Rogue's Gallery

You stated something very different in your post previous to the above statement.

The reason that I believe it is still relevant outside Oregon is that the laws are quickly changing. Six years ago, my understanding was that Florida was the only state that had a specific law against the use of bogus degrees. Around the country, using bogus degrees was still likely illegal based on the general fraud laws but a specific law against bogus degree use, makes it much more clear and simple. Now since then the Florida law was ruled unenforcible by the Florida Supreme Court but, 6 other states have passed similar laws.

So the point is that getting a degree from an unaccredited institution is a risk because it could be made illegal in the future in your state even if it isn't illegal today. This is the apparent trend.

Another reason to avoid unaccredited institutions is that they have a tendency to go out of business after a few years and then there's no way for the graduate to prove that they really ever got a degree from there.

Of course the primary reason to avoid unaccredited degrees is that utility is much lower than accredited degrees.

Now taking Dennis as a specific case, I doubt that he has much to worry about because CCU will apparently be accredited by DETC. At which point Dennis will owe the Oregon ODA a debt of gratitude. ) I had to say it again because it was so much fun.)

 

My objection to the list is that it says:

Some of the institutions listed below are diploma mills that simply provide a paper degree in exchange for money. Some provide actual course work in a classroom or online setting that may be suitable for some students’ needs. Some are difficult to classify. ODA does not evaluate the quality of an institution unless the institution applies for Oregon authorization.

It paints all of the schools with the same diploma mill brush, telling the reader that some schools on the list are diploma mills, but it's hard to tell which.

If Oregon wants to make illegal the use of degrees from unaccredited schools, fine. What do I care? But the list, as we all know, is compiled incompletely, without any regard for differences in legitimate and illegitimate schools, and with a significant price and process to get removed. This is the moral equivalent of someone breaking your window, then charging you to fix it.

The onus should be on the ODA to either (1) make true determinations regarding which schools to put on the list (instead of its current, haphazard method) or (2) list every unaccredited school. (That would be a helluva list.)

Finally, I simply cannot believe for a minute that ODA's listing of CCU had anything to do with CCU's decision to pursue DETC accreditation. The ODA's list is a minor curiosity, at best. I'm sure most of the legitimate schools on their list couldn't give a damn about it, and are not interested in forking over one thin dime to the ODA.

 

Yes and no. CCU may very well receive DETC accreditation status before the year is out. This would be great news for Dennis.

However, the Education Ministries in all 10 provinces (and territories) of Canada have specific guidelines and policies on foreign degrees (U.S. and international). Foreign degrees need to be accredited in order to be accepted in Canada - especially if you plan on teaching/working in Canada.

The ODA list doesn't apply to Canada. However, the authorities here are well aware of the numbers of less-than-wonderful schools that exist and as a result have taken steps to make these degrees illegal. In the U.S., each state is responsible for policing the use of illegal degrees. In Canada, it's a responsibility of both the federal and provincial governments.

Credit Card/Resume and Experiential Learning degrees (no books or exams required) will always remain illegal in Canada.

 

I have no objection to the ODA's list. Nor to charging a school for the process of getting Oregon approval. Why should the taxpayers pay for this?

But I do think the website should make it clear that the list is incomplete (and perhaps provide an easy way for people to propose additions).

I also think that they could provide a streamlined process for temporary relief for a school that's recently opened (e.g. within first two or three years of actual teaching of students) or that has formally started an accreditation process with a CHEA-approved agency.

 

No I did not, I clarified my point.

Bill wrote

The previous post should have read "ODA is not an accurate list of legal schools in the US" Therefore the clarification.

B.

 

Yes, and if CCU does not get DETC approval then Dennis might be marooned upstream without a paddle in Canada.

Roy, what criteria does Canada use to determine a bogus degree?

If it is as you say, does that mean that CCU is currently illegal in Canada?

So, Dennis by Bill's definition you might be breaking the law up there in Canada if you decide to use the degree.

I agree this is good, but how do they determine this? Many good (RA, NA, GAAP) schools allow a transfer of credits, life experience credits and requisite exams or assignments.

B.

 

Huh! My definition? If an unaccredited degree is illegal in a certain jurisdiction then using the degree in that jurisdiction would be breaking the law. Why do you say my definiton?

 

The Canadian government uses the same criteria that the U.S.(CHEA) uses for determining legitimacy. GAAP accredited schools, RA schools and DETC schools are closely monitored by the Federal government and the provinces. Each province, like any U.S. state, has specific guidelines in place that distinguish and recognize certain academic degrees.
For example, if someone with a doctorate from SRU wanted to teach at York University in Toronto. The university would ask the candidate to submit his/her documents to WES and the Ministry of Colleges, Univesities and Training for verification. The Ministry would investigate the source of the degree (type of school, accreditation status, history, utility, etc.)A validity report would be sent to York. At this point, the candidate would be shown the door. If the degree was from Florida State or the University of Leicester, the candidate would most likely advance to the next stage of the hiring process (interviews, teaching experience, research).

As for Dennis, I can only hope that CCU becomes accredited by the end of 2004. Otherwise Dennis runs the risk of having an unaccredited degree. I cannot speak on behalf of the provincial government of Alberta, but my guess would be that his degree would be seen as illegal.

 

Roy, thank you for the layout.

B.

 

I believe that Oregon's ODA website is a very visible example of an apparently growing trend to make the use of unaccredited degrees illegal. As such, if it played into CCU's decision to go for accreditation, it was more of a "straw that broke the camel's back" type of a consideration.

P.S. I believe that it would be absolutely impossible for the ODA to list every unaccredited school that ever existed. Don't you think that it is kind of silly to even propose that it should be done? I guess your argument is that if that weren't the case then there would be an element of haphazardness to the list. To which I answer, so what if it is somewhat haphazard? That is an irrelevant concern. The list provides examples of schools that offer degrees that are illegal for use in Oregon. I don't believe that there is anything wrong with giving some examples. The list doesn't claim to be complete.

 

The Rev: "If St. Regis is not a mill or a scam school, where are its dissertations published or archived with the examiners signatures affixed."

John: Since the St. Regis Ph.D. can be "earned" in ten days or less, it is likely that its graduates have not produced a significant dissertation.

On the other hand, let's see. If you can type 60 words a minute, and you type for 8 hours a day, you could produce 100,000 words in less than a week.

"Oh, no!" he ejaculated, "No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no..."

 

Boys and girls, punctuation is so important!

 

What Sir was that about....?

 

If you have 60 domesticated monkeys in a room and each one of them is allowed to play with the keyboard of a PC for a period of two weeks, can these monkeys type an entire page of words?

Do they qualify for an SRU degree?

 

pigeons vs. monkeys

If most pigeons qualify for AA degrees, then most monkeys ought to qualify as Professors.

G

 

Re: pigeons vs. monkeys

ipso facto?

 

Re: Re: pigeons vs. monkeys

That doesn't (necessarily) mean, of course, that most professors are monkeys.

G

 

Re: Re: Re: pigeons vs. monkeys

Interestingly enough, if St. Regis University professors indeed were monkeys (and I’m not saying they are), I do not think it would change the enterprise’s business model at all.

 

This is an old question that I would like to answer,

I stated earlied in this thread that SRU does not pay it's professors any form of salary or wages unless they develop a program and implement it and then are paid a commission per student. Or something to that effect.
I inquired with them about a position on their staff, to aid
in making sure they had an honest music program.

Forget it,
I was right, they don't pay. Told me so and what I would have to do to get paid. I'm charitable, but I don't have the time to start an entire Music course outline without compensation.
Tax time is looming over head and I have recently evaluated my
charities and what I need as far as employment goes.


I have a question....please, I beg you not to think I"m starting trouble. I have no time to read all the previous posts here or at SRU....but I am truly confused.

I think I saw a thread at SRU saying Mr. Bear had some nice Comments in an edition of his book. Almost an endorsement.
SRU began reading between the lines, and were quite cynical.

As some one who is not that familiar with this, could someone
explain this to me?

I may have read the post incorrectly, but I"m sure I didn't as
I vividly recall one remark " can it be that Mr. Bear has had a change of heart?...if so, SRU doesn't seem to be able to
be gracious when complemented. Or Br. Bear wasn't truthful.
Which is it?

Again I'm truly confused...and please please don't put me on the stand again..I have no answers only questions.
I hope this doesn't offend anyone with all of my heart and every fiber of my being. I live in a small town, and it seems these message boards are the only mature conversations I have.
I'll admite I ramble, but it's due to lonliness and the meds I was on before. NOw I'm on painkillers...wheeeee.......I was in an
accident in my car, which activated the airbags..... and sprained my right wrist, bruising to both arms and a good knot on the side of my head....that was 2 days ago, and I still get headaches and soreness in the side of my neck.

The pain of my insurance premium is going to be far worse.

Deb

 

more detail, please

Hi Deb,

Sorry, but you'll need to quote the text of Bear's comment to us. You described it as content in "a thread at SRU." I'd guess that most of us do not have access to an SRU board. Further, anything on an SRU discussion board that is attributed to Bear would need his confirmation. I think a post on an SRU board that is said to come from John Bear is likely to be thought a fabrication by SRU rather than something that Bear actually posted.

It can wait until after April 15, of course.

I'm sorry you got banged up in a car accident. Ouch!

G