Oregon and Kennedy-Western

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Alan Contreras, Mar 2, 2005.

  1. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Hi Jack,

    Thanks for replying. Actually, It's true that I didn't reply to your set of questions. I did jump ship (BTW: that thread was started by Bill Huffman), not because you hadn't both asked good questions and made good points, but because we ran into an impasse. In my haste I hadn't had a chance to explain why I had left.

    You had specifically stated two points that I felt silenced our dialogue:

    Correct me if I'm wrong:

    (1) You asserted that because I had not done a study (which I had admitted), and that these ideas were only my "opinion(s)," that I should keep quiet. Not only did this seem like a self-defeating argument (unless you - or others here -have done a study), but I interpreted it as an act of silencing me. Yes, I have only my opinions. I don't claim to have the Truth. Like most people, I'm in the dark and searching for some answers to these difficult questions. I thought that's what we are doing here(?) By debating, by questioning, by challenging we have the opportunity to see the weaknesses in our own, as well as each other's, views. However, once you ruled out my "opinion" then how could I reply to your questions and points?

    (2) You disallowed philosophical speculation ("hot air"). I understand that folks who come from the social and "hard" sciences, or a technical field, sometimes find the methods of the humanities somewhat disconcerting. However, to reduce everything to "philosophic hot air" was, once again, shutting the door on our conversation.

    Thus, I chose an exit. Because I had earlier designated poetry as being one of the fields that should be beyond government regulation (though there are other fields I believe - e.g. religion), I chose that path to say goodbye to that thread.

    My "efficacy" thread was based on looking at the ODA. In the meantime, Alan cleared up many of my questions. Bill Huffman's thread looked at (my) supposed defense of substandard education. I'm not sure we need to revist those threads. A lot of ground was covered in both.

    In any case, I look forward to our future conversations.


  2. Jack Tracey

    Jack Tracey New Member

    Hello Morgan - You're making the standard effort to rewrite history. First, the thread that I linked to in my most recent thread was started by YOU. Try clicking on it. It's pretty simple, I bet you can do it. Second, I never told you (in that thread or any other) that you should "keep quiet." I simply pointed out that since, by your own admission, you had done no research on the topic whatsoever, that your expressed opinion was baseless. As far as I'm concerned you can blather on at will. As far as I'm concerned, every time you post you weaken your own argument. I also believe that you're wrong when you say that "like most people, I'm in the dark..." I believe that most people have a very clear vision of the situation. This is because they've done some research and found some real answers. You see, your philosophical musings are only of value in the absence of facts. Once there are facts then these facts become the basis of discussion. You wrote, "...by challenging, we have the opportunity to see the weaknesses in our own, as well as each others views." I plainly see the weaknesses in your argument. I've addressed them repeatedly. You have had no answer to my challenges. You still don't.
    In your post above you've clearly indicated that you stopped posting because you thought that's what I wanted you to do. You said that you thought I told you to keep quiet and so you ended the thread. You said that because you thought I had I "disallowed" your philosophical discussion, you stopped your philosophical discussion. I wasn't aware that I had such power over you. If I tell you to go away forever will you do it?
  3. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Re: No Sale


    First, your accusation would only be true if Russ and I, or anyone else here, were to state that a particular school that a RA body had rejected was, in fact, of high quality. I have never said that, neither, do I believe, has Russ. Moreover, many of the non-RA schools that are regularly discussed here (e.g. KWU, PWU, etc.) have not applied for accreditation.

    But let’s take the implications of your statement a little deeper. By holding up the RA system (which I’m not rejecting) as paramount, it appears to me to be particularly un-American. If you have gone through an RA program, you’ve probably read Samuel Huntington’s work, “The Clash of Civilizations.” Although I take issue with some – or even much - of it, I do find his analysis of Confucian cultures visa vie Western (Huntington really means Protestant) interesting in comparison to the West. Those cultures, particularly the Confucian, are based on authority. The West, he asserts, is far more open to individuality, and thus has a built in allowance for flexibility. Confucian cultures favor tradition and a ruling elite over innovation and dissension. Huntington’s cultural analysis seems to support those who would argue that the West’s predominance in the past 200 years has been from its ability to quickly change gears, to favor the dissenter and the inventor, over the status quo.

    I would like to suggest that an RA only system, as you are implying, favors a Confucian type model of authority and rigidity. By “stopping the clock, and closing down the patent office” (viz. not allowing new or innovative universities to emerge), the U.S. moves dangerously away from one of the underlying pillars that supports its competitive edge.

    Morgan Khanstein, Esq.
  4. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member


    I just wanted to revisit one of your points, as quoted above.

    If a fascist government were to take over a country it would probably attempt to control certain societal sectors, including: the press, education (both secondary and higher), politics, and religion.

    Supporiting a non-RA alternative to higher education is, in my mind, on the same level as supporting a free press. The non-RA alternative is one more bulwark against extreme authoritarianism.

  5. russ

    russ New Member

    Morgan, you make some excellent points as well. I have no problem with looking at this from a philosophical view since, to me, an individual's view of education is strongly effected by their personal philosophy.

    The arguments being made by the "establishment" here is that only RA schools have legitimacy, NA (nationally accredited) are acceptable but of much less quality, and unaccredited schools are "diploma mills" by definition. To be reasonable they will grudgingly admit that there may be exceptions to the above rules but they can't seem to think of any.

    So they are defenders of the "faith" that a legitimate education is obtainable only from a RA school. The quality of the education is not important since they accept testing out completely at an RA school. It just has to be an RA school.

    The "extreme authoritarianism" that you mention are the regional accreditation bodies (there are six of them) that were designed and managed by the same schools they accredit (how is that for objectivity?). These bodies have no outside accountability (other than the schools they accredit) and reserve for themselves the right to pull accreditation if a particular school is not following their requirements. All six of the RA bodies treat their respective regions as their education fiefdoms to the point that they even disqualify credits from other RA schools. Their main enemies, however, are the national accrediting bodies (NAs) and unaccredited schools. These they would like to eliminate altogether (competition breeds excellence and they certainly do not want that in education). They refuse (in most cases) to even look at a NA credit and even threaten to pull accreditation from any RA school in their fiefdom that accepts an NA bachelors degree from a NA college for a masters program.

    This is the system that people on this board defend to the death. They see nothing wrong with it, in fact, they consider the RA system to be superior to any other idea you may come up with. Still, the fight is a worthy one against the totalitarianism of the RA system.
  6. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Uh huh.:rolleyes: Let me know when you actually begin the fight. So far you've just entertained us with falsehoods, lies, and unsupported statements.
  7. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Who has suggested eliminating non-RA alternatives? Why do you insist on battling against straw men?

    (You're just trolling us, aren't you?)

    Here's the deal:

    You are either arguing for crappy schools or else you aren't. If you aren't, then it's your responsiility to convince the rest of us that the non-accredited schools that you like aren't crappy.

    Simple as that.

    We aren't under any obligation to accept any (let alone all) non-accredited schools uncritically and a-priori. And you certainly aren't striking any noble blows for liberty by suggesting that we are.
  8. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    No it isn't. You can't know, apriori, what will be the best educational structure or mode any more than you can know in advance what will be the most desirable automobile. Experience and not "experts" teaches the best future.

    The Soviet Union did plan and build the best automobiles, you know. In fact, the Soviets assembled the best of experts and planned a perfect future.
  9. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Of course. That was precisely my point.

    I said that when people insist that we accept non-accredited options, they are either insisting that we accept crappy options or else they aren't.

    If they aren't, then they have to convince us that what they are promoting isn't crappy.

    In other words, if they want to promote something different than accreditation, it's up to them to explain what they are doing and to convince us why we should believe in it.

    I'm not sure why you reject that idea or what your alternative to it would be.

    I don't understand the relevance of that to what I just said.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 10, 2005
  10. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Russ continues to simply lie about what "everyone" else says and then argue against his own strawman. I really can't remember one post that was on the level by this supporter of academic fraud. I had hopes that he might actually learn something but have now given up hope.
  11. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Isn’t the point here that in USA people are slowly loosing freedoms?

    I see this in the radio and broadcast, now maybe this is little of topic and more of politics but there is now a situation were
    the government can take legal action agents Radio talk show hosts because they government may not like what they talk show host may say.
    And who is next?

    So I’m for freedom as long that there is no deception.

    If I as employer require hiring degree holders of RA and NA schools only. Can this be a basis for discrimination lawsuit?

    If the school claims to be unaccredited or with other unrecognized accreditation can I say I don’t recognize this as meeting the education criteria required?
    Can I fire a manager who hired a person with unaccredited degree?

    Today HR personnel can visit a site or 2 and quickly verify the status of the school.

    I will not call KWU academic fraud.
    I will call them UNACREDITED and that’s it.
    With this I will assume that the degree and education is of unknown quality.

    Well I took a chance and ate at one of this stands that are not certified by health department.
    The food tasted good but this was never inspected so I took a larger risk.

    My good friend works for health department and inspects restaurants, all of them want to maintain grade A.

    Many in order to comply actually take the corrective activities
    that the state inspectors recommend.

    I wander if this activity should be taken away from State and given to restaurant accreditation body?

    Why States can do a fair job in this area (lawsuit?) but not in the area of inspecting the schools for quality?
    Can an employer sue the State for bad quality education institution – provider?

    We have an option today to check the school legitimacy and quality status.

    Just like with the restaurants the inspectors come back and more than in one occasion the quality degrades and corrective actions take place.

    When I see grade A I know that there is at least some inspection performed for sanitary and other aspects that maintained on regular basis. (Well there may be some inspectors on the take) but in general I think they do a fair job.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 10, 2005
  12. DaveHayden

    DaveHayden New Member

    You know,

    Lets be really clear. K-W is NOT simply unaccredited. It is a fake, a fraud, and a sham. It provides NOTHING close to accredited education. While I think CCU was inaccurately portrayed in the federal hearings last year, K-W was not. It is definately a degree mill. It would be nice to see the FBI take action and close it and prosecute those responsible for the fakery. Considering 9-11 and the current siuation going on in Iraq I can understand why that isn't currently happening, but that doesn't mean it won't happen when the time is right.
  13. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Congratulations! You mastered the incredibly difficult task of creating a login ID and getting an account! What's next, solving pi?

    If by some odd chance your account gets disabled (it could happen, if only by accident), "imafargingicehole" might still available. But Richard Dimitri might already have it. :rolleyes:
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I realize you still carry with you the disappointment of being passed over as the Construction Worker when the band was formed, but let it go!:D
  15. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Wow that’s a strong opinion.

    To be honest KW-U fooled me, I was under impression that they are some what like CCU or SCUPS.
    I didn't do my homework and didn't research KW-U at all.
    They are not in my list of schools that I would waste time to know about.

    So if they are really what you say they are than its question of time just like it was with Columbia State.

    Do they sell certificates for no or very little work?

    I will have to read more about them.

    But if they are protected by law and have permit to provide
    education I would note that in my book its as legal mill.

    In my view credential from unaccredited or foreign non-GAAP credential are the same as no credential and have no value.
    But this is my personal view and I am not shuffling it to anyone throat.

  16. DaveHayden

    DaveHayden New Member

    Legal Mill? Is that before or after the FBI closes 'em down? :) As you well know, it is notoriously easy to get a state license in Wyoming and some other states. My opinion isn't so much strong as I think it is wrong to get sucked into degree mill apologists' rationalizations. Degreeboard is a great example of such garbage. Bottom line is that unaccredited schools that require little real work ARE degree mills plain and simple.
  17. DaveHayden

    DaveHayden New Member

    P.S. You mean the way Columbia State was "protected" when the FBI raided, closed them down, and prosecuted them?
  18. RobbCD

    RobbCD New Member



    The only person on this thread who insists that RA accreditation is the only acceptable type of accreditation is you, and you only do it so that you can accuse others (like me) of maintaining this viewpoint so that you can argue against it. You're arguing with yourself.

    Any school accredited by a body approved by the CHEA and/or the USDE is perfectly legitamate in my book. UA degrees are still produced and purchased to perpetrate frauds.
  19. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member


    Sub standard schools operate legaly are Legal Degree Mills.

  20. DaveHayden

    DaveHayden New Member

    Umm Lerner...

    You seem to be missing my point that it is basically impossible for a perspective student to know IF a school really is operating legally since that distinction is almost always made retroactively. A big part of the con-artist's efforts go in to making a school look legit or mostly legit. Columbia State, SRU, K-W, and others are perfect examples. It is only after they explode that there is verifiable proof. Since the term is undeterminable it is of no use.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 12, 2005

Share This Page