Suffield College and University - New Diploma Mill?

Degrees are not based on "intelligence." They're based on completing a prescribed course of study.

Have you really met intelligent elementary school dropouts? Who in this age drops out of elementary school? Should we solve this problem by awarding the smart ones bachelor's degrees? And what ever does this have to do with awarding college credit for experience?

These rationalizations miss the point that legitimate institutions don't award credit for time served on the job. They award credit by verifying learning done outside the classroom. Kennedy-Western has been shown that they do no such evaluation of learning.

 

I don't know how all accredited universities grant credit for prior learning, but I know from experience that the method used by KWU is not very different from the method used by a State University where my wife and I attended.

The credit assessment you recieved at their website was a tentative assessment, assuming you told the truth about your background. KWU does require official transcripts to be sent to them to complete your admission.

 

Kennedy-Western has been demonstrated publicly to award credit without verifying the experiences (not to mention the actual learning) presented by its applicants. This is academically fraudulent.

Requiring transcripts is irrelevant to this discussion--we're talking about the award of college credit (even at the doctoral level) for work experience, attending seminars, etc., without any verification process. The idea itself--awarding experiential learning credit beyond the bachelor's--is inconsistent with legitimate higher education practice. But to do so in EVERY case, regardless of the person's actual background--is just wrong. "Assuming you told the truth" indeed.

Please share with us the name of the state university you attended that conducted a process similar to Kennedy-Western's. That would go a long way to supporting your contention (assuming it's true).

 

I didn't mean to offend you, or imply you did not tell the truth. I meant that anyone applying for the tentative evaluation is taken at his or her word (marketing) but are then verified. And I know from experience the credentials are verified to an certain extent (certainly not a thorough background check, that would be expensive) by review of certificates and documents the student sends.
As far at the State University, it was the University of Wisconsin. UW, and I assume other universities, have external degree programs for working adults that are more lenient in entry requirements and granting of credits for past experience (note "experience", not education). I admit the UW method of documenting the experience was more vigorous (required a research paper explaining how the experience was relevant to the individual's area of emphasis [major]).

 

No offense taken. So, if I read your post correctly, the processes used by K-WU and Wisconsin are quite different. As we all know, KW-U requires no documentation. This has been establish by one poster here (Paul, who has a regionally accredited Ph.D.), and by a witness at the Congressional Hearing held by Sen. Susan Collins.

It is also safe to assume that the University of Wisconsin does not award such credit at the graduate level, not to mention the doctoral level. This, too, makes it much different from K-WU, which does both.

Sorry, but what K-WU does is not justifiable. They award degrees based in part on unverified prior learning, award bachelor's degrees after only 5-9 courses, and award experiential credit for graduate degrees. We also know that their "courses" are nothing more than a book and an open-book test, very easy to pass. (Again, this was testified to before Congress recently.)

It's clear that K-WU does what it can to be barely legal. That California (where K-WU really is) tolerates this is pathetic. That Wyoming allows it is doubly so.

 

No, they are NOT quite different. UW requires the student to prepare a paper discussing how their experience applies to their major. I see that as the only difference
I do not know what UW or any other university has for graduate programs, so I cannot defend KWU on the practice of granting experiential credit in graduate situations. Perhaps the KWU model is different, perhaps it isn't. Perhaps it is only a benefit of being unaccredited that they can award experiential credit at the graduate level. Maybe other readers can give examples of the practise being done at other universities.
As far as open book exams being easy... not every KWU student passes the exams. As far as open book exams being substandard, I know from my experience at other universities that it is not uncommon.
As far as KWU being barely legal.. I'll leave that argument up to lawyers and legal scholars.

 

I just dont get these numbers!

Hi Morleyl... maybe I can try to answer your question though I am no expert. Consider the example of Suffield College and Univ or what have you:

Master Degree: Requires 60 credits.
For a student to apply for a Masters degree, the student must first have a Bachelor degree or apply for a multiple degree program - Bachelor/Masters. You qualify for a Master degree if you have one of the following:
> 2 years work/life experience related to your major and a bachelor degree.

By virtue of this statement above (extracted from the website of suffield), all I need to do to get the Masters degree is to work for two years in my field of study after my bachelors degree...

What company would give me a starting job challenging enough for me to learn all that I can from a Masters??? I would not have been as suspecious if they said "10 or 15 years of R&D or research work related to your field"...

There's so much of an information and discipline gap between a masters and a bachelors that cannot be covered by work experience alone. Else, people wouldn't get paid by their companies to go do their masters or PhD to be of better assistance to the company (generally speaking)... I am talking from an engineering perspective, but I think this would go for any field in academia.

So degree awarded on life-experience basis is something I would be extremely uneasy with... if I must totally skip through the process of "formal education" for a masters degree, I'd at least try to test out the courses...

 

I would never consider entering in a program from an institution, which is not properly accredited ( and here i mean the european/canadian way of state charters, not the shadier US one of " private committees " accrediting private entities ).

I would however consider ( as a self-employed consultant ) a degree mill sounding good enough to give a prospective client the "idea" ( because that's all it's about ) i am the right person to hire (money money ).
And i mean by restricted means: i am not saying i'd consider rocket fuel science or cheeck transplant.
However, being in the commercial field, if an important customer might have rather liked to deal with a B.A in manure hauling, then i'd consider purchasing a manure hauling degree.

My point here is: one may as well face the same prejudice & obstacles with a real-life, brick & mortar degree, than he might with a degree mill.
The only untold of portion of the story deals with "intellectual honesty".

At least i did.
I couldn't successfully market my canadian M.A here...
1 it isn't approved here
2 the university wasn't really that good in our opinion...
3 it was taught in another language
4 exam (say) " labour history in XIX Europe " is worth here 3000hours, and only 34 hours in our opinion when by the university you're from.
etc

As you can see, no mention of the intrinsic values of studying abroad; intellectual challenges etc etc: only hair splitting about nonsense.
Interesting enough, i had friends who tried to market their LOCAL degrees & "divine surprise"...they were told exactly the opposite:
1 even traffic lights here have degrees such as yours
2 you know no foreign languages
3 if only you had studied abroad, you'd have the kind of open-mindedness...blahblah...

A few companies even told me i was "too educated" ( three languages and a half ) to give me the BS trip above; and since they were profit driven, they'd hire some local university's sprout to subsequently give him the BS trip to pay him less.

It all boils down to perception.
I had friends with M.Ds given the same trip.
Perception is subjective.
As a result, i didn't even try to market my Ph.D ( i love learning for the sake of it ).

 

I think I have missed the method of posting a response. I have indicated Mr. Douglas comments in quotations. I will get it right the next time, I think.

 

Rich, I see where you're heading at, and I really have to disagree. I don't want to put anyone down for choosing college or not, as long as the road their taking is on a positive track.

Now you say have you ever met an intelligent elementary drop out, I can say yes, this county was built by a whole lot of them. You look at a person who worked at McDonald's all their life, choosing to make a career. They become manager all the way up to a owner of their own store. Any franchise work is a great head start to a business education, you learn how to do the labor, manage, supervise, perform accounting transactions, and HR action and training.

I feel experience counts for a lot, researching, and problem solving is learned hands on with experience along with actually performing the tasks. The difference, in college you get an "F" if you do it incorrectly, verses the work word when you may get fired. It's dead wrong to judge someone because of their educational level. I don't think you could survive in a jungle, but a native of that jungle, with no school education, could teach you tons about staying alive.


Thank for the reply.