Wyoming Legislator Slams Accreditation

Not being one of the 12 Angry Men I haven't prejudged you or presupposed your arguments, but...just what you are for or against does remain a bit murky.

 

posted by russ

Many of the unaccredited colleges around the country are businesses pretending to be a college and they are awarding a degree for a fee and not for meeting the standards associated with one.

I do not think that accredited schools see them as competitors no more than than a jewelry store sees the guy outside the store selling out of his coat as one.

 

Russ should not have to answer that because others have been asked these questions and the questions were not answered. It was irrelevent then and so it should be now. I do not agree with Russ, but I do not see him as shilling for any school. He just seems to dislike the ODA and accreditation.

 

Except:

1. He's been particularly vocal about Kennedy-Western, entirely consistent with others who have been associated with that entity or others of its ilk, and....

2. He' been snide regarding Union, which never, ever comes from people associated with legitimate schools. In fact, serious criticisms of Union tend to come from either Steve or me.

 

Oh, Rich, you jackbooted guvmint thug!

 

If someone is a shill then the best way, IMO, to expose them is to let them speak. Jumping down their throats leads to interminable, fruitless threads like this one.

Anyone who remembers Tony Brown's Journal may recall that he would invite suspected racists onto his show and encourage them to speak their piece. He would avoid challenging them to let them speak. Smart man, Tony Brown.

 

Quote:
"
I would think you guys would read the information under "accreditation" on degree.net before coming here. That is where those numbers came from and the fact that major accredited universities seriously considered dropping accreditation all together which I still believe is a wonderful idea. It is one more 'cost center' which, for many universities, is just not necessary.

Who really cares if Harvard, Yale, Princeton or even University of Oregon and Oregon State University says they are accredited? It really does not mean anything if the school is considered legitimate.


__________________
Only the mediocre are always at their best. "




Well you can be good friends with CA governor the terminator.

Governor Arnold is closing 88 boards in the CA State and this is just a beginning.

If there is National board why to have a second layer of State boards this is the rational, to eliminate duplicate unnecessary funding.

So I don't mind if there will be one Nationally empowered agency that will oversee QA in all states, maybe the agency could be bracken to 6 regional centers ;- ).

But to get away of all QA in education - this is not acceptable.

 

OO! OO! Can I have some jackboots, too??

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by plcscott


Russ should not have to answer that because others have been asked these questions and the questions were not answered. It was irrelevent then and so it should be now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder why others have been asked this question and yet the question remains unanswere.

Surely truthfully, voluntarily, and independently verifiably answering the question - about any degree(s) you hold, where from, when obtained, in which subject(s), etc. - is an invaluable tool in laying to rest all ensuing questions about one's apparent motives for condemning the voluntary US academic accreditation system, to rest.

Unless one probably (but not always) has something to hide?

Thanks.

 

Done!

Whew!! (my very first post done)!

.... after a one-year membership; a full year of reading and re-reading and researching responses and positions and facts and inuendo, ad nauseum)..... smile.

Great forum!

Kudos to all who hold up the banner of legitimate academic accreditation .... call it externally-verifiable and institution-independent, academic quality control exercised by widely respected and generally-accepted educators, investigators, auditors, and quality-assurance-motivated standard-bearers.

(wow, my second post ... that was not too bad now, was it?).

Me? A lurker, no more. Thanks.

 

Welcome, Jake_A. Happy to have brought you out of the woodwork.

 

I know, isn't that great.

I just like to get these guys going and as you can see by the popularity of this post compared to others on this board, it works very well.

I have always been suspicious of entrenched bureaucracies that no one questions. Education to me is too subjective to quantify easily, even to minimal standards. Bureaucracies also add layers of costs that are too often not justifiable and are passed down - hiking tuition costs for students and their families.

I would love to read the book that was mentioned about "rampant credentialism." Our society is so wrapped up in this that traditional credentials are becoming meaningless.

 

Sorry, wrong again. As I said, it is not important what my "credentials" are unless that is a requirement for being on this board. I have an interest in this topic and as a member, I think I am entitled to free speech here unless you guys are into censoring as well.

I probably would have been off this site a while ago but it is so fascinating to see how people with "superior" educations act when they are being challenged. Imagine being called a "crying girl with a skinned knee" by one of your most articulate (and arrogant) posters.

 

Pretty clearly "Russ" is playing games. He continues to quote the K-W party line and rufuses too back ANYTHING he says with a shred of evidence. I have no idea if he is a degree mill shill or not, but by this time it is clear he continues to say things that are untrue even after corrected. Time for the ignore file!

 

You are absolutely correct. He doesn't have to answer any questions. I think that it is fine to ask and speculate though.

 

If I have said anything untrue, please specify it. If I disagree with you and hold to my opinion, that is not being untrue, it is simply an absence of a meeting of minds. You have your beliefs, I have mine.

The idea that once you have "corrected" me that I should immediately concede and kowtow to your "truth" is a very arrogant position for anyone to take.

 

You have stated untrue things many times as you put words in other's mouths that they never said and then proceed to tear apart the strawman.

 

I would invite readers to examine the body of "russ's" posts and decide for themselves.

 

Since you cannot specify a single time I said anything untrue where I was stating a fact then this statement has no validity. The challenge was only "one" thing that was a lie. It can't be that hard to find if I have said so many lies.

 

You said to find an untruth but did not specify from where, so I have found one. You claimed that Multnomah School of the Bible was unaccredited.

Yet ATS, recognised by CHEA accredits them, along with the Association for Biblical Higher Education

I believe that satisfies the definition of untruth (at least according to the OED)