 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
What to Do About DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-19-04 15:33
Hundreds of unaccredited colleges and universities have Web addresses that use the ".edu" suffix, confusing some students into thinking that the institutions are accredited by agencies recognized by the U.S. government. Some critics want Educause, the higher-education-technology consortium in charge of administering the ".edu" domain, to take the suffix away from unaccredited institutions. But Educause says it lacks the authority to do that and would invite lawsuits if it tried. Is Educause doing all it should? If not, what more could it do? Should ".edu" act as a seal of approval? If not, what's the point of it? Read more...
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-22-04 09:47
Hello,
When speaking of "unaccredited universities" all must accept that fact that, for example, Oxford University is not accredited by the U.S. government. Yet, no one questions their credentials. Of course, neither do I question them.
Also, does the University of Paris have American accredidation? No. It is unaccredited. Yet, who questions the Univeristy of Paris's credentials?
There is clearly a double standard. I admit that there exists a number of "diploma mills" and it is an embarrassment to higher education!
I think, however, that a few (and I mean a very few) unaccredited universities do offer equivalent training and education to students. This is especially true when many institutions of higher education want to create an "online presence" by offering potential studunts distance learning opportunities.
There needs to be a new accredidation body: One especially for distance (online) degrees. The University of Phoenix, for example, offers many challenging degrees equal to any traditional program.
Yes, there are is a lot of fraud currently going on in the online "life experience universities" and it is a shame. You can even purchase an Honorary Doctorate from the so-called "St. Regis University, " along with many others. This is wrong.
There are several college/university faculty now employed at ACCREDITED universities that have a "doctorate" from an unaccredited university.
If memory serves correctly, then there was an article printed in the liberal _Chronicle_ within the past three years regarding this matter.
In brief, "Online unversities," such as Walden (which is accredited) are not, and should never be, equated with unaccredited diploma mills operating outside of the U.S.
However, online education from an accredited instutions, such as the Universit of Phoenix, offers many people an opportunity to gain an education without the problem of relocating. This is especially true of professionals who already have families and don't have the luxury of moving anywhere in the nation to attend college.
The Internet and online education is here to stay. The Rubicon has been crossed. The question is: Can traditionalists come to grips with technology (given there are standards to differentiate between good and bad distance learning institutions) that offers opportunities to many people that, otherwise, might not be able to take college courses due to their work schedule or where the live (i.e. if one is in the military).
Tim Harris
Consumer skepticism
Date: 11-22-04 15:02
What is lacking here is a healthy dose of consumer skepticism. If we raise enough awareness that .edu does not automatically mean quality education, then the .edu problem goes away on its own. I think too many people just want to be told (or make assumptions) about who gives quality education, and not enough people do the work to investigate individual institutions.
Ask the important questions:
1) Does the institution provide quality education?
2) What opportunities are available to graduates of the institution?
3) What level of training do the faculty actually have?
...etc....etc.
Let's do our own homework on where we invest our time and money in higher ed, rather than making decisions based on a passing glance at an email domain.
Accreditation and Smart Shopping
Date: 11-22-04 19:01
Quick - who can be the first to name any of the regional institutional accrediting agencies, and define their official accreditation criteria? Go!
Unless you were the unfortunate soul who was volunteered for the department's internal audit last year, you will probably have difficulty getting beyond a list of vague statements about "clear and publicly stated purposes." Among prospective students and their parents, there is even less awareness about these organizations.
Certainly, accreditation is a critical aspect of higher education. Using these metrics to make the ".edu" mark as strong and reliable as possible is important (and the Educause policy of attrition may be the best we can hope for). No matter how tight policies become, however, there will always be illegitimate organizations that sneak their way in.
The existence of ".edu" should never be the basis of a college decision, and higher ed should not encourage the practice. After all, choosing an accredited institution that doesnit fit oneis needs can be as disastrous as getting scammed by a diploma mill. At least in the latter case, your son or daughter will realize they've been had before giving four years of their life to the cause.
Ben Myers
Owner, Summit E-Solutions
ben@summitesolutions.com
http://www.summitesolutions.com
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-22-04 19:16
Hi,
Oxford University (http://www.ox.ac.uk/) and foreign colleges should NOT be within the scope of the discussion, because most of them do not use the domain of "edu", but rather, use the country domain (such as uk, fr, ca, etc), even if edu is part of the URL. Typically, only US colleges use edu as the domain.
So "domain" is a keyword here for discussion, and US is the scope.
There is no doubt that it is good to prevent diploma mills from using edu domain. There is no need to list the benefits. Problem is, how. Educause maybe right by saying it lacks the authority. How about Congress?
Chen
Bradley University
Peoria, Illinois
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-23-04 10:43
If the suffix ".edu" does not mean that someone, somewhere with the authority to do so has made a formal determination that the entity using it is a legitimate educational institution, then it serves no purpose. Its continued use under such conditions provides a form of false information to the public. If Educause does not have the authority to fix the problem, fine. Someone does. Fix it.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-23-04 11:19
I find it interesting that Tim Harris should want to equate the University of Oxford with a diploma mill as both being equally "unaccredited." This, of course, is quite false. Although the University of Oxford doesn't have US accreditation, it's accredited under UK law, and there's a well-established tradition of controlled recognition of foreign accreditation. For example, the US department of education has established the "National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation (NCFMEA)," charged with determining whether or not a foreign accreditation body uses standards "standards used to accredit medical schools in the U.S." Oxford is accredited, and by a number of recognized bodies such as the British Council, and ultimately by an act of Parliament.
And, as has been pointed out, Oxford doesn't use the .edu domain.
In this light, I have no objection to restricting the .edu domain to accredited universities only. A foreign university, of course, has access to the country-code domain within its home country under the local rules, and doesn't need access to the .edu domain. A foreign university that doesn't have access to the corresponding country-code domain (Oxford, for example, is ox.ac.uk, where the .ac. subdomain corresponds to the US .edu domain), is a university that for some reason or other the locals do not recognize as a valid university --- and it seems perverse of the United States to offer them recognition as a university. Within the US, of course, any university that genuinely offers "many challenging degrees equal to any traditional program" can apply for accreditation as normal -- the University of Phoenix, for example, is accredited through the NCA, just like Case Western Reserve University or the University of Wisconsin.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-23-04 13:11
This is a sad development that must be addressed by the education department. It is embarrassing and stupendous that the education department and accrediting units allow such to go unpunished. For prospective students, I would say call up the institution's admission office, check the faculty page, catalogue, and more importatntly, call the education department when in doubt. It is time that the Congress pass a stiff law making it a criminal offence to set up such "diploma factory offices" or web sites, or send letters through the internet to unknown victims.
buyer beware
Date: 11-24-04 10:35
buyer beware
blame it on the teachers
Date: 11-24-04 11:08
Any student who believes ".edu" on a website means it is a U.S. government approved college has got to be a product of our wonderful public education system.
Public education in this country has a long history of turning out complete morons. This is just more proof...
Re: blame it on the teachers
Date: 11-24-04 18:12
Sounds like a product of our "our wonderful public education system"
UK experience
Date: 11-26-04 06:37
In the UK the ac.uk domain is administered by UKERNA. It is not only insitutions who can get .ac.uk, but also academic subject associations and research projects can apply. However, experience has shown that such domains are difficult to get hold of, even for new organisations/ projects that clearly meet the criteria and it usually takes 2 or 3 attempts before they hand them over. This does appear to provide 'safety' to the domain, but now the UK government proposes to give university title to private companies in the future this may change.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-27-04 13:14
I found this an interesting discussion and I appreciate Tim's comments.
As an adult professional, well beyond the traditional age for attending college, even graduate school, I have been investigating distant learning opportunites available to earn a terminal degree. (I have an MBA and a number of professional designations.) The opportunities are, in a word, almost non-existant.
There is The University of Phoenix, which is relatively well known and Northcentral University, of which I recently became aware. My concerns are not that they are degree mills but rather how well their degrees are "accepted" by the academic world. Both have the accreditation of the US Governement as well as a regional accredition agency.
If I am to invest $25,000 to $40,000 and 2-4 years completing a Ph. D. I want to know my time, energies and dollars will not be summarily dismissed as "less than worthy" by the elitists in academia.
Are there resources you may be aware of where the acceptance of distance learning degrees are discussed with regard to their acceptance in academia?
As far as the .edu issue is concerned, we do not need the government getting involved. All the .edu group needs to do is change the rules for everyone who holds the .edu suffix to require accreditation and anyone failing to provide the proper evidence will lose the .edu suffix for their site. Since everyone will be treated equally, the chances of a successful lawsuit are severly diminished. in addition, the purveyor of the .edu should require payment of some sort from those using the suffix to fund any defense of their actions to protect the .edu from the degree mills about whom everyone is concerned.
Just an idea.
Kevin M. Lynch
What is a Diploma Mill?
Date: 11-29-04 11:21
Is seat time in a classroom what separates diploma mills from "real" universities? I think the problem is much more complex.
Really bad universities get accredited, because it is based on tonnage of documents produced by administrators. I know this first hand.
So even if we could get rid of "diploma mills," we would still be left with the problem of most college students earning degrees, from pretend universities, without being challenged much.
Oh, and high school students shouldn't be expected to know which universities are good and which aren't. The packaging looks about the same.
Re: What is a Diploma Mill?
Date: 11-29-04 17:02
Steven, ex-prof wrote:
> Is seat time in a classroom what separates diploma mills from
> "real" universities? I think the problem is much more
> complex.
I don't think anyone has been suggesting that seat time is the separation (did I mis-read someone)? Much of the problem can be captured very simply -- unaccredited "universities."
There is, of course, a minor nuance here. In the United States, "accredited" is usually shorthand for "accredited by a regional accreditation body recognized by the Department of Education." There are a lot of accreditation bodies out there, some (most?) focused on "national accreditation," usually for specific disciplines (such as ABET accreditation for engineering), and a few simply outright frauds selling credentials that the fraudulent schools turn around and resell as false advertising to their clients.
Let me be blunt here. If your school (college, university, &c.) is located in the United States or draws primarily US-based students, and is not "regionally accredited" by one of the magic seven agencies, it is a fraud and a diploma mill. There are a number of distance-education schools that have achieved this not-especially-lofty heights and are not diploma mills; there are also a number of brick and mortar schools that are unaccredited and therefore diploma mills.
There's no need to muddy the waters.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 11-30-04 02:07
re: Psst. Is the Chronicle Living in the Past?
One of the first things one would expect from the Chronicle of Higher Education is the ability to think in nuanced terms, not simple Cartesian black and white. One expects the ability to see, not just shades of gray, but different colors as well, orange, green, purple. The article "Psst. Wanna Buy a PhD?" by Barlett and Smallwood (June 25, 2004) shows none of this talent.
For perspective, my own credentials are that I received my inter-field doctor of philosophy in psychology and education from Claremont Graduate School, and I am a licensed California psychologist. I sought my license in spite of the fact that I am a social psychologist, not a clinician, because that extra effort reinforces my qualifications. I got my degree long enough ago that Claremont was still a school. The administrators had not yet changed the name to Claremont Graduate University, which I find abhorrent. Scrapping "School" for "University" seems just as much an effort to achieve a fake upgrade as the so-called diploma mills that the Chronicle so scathingly, and with equally puffed-up self-righteousness, decries. My thesis is that the Chronicle writers defend self-righteous stances that are much less defensible than the forms of education they attack.
Do I defend trading degrees for money? Of course not, and I will challenge anyone who suggests I would to pistols at twenty paces. I do suggest, however, that the Chronicleis writers need to think beyond simple black and white terms, lumping anything different into the category "bad.i
My complaints are several. My first concern is that I recognize, even though the Chronicleis authors do not, that education, like everything else in life, must evolve. For education to stop being an elitist institution that targets the cultural elite, and let us be blunt, mostly white folks, it needs to offer alternatives to the standard four-wall sit-and-listen and regurgitate model. Lumping all schools together that do not fall inside some rigid definition of "good" does not allow for difference and newness. To lump together and attack all different approaches as bad smacks of self-righteous cultural elitism. It also demeans both those institutions that offer alternative yet legitimate paths to knowledge. The conflation demeans students who take alternative paths, often because other paths are, let us be blunt, closed to them. Further, this stance suggests that higher education should be closed guild.
The authors do not distinguish between writing a check and getting a diploma in the mail, and schools at which students engage in actual studies and work that might not be within "the one right way" yet still represent academic work.
The Chronicle seems to be defending one particular model of education -- seats in seats for many hours -- with no acknowledgement that legitimate efforts are being made to expand opportunity. Why no article lauding efforts to expand education? For example, the United Nationsi International Labour Office is sponsoring alternative education strategies, as are the American Council on Education and Council for Adult and Experiental Learning (CAEL). The Labour Office states, "First ewe recommend that the expansion of post-secondary educational opportunities be encouraged outside the formal college in apprenticeship programs, proprietary schools, in-service training in industry, and in military programs; that the appropriate credit be given for the training received; and that participants be eligible, where appropriate, for federal and state assistance available to students in formal colleges.i And second, eWe recommend that opportunities be created for persons to re-enter higher education throughout their active careers in regular daytime classes, nighttime classes, summer courses, and special short-term programs. Higher education is now prejudiced against older students. They should be welcomed instead.i"
CAEL defines prior learning assessment (PLA) as the "process of defining, documenting, measuring, evaluating and granting credit for learning acquired through experience". This would include such training as professional continuing education courses that, through prior learning assessment, could comprise a course of study toward a doctorate. Of course, for a doctorate, one would also need to complete a qualifying dissertation, but it is nothing less than elitist to say that sufficient continuing education courses could not be organized and accepted as at least part of a course of study. Does the Chronicle reject the evolution and expansion of educational opportunities?
About the International University, the article states that students must "complete a five-day residency on the island [St Kitts] before receiving their diplomas". The article says nothing about the additional requirements, and by leaving those out, implies that the school is just another "buy your degree" diploma mill. If that were all the university required, I would be just as indignant as the authors. The authors show their bias by leaving out the fact that the schoolis requirements that (at least from the standpoint of an outsider not involved in the school) clearly appear to meet UN and CAEL standards. Students must also submit for evaluation any "credit for learning acquired through experience". The authors also leave out the requirement to complete a dissertation.
The Chronicle edges right up on (some would say clearly steps over into) overt racism and classism. Referring to accreditation by the government of Saint Kitts and Nevis, they state that "experts" consider such accreditation meaningless: All because "the Caribbean nation once accredited a university that doled out degrees for watching I Love Lucy and other sitcoms." The logic offered? Alternative education institutions that are accredited by Britain are legitimate. Those accredited by Caribbean nations are not. Shame on the authors and those who make such absolutist claims. Now, it may be that the unaccredited University of Oxford is a better school than any particular Caribbean school, that is not the point of my criticism. The point is that the only reason that these authors cite for why British accreditation is better than Caribbean accreditation is the mention of a course offered by some unnamed institution that included "watching I Love Lucy and other sitcoms." The authors give no context on that course, do not tell us the title of the course, or the degree program in which it was embedded. Having reviewed the accreditation standards for St. Kitts (which are available online), I find them to be reasonable. Others may disagree, but the standards exist and they are of a significantly higher caliber than the authors report.
Let us call out some course titles from other institutions and see how they sound. How about "History of the American Motion Picture"? How about "History of Animation" which is a course in cartoons! The course titles tells nothing about the quality of the actual content or the context in which they exist. The former is offered at UCLA, the latter at the University of Southern California, two of the most respected media institutions in the world. Using the authorsi logic, that course titles tell you everything you need to know, one could just as easily criticize UCLA or USC. I have no idea whether the "I Love Lucy" course or its associated degree at the unnamed school was legitimate or not. The authors provide no context from which either to support their claim, or refute it. In a degree program in media such a course could be perfectly legitimate. As presented, the effort to pair associate a course that included watching "I Love Lucy" with the overall quality of Caribbean n specifically Kittitian n compared with British accreditation smacks of nothing less than racism.
Can any academic program improve its offerings? Of course. But to paint all alternative programs, especially those that simply offer alternative routes, with the same brush is to impugn good work being done, and efforts to open doors to education for those who have been locked out. The article seems not much different than writing from the turn of the last century that bemoaned the oh-so sad decline of the British Empire, longing for the good old days when whites ruled the earth, and everyone else had to conform.
The article ends by asking "How do you separate the people who want to do this legitimately from the crooks?" Not only does the article do nothing toward that end, but seems to support the notion that all alternative forms of education are crookery. I suggest that this is elitism, pure and simple. I would expect more from The Chronicle. It would be my hope that The Chronicle will work to promote and expand educational opportunities for everyone.
Sincerely,
Daniel Jordan, PhD
Re: What is a Diploma Mill?
Date: 11-30-04 11:52
My point was that many "accredited" universities have academic standards that are so low that they are no better (and maybe they are worse) than diploma mills.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-02-04 07:52
I guess I want to clarify some things. As a former employee at an online university, I can tell you that online universities such as, AIUonline, Univ. of Phoenix, Capella University, Jones International University, Touro University, and CTUonline are all accredidate by regional accredidators. AIUonline is accrediate by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, so the degree you receive from here or the other schools listed above are valid degrees. However, one could argue that the curriculum is not on par with traditional universities, given that most of these programs are on a very accelerated pace and the requirements to be accepted are having a hearbeat and a wallet, although you do need to have a certain GPA. For example, you can earn a graduate degree in as little as 10 months. But, that's probably a different conversation.
Also as for Oxford University and University Of Paris, you are correct that there is no accrediating body, but these schools are recognized by their Ministry of Education. When a student with a terminal foreign university degree wants to attend an American university, they must submit their degree and other paperwork for an evaluation, which is either done by the school or an independent evaluator, to determine if their degree is valid and what type of degree they hold. We had many problems with students from India who held a "bachelor's degree," when in reality that American equivilant was that they only had three years of college. India only has four year degrees in engineering and computer science, I believe.
I think when it comes to diploma mills, state governments should set up a watch dog department to keep an eye on the development of these schools. Some unaccrediate school do actually have coursework and so on, but for the most part they charge a few hundred dollars and give you your degree. These need to stopped, although it is very difficult. Also, companies need to train their HR staff to spot fake degrees on submitted resumes. But also companies need to be aware that the men and women they hire with these fake degrees are not as qualified, although most companies just want to see B.A. or even an MBA, regardless of where it comes from. But there is a difference and that information needs to be conveyed, because once employers reject applicants with fake degrees, diploma mills may cease to exist.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-02-04 13:41
This is an interesting discussion.
Perhaps what should be done is not to try to "take" XXX.edu away from a group, but instead to initiate additional "e-suffixes" that can only be granted to institutions to use under certain parameters. You could tell everybody that whatever the parameters were set at that they applied to your institution by just using a simple e-suffix.
Of course, any institution could go right ahead using the XXX.edu e-suffix if it wanted. With the new e-suffixes that were more prescriptive, ALL institutions, could take pride in their meeting the standards to use their particular e-suffix, and those who were dealing with them would know immediately the status of the educational institution.
If this were done, eventually, XXX.edu wouldn't mean anything.
Of course, some could argue that it does not mean anything now.
Would they be right?
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-03-04 11:52
Can Educause take away the i.edui designation? There is little doubt that they can, and should. However, will this cure the confusion? Is there confusion in regard to diploma mills?
In response to the first question I would say that diploma mills need to be shut down, it is just that simple. These organizations are merely scams that cheapen the degrees given by truly accredited colleges and universities. There are iaccreditationi organizations that have been developed by unscrupulous, but otherwise talented, individuals in order to call an institution accredited.
How do we distinguish the truly accredited institutions from the shams? Accredited organizations need to be monitored through a uniform criteria set-up by the U.S. Department of Education and monitored through the States.
The reason for this approach may seem relatively simple. If our degrees are cheapened by allowing the existence of diploma mills it is believed that this would have an adverse impact on the value of our human resource, which in turn, would adversely effect the U.S. work force. This can lead to a weakening of the U.S. economy, and therefore should be considered a national security problem.
Obviously, this is a greater problem than an iedui designation on the Internet.
Secondary schools need to be provided with the information necessary to make the distinction between accredited schools and nonaccredited schools. This is believed the best way to address this dilemma, through education at the secondary education level. This is when most individuals plan for higher education.
High school students need to be aware that the fact that a college or university is accredited does not mean all the programs are accredited. For example, there are many programs in psychology that are within accredited colleges or universities, but are not accredited through the American Psychological Association (APA). If the APA does not accredit the program the student can have problems in the future with obtaining access to an accredited doctoral program, and subsequent licensor procedures.
The second question may be more simple to respond to here. Most people that seek a idegreei from the diploma mills do it to get around the hard work that most of us have already undergone. These people want the easy way out and they do not want to put the time into the programming and learning process that exists at accredited institutions.
If a person is receiving a Bachelors degree after only one month of work, one should know that this is not an accredited program. If a Masters degree can be obtained by writing a paper and submitting it for full fulfilment of the degree requirements, then there is a problem. If a person can obtain a doctoral degree with this same lame effort, then they should know that they are not receiving an accredited degree.
These individuals are paying for a piece of paper, not working toward a degree. They know better, and they paid for a useless piece of paper.
Some employers do not have any idea of which school is and which school is not a diploma mill. This compounds the problem.
To get back to the original question, I believe taking away the iedui designation is a start, but it will have little or no affect on a personis desire to seek out a diploma mill. As long as we have people that are willing to pay for useless pieces of paper with the intent of representing them as idegrees,i this will remain a problem. This is a mark of a lazy society, and it is not healthy for our nation.
(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Justice or the United States).
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-03-04 14:02
Dr. Gala makes a number of good points. I have one significant reservation with his arguments. I, for one, most definitely do not want federal or state governments establishing uniform criteria for accreditation. I can see ideology entering in far too easily. Just look at the current controversy in Georgia about requiring stickers in school textbooks defining evolution as "only a theory." Extrapolate to higher education and get scared.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-06-04 10:43
Don Drennon Gala, Ph.D. wrote:
> In response to the first question I would say that diploma
> mills need to be shut down, it is just that simple. These
> organizations are merely scams that cheapen the degrees given
> by truly accredited colleges and universities. There are
> iaccreditationi organizations that have been developed by
> unscrupulous, but otherwise talented, individuals in order to
> call an institution accredited.
>
> How do we distinguish the truly accredited institutions from
> the shams? Accredited organizations need to be monitored
> through a uniform criteria set-up by the U.S. Department of
> Education and monitored through the States.
This is more or less the situation that we have today; the US DoE lists six "regional accreditation" agencies that accredit schools; schools accredited by one of these six agencies are eligible to receive federal funds. There's a slightly broader list of agencies that accredit schools and programs whose students are eligible for federal funds like Pell Grants. The Fed even publishes a comprehensive list of all "accredited" schools and programs on
a yearly basis.
The scam accreditation agencies are, by and large, not recognized by the DoE; their schools can't get Federal money and their students can't get Federal financial aid.
What more of a distinction mechanism do you want? It would be very easy to simply state that the ".edu" domain name can only be used by institutions accredited (or provisionally accredited) by DoE-recognized accreditation agencies. There's no need to muddy the waters.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-07-04 03:36
Me wrote:
"The scam accreditation agencies are, by and large, not recognized by the DoE; their schools can't get Federal money and their students can't get Federal financial aid."
This is great. I need to examine the DOEd information about these six organizations, since I was not fully familiar with this information before "Me" passed it on to us.
I have to agree with "Me," that reserving the ".edu" for accredited educational institutions is not only the easiest way of dealing with this problem, but obviously, it is the most appropriate.
During this dialogue, "keep it simple" appears to be the message that rings out loud and clear. It is something that we all can live with, with the exception of those unaccredieted educational institutions, and it appears that those of us involved in this colloquy have no concern for these institutions.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-09-04 02:05
As a customer for higher re-education, here's an idea that would satisfy me:
Since Educause controls whether a .edu address will function, they could require a box or banner to appear prominently on at least the home page.
This box would click through to an Educause site, to a page that describes the current accreditation status of the institution in question. This assumes that Educause keeps the site up to date, but given that, it would address a number of issues raised by contributors to this thread:
- It would state which DoE-approved accreditation organizations have approved the institution, and the current status and accreditation history.
- If the institution is discredited (known fraudulent), then this can be indicated.
- Even if it's not practical to research all the institutions having a .edu, the student can clearly see if it's not accredited. We would not necessarily know if it's DIScredited, but "not-accredited" is valuable information.
- The site can make it clear, however, that "not-accredited" does not necessarily mean low quality. Examples such as Oxford can be cited.
- This would give much more information than the .edu suffix can possibly convey.
-A grandfathered institution would not have a grievance based on being forced to change its email addresses. Sincere instutions that have lost accreditation can maintain their website while seeking reaccreditation.
This seems like a straightforward solution. Is there any reason it wouldn't work?
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-09-04 03:57
If you think Warnborough is a scam what about UNIVERSITAS 21? They are a company set up in the Channel Islands. Where do they get their authority to award degrees?
Strict control in UK for use of .ac.uk?
Date: 12-09-04 04:06
In the UK - the .ac.uk domain name is strictly controlled for genuine educational institutions. Perhaps in the USA .edu should be under tighter control.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-09-04 11:39
I researched on-line institutions for several months before choosing Capella. I would have preferred attending a brick and mortar university, however work, family and commute constraints kept that option out of reach. I am a systems engineer for Commonwealth Industries. I obtained a B.S. from Wayland Baptist University. I've been a field engineer for both Harris Corp and Lockheed Martin. That being said, I've attended numerous class room specialty courses over the years for these companies at accredited colleges.
I was apprehensive about Capella, but I decided to enroll. Several courses later, I must say that the professors are fantastic. The discussion groups are better than "physical classroom discussions", the textbooks are good, and I have access to all of the major university libraries and journals. Capella is extremely thorough grading assignments. Students must earn the grades. It's not easy. In fact I find on-line study a bit more difficult as I must have the discipline to read the assignments and ask questions. I've never written so much in my life. The research is extensive in each course.
I am currently in the Marketing Management course. I must write papers on published research every two weeks. I have a marketing plan due next week. I must participate in the discussions that are posted with 250 - 300 word posts and replies.
The professor for the organizational management course made me revise my 25 page final paper three times as some of my resources were not from scholarly authors and I lost focus a few times mid-way through the paper.
My point is that on-line education through a reputable college is a sound approach to obtaining a degree. Don't jump headfirst into a program without doing a bit of research. Contact the professors and ask questions about their credentials. Capella has the professor's credentials posted. Not all institutions will post credentials on their websites.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 12-14-04 12:27
What is being referred to here is spam like I get from time to time. Distance learnig is not like that. Here is an example of it...
*********************************************
A Genuine College Degree in 2 weeks!
Have you ever thought that the only thing stopping you from a great job and better pay was a few letters behind your name? Well now you can get them!
BA BSc MA MSc MBA PhD
Within 2 weeks , No Study Required, Completley verifiable!
These are real, genuine degrees that include Bachelors, Masters and Doctorate degrees.
Student records and transcripts are also available.
Order yours today. Just call the number below. You'll thank me later.
Call 1-206-339-6091 Now
**********************************************
There should be a law agains this sort of thing.
Re: What is a Diploma Mill?
Date: 12-16-04 00:52
How arrogant,
There are many "schools" and other educational institutions that offer a body of knowledge that is not part of the mainstream accrediting system as of yet. These are not diploma mills. They are unaccredited institutions of learning.
Acupuncture schools were not accredited until a few years ago. Does that mean they were diploma mills?
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
lewis Harrison
Re: What is a Diploma Mill?
Date: 12-16-04 10:47
Mr. Harrison,
Distance education is usually accredited.
**********************************
You say ...
"These are not diploma mills. They are unaccredited institutions of learning."
**********************************
Unaccredited institutions of learning do not qualify for federal financial aid to my knowledge. That alone conveys a certain message, does it not?
Such unaccredited institutions must carry the caveat "student beware". Becoming an accredited institution takes a lot of time and work. However, it is a worthwhile undertaking for any organization.
In a larger sense, I am sure that you will agree that the "Diploma Mill" mentality is something that undermines the sincere, unaccredited institution, also.
All needling about accupuncture aside, exploring a new technology or concept is not something that should fall on the shoulders of amatuers.
However, to the credit of what you are trying to say, advancements in any arena are not usually the product of the arrogant, but instead the innovator who is not afraid to take risks and take on the status quo. Distance education is the latter but I am not the former.
Those odd telephone numbers on these types of "spam" ads that come in e-mail can connect up to a place that charges by the minute and collects their charge by adding it to your telephone bill. I guess that one could say that they provide a specific type of education, however it is certainly not something of which anyone could be proud.
A true "diploma mill" is nothing but an exercise in academic counterfeiting. It is fraud. There is no way to deny this. The only way to guard against it in America is to be an accredited institution.
Sometimes, sir, we must take the horse by the tail and face the situation.
Re: What to do about DiplomaMill.edu
Date: 02-11-05 17:56
Hi,
Is there any institutional/formalized example of U.S. recognition of a degree from Oxford (as opposed to on a case by case basis)?
Why does the US Dept. of Education not recognize an institution accredited by a Foreign government as reputable as the UK for example?