Regional Accredited Degree in 4 Weeks

Originally posted by Jim S

In the states that I checked into you could not even qualify to take the EIT with a KWU degree, so before you mislead someone into thinking you can you may want to look into this a lot closer.

Was KWU not allowed to testify? Do you have proof of this? If you recall they would not even answer student/alumni emails and post on the pub about it, so if they would not comment in house what makes you think they were not allowed.

It seems that you are suspicious and question everything except KWU, and you blindly support KWU even though they always avoid any specific questions about their operating practices. Politicians, USDOE, the government, the military, accredited schools, the accreditors, reporters, former employees, students/alumni who criticize KWU, states, or anyone else that does not see KWU as a credible degree granting “university” must have an agenda, right?

So, the investigator (a Lt. Commander in the Coast Guard) did not give it a chance, and was biased in her testimony? And, the former employee was a disgruntled? From the testimony it appears more than this one former employee was interviewed:

From the Lt. Commander's testimony:

How should we distinguish between a diploma mill, a substandard school, and a legitimate non-accredited school? Shouldn’t the legitimate non-accredited schools share the same minimum standards as accredited ones?

 

It is true that in most state, possession of a KW B.S. in Engineering won't actually BAR the applicant from taking the F/E exam but that statement is a little misleading. In those same states, having NO degree is not a bar to taking the F/E exam. Thing is, the degree likely carries no credit toward the qualifications for the exam. In short, the applicant is no better off WITH the KW degree than he would be WITHOUT it.

As to whether the knowledge gained is worth the tuition in terms of exam passage rate, I'd have to see some figures. There are plenty of programmed F/E review texts and courses out there that claim to do the same thing.

Discalimer: I am not an engineer but I used to be the attorney for the New Mexico Board for Registration of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors and am therefore somewhat familiar with the examination, education, and experience regime.

 

The question still remains unanswered:

If unaccredited schools can be legitimate (and some arguably are) and are distinctly separable from diploma mills, how is one to tell them apart if one (owner/purchaser/victim/supporter/"student" of such an unaccredited/diploma mill entity) is uncompromisingly averse to accreditation schema of any kind, as almost all of them are? [/B][/QUOTE]

First my perspective, I have taken RA classes, mostly graduate education classes for one to two credit hours, that required simply attendance. I also have an RA masters, not to say which one, that required virtually no work in many of the classes. Some classes only had participation grades. All accredited, and all devoid of any real work. Which shapes my views..........

I would say you could distinquish the two by reading books or websites, such as this one, that would have people recount their experiences with these schools. Its anecdotal but we use anecdotal, or word of mouth, for many of our decisions.

You would have access to graduates of these schools and their employers who could attest to their worth, or lack of.

There is no easy answer, I just operate with the presupposition that unaccredited fills a need, personal or professional for some people.
BH

 

Hi Jim,

You're doing a great job. You are much better at this than I am since you are not getting the "lying about KWU" comments. Maybe the folks here are finally trying to be civil.

I agree that not every school needs to be accredited and that there are different "needs" for different people. As long as you feel you are getting the education you are paying for, what is there to complain about?

Hang in there.

 

...from the grownup end of the table

Jim is both posting civilly and receiving civil replies. This is because he is not a troll. He does not engage in doubletalk or rhetorical nihilism. You could learn something from him. Or not.

 

Re: ...from the grownup end of the table

Take away "doubletalk" and "rhetorical nihilism?" You must be joking. Someone else here is quoting Niccolo Machiavelli as their hero who is certainly not the essence of virtue.

What I can learn from Jim is that KWU may be a viable alternative for those who wish to obtain their degree. He has made some powerful arguments in favor of the institution which I have yet to see effectively rebutted here. It appears that KWU just chooses to take a different path than regional accreditation but they have also indicated that they would support moving toward accreditation some day.

 

droll troll

You quoted a philosopher and then denied his views were yours. No one has declared Machiavelli his hero. If you can quote and deny, why do you feel the need to lie about another poster?

 

Knocking over a liquor store meets some people's needs, but that doesn't make it right. Diploma mills meet a lot of people's needs, but that doesnt' make them legitimate.

The argument above misses the whole point. We're not talking about education, we're talking about degrees. I don't care about the quality of education you got or didn't get at a fake school like Kennedy-Western. Caveat emptor. But higher education has two other consumers besides the student: employers and the general public. And it is them, not the student (well, sometimes the student, too) who gets scammed in this. You cry out for individual choice and you ignore the fact that it isn't an individual issue.

Would you want to go to a dentist who went to an unaccredited school? A physician? How would you know? Do you check every person's resume before writing a check? Does anyone? Of course not.

I've argued for years that employers need to do a better job checking on degree claims. But that doesn't excuse the diploma mills you defend. And you cannot expect the general public to take the same due diligence that should be followed by employers.

Scam artists know a road to their success is avoiding scrutiny/evaluation/detection/etc. Why do you think K-WU is in Wyoming?

 

Re: Re: ...from the grownup end of the table

WHICH day? They've been operating for more than 20 years!

That you deem Jim's comments irrefutable reflects not on their veracity, but yours.

 

quote

KWE has been analyzed ad infinitum on these boards. Many a prospective student has been helped tremendously as a result.

For the benefit of some new members here - and others arriving here daily - here are some of JimS's statements about KWE and some responses to them.

I am not doing this for your benefit, Russ. (You are unapproachable, almost beyond hope, sadly).

Thanks.

=======================================
quote

Response: KWE claimed a fake accreditor 15 years ago - and is still (TODAY!) confusing many unsuspecting folks via deliberately confusing or deceitful advertisements that put KWE among properly accredited DL schools (like Capella, Walden, UoP, etc). The leopard has not changed its spots.

Also, the Singapore connection is about more than just conferring honorary degrees. Do a search on these boards or elsewhere.

quote

Response: No. ACE evaluates credits from prior properly and legitimately accredited schools and programs. KWE has no chance with ACE unless ACE changes its rules and allows participation by unaccredited entities (highly doubtful).

quote

Response: Some who post or have posted here are also former KWE enrollees. They have just as much information, if not more, as JimS does.

It is possible that the KWE administrative staff may be professional and dedicated. Can one say the same about the founder(s), the owners, the investors, those profiting from the enterprise?

Does Russ or JimS or any KWE "student" personally or otherwise know these people? I have seen no such evidence here.

On the contrary, some persons in the know have posted here and in other fora that the owners/investors are almost always hidden, hard to reach, unresponsive to emails, faxes, etc.

However, it appears that they are quite adept at "buying influence" and taking some Wyoming legislators on all-expenses paid trip to the likes of Singapore, etc.

quote

Response: Even JimS, a current enrollee of KWE, does not know all there is to know about KWE. (Thanks for admitting that, JimS).

About the so-called "general improvement in KWE's enrollees' attitudes", can JimS post some specifics?

What constitutes "improvement?"

What percentage of KWE current enrollees post on "the Pub" and what percentage of those who do post show this so-called "improvement?" And why are they "improvements?"

There exists a separate forum made up of former KWE enrollees which has posters quite vehement in their continued denunciations of KWE and its ongoing mill-like operations.

Much is reported (from what current enrollees are saying) that not much has changed. Same old, same old .......

quote

Response: PE exam preparation is available to persons with degrees and without degrees, from KWE or elsewhere.

Does any available evidence exist that any state's EIT requirements accept/look favorably upon KWE degrees?

quote

Response: More speculation. Any proof that KWE was not allowed to testify? Any proof that KWE asked to testify and was disallowed?

KWE's billing of the federal government on a per credit or per course basis to obtain reimbursement for some enrollees when KWE clearly never bills students on a per credit or per course basis - appears to be one word: fraudulent.

KWE has never denied that it did this. The US Senate and GAO have proof that it did this.

JimS asks: "I question why the hearings were performed in the first place?"

Possible answer: The US Senate and GAO have every right to hold hearings to investigate the improper use of federal education funds.

JimS stated: "I consider the second witness to be a disgruntled ex-employee."

Possible answer: Maybe so, but that does not mean that what this former employee (Andrew Coulombe) testified about was necessarily false.

KWE has up to now, offered nary any evidence that this employee's testimony, was not correct. US Senate and GAO investigators have proof that they were correct.

quote

Response: There are several supporters here who support the right of legitimate unaccredited schools to exist and to function, if you have not yet noticed.

Almost universally, KWE is not considered by a preponderance of the available evidence and by a whopping majority of the DL experts and contributors in here AND ELSEWHERE (who are not mill shills), to be one of them.

KWE says that 70 percent and up to 85 percent of its faculty have accredited PhDs or similar degrees. Ok, fine.

What KWE does not tell students or the world is that contact by "students"/enrollees with even one of them IS NOT REQUIRED!

Yes, "Student Services Advisors" encourage, advise, tell enrollees to request "Tutorials" anytime they want to but they are never told that they ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE ANY.

If an enrollee requests a "tutorial" the request can only be made directly to the "Student Services Advisor" then the "Student Services Advisor" relays it to the faculty. Then, and only then, can the enrollee contact or speak with the faculty.

It is optional, it is NOT required (as in, "you must TALK TO THE FACULTY, or you will not get your degree").

Some former KWE enrollees have posted elsewhere that they completed their entire courses and received their KWE degrees without ever having to talk directly with even one faculty member.

Read this, Russ:

This is critical to know and understand about KWE and why it is, by inference, a supremely sub-standard entity:

One could complete all of one's self-selected courses (that is, read all the purchased books), take all the open-book exams, write a proposal and final paper, without ONCE BEING REQUIRED TO INTERFACE DIRECTLY with even one faculty.

When an enrollee writes a proposal it goes to... yes, you guessed it, the "Student Services Advisor" who gives it to someone in the "Final paper Department" who reviews it then sends it to faculty. Same with the final paper itself.

It is possible to write one's proposal and one's final paper without EVEN ONCE CONVERSING DIRECTLY WITH FACULTY. Faculty may review your proposal and paper but they do not have to mandatorily converse or interact with you. They may or they may not.

It is possible. I am not saying that it happens all the time but it is possible. It can happen because it is NOT REQUIRED that an enrollee speak directly with faculty, even once.

Now, which legitimate college or university do you know of that does not require mandatory interface with an instructor?

On the other hand, how many diploma mills do you know of that do not require mandatory interface with an instructor? ALMOST ALL OF THEM!

Thanks.

 

Reply to Jake_A

Jake,
I have attended two state universities and one 2 year college. I also administered a distance degree program for the University of Maryland. I don't remember any professor ever taking attendance, or requiring lecture attendance. I know there were some students who did not any attend classes (they worked shift work and didn't want to drive the 70 miles round trip). Some students mailed their papers to the professor. Exams were proctored my teaching assistants, or by me as the administrator. I don't think it is unusual for students at large brick and mortar students to graduate without direct contact with a professor (unless if you consider sitting in a hall with a hundred other students at a lecture as direct contact).
Why do you not use the same examples of "substandard eduacation delivery" to condem RA schools who use the same practises as KWU?
Jim

 

Hi Jim: Thanks for keeping it civil. By doing so you help whack the trolls. I'm afraid I find Rich's response to your arguments convincing, but I genuinely appreciate your contributions to this thread. Best wishes to you, Janko

 

I discussed this subject with my wife, and we both recalled instances of how labs were performed by one lab partner with the other lab partner not present. The partner who attended the labs gave the lab data to the one who did not attend, so that person could write a separate lab report. There were also many cases where the professor for the course was not present for any of the labs. The labs were supervised by a teaching assistant, or by a program administrator (such as myself).
My wife also had one microbiology course (state RA university) where the labs were performed via a website and a virtual microscope.
Jim

 

I forgot to mention that the microbiology labs were performed at home via the internet.
Jim

 

Jim,

You consistantly try to give examples of accredited schools that may do this or that, but you can only give non-specific samples. You have not ever shown any accredited school that operates like KWU. Not one example that you have brought up is comparable to KWU's operating practices.

Please name an accredited school that:

1) Has one open book final examination that covers the entire course for each course offered by the ENTIRE university, no required coursework or assignments, no quizzes, and no required contact with the instructor (tutor).

2) Gives liberal amount of credit based on an application or a resume without assessing or verifying the claimed experience for it's academic value even at the graduate level.

3) Does not publish it's requirements for graduation, and will not even give information about the secret formula for coming up with the 4 to 8 courses (exams) required by everyone to complete a degree.

4) Allows students to choose which courses he or she wants to take once the magic number is determined regardless of whether core competencies are met for a major.

5) Will not answer any specific questions about how it evaluates prior learning (experience).

I have taken an online Biology course that had a virtual lab, and it was incredible how close it simulated being in a real lab, however, you can give NO examples like this for a KWU course because their is NO labs, no assignments, no required online lectures, no quizzes, no required communication with an instructor or classmates. Do you deny that each course in the entire "university" consist of just one open book exam?

And, since I know this to be true, can you now give an example of ANY accredited school that operates with comparable practices?

 

Reply to plcscott

No, I cannot name an accredited school that operates like KWU. But, then my personal experience has only been with three universities and one 2 year college in one state system, and UMUC in the U. of Maryland system. Everything else I "know" about other schools is second (or third, or fourth hand information). I try to limit my comments to what I have experienced by myself, or by my family (wife and son).

You are correct on one point. I don't know of another school that bases the grades for all courses on single final exams. But, that is not a very far stretch from what my wife and myself have experienced at RA universities. We had courses that from RA universites that were not different from the KWU methodology, but not all our courses were by that method. But then, those experiences were not in 100% distance learning programs like KWU.

My gut feeling is that there are students in other DL programs (who read this forum) who are holding back with regard to how similar their programs are to KWU, because of potential criticism. But, that is only a gut feeling.

Jim

 

Re: Reply to plcscott

Originally posted by JimS

Then tell me the other points that I am NOT correct on.

Then how about giving the specific course, title, and university that you, your wife, or your kid have attended that has A course where you were just told which textbook to purchase for a course, had no assignments, no quizzes, no required lectures, no required correspondence with classmates or instructors, no labs, and only one open book exam to determine your grade. Just one specific course from a specific school where I could check it out, otherwise, I think you are really stretching out trying to defend a "university" that is substandard and shares some of the bad practices that diploma mills have. The best that can be said about KWU is that it is not a diploma mill and it requires some work, but you really have stretch to say it is close to being on par with the standards associated with any accredited schools.

I would call that wishful thinking, not a gut feeling.

 

Re: Reply to plcscott

 

Great post, plcscott! Thanks!

The above is one of the best summaries of the entity known as KWE that I have seen in a while .......

It is also the essence of the most damning indictment of the KWE pseudo-school. Plcscott's summary above uncovers the KWE lie and shows it to be closest to the diploma-mill-omia of academic scrapola and farthest from even the lowest accredited school on the quality totem pole, no matter how one measures it.

To which I want to add three more KWE factolas (rhymes with "KWE scrapolas"):

(Please pay attention, new board members and prospective DL study candidates - and flee, yes, FLEE - from the KWE scarlett letter insignia and time-bomb!):

- At KWE, one could obtain a "bachelors degree" by providing a credit card number and passing 4 to 9 ONE open-book exams plus a paper.

- At KWE, one could obtain a "masters degree" by providing a credit card number and passing 4 to 9 ONE open-book exams plus a paper.

- At KWE, one could obtain a "doctorate degree" by providing a credit card number and passing 4 to 9 ONE open-book exams plus a paper.

Question:

Why on earth does any enrollee bother with a KWE bachelors instead of going straight for the KWE doctorate?

LOL.

Ummm, did anyone say something? Did I hear someone say that it is because there are requirements for pursuing a bachelors vs a masters vs. a doctorate at KWE?

If so, please do us a favor and post these requirements below and tell us where KWE has openly and widely published these admission requirements - something that EVERY standard, legitimate, accredited, and proper college or university routinely does.

Thanks.

 

It is said that Kennedy-Western is even more dangerous than a straight-out diploma mill because it does enough to appear like a school as to facilitate its deception. Juuuuusssssssttttttt enough, until one takes a critical look. And who does?

In the entertainment business, they talk about actors' "Q" rating, their "name recognition." This is also a factor in politics. I wonder what K-WU's "Q" factor is in relation to other DL schools, even accredited ones. I bet it's high, and that high level of recognition substitutes for accreditation and legitimacy. People know they've heard of it (but they don't know why), so it must be okay.

They don't do all of that advertising with web pages listing schools just to attract students. They also do it to have their school advertised next to legitmate ones. Rushmore does this in the Economist magazine, too. I don't know how many students their Economist ads attract, but just being there next to prestigious (and real) schools has got to help. Sadly.