VAE encore and encore !

What is your definition of a Diploma mill and how does Sorbon fits that?

Seems the definition seems to keep changing.

 

I said you were doing just fine. Now you're not.

You have been effectively and impressively debating French VAE of the legitimate kind (as opposed to that which Sorbon dispenses). Please continue debating that, and not Sorbon... or, in this case, Sorbon indirectly by challenging the very definition of a mill. This thread will not be about Sorbon, or any bogus entity like it which claims to dispense French VAE; nor will talk of it be back-doored into the discussion by deflecting it to defining what is a diploma mill apropos Sorbon.

Don't push this, morleyl.

You were doing fine. Please get back to that.

 

Well, I had no intention of going down that rat hole. Since I was traditionaly educated, I do not want to trade punches with the non-traditionalist.

In any case I ask because I wanted to have an objective view of where the thinking is here.

I do believe America is a great or the greatest country because of its grasp of freedom. I think the US is the only white majority country that allowed or has black universities. I am very sure in the early days, graduating from a black university may not have been accepted for jobs or further studies.

The same thing may apply here to schools that are different from the norm.

The important thing to say here is that facts, fairness, respect and honesty can go a far way. If you use all the above to declare a school as diploma mill then I will support you 100%, but if its just a personal bias or unfounded base, then I will have to disagree.

Back to VAE.

The VAE to me is very good concept to inject life into an educational system. Many persons who may not have gotten a qualification may now do so. For example a barber may get a Certification in his/her field and decide that now pursue something bigger with this start.

Another group that would benefit from this are persons working in an area that they were not professionally trained. This gives them a chance to have a paper to show some achievement and get a better job/education in that field.


There are schools in the US, that allow someone to get a full degree base on passing a bunch of exams, I really cannot to relate to why that is more qualified or educated than someone with real application or learning on the job. No job is just about using the hand, there is always some theory somewhere involved.

I agree if the person needs to take a class no problem, but how does the learning help them to apply themselves in a profession.

 

Just looking back on all the discussions on experience base credits etc..

I think the best solution would be to have a respectable vocational qualification such as the one given by City and Guilds Senior Awards.

This way its comparable to a degree level not directly a degree. At least the many discussions would be minimize.

The best route for this in the US would be to join IEE or BCS then apply for chartered status, this can then be converted to CGI..

I still think it would be nice to have something thats US flavor and respected. Just like CPA or one of those.

 

Wile I like the rout you just mentioned and very strong supporter of professional and vocational qualifications there is always the possibility to take an exam or series of exams to prove what you know and earn that credential.

But it's not always fair because some of the exams even degreed persons will have hard time to pass with reasonable scores.

And there is always the DL rout when you can study at your own pace, time and comfort.

Learner

 

All of the above doctorate degree programs are ACTUALLY involved academic work done, e.g. publications, projects, ...etc, and can be evaluated the performance based on research methodologies, literature review ... etc. Therefore, academic transcript can also be attached to record how good of the level of performance of research work done before.

They are totally different from the conferment of VAE degree that can be based on 100% life experience, no academic work necessary! Therefore, what is the different criteria/standard to grant a degree from VAE or Honorary degree? It seems no difference!

Supposing I got a VAE degree and someone, who obtained a Hon. doctor degree, asked me how to earn such degree, I would reply him based on 100% my life experience. What will he think? Just same as his degree or even inferior if his Hon. degree is from a famous accredited university!

 

I think you misunderstand both the honorary process and the VAE process. The transcript does not dictate the degree type.

The VAE process is base on matching learning experiences with an academic course list. You can look this up an read about it. Thats why it can be total or partial.

We always get into this rat hole that learning is limited to one means and just can't seem to understand thats the most important thing especially for work is the competence that is evident.

A person can practical learn anything either academic or vocational without going to school actually. The school is just there to validate the learning.

 

Do you really think this MBA is honorary?

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.vae-grandesecoles.com/mba-esg.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Desg%2Bmba%2Bvae%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D

 

Thank you for your information. However, the MBA is not wholly based on VAE validation. Candidates are STILL required to pass tests and examinations at different level as stated in your url, e.g. a written test of 4 hours synthesis ... etc.

So, you may say VAE is one of ways to get exemptions from the MBA course but it cannot form an academic degree without additional tests, e.g. written tests, oral tests, report writing ... etc. It implies candidates' performances are still required to be measured by using such tests as explained in your quoted url!

 

My point was that VAE invovles various steps base on the school to validate the knowledge in respect to Academic contents. The test are part of the VAE process.

Even Sorbon, I gather, does verification before the Jury gets the file. Means they can quiz the person or ask for a thesis etc..

 

Sorbon degrees are not recognized nor accepted in France. That means to me that Sorbon is a diploma mill. Comparing any kind of diploma mill degree to any kind of diploma from a real school is invalid.

 

It seem some people have specific opinion about Sorbon or its degrees. I think without any real facts, its hard to real use that in any discussion.

To me an unaccredited school may have issues of recognition but does not make it a diploma mill. That factor should be judged on the standards for obtaining the degree.

Why can't people stay objective?

 

No. Standards mean nothing unless they are enforced. Every DL and "life experience" school claims to have high standards. Yet many are bogus.

Because it's difficult or impossible to get an objective evaluation of an unaccredited school. Unaccredited schools, by definition, do not submit to objective evaluations.

Most people would not invest in a company that refused to cooperate with independent financial auditors. In the same way, most people will be skeptical of a school that refuses to cooperate with independent academic evaluators.

 

Personally, my goal is very high standard, so I am not endorsing Sorbon or any of those.

What I am saying is that you can judge the school by the actual process it uses to issue degrees. Not what a specific evaluator says or not say.


In respect to schools, its the legality and then the standard.. If the school is legal then you can focus on the standard thats used.

I would think an evaluator makes a decision base on the laws in each Country actually.

 

No. How do you evaluate the "actual process" that a school uses to issue degrees? There are only three ways to do it:

(1) The school can evaluate itself, and tell you the results. This is a "first-party" evaluation. However, this will not satisfy most people. A first-party evaluation lacks objectivity and credibility; a school has an obvious incentive to state that it grants meaningful and valuable degrees.

(2) Students can evaluate the school, and tell you the results. This is a "second-party" evaluation. However, this will not satisfy most people either. A second-party evaluation lacks objectivity and credibility; students have an obvious incentive to state that they have received meaningful and valuable degrees.

(3) An independent outside party can evaluate the school, and tell you the results. This is a "third-party" evaluation. This is the only kind of evaluation that is objective and credible, and it is the only kind of evaluation that will satisfy other "third parties" (in other words, other people that have no connection to the school). But unaccredited schools, by definition, do not allow independent third-party evaluation.

So the problem is obvious. If you are connected with the school, as a first or second party, then you cannot objectively judge on the schools' degree-granting process. But if you are not connected with the school, as a third party, then you still cannot objectively judge the school's degree-granting process, because the school will not cooperate with you.

The net result is that there is no way for anyone -- first, second, or third party -- to objectively judge the degree-granting process of an unaccredited school.

 

This is plainly incorrect on both counts.

Your first assertion that legality is the first requirement. While it is true that a school should be legal, there is so much more that it makes it almost meaningless. For example, judging what is good or bad based on the legality means that we should consider eating bugs, drinking urine, and banging our heads against the wall because that is all legal.

Your second assertion is the standard used by the school should be the final focus is also incorrect. One cannot tell what standard is actually used by almost any unaccredited school because by their very nature they do not submit to outside scrutiny in what their standards actually are and how they are administered. Without this assurance degrees from unaccredited institutions cannot be trusted to be near the accepted standards. So they are sometimes referred to as diploma mills.

 

I agree with. I guess, the best option would be to evaluate the graduates of the school

 

So, does everyone now see why I've been riding herd on this thread? No matter how many warnings I give; no matter how the long-time members of DI (like CalDog and Bill Huffman, for example... and others who have appropriately carried the well-deserved anti-Sorbon torch in this thread) try to discuss real (as opposed to the Sorbon version of) VAE, some millist, shill, troll or those who seem so will somehow try to drag the discussion, by hook or by crook, back to Sorbon.

I will not allow newbies to be misled, here. It's, in part, a consumer protection issue, in my mind. This thread is not about Sorbon. It's about legitimate French VAE. Period. Sorbon is a diploma mill. It grants VAE for the mere act of breathing... and writing a check. We have established that Sorbon is a mill. That not debatable here. It is established, even if only by my arrogant declaration here, as a moderator, that it is so. This is not a "free speech" issue. This forum has the right to control its content. Previous Sorbon threads here have always gotten out-of-control or by some other means downright hysterical and abusive. I will not have talk of Sorbon -- except to repeat that it's bogus and, in actuality, has nothing, whatsoever to do with legitimate VAE -- interminged in with the otherwise perfectly wonderful discussion of legitimate French VAE that is trying to thrive here, in this thread.

I am as serious about this, now, as a heart attack. The next person who writes in this thread (or who starts a new thread in order to end-run the intent of what I'm now saying) the word "Sorbon" (or any thinly- or not-so-thinly-veiled references thereto), other than to point-out that it's a worthless diploma mill that should be banished from the face of the earth, will get his/her post deleted (or severely edited) by me; and will risk being banned from DegreeInfo. Heavy-handed? You bet! This thread will stay on the topic of non-Sorbon-related, legitimate VAE, if I have to do it with a sledgehammer.

We will not debate the fairness of it. There will be no talk of freedom of speech; or ratholes; or trading punches; or America's grasp of freedom and/or its allowance of black universities though it be a predominantly white culture as a means of shaming; or defining degree mills on their "nature"; or Sorbon's alleged "verification" process and/or it's "jury"; or any suggestions that Sorbon is merely unaccredited, but that that doesn't make it a diploma mill; or any soulful laments about why people who call Sorbon the mill that it is can't be "objective"; or tired, old millspeak about legality and standards; or anything else about Sorbon (or the unfairness of its mention not being allowed here) that anyone can think of to add!

Sorbon, except to call it a diploma mill and/or to further evidence its behavior which clearly proves so, is off-limits here.

How many more times, and in how many more ways, am I going to have to say that here before certain people's logins at DegreeInfo stop working? Do not go there.

Then start doing it... or there will be consequences.

It's not. So don't.

And don't make me warn you again.

Others in witness who may be tempted to take-up the Sorbon cause, here, pay heed.

Now, let's resume this conversation... but on topic, please.