Kennedy-Western University is moving towards accreditation in response to the new reg

And since KW won't do it, some state governments have decided to do it for them. For example, it is legal to advertise a KW degree in the State of Oregon, but only if a disclaimer is attached to indicate that the degree has no recognized accreditation.

Historically, KW has not offered its degrees to Oregon residents, apparently to avoid acknowledging this issue. The State of Washington recently adopted a similar law, and it will be interesting to see if KW stops offering degrees to Washington residents as well.

 

I believe that it is important to call KWU a diploma mill in this forum for a couple reasons.

1. People use the information provided here to make decisions on where to earn a degree. KWU is a poor choice for most people because the utility will generally not meet the expectation of most people that wish to earn a degree.

2. The attitude of the general public, I believe, is to automatically assume that any unaccredited distance learning general education school is a diploma mill. If someone has a degree from KWU, it is better that they be told up front what is thought of the degree rather than lossing credibility/respect without ever even finding out way.

So, it is best, IMHO, to tell it like it is. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then call it a duck even though it may be one of the more attractive ducks in the flock.

 

Gentlemen,
I am sure that you know to whom this is directed. I will no longer be drawn into this debate whirlpool. I see that it is fruitless to present any point of view with which you disagree.
For any point that I present, you will have a counter point that supports your opinion, conclusion, or point your view.
I have not tried to sell any school or program to anyone. I only gave my experiences in my post. Never did I say that others should enroll at any school, college, or university.
Therefore, I bow out of this discussion, but I will not walk away with my head bowed in shame, and neither will I hide my diploma in the hall closet.
Have a good life. I wish you well.
Bill947

 

I am sorry to see bill947 drop out of this thread. For the benefit of other engineers, I would like to offer a constructive alternative for those that might be looking at unaccredited engineering degrees.

I do not recommend unaccredited degrees in engineering, such as those from KW, because they are perceived negatively by a significant percentage of the engineering community. Whether or not KW deserves the title of “diploma mill,” there can be no doubt that many engineers do apply it. A KW degree will get little or no respect from mainstream academia, professional societies, or licensing boards. It’s true that some employers may regard it as acceptable, but it’s also true that others will regard it as disqualifying.

Yet I can understand why people pursue such degrees. ABET degrees are very difficult and expensive to earn, especially on a part-time or DL basis. So an unaccredited degree may seem like the only viable way to get an engineering credential.

But here is a suggested alternative: instead of an unaccredited bachelor’s degree, set your sights on passing the FE exam, and obtaining a state-issued Engineer-in-Training certificate. This is technically not a degree, but it is widely accepted as showing the same level of proficiency as an engineering bachelor’s degree. In fact, some ABET schools use the FE exam as an exit exam.

FE study materials are readily available, for relatively low cost. The widely-used PPI study guide costs $60, and even comes with a “pass or your money back” guarantee. You can, of course, supplement it with other books or sample exams. If you need a live tutor, you can enroll in PPI’s “Passing Zone” online courses, for $195 for 15 weeks. Even if you repeat the “Passing Zone” several times, it will still cost less than KW tuition.

Your state board may not allow you to sit for the FE exam without an ABET degree. In that case, simply apply in some other state that will (try California, Michigan, or New Hampshire). You may have to pay for airfare, a hotel, and a rental car in Los Angeles in order to take the FE exam there, but again -- it’s probably still cheaper than KW tuition.

If you pass, your state-issued EIT certificate will provide much more recognition and prestige in the engineering community than an unaccredited KW degree, and it will probably cost much less. Granted, an out-of-state EIT certificate will have no legal value in your home state, but this doesn’t really matter. Everyone knows that all states use the exact same FE exam, so an out-of-state EIT certificate still merits respect.

 

Hey bill947

Don't let these negative comments about your school bother you or consider those comments a expert opinions. You have to understand that this discussion board was created by and consist of a majority who has the opinions that any unaccredited school, with very few exceptions, are diploma mills. That includes State Approved schools too. It is interesting reading the posts on here and sometimes getting involved in sharing of opinions, that's what makes the world go round There are other discussion boards on the opposite side of the fence. I don't take those comments to be expert opinions either.

If you posted you had a degree from a place like Columbus University or the American World University, I would tell you flat out that is a joke. But from what I have read, KWU has changed somewhat from its past. Be proud of your accomplisment.

Until the federal laws and the DOE policy on accreditation changes, that is to make accreditation by a USDOE recognized agency mandatory to be classified as a school of higher education, then any school that offers a curriculum with course work and monitors its learners performance, the school is legitimate. All three of my degrees are from SACS accredited schools (AAS, AB, and MA Ed), and I don't consider all unaccredited schools to be diploma mills or substandard. So chin up and don't let things you don't like to hear bother you.

 

Robbie,

Thanks for the encouragement and the reply. I do not let the negative comments about the school bother me. It is pointless, in my opinion, to continue any dialog where there is always a counter point opposing the original viewpoint.
Like I said, I would not hide my diploma in the hall closet. I know what I accomplished, and it doesn’t matter what others think. It is not like I’m fresh out the college door. I worked in my field of discipline for over 50 years. I’ve been there and done that so to say. If you read my post you will see I only explained my experienced with the school. I cannot say what others do, that would only be conjecture on my part. In addition, I gave my life’s work experiences and my other college degrees. If this not convincing enough, what is?
I have no need for joining a Professional Organization, becoming a part of Academia, or acquiring a Professional Engineers License, in fact, I am not even in the labor force since I’ve been retired for 13 years. I worked my way through the KW Engineering Program as a past time project.

bill947

 

But as US citizens, aren't we affected by laws and policies at the state level, as well as the federal level?

If so, then depending on the state, we may find that unaccredited degrees are:

- flatly banned (e.g. North Dakota), or
- illegal to advertise, unless accompanied by a legal disclaimer (e.g. Oregon, Washington), or
- not acceptable for goverment employment (e.g. Michigan), or
- not acceptable for professional licensure (most states)

It would appear, then, that state governments do not necessarily define "legitimate" in the same way than Robbie does. And their opinions carry considerably more legal weight.

 

If you want to get an unaccredited degree solely for personal enrichment, then no one is likely to care. However, the fact is that many people do attempt to use unaccredited, non-standard degrees for professional purposes. And that's when the concern arises.

See, for example, the article "Are Fraudulent Academic Degrees Making a Mark on Engineering?", published recently in Engineering Times. This article indicates that KW degree holders have been applying for engineering licensure in Tennessee. A quick Google search revealed that similar issues with KW degrees have been reported by the state engineering boards in New Jersey, Nebraska, and Arkansas.

The KW homepage certainly doesn't appear to be targeting retirees looking for personal enrichment. Instead, it is aimed straight at the professional market:

 

While I understand the point of the article, being that KWU degrees are not equivalent to or as rigorous as standard engineering degrees, but the journalist is misusing the word "fraudulent" to embelish their story. The KWU graduates seem to be passing the required tests for licensure and are not using intentional deceit to deprive people of money or infringe upon rights.

The article also mentions that the schools in question don't require classroom instruction, which is evidence that the journalist doesn't really know enough about distance learning to write the article:

"These mills are described by GAO as nontraditional, unaccredited, postsecondary schools that offer degrees for a relatively flat fee, promote the award of academic credits based on life experience, and do not require any classroom instruction. Kennedy-Western University, California Coast University, and Pacific Western University are examples cited by GAO."

That part of the GAO report should have been explained by a knowledgeable person.

Again, standardized education means something but words are the stock and trade of journalists, too, so I'm wondering about the level of training of author of the article...

Dave

 

Your interpretation about "passing the required tests" is incorrect. The article indicates that "it's doubtful the [Tennessee] board would approve the application [from a KW grad] because the degree is not substantially equivalent to an engineering degree from an accredited university." If the application was not approved, then the individual in question never took the required tests for licensure.

In this instance, the KW grad in question was attempting to gain professional privileges that he was not entitled to, based on his educational background. Similar cases have occurred in other states. Granted, this is not "using intentional deceit to deprive people of money or infringe upon rights", but using intentional deceit to claim undeserved rights could also be regarded as unethical.

In general, scientists and engineers readily accept DL for some purposes; however, they are also strong believers in hands-on learning in supervised laboratory settings. There are ABET-accredited DL programs in engineering (e.g. Univ. of North Dakota), but they still require several weeks of full-time residency for lab work. DL is not considered a satisfactory format for labs.

From the standpoint of the engineering community:
"no classroom instruction" = no lab work = bogus.

 

Your points are worth considering and I would tend to go with your interpretation about not being approved to sit for the exams, but the article is almost too old and inaccurate to use as a reference about DL without the additional commentary you provided.

Dave

 

For argument's sake, let me throw this out: If a graduate from a school such as KWU or any unaccredited school for that matter was allowed to sit for such an exam to become licensed and they passed, doesn't this show that they have the knowledge equivelent to the graduates of the accredited schools required to become licensed? Or are you saying that it is a restricted club based on the "neighborhood" you come from?

I am in the middle of the road - not too far left and not too far right when it comes to accreditation. I like to hear others' opinions and what facts are there to back those opinions up.

 

I would say "yes", but unless KW grads show a reasonable pass rate as a group, I wouldn't conclude be able to conclude that KW was equivalent to an RA engineering program.

 

Arguably yes, and in fact, some states do take this position. In California, for example, it is theoretically possible to qualify for engineering licensure with no college degree at all, so presumably you could qualify with an unaccredited degree. You would need more qualifying work experience than someone with an ABET degree.

I don't know how many California licensed engineers are, in fact, graduates of unaccredited engineering schools, because such statistics are not reported. I've never heard of a California PE with an unaccredited engineering degree one, but they could exist. However, I would suspect that relatively few such graduates actually take licensing exams, and I would also suspect that their pass rate is probably low. This is definitely the case with California law school graduates.

 

To me, whats more important is the issue of quality output. An unaccredited school could actually produce quality graduates. Key issue is wether they are setup to really educate people or just in it for money.

 

In theory, yes. But how do you propose to evaluate this issue in practice ? Unaccredited schools -- by definition -- do not cooperate with independent outside evaluators.

Your definition only works if it is possible to conduct a comprehensive and unbiased evaluation of a school's educational program. If you can't -- and this is typically the case with unaccredited schools -- then it's worthless.

 

You previously mentioned that you took 10 courses at KWU for your degree. Here you mention that one of the ten was not actually required by KWU. How many courses were minimally required by KWU for you to graduate?

 

Bill Huffman

Bill, as I said in a previous post, I will no longer will be drawn into this debate whirlpool. I see that it is fruitless to present any point of view with which you and others disagree.
For any point that I present there will always be a counter point that supports a different opinion, conclusion, or point your view. I will not become the only favorite “Straw man.”
I gave my experiences in my post. Never did I say that others should enroll at any school, college, or university. I am not defending Kennedy Western, only my education, my life experience. I do not want to have what I have learned, or my education acquired over 50 years berated.
The Kennedy Western program was only one of many my educational endeavors and college experiences. I know you are against diploma mills. You are at liberty to think what you wish and I am also at liberty to do the same. I will not flame you for your statements and it appears you have respected mine. So out of consideration for you and the civil manner in which you asked, I will say that I was required to complete 8 courses, and write a 75 page research paper. My paper was longer (150 pages) because of the content I wanted to include. I was awarded credits for all courses and the Final Paper.
That being said, I will not reply to you or any others who berates my educational background.
That simply is unjustifiable.
Bill947

 

Thank you Bill947 for providing the tidbit of information and clarifying the data point.

I am not interested in beratting you for your experiences at KWU. I know that you didn't say that I did but I want to make it clear that my issue is with diploma mills devaluing and demeaning formal education for all of us.

KWU devalues and demeans formal education by not publishing their graduation requirements and by assigning individual graduation requirements apparently based more on what the individuals expect and want in order to get the sell rather than fixed requirements. There have been too many examples where KWU requires 7 or 8 classes for graduation when the person has an associates degree. Whereas KWU seems to only require 4 or 5 classes when the person has very little to no previous college credit. Why do you think that is? Perhaps it is just coincidence in the sample set that has been presented to us? I think a better explanation has to do with what the different KWU candidates expect. If they have some college experience then they have a better expectation of the amount of work that would be required to graduate. So those people have more classes required. What about the test that KWU mentions in their policy for people with no lower division college experience? When the KWU forum was publically accessible I researched this issue. Why could I not find out any information about this test nor find one person that had ever taken it or heard of anyone that took it? It seems to me that the only purpose of that statement in the policy is for show, to provide an illusion of academic rigor within the process.

Why does KWU not publically publish the specific graduation requirements for their different degree programs? My conclusion is that the graduation requirments differ from one individual to the next because KWU does not want graduation requirements infringing on a potential sale. To me, not publically publishing specific graduation requirements is a strong indicator that we're dealing with a diploma mill.

 

While I have an open mind about unaccredited schools, as I think they have to be treated on a case by case basis, I can't help but get the impression that the content of KWU degrees varies widely. Degrees with standardized names should have standardized content and not be so "negotiable"...

Dave