Unaccredited Degrees Are Legal

This is a logical fallacy called a "faulty analogy." Comparing emotional intelligence with IQ doesn't have anything to do with comparing unaccredited and accredited schools.

You have yet to offer up even one example of "alternative forms of education." I would love to see one. That term, by the way, is old. It used to be applicable when there were legitimate, unaccredited schools taking alternative routes not yet taken by accredited schools. But no more. THAT'S why we who have been in this game for a while recommend accredited schools. The argument in favor of unaccredited schools, as a class, is gone. The only thing left are diploma mills and a few schools teaching niche subjects on the fringe. But for every WISR, there is a hundred K-WU's.

 

But those schools are so few these days. Even Bob Jones U. is pursuing recognized accreditation. You cite them as an example, but they don't fit. Doesn't that defeat your point?

 

Of course it's legal. It's also legal in many states to go to palm readers, fortune tellers and tarot card readers.

 

Another point to consider under this topic of discussion is: Who has the burden of proof that a school is "substandard"?

I believe that the burden should fall on the government rather than on the IHE to prove that it meets standards. [An analogy is from the vitamin and herb industry. Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, which passed congress in 1994, the burden of proof of a supplements harm falls upon the government (FDA)].

On a another thread I bemoaned the fact that all new universities (i.e. the notorious ODA hit list) begin with the label "diploma mill" and then have to work their way up out of the "mire." This places the burden of proof on the IHE.

Let's reverse this tendency.

 

BJU is accredited by TRACS now. Plus they don't specialize in distance learning. I'm still waiting for your example of a habitually unaccredited higher education school specializing in distance learning that you think is academically sound and ensures a standard education for its graduates. BJU doesn't fit the bill on any counts (except ensuring a standard education but they're accredited!!!).

 

This is the same thing as saying that you expect us to believe all those spam emails saying we're going to be rich if we contact this widow or send in money to that place. Then saying that it is a burden on the government to prove them bogus so we can just believe any new scam that comes along until the government proves them bogus. If that's the way you want to do it then fine but don't expect sane people to follow your suggestion.

Here's the deal Morgan. The VAST majority of unaccredited schools are totally bogus diploma mills. New ones pop up so fast that they can't all even be investigated. Why do you keep insisting that we can't accept that all unaccredited schools must be accepted? You don't even provide a list of habitually unaccredited schools that specialize in distance learning that you feel ensure a standard education.

 

We have that already. It's called accreditation. Let's see your list of legitimate colleges that are habitually unaccredited. Who are you trying to protect? Since you can't provide any list I must conclude that the answer is no one but academic frauds.

 

I think that if a person presents an academic degree and expects other people to respect the education that the degree supposedly represents, then the person who is seeking the recognition has the burden of proof.

There's no a-priori obligation that compels the rest of the community to accept and respect all "degrees", wherever they come from, sight unseen.

If you are suggesting that the government make accreditation standards mandatory, then aren't you arguing for a version of 'RA or no way'? That's considerably less tolerant and accomodative than the current system and it seems to contradict what you've written previously.

I don't think that credible new start-ups are typically called 'diploma mills' and I don't recall seeing any new universities on an accreditation track on the ODA list.

But bottom line: If institutions expect the rest of the community to recognize and respond to the educational certifications that they award, then the burden of proof lies with those who seek the recognition, not with the community.

 

By ODA
Barrington University
Ashington University =diploma mill.
Lambert University =diploma mill.

As of March 21, 2005, the following institutions have submitted applications for accreditation to the DETC Accrediting Commission:

Ashington University
Barrington University
Lambert University

 

From previous information made public here, Barrington University has all the appearances that it is a diploma mill. Would you care to make a wager as to their ability to get accredited? (I say they won't get accredited, BTW.)

 

It's not at all the same thing. What you believe is up to you and the government can do nothing about what you believe. Nor should the government try to do anything about what you believe.

Uhhh...the burden is on the government to prove them bogus if the government is to do anything to them. Good thing or you could be arrested tomorrow on any accusation by any government agent.

So that you can just believe any new scam that comes along? Do you? If so then the government can't help you. Nothing can help you.

You've misidentified who is sane.

 

Just an interesting side note. My older brother received a degree from Kennedy Western 3 years ago. His employer is one the largest companies in the world (General Electric). They not only paid for the degree, they accepted it. He was given a very lucrative promotion 2 weeks after completing the "degree". Now, it should also be noted that in my opinion the promotion was more merit based and they just needed him to have some kind of a degree to put him in mangement based on policy. For the record, once I learned about KW on this forum I removed them from consideration (I have recently enrolled in Bellevue University) because I have no interest in a unaccredited degree.

 

KWU and Tennessee Eng. Board

I've been away for a while, but would like to jump back in and comment on JimS' previous suggestion that a State Engineering Board could approve a KWU degree if it was evaluated and found to be ABET-equivalent. Some states do have this option, but in practice it is highly unlikely that a KWU degree would ever meet this standard.

For example, the July 2004 Engineering Times recently covered diploma mills, and discussed the Tennessee Board's experience with KWU degrees:

So to reiterate the point I made earlier, a KWU engineering degree is legal, but it is not respected.

 

Somebody needs to send to the HR Dept. Head at your brother's company (the mighty GE) a copy of the former KW"U" employees' and "students'" testimonies at the US Senate hearings of last May, where one Coast Guard officer, Lt. Claudia Gelzer, testified that she was able to complete 40 percent of KW"U"'s requirements for a Masters degree after only 16 hours of study!

Relax! It won't be me (at least, not here, not now).

I wonder how GE feels (now versus then) after reading the official GAO Report which states, without mincing words, that "Kennedy-Western University, an unaccredited school and a diploma mill, earned short of $25 million in 2003 and currently has almost 10, 000 students enrolled."

Another proof that the US GAO considers KW"U" a diploma mill (their direct quote). See the GAO 'diploma mill' summary here.

And, please, do not forget this gold gem .........

The "only-16-hours-of-study-led-to-completion-of-40%-of-KWU's-Masters-Degree-Requirement" story!

See this.

The, oh-so-gentle Senator Collins may not have openly called KW"U" a diploma mill but she did classify "KW"U" degrees among the other unaccrediteds that she and the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs investigated, in May of 2004, as BOGUS DEGREES (her characterization , not mine).

Companies and businesses, large and small, are being taken for a ride, frequently, by academic frauds and some outright imposters, and less frequently by scammed innocents, wielding unaccredited and diploma mill degrees, which they may openly or subtly pass off, as legitimately-accredited degrees.

But the diploma mill time-bomb continues to tick, though. Tick, tock, tick, .......

Yes, unaccredited degrees may be legal. And BOGUS, as well.



Thanks.

 

DETC does not have interim steps (statuses like "candidate" or "correspondent") to accreditation. A school is either (a) an applicant, (b) accredited, or (c) not accredited. These schools are not on an "accreditation track" by applying, since DETC does not evaluate schools before accepting them as applicants.

LaSalle University (as Orion College) was an applicant to DETC. We know how well that worked out.

 

Ashington was ordered to apply for DETC accreditation in order to continue operating in Louisiana. You can read the following quotes here:

Apparently the State of Louisiana feels that DETC's opinion has some bearing on Ashington's legitimacy. Perhaps there will be a Step (5) in the future: Ashington University relocates to Wyoming.

 

Bill Huffman wrote:

"This is the same thing as saying that you expect us to believe all those spam emails saying we're going to be rich if we contact this widow or send in money to that place.

Forget the government.

Suppose that somebody presents you with a degree awarded by a non-accredited institution that you are unfamiliar with.

How should you respond? In particular, how would you address Morgan K's issue? Who has the burden of proof in these cases?

Are you somehow obligated to accept all degrees presented to you unless you have sufficient information to discredit them?

Or is it the responsibility of the person presenting the degree, and of the institution that awarded it, to make a case for themselves and to convince you?

Bill Huffman wrote:

"Then saying that it is a burden on the government to prove them bogus so we can just believe any new scam that comes along until the government proves them bogus."

Morgan K. wrote: "I believe that the burden should fall on the government rather than on the IHE to prove that it meets standards."

In that case, either the government (wherever they are in the world) makes reliable accreditation inspections of all schools that it allows to operate, or else it doesn't.

If it does, then we have just outlawed non-accredited schools and mandated the equivalent of state-enforced 'RA or no way'. (With the government setting the standards, not the academic and professional comunities as with the current American accreditation system.)

If some trustworthy government hasn't reliably inspected every school in the world that has degrees circulating out there, then we are asking people to embrace some very doubtful schools whose standards have never been verified. I think that was Bill H's objection.

If people aren't obligated to believe any new scam that comes along, then don't the non-accredited schools and their champions have the burden of proof in making a persuasive case for themselves?

 

Ashington behind schedule with DETC ?

Wait, there is more to the story. Actually, Ashington was ordered to start pursuing DETC accreditation as early as 2002, as per these records:

For some reason, it apparently took Ashington until 2005 to get the ball rolling with DETC. The 2005 records posted earlier (which have several hard deadlines for 2005 and 2006) suggest that maybe the Louisiana Regents are losing patience.

 

Can't. That's what we're talking about.

I'd have to check it out. Same as now and same as ever.

The burden of proof of what and to whom?

The burden of proof of the employee's or potential employee's having a suitable degree is on the employee. Unless, that is, I take the burden of verification on myself.

No. I can reject any degree for any reason. If I reject wisely then I prosper. If I reject foolishly then I flounder.

It's the responsibility of the degree presenter and granter if I say so.

Accreditation inspections?

Oxymoron. Government is not some magical, mystical thing. Government is comprised of people and controlled by people no wiser or more honest than any you know. No wiser or more honest and holding great power over other people. People holding great power over other people.

People no wiser or more honest than any other and holding great power over other people. That is government.

Aren't obligated to whom to believe any new scam?

Burden of proof to...?

Your arguments are supported with skyhooks. You have vague notions of obligations and burdens but no fix on what or who the obligations and burdens are to or on.

 

I don't but you and the academic fraud support crowd argued in this thread that we must trust unaccredited schools until the government proves that they're bogus.

Have you sent your bank account number off to that widow in Nigeria yet? HAHAHAHA