Christian Distance Learning
lew...@wichita.infi.net
/ Bear guide to nontraditional religious education be willing to share
what the "top 10" schools are according to this guide.
Yes, I have read NIFI but since Levicoff is generally full of shit I
would prefer to get an authoritative opinion on quality DL programs.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Steve Levicoff
>Since the book is out of print, would anyone with a copy of the
>Walston/Bear guide to nontraditional religious education be willing to
>share what the "top 10" schools are according to this guide.
>
>Yes, I have read NIFI but since Levicoff is generally full of shit I
>would prefer to get an authoritative opinion on quality DL programs.
Thanks, lewchuk, I appreciate the compliment (considering the source).
I have not seen Walston's book for several editions, but if I recall
correctly, I listed almost every school in his "Top 10" (which actually
consisted of only eight entries) as a degree mill. The only one I
didn't list (at all) was one of which I was not aware, but would likely
have met the degree mill criteria as well.
As a semantic note, Walston has been on his own for a number of years.
There was only one edition under the "Walston & Bear" heading before
Bear divested himself from the venture. Even then, Walston used much
of Bear's original text (from the guide now written by John and
Mariah), simply giving it a religious slant and heavily endorsing
unaccredited schools (including the two mills from which he earned his
own doctorates, Bethany in Alabama and Greenwich). Walston, of course,
continues to run his own degree mill in Washington state, Columbia
Theological Seminary (formerly Faraston Theological Seminary).
If that's where you want to put your trust for academic guidance, more
power to you, sport.
For those who want more current information on *legitimate* Christian
distance ed programs, however, I recommend the Center for Christian
Distance Education (formerly the Christian Distance Learning
Directory), run by Jason Baker, who maintains a *very* credible
database, at http://www.ccde.org. (In fact, I trust them enough to
have granted them the exclusive right to publish "NIFI" on the web.
And, by way of disclosure, I get nothing from them financially - I'm
simply pleased to recommend them based on their continuing
credibility.)
,-~~-.___.
/ | ' \
( ) 0
\_/-, ,----'
==== //
/ \-'~; /~~~(O)
/ __/~| / |
=( _____| (_________|
-----------------------------------
Steve Levicoff
levi...@ix.netcom.com
http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
-----------------------------------
,-~~-.___.
/ | ' \
( ) 0
\_/-, ,----'
==== //
/ \-'~; /~~~(O)
/ __/~| / |
=( _____| (_________|
-----------------------------------
Steve Levicoff
levi...@ix.netcom.com
http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
-----------------------------------
J. Ed Komoszewski
>>Walston, of course, continues to run his own degree mill in Washington
state, Columbia Theological Seminary (formerly Faraston Theological
Seminary).<<
In this recent message and throughout the archives, Steve has wrongly
identified the institution with which Rick Walston is affiliated. Rick
Walston is the president of Columbia *Evangelical* Seminary, *not* Columbia
*Theological* Seminary. The latter is a graduate school of the Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.), and is fully accredited by the Association of Theological
Schools in the United States and Canada.
Ed Komoszewski
Emil Knutti
institutions is not the same today as is was in 1992 when the book was
published. You need to do some research. Some of these schools have
been discussed on this ng.
List from pp. 249-52 of Walston's Guide: Bethany Bible College and
Seminary; Canadian Pentecostal Correspondence College; Emerge
Ministries Inc.; Faith Seminary; Faraston Theological Seminary;
Graduate Theological Seminary; Greenwich University School of Theology;
and, Southern California Center for Christian Studies. Two liberal
arts universities with religious schools that were recommended:
Columbia Pacific; and, Greenwich University.
The list doesn't add to ten because there weren't ten to be recommended.
Emil Knutti
In article <7lokke$43n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
lew...@wichita.infi.net wrote:
> Since the book is out of print, would anyone with a copy of the
Walston
> / Bear guide to nontraditional religious education be willing to share
> what the "top 10" schools are according to this guide.
>
> Yes, I have read NIFI but since Levicoff is generally full of shit I
> would prefer to get an authoritative opinion on quality DL programs.
>
lew...@wichita.infi.net
July fireworks are keeping me up I will respond.
You love to throw the title of "degree mill" on any school that doesn't
meet the mighty "Levicoff criteria", although some of these schools are
recognized by people and institutions with much greater legitimacy than
an excommunicated truck driver with a doctorate from Union who offers
his book on the net. By people and institutions I am referring to both
the RA schools that accept credits and degrees from some of these
"mills" as well as John Bear and others who disagree with your opinion
on a number of schools. I don't know much about Walston but have
always found Mr. Bears opinions to be accurate and reasonable.
Therefore, if Mr. Bear is going to co-author a book with a fellow I
think it is reasonable to believe that the opinions in it the book will
have some value. Furthermore, I think it also reasonable to suggest
that Mr. Bears association with Walston confirs a degree of competency
on Mr. Walstons behalf. Generally, Bear has been accuate... Levicoff
usually full of shit... guess who wins !!!
Regarding the Christian Distance Learning Directory, although it is of
some value (where is the competition?) it is lazy and superficial. It
attempts to be authoritative when in reality the legitimate authorities
disagree with some of its conclusions.
Finally,
I laughed for hours after having confirmed that the Union Institute has
accepted degrees from Trinity (IN)... one of your "mills".
Regards
In article <7lomh1$1...@dfw-ixnews17.ix.netcom.com>,
levi...@ix.netcom.com(Steve Levicoff) wrote:
> lew...@wichita.infi.net writes:
>
> >Since the book is out of print, would anyone with a copy of the
> >Walston/Bear guide to nontraditional religious education be willing
to
> >share what the "top 10" schools are according to this guide.
> >
> >Yes, I have read NIFI but since Levicoff is generally full of shit I
> >would prefer to get an authoritative opinion on quality DL programs.
>
> Thanks, lewchuk, I appreciate the compliment (considering the source).
>
> I have not seen Walston's book for several editions, but if I recall
> correctly, I listed almost every school in his "Top 10" (which
actually
> consisted of only eight entries) as a degree mill. The only one I
> didn't list (at all) was one of which I was not aware, but would
likely
> have met the degree mill criteria as well.
>
> As a semantic note, Walston has been on his own for a number of
years.
> There was only one edition under the "Walston & Bear" heading before
> Bear divested himself from the venture. Even then, Walston used much
> of Bear's original text (from the guide now written by John and
> Mariah), simply giving it a religious slant and heavily endorsing
> unaccredited schools (including the two mills from which he earned his
> own doctorates, Bethany in Alabama and Greenwich). Walston, of
course,
> continues to run his own degree mill in Washington state, Columbia
> Theological Seminary (formerly Faraston Theological Seminary).
>
Steve Levicoff
>Steve Levicoff <levi...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> > Walston, of course, continues to run his own degree mill in
> > Washington state, Columbia Theological Seminary (formerly Faraston
> > Theological Seminary).
>
>In this recent message and throughout the archives, Steve has wrongly
>identified the institution with which Rick Walston is affiliated. Rick
>Walston is the president of Columbia *Evangelical* Seminary, *not*
>Columbia *Theological* Seminary. The latter is a graduate school of
>the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and is fully accredited by the
>Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada.
Thanks, Ed. I gladly stand corrected on this one.
Incidentally, Walston's renaming of Faraston follows a tradition among
degree mills - to name them in a manner similar to established,
legitimately accredited schools. In Walston's case, since he markets
to an evangelical audience, the renaming of Faraston was not intended
to be like Columbia Theological Seminary, a PC-USA school, but more
like Columbia Bible College & Seminary, a legitimately accredited
school in South Carolina (part of Columbia International University).
This follows a similar trend on the part of Trinity Evangelical
Seminary, a degree mill in Florida, which changed its name from Trinity
Theological Seminary a few years back so they might be confused with
the ATS-accredited Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Illinois
(part of Trinity Evangelical University and one of the "cadillac"
evangelical graduate schools). Ditto our old friends at Trinity Bible
College & Seminary, the degree mill in Newburgh, Indiana.
Steve Levicoff
>You love to throw the title of "degree mill" on any school that
>doesn't meet the mighty "Levicoff criteria", although some of these
>schools are recognized by people and institutions with much greater
>legitimacy than an excommunicated truck driver with a doctorate from
>Union who offers his book on the net.
Strictly for the benefit of any newbies to the newsgroup, the criteria
Lewchuk refers to are actually a 72-point set used to discern whether a
school is a degree mill. The comprehensive criteria appear at
http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff/criteria.htm.
As for the presence of my book on the net, that is no secret (nor is my
decision to leave the politics of academia to become a trucker, which
is far more fun any day). "NIFI" went through several print editions,
and I simply decided not to continue revising it. Since I still get
requests for the book, I authorized the folks at the Center for
Christian Distance Education to publish the full text on the net at no
charge. Consumers benefit by having it available, I benefit by not
having to worry about future editions.
>Finally, I laughed for hours after having confirmed that the Union
>Institute has accepted degrees from Trinity (IN)... one of your
>"mills".
Conirmed *how*? C'mon, sticky buns, provide your evidence. Who
confirmed it, and in what manner? If Trinity graduates have been
accepted in Union's Ph.D. program, under what circumstances? And how
many Trinity graduates? And what is the source of your information?
I'm calling your bluff, lew', and you can bet your buns we'll
investigate your claims. Frankly, however, I don't think you'll have
the balls to elaborate, and right now I'm the one who is laughing.
Chip
> You love to throw the title of "degree mill" on any school that doesn't
> meet the mighty "Levicoff criteria", although some of these schools are
> recognized by people and institutions with much greater legitimacy than
> an excommunicated truck driver with a doctorate from Union who offers
> his book on the net.
When you can't find fault with the argument itself, try to find something,
no matter how irrelevent and unrelated, that you can insult about the person
making the argument. Truly a sign of advanced abstract thinking and
sophisticated debating skills.
> By people and institutions I am referring to both
> the RA schools that accept credits and degrees from some of these
> "mills"
Citations, please. All of the degree mill apologists are quick to make this
claim, but I can't ever remember anyone actually producing verifiable
evidence of RA schools accepting degree-mill (or otherwise unaccredited)
credentials... except in cases where the RA school admits the student based
on *achievements* and not on the bogus degree. Dr. Levicoff and Dr. Bear can
and do back up the claims they make... it's only fair to ask you to do the
same.
as well as John Bear and others who disagree with your opinion
> on a number of schools. I don't know much about Walston but have
> always found Mr. Bears opinions to be accurate and reasonable.
And you'll note that recently Dr. Bear has stated that there are so few
valid reasons for going the unaccredited route that he wonders if there's
*ever* a justifiable case, particularly when there are so many good
accredited options.
> Therefore, if Mr. Bear is going to co-author a book with a fellow I
> think it is reasonable to believe that the opinions in it the book will
> have some value.
Again, as Steve previously pointed out, Dr. Bear hasn't had any connection
with the co-authored book in years, so it may *not* be reasonable to assume
that just because Bear and Walston shared a viewpoint at one time that they
still do.
> Furthermore, I think it also reasonable to suggest
> that Mr. Bears association with Walston confirs a degree of competency
> on Mr. Walstons behalf.
Clue phone... it's for you. Press release: JOHN HASN'T BEEN ASSOCIATED
WITH THIS BOOK FOR YEARS!! Your argument is about as strong as Les Snell's
"accreditation by association" argument.
> Generally, Bear has been accuate... Levicoff
> usually full of shit... guess who wins !!!
Again, citations, please? When one speaks of "accuracy", one must
necessarily deal in facts. Please cite a sufficient number of *factual*
errors by Dr. Levicoff to support your contention that he is "usually" full
of shit.
Of course, if you disagree with his *opinion*, that's perfectly within your
right, but don't try to compare factual assertions with opinions... they are
different animals entirely.
The flawed logic exhibited in the original post is typical of someone who
holds a degree mill credential. I don't know that to be the case, but I
wouldn't be surprised, particularly given that degree mill apologists on
a.e.d. virtually always have a vested interest (i.e., defending their own
bogus credentials).
> Regarding the Christian Distance Learning Directory, although it is of
> some value (where is the competition?) it is lazy and superficial. It
> attempts to be authoritative when in reality the legitimate authorities
> disagree with some of its conclusions.
>
> Finally,
> I laughed for hours after having confirmed that the Union Institute has
> accepted degrees from Trinity (IN)... one of your "mills".
>
> Regards
lew...@wichita.infi.net
mighty 72 commandments on ? What gives you the authority to dictate
what consitutes "criteria", particularly when they are at odds with
some of your "peers" (by "peers" I am referring to Dr. Bear and I
immediately apologize to Dr. Bear for the insult). Just because you
are a legend in your own mind does not mean you are a legend in anyone
elses.
Finally, you have denigrated countless individuals on this NG for being
lazy, lack research, and unwilling to investigate. SO WHY IN HELL
SHOULD I TELL YOU MY SOURCES TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR OBVIOUS LAZINESS.
Since you are the omniscient god, you prove me wrong.
In article <7lp9mj$3...@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>,
levi...@ix.netcom.com(Steve Levicoff) wrote:
> lew...@wichita.infi.net writes, in irrelevant part:
>
> >You love to throw the title of "degree mill" on any school that
> >doesn't meet the mighty "Levicoff criteria", although some of these
> >schools are recognized by people and institutions with much greater
> >legitimacy than an excommunicated truck driver with a doctorate from
> >Union who offers his book on the net.
>
> Strictly for the benefit of any newbies to the newsgroup, the criteria
> Lewchuk refers to are actually a 72-point set used to discern whether
a
> school is a degree mill. The comprehensive criteria appear at
> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff/criteria.htm.
>
> As for the presence of my book on the net, that is no secret (nor is
my
> decision to leave the politics of academia to become a trucker, which
> is far more fun any day). "NIFI" went through several print editions,
> and I simply decided not to continue revising it. Since I still get
> requests for the book, I authorized the folks at the Center for
> Christian Distance Education to publish the full text on the net at no
> charge. Consumers benefit by having it available, I benefit by not
> having to worry about future editions.
>
> >Finally, I laughed for hours after having confirmed that the Union
> >Institute has accepted degrees from Trinity (IN)... one of your
> >"mills".
>
> Conirmed *how*? C'mon, sticky buns, provide your evidence. Who
> confirmed it, and in what manner? If Trinity graduates have been
> accepted in Union's Ph.D. program, under what circumstances? And how
> many Trinity graduates? And what is the source of your information?
> I'm calling your bluff, lew', and you can bet your buns we'll
> investigate your claims. Frankly, however, I don't think you'll have
> the balls to elaborate, and right now I'm the one who is laughing.
>
> ,-~~-.___.
> / | ' \
> ( ) 0
> \_/-, ,----'
> ==== //
> / \-'~; /~~~(O)
> / __/~| / |
> =( _____| (_________|
> -----------------------------------
> Steve Levicoff
> levi...@ix.netcom.com
> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
> -----------------------------------
>
>
lew...@wichita.infi.net
ch...@remove.mindspring.this.com wrote:
> Oh, please.
> When you can't find fault with the argument itself, try to find
something,
> no matter how irrelevent and unrelated, that you can insult about the
person
> making the argument. Truly a sign of advanced abstract thinking and
> sophisticated debating skills.
I will grant you that one. However, personal slams are pretty much
standard issue on this NG, so when in Rome...
>
> Citations, please. All of the degree mill apologists are quick to
make this
> claim, but I can't ever remember anyone actually producing verifiable
> evidence of RA schools accepting degree-mill (or otherwise
unaccredited)
> credentials... except in cases where the RA school admits the student
based
> on *achievements* and not on the bogus degree. Dr. Levicoff and Dr.
Bear can
> and do back up the claims they make... it's only fair to ask you to
do the
> same.
I could but I will refuse because I am the layman, you guys are the
experts. I will give you my personal example for entertainments sake.
I went to a private school which had equivalent to degree mill status
in most of the public system. Then a very prestigious public school
decided to give the graduates from my private school a chance. They
found that the graduates excelled and so started to recruit at the
private school for students. I applied to a different public
institution and my degree / credits were rejected. I then obtained
proof that my degree / credits were accepted at this more prestigious
school and wham... all of a sudden by degree was accepted at the public
school of my choice. This goes on all the time. Levicoffs "mills"
being accepted at fully accredited schools because someone took the
time to find out that the education and graduates were of high quality.
> And you'll note that recently Dr. Bear has stated that there are so
few
> valid reasons for going the unaccredited route that he wonders if
there's
> *ever* a justifiable case, particularly when there are so many good
> accredited options.
>
>Whoa... I believe that the good doctor was referring to undergraduate
degrees only when he made that statement.
>
> Again, as Steve previously pointed out, Dr. Bear hasn't had any
connection
> with the co-authored book in years, so it may *not* be reasonable to
assume
> that just because Bear and Walston shared a viewpoint at one time
that they
> still do.
>
True !
> > Furthermore, I think it also reasonable to suggest
> > that Mr. Bears association with Walston confirs a degree of
competency
> > on Mr. Walstons behalf.
>
> Clue phone... it's for you. Press release: JOHN HASN'T BEEN
ASSOCIATED
> WITH THIS BOOK FOR YEARS!! Your argument is about as strong as Les
Snell's
> "accreditation by association" argument.
>
Dr. Bear at one point felt that Dr. Walston was competent enough to co-
author a book. I doubt Dr. Walstons competency has diminished
greatly. You believe it has. Neither of us really knows, however I
propose that my view is more rational whereas yours seems to be based
on a dislike of Dr. Walstons views.
> > Generally, Bear has been accuate... Levicoff
> > usually full of shit... guess who wins !!!
>
> Again, citations, please? When one speaks of "accuracy", one must
> necessarily deal in facts. Please cite a sufficient number of
*factual*
> errors by Dr. Levicoff to support your contention that he is
"usually" full
> of shit.
>
I came accross an interesting article between Levicoff and the
president (I think) of a Miami Christian College (I think that was the
name, I deleted the file). He took Levy to task for numerous errors.
They information is out there. Do the research yourself.
> Of course, if you disagree with his *opinion*, that's perfectly
within your
> right, but don't try to compare factual assertions with opinions...
they are
> different animals entirely.
>
> The flawed logic exhibited in the original post is typical of someone
who
> holds a degree mill credential. I don't know that to be the case, but
I
> wouldn't be surprised, particularly given that degree mill apologists
on
> a.e.d. virtually always have a vested interest (i.e., defending their
own
> bogus credentials).
>
Although my undergrad is from a school the public system would possibly
consider a degree mill, according to NIFI Levicoff would not so I must
be OK. Incidently, your logic is actually flawed. You assume that the
only one who would defend your "mills" would be to legitimize there own
credential. Sorry to disillusion you.
> > Regarding the Christian Distance Learning Directory, although it
is of
> > some value (where is the competition?) it is lazy and superficial.
It
> > attempts to be authoritative when in reality the legitimate
authorities
> > disagree with some of its conclusions.
> >
> > Finally,
> > I laughed for hours after having confirmed that the Union
Institute has
> > accepted degrees from Trinity (IN)... one of your "mills".
> >
> > Regards
Emil Knutti
listed them. This allows the reviewer to know exactly what went into
his categorizing process. This is much better, IMHO, than having to
guess the basis of some of the things that one reads on this ng.
Emil Knutti
In article <7lqsmd$p0d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
lew...@wichita.infi.net wrote:
> So Steve, a few questions, On what stone tablet did you carve your
> mighty 72 commandments on ? <huge section snipped>
SheilaD1
Steve and I have had huge disagreements over the use of words like "legitimate"
as well as his standards for declaing a school a degree mill or a diploma mill.
We have also disagreed over his use of language as well as the size of his sig
file. (Does that about cover it all Steve?)
However, if there is one thing that Steve is NOT it is "full of s...."
Steve calls it exactly the way he sees it. That is what newgroups are all
about anyway.
I still feel the profanities and personal insults are not necessary, but I have
come to accept the fact that they will continue.
-Sheila Danzig
-Sheila Danzig
T.L.C. Head
> So Steve, a few questions, On what stone tablet did you carve your
> mighty 72 commandments on ? What gives you the authority to dictate
> what consitutes "criteria", particularly when they are at odds with
<snip>
The answer's really quite simple: he was asked to do so.
When you're willing to put together similarly exhaustive resources
and make them available on the net, you might have room to gripe. As it
stands now, you're beginning to come across as a spoiled child --
particularly to the many among us who have used Dr. Levicoff's
"dictatorial" criteria to choose our universities.
Peace,
Tom
"Being properly distracted for a moment is child's play; being
rightly distracted for a lifetime is an art."
-- Douglas Adams
lew...@wichita.infi.net
The problem is that Dr. Levicoff does get a lot of "air" on this NG and
the tone of his correspondence suggests that his opinions are in some
way authoritative, which they are not. I see the alternate views of
the Dr. Bears' and the Shiela Danzigs' getting silenced by the
agressiveness of Dr. Levicoff and his skill in throwing insults. The
academics who work at some of Levicoffs "mills" are unaware of his
comments, do not have time to respond to every net publisher with a
criticism and / or have decided not to dignify the Levicoff
accreditation cottage industry. The danger is that some will take Dr.
Levicoff as authoritative, not do their own research and miss some
legitimate distance learning opportunities which may meet their needs.
Dr. Levicoffs input has been valuable and has filled a bit of a vacuum
but we really need an alternate voice.
In article <19990705132853...@ng-ch1.aol.com>,
Steve Levicoff
>So Steve, a few questions, On what stone tablet did you carve your
>mighty 72 commandments on ? What gives you the authority to dictate
>what consitutes "criteria", particularly when they are at odds with
>some of your "peers" (by "peers" I am referring to Dr. Bear and I
>immediately apologize to Dr. Bear for the insult). Just because you
>are a legend in your own mind does not mean you are a legend in anyone
>elses.
For the benefit of newbies, you will find my curriculum vita right on
my home page. To this date, I am one of the few newsgroup participants
who has been totally up front about his credentials, up to and
including my academic transcripts, dissertation and thesis, and full
C.V., all available right on the web. So, lewchuk, where are your
credentials? If I am an expert, it is not because I called myself one,
but because my expertise has been recognized by others in authoritative
positions. In the words of the old legal maxim, res ipsa loquitor -
the thing speaks for itself.
>Finally, you have denigrated countless individuals on this NG for
>being lazy, lack research, and unwilling to investigate. SO WHY IN
>HELL SHOULD I TELL YOU MY SOURCES TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR OBVIOUS
>LAZINESS. Since you are the omniscient god, you prove me wrong.
I love it, dude! (Or dudette, as the case may be.) Let's see if I
understand this . . . You have submitted that one of my alma mater, The
Union Institute, a regionally accredited university, has accepted
degrees from Trinity Bible College & Seminary of Newburgh, Indiana, a
degree mill, for admission to its (TUI's) doctoral program. I have
called your bluff and challeneged you to submit evidence for such a
contention. You, in turn, have copped out and refused.
In other words, your bluff has been successfully called. No wonder we
have reason to laugh our asses off at you.
So let's try again . . . You have indicated that Union accepts degrees
from Trinity, a degree mill. Prove it, sport. As the old expression
goes, shit or get off the pot.
By the way, I am neither omniscient nor a god. But thanks, anyway.
Thomas Nixon
lew...@wichita.infi.net wrote:
> So Steve, a few questions, On what stone tablet did you carve your
> mighty 72 commandments on ? What gives you the authority to dictate
> what consitutes "criteria", particularly when they are at odds with
> some of your "peers" (by "peers" I am referring to Dr. Bear and I
> immediately apologize to Dr. Bear for the insult). Just because you
> are a legend in your own mind does not mean you are a legend in anyone
> elses.
>
> Finally, you have denigrated countless individuals on this NG for being
> lazy, lack research, and unwilling to investigate. SO WHY IN HELL
> SHOULD I TELL YOU MY SOURCES TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR OBVIOUS LAZINESS.
> Since you are the omniscient god, you prove me wrong.
Survey says, "buzzzzzzzzzz". Obviously he can't contact everyone who works
at TUI. If you can't produce your evidence, we'll assume you've lied. End
of story.
Tom
Steve Levicoff
>. . . personal slams are pretty much standard issue on this NG, so
>when in Rome...
Welcome to the 'net, sport. Personal slams are pretty much standard
issue on *any* newsgroup. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the
kitchen. At least when the Gang of Six engages in slamming, we have
done our research and know of which we speak . . .
>I could but I will refuse because I am the layman, you guys are the
>experts. I will give you my personal example for entertainments
>[sic] sake.
Why for the sake of entertainment? You obviously feel burned by the
system - whether you have the right to feel burned is another question
that we cannot address without specifics.
>I went to a private school which had equivalent to degree mill status
>in most of the public system. Then a very prestigious public school
>decided to give the graduates from my private school a chance. They
>found that the graduates excelled and so started to recruit at the
>private school for students. I applied to a different public
>institution and my degree / credits were rejected. I then obtained
>proof that my degree / credits were accepted at this more prestigious
>school and wham... all of a sudden by degree was accepted at the
>public school of my choice. This goes on all the time. Levicoffs
>"mills" being accepted at fully accredited schools because someone
>took the time to find out that the education and graduates were of
>high quality.
Like I said, this means nothing without specifics. Hell, I have cited
unaccredited schools which are quite outstanding. There is a far
difference between merely being unaccredited and having "degree mill
status."
When you refer to a "school" here, it almost sounds like it was an
alternative high school (or something other than a college). So let's
get specific. Did you receive an unaccredited degree that was not
accepted by a graduate school? Or merely a high school diploma that
was not accepted by an undergraduate college? Unless you are willing
to provide specific institutional names, I see no reason to take off
the hip-high boots.
If, on the other hand, you went to an unaccredited school that is
legitimate - and they *do* exist - you would find me more supportive to
your dilemma than you might think.
>Dr. Bear at one point felt that Dr. Walston was competent enough to
>co-author a book. I doubt Dr. Walstons competency has diminished
>greatly. You believe it has. Neither of us really knows, however I
>propose that my view is more rational whereas yours seems to be based
>on a dislike of Dr. Walstons views.
I don't believe that Rick's competence has diminished either - I think
his methods and *motives* have always been suspect. If John Bear, whom
I admire greatly as the granddaddy of our field, has a fault at all, it
is that he trusted Rick Walston's competence in the first place. if
anything, that shows one of the differences between John and me. Until
he knows better, he assumes you're legitimate. Until I know better, I
assume you're a sleazeball.
Incidentally, Rick and I have spoken, have traded our books, and
recognize each other's knowledge - and he *is* knowledgable about the
field. However, there's no getting around the fact that he holds two
degree mill doctorates and runs a degree mill himself. And in this
field, we call that a conflict of interest.
>I came accross an interesting article between Levicoff and the
>president (I think) of a Miami Christian College (I think that was the
>name, I deleted the file). He took [sic] Levy to task for numerous
>errors. They information is out there. Do the research yourself.
The school was Miami Christian University. (Miami Christian College
was legitimately accredited and is now the Miami campus of Trinity
International University.) MCU purported to grant theological degrees
through the doctoral level, yet did not have one faculty member with a
legitimately accredited graduate degree in theology. And when I
exposed them, they began to make multiple changes in their web site
(almost as frequently as Leland Milton Goldblatt). Like I said, dude,
res ipsa loquitor - the thing speaks for itself. Moreover, I accused
MCU of being one of the sleaziest degree mills in operation, certainly
giving them enough ammunition for a defamation suit if what I said
wasn't true. And of course, they didn't have the balls to follow
through.
What I see here, lewchuk, is known as "the halo effect." You don't
like me, so you assume that everything I say is wrong. If a school I
have classified as a degree mill trashes me, you assume they are right.
You have admitted here that your perspective is biased based on the way
you have been treated by accredited schools in the past. In short,
sport, you should try getting your head out of your ass and looking at
the facts instead of placing so much faith in your personal biases.
John Bear
> Since the book is out of print...
There will be a new (4th?) edition of Walston's book out any week now. I
believe he is adopting the 'generally accepted accreditation principles'
as a standard for separating "accredited" from "unaccredited."
Walston's own school is at http://www.ColumbiaSeminary.Org I trust that
is how he can be reached.
--
John Bear, Ph.D. (Michigan State University, 1966)
Co-Author, Bears' Guide (13th edition described and
sold at http://www.degree.net, but sold much more
inexpensively at www.amazon.com or www.barnesandnoble.com)
Steve Levicoff
>OK maybe he isn't full of shit... just half way.
Gee, I thought it was only 17%.
>The problem is that Dr. Levicoff does get a lot of "air" on this NG
>and the tone of his correspondence suggests that his opinions are in
>some way authoritative, which they are not. I see the alternate views
>of the Dr. Bears' and the Shiela Danzigs' getting silenced by the
>agressiveness of Dr. Levicoff and his skill in throwing insults.
Sheila has been conspicuously absent from the newsgroup for the past
year and a half, although I am always delighted to see her make an
appearance (much as our positions disagree).
I think you'll find that John and I agree with each other *far* more
than we disagree, and we are able to disagree on some issues quite
agreeably. To disagree agreeably in nontraditional education has
nothing to do with positions, it has to do with having a sense of
humor.
>The academics who work at some of Levicoffs "mills" are unaware of his
>comments, do not have time to respond to every net publisher with a
>criticism and / or have decided not to dignify the Levicoff
>accreditation cottage industry.
In fact, the academics at virtually *every* credential mill I have
written about in "Namd It & Frame It" (whether degree, counseling,
ordination, or any other type of mill) are quite aware of my position.
This is due to the fact that when "NIFI" was published in print form,
it was marketed to the degree mills as much as any other market, and
they were informed that they were profiled in the book. (Hell, you
don't think we wanted to miss *those* sales, do you?)
Those who did not "dignify" us with a response to the book generally
realized that they had no legal leg to stand on. Those that responded
with lawsuit threats (and there were about 50 such threats of
litigation) ran away with their heads up their butt when I responded,
"Go ahead. Make my day." And you can believe that if they had a sound
case to make for a defamation cause of action, they would not have run
so quickly.
>The danger is that some will take Dr. Levicoff as authoritative, not
>do their own research and miss some legitimate distance learning
>opportunities which may meet their needs.
Then I suggest you re-read the very first paragraph on my home page. I
have always encouraged people to do their own research, to use primary
sources, and to make decisions in an informed manner. If someone has
done his research and opts for a degree mill, more power to him. The
people I try to reach are those who never thought they had to do their
own research or gain other perspectives because they take everything at
face value and end up getting screwed.
>Dr. Levicoffs input has been valuable and has filled a bit of a vacuum
>but we really need an alternate voice.
Well, lewchuk, we have many alternative voices that bop into the
newsgroup on occasion. They range from Leland Milton Gholdblatt to Les
Snell to Rita Laws to Sheila Danzig to Ray Chasse to a slew of others I
could cite by name. Most of the time, they realize that they will not
win the game and end up leaving the newsgroup. Some, such as Sheila
and Ray, still pop in on occasion, and I am always delighted to see
their contributions: that's what makes for a lively and active
dialogue. Even you, lewchuk - occasionally, you pop in here and make
an ass of yourself, but that still provides an opportunity for people
to realize that there is more than one position. They, in turn, will
look at your side of the story *and* my side of the story and make
their own decision. The majority will go with the "G-6" position, but
some will go with you. At least they will have read both sides, and
ultimately they will take responsibility for their decisions, reaping
the benefits or the consequences accordingly.
So once again, do tell us, what are the *specific* institutions with
which you have been affiliated and that have made you feel so
compulsive about your editorial position? (You realize, of course,
that you've become a bit obvious in avoiding the answer to this.)
SheilaD1
>year and a half, although I am always delighted to see her make an
>appearance (much as our positions disagree).
Oh Steve -- you've been counting the days since I have been here.
You do care!
Actually we don't disagree all that much, we are both so bull headed that we
only focused on the things we disagreed about.
-Sheila Danzig
-Sheila
Chip
> OK maybe he isn't full of shit... just half way.
>
> the tone of his correspondence suggests that his opinions are in some
> way authoritative, which they are not.
Considering that unlimited "airtime" is available to anyone with a desire to
post, this point, like most of "Lewchuk's" previous post, is irrelevent.
Also, Dr. Levicoff's opinions **ARE** recognized as expert, at least by the
New York State Supreme Court, the Pennsylvania legislature, and various
other organizations that have sought his professional opinion. I'm not sure
how you define the difference between an "expert" opinion and an
"authoritative" one, but I still invite you to post any evidence refuting
the factual accuracy of his statements. Absent any evidence to the
contrary, someone with a track record for consistent, factually correct
statements on a given subject could, IMHO, be considered an "authority" on
that subject.
I see the alternate views of
> the Dr. Bears' and the Shiela Danzigs' getting silenced by the
> agressiveness of Dr. Levicoff and his skill in throwing insults.
Actually, at the first annual Gang of Six meeting last fall, where John,
Steve and I were all present, we found that we had almost no differences of
opinion. The few differences that John and Steve have are amicable ones,
certainly not anything that would involve "aggressive silencing" of John's
opinion (as if anyone could do that, anyway.)
Sheila is another matter. From what I've seen of her posts, as well as her
recent launching of a diploma mill all her own (complete with worthless
accreditation), her opinions, while she's certainly entitled to them, need
to be tempered with facts and good advice when it comes to helping people
make decisions that affect their careers and futures.
> The academics who work at some of Levicoffs "mills" are unaware of his
> comments, do not have time to respond to every net publisher with a
> criticism and / or have decided not to dignify the Levicoff
> accreditation cottage industry.
Unless other supporting evidence is supplied, I will assume this to be
unsubstantiated conjecture by the poster. If, in fact, anyone posted
libelous or defamatory information, it would be a relatively simple matter
to take legal action to stop such statements and restore one's good name. I
think the more likely answer is that most of the "academics" working at the
mills in question realize they haven't a snowball's chance in Hell of
prevailing, so they simply slink away.
> The danger is that some will take Dr.
> Levicoff as authoritative, not do their own research and miss some
> legitimate distance learning opportunities which may meet their needs.
This is a true and important statement. Anyone with any integrity who
regularly posts on a.e.d. encourages folks to do their own research...
particularly when a life-affecting decision is at hand. Anyone who blindly
takes the advice of *anyone* on the NG and doesn't check it out for him or
herself deserves what they get. The problem comes when some of the sleazier
schools so effectively obfuscate the truth that it's hard for someone
unfamiliar with the subtleties to wade through the crap to get to the truth.
Steve, John, Dennis, Tom, Emir, myself, Russ, Jonathan, and numerous others
who regularly post on the subject of mills do so to help folks see past the
"spin" and find the truth. No more, no less... and when opinions are
offered, most everybody (at least among the regulars) state them as such.
> Dr. Levicoffs input has been valuable and has filled a bit of a vacuum
> but we really need an alternate voice.
Sounds like you're off to a start. I personally think debate is a good
thing, but be prepared to offer *facts* and citations to support your
statements, otherwise they'll be written off by most as baseless conjecture.
Chip
> Finally, you have denigrated countless individuals on this NG for being
> lazy, lack research, and unwilling to investigate. SO WHY IN HELL
> SHOULD I TELL YOU MY SOURCES TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR OBVIOUS LAZINESS.
> Since you are the omniscient god, you prove me wrong.
Ah! Proof at last!
The above is the ultimate dodge used by all holders of diploma
mill/"less-than-wonderful" credentials.
The non-response speaks for itself.
Jason D. Baker
>some value (where is the competition?) it is lazy and superficial. It
>attempts to be authoritative when in reality the legitimate authorities
>disagree with some of its conclusions.
For those who don't know, the directory found at the Center for Christian
Distance Education site (formerly known as the Christian Distance Learning
Directory) uses Department of Education and Council for Higher Education
Accreditation approved accreditation agencies as the standard. Therefore,
if a school is accredited by a DofEd/CHEA-approved agency, their programs
can appear in the directory. Yes, this is a restrictive standard. And,
yes, some people would rather the directory include unaccredited
institutions. However, DofEd/CHEA-approved accreditation remains the
accepted standard within academe and is therefore entirely appropriate for
use within the directory.
BTW, the directory is free to both institutions and visitors, takes no
advertising, and has been a strictly volunteer project for the past three
years. In the near future, the directory will be coming under the banner of
the Christian University GlobalNet (a non-profit organization created by the
Council for Christian Colleges and Universities to encourage and support
Christian distance/distributed education) which will enable the directory to
add features like a comprehensive course listing (in addition to the current
program listing). However, the directory will remain free for both
institutions and users.
Jason D. Baker
j...@loyola.edu
Center for Christian Distance Education
SheilaD1
>Sheila is another matter. From what I've seen of her posts, as well as her
>recent launching of a diploma mill all her own (complete with worthless
>accreditation), her opinions, while she's certainly entitled to them, need
>to be tempered with facts and good advice when it comes to helping people
>make decisions that affect their careers and futures.
Chip,
Please tell me about this new school I launched, because I don't know anything
about it. I assure you that should I ever get involved in any school (and I
am *NOT* involved nor conected with any school despite postings to the contrary
on this ng) it will be fully accredited, by all standards. And I thought you
prided yourself on checking the facts. There is no school.
Someone asked me to post some questions on a web page, which I did. BTW, the
page was scheduled to come down last week, but my tech guy was out. Hopefully,
it will be taken down soon.
If you have any questions, just ask me.
-Sheila
Larry McQueary
Howdy! Good to see you around! Rather than address the
immediate issue that has your knickers in a twist, I'd like
to address a tangential one: your statement "and I am *NOT*
involved nor conected [sic] with any school despite postings
to the contrary on this ng".
To quote the President, 'that depends on what the definition
of "is" is.' (Umm, or the definition of 'am', anyway ;-))
Are you saying that you are no longer connected in *any way
whatsoever* with American Coastline University?
Larry
SheilaD1 <shei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990705221657...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
SheilaD1
>immediate issue that has your knickers in a twist, I'd like
>to address a tangential one: your statement "and I am *NOT*
>involved nor conected [sic] with any school despite postings
>to the contrary on this ng".
>
>To quote the President, 'that depends on what the definition
>of "is" is.' (Umm, or the definition of 'am', anyway ;-))
>Are you saying that you are no longer connected in *any way
>whatsoever* with American Coastline University?
>
Larry,
My knickers are in order, thank you. No twists at all. As far as ACU, I am
not affiliated with the school and never have been. I have a degree from the
school if that is what you are geting at. That is well known here. I don't
consider that a connection with the school. I am a graduate of Hunter College
of the City University of NY but I don't think the adminstration there would
say that I am connected to the school. If that is not a clear enough use of
the word connected, I humbly appologize. I have met Ray Chasse and I think he
is a truly good, kind, and interesting person, but we have no professional or
financial affilitation (is that better wording for you?)
-Sheila
Larry McQueary
My question stems from the fact that you have a (more or
less) complete ACU web site set up on
http://www.nsmi.com/onlinedegree -- with all comunications
directed to deg...@danzig.com, rather than (e.g.)
admis...@amercoastuniv.edu, or even rayc...@aol.com.
While a couple of glowing paragraphs from a former student
would not necessarily mean much - an entire website kinda
sorta indicates a connection beyond that of enthusiastic
alumnus, wouldn't you say? :-)
Larry
SheilaD1 <shei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990705234453...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
[ my original post snipped ]
SheilaD1
>would not necessarily mean much - an entire website kinda
>sorta indicates a connection beyond that of enthusiastic
>alumnus, wouldn't you say? :-)
Apparantly you would say. But the site you mention is no longer linked to my
site and was only done in gratitude to Ray. Nothing else. There is no other
connection. Larry, why not ask me the questions instead of jumping to
conclusions without the info.
-Sheila
Bill Highsmith
please, and offer a constructive improvement. (Steve will listen, I
believe.) If you disagree with all of the criteria, be up front and admit
that you don't like any sort of scrutiny of educational programs.
Bill
lew...@wichita.infi.net wrote in message <7lqsmd$p0d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>So Steve, a few questions, On what stone tablet did you carve your
>mighty 72 commandments on ? What gives you the authority to dictate
>what consitutes "criteria", particularly when they are at odds with
>some of your "peers" (by "peers" I am referring to Dr. Bear and I
>immediately apologize to Dr. Bear for the insult). Just because you
>are a legend in your own mind does not mean you are a legend in anyone
>elses.
>
>Finally, you have denigrated countless individuals on this NG for being
>lazy, lack research, and unwilling to investigate. SO WHY IN HELL
>SHOULD I TELL YOU MY SOURCES TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR OBVIOUS LAZINESS.
>Since you are the omniscient god, you prove me wrong.
>
>In article <7lp9mj$3...@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>,
> levi...@ix.netcom.com(Steve Levicoff) wrote:
>> lew...@wichita.infi.net writes, in irrelevant part:
>>
>> >You love to throw the title of "degree mill" on any school that
>> >doesn't meet the mighty "Levicoff criteria", although some of these
>> >schools are recognized by people and institutions with much greater
>> >legitimacy than an excommunicated truck driver with a doctorate from
>> >Union who offers his book on the net.
>>
>> Strictly for the benefit of any newbies to the newsgroup, the criteria
>> Lewchuk refers to are actually a 72-point set used to discern whether
>a
>> school is a degree mill. The comprehensive criteria appear at
>> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff/criteria.htm.
>>
>> As for the presence of my book on the net, that is no secret (nor is
>my
>> decision to leave the politics of academia to become a trucker, which
>> is far more fun any day). "NIFI" went through several print editions,
>> and I simply decided not to continue revising it. Since I still get
>> requests for the book, I authorized the folks at the Center for
>> Christian Distance Education to publish the full text on the net at no
>> charge. Consumers benefit by having it available, I benefit by not
>> having to worry about future editions.
>>
>> >Finally, I laughed for hours after having confirmed that the Union
>> >Institute has accepted degrees from Trinity (IN)... one of your
>> >"mills".
>>
>> Conirmed *how*? C'mon, sticky buns, provide your evidence. Who
>> confirmed it, and in what manner? If Trinity graduates have been
>> accepted in Union's Ph.D. program, under what circumstances? And how
>> many Trinity graduates? And what is the source of your information?
>> I'm calling your bluff, lew', and you can bet your buns we'll
>> investigate your claims. Frankly, however, I don't think you'll have
>> the balls to elaborate, and right now I'm the one who is laughing.
>>
>> ,-~~-.___.
>> / | ' \
>> ( ) 0
>> \_/-, ,----'
>> ==== //
>> / \-'~; /~~~(O)
>> / __/~| / |
>> =( _____| (_________|
>> -----------------------------------
>> Steve Levicoff
>> levi...@ix.netcom.com
>> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
>> -----------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
Larry McQueary
Thanks for the clarification
SheilaD1 <shei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990706002303...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
Larry McQueary
a conclusion: Why are you listed as "key faculty" of ACU on
the following web page?:
http://www.drnunley.com/acu.htm
Thanks,
Larry
br...@cnetech.com
> OK, here I ask the question of you openly without coming to
> a conclusion: Why are you listed as "key faculty" of ACU on
> the following web page?:
>
> http://www.drnunley.com/acu.htm
>
> Thanks,
> Larry
Doh!
Mike B
br...@cnetech.com
Steve Levicoff
>My question stems from the fact that you have a (more or
>less) complete ACU web site set up on
>http://www.nsmi.com/onlinedegree -- with all comunications
>directed to deg...@danzig.com, rather than (e.g.)
>admis...@amercoastuniv.edu, or even rayc...@aol.com.
>
>While a couple of glowing paragraphs from a former student
>would not necessarily mean much - an entire website kinda
>sorta indicates a connection beyond that of enthusiastic
>alumnus, wouldn't you say? :-)
Welcome to Sheila's world. She's a sweetheart (who has a delightful
preoccupation with loofahs), but a potentially dangerous one with a
vested interest in unaccredited schools (especially American Coastline
University, the degree mill run by Ray Chasse, from which she earned
her own Ph.D.). She can develop direct links to ACU yet deny any
direct affiliation with the school.
By way of her denial of running another degree mill, I can vouch for
that. At least at this point . . . What most newsgroup participants do
not know is that Sheila contacted some of us, including me, a couple of
months ago discussing her plans to personally develop "an unaccredited
offshore university" that would grant degrees through the doctoral
level. This is the school to which Chip referred (as Chip is on the
fronline of G-6 gossip, and you can bet your buns that Sheila's plans
were a topic of some humor when we received her e-mails). True, Sheila
does not run such a school *now* (unless her plans have progressed
suficiently), but she has made her intention to start one.
For recent newbies on the newsgroup, incidentally, Sheila has been one
of our "let's puff the degree mills" stars of the past. She dropped
off the newsgroup when everyone trashed her for her deception and her
constant self-defense of her own bogus credential, yet pops in
occasionally for a new dose of degree mill hype. If her record is any
indication, she will again drop off soon enough, but her renewed
presence provides a chance for the latest newsgroup generation to
become familiar with her shenadigans. For additional background, her
web site is an absolute hoot - http://www.danzig.com, or
htp://www.nmsi.com.
Sheila, in short, is a cornucopia of multi-level marketing schemes, as
well as Florida's answer to Tammy Faye Bakker and Jan Crouch. Some
people practice the fine art of psychological denial because they
deceive themselves into believing that their credentials are
legitimate; Sheila has mastered the art of denial, and is fully aware
that she's doing it.
So enjoy her while she's around in her current incarnation; she won't
hang out here for too long and, in the meantime, she is providing more
humorous fodder than Leland Milton Goldblatt.
leroykaminski
Thanks for your work.
Since you revising the directory and/or banner, will you consider
the possibility of also listing accredited DMin programs? As a
professional program, the DMin offers many benefits to universities,
seminaries and students.
All the best,
LeRoy
In the near future, the directory will be coming under the
banner of
> the Christian University GlobalNet (a non-profit organization created
by the
> Council for Christian Colleges and Universities to encourage and
support
> Christian distance/distributed education) which will enable the
directory to
> add features like a comprehensive course listing (in addition to the
current
> program listing). However, the directory will remain free for both
> institutions and users.
>
> Jason D. Baker
> j...@loyola.edu
> Center for Christian Distance Education
T.L.C. Head
> Since you revising the directory and/or banner, will you consider
> the possibility of also listing accredited DMin programs? As a
> professional program, the DMin offers many benefits to universities,
> seminaries and students.
Hmmmmm... Besides the Nova Southeastern University D.Min., is there an
accredited semi-distance learning D.Min. program out there?
I really am devastated that the D.D. has plummeted in market value
over the years, incidentally, as my great-grandfather had the degree back
when it was a legitimate feather in ones' cap and I always envisioned
myself obtaining one when I get to be middle-aged or so. For some reason,
"Doctor of Ministry" lacks the poetic flavor of "Doctor of Divinity," even
if the latter *does* make one sound a bit too much like Faust.
Larry McQueary
Make that www.nsmi.com
Larry
Steve Levicoff <levi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in relevant
part:
[ snip ]
For additional background, her
> web site is an absolute hoot - http://www.danzig.com, or
> htp://www.nmsi.com.
[ snip ]
Thomas Nixon
Thought I'd spice it up a little and go ahead and post it:
ACU Key Faculty:
Julius Blakeny, PhD, President-Human Services
John Boylan, PhD, Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies, RD, Southwest
USA
Moshe Binnenboi,, Edd, Phd, Professor of Military Science, Isreal
Raymond J. Chasse, PhD, Chancellor - Academic Dean
Min Chien, D.Eng, Chair Science and Technology
R.S. Compton,PhD, Chair, Psychology and Biofeedback Training
Sheila Danzig, PhD, Mentor-Internet Marketing
Thar she blows!!!!
Tom
Larry McQueary wrote:
> OK, here I ask the question of you openly without coming to
> a conclusion: Why are you listed as "key faculty" of ACU on
> the following web page?:
>
> http://www.drnunley.com/acu.htm
>
> Thanks,
> Larry
>
> SheilaD1 <shei...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:19990706002303...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> > >While a couple of glowing paragraphs from a former
> student
> > >would not necessarily mean much - an entire website kinda
> > >sorta indicates a connection beyond that of enthusiastic
> > >alumnus, wouldn't you say? :-)
> >
SheilaD1
>
>
>Thar she blows!!!!
So I do!!
This morning I have asked Ray to remove me. I truly forgot about this
agreement I had with Ray. And I apologize for any misunderstandings.
-Sheila
SheilaD1
>preoccupation with loofahs), but a potentially dangerous one with a
>vested interest in unaccredited schools (especially American Coastline
>University, the degree mill run by Ray Chasse, from which she earned
>her own Ph.D.). She can develop direct links to ACU yet deny any
>direct affiliation with the school.
>
>By way of her denial of running another degree mill, I can vouch for
>that. At least at this point . . . What most newsgroup participants do
>not know is that Sheila contacted some of us, including me, a couple of
>months ago discussing her plans to personally develop "an unaccredited
>offshore university" that would grant degrees through the doctoral
>level. This is the school to which Chip referred (as Chip is on the
>fronline of G-6 gossip, and you can bet your buns that Sheila's plans
>were a topic of some humor when we received her e-mails). True, Sheila
>does not run such a school *now* (unless her plans have progressed
>suficiently), but she has made her intention to start one.
1. My connection with ACU is no more than the liks to Ray's page.
2. The plans were for a *fully* accredited non-US school. And, in actuality,
they were not my plans, but someone who came to me. You never responded to my
email, so we never had an opportunity for open communications.
Steve, I think you are great, and one of a kind, and insulting me just adds to
how entertaining the internet can be for me.
-Sheila
PS Your sig file is still too big, in some ng's it would be cut off at 7
lines. Just as an attempt to save bandwidth. :)
leroykaminski
I didn't know Nova had a D.Min.- I didn't see it on their site.
There are many accredited DL D.Min. programs, including
universities and seminaries such as Princeton, Drew,
Trinity International, Bethel Sem.,Luther Sem., etc.
Most D.Min. progams are in-ministry programs, with the
major work by DL.
The best,
LeRoy
(Should we consider a DD support group; to help let-go?)
>Besides the Nova Southeastern University D.Min., is there
an accredited semi-distance learning D.Min. program out there?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Thomas Nixon
leroykaminski wrote:
> Tom,
> I didn't know Nova had a D.Min.- I didn't see it on their site.
> There are many accredited DL D.Min. programs, including
> universities and seminaries such as Princeton, Drew,
> Trinity International, Bethel Sem.,Luther Sem., etc.
> Most D.Min. progams are in-ministry programs, with the
> major work by DL.
> The best,
> LeRoy
I also didn't know that Nova did a D.Min. As a matter of fact I was
looking at their website today and didn't see it listed. Perhaps Tom
could provide a URL?
Tom Nixon
pete
Earned? Purchased is more like it!
Chip
On the same day, Sheila Danzig writes:
Chip,
Please tell me about this new school I launched, because I don't know
anything
about it. I assure you that should I ever get involved in any school (and
I
am *NOT* involved nor conected with any school despite postings to the
contrary
on this ng) it will be fully accredited, by all standards.
and, a couple of hours later, writes:
> 2. The plans were for a *fully* accredited non-US school. And, in
actuality,
> they were not my plans, but someone who came to me. You never responded
to my
> email, so we never had an opportunity for open communications.
So which is it? "I don't know anything about it" or "The plans were for a
*fully* accredited non-US school?
Can't have it both ways.
And I won't even go *into* "fully accredited" except to say that my
suspicion is that the accreditation would be the equivalent of Berne or
Greenwich's bogus end-runs.
Chip
> Chip,
> Please tell me about this new school I launched, because I don't know
anything
> about it.
Well... ok. There's a school called Oxbridge University that, if I remember,
is domiciled somewhere in South America. There was a Web site for it
briefly, but I notice that oxbridge.org is now aliased to the webhosting
provider's main page. There are other regulars on the NG with substantially
more information that ties oxbridge.org to the above named university.
Now, Oxbridge.org is registered to NSMI in Florida. When you go to NSMI's
page, it says -- big surprise here -- " Welcome to the home page of Sheila
Danzig".
I would therefore submit that it's hard to support the argument that you
know absolutely nothing about said school when it's registered by the
organization that you own.
I assure you that should I ever get involved in any school (and I
> am *NOT* involved nor conected with any school despite postings to the
contrary
> on this ng) it will be fully accredited, by all standards. And I thought
you
> prided yourself on checking the facts. There is no school.
I cannot swear that the school is now operating, but there are several folks
on a.e.d. who have firsthand knowledge of Sheila's stated plans to start
said organization.
And... while we're at it, Mary Sunora, who regularly posts here, was the one
originally plugging people to go to a page offering a survey about DL... the
purpose of the survey, basically, was to see if folks would be willing to go
for a bogus degree. Although the page itself didn't identify its owner, a
quick review of the HTML page source revealed that all responses went to
oxbridge.org, which, of course, we've already shown, is owned by Sheila.
And that, Sheila, is why I made the statement I did. I stand behind it.
Steve Levicoff
I gladly stand corrected, and recommend checking Sheila's web site out
after "Win Ben Stein's Money." As far as humor goes, it would be the
icing on the cake.
Steve Levicoff
Steve Levicoff
>>Welcome to Sheila's world. She's a sweetheart (who has a delightful
>>preoccupation with loofahs), but a potentially dangerous one with a
>>vested interest in unaccredited schools (especially American
>>Coastline University, the degree mill run by Ray Chasse, from which
>>she earned her own Ph.D.). She can develop direct links to ACU yet
>>deny any direct affiliation with the school.
>>
>>By way of her denial of running another degree mill, I can vouch for
>>that. At least at this point . . . What most newsgroup participants
>>do not know is that Sheila contacted some of us, including me, a
>>couple of months ago discussing her plans to personally develop "an
>>unaccredited offshore university" that would grant degrees through
>>the doctoral level. This is the school to which Chip referred (as
>>Chip is on the fronline of G-6 gossip, and you can bet your buns that
>>Sheila's plans were a topic of some humor when we received her
>>e-mails). True, Sheila does not run such a school *now* (unless her
>>plans have progressed suficiently), but she has made her intention to
>>start one.
>
>1. My connection with ACU is no more than the liks to Ray's page.
I believe that Larry McQ. addressed this quite effectively.
>2. The plans were for a *fully* accredited non-US school. And, in
>actuality, they were not my plans, but someone who came to me. You
>never responded to my email, so we never had an opportunity for open
>communications.
Fully accredited. yes, of course. I hate to ask the obvious, but...
accredited by whom? (Remember, kids, you can ask this one at home.
It's the *first* question you should ask when a school claims to be
"fully accredited."
And Sheila is quite correct. I never did respond to her inquiry, as
her past history and association with Ray Chasse's enterprise was not
something that I would choose to be affiliated with, even to the point
of giving advice. (This is a lesson that Leland Milton Goldblatt has
learned well in teh past week or two.) However, I was not the only one
with whom Sheila was in contact about her plans (which were clearly
written in first-person form, not on behalf of a third party), and
several of had detailed discussions about her various correspondences.
>Steve, I think you are great, and one of a kind, and insulting me
>just adds to how entertaining the internet can be for me.
Well, Sheila, it's nice to see that you're still a glutton for
punishment.
>PS Your sig file is still too big, in some ng's it would be cut off
>at 7 lines. Just as an attempt to save bandwidth. :)
As a matter of fact, I did drop the sig file at one point, but there
were so many comments on its absence that I brought it back. To this
date, you are the only one who has ever complained about its size. And
I can't help thinking that if this is your biggest complaint about me,
you obviously haven't been able to come up with anything substantive.
T.L.C. Head
> > I didn't know Nova had a D.Min.- I didn't see it on their site.
> > There are many accredited DL D.Min. programs, including
> > universities and seminaries such as Princeton, Drew,
> > Trinity International, Bethel Sem.,Luther Sem., etc.
> > Most D.Min. progams are in-ministry programs, with the
> > major work by DL.
>
> I also didn't know that Nova did a D.Min. As a matter of fact I was
> looking at their website today and didn't see it listed. Perhaps Tom
> could provide a URL?
Actually, I can't; this falls under the general heading of "I'm Pretty
Sure I Saw it in Something They Mailed Me." I'll be going through my
papers over the next week or so anyway, so if I run across anything I'll
let you folks know. Otherwise, assume it was a mind belch.
T.L.C. Head
> I didn't know Nova had a D.Min.- I didn't see it on their site. There
> are many accredited DL D.Min. programs, including universities and
> seminaries such as Princeton, Drew, Trinity International, Bethel
> Sem.,Luther Sem., etc. Most D.Min. progams are in-ministry programs,
> with the major work by DL.
Hrm. What about those of us who aren't, you know, ministers? :P
> (Should we consider a DD support group; to help let-go?)
(A splendid idea! And while we're at it, why isn't there an Associate of
Divinity, anyway?)
Thomas Nixon
distance ed. university, now is just an "under construction" sign.
Tom
Chip wrote:
> Hmmmm.
>
> On the same day, Sheila Danzig writes:
>
> Chip,
> Please tell me about this new school I launched, because I don't know
> anything
> about it. I assure you that should I ever get involved in any school (and
> I
> am *NOT* involved nor conected with any school despite postings to the
> contrary
> on this ng) it will be fully accredited, by all standards.
>
> and, a couple of hours later, writes:
>
> > 2. The plans were for a *fully* accredited non-US school. And, in
> actuality,
> > they were not my plans, but someone who came to me. You never responded
> to my
> > email, so we never had an opportunity for open communications.
>
> So which is it? "I don't know anything about it" or "The plans were for a
> *fully* accredited non-US school?
>
> Can't have it both ways.
>
> And I won't even go *into* "fully accredited" except to say that my
> suspicion is that the accreditation would be the equivalent of Berne or
> Greenwich's bogus end-runs.
--
Thomas Nixon
Editor, TEFL Connection
Teach English Overseas? http://www.TeachEFL.com
lew...@wichita.infi.net
theology from a AABC school, a 2 year business diploma from an
accredited college, I am a professional accountant and (good lord
willing and the creek don't rise) will have an accredited DL MBA in the
near future.
I also have limited teaching experience at accredited institutions.
A program at Trinity IN attracted my attention. I e-mailed Dr. Bear
for his opinion and he was gracious enough to respond with a positive
recommendation. After the negative e-mails in this NG I did my own
research (of which I am not complete) and have arrived at a conclusion
in agreement with Dr. Bear.
I have also recently looked into Columbia Evangelical, a school Dr.
Bear personally recommends on its web-site. Although I have done less
research into CBS, the faculty and Dr. Bears recommendation is
impressive.
My lack of research into RA schools is not due to laziness or cost but
the failure to find a 100% DL program in my area of interest.
I have also had experiences with a couple of RA schools with standards
which are laughable. Therefore, I have been de-converted from RA
worship.
In summary, Dr. Bear & Walston have been closer to what I have
discovered than Levicoff & Baker.
P.S.
Regarding the 17% BS.... I will quote an e-mail I personally recieved
"I like that - Levicoff is fuller than FULL OF SHIT, so the NG for me
now is
a place of derision and amusement. If you want biased information from
people who HATE non RA DL schools, and who have never been able to get
their
own qualifications, even the basic ones at a traditional school, the NG
is
the place to go."
Regards
>
> So once again, do tell us, what are the *specific* institutions with
> which you have been affiliated and that have made you feel so
> compulsive about your editorial position? (You realize, of course,
> that you've become a bit obvious in avoiding the answer to this.)
>
> ,-~~-.___.
> / | ' \
> ( ) 0
> \_/-, ,----'
> ==== //
> / \-'~; /~~~(O)
> / __/~| / |
> =( _____| (_________|
> -----------------------------------
> Steve Levicoff
> levi...@ix.netcom.com
> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
> -----------------------------------
>
>
Larry McQueary
You have to admit that your concern over this is rather
ironic, considering what you have to say on the following
web page:
http://www.nsmi.com/noflames.html
So, which is worse, violation of the letter of the law, or
violation of the spirit of the law? :-)
My vote is that sock-puppet newsgroup conversations and ads
in sig files are much more offensive than an overlong (yet
creative) sig file.
There's no question that ads use up a lot more bandwidth in
today's Internet than longish sig files do.
Larry
SheilaD1 <shei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990706133608...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
[ snip ]
Larry McQueary
the person continues to follow this newsgroup, regardless of
the resentment and bitterness they obviously harbor. This
minor quote says volumes about the person - I'd be willing
to bet they hold a PhD from some unaccredited institution,
and just can't take the scrutiny here in the NG. Do you
imagine that this is the majority viewpoint, based on this
single data point?
I suppose the person's comment bolsters your
self-confidence, but it's really just a petty little jab
that the person is too scared to post publicly.
If you're going to use quotes from personal email you
receive, take into account that quotes like the below are
easily attributable to holders of degree mill credentials,
and/or operators/associates of degree mills. Who else would
have that sort of pent-up frustration? What other viewpoint
would you expect them to have?
The other funny thing is that of all the regular
participants of this group, I believe I'm the only extremely
vocal one who has not a single degree to his name (for the
time being). So the little comment about not being able to
get 'their own qualifications' is just so much BS (so to
speak).
Wisely, I suppose, this person has opted to stay out of the
kitchen, since they can't find the popular support for their
viewpoint in the newsgroup.
Larry
<lew...@wichita.infi.net> wrote in message
news:7lub8g$v2j$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
[ snip ]
Chip
> Just to make you happy... I have an undergraduate degree in exegetical
> theology from a AABC school, a 2 year business diploma from an
> accredited college, I am a professional accountant and (good lord
> willing and the creek don't rise) will have an accredited DL MBA in the
> near future.
Of course, the *names* of said institutions are conspicuously missing,
conveniently making it impossible to verify any of your claims.
> I have also had experiences with a couple of RA schools with standards
> which are laughable. Therefore, I have been de-converted from RA
> worship.
Now this makes a lot of sense. "I had a couple of bad experiences with RA
schools, so instead of choosing a school that must meet at least the
*minimal* standards provided by RA, I'll instead choose a school that
doesn't have to meet *any* standards at all" .
> P.S.
> Regarding the 17% BS.... I will quote an e-mail I personally recieved
> "I like that - Levicoff is fuller than FULL OF SHIT, so the NG for me
> now is
> a place of derision and amusement. If you want biased information from
> people who HATE non RA DL schools, and who have never been able to get
> their
> own qualifications, even the basic ones at a traditional school, the NG
> is
> the place to go."
Remember that you were asked to back up your assertions with *facts*. So
far, you've offered up an incomplete citation of accusations made against
Dr. Levicoff by someone who had a vested interest in discrediting Levicoff
in order to make his own program look better. Credibility of your argument
so far: near zero, IMHO. Now you follow it up with an anonymous email
offering somebody's opinion, and the email itself contains major factual
errors, in that the majority of regulars on the NG hold advanced degrees,
many of them from DL institutions.
Dude, in trying to strengthen your position, all you're doing is
inadvertently providing further support to the notion that unaccredited
degrees don't develop some of the most basic skills that colleges are
supposed to teach: critical thinking skills, abstract logic, the ability to
separate fact from opinion and at least basic research skills.
SheilaD1
>*fully* accredited non-US school?
>
Chip I don't know anything about a school that I launched.
On the other hand I have been involved as a consultant in discussions about an
accredited non-American university.
Is there no difference between having launched a school and talking about a
school? If they are the same thing, then I stand corrected and confused.
-Sheila
-Sheila
SheilaD1
>accredited by whom? (Remember, kids, you can ask this one at home.
>It's the *first* question you should ask when a school claims to be
>"fully accredited."
Fully accredited by the GAAP standards, unless you have other standards to
suggest.
>>As a matter of fact, I did drop the sig file at one point, but there
were so many comments on its absence that I brought it back. To this
date, you are the only one who has ever complained about its size. And
I can't help thinking that if this is your biggest complaint about me,
you obviously haven't been able to come up with anything substantive.<<
Oh Steve, if YOU don't know a joke when you see one you might need a vacation.
-Sheila
Larry McQueary
;-)
Larry
Thomas Nixon <tcn...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3782DA15...@ix.netcom.com...
> It is interesting that degree.com, which earlier today had
a page about a new
> distance ed. university, now is just an "under
construction" sign.
>
>
> Tom
>
> Chip wrote:
>
> > Hmmmm.
> >
> > On the same day, Sheila Danzig writes:
> >
> > Chip,
> > Please tell me about this new school I launched, because
I don't know
> > anything
> > about it. I assure you that should I ever get involved
in any school (and
> > I
> > am *NOT* involved nor conected with any school despite
postings to the
> > contrary
> > on this ng) it will be fully accredited, by all
standards.
> >
> > and, a couple of hours later, writes:
> >
> > > 2. The plans were for a *fully* accredited non-US
school. And, in
> > actuality,
> > > they were not my plans, but someone who came to me.
You never responded
> > to my
> > > email, so we never had an opportunity for open
communications.
> >
> > So which is it? "I don't know anything about it" or
"The plans were for a
> > *fully* accredited non-US school?
> >
Barry Wong
> Hmmmmm... Besides the Nova Southeastern University D.Min., is there an
> accredited semi-distance learning D.Min. program out there?
If you feel okay about TRACS accreditation (not regional but government
approved) for a D.Min. -- and frankly, I don't see why someone wouldn't,
since the D.Min. is more of a professional degree than an academic one
-- you could take a look at Luther Rice Seminary's D.Min. An M.Div. or
equivalency (i.e. extra units on top of the M.A.) is required to qualify
for the program.
Good providence!
Steve Levicoff
>Just to make you happy... I have an undergraduate degree in exegetical
>theology from a AABC school, a 2 year business diploma from an
>accredited college, I am a professional accountant and (good lord
>willing and the creek don't rise) will have an accredited DL MBA in
>the near future.
>
>I also have limited teaching experience at accredited institutions.
Okay, lewchuk, let's go back to your original gripe - you stated that
with an unaccredited degree, you could not get into one regionally
accredited program, although another one was willing to admit you.
And despite being asked for specific names of institutions, you have
copped out once again and provided abstract information. Nonetheless,
it turns out that your undergraduate credential *is* from a school that
is accredited by AABC, which *is* recognized by both DoEd and CHEA.
Well, bully for you, sport. I have always been up front in stating
that many regionally accredited schools will recognize *only* degrees
from other regionally accredited schools. In fact, both here on the
newsgroup and in my own book I cited Thomas Edison State College (my
own B.A. alma mater) as one that would *not* accept transfer credits
from AABC-accredited schools that do not hold regional accreditation.
Thus, you have not revealed anything new here at all (and have even
copped out on the information you were asked about). So let's try
again: From what *specific* schools did you earn your degrees, what
*specific* school turned you down based on an AABC-accredited degree,
and for *what* type of program were you applying.
The issue here has never been that one cannot receive a quality
education from a non-R.A. school (and I have always endorsed both AABC
and their accredited schools - if you don't believe that, you have not
read "NIFI"). But let's have a reality check, shall we? In case you
don't get the message, I'll repeat it once again: AABC accreditation of
a degree does *not* guarantee admission to a regionally accredited
graduate school, and many R.A. schools will *not* accept AABC school
credits, even though AABC is a recognized accreditor. Ditto DETC,
ditto TRACS, and ditto *any* other DoEd-approved accreditor if the
school does not also have regional accreditation. That's reality,
whether you like it or not.
As for your belief that Trinity (Newburgh) and Columbia Evangelical are
legitimate schools, it sounds to me like you've used circular reasoning
to get there based on the non-acceptance of your undergrad degree by
the school of your choice. Tough noogies, sweetheart, but all you've
done is prove my position. If Trinity and Columbia are what you're
willing to settle for, more power to you.
Steve Levicoff
>The other funny thing is that of all the regular
>participants of this group, I believe I'm the only extremely
>vocal one who has not a single degree to his name (for the
>time being). So the little comment about not being able to
>get 'their own qualifications' is just so much BS (so to
>speak).
Actually, you are not the only "extremely vocal" NG regular who has no
degrees. Some of us are aware of various people's credentials, and
there are a few I can think of who are highly respected (including a
few who are in the Gang of Six, which, even in Snell's original
incarnation, ranges from persons with zero degrees to 12 degrees) who
have not yet earned a degree.
The issue on the newsgroup has never been how many degrees a person
has, or whether they have any at all, but how accurate they are when
writing about distance education. Yes, we use a B.S. index here, but
it does not stand for Bachelor of Science.
Steve Levicoff
>If you feel okay about TRACS accreditation (not regional but
>government approved) for a D.Min. -- and frankly, I don't see why
>someone wouldn't, since the D.Min. is more of a professional degree
>than an academic one -- you could take a look at Luther Rice
>Seminary's D.Min. An M.Div. or equivalency (i.e. extra units on top of
>the M.A.) is required to qualify for the program.
>
>Good providence!
However, before someone goes with a TRACS-accredited school, I would
recommend that they read what I wrote about TRACS in "Name It & Frame
It" chapter 4 for the big picture. TRACS remains a joke among many
regional accredited schools.
Nice to see you make an appearance, Barry!
leroykaminski
> However, before someone goes with a TRACS-accredited school, I would
> recommend that they read what I wrote about TRACS in "Name It & Frame
> It" chapter 4 for the big picture.
This leads to a question of D.Min. priorities.
When considering a D.Min. program (knowing that its purpose is not
academic, but professional for working within a particular church body),
is the highest priority to be given to what the
university/seminary *believes*
or
to its *accreditation*?
All the best,
LeRoy
Barry Wong
> bw...@flash.net (Barry Wong) writes:
>
> >If you feel okay about TRACS accreditation (not regional but
> >government approved) for a D.Min. -- and frankly, I don't see why
> >someone wouldn't, since the D.Min. is more of a professional degree
> >than an academic one -- you could take a look at Luther Rice
> >Seminary's D.Min. An M.Div. or equivalency (i.e. extra units on top of
> >the M.A.) is required to qualify for the program.
>
> However, before someone goes with a TRACS-accredited school, I would
> recommend that they read what I wrote about TRACS in "Name It & Frame
> It" chapter 4 for the big picture. TRACS remains a joke among many
> regional accredited schools.
Fair enough, but that was my point above -- since the D.Min. is a
terminal degree (and a professional one), who cares what a regionally
accredited school thinks? Most D.Min. types can't teach at a seminary
anyway (at least not on the strength of their D.Min.), and typically,
the D.Min. doesn't qualify one to pursue a Ph.D. or some such, so I
don't really see how a TRACS D.Min. is any less useful than a regionally
accredited one.
Is there something I'm missing here?
T.L.C. Head
> > Hmmmmm... Besides the Nova Southeastern University D.Min., is there an
> > accredited semi-distance learning D.Min. program out there?
>
> If you feel okay about TRACS accreditation (not regional but
> government approved) for a D.Min. -- and frankly, I don't see why
> someone wouldn't, since the D.Min. is more of a professional degree
> than an academic one -- you could take a look at Luther Rice
> Seminary's D.Min. An M.Div. or equivalency (i.e. extra units on top of
> the M.A.) is required to qualify for the program.
Hey, thanks! I'll give that one a look.
One of the things I've noticed is that a Theology M.A./M.T.S. is
*much* easier to get by distance learning (Berean, Liberty, etc.) or
extension (Spring Hill, Loyola, etc.) than an M.Div., for logical reason,
so what might be a good route is to finish up that local M.T.S. program
I've been lustily eyeing, do the ministry credits through a local seminary
(which is probably a better place for it anyway), and then look at a
D.Min.
Larry McQueary
I happily stand corrected - and was corrected via email last
evening as well.
How terribly empowered I feel! ;-)
Larry
Steve Levicoff <levi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7lvmp3$2...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com...
Steve Levicoff
>This leads to a question of D.Min. priorities.
>When considering a D.Min. program (knowing that its purpose is not
>academic, but professional for working within a particular church
>body), is the highest priority to be given to what the
>university/seminary *believes* or to its *accreditation*?
>
>All the best,
>LeRoy
Good question. The answer is . . . neither. But I say that with
tongue in cheek, because in academe, the D.Min. is considered a joke.
You will find D.Min. programs ranging from scholarly to simple "How-to"
courses. There are minimal D.Min. standards at many schools, and some
will even admit any student. (At legitimately accredited seminaries,
the D.Min. requires a pre-requisite M.Div. degree *plus* three years
full-time pastoral experience, plus a current pastoral position.)
For specific denominations, accreditation is not necessary at all. One
of the best theological seminaries in the country is the Lutheran
Brethren Seminary in Minnesota, which serves the L.B. denomination
exclusively. LBS is not accredited at all. And most L.B. churches
will take an LBS graduate before they will take a Yale Divinity School
graduate because they know the LBS grad was trained within the
doctrinal context of their denomination.
(By the way, remember that one, campers. You heard it here first: I
just called a totally unaccredited school one of the best in the
country.)
(Remember that one, campers, you heard it here first: I just called a
totally unaccredited school one of the best in the country.)
Steve Levicoff
>Fair enough, but that was my point above -- since the D.Min. is a
>terminal degree (and a professional one), who cares what a regionally
>accredited school thinks? Most D.Min. types can't teach at a seminary
>anyway (at least not on the strength of their D.Min.), and typically,
>the D.Min. doesn't qualify one to pursue a Ph.D. or some such, so I
>don't really see how a TRACS D.Min. is any less useful than a
>regionally accredited one.
>
>Is there something I'm missing here?
Well . . . yes, a minor point or two. Remember that in most fields,
one pursues, say, a 30-credit masters followed by a doctoral program
that might take a number of years. In theology, however, pastoral
professional *first* earn a Master of Divinity degree, which is about
*90* semester hours, *then* they go on to a 30-credit Th.M. (or its
equivalent S.T.M. or M.T.S.) or a 30-credit D.Min.
Thus, you will find many persons with a terminal D.Min. teaching in
seminaries, but they received the *bulk* of their education at the
M.Div. level. Also, remember that in ATS-accredited seminaries, one
must already possess an M.Div. plus three years of full-time pastoral
experience to even gain admission into a D.Min. program. Many seminary
professors, however, also have the Th.M. or S.T.M. degree, which is
academic (rather than professional) in nature.
There are many seminary professors (as opposed to university
professors) that hold the D.Min. as a terminal credential rather than
the Ph.D. or Th.D. Again, this is based on my experience with
ATS-accredited seminaries rather than their non-accredited
counterparts, which will settle for just about anything (especially, in
the case of the degree mills, if it is home grown).
Anecdotally, when I taught at Biblical Theological Seminary (which is
accredited both regionally and by ATS) a few years ago, it was quite
clear that they started their D.Min. program because every other
accredited seminary program in Pennsylvania had one - BTS simply didn't
want to be left out of the market. Even then, they developed such a
mickey-mouse program that it didn't go down well with the Pennsylvania
Department of Education (which must approve all new degree programs).
It was finally approved, but in my opinion, it's still a mickey-mouse
program (as are most D.Min. programs I have seen anywhere).
sea_...@my-deja.com
>>While a couple of glowing paragraphs from a former student
>>would not necessarily mean much - an entire website kinda
>>sorta indicates a connection beyond that of enthusiastic
>>alumnus, wouldn't you say? :-)
>
>Apparantly you would say. But the site you mention is no longer linked to my
>site and was only done in gratitude to Ray. Nothing else. There is no other
>connection. Larry, why not ask me the questions instead of jumping to
>conclusions without the info.
>
>-Sheila
That's exactly what Larry does, Sheila. Defensiveness doesn't work
when the other party is offensive.
Larry McQueary
OLD BUSINESS:
I apologized to you separately in email, and will do so
publicly here: I over-reacted in my response to your latest
appearance in the newgroup lats week: There are far worse
Usenet sins than posting a link to a relevant web site.
I've stated several times my general reasoning for why I
object, but I didn't have to be nasty about it.
Please accept my apology in good faith.
NEW BUSINESS:
I don't blame you for this response, given your general
annoyance at me - but you'd have to understand Sheila's
history in this newsgroup (i.e. some context) to understand
the relevance of my posts here.
Though you might find it easy to characterize my post as a
thoughtless offensive jab, it's not. I'm just offering up
some public evidence to refute an explicit, public (and
clearly, based on the evidence, untrue) claim that she made.
Larry
<sea_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3783cd08...@news.earthlink.net...
John Bear
>>Dr. Bear recommends (publicly in the case of CES) these schools
But ONLY, and very clearly (I hope) for those people who are convinced
they can benefit from an unaccredited degree, now and in the future. And
that is really a very small number of people, I grow increasingly
convinced.
John Bear
Evangelical Seminary. I am only suggesting that for those people who fully
believe they can benefit from an unaccredited degree, now and in the
future (and, presumably, in their next life), and who share the
evangelical stance, this is a reasonable place to consider. And,
increasingly, I am coming to believe that the number of people who can so
benefit it quite small. (I get increasing amounts of mail from people who
say, in effect, "It seemed like a good idea at the time, but now....")
John Bear
lew...@wichita.infi.net
How come you keep dancing around the fact that Dr. Bear recommends
(publicly in the case of CES) these schools. You aim your guns at me
(a novice) but fail to take on the pro. Put your money where your
mouth is Levicoff... prove da Bear wrong !!!
To make you happy,
University of Calgary 1986
B.Th. (cum laude) Western Pentecostal Bible College 1989
Diploma in Business Administration (honours), Southern Alberta
Institute of Technology 1991 (Initially rejected my credits until I
proved that the University of Waterloo would accept them)
Certified General Accountant 1997
MBA Student Heriot-Watt University 1997-
Adjunct Professor in Theology, Northwest Pentecostal Bible College 1990
Accounting Instructor, Certified General Accountants Association of
Alberta, 1997
My point was is that I DID GET MY NON-ACCREDITED COURSES RECOGNIZED by
pulling in a "de-facto" accreditation by an to RA school which
recognized the quality of my education. Students from non-accredited
but legitimate schools do this all the time... it is the Trinity-
Liverpool game. It goes like this, a school rejects Western but
Waterloo accepts Western so rejecting Western = rejecting Waterloo, now
the school accepts Western. School rejects Trinity but Liverpool
accepts Trinity so rejecting Trinity = rejecting Liverpool, now school
accepts Trinity.
Regarding "willing to settle for", you have done nothing to prove that
the standards at either school require "a willingness to settle for"
Again, take on da Bear.
Finally, you seem to believe that appropriate RA alternative exist for
everyones educational objectives. That is clearly not the case.
In article <7lvmd1$l...@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>,
> ,-~~-.___.
> / | ' \
> ( ) 0
> \_/-, ,----'
> ==== //
> / \-'~; /~~~(O)
> / __/~| / |
> =( _____| (_________|
> -----------------------------------
> Steve Levicoff
> levi...@ix.netcom.com
> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
> -----------------------------------
>
>
Larry McQueary
> My point was is that I DID GET MY NON-ACCREDITED COURSES
RECOGNIZED by
> pulling in a "de-facto" accreditation by an to RA school
which
> recognized the quality of my education. Students from
non-accredited
> but legitimate schools do this all the time... it is the
Trinity-
Impressive induction - what (or who) makes you beleve that
legitimate schools do this all the time? Your experience
makes this suddenly commonplace? There's no question that
exceptions are made - and every regular poster here will
agree with that - but the point is that these are exactly
that - exceptions.
And don't count on what your email correspondent from your
previous post is feeding you, either ;-)
> Liverpool game. It goes like this, a school rejects
Western but
> Waterloo accepts Western so rejecting Western = rejecting
Waterloo, now
> the school accepts Western. School rejects Trinity but
Liverpool
> accepts Trinity so rejecting Trinity = rejecting
Liverpool, now school
> accepts Trinity.
For students in the US, the Liverpool acknowledgement of
Trinity's degrees would not hold water. Your commutative
logic would not as easily be applied.
> Regarding "willing to settle for", you have done nothing
to prove that
> the standards at either school require "a willingness to
settle for"
> Again, take on da Bear.
The issue gets back to acceptance of the degrees by other
institutions. So far, you've given exactly one example of
that happening, and you had to go through some hassle for
even that.... which is precisely the point. People who are
willing to settle for what will ultimately be a crap shoot
with their degree may get lucky, but the odds are that they
will have problems.
> Finally, you seem to believe that appropriate RA
alternative exist for
> everyones educational objectives. That is clearly not the
case.
No, but there are appropriate RA alternatives for the
majority of common educational objectives. Some options,
like the BSCS, are more limited than others. That certainly
doesn't mean that one should go running for the nearest
unaccredited institution instead.
Larry
Steve Levicoff
>I am going to step aside for a moment and ask a very simple question.
>How come you keep dancing around the fact that Dr. Bear recommends
>(publicly in the case of CES) these schools. You aim your guns at me
>(a novice) but fail to take on the pro. Put your money where your
>mouth is Levicoff... prove da Bear wrong !!!
I do not have to prove da Bear wrong; da Bear is not personally
involved in evangelizing for a particular agenda, as you are. And da
Bear and I have taken each other on in the past in both a public and
amiable manner. However, we agree far more than we have ever
disagreed, and that's good enough for me. John may or may not endorse
CES (Columbia Evangelical Seminary, run by Rick Walston, which, IMO, is
a degree mill), and that's not a concern to me. As I see it, Rick
probably said to John, "Hey, do you mind if I put an endorsement from
you on my web site?" John, nice guy that he is, probably said, "Sure,
go ahead." That does not necessarily mean that John is sending
prospective students to CES, nor that he does or does not feel that CES
meets the GAAP principles. One way or the other, it's not a concern to
me, since Rick is a bit player when it comes to degree mills.
>To make you happy,
>University of Calgary 1986
>B.Th. (cum laude) Western Pentecostal Bible College 1989
>Diploma in Business Administration (honours), Southern Alberta
>Institute of Technology 1991 (Initially rejected my credits until I
>proved that the University of Waterloo would accept them)
>Certified General Accountant 1997
>MBA Student Heriot-Watt University 1997-
Well, lew', you never bothered mentining that the schools you attended
were in Canada. You should certainly know that Canada has nothing akin
to regional accreditation, thus there is no issue here, as far as I'm
concerned. If SAIT initially rejected you, it is most certainly not
because Western Pentecostal lacked regional accreditation - because
*no* school in Canada has regional accreditation. Therefore, the
bottom line is that you have been raising these arguments merely in a
vain attempt to be a pain in the ass.
>Adjunct Professor in Theology, Northwest Pentecostal Bible College
>1990
>Accounting Instructor, Certified General Accountants Association of
>Alberta, 1997
Big whoop. The fact that you were an adjunct professor at a fairly
small Pentecostal college simply means that you know how to tap dance
in tongues and swallow the party line to the satisfaction of the
school's administrators. And the fact that you are allegedly an
instructor for a professional association simply means that you do
workshops.
Frankly, I have no problem with either credit on your C.V. We'll give
you the benefit of doubt and say that you may even have sound
pedagogical skills. But let's keep the whole act in perspective, shall
we?
>My point was is that I DID GET MY NON-ACCREDITED COURSES RECOGNIZED by
>pulling in a "de-facto" accreditation by an to RA school which
>recognized the quality of my education. Students from non-accredited
>but legitimate schools do this all the time... it is the Trinity-
>Liverpool game. It goes like this, a school rejects Western but
>Waterloo accepts Western so rejecting Western = rejecting Waterloo,
>now the school accepts Western. School rejects Trinity but Liverpool
>accepts Trinity so rejecting Trinity = rejecting Liverpool, now school
>accepts Trinity.
To *what* RA school? Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, which
accepted you based on Waterloo's intended acceptance of your credits?
How many times do we need to spell this out: Southern Alberta I.T. is
not an RA school, because Canada is not covered by any of the regional
associations. There is no such thing as "RA" in Canada, period.
You neglect to note that the Trinity-Liverpool connection is considered
a joke here in the States. Hell, it was one of the funniest jokes ever
to hit this newsgroup, and certainly not the first time Trinity has
played a bullshit game in the world of higher education.
Nonetheless, I would reiterate that the whole issue of RA schools is
irrelevant to your situation in toto. Again, sport, there is no
regional accreditation in Canada, and the history you have cited above
deals solely with non-U.S. schools.
>Regarding "willing to settle for", you have done nothing to prove that
>the standards at either school require "a willingness to settle for"
>Again, take on da Bear.
Why? I have no gripe with John at all. He and I hold different views
in some areas but, unlike you and I, we are able to disagree quite
agreeably. Perhaps you should learn to do the same instead of making
an ass of yourself here.
And in the case of Trinity, one need only read what I have written
about them in "NIFI" chapter 12 to understand why I contend you would
be settling for mediocrity at best. The school is as mickey-mouse as
they come, and the shenadigans they tried to pull with Liverpool is
merely the icing on the cake.
>Finally, you seem to believe that appropriate RA alternative exist for
>everyones educational objectives. That is clearly not the case.
Nor does it have to be. Again, you are in Canada. Regional
accreditation is irrelevant to Canadians unless they are going to
school in the States (or want to go to school in the States). In fact,
I submit that you could have enrolled in many RA academic programs here
in the U.S. and that your degree from Western Pentecostal would have
been quite acceptable to them. Why? Because they cannot hold Canadian
schools to an RA standard since no Canadian school is RA. Get it,
sweet cakes?
leroykaminski
> Remember that in most fields,
> one pursues, say, a 30-credit masters followed by a doctoral program
> that might take a number of years. In theology, however, pastoral
> professional *first* earn a Master of Divinity degree, which is about
> *90* semester hours, *then* they go on to a 30-credit Th.M. (or its
> equivalent S.T.M. or M.T.S.) or a 30-credit D.Min.
> it's still a mickey-mouse
> program (as are most D.Min. programs I have seen anywhere).
>
It is not easy to earn a D.Min.
You are correct about the M.Div. being 90 semester hours (not easy
courses either). The M.Div. often takes 3 years of classroom plus
another year vicar/intern, for a total of 4 years.
After 3 or more years of experience, then the student returns to
the classroom for another 3 years for the 30 credit D.Min. work.
At the same time, most students continue their ministry.
That makes a total of at least 120 semester credits and about
10 years of work.
In my opinion, that is not an easy program. When they finish
a D.Min, they have earned the title as much or more than other
professionals.
All the best,
LeRoy
Emil Knutti
misunderstand his "recommendation(s)" related to unaccredited schools
is to stop making the "recommendation(s)." It is so simple, no
"recommendation(s)," no misunderstanding(s).
Emil Knutti
In article <john-07079...@coat11.ppp.lmi.net>,
Emil Knutti
further. But, I am not the one who brought it up this time. Again, I
suggest that the best place for this qualified, whatever it is to be
called --"recommendation" in an earlier post, is the dust bin of
history. If those who benefit from an unaccredited degree are becoming
fewer and fewer, why give even the least bit of credence to
unaccredited programs?
Emil Knutti
In article <john-07079...@prope11.ppp.lmi.net>,
John Bear
> In my opinion, the best way for Dr. Bear to be sure that people do not
> misunderstand his "recommendation(s)" related to unaccredited schools
> is to stop making the "recommendation(s)." It is so simple, no
> "recommendation(s)," no misunderstanding(s).
I remember a household hints program on radio KABC in Los Angeles, years
ago, where the advice was given, "To keep patio furniture dry when it
rains, bring it inside."
Now why didn't I think of that.
--
John Bear, Ph.D. (Michigan State University, 1966)
Co-Author, Bears' Guide (13th edition) described
at http://www.degree.net, and sold at www.amazon.com
or www.barnesandnoble.com, bookstores, and www.tenspeed.com.
John Bear
> If those who benefit from an unaccredited degree are becoming
> fewer and fewer, why give even the least bit of credence to
> unaccredited programs?
Because there are still more than a few people who can benefit from them.
Probably the best example are those would-be therapists in California who
can sit for the state board exams with an unaccredited state-approved
degree. So when I say, "If you are confident you can benefit from an
unaccredited degree (blah blah blah)..." it is people like this who would
be at the top of the list.
Chip
> Because there are still more than a few people who can benefit from them.
> Probably the best example are those would-be therapists in California who
> can sit for the state board exams with an unaccredited state-approved
> degree. So when I say, "If you are confident you can benefit from an
> unaccredited degree (blah blah blah)..." it is people like this who would
> be at the top of the list.
I have to agree with Emir here... since so many that have gone the
unaccredited route are now saying "well, maybe it wasn't such a good idea",
it *might* be better to say that with so many new accredited options
available, it is now almost completely pointless to go unaccredited.
A thought on the example posed above: since many HMOs are now refusing to
reimburse for anything other than psychological care provided by a
doctoral-level therapist, a California therapist with an unaccredited degree
might end up being unable to complete a doctoral degree -- and is certainly
likely to be stuck with an unaccredited one -- if s/he decided to go back to
school to enhance their insurance reimbursement options.
Likewise, if I understand it correctly, if a California therapist moves to
another state, they will run into trouble getting licensed... and there are
an *awful* lot of people who have moved in the past x years that *never*
thought they'd move...
Just a little more "food for thought"
Larry McQueary
Larry
Chip <ch...@remove.mindspring.this.com> wrote in relevant
part:
[s nip]
> I have to agree with Emir here... since so many that have
gone the
[ snip ]
Emil Knutti
a previous post, not mine) has extended far beyond the state-approved arena
of unaccredited schools, about 20 by my count not including religious
schools (I know, he was just providing an example with the California
approved schools). In fact, a few weeks ago it seemed that this
"recommendation" would extend to many, many, schools which make up, is it
Chapter 21?, of his book if a new edition is published (I don't have time to
look for the post but it was in the "hey, Louisiana just got tough," or
something like that, thread, or in a Colombia Southern thread.).
Oh well, this is it for a while (until someone brings up the issue
again<g>).
Emil Knutti
John Bear wrote in message ...
>Emil Knutti <ekn...@access.mountain.net> wrote:
>
>> If those who benefit from an unaccredited degree are becoming
>> fewer and fewer, why give even the least bit of credence to
>> unaccredited programs?
>
>Because there are still more than a few people who can benefit from them.
>Probably the best example are those would-be therapists in California who
>can sit for the state board exams with an unaccredited state-approved
>degree. So when I say, "If you are confident you can benefit from an
>unaccredited degree (blah blah blah)..." it is people like this who would
>be at the top of the list.
>
Chip
I was thinking "Emil" and typed "Emir".
lew...@wichita.infi.net
levi...@ix.netcom.com(Steve Levicoff) wrote:
> lew...@wichita.infi.net writes:
>
> >I am going to step aside for a moment and ask a very simple question.
> >How come you keep dancing around the fact that Dr. Bear recommends
> >(publicly in the case of CES) these schools. You aim your guns at me
> >(a novice) but fail to take on the pro. Put your money where your
> >mouth is Levicoff... prove da Bear wrong !!!
>
> I do not have to prove da Bear wrong; da Bear is not personally
> involved in evangelizing for a particular agenda, as you are. And da
> Bear and I have taken each other on in the past in both a public and
> amiable manner. However, we agree far more than we have ever
> disagreed, and that's good enough for me. John may or may not endorse
> CES (Columbia Evangelical Seminary, run by Rick Walston, which, IMO,
is
> a degree mill), and that's not a concern to me. As I see it, Rick
> probably said to John, "Hey, do you mind if I put an endorsement from
> you on my web site?" John, nice guy that he is, probably said, "Sure,
> go ahead." That does not necessarily mean that John is sending
> prospective students to CES, nor that he does or does not feel that
CES
> meets the GAAP principles. One way or the other, it's not a concern
to
> me, since Rick is a bit player when it comes to degree mills.
So, you are saying that Dr. Bear publicly recommends institutions just
to be nice to their presidents. What a pile of shit (as well as an
insult to Dr. Bear). What do you mean "may or may not endorse", why
don't you get off your lazy ass and find out what Dr. Bear actually
says about CES.
>
> >To make you happy,
> >University of Calgary 1986
> >B.Th. (cum laude) Western Pentecostal Bible College 1989
> >Diploma in Business Administration (honours), Southern Alberta
> >Institute of Technology 1991 (Initially rejected my credits until I
> >proved that the University of Waterloo would accept them)
> >Certified General Accountant 1997
> >MBA Student Heriot-Watt University 1997-
>
> Well, lew', you never bothered mentining that the schools you attended
> were in Canada. You should certainly know that Canada has nothing
akin
> to regional accreditation, thus there is no issue here, as far as I'm
> concerned. If SAIT initially rejected you, it is most certainly not
> because Western Pentecostal lacked regional accreditation - because
> *no* school in Canada has regional accreditation. Therefore, the
> bottom line is that you have been raising these arguments merely in a
> vain attempt to be a pain in the ass.
That is not completely true. The UK schools always claim that a Royal
Charter is equal to RA. Waterloo, SAIT, University of Calgary, etc.
would have the equivalent to a Royal Charter or RA. A public school in
Canada would accept credits from any RA school and vice versa. The
situation of a AABC degree transfering to a public school in Canada is
no different than a AABC degree transfering to a RA school in the US.
>
> >Adjunct Professor in Theology, Northwest Pentecostal Bible College
> >1990
> >Accounting Instructor, Certified General Accountants Association of
> >Alberta, 1997
Steve, you should really shelve the ego when you clearly don't know
what you are talking about. I was able to obtain the position based on
a recommendation from the academic dean of my school. Strangely
enough, I was not ordained nor did I ever sign or agree to their
statement of faith. Furthermore, I actually taught a few things which,
if the dean had known, probably would have had him throw a fit. The
accounting course I taught was transferable to the University of
Calgary (their Bachelor of Accounting Science program)
To whom is the Trinity-Liverpool connection considered a joke ? Perhaps
to Levicoff and his 4 disciples.
>
> Nonetheless, I would reiterate that the whole issue of RA schools is
> irrelevant to your situation in toto. Again, sport, there is no
> regional accreditation in Canada, and the history you have cited above
> deals solely with non-U.S. schools.
>
> >Regarding "willing to settle for", you have done nothing to prove
that
> >the standards at either school require "a willingness to settle for"
> >Again, take on da Bear.
>
> Why? I have no gripe with John at all. He and I hold different views
> in some areas but, unlike you and I, we are able to disagree quite
> agreeably. Perhaps you should learn to do the same instead of making
> an ass of yourself here.
Steve, I will never be able to make as big an ass of myself as you
have... I am simply not that talented. I do apologize if I have
offended... you do not come across as being offendable.
>
> And in the case of Trinity, one need only read what I have written
> about them in "NIFI" chapter 12 to understand why I contend you would
> be settling for mediocrity at best. The school is as mickey-mouse as
> they come, and the shenadigans they tried to pull with Liverpool is
> merely the icing on the cake.
You kill me. You and Dr. Bear clearly disagree on the quality of some
schools. My research so far has led me to agree with Dr. Bears
assessment, not yours.
>
> >Finally, you seem to believe that appropriate RA alternative exist
for
> >everyones educational objectives. That is clearly not the case.
>
> Nor does it have to be. Again, you are in Canada. Regional
> accreditation is irrelevant to Canadians unless they are going to
> school in the States (or want to go to school in the States). In
fact,
> I submit that you could have enrolled in many RA academic programs
here
> in the U.S. and that your degree from Western Pentecostal would have
> been quite acceptable to them. Why? Because they cannot hold
Canadian
> schools to an RA standard since no Canadian school is RA. Get it,
> sweet cakes?
>
The bull shit meter is hitting red. I guarantee you that Western "did"
not have anywhere near full acceptance at RA schools. Many Bible
college students pursue further education upon graduation and I knew of
several who were unable or who had difficulting getting credits
transferred to RA schools. Many students (either in the US or Canada)
had to pull the de-facto accreditation game. The US schools do not
consider the private religous schools to be on an equal footing with
the public ones.
> ,-~~-.___.
> / | ' \
> ( ) 0
> \_/-, ,----'
> ==== //
> / \-'~; /~~~(O)
> / __/~| / |
> =( _____| (_________|
> -----------------------------------
> Steve Levicoff
> levi...@ix.netcom.com
> http://members.tripod.com/~levicoff
> -----------------------------------
>
>
Larry McQueary
news:7m3md5$ttv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
[ snip ]
> So, you are saying that Dr. Bear publicly recommends
institutions just
> to be nice to their presidents. What a pile of shit (as
well as an
> insult to Dr. Bear). What do you mean "may or may not
endorse", why
> don't you get off your lazy ass and find out what Dr. Bear
actually
> says about CES.
Have you read John's posts lately concerning this topic in
general, and CES in particular? Would you characterize what
he's said as endorsement?!
<KNOCK KNOCK>
You: "Who's there?"
It: "Subtext"
You: "Subtext who?"
It: "Never mind."
[ snip ]
> To whom is the Trinity-Liverpool connection considered a
joke ? Perhaps
> to Levicoff and his 4 disciples.
Wow, this insulting statement speaks louder than anything
else you've said so far - do you have a little hangup
against Steve, or what? It's certainly showing. This isn't
really about an issue, per se - it's about your feelings of
inferiority and paranoia - do you imagine that there's some
byzantine plot to overthrow all logic, reason, and
objectivity in favor of 'whatever Steve Levicoff says' ?.
Yes, Mr. Lewchuk, please insult those who disagree with
you - it lends such credibility to your cause.
The arrangement with the University of Liverpool is a
marketing ploy, and nothing more. That's why it's a joke.
It's a calculated effort on the part of Trinity to get
themselves name recognition and legitimacy through
association. That the University of Liverpool accepts
credits and degrees from Trinity means absolutely zilch -
unless you plan to attend the University of Liverpool. It's
not a substitute for recognized accreditation.
I refer you to your own posts from this last February, in
which you conceded several negative points about Trinity, by
the way.
As for me, I'm a lot less willing than Steve L. is to call
Trinity a degree mill. However, I have no qualms about
calling the UofL arrangement a very transparent, laughably
ridiculous ploy. LaSalle, which may or may not be a better
school now that it is under new ownership and management, is
doing something similar by associating itself with Texas
A&M. While encouraging, in LaSalle's case, they are still
unaccredited and their graduates will still have
difficulties getting recognition for their LaSalle degrees.
As I pointed out in another post, you have merely
illustrated an exception based on your personal experience.
You have not shown how 'commonplace' it is to get
recognition for an unaccredited degree. If it were
commonplace, then why would nearly every regionally
accredited institution publish the fact that they only
accept credits in transfer from regionally accredited
institutions (or ACE-evaluated courses) ?
Love it or leave it, but please get off of this pissing
contest with Steve Levicoff - your interest in this really
has more to do with trying to stick it to him than with
proving a point. If it were about proving a point, you'd
immediately recognize your own circular logic.
Larry
Chip
It's quite obvious that you're not interested in facts, or in the truth that
Steve and quite a lot of others on this NG (including probably just about
all of the vocal regulars) share a similar viewpoint.
You ceased quite some time ago arguing with logic, and it's clear that for
some reason you just don't like Steve. Too bad, because he's a sharp guy
with a lot of good information... and he's rarely wrong about what he posts
(I notice you've conveniently ignored my invitation to provide *any* backup
evidence to support your assertions to the contrary)
So... whether you like it or not, continuing to badger Steve won't get you
anywhere, and will just continue to lower the opinion others on the NG have
about you.
ike_...@my-deja.com
I am in total agreement with you, Chip. The regard (not much anyway) I
have for Lewchuk is ebbing at a rocket speed.
Ike
In article <7m3tdu$75$1...@nntp4.atl.mindspring.net>,
Christopher L. Smith
In the big picture I would agree with you. If you look at JUST the
D.Min. as a separate degree, it is not that hard of a doctorate. Of
course, if you consider it to be a supplemental degree on top of a
program whose length and rigor is the equivalent of a doctorate in other
fields an easier justification for it could be made.
> After 3 or more years of experience,
While these three years are part of most requirements, I would not
include them as years of work towards to degree.
> then the student returns to the classroom for another 3 years for the
> 30 credit D.Min. work. At the same time, most students continue their
> ministry.
Again, this is three years part-time (or in a few schools a year full
time), so depending on how you count practical experience, the time for
the M.Div./D.Min. academically could be reduced to four years of solid
academics or maybe a five year academic program.
> When they finish a D.Min, they have earned the title as much or more
> than other
> professionals.
With my statements I am not disagreeing with your conclusion, just
casting some question on the argument. Even without adding in
experience time your argument can be made IMO.
Shalom,
The Rev. Christopher L. Smith
having been/am ABD in applied math will be beginning postgraduate
studies (ditance) in ethics this fall