Buying diplomas? WTF? Please explain...

[C Elegans]

Originally posted by Waverly
Here is your answer. No savvy employer or academic institution would be fooled. A waste of money unless you have reason to believe your potential mark has very poor fact checking skills.

Seems like Waverly answered the question I posted to Lazarus, but I don't understand the answer. What is a non-accredited university as opposed to an accredited one? Sorry if my questions are very naive but I'm rather ignorant about non-European education systems. Here, an academic institution must fulfill a certain set of criteria in order to be allowed to call itself a university, and not other institution than universities are allowed to award academic titles like BA/BSC and higher.

[KidD01]

Originally posted by C Elegans
<SNIP>@Kid: The diplomas you can buy from well known uni:s, are they forgeries, or are the universities participating in the business?<SNIP>

It's legitimate allright, but I can't confirm if the Univ got any part on it - AFAIK from my source it's kinda like a mafia connection of the staffs in that Univ. U only get to provide your high school certificate, & approx USD 250 - USD 500 (kinda cheap in US, right ? but in most Asian countries that mean a "lot" of money )

[Lazarus]

Originally posted by C Elegans
<big snip>
@Lazarus: So, do you think anyone could have any real use for a fake diploma?

Waverly answered part of the question: in the US any respected learning instiution is "accredited." Accredation ensures that each instution maintains a certain minimum ciricculum (sp!?) Anything non-accredited is anyone's guess - they can do anything they want.

Again, in reference to engineering, I could not have even taken the "engineer in training" exam, until and unless I had taken a degree (or, as in my case, gotten to my last few classes in anticipation of graduation this winter) at an accredited university.

You ask if someone could perhaps get into a profession w/o a proper degree and get in some trouble before discivery. I suppose it is possible, though it seems highly unlikely. In any event, it seems to me that such a person need hardly bother with obtaining this scam diploma. As I said: they could simply lie in an interview. I decry these scams, but I see little societal threat in them.

But are there uses for "fake" diplomas? Sure. I suppose in some less "professional" careers, simply showing that you have a degree at some academic institution would get you a foot in the door. Say, management at McDonald's.

[C Elegans]

@Lazarus: Ok, so an accredited uni in the US is the same as a European uni, it's just that here the word "university" is protected.

PS Did you see my last post in the "fluid geometry" thread? I gave a brief description of what it's supposed to be applied to, I could post a more detailed description if needed. I would be extremly grateful if you could post something there before the 6th of May.

[Lazarus]

@CE: Yes, if there is some type of limitation on the actual term "university" in Europe, I imagine they have the same kind of minimum requirements as US accredited insitutions. Truthfully, the term "university" may have the same meaning here in the US, but I don't know that for certain.

RE: fluids, I did see your last post, but thought (from what you said) that you would come back with another post. Ooops! I'll take another look and post something - before 6. May.

[C Elegans]

@Lazarus: From what I've heard about the good US universities, they are very similar to the good European and Asian ones in terms of requirements and such. The difference seems to be nominal - in Sweden for instance, educational institutions that does not fulfil the requirements call themselves "institutes" because that is not a controlled term. Probably that would be equivalent to a non-accredited "university", except those "institutes" can't award any academic degrees.

Re fluids, I planned to make a new post the next day, but as often I got buried in more work than expected. Thanks a lot for offering to help out

[Georgi]

You can (or at least you could, don't know if they still do it), if you have a Bachelors degree from Oxford, actually get a Masters from the university several years after you graduate just by paying for it... I don't know if they count as "honourary" degrees like Ysh was talking about...

[thantor3]

Hi CE.

Actually, this problem of degrees is a thorny one in naturopathic medicine. There are a great many "mail order" naturopaths who get their degrees via correspondence courses and the like. This has created a huge schism within the field of naturopathy -- those who believe in and want licensing (along with the education and clinic training that this requires) and those who believe naturopaths were not meant to be "doctors" in the conventional sense of the word. There has been some discussion about differentiating an ND (i.e. a naturopathic physician) from a "naturopathic counselor" or some such title (i.e mail order, correspondence course, etc.) but this has not occurred. The result is that the public may have contact with an "ND" who learned medicine in their living room. The mail order people are well organized, numerous, and well funded. As usual, it is the public that is put at risk in these cases, since these people tend toward unproven and controversial therapies like coffee enemas, gallbladder flushes and so on. Granted, people are free to choose their form of health care, but they should be able to make an informed decision based on knowing their health care provider's credentials and background. To give one poignant example, my wife and I are treating a 34 year old woman with stage IV cervical carcinoma that has been unresponsive to chemotherapy and radiation. Truly, it would take a miracle to save this woman's life but there is are some options that at least have some research behind them. Unfortunately, she has been influenced to try an unorthodox treatment program based on the theory that all cancer is caused by isopropyl alcohol and the human intestinal fluke parasite. This is as frustrating as it is tragic.

Accreditation in the US is a process that determines whether an institution or program meets established standards for function, structure, and performance. This is usually done by an approved accreditation institution that is recognized by a governmental agency -- the Department of Education typically. In the field of medicine, participation in an accredited program is mandatory in order to receive federal student loans, as well as the ability to be licensed as a physician after meeting the necessary requirements.

A final note: I have recently come across a free program that has cut down the amount of spam I receive by at least 75%. It is called MailWasher (www.mailwasher.net). You launch the program prior to getting your email. It goes onto the server where your email is being held and allows you to scan it before downloading. If you see any spam, you have the option to bounce it back to the sender as if your address was no longer viable. You can also add it to a "blacklist" so that any further spam from this sender is automatically bounced back. Works great to discourage any future diploma peddlers.

[KidD01]

@Thantor3 : Can it be used to webmail account like Hotmail, Yaoo, etc ??

[thantor3]

@Kid: Yes, I believe it can be. There is probably information on the website.

[KidD01]

@thantor3 : Thanks, I'll check it out

[C Elegans]

Originally posted by Georgi
You can (or at least you could, don't know if they still do it), if you have a Bachelors degree from Oxford, actually get a Masters from the university several years after you graduate just by paying for it... I don't know if they count as "honourary" degrees like Ysh was talking about...

Really strange - what is the difference between a Bachelors and a Masters degree in the UK?
In Sweden, a Bachelors requires 3 years of full time studying at the university, whereof 1.5 year must be in the same subject. I believe this is equal to "majoring" is a subject? You then write a thesis which should be equal to 0.25 year of work.
For a Master, you need an additional 1 year whereof 0.5 year must be in the same subject as your Bachelors were in. Then you write a thesis that equals 0.25 year if you did a Bachelors, 0.5 year if you didn't do a Bachelors but decided to shoot for the Master right on. Regardless if whether you write the long or shorter Masters thesis, you must defend it publically before an opponent and a "jury", just like with a PhD. There is no way to go around those regulations, a Masters degree can't be obtained any other say.

So let's say a student from Oxford applies to one of my Master/PhD courses in cognitive neuroscience. I will not interview the students before they are accepted, they just leave a written motivation including what work they are currently doing or plan to do, and their diplomas. How will I know that this student has a "real" Master, and not just a bought one?

[Georgi]

Originally posted by C Elegans
Really strange - what is the difference between a Bachelors and a Masters degree in the UK?

Well, I'm not an expert on Masters degrees, so I can't tell you much other than a Bachelors usually takes 3 years, and then the Masters would take an extra year after that. I think the weighting of the thesis depends on the subject though; I believe in some subjects, the entire year would be devoted to researching and writing a thesis, whereas in others you would have classes to attend.

How will I know that this student has a "real" Master, and not just a bought one?

I don't know, I'm afraid - I only know of it from reading it in a university guide when I was applying for uni

[C Elegans]

Originally posted by Georgi
Well, I'm not an expert on Masters degrees...

You will be I'll ask you again later

I don't know, I'm afraid - I only know of it from reading it in a university guide when I was applying for uni

*Cough* but of course *cough*

posted by Thantor

Actually, this problem of degrees is a thorny one in naturopathic medicine. There are a great many "mail order" naturopaths who get their degrees via correspondence courses and the like. This has created a huge schism within the field of naturopathy -- those who believe in and want licensing (along with the education and clinic training that this requires) and those who believe naturopaths were not meant to be "doctors" in the conventional sense of the word. There has been some discussion about differentiating an ND (i.e. a naturopathic physician) from a "naturopathic counselor" or some such title (i.e mail order, correspondence course, etc.) but this has not occurred. The result is that the public may have contact with an "ND" who learned medicine in their living room. The mail order people are well organized, numerous, and well funded. As usual, it is the public that is put at risk in these cases, since these people tend toward unproven and controversial therapies like coffee enemas, gallbladder flushes and so on. Granted, people are free to choose their form of health care, but they should be able to make an informed decision based on knowing their health care provider's credentials and background.

Hi Thantor Thanks for your insightful reply. I certainly hope you can make your patients life better although hope of survival is low.

The problems of patients being offered an "informed choice" seems to touch upon my question 3 above where I suggested that a non-expert 3rd party could be negatively affected. Do you see any good solution to this problem?

[Georgi]

Originally posted by C Elegans
You will be I'll ask you again later

Not if I can help it, why do you think I'm going off gallivanting around the world next year?

*Cough* but of course *cough*

True, it's one of the incentives that made me want to apply there