UAF policy discredits 'diploma mills'

[Hawk]

The University of Alaska Fairbanks administration has approved a policy that would let administrators disregard credits and degrees earned at institutions defined as "diploma mills." Story (http://www.news-miner.com/Stories/0,1413,113~7244~2656892,00.html)

[J]

Another inglorious moment for Oregon ODA:

The policy statement included a 578-member list of unapproved institutions, as compiled by an Oregon degree-authorizing office. The list was to be posted on the UAF Provost's Web site and updated annually.

The list was where the problem lay, Jones said. He said UAF soon received a "sharply-worded, threatening letter" threatening legal action from an individual representing one of the schools on the list. He said UAF also became aware that other schools on the list were involved in lawsuits against the compilers of the lists.

"We don't want to get in a situation where we identify a university or the source of a diploma as being other than legitimate, and we end up with a libel suit filed," he said. "We're being very cautious for those reasons."

[Robert J.]

Funny that the Oregon list only has 250 or so schools on it. Yet what they gave to UAF was over 500. Do they have two lists of schools? With an additional 250+ too "hot" for their own list? Or 250+ that weren't properly researched for Oregon but was "good enough" for UAF? I don't get that, why are they supplying two different sets of information when disseminating their info? One of the schools mentioned in the Article must've been KWU and the KWU lawsuit. So that means Oregon was still disseminating info that KWU is a mill outside of Oregon ? But yet won't make that claim in Oregon anymore, if that is the case, and I can only speculate, that would be the clearest case of the ODA having an Agenda yet.

[Neil Hayes]

Funny that the Oregon list only has 250 or so schools on it. Yet what they gave to UAF was over 500. Do they have two lists of schools? With an additional 250+ too "hot" for their own list? Or 250+ that weren't properly researched for Oregon but was "good enough" for UAF? I don't get that, why are they supplying two different sets of information when disseminating their info? One of the schools mentioned in the Article must've been KWU and the KWU lawsuit. So that means Oregon was still disseminating info that KWU is a mill outside of Oregon ? But yet won't make that claim in Oregon anymore, if that is the case, and I can only speculate, that would be the clearest case of the ODA having an Agenda yet.

It is very sad that the University of Alaska Fairbanks had to refer to the ODA for information, particularly as Kennedy Western have already shown that the ODA list is seriously flawed. I would have thought that the high number of academics at UAF would have been able to quite quickly determine a mill from a legitimate school.
It certainly seems that the ODA has a hidden agenda and will be blindly bumbling along for some time yet - until the next series of litigation problems!

[michael]

It is very sad that the University of Alaska Fairbanks had to refer to the ODA for information, particularly as Kennedy Western have already shown that the ODA list is seriously flawed. I would have thought that the high number of academics at UAF would have been able to quite quickly determine a mill from a legitimate school.
It certainly seems that the ODA has a hidden agenda and will be blindly bumbling along for some time yet - until the next series of litigation problems!


I doubt the list is serously flawed. I for one see no academic value in KW or many of the other schools on the list. What they never should have done was say that a school was a mill. They should have marked them as unacceptable, of course other people have all ready brought this up. I think it is foolish to say you can't use those degree's for any job, in Oregon, I think they should have done like other states have and simple stated that degree's from these school's can not be used for civil employment. Just my .02

[dr. latin juris]

A fresh inventory with no Due process and merely with prejudiced opinions; the thing is becoming enormous for the Legal Representatives of the State Approved~ Licensed Universities.

In addition, for the Legal Representatives of the persons that holds diplomas of officially permitted State Approved or Licensed Universities.

More sues and more justice and money.
:D

[Neil Hayes]

I doubt the list is serously flawed. I for one see no academic value in KW or many of the other schools on the list. What they never should have done was say that a school was a mill. They should have marked them as unacceptable, of course other people have all ready brought this up. I think it is foolish to say you can't use those degree's for any job, in Oregon, I think they should have done like other states have and simple stated that degree's from these school's can not be used for civil employment. Just my .02

I'm sure thousands of KWU graduates would disagree with you. "Unacceptable" is also a very subjective term. KWU has produced many fine graduates, three of whom were prepared to stand up and be countered in the KWU litigation proceedings. As an outsider, who has taken a close look at KWU's operation, it would appear that many of KWU's problems have been generated by its very considerable success. And that such success has does not sit easily with the B&M schools. Hence the reference to the UOP being referred to as a mill!

[J]

Guys - let's stay on topic. No personal attacks please.

[dr. latin juris]

Be endorsed by one of the renowned accredited associations is merely and purely voluntary by US Federal Law, for the reason that education is only a State Power. If a person (Juridical or Natural) put in a list that x institution of higher education is awful because only no have the voluntary endorsement (Primary Purposes of Accreditation is for Federal Education cash and finance), merely that argument is not satisfactory superior evidence in a Court of Justness.

Numerous officially permitted ~ State Approved Universities in the past, no wish for take Legal Proceedings against that sort of libelous opinions and lists. Currently, Kennedy Western and Central State University confront ODA, and archived some changes, nowadays, some of the others US Authorized institutions of higher education are preparing the Legal Actions against the List Creators.

Therefore, I expect that University of Alaska Fairbanks organization have solid evidence to proof and support that list in a Court.

If no accreditation is the solitary evidence, possibly they will be unsuccessful.

[dr. latin juris]

The University of Alaska Fairbanks list.

http://gov.alaska.edu/faculty/2004-11-01.UAF-AcceptableDegreeMotion.pdf

[J]

The University of Alaska Fairbanks list.

http://gov.alaska.edu/faculty/2004-11-01.UAF-AcceptableDegreeMotion.pdf

And there it is in black and white - proof positive of the ODA's real agenda.

A couple of places on the "full" list caught my eye. Firstly the Universal Life Church, CA - in the past ULC forum posters have suggested that the institution is Oregon-proof, but clearly not so.

Also interesting was the inclusion of the Royal College of Science, which is a constituent body of the highly legitimate Imperial College, London (http://www.imperial.ac.uk). I doubt they'd be too pleased to see themselves there.

ULC certainly has the money to sue, and their HonDD is protected by Federal Court judgement.