Knightsbridge U. Part of Immigration Scheme

I'm afraid that's debatable. Granted, Knightsbridge has no explicit authority to grant degrees. But if private, non-state supported universities are unregulated in Denmark, then it arguably has implicit authority to grant degrees.

Actually, there is a reason: ODA's own regulations. If private, non-state-supported universities are unregulated in Denmark, then yes, a Danish bakery could legally issue degrees. And in that case, it would arguably qualify as a "non-standard school", rather than as a "diploma mill", under ODA rules. This may be silly, but the problem is with ODA's definition of "diploma mill". If you define a diploma mill on the basis of legality, as ODA does, then this could be the result.

First you have to define the term "diploma mill". If you define it as "a non-U.S. entity that does not have the legal authority to issue degrees", in accordance with ODA, then the fact that Knightsbridge grants degrees legally in its home jurisdiction suggests that it is not a mill. Same goes for Kennedy-Western and Breyer State.

**********

In my opinion, ODA should get away from the terms "diploma mill" and "degree mill" altogether. They are inflammatory and subjective. There is no "bright line" that separates a "good" unaccredited school from a diploma mill; reasonable people can and do disagree on where to draw that line.

Instead, ODA should simply focus on the difference between accredited and unaccredited schools. That's where you can draw the bright line. All degrees that fall on the wrong side of the line are "non-standard". Allow them to be used, but stick them all with the "unaccredited" disclaimer.

Admittedly, this proposal would lump schools like Kennedy-Western or Knightsbridge, which claim that they make their students do real work for their degrees, into the exact same category as the worst "name it and frame it" diploma mills. Well, too bad -- that's the downside of foregoing accreditation.

 

CalDog....

Man walks up to you in Oregon. Says during the conversation that he has a PhD ....

Hey, wait a minute. I'm a libertarian. I'm not going to hand over to a government a roadmap to the unconstitutionality of its regulations. That's what due process is for. Let them figure it out.

 

What Knightbridge is doing in Denmark is not illegal so it must be legal.

If Oregon decides to call KU a 'degree mill' that is their call, however, a KU degree may have some utility in Denmark as well as other parts of the world.

 

I agreed your point. I think ODA also should consider to revise the definition of Degree Mill, providing the institution is legalized to grant its degree with real workdone by the students.

 

Isn't the above similar to the following statement.

Deceptive behavior may have some utility in Denmark as well as other parts of the world.

 

The funny part about this is I have customers from Denmark. When I ask if they have ever heard of Knightsbridge they say no. When I point them to the "schools" website they go, oh, interesting, but a degree from here would be useless in Denmark. So go figure.....

 

Yes, the "utility" argument is bogus. I don't doubt that substandard or meaningless academic degrees could be useful to some people in some situations. But this is equally true for phony driver's licenses, fake passports, and forged Social Security cards. Such items must have some significant utility, because they have some significant market value (just check online). But that doesn't mean that they merit the same respect and treatment as standard credentials.

 

It's "legal"! It's "legal" to eat turds, too, but why would you?

 

If a man walks up to me in Oregon and says that he is a Professional Engineer, then he needs to be licensed as a PE in Oregon. If he is licensed in some other jurisdiction, then he cannot legally use the PE title in Oregon, unless he qualifies that title accordingly. All states (not just Oregon) have similar rules for licensed professionals (not just engineers).

If a man walks up to me in Oregon and says that he is a PhD, then he needs to meet Oregon standards for the PhD. If his PhD was granted in some other jurisdiction with different standards, then he cannot legally use the PhD title in Oregon, unless he qualifies that title accordingly.

The rules for using professional licenses are reasonable and well understood. Why not simply apply the same rules to academic degrees ?

 

To get the Knightsbridge taste out of one's mouth?

 

Like I said -- I'm not going to hand the specifics over to the lawyers who draft these things. They get paid to find the holes. I don't, and even if I did, I believe in less, rather than more regulation. My per diem to do the full layman's analysis on the constitutionality of the Oregon regulations is more than the taxpayers of Oregon could likely afford, and I'd take 5 or 6 months to do it right, so I'll let them figure it out when someone decides to challenge it on more than just freedom of speech and full-faith and credit (there are other things mentioned in the Constitution besides those two).

 

Professional qualifications are not equal to academic degrees! Those who earned an accounting degree may not be qualified as a certified public accountant. Similarly, graduates with engineering degree do not mean they are certified engineers.

Professionals are those taking practices that are liable to public, including their negligence, while degree holders are without public liabilities.

Therefore, professionals in particular field e.g. doctor, lawyer ... etc should be more rigid than those of academic level in their own ethnics. That is why each professional society/association body in particular field, e.g. medical council, has its own ethnical codes to supervise their members. Even if one does not commit any ciminal act, e.g. deception, he/she is still liable to negligence or offend the professional ethnical code of the professional body, leading to suspend he/his practice licence!

 

Ah, OK, let's run with this.

So, a man walks up to you in Oregon, you two start talking, he mentions he holds a PhD, naturally curious, you ask from where, and ....

We can do it, if we just fill in the blanks....

 

You guys disappoint me. Granted, there are good reasons for questioning the validity of Knightsbridge degrees -- I would require them to be flagged with an "unaccredited" disclaimer, and would reject them entirely for engineering licensure -- but coprophagy jokes aren't an effective way to advance your arguments or to build credibility.

 

no joke

While I am more appreciative of Dr Douglas' humour than you are, let me assure you that my comment was NOT a joke. Many things which are stupid, distasteful, and dangerous are legal. The shills' shrill slogan "but it's leeeegal" is as stupid, distasteful, and dangerous as coprophagy--and that's no joke--especially since their concept of "legal" means that nobody has been arrested just now, or that positive law does not actively punish every last single solitary form of wretched deceit.

 

Once again, why not use the same reasonable and well-established procedures that have been developed for professional titles?

If you feel that a professional title is being used in an illegal or misleading manner, then you typically submit a complaint form. Such forms are readily available online; here's a typical example. I've never actually submitted a complaint form myself, or been the target of a complaint. But complaints certainly do happen, and even the threat of one is taken quite seriously by licensed professionals.

I don't know if Oregon ODA, or any other agency, has "complaint forms" for misuse of academic titles, but there doesn't appear to be any reason why they couldn't.

In practice, the use of complaint forms is obviously up to individual discretion. Most people would not submit one based on a passing reference to a title in casual conversation. And even if a complaint form was submitted under such circumstances, it's doubtful that the regulatory board would regard the matter as worth pursuing.

 

Unless, of course, that wasn't one's intention. (It certainly wasn't mine.)

The argument against Knightsbridge's legitimacy has been advanced, is well-founded, and is irrelevant to the joke.

The only evidence regarding Knightsbridge is a lack of evidence. That makes it a diploma mill.

 

Copro-what?

I'm a California State University guy, not a UC guy. We know about turds, but we don't know nuthin' about no copro-whatever it is.

 

In most cases, licensed professionals are "practice-regulated". But in other cases, licensed professionals are only "title-regulated". In such cases, the only legal difference between licensed and unlicensed individuals is that the license allows you to use a specific title.

For example, several engineering branches in California (agricultural, metallurgical, industrial, control systems, etc) are only title-regulated. Anyone -- even a non-engineer -- can legally practice agricultural engineering in California. The only legal advantage to being licensed as a Professional Agricultural Engineer is that you get the use of a prestigious title.

In such cases, it's hard to see much practical difference between academic and professional titles. In practice, you could regulate them in a similar manner, though I don't think that any state actually does.

 

Do any 'private non-state supported universities' exist in Denmark? Has Denmark boasted any in its history? My impression is that there is little or no Danish legislation specifically addressing them because the need for that legislation has never arisen.

Apparently Mr. Contreras has spoken to the Danish authorities and gotten their opinion on Knightsbridge's status. The ambitious Mr. Fyrst argues much as you did above.

I don't have any objection to Mr. Contreras going with what the Danish government tells him, rather than with what others argue they should have said.

Those who disagree probably need to address the matter in the Danish courts, not by criticizing the state of Oregon half the world away. Mr. Fyrst needs to petition the Danish court to order the government to recognize private universities' legal but totally unregulated status.