay the approx. $7000 and select any four courses I wanted and complete a final paper.

You may make whatever assumption you would like. This right is oft utilized in this forum. However, any assumption that infers anything other than what I have indicated would be a waste of a perfectly good assumption.

 

I know of another fellow that had zero college credits but had apparently negotiated entrance into a K-W Ph.D. program. He didn't take the offer after finding out that K-W was a degree mill but he was initially tricked by their claim to state approval and thought it might be the same thing as accreditation.

 

I'm curious about your considerable experience in this field, because every properly accredited institution that does grant credit for prior learning and experience uses one or more fairly rigorous forms of knowledge verification... either exams (written or oral), evaluation of written or other materials that the applicant has produced in the course of gaining the subject experience, submission of documentation (which is usually verified) of coursework or seminars completed, or other bona fide proof.

I would expect that someone with extensive experience in the field would understand the assessment process and know that K-W's process, by comparison with the real thing, is a complete joke. No actual attempt is made to ensure that *any* learning has taken place -- or indeed that the person has even done what s/he claims on a resume or application.

The verification That is the difference between a legitimate school and a less-than-wonderful or mill.

 

Having experience with KW I can say that the above is true. I was never asked for official sealed transcripts from my AS degree, and I am pretty sure no references were contacted. I had to take 6 courses of which 4 were of my choosing as long as 2 were higher level. I had to take 2 courses in engineering mathematics with calculus, and these were much harder than the courses I had at in my AS program.

I took college transfer general education courses in my AS program, and the KW mathematics were much harder, and at a higher level than I expected. The other KW courses were also a lot harder than I had imagined. I had fewer courses, but I had to study a lot more for the KW courses than I ever studied for my RA AS degree.

So, I agree that KW admissions is a joke, but you probably can make what you want out of any degree program. Looking back I honestly think if I had balked at the idea of taking the 2 courses that the advisor suggested they might have let me choose 2 more, but he sold me on the point that I had only taken Calculus with one variable, and needed more math. I feel like I did enough work with my background and experience to earn a non traditional degree, but I am sure their are others who complete the KW program who are a lot less qualified to have the degree.

I am sure I am less qualified than someone with a traditional degree in the academic world, but in the real world mainly because of experience I can run circles around most engineers. I came up from being an electrician, electronics technician, contractor, and so on to being an engineer. When I design a control system, or distribution system, and do the CAD drawings I can look for the best way to do things from the entire perspective of the job because I have been there. Some guys who have only seen things from one side do not have that advantage. The KW degree may not have been the best choice, but I think it was a viable choice especially with the information I had at the time.

Any arguments here?

 

My father moved around a lot following his work, so I changed school often. I went to four different high schools. One difficult, two about average, and the last one, not very good. I graduated from the bad one. At all of these schools there were good students, even at the last one. Good students often come from bad schools. K-W may be a bad school, but some of the students have done some good work, and increased their knowledge. You made the choice you wanted to using the knowledge at hand. From what has been shown I will call K-W a bad school, but above a degree mill. I respect your efforts, and view you as a good student, and when combined with your experience, and previous education, that you have earned your diploma. My opinion, for what that's worth.

 

I'll take you at your word that you learned while taking classes at K-W. I can assume that you're a great engineer. I will even grant that sometimes employers accept a K-W degree as valid. People fall for scams all the time.

You have to draw the line somewhere as to what makes a degree. The standard line is defined by RA. I believe that DETC accreditation tries to draw the line in the same place. DETC just isn't as vigilant in ensuring this standard is in fact met. CCU is unaccredited but appears to try to meet this standard. CCU's problem is that they're not accredited (yet) so we can't feel real comfortable about how well they meet this standard. Anything below that line is not a standard degree and in my view doesn't cut the mustard.

K-W doesn't even try to come close to the standard. The K-W use of life experience for credit is apparently a joke. It is a marketing tool used to convince prospective victims that K-W is close to the standard. This is the typical scam for the classical degree mill. It appears to me that the K-W sales department works the same as the classical degree mill sales department. The least academic work one can do and still get a K-W degree is closer to a degree given for zero work than it is to a standard degree.

Where do you draw the line for what makes a valid Bachelor's degree, for example?
120 credits is standard
Is 60 good enough? I say no.
Is 30 good enough? I say absolutely not and K-W is below here.

I will grant you that you even earned something at K-W but it certainly wasn't a Bachelor's degree. (assuming that is what we're talking about)

 

Bill:

Here is my portfolio:

Piedmont Tech. College ASEET 76 credit hours (all general ed. courses college transfer)

Clemson University 12 semester hours.

KW 30 credit hours (6 courses and a final project)

Credit for 16 years work experience, certificates, seminars, and licenses at least 10. (it could be a lot more)

Lets see that is 127.

You can have your view, but I see that I earned a degree. Every exam I took was proctored by an instructor at the technical college. Does CCU, UOP or AIU have proctored exams? This is not to take up for KW because you have seen my views here about the administration.

Anyone who still thinks that my degree is not earned or valid can meet me under the mistletoe that I have attached on the belt loop of the back of my Levi's!

 

If you're so certain that you've earned a valid degree, why are you so bent on justifying it to everyone? One of the many advantages of earning a RA degree is that it needs no defending.

You're making the common mistake of assuming that since you did some work, you have a valid degree. I've read many stories of people who wrote substantial papers for Columbia State University, the biggest diploma mill ever.

The standard is the credibility of the institution issuing the degree, not the student. In that regard, I think K-W falls far short.


Bruce