Knightsbridge University

I think I'll let Rich or Steve (or anyone) answer this one, although the answer is obvious. I'm can't stop laughing long enough to compose a longer post than this one.

 

So the complaints about Union granting degrees in areas where they have no professors with expertise are wrong???

 

I would, but decorum and adherence to the TOS of this forum prevent me.

As usual, Dr.Dr. Quack-Quack, you provide no corroboration for your statements. If, however, it was your intention for me to provide corroboration for mine, allow me to use your own words to do so (all quotes are from CollegeHints).

Concerning being awarded a Ph.D. in Environmental Management, on 01-29-2004, you wrote:

• ”I'm sure that my friends at CollegeHints will be pleased to know that I have just received word from Knightsbridge University that I have earned, and been awarded (subject to ratification by the KU Executive Council), a KU PhD in Environmental Management, under the KU 'PhD by Published Work' programme.”

When questioned as to the name of your supervisor, examiner, or assessor, on 02-02-2004, you had this to say:

• “I'm struggling to determine the relevance, or value, of knowing the name of a PhD candidates supervisor.”

Then, a whole two days later, on 02-04-2004, you revealed the following:

• I can mention that the assessment of my application, which took two months, was carried out by a Professor of Zoology at a German State University - a highly respected individual and KU Faculty member.”

Only to later that same day post this response to an observation that, prior to the your announcement you seemed to be unaware of the name or credentials of your the assessor:

• ”(I can't actually recall saying that I had a supervisor and didn't know that persons name) However, if I did say that, an assessor is in fact the 'supervisor' of the application and determines its value/quality and whether it is worthy of a KU degree.”

By admitting the possibility that you said something, you are admitting that the statement is not false (unless, of course, you prefer to admit that you frequently do not tell the truth). So it seems you had no clue as to who was assessing your application for a degree in Environmental Managment.


Then today, on 02-05-2004, in response to the question whether you only had ONE assessor, rather than a board, judge the merits of your application, you wrote the following:

• ”I now have a copy of the assessment report on my KU PhD by published work application. As already mentioned, the assessment was carried out by a Professor of Zoology at a German State University. The Professor was very complimentary about my dossier, which included - 3 published manuals, a comprehensive DL course on Wetlands, all my published papers and a CV. I'm not yet at liberty to provide a full copy of the assessment report, but I can provide CH members with an extract:
  
  ’In summary, all the presented documents and my literature search, indicate that Mr Hayes has a deep involvement in the study subject coupled with enthusiasm and readiness to invest substantial effort, an ability to combine basic and applied research studies, an ability to observe and synthesize material, knowledge of relavent literature, and a
  talent for writing. In my mind Mr Hayes is ready and equipped to defend his thesis and qualified to be granted the PhD in Zoology by Published Work’
  
  The PhD in Zoo being a considerable upgrade to my original application.
  Whilst I have never used my TCU PhD I have no reservation whatsoever about using the KU PhD - anywhere, anytime.
  
  As mentioned in other posts, the PhD by published work system is used by a number of universities. And in many Commonwealth countries it is quite common to have just one PhD Supervisor, who is usually university based and who may, or may not, call for external assistance. But it is that particular supervisor who decides whether a PhD should be awarded.
  One must always bear in mind that the RA system in the USA is simly not the be-all and end-all of the world education system!”

So let’s see what we have here (in your own words). You applied for (and were informed you were awarded) a Ph.D. in Environmental Management. You (and the Vice-Chancellor of Knightsbridge, Professor Henrik “Harold Hill” Fyrst) were questioned as to who the assessors or examiners were. You did not know and Henrik was not forthcoming with the information. Then the individual’s something (not a name, not his or her credentials or affiliations) is revealed (I guess all that was revealed was that he or she is supposedly some kind of Zoologist). You then claim that the PhD in Zoology is a significant “upgrade” to your application (you own words betray the fact that you were just as surprised as the rest of us).

It seems, Dr.Dr. Quack-Quack, that, if I am ill-informed, then only you are to blame. The more suspicious among us may think that Knightsbridge, after being publicly pressured, had to scramble to find someone, anyone, to vouch for the degree that it had already granted you (and that you had already publicly claimed), and failing to find someone in the field of Environmental Management, settled for the closest thing they could find, Zoology.

Moreover, the words you attribute to your assessor are bit ambiguous. Could you please explain what your assessor meant by “Mr Hayes is ready and equipped to defend his thesis?” What thesis? Could it be he or she thought they were just signing off on some kind of candidacy?

Also, I don’t think you ever answered the question concerning whether you paid full tuition to Knightsbridge or whether some kind of waiver was granted in exchange for other services.

Is this post intelligent enough for you? Don't you hate it when your own words come back to bite you in the ass?

 

And your license to criticize Dr. Hayes comes from where??

You know the one - the one that says PhD on it. Oh I understand.

 

No, the (nonexistent) complaints that individuals are simply mailing in some documents in application for a doctorate in one discipline and being first informed that it was granted only to later be informed that it was indeed granted but in a completely different discipline after being examined by a single individual (also known as the Knightsbridge model)) are false. But you knew that.

 

License? Is that something like a badge? If so, you know my response.

 

No a license is like what you bought for your dog, presumably the only piece of paper you own with an embossed seal.

A badge could be like a badge of honor one would claim to wear when they were asked to leave a party because they were acting boorish.

Or maybe it could be like a metal tag that come with the dog license.

 

Congratulations, Mr. Hayes! please let me know when you're defense is done so that I can start calling you doctor (again)!

 

What? Was this an attempt at being witty, or was it simply some kind of (not so) veiled personal attack?

NOTE TO MODERATORS: Dennis appears to be pushing the envelope in hopes of being banned so that he may display this as some kind of badge of honor at CollegeHints.

Hey! Isn’t that what I just said?

Considering how I regard you (think Master Peter) I defer to your canine expertise.

 

I am. Hayes prints this garbage at another site where I post as rcdouglas.

His use of "RC" is very telling, reminding me of a shill/troll there who posts under many guises.

 

Nice comeback.

No denial, of course. The truth hurts, huh?

 

Wrong. What an absurd--and uninformed--comment.

Dennis, you never have anything substantive to say about distance learning. And when you try, you say even less.

 

Oh, of course. Try your game at a properly accredited school and see where it gets you.

Marianus tried, in vain, to show that the "process" used by Knightsbridge to award the Ph.D. to people for handing in some work done previously was legitimate. He tried to show this was a common practice at recognized schools. Why then, Neil, did you choose yet another unaccredited school? Why not go to one of the schools Marianus mentioned? Or do we already know the answer to that one?

 

This is a gross, uninformed overstatement. You haven't read the report. How can you possibly consider its contents?

Each doctoral committee has at least two subject-matter experts on it, often more. While that model might not sit well with the OBR, it is far and away from "no professors with expertise." As usual, you show you don't know what you're talking about.