Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by uncle janko, Nov 20, 2005.
Could you remind us about this? He's a Frederick Taylor Univ. person. But I don't remember about FTU.
From Bears Guide to Earning Degrees by Distance Learning, 15th Edition, page 201:
Frederick Taylor International University (FTIU)
In March 2002, the State of Hawaii settled pending litigation against FTIU and its principal, Mr. Monsour Saki of California. Under the terms of the settlement, FTIU and Mr. Saki are enjoined from operation of any unaccredited degree granting institutions in, from, or under the claimed authority of Hawaii and its laws. The defendants also agreed to offer full restitution to all FTIU graduates and students and paid a civil penalty of $35,000. The Frederick Taylor University (FTU) web site no longer mentions FTIU, and FTIU now has its own web site, which does not mention FTU, although it does provide the same California address and telephone and fax numbers provided by FTU, and lists many of the same faculty and administration. FTIU incorporated in Hawaii in 1997 and filed articles of dissolution in September, 2001; it incorporated in Montanta in July, 2001.
Frederick Taylor University (FTU)
Degrees offered are a B.S. in management, a BBA, and an MBA. Credit is awarded for experiential learning (up to 30 semester units at the undergraduate level, and 6 credits for graduate degrees) as well as for challenge exams. Financial aid and scholarships are availabe, and the programs are approved by the state of California. To their credit, FTU was one of the first schools to resign its accreditation from the nonwonderful World Association of Universities and Colleges (WAUC). At the same address as FTU, but as a separate institution, is Frederick Taylor International University (FTIU) which offers graduate degrees.
So that the reader will not be misled, the nefarious World Association of Universities and Colleges (WAUC) is not an accreditor (and, in my opinion, should not even be calling itself an "accreditor") that is, or has ever been (nor, I dare say, is it likely to ever be) approved or recognized by the US Department of Education (USDE) or its Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA); and WAUC is generally considered to be a worthless, bogus, wanna'-be "accreditor" whose "accredited" institutions should be avoided like the plague (see also this web page).
FTU is not, nor has it ever been (nor, I dare say, is it likely to ever be), accredited by any USDE- and/or CHEA-approved accreditor (who, in my opinion, are the only entities who deserve to use the word "accreditor" to describe themselves).
FTU does, however, have "institutional approval" from the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary Education (BPPVE); and it has a record in the database of the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC), and appears on its web page listing of California's 259 (at this writing) state-approved and exempt (from state approval) institutions. On the FTU web site, at this writing, is the following disclaimer regarding its state approval:
We are registered with the State of California. Registration means we have met certain minimum standards imposed by the state for registered schools on the basis of our written application to the state. Registration does not mean we have met all of the more extensive standards required by the state for schools that are approved to operate or licensed or that the state has verified the information we submitted with our registration form.
Not to confuse with FTU in Florida - what is now UCF
Florida Technological University, nicknamed Florida Tech, from its establishment - it was renamed to University of Central Florida by the State Legislature.
FTU's former rival, the Florida Institute of Technology, has since been known as Florida Tech. In 2003, UCF had the distinction of being the fastest growing university in the United States in terms of undergraduate enrollment, and as of 2005, more than 44,000 students attend the school.
Thanks for the FT(I)U info--
At the time I met Mansour Saki, perhaps 9 or 10 years ago, he had an MBA from Armstrong but no doctorate. Now I see he lists a Ph.D. from the CSM Institute of Graduate Studies, Kolkatta, West Bengal, India.
Looking more closely at CSM, they seem to be a part of TASMAC (www.tasmac.ac.in), which, incredibly, seems to have an affiliation with two other schools -- the excellent University of Wales, and the totally fraudulent Adam Smith University of Liberia.
Wales, recall, also has an affiliation with the dubious Robert Kennedy College.
The FTU in question has no connection to the Florida institution--and no one else has yet claimed any personal connection. Another poster was asked what FTU stood for, and refused to answer on routinely specious grounds.
Also, it's Kolkata (one T) replacing Calcutta (two Ts).
Finally, the salubrious beverage is sake, not Saki.
Agreed, UJ. Thanks for the home run. May your tribe increase (Do have some sake from Kolkata ).
The surreptitious attempt, IMHO, to maybe, link the completely and legitimately accredited and USDoE- and/or CHEA-recognized FTU with the monumentally shady and unaccredited FTU will not fly in here.
Newbies, watch out, please!
Creating, continuing, exacerbating and feeding fat on this long-time trick of sowing confusion is what almost all diploma mills, shills and their co-conspirators do.
Stay away from that other FTU-cum-FT(I)U.
Thank you, Jake. We must all live and lern.
The atempt was too link me with unaccredited FTU, because in another post I stated that I hold Graduate Certificate from FTU.
There was no surreptitious attempt on my part to mix FTU in Floriida with Unaccredited FTU UJ mentioned.
Actually the oposit is correct, my words were clear to unbiased
readers with good intentions, should I repeat.
I 100% agree.
Why did UJ posted about FTU in a first place let us see,
maybe it has todo wiith my post about the professional accreditation?
Its OK, I'm not surprised.
Masterman once said that Kuhn used the word "paradigm" in 24 different senses in his "On Scientific Revolution", rendering its use unclear and almost useless. As a Popperian, I don't care much about Thomas Kuhn anyway, but what bothers me is when words begin to fog over entirely in this forum about which I care very much.
Please note that Lerner has not answered Bruce's question about where his qualifications are from. Lerner has never said which FTU his qual is from; he merely juxtaposed the Florida school with the California outfit, but did not answer the question.
Unbiased readers with good intentions, take note and apply this to other material in this sub-forum.
But I confess that we live in the age of miracles. The person who cannot spell "opposite", "ago" or "while"* can spell "surreptitious". Glowry! The slide from perfect English to Russian-accent typing (something not done by any other Russian-provenance--or ostensibly Russian-provenance--posters at degreeinfo) and back again, within a single post and in successive posts, makes one wonder about the authenticity of seemingly objective, detached, nonpersonal information. Is it a game? Is it an unintentional confusion? Is it a quote? Is it logomachy? Is it, faute de mieux, perfect accuracy? One never quite knows for sure, rendering all ostensible information presented in this way open to serious question unless independently verified by another poster.
One must wonder how this obfuscation really enhances the ability of this forum to convey clear information for the sake of wise decisions and consumer protection, not to mention quips and chortles, Gemuetlichkeit and gay abandon (hi Steve). One must ask: cui bono?
And the answer is not sunny.
*Customarily spelt "wile" by this person --Paging Dr Freud! Your slip is showing!
This time the word was in front of me, I was siimply replying to Jake_A posible acusation.
I wander if I should even contiinue comentiing on this wild theories about perfect English with Russian accent.
It is puseling and its a patern notticed by others that when ever I post about professional accreditation couple of indeviduals pop up
as if they are programmed or payied to do so.
bUt yoo coudnit paiy me enuof to do thet jobb......
No one is programmed -- or, least of all, paid -- to confront you, here, about professional accreditation, Lerner... or anything else, for that matter. For you to characterize that as the reason why people have a problem with you is... well... let's just say that I hope you haven't deluded yourself into believing that that's the problem.
Your ability to write near perfect English in one post, and then to slip back into the other style of writing that you do around here is confusing... troubling. It isn't that people don't like you... er... well... at least in my case that's certainly not it. If that's part of the problem, it's only because people don't easily forget some of the posts you've made here and elsewhere that were genuinely hurtful; or which seemed to support those who had made such posts. But, really, even that's not the real problem, I think.
If folks don't fully trust you yet, one of the biggest reasons is the English thing. It just furrows the brow, and makes one ask oneself, "What the heck is that about?" It's so obvious to everyone that you're capable of perfect English -- and of grasping and espousing complex concepts -- that when you slip back into your "I am jus' poore Rooshin imagrint" thing, it feels like an insult and a betrayal to those whom you asked to take you seriously -- and who did so -- during one of your periods of perfect English. It makes people ask, "What game is this guy playing?", and it's that that's been putting a cloud, for many, over whatever you write around here.
I wish you'd just be yourself... the obviously articulate, really bright person that we all know you to be... and just dump the whole Russian immigrant thing. Well... I mean... wait a minute... don't misunderstand me. If you're actually a Russian immigrant, then please don't hesitate to wear that with pride. What I mean is, the whole bad English thing. It's obviously a put on of some kind. How you can't see that is... well... it's disconcerting, to be candid. A little creepy, actually.
Another possibility I've contemplated is that you're really not putting us on, but that you've got a problem of some kind... like a drinking or drug problem (which is something within your control and, therefore, less worthy of sympathy); or, heaven forbid, you've got a medical problem or something (which isn't within your control) and that makes you move from periods of great lucidity to periods of near inability to type properly... or that some medication you take causes it. Angry as I've been with you in the past -- and even if you really are some kind of troublemaker who's always had some kind of weird ulterior motive whenever you've posted here -- I'd certainly never wish something like that on you... and I hope that that's not the case. If it were however, if you'd just share it with me privately so that I'll know that you deserve a bit of a break around here and can then act accordingly (and encourage others to do so, too... but without violating your confidence by telling them why), that would certainly help.
The only other thing I can think of is that maybe there's more than one of you sharing the same computer and using the Lerner username here... not as some kind of game, mind you... but just because you and whomever it is that's sharing the username are just not bothering to go to all the trouble of each of you having your own usernames and doing the whole logout thing when you're done so that when the next person sits down at the computer they must login with their own name. If that's what's happening, then I don't think anyone here would have too much trouble understanding that. Most people could see how easy it would be for more than one person sharing a computer to just be lazy and make all their posts here under the one username that they all know works; and under which one may stay logged-in from browser session to browser session. If that's what's going on, Lerner, I wish you'd just tell us so, so that we will always know that whenever we see the bad English it's one person in your household; and whenever we see the perfect English, it's another. Knowing that we're actually dealing with two different people -- if that's actually the case -- would really help.
The bottom line, however, is that without knowing if any of the possibilities that I've just outlined is what's really going on, the good-English-then-back-to-bad-English thing just strikes everyone as deceptive -- even deceitful -- in some way. It makes no sense to us. It not only makes it difficult to take you seriously, but it gets in the way of doing so. I mean... just think about it: If you were talking to someone about something, and you knew that they were playing games with their very identity and were fully convinced that they were so good at, or that you were just too stupid to notice it, wouldn't you be offended? Wouldn't you maybe be so offended that it distracted you from even being able to stay on topic because the whole fake identity thing was becoming the elephant in the room?
Why won't you let us know who (and by that I don't mean that you must reveal your identity) you really are? If none of the possibilities I mentioned above is really what's going on with you, why not just up and be you -- the perfect English-speaking/writing you -- so that whatever deception or game that we fear you're playing stops being an impediment to your full and unfettered participation here? Frankly, I think you'd have more fun around here, too! And I'm betting it wouldn't be anywhere near as much work for you as putting-on the whole fake Russian accept thing.
Look... Lerner... if I'm wrong about all this, or have written anything here that's hurtful or that makes you feel bad, then I'm sorry. I'm not trying to do that. I'm just trying to help you understand what the real problem is... or at least one of the real problems. If there's some other reason why you do this, but you just don't want to talk about it publicly; but you'd like one of us to know about it so that we can all cut you a little slack, then please PM me -- or email me... or something -- and let's talk. Even back when I was much harder on you around here, my invitation to you to talk and make honest-to-goodness peace was heartfelt and sincere. So was (and still is) my promise that whatever we talk about will stay between us... no matter what.
But until and unless you become willing to explain yourself, you can't ask everyone around here not to notice what you do, to wonder why you do it, and to let it get in the way. Being reasonable people, members here are bound to consider the possibility that you're trying to pull some kind of fast one... and to let that color their interactions with you here. Your past postings here and elsewhere that genuinely hurt some folks; or your continued posts in othe fora under another username, but which everyone can tell is really you, is also insulting.
Please don't forget that the members here are not just average joe's walkin' down the street. Oh, don't get me wrong... I don't mean we've got a bunch of Einsteins in this place (although we've got some pretty darned bright folks). I'm just saying that, as a forum largely populated with people who have not only degrees, but in many cases quite advanced ones, you're not going to easily be able to pull the wool over their eyes -- at least not for as long as some think you've been trying to -- without them both noticing, and being offended by it.
I think that that's kinda' where we are, here, at this point. You seem to be asking some very smart people not to notice what, to some of them, feel like fairly outrageous -- and even insulting -- behaviors. If there's a good, explainable and understandable reason why you're doing that that, if we just knew about it, would make us all more sympathetic, then I'd say that right about now would be a good time to share it with someone -- me, for example -- so that the word can start getting around (but without violating your privacy) that we should all be more tolerant of, and patient with, you. One thing that's present in this place is the ability to understand... to be kind, even. No one here is a monster. But no one here likes to be jerked around, either. That's kinda' how many of us feel, when it comes to you; and that's your doing, I'm afraid.
So give us something to work with so we can all be done with this kinda' stuff, okay? This isn't fun for anyone... not Janko, I'm sure... and I'm guessing, least of all, you. Don't you want your participation here to be fun? Interesting? Happy? Smooth? Not contentious? Wouldn't you rather call Janko, or Carl, or any of the others who have challenged your behavior around here "friend," not "foe"? That's possible, you know. It's in your hands.
I mean... look... you do what you want, Lerner; but I believe you're really missing out on the sense of community that you could be feeling around here if you'd just start being straight with people... in every way, of course... but most especially regarding the English thing.
Thanks, Lerner, for reading this and, hopefully, understanding. If you'd like to chat in private, you know how to reach me.
In the meantime, let's not turn this thread, too, into a big arguing/sniping session. The topic is FTU... er... well... really... Mansour Saki. Let's all try to confine it to that, shall we?
I'm a native English speaker (first time listener, long time caller), and I still make the same ol' mistakes in my spelling I made years ago (even though I used to be an editor for crying out loud!).
I now have Google Toolbar, which I sometimes use and sometimes do not -- to catch the egregious ones. (Double letters have always been a problem for me -- compounded by the confusion we Canadians sometimes have about Canadian, British, and American usages such as "judgment" as opposed to "judgement".)
For years I fought the Americanization of my spelling -- until I finally just gave in to the spell-checkers.
My most visited URL? http://www.m-w.com Webster is our friend.
When I was suffering from really nasty gout pain, I often didn't bother to check the tone or form of my Internet posts. I just hit send and let the Internet correct for my distraction.
There are a million-and-one reasons why one day someone who has English as a second (or third?) language might fluctuate. I don't find most of them worthy of raising suspicion or concern. What I do find interesting (more than the faux pas in question, actually) is the constant harping on the issue.
On a tangentially related issue -- I speak French with an Alsacian (slightly German) accent. In my prime, although I'd never encountered such a speaker, I for some reason spoke as if I came from there, and didn't present while in Montreal as an Anglophone. Socially, this was great. Quite by accident I spoke French in a way that allowed me to avoid being labeled an Anglo, in a highly affluent anti-Anglo neighborhood. This made my tips higher. I could, in an instant, switch to a typical "Chicoutimisois" in a pin drop, and often did when going to speak with the mechanics at the garage. And when I speak on the phone with someone with an accent, within a few seconds, I acquire (uncontrollably) in a great number of cases the tone, accent, and pace of the speaker on the other end.
In other words -- maybe it's the Scotch-Irish in me (I've heard the Scotts are great with "voices") -- maybe it's my former desire to get into voice impersonation -- I'm a voice chameleon. That doesn't mean I'm a deceptive person. It just means I'm a voice Zelig for some reason. I can swear like a lumberjack without blushing. My voice can go really deep without cracking, or high, to suit the situation. Many times, outside of my control. Drives my wife batty to hear me on the phone. She can tell me WHO I am speaking with just by the pace, vocabulary, accent -- even if I don't mention the person's name while talking.
It's a wild world. None of that stuff comes across on the Internet fora. Thirty seconds with me on the phone, however, and one might think "Why is Quinn trying to fit my voice patterns?" I'm not. Just happens.
And as for the user name "lerner" -- I think it's cute. Stay golden, pony boy -- don't ever have it changed to "Learner".
#1 QTJ, I'm sorry to see you retire from all distance learning discussions. I hope that it is instead a short vacation and that you will return in 2006. Your insights will be sorely missed.
#2 The whole deal with "Lerner" is neither cute nor charming; it is flat out annoying. He should be more consistent and stick to either "Lerner" or "Learner" but not alternate or worse, use both in the same post.
The answer to your rhetorical question is a resounding "NO." Lerner, due to some unknown reason, must actually enjoy pulling all of our collective chains. I said it before, I think that the underlying problem relates to a lack of maturity. I can't fathom any other reason for Lerner's continued insistence that he is a poor, off-the-boat Russian (??) immigrant.
While I don't think that Lerner wants to be considered Uncle J's "foe", all the signs seem to suggest that he wants the relationship to be on his terms (i.e. Lerner is Unc's "frind"). This would appear to relate to the maturity issue.
Re: Lerner Stuff
In Russian we say don't have 100 rubals but instead have 100 friends.
No I'm not poor Russian, I only speak Russian I was born in Ukraine, I'm what is called in USA the indengered spicy a Middle Class high teck professional. My wife and I work and we raise kids, have 3 cars
(one for my 19th year old college student), A dog and cat.
I have very good message to the readers and these who have ears to hear and eyes to read know my message.
I'm who I'm.
Another unattributed quote.
But no one will mistake you for its Author.
Separate names with a comma.