Proposal for a blindfold test of accredited vs. unaccredited dissertations

I think that Rich has brought up some interesting ideas.

I think that the intention of this exercise is to try to justify the assertion that work producd by certain individual non-accredited schools of the experimenter's choosing is RA-equivalent in the opinion of his chosen judges.

If anyone tried to generalize those results to the entire non-accredited class, that would obviously go way beyond anything the exercise might demonstrate.

So it probably makes most sense to limit the number of non-accredited institutions sampled to one.

I don't see any way of ensuring that. So what the judges would receive is a submission from the non-accredited school that may or may not represent their typical dissertations. It might represent the school's best work. Or it might even be work that was done elsewhere under somebody else's auspices, since many of non-accredited schools emphasize awarding degrees for prior learning.

I agree. Like I said in my last post (which everyone ignored), just Google the damn school.

If people associated with a university are actually doing something, performing research and making contributions, what are the odds that nobody in their field has ever noticed or ever made a single comment about it? I find that pretty near to inconceivable.

So something resembling John Bear's test has already been performed for every school, whether accredited or not, and the results are already freely available.

I think that good non-accredited schools exist. And some of them really can't get accredited. But that's usually because of some peculiarity of the school or what it teaches.

So if the good non-accredited schools tend to be unique in some way, it's going to be awfully hard to compare their dissertations head-to-head with comparable RA schools if there aren't any comparable RA schools.

Beides, most of the better non-accredited schools don't seem to specialize in churning out Ph.D.s. They typically offer masters degrees, less often bachelors degrees, and sometimes professional doctorates in fields like law and clinical psychology.

I think that John wants to justify the Greenwich University model, while I'm thinking more along the lines of Expression College, Ryokan, NWCal Law or Dharma Realm.

I would be interested to see the results of his experiment for the Institute of Advanced Study of Human Sexuality, though. These people do publish a long list of their dissertations on their website and they make copies of them available. While it's a virtually unique subject area, I think that a list of RA dissertations in similar areas might be generated for comparison purposes by the Kinsey Institute or someplace.

My own layman's observation is that IASHS specializes more in empirical investigation of what's happening in underground S&M clubs, among prostitutes and edgy places like that, while the RAs are more inclined to produce post-modern analyses of 'embodidness' or race-class-gender theorizing about the politics of sexuality. (That's why public health authorities are more apt to consult with IASHS than with the cultural-studies departments.) Personally, I think that the IASHS work is probably intellectually superior to what even 'top-tier' universities are producing and a damn-sight more interesting.

But would a panel of judges agree with that? When schools' philosophies differ, how could you possibly select your judges without stacking the deck?

 

An interesting tangent to this test would be For-Profit vs. Not-For-Profit, as I have seen the difference in their education debated a great deal.

 

Dave's point is a good one. These different categories of schools may well attract different categories of students and may therefore produce different categories of products (dissertations). Hey, wait a minute. That's the whole point, isn't it? The dissertations may not be of equal quality?

Again, Dave's point is a good one. Is the difference a function of the school or a function of the student? I can only say that if the student produces a substandard dissertation, it is up to the school to give it a pass or hold to the higher standard. In general we expect the higher standard to be withheld. That's the whole point, isn't it? In the end, it is the standard set by the school that counts.
Jack
(oh, and by the way, unaccredited schools don't require the GRE for admission)

 

It depends on the research question. We can guess that the average dissertation quality between accredited and unaccredited schools will be different, given the range of unaccredited schools, so a more interesting question might be why? Process? Students? Topic Relevancy? Low standards? Something else...?

Dave

 

Hard to know this for all places and cases, but you might be right.

Dave

 

Ya know Dave, between you and me there might not be any real diiference of opinion in this matter. BUT, since you've got more than 400 posts under your belt, you've been around long enough to know that there are some readers of this forum who might not be so quick to agree with us. It seems to me that it would be better at this stage to stick to the basics and establish the FACT that there is a difference in dissertation quality (if, in fact, this is the case) before we run off and try to establish the "why" aspect.
Jack

 

How about investigating a correlation between GAAP compliance point by point and the "quality" of the dissertation? That is, making this a test of association and not of differences. Framing the research question as unaccredited versus accredited doesn't make any sense, because the unaccredited schools share nothing in common except not being accredited, in my view.

Dave

 

OK, go ahead. First, do me the favor of defining "GAAP compliance."
Jack

 

Study or Open Competition

Dr. Bear,

Your proposal is obviously brilliant, but complicated. However, I wonder about the purpose of the proposed study. Can we conclude from a one time study of random samples that an entire category is less than, equal to, or better than the other entire category (especially since, as pointed out, there are wide differences in quality)? I seriously doubt that.

BTW: has a comparable study ever been done between two RA schools (or “tiers”)?

What I do see as a tremendous potential outcome is the possibility of “raising the bar” and the “expectations” among non-RA institutions and their students. Wouldn’t a blind ongoing (yearly) open competition, where individuals could submit their dissertations, accomplish this outcome, rather than a one time study?

My guess is that in an open competitive format, where both non-RA and RA scholars and schools can compete against each other, you would get a very favorable response from non-RA schools, students and non-RA scholars. I also believe that in such a competition it would be the RA schools and scholars that would fear competing, since they have everything to lose.

I personally would welcome a competition, and it would be just the thing to push me to enter a non-RA program to compete.

Thanks for the suggestion,

Morgan

 

Re: Thesis

Hello Stae,

I think it would be a good idea to let those of us who wish, read your theses.

I have read some of the ICCT theses and to be frank, they read more like middle school essays.

So, I'd like to read your theses to see if I just read a couple bad ones.

Thanks!

 

Re: Study or Open Competition

Go ahead, make my day.
Jack

 

Re: Re: Study or Open Competition

Hi Jack, I hope the following does. You see, I was so perplexed by the fact that you, and Uncle Janko and Jack_A were so civil and understanding of Dr. Bear's proposal, and towards him, that I had to take it to my good friend Dr. Sigmund Freud for help in understanding you. I also, BTW, mentioned your problem with not being able to understand the difference between "is and ought."
Here's the transcript (please excuse the good Doc's Vienese accent):

Morgan: Dr. Freud. I'd like to speak with you about a few of my
f(r)iends, and some of the problems I'm having.

Freud: Morgan... Morgan... Morgan, you mean to tell me zat Jack doesn't know the difference between za Ist und za Ought? Vat kann I zenn say?

Morgan: Let's forget that for a moment. But what about their little problems.

Freud; Zehr problemas? Not little problems. Big problems. More zann Vater problemas. No. Zis is much deeper. More deeper even zann Greek trajedy problemas.

Morgan: Oh?

Freud: You see, your f(r)iends are sufferrring von severe REACTION FORMATION.

Morgan: Oh my.

 

Hello Morgan - I'm surprised to hear from you again. You seemed to be sufficiently embarrassed to leave us. In fact, you said you were leaving, never to return. Oh well, I guess you just can't believe what some people say. As to your most recent contribution, it really creates some serious doubt about your alleged HUX degree. Anyone who had actually studied philosophy would be able to do a much better job with the "is/ought" debate. All you could do is create a poor cartoon of a criticism. Freud? Reaction formation? Are you just picking words at random from the dictionary? Perhaps you're being paid by the word. There must be some explanation as to why you would post so many, shall we say, unusual, posts. Try not to embarrass yourself further.
Jack
for those interested in learning something of the "is/ought" debate, you can look here:
http://www.utilitarian.org/is-ought.html

 

Morgan,

"Those who live in glass houses .........."

(is it "ought not to" or "must not" throw stones)?

Question for you:

How is your pro-unaccreditation, Cambridge-based, next-door-to-HarvardU higher-education consulting "business" doing? Do you have your unaccredited PhD degree listed on your business card? If not, why not?

Methinks that your unaccredited PhD may not be serving you well at all, judging by the "free" schooling in your supposed field of philosophy that you are being provided here.

You really "ought" to be grateful to Jack Tracey for the immense assistance and useful and free advice he has given to you in this area. (You are, aren't you? - or in the spirit of your "is-ought" debate - should I say, "you is, isn't you?").

You "ought" to relearn the nuances of the is-ought debate in a philosophy course or two available at a (Lawd forbid!) legitimately RA-accredited university, such as at:

Univ. of San Diego (accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC-ACSCU) Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities);

"course description:
"494 [194] Contemporary Philosophical Problems (3)
"An intensive examination of one or more contemporary philosophical problems such as: the is-ought debate; the mind-body problems; relativism and the possibility of objective knowledge; etc. Topic may vary. The course may be repeated for credit, provided the content of the course has changed.

or
Univ. of Iowa (accredited by North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA-HLC) The Higher Learning Commission);

"course description:
"26:180 Analytic Ethics Fumerton
"In this course we will examine in depth various metaethical controversies concerning the nature of intrinsic value and its conceptual connections (if any) to the concept of right action. We will also examine various forms of the is/ought debate. Texts: to be announced. Prerequisite: consent of instructor.

What's the question again?

Is it the education one claims to have received or the degree claimed or the individual claiming the degree that need investigation/validation?

Where is the education/degree/school quality thread again? Or is it the unaccredited/legitimately accredited discussion? No, Morgan, I think you should re-read and re-digest the many thoughtful posts in the "unaccredited = diploma mill" discussion.

LOL.

Thanks.

 

Re: Study or Open Competition

The problem with the competition is that there is no guarantee that the entries are going to be representative. There is a danger that only the best theses from each side would be submitted. A hypothetical unaccredited school might produce 2 great doctoral theses, 8 good, but not spectacular ones, and 90 disappointing, sub-standard works. If only the 10 non-terrible ones are submitted, it leads to an inflated view of the quality of the unaccredited institution. Likewise, if an RA school produces works that are not up to scratch, they are also likely to be suppressed.

A school really needs to be judged upon the average quality of the graduates, as well as the best.

The study can be repeated every so often (with different schools or the same schools), to get around the one off issue.

 

Re: Re: Study or Open Competition

A random sampling of sufficient quantity is, by definition, representative, no?
Jack

 

Re: Re: Re: Study or Open Competition

A random sampling of sufficient quantity would be representative, but I am not convinced that a competition where works are submitted for consideration would really be a random sample. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

 

Perhaps your doubt is well founded. For example, I do not believe that Miss America is the best looking, most talented, etc. woman in the country. I believe this to be the case for all countries, continents, universes. I believe that on any given weekend I could walk into virtually any large shopping mall and find at least one woman who could easily rival Miss America. So what does this say about the Miss America contest? What does it say about the dissertation contest? Nothing really, I just like talking about pretty women.
Plantagenet: There are two things for you to remember.
1) Random samples are not "submitted," they are selected, randomly, from the entire pool of potential dissertations. This is what makes them randomly "selected."
2) This whole idea is just an exercise in imagination. It's nevernevernever going to happen. There's not an unaccredited university anywhere that would take part in this exercise. Why? Well, one theory is that about twenty minutes after they ship off your PhD diploma, they drop your dissertation into the circular file. Clearly there are a few exceptions to this "rule." They've been identified and discussed plenty of times in the past. But we're not talking about these schools, are we?
Jack

 

Re: Re: Study or Open Competition

I don’t think we should be so quick to rule out a competition. Couldn't we have both?

A competition might do wonders to raise the level of unaccredited schools. Imagine a particular school (a Greenwich model) started actually doing well against RA schools. Potential students who are looking for an affordable non-RA route might choose it. In order to compete for students substandard non-RA schools might up their standards.

You’re right when you say that it wouldn’t tell us much about the “average.” But, when I think of some of the great American college football teams (e.g. UCLA, USC, Notre Dame) I really am interested in their top performers. Besides a few laughs, who cares how all those average “Supersize me” hamburger eating sophomores would perform on the track. I want to see the best. And by focusing on the best (so the “capitalist story goes”) others are inspired to also perform well.

 

Jack...Jack...Jack...When did I ever say that I would leave and never return? (Newbies, on my honor as Esquire I have never uttered such a phrase!)

Jack...Jack...Jack - When did I ever define the "is/ought" debate?

Oh Jack, if I have to explain the punch line to you one more time I really will leave - out of frustration.

Let's see. I'm looking through the dictionary right now. Here's an interesting word: "Hermeneutics." (Learning the use of this dictionary type word could help you with the posts).

Now, if you have a B.A. or higher and find yourself asking "Hermen who" you probably should have gone the non-RA route.