Kennedy Western Response To the Discussion Questions Feedback

[Robert J.]

Mr David Gering has reviewed the Discussion Questions thus far and these are his comments back to the community.

The Community May Respond and Reply:
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mr David Gering Says:


Applying for Oregon 'approval' --
For quite awhile, people have speculated on various bulletin boards about why
Kennedy-Western hasn't just "applied for state approval" with Oregon, the improper
presumption being that we haven't because we don't believe we could be approved.
This is simply false. We are already licensed in Wyoming and abide by rigorous
standards to maintain that licensure. Paying $250 for "approval" by Oregon would be
analogous to obtain driver's licenses in each state someone drives through.

Further, Wyoming licensure requires KWU and all other licensees to put a great deal
more money where their mouths are than does Oregon. KWU must post a $100,000
performance bond and pay a $2,500 annual licensing fee, both a great deal more than
the $250 Oregon's "approval" requires. To maintain its license, KWU must provide,
among many other things: detailed University mission statement and documentation of
how the University supports its purposes and objectives; detailed evidence that
substantive academic and student service-related activity is conducted;
documentation of instructional methods used including those for assigning,
monitoring and evaluating work; awarding credit, and granting a degree; complete
professional credentials for each professor of the University, including
verification that at least 50% of professors have Ph.D. degrees, with the balance
having Master's degrees, all from accredited universities (KWU exceeds this standard
with approximately 75% Ph.D. professors) Further, licensure means that KWU must
provide audited financial records and undergo both announced and unannounced state
inspections of its offices. Kennedy-Western supports efforts to make diploma mills
illegal. In fact, since 1996, Kennedy-Western has been at the forefront of state
legislation in Wyoming. Those efforts have led to new laws that, in turn, has
created an inhospitable environment for diploma mills in the state. In sum, this is
a great deal of state due diligence and ongoing oversight, which we have always
welcomed and never dodged.


Defining who 'settled' the lawsuit --
A number of comments were made to the effect that Kennedy-Western settled with
Oregon, clearly implying we doubted our case. The facts substantiate the opposite.
KWU filed the lawsuit against the state, not the reverse. The state of Oregon
certainly has more resources than KWU to take this case to court if the state
believed it could prevail, but the state chose not to proceed. The fact is that the
state acknowledged in the settlement that its law needs to be amended. The fact is
that KWU didn't withdraw its lawsuit. The settlement is explicit that if the Oregon
legislature doesn't amend the law in ways consistent with the settlement terms, KWU
will press forward again with the suit. When one examines the terms of the
settlement, one is hard pressed to view it as KWU having settled to avoid proceeding
with the suit.


Hawaii --
Periodically, we see comments about how KWU once operated in Hawaii. This is
categorically false and a search of public records will confirm Kennedy-Western
University was never licensed there, either as a private university or even a
business. This blatant misconception probably stems from the fact that for a short
period of time, one University employee lived in Hawaii and worked remotely from his
home.


Quality of KWU students --
Some insulting and untrue comments have been made about our students' abilities.
Many of our students have qualified for and graduated from accredited universities.
Our professors frequently comment on the high caliber of our students who are
working professionals, successful and serious-minded, and driven. The
Kennedy-Western program is for those who don't need credit transferability. They
can't avail themselves of traditional campus-based programs due to commitments to
family, work and limitations of time and distance. Our program meets their needs for
a flexible, self-paced program that relies on what is called an asynchronous
approach, meaning they are fully responsible for their own success and don't have to
rely on scheduled work with other students. So, accreditation isn't part of our
students' decision process. They are looking for elements in an online degree
program that they don't find elsewhere, at either accredited or non-accredited
universities.


Faculty qualifications --
Various things are said about KWU's faculty, some of which is false. Our faculty
hold teaching positions with well-respected universities throughout the U.S.
including Brigham Young University, Harvard, Stanford, Texas A&M, Notre Dame, UCLA,
Temple, USC, Berkeley and Auburn. Further, Kennedy-Western requires professors to
meet or exceed strict standards. Some look askance at the fact that KWU professors
are all adjunct faculty, carrying negative implications about the faculty or KWU's
educational model. However, regionally accredited online universities use adjunct
faculty as well. Interestingly enough, more than a few professors at other
accredited online universities have applied to join the faculty of Kennedy-Western
but have been declined because they do not meet our standards. KWU faculty are often
the same ones who develop and revise curricula.


Faculty activity --
Further, to those who label our professors as mere tutors, please look at the facts
to the contrary. KWU professors teach, which has always been the case. They provide
phone or email Tutorial Assistance to individual students whenever students request
contact with their professors. Our professors actively work with our Curriculum
staff to generate and update curriculum. Faculty select texts, often the same as
those they require in their traditional classes. Our faculty have no assistants or
proxies. All of this means KWU delivers high-quality, academically rigorous degree
programs.


Hiring faculty --
Wyoming licensing gives KWU no choice in the matter of hiring only faculty with
degrees from regionally accredited institutions. Wyoming requires that all of our
professors have their own degrees from accredited universities. Further, licensing
requires that they have teaching experience at accredited universities before they
can teach with us, and since most universities require professors to have degrees
from accredited universities in order to teach, our graduates can't have that
experience. So we are precluded from hiring our graduates or faculty with degrees
from other non-accredited universities.


Open book exams --
The issue of exams crops up periodically. Students must have a mastery of the course
material in order to complete open book tests within the time limit. The fact that
the exams are open book only means that students have to understand how to apply
information they have learned in order to answer the questions. Of the final
examinations administered by the University, 15% receive a failing grade. Another
20% receive a 'C' grade. Less than 45% of the students will receive an 'A' on their
final examination, despite the materials provided to help the student prepare. This
speaks to the difficulty of the tests. Also, open book exams are widely used
elsewhere, so one must ask why such tests are somehow only suspect at KWU?

[Robert J.]

You may reply to this thread for those who's comments he might be responding to.

[plcscott]

Applying for Oregon 'approval' --
For quite awhile, people have speculated on various bulletin boards about why
Kennedy-Western hasn't just "applied for state approval" with Oregon, the improper presumption being that we haven't because we don't believe we could be approved. This is simply false. We are already licensed in Wyoming and abide by rigorous standards to maintain that licensure. Paying $250 for "approval" by Oregon would be analogous to obtain driver's licenses in each state someone drives through.

Further, Wyoming licensure requires KWU and all other licensees to put a great deal more money where their mouths are than does Oregon.

If that is the case then why did KWU move the license all the way to Wyoming when Oregon is a lot closer to California where the "university" is and has always been?

KWU must post a $100,000 performance bond and pay a $2,500 annual licensing fee, both a great deal more than the $250 Oregon's "approval" requires.

So, KWU moved its license across many states so that you could pay more money? The economics of this doesn't make a lot of sense. :rolleyes: According to the senate hearings KWU did $25 million in 2003, so a $2500 license fee is only .01% of that.

To maintain its license, KWU must provide, among many other things: detailed University mission statement and documentation of how the University supports its purposes and objectives; detailed evidence that substantive academic and student service-related activity is conducted; documentation of instructional methods used including those for assigning, monitoring and evaluating work; awarding credit, and granting a degree; complete professional credentials for each professor of the University, including verification that at least 50% of professors have Ph.D. degrees, with the balance having Master's degrees, all from accredited universities (KWU exceeds this standard with approximately 75% Ph.D. professors) Further, licensure means that KWU must provide audited financial records and undergo both announced and unannounced state inspections of its offices. Kennedy-Western supports efforts to make diploma mills illegal. In fact, since 1996, Kennedy-Western has been at the forefront of state legislation in Wyoming. Those efforts have led to new laws that, in turn, has created an inhospitable environment for diploma mills in the state. In sum, this is a great deal of state due diligence and ongoing oversight, which we have always welcomed and never dodged.

Wyoming 21-2-401 (http://legisweb.state.wy.us/statutes/titles/title21/c02a04.htm)

(iii) The professional credentials for each instructor of the
institution including an official copy of academic transcripts
verifying academic status, verification of educational degrees
attained, the name of the institution granting the degree and the
status of the institution with respect to accreditation by a regional
accrediting association recognized by the United States department of
education. For institutions granting bachelors, masters or doctorate
degrees, application shall include verification that not less than
fifty percent (50%) of instructors employed or contracted by the
institution have received a masters or doctorate degree in their
respective field of study from a college or university accredited by
a regional accrediting association recognized by the United States
department of education, and that unless a waiver is granted by the
department for an otherwise qualified instructor, the remaining fifty
percent (50%) have received at least a bachelor's degree in their
respective field of study from a college or university accredited by
a recognized regional accrediting association or as evidenced by an
evaluation of academic transcripts by service organizations pursuant
to paragraph (ix) of this subsection;

So, according to the above KWU COULD hire graduates from it's graduate programs couldn't it?

[plcscott]

Hawaii-----
This blatant misconception probably stems from the fact that for a short
period of time, one University employee lived in Hawaii and worked remotely from his home.

OK, so someone just worked from Hawaii, so if Hawaii is taken off the list then we still have California, Idaho, then to Wyoming.

From your response above:
In sum, this is a great deal of state due diligence and ongoing oversight, which we have always welcomed and never dodged.

Then why did KWU move from CA in the first place, then to Idaho, then to WY? Why didn't KWU welcome the changes in CA, or Idaho instead of dodge them?

[plcscott]

Quality of KWU students --
Some insulting and untrue comments have been made about our students' abilities.

Not from me. I think a lot of KWU's students have a lot of abilities, and many of them have learned a lot on there own. My problem is with the way the business KW masquerades as a university, yet falls short of the normal standards associated with one.

[plcscott]

Faculty activity --
Further, to those who label our professors as mere tutors, please look at the facts to the contrary. KWU professors teach, which has always been the case. They provide phone or email Tutorial Assistance to individual students whenever students request contact with their professors. Our professors actively work with our Curriculum staff to generate and update curriculum. Faculty select texts, often the same as those they require in their traditional classes. Our faculty have no assistants or proxies. All of this means KWU delivers high-quality, academically rigorous degree programs.

That is what most people would call a tutor. Tutor = someone who gives guidance or instruction to another. There is no assignments, no required lectures, no quizzes, so the faculty choose the textbook and provide tutorial assistance when/if requested by the student.

[plcscott]

Hiring faculty --
Wyoming licensing gives KWU no choice in the matter of hiring only faculty with degrees from regionally accredited institutions. Wyoming requires that all of our professors have their own degrees from accredited universities. Further, licensing requires that they have teaching experience at accredited universities before they can teach with us, and since most universities require professors to have degrees from accredited universities in order to teach, our graduates can't have that experience. So we are precluded from hiring our graduates or faculty with degrees from other non-accredited universities.

See above. from the WY 21-2-401, it looks like KWU could hire its graduates. Do you have some documentation that you would like to post to show where KWU cannot that says that ALL of its faculty MUST have accredited degrees?

So again, someone could have an RA accredited bachelor's master's degree and be qualified, but once they get a KWU doctorate they are disqualified?

[plcscott]

Open book exams --
The issue of exams crops up periodically. Students must have a mastery of the course material in order to complete open book tests within the time limit. The fact that the exams are open book only means that students have to understand how to apply information they have learned in order to answer the questions. Of the final examinations administered by the University, 15% receive a failing grade. Another 20% receive a 'C' grade. Less than 45% of the students will receive an 'A' on their final examination, despite the materials provided to help the student prepare. This speaks to the difficulty of the tests. Also, open book exams are widely used elsewhere, so one must ask why such tests are somehow only suspect at KWU?

The reason that KWU does not have more exams, assignments, quizzes, etc is because KWU wants to spend as little as on it's programs as possible, and as much as possible on marketing as possible. With 119 employees 68 of which are admissions (sales) counselors it becomes clear. There are a lot of exam challenges (most are successful according to post from the pub) because some of the exams are terrible.

With that said, many of the exams are very hard. Trying to squeeze an entire course into one exam is rough especially in subjects like engineering, health administration, business, etc. In my opinion this is not done for the benefit of the student; it is this way because KWU will not pay "faculty" to develop courses.

Can you name an accredited institution, RA or NA, that has one open book exam for every course offered by the institution?

[Robert J.]

That is what most people would call a tutor. Tutor = someone who gives guidance or instruction to another. There is no assignments, no required lectures, no quizzes, so the faculty choose the textbook and provide tutorial assistance when/if requested by the student.

Then what is the system of the learning itself? There must be some path, e.g. Read the book, answers the questions on the back, you yourself have said your tests were all proctored.

This doesn't seem too different than any other correspondence course I have taken or are taking now from accredited schools.

[Robert J.]

See above. from the WY 21-2-401, it looks like KWU could hire its graduates. Do you have some documentation that you would like to post to show where KWU cannot that says that ALL of its faculty MUST have accredited degrees?

So again, someone could have an RA accredited bachelor's master's degree and be qualified, but once they get a KWU doctorate they are disqualified?

I think you are reading it wrong, but the point is still valid. I'm reading as 50% must have Accred. Master or Doctorate, the remainder must have an Accred Bachelors, which tells me they can technically hire a KWU Masters or Doctorate holder provided they have an Accred. Bachelor's degree.

[plcscott]

I think you are reading it wrong, but the point is still valid. I'm reading as 50% must have Accred. Master or Doctorate, the remainder must have an Accred Bachelors, which tells me they can technically hire a KWU Masters or Doctorate holder provided they have an Accred. Bachelor's degree.

Nope, that is exactly how I read it also. KWU claims that Wyoming "strictly dictates" that they cannot hire graduates with an unaccredited degree, so unless KWU has to abide by other regulations this is not the case.

[Robert J.]

The reason that KWU does not have more exams, assignments, quizzes, etc is because KWU wants to spend as little as on it's programs as possible, and as much as possible on marketing as possible. With 119 employees 68 of which are admissions (sales) counselors it becomes clear. There are a lot of exam challenges (most are successful according to post from the pub) because some of the exams are terrible.

With that said, many of the exams are very hard. Trying to squeeze an entire course into one exam is rough especially in subjects like engineering, health administration, business, etc. In my opinion this is not done for the benefit of the student; it is this way because KWU will not pay "faculty" to develop courses.

Can you name an accredited institution, RA or NA, that has one open book exam for every course offered by the institution?


I think your comments in the first two paragraphs are too subjective to make any firm decision either way, Herriot-Watt for example is all basically reading and taking a very hard test at the end, but the test is proctored.

I don't know about "open-book" exams, but I believe ccconline.org all of their courses are non-proctored and my wifes first course at a Tier1 school online was no exam at all,but 5 easy quizzes open book. Also of my previous courses at a online school (RA) was also completely quiz and test-less altogether.

Are they doing what KWU is doing? Not exactly, but I see that all within the same spectrum with their own twists on the rigor, again, just seems subjective to me and hard to say this way is right, this way is wrong.

[plcscott]

Then what is the system of the learning itself? There must be some path, e.g. Read the book, answers the questions on the back, you yourself have said your tests were all proctored.

This doesn't seem too different than any other correspondence course I have taken or are taking now from accredited schools.

There is no required interaction with a professor unless you need "tutorial assistance". The only time I ever communicated with a professor was over an exam challenge which the professor told me he did not write. So if the professor does not assign assignments, create quizzes, grade exams, and is only contacted when a student needs tutorial assistance or wants to challenge an exam then is he or she more of a tutor or professor. This may be semantics, but that is the point and why I think tutor is more appropriate.

[Robert J.]

There is no required interaction with a professor unless you need "tutorial assistance". The only time I ever communicated with a professor was over an exam challenge which the professor told me he did not write. So if the professor does not assign assignments, create quizzes, grade exams, and is only contacted when a student needs tutorial assistance or wants to challenge an exam then is he or she more of a tutor or professor. This may be semantics, but that is the point and why I think tutor is more appropriate.

I think it is semantics and again is subjective, my wife's first class at a Tier1 school was also completely professorless, she emailed her professor introducing herself and she never even gotten a reply back from that. When dealing with Adjuncts many of them really don't have much say in the academics in terms of tests and assignments, however, they do generally do the grading I think.

[plcscott]

I think it is semantics and again is subjective

David Gering and KWU have made many subjective statements about KWU being as rigorous as traditional schools, and about KWU's academics being comparable to traditional universities, where were you then? Where is the challenge to those statements?

Again, show me a RA or NA accredited institution that only requires one open book exam for each course offered in the entire university, that requires no contact with a "professor", no assignments, quizzes, etc.

[Neil Hayes]

David Gering and KWU have made many subjective statements about KWU being as rigorous as traditional schools, and about KWU's academics being comparable to traditional universities, where were you then? Where is the challenge to those statements?
Again, show me a RA or NA accredited institution that only requires one open book exam for each course offered in the entire university, that requires no contact with a "professor", no assignments, quizzes, etc.

In the 1950's, 60's and 70's (long before most contributors here were born) DL education was all 'open book' examinations - ICS, British Institute of Engineering Technology, Stott's, and so on - and huge numbers of people were educated very thoroughly by this method. In 1962 I completed an exhaustive mechanical engineering diploma with BIET, with each subject having a different tutor, and I well remember the Work Study subject running to 40 massive modules, plus a text-book. Each module had an 'open book' exam comprising 20 questions on average. Each module was checked/marked by a BIET adjunct tutor. I am lead to believe this method of learning is now coming back into education all over the world and I can see very little to criticise from what I've read about the KWU process.

[Robert J.]

where were you then? Where is the challenge to those statements?

Again, show me a RA or NA accredited institution that only requires one open book exam for each course offered in the entire university, that requires no contact with a "professor", no assignments, quizzes, etc.

You are a bit pre-emptive, we have not even published the responses to all 12 questions let alone Degreeboard's follow-ups. This is not a real time interview, someone else jumped the gun on me once already, it isn't entirely wise to do.

As I said before, there are schools from UoP that do not have any Quizzes or Tests for an entire degree program, my personal experience with other schools has been interaction with professors from basically as much as I make of it, which has generally been near zero to my wife's own program in a Tier1 school with quizzes, no tests and no faculty interaction. Are they all equal ? No they are all different, do I consider their rigor within the same spectrum, yes I do, you seem to argue that since no other accredited program does it exactly like KWU's model, it's somehow wrong or inferior, I do not prescribe to that, I see much overlap as to how other accredited online school's do things in comparison to KWU. No "smoking gun" for me with that argument on that point. But to each his/her own, that's why we brought out this series.

[plcscott]

You are a bit pre-emptive, we have not even published the responses to all 12 questions let alone Degreeboard's follow-ups.

You said my post was too subjective, and when I asked where you were on the other subjective statements you get ticked? I am responding to what is here and now, how is that pre-emptive? Am I supposed to guess that you may have a different response at the end of this? You were responding to what I wrote here and now, and I was responding to what you have written here and now.

This is not a real time interview, someone else jumped the gun on me once already, it isn't entirely wise to do.

You have got to be kidding. So, fall in line, or walk on egg shells? Not me. I do not call people ******, frauds, apologist, and I do not accuse people of being a part of a gang or agenda. But, nobody should have to walk on egg shells simply because they have a different point of view. Mature adults should be able to disagree.

If after this interview you see KWU as completely legit then I have no problem with that and I will agree to disagree. However, I will give my perspective of it, and show what I think are some serious shortcomings of KWU unless you decide to stifle it.

[Robert J.]

You said my post was too subjective, and when I asked where you were on the other subjective statements you get ticked? I am responding to what is here and now, how is that pre-emptive? Am I supposed to guess that you may have a different response at the end of this? You were responding to what I wrote here and now, and I was responding to what you have written here and now.



You have got to be kidding. So, fall in line, or walk on egg shells? Not me. I do not call people ******, frauds, apologist, and I do not accuse people of being a part of a gang or agenda. But, nobody should have to walk on egg shells simply because they have a different point of view. Mature adults should be able to disagree.

If after this interview you see KWU as completely legit then I have no problem with that and I will agree to disagree. However, I will give my perspective of it, and show what I think are some serious shortcomings of KWU unless you decide to stifle it.


Like someone else no longer posting here, you need to focus back on the topic at hand and not Robert J.

As far as walking on eggshells, you have posted probably 20 posts critical of KWU completely un-opposed nor censored (except for the one little bit you know about). To imply anything but the fact I have given you 100% open free speech is insulting, and not accurate.

[plcscott]

As far as walking on eggshells, you have posted probably 20 posts critical of KWU completely un-opposed nor censored (except for the one little bit you know about). To imply anything but the fact I have given you 100% open free speech is insulting, and not accurate.

And, I will continue to do so based on facts or my personal opinion based on my experience. If someone comments about my comments then I will do the same.

[Redlyne Racer]

Various DL programs cover a broad spectrum of approaches to instructor involvement, testing protocols, etc. Focusing only on these elements as a hallmark of legitimacy seems a little short sighted.

First hand accounts of student experiences can be valuable, but all we are getting here seems to be one failed former student with an ax to grind. Surely there must be more than one past or present K-W student out there with some less biased commentary.

Everything I've read from David Gering so far suggests K-W is moving in a very positive direction. It will be interesting to see how high and far K-W might go with the government and the other lobsters in the bucket off their backs.

[plcscott]

Various DL programs cover a broad spectrum of approaches to instructor involvement, testing protocols, etc. Focusing only on these elements as a hallmark of legitimacy seems a little short sighted.

I am not focusing just on instructor involvement and testing protocols, I am just pointing that out as part of the whole picture. When you add it all up is when it comes up short.

First hand accounts of student experiences can be valuable, but all we are getting here seems to be one failed former student with an ax to grind. Surely there must be more than one past or present K-W student out there with some less biased commentary.

No failed former student here, but there is a former student here that will tell it like it is and call out the non-specific KWU promotional talk. As far as my bias, I guess you will have to add me to the list of reporters, senators, former employees, the OPM, the military, California, Idaho, Oregon, Michigan, NJ, ND, accredited universities, accreditors, and many academics that are biased and think KWU is not up to par.

Everything I've read from David Gering so far suggests K-W is moving in a very positive direction. It will be interesting to see how high and far K-W might go with the government and the other lobsters in the bucket off their backs.

What has changed? Is he telling us they are changing any of their practices or procedures? Are they seeking state approval in CA? Are they applying for accreditation? Are they going to start publishing requirements? Is he going to tell us specifically how they evaluate experience credit or how they determine the amount of required courses a student must take?

[James Grey]

In the 1950's, 60's and 70's (long before most contributors here were born) DL education was all 'open book' examinations - ICS, British Institute of Engineering Technology, Stott's, and so on - and huge numbers of people were educated very thoroughly by this method. In 1962 I completed an exhaustive mechanical engineering diploma with BIET, with each subject having a different tutor, and I well remember the Work Study subject running to 40 massive modules, plus a text-book. Each module had an 'open book' exam comprising 20 questions on average. Each module was checked/marked by a BIET adjunct tutor. I am lead to believe this method of learning is now coming back into education all over the world and I can see very little to criticise from what I've read about the KWU process.

I had to reply to this one ...

The BIET courses met one of two things - either their own Diploma which could have as little as 4 subjects in it [Mechanical Engineering] and compared to today was unaccredited, or preparation for the Professional Institutes examinations which were 'exhaustive' courses - Institution of Engineers Australia 11 subjects, Society of Engineers Australia & New Zealand 8 subjects, Institution of Mechanical Engineers UK/Global 12 subjects. These subjects of course cannot be equated with what we regard as a subject today - from my calculations they cover what an average 3 subjects cover today. ICS and Stotts operated similarly - either a short-cut non accredited yet publicly accepted course, or preparation for Institution examinations leading to true professional status.

If people took the BIET course only, or ICS or Stotts etc., there was NO proctoring at all and anyone could have done the work, so on this front BIET could have been as slack at KWU appears to be. If the professional institutes exams were undertaken, then you have something equal to a present university degree, and far in excess of KWU proven requirements.

Being another BIET 'graduate' I'd like to think that what I did was above what I have seen KWU accept. No professional body will accept a KWU degree for admission/licensing purposes, but BIET qualifications were accepted fairly readily in many areas. I did the same 'Work Study' subject as you did. OK it was tough, but so it should have been, and the method of teaching in those days was by progressive detailed assessment and heavy reinforcement that we find missing today in most places and learning domains. That is a pity, but the price of progress.

BIET = KWU? Come on Neil ...

I have seen some excellent work done for a KWU degree, and at this stage and having read the replies/defences, I am still of the firm opinon that it is pity that people 'wasted' good work on an unaccredited KWU degree.

[Neil Hayes]

I had to reply to this one ...
The BIET courses met one of two things - either their own Diploma which could have as little as 4 subjects in it [Mechanical Engineering] and compared to today was unaccredited, or preparation for the Professional Institutes examinations which were 'exhaustive' courses - Institution of Engineers Australia 11 subjects, Society of Engineers Australia & New Zealand 8 subjects, Institution of Mechanical Engineers UK/Global 12 subjects. These subjects of course cannot be equated with what we regard as a subject today - from my calculations they cover what an average 3 subjects cover today. ICS and Stotts operated similarly - either a short-cut non accredited yet publicly accepted course, or preparation for Institution examinations leading to true professional status.
If people took the BIET course only, or ICS or Stotts etc., there was NO proctoring at all and anyone could have done the work, so on this front BIET could have been as slack at KWU appears to be. If the professional institutes exams were undertaken, then you have something equal to a present university degree, and far in excess of KWU proven requirements.
Being another BIET 'graduate' I'd like to think that what I did was above what I have seen KWU accept. No professional body will accept a KWU degree for admission/licensing purposes, but BIET qualifications were accepted fairly readily in many areas. I did the same 'Work Study' subject as you did. OK it was tough, but so it should have been, and the method of teaching in those days was by progressive detailed assessment and heavy reinforcement that we find missing today in most places and learning domains. That is a pity, but the price of progress.
BIET = KWU? Come on Neil ...
I have seen some excellent work done for a KWU degree, and at this stage and having read the replies/defences, I am still of the firm opinon that it is pity that people 'wasted' good work on an unaccredited KWU degree.

I'm not qualified to comment on KWU delivery methods, as I have not studied with KWU. But from what I've read KWU methods are not too dissimilar to many modern DL educational methods used by a number of universities and I'm know that many KWU students are more than happy with their KWU degree - hence the legal action against the ODA. Your last comment is really totally subjective, as you have no real insight into KWU operations.

[James Grey]

I'm not qualified to comment on KWU delivery methods, as I have not studied with KWU. But from what I've read KWU methods are not too dissimilar to many modern DL educational methods used by a number of universities and I'm know that many KWU students are more than happy with their KWU degree - hence the legal action against the ODA.

Your last comment is really totally subjective, as you have no real insight into KWU operations.

Neil, you have no idea what '...real insight...' I have '...into KWU operations...' so pardon me. I have seen examples of KWU work both ends of the spectrum, and on that and confirmed statements from others directly involved I base my opinion. Furthermore I work in the DE post compulsory education sector and have been an active participant for over 40 years, the last 10 of which have included being a curriculum designer, assessor, tutor, teacher of DE teachers, researcher, and auditor of accredited programs.

I rest my case and remain of the firm opinon that it is pity that people 'wasted' good work on an unaccredited KWU degree. Such opinion is now shared by some KWU graduates.

[J]

There is no required interaction with a professor unless you need "tutorial assistance". The only time I ever communicated with a professor was over an exam challenge which the professor told me he did not write. So if the professor does not assign assignments, create quizzes, grade exams, and is only contacted when a student needs tutorial assistance or wants to challenge an exam then is he or she more of a tutor or professor. This may be semantics, but that is the point and why I think tutor is more appropriate.

I agree that this is a semantic point.

The title professor refers to status as much as it does to a professional role. However, KW has some very distinguished faculty. Their involvement to me adds credibility and substance to the program, whether their role in your particular course was advisory or supervisory.

[J]

Neil, you have no idea what '...real insight...' I have '...into KWU operations...' so pardon me. I have seen examples of KWU work both ends of the spectrum, and on that and confirmed statements from others directly involved I base my opinion.

How about some specifics on this?

[J]

With that said, many of the exams are very hard.

I see this acknowledgement on the one hand and on the other you blasting KWU for its lack of rigor. If the exams are hard, whatever their subject matter, doesn't that completely undermine your position?

[plcscott]

I agree that this is a semantic point.

The title professor refers to status as much as it does to a professional role. However, KW has some very distinguished faculty. Their involvement to me adds credibility and substance to the program, whether their role in your particular course was advisory or supervisory.

KWU calls them professors, I say they should be called tutors. I think Neil brought up a term that fits even better, adjunct tutor.

[plcscott]

I see this acknowledgement on the one hand and on the other you blasting KWU for its lack of rigor. If the exams are hard, whatever their subject matter, doesn't that completely undermine your position?

I criticize KWU for the way the school operates, and the many practices they share with diploma mills. I criticize KWU for GIVING experience credit, not having standards, not sharing their procedures for determining how many courses students have to take, avoiding academic oversight and moving their license around, and for bringing on investigations by the senate and many reporters because they have underhanded practices like changing billing records in order to get government money.

I have never said all their courses (exams) were easy. In fact, I have said that some are harder than any I have ever taken. But, it is the textbook that is hard because their is no coursework, no assignments, no teaching, no quizzes, no other exams, just one open book exam. Take a textbook that is used for any college level course (especially engineering, etc.), create 20 to 100 problems or questions covering the entire book, and see if it is difficult or not. Some of the engineering mathematics courses that I feared the most I did great on, and even perfect on one. Some of the others that I thought I would master I did not do as well because the exams were terrible and did not even reflect the textbook. MANY people discussed the quality of the exams on the old pub.

The open book exams are only a small problem in the big picture here.

[plcscott]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter French
Neil, you have no idea what '...real insight...' I have '...into KWU operations...' so pardon me. I have seen examples of KWU work both ends of the spectrum, and on that and confirmed statements from others directly involved I base my opinion.



How about some specifics on this?

Yes, Peter, since you are critical of KWU how about some specifics. ;)

[James Grey]

How about some specifics on this?

You doubt me? That is Ok and your choice.

However, I am not about to publicly refer to other people's work, or their comments following completing a KWU degree, as I do not have nor have I requested their permission to do so. Let them come forward if they wish, or read the comments posted on their student site, and correspond with them to gather your own information. That is what I did.

There seems to be an interestingly strong air of 'defence' on this site regarding KWU. Someone asked previously, I think it was PLScott, if a moderator was a KWU graduate - was that question answered?

[plcscott]

There seems to be an interestingly strong air of 'defence' on this site regarding KWU. Someone asked previously, I think it was PLScott, if a moderator was a KWU graduate - was that question answered?

Not me.

[Dennis Ruhl]

Someone asked previously, I think it was PLScott, if a moderator was a KWU graduate - was that question answered?


Yes - in the negative.

[Robert J.]

I think it was PLScott, if a moderator was a KWU graduate - was that question answered?

It was very answered. I haven't seen any defense of KWU either, I see some people like myself saying just because KWU is doing this and this and that and accredited school X, Y, Z doesn't do that (and in fact though they really do), doesn't really tell us anything about anything and is subjective. Considering there's about a 1:20 ratio of those posts to plcscott's and I should rename these threads to "plcscott's Comments", I think it absurd to imply there's some "air of defense" of KWU, the argument the discussions to me seem totally lopsided in plcscotts direction which is somewhat disapointing to me, I was looking for more opinion on the subject and was hoping past and present students would come out of the woodwork but they have not. The staff here has intentionally taken a hands-off approach on the discussions.

But the first round is nearly an end, I have the answers to all 12 in hand and next week Degreeboard will start the round of follow-ups based on some of the feedback based in these threads.

[plcscott]

With all due respect Robert, I thought the entire purpose of the discussion threads was to allow discussion of Mr. Gering's answers. Do you not want me to comment on them? Should he just be allowed to defend and promote KWU without challenge? Have I not made logical comments?

I have not called KWU a diploma mill; I have just pointed out KWU's shortcomings. I would like to see KWU separate themselves from the bad practices that they share with diploma mills then students/alumni would be proud to promote KWU.

But the first round is nearly an end, I have the answers to all 12 in hand and next week Degreeboard will start the round of follow-ups based on some of the feedback based in these threads.

Good, maybe Mr. Gering will answer some of these follow-up questions specifically.

[Robert J.]

With all due respect Robert, I thought the entire purpose of the discussion threads was to allow discussion of Mr. Gering's answers. Do you not want me to comment on them? Should he just be allowed to defend and promote KWU without challenge? Have I not made logically comments?

I have not called KWU a diploma mill; I have just pointed out KWU's shortcomings. I would like to see KWU separate themselves from the bad practices that they share with diploma mills then students/alumni would be proud to promote KWU.



Good, maybe Mr. Gering will answer some of these follow-up questions specifically.

I never said I had issues with your comments, only the fact you seem to be the only one commenting, that's not your fault, people are having their chance, and they are not taking it, unlike yourself. Many of our follow-ups will be precise and narrow things down a bit we are forumating questions now.

I look forward to next week myself.

BTW: Your "prize" is that will we will submit one direct question from you on any of the replies and feedback KWU has given to degreeboard. Make it good !

[plcscott]

BTW: Your "prize" is that will we will submit one direct question from you on any of the replies and feedback KWU has given to degreeboard. Make it good !

Only one? :D :D

[Robert J.]

Only one? :D :D

I know it will be difficult but try anyways.