Sunday, June 26, 2005

Did a Conservative nominee call Layton a Nazi?

For those who missed it, the Conservative nominee in Edmonton-Centre (which is currently represented by Anne McLellan), Laurie Hawn has a blog in which he shares his thoughts on life and politics. Most of what he says is the sort of stuff that one would expect. His party's positions are advanced, those of the other parties criticized. That is only to be expected, and I think this new phenomenon of creating direct access to politicians is a good thing.

In a recent entry, A Conflict of Hypocrisies, Mr. Hawn accuses Jack Layton of hypocrisy:
Okay everyone, hands up all who think that the Duty National Socialist Leader, Jack Layton, would put himself at the back of the queue if he (or his wife) needed an MRI. I didn't think so.
This is, of course, a cheap shot. I have no idea what I would do in such circumstances, much less Mr. Layton. But politics is full of cheap shots. One might fire back that it is hypocritical to condemn others for doing something that you yourself advocate. But once we start that style of argument, we'd pretty quickly all be convicted of hypocrisy on some score.

So, what is the problem with this post? Hawn calls Jack Layton "the Duty National Socialist Leader". The National Socialists, in case you missed high school history and never watched the History Channel, were Hitler's party, and National Socialism his philosophy. The shortened form of 'National Socialist' is Nazi.

Admittedly, we have to put up with a lot of name calling in Canadian politics. We have recently heard a cabinet minister likened the conservative party to the Klu Klux Klan (he apologized); we've also heard the Liberal party likened to fictional serial killer, Hannibal Lector. But calling someone a Nazi--for failing some strange hypothetical hypocrisy test--is a new low.

Update. Mr. Hawn responds:
For the benefit of those who get their exercise jumping to conclusions and making leaps of logic, please allow me to clarify something from my blog "A Conflict of Hypocrisies". I refered to Jack Layton as the Duty National Socialist Leader. For those who like to "exercise", that meant that I was calling Jack Layton a Nazi, and that I was disrespecting all those who died at Hitler's hands.

Please settle down and park your misplaced indignation. "National" refers to Canada and "Socialist" refers to a political philosophy. Period. Dot. Stop. In no way did I intend those words to mean anything else. I'm sorry if capital letters confused some people. I have de-capitalized the description of Jack and changed the word "Duty" to "Canada's" to help them out.

For those who lectured me on history and defending democracy, back off. I spent more than thirty years and buried more than forty friends defending your right to yell at me. I hope that you enjoyed it, even though you are way off base. Now get back to work or go to the gym for some real exercise.

Update2 Here is my exchange with Mr. Hawn in his comments. As far as I'm concerned, this ends the matter.
buckets said...
Mr. Hawn, thank-you for your clarification. It seems to me, however, that you should be more careful with your choice of words in the future. How, really, could you have expect people to interpret your words in any other way? National Socialism is a historical phenomenon; it only means one thing. The NDP/CCF have been called socialists since the thirties; they've been a national party the whole time. But in my recollection no one has ever called them National Socialists. Why? Because those words, when put together, mean more than the sum of the parts.

Laurie Hawn said...
Point taken, buckets. Thanks.

Dryden on SSM and the dangers of passionate certainty

Flash Point Canada links to Ken Dryden's piece, Why I support gay marriage bill, in the Toronto Star.

Dryden has always had a gift of using 100 words where 20 would do, as this piece shows. Much is worth repeating, but especially interesting, I think, is this paragraph:
In the midst of this heated debate, it is hard not to be swayed, usually in the reverse direction, by the words and tone of the advocates who scream their certainty, who tell the rest of us that we surely must be stupid or at least depraved if we aren't as certain as they are. It's okay to be 60-40 or 70-30 on this. As the debate more and more attempts to polarize us, it is important to know that on one side of the question or the other most of us have more in common than it seems. It is important to know, because it will help us immensely to get along again when all this is done.
This puts its finger on something important. That it is not merely arguments that sway people, but their tone, too. There are many people who are uncomfortable with gay unions of any kind; there are many who would prefer to create some kind of separate-but-equal civil unions for gays. But I suspect that come the next election, most of these people will decide not to vote for anti-ssm candidates. Why? Someone who is 60-40 against ssm will be less comfortable with a 100-0 anti-ssm candidate than a 60-40 pro-ssm. There is something about the passionate certainty of a black-and-white world that alienates those who see more shades of gray in the world.

Saturday, June 25, 2005

In that moment of humiliation, the last vestiges of civility remain

In the G&M, Ibbitson reports (google link, here) on one of the few moments of decency to be heard in Ottawa recently:
Stephen Harper approached Paul Martin and the two spoke briefly. Then they went their separate ways.

What did the Conservative Leader say in that moment of humiliation? Did he offer a quiet, deadly vow of revenge, or a stiff-upper-lipped word of congratulations on a contest fairly won? The mind races.

Sadly, reality was more prosaic. Mr. Harper was asking a favour: It being midnight, no more commercial flights were leaving Ottawa that day for Edmonton or Calgary. But Conservative MP Lee Richardson was scheduled to tour flood-damaged areas in Alberta yesterday, as was Mr. Martin, who was flying out on the government jet. Mr. Harper wanted to know whether Mr. Richardson could hitch a ride. Of course, the Prime Minister replied.

Better to be dishonest than out-manouevred?

Just to add another point about why it is that the Conservatives were so upset at being out-manouevred Thursday night.

An awful lot of it has to do with Stephen Harper and his strengths and weaknesses. Many have mentioned that he is a bit too aloof and cerebrial to succeed in politics. Maybe true, maybe not. But one thing that commentators allow is that Harper is a good tactician and strategist.

I think part of the reason that the Conservative MPs blew up the other night is that they have been bested on what they had thought was their leader's strong suit. Tactically, the Liberals snookered the PCs. But probably strategically now, too. There may be fireworks about same-sex marriage in Parliament, but from this point forward being strongly anti-ssm will be an increasingly losing position as ssm locks itself into being the Canadian status quo.

For the PCs it is the equivalent of losing a very close hand in poker over one misplayed card. They not only lost the hand, but it did enough damage to their capital that it will be an uphill struggle from here.

Thursday, June 02, 2005

Dancing with whackos

Politblogo (here and here) engages with crypto-separatist the Monarchist, dissecting the latter's argument and exposing its logical missteps and rhetorical excesses. For those who missed it, the Monarchist argued that because Ontario has not (to judge from recent polls) abandoned the Liberals despite their obvious failings, 'the West' has reached a 'tipping point' that will lead it into separatism.

Now I suspect that all progressive and non-partisan bloggers are highly grateful to Politblogo for undertaking this unpleasant task. But are western separatists our problem? Shouldn't the argument about separatism be taking place among Conservatives? It is, after all, the failure of the Conservative Party that is motivating the Monarchist's outrage. He seems to think that he can work for the Conservatives and advocate separatism at the same time. (He is a member of Blogging Tories, who seem to have no problem having him in their number.) So, too, members of the CPC Caucus. When asked about separatism recently, MP Myron Thomson said : "I reserve my opinion till later". Over at FreeDominion, a site that describes itself as "the voice of principled conservatism" and is populated by conservative activists, a poll asking "do you support Western separatism" had 42% year, 24% no, and 28% "if the Liberals win the next election" (here). Rather than coddle separatists, the CPC should be expelling them and denouncing them.

Monday, May 30, 2005

How many social conservatives does it take to change a light-bulb?

Only one. But while he's doing it, the others pray that the rest of us will see the light!

Just kidding. Let's try it again. How many social conservatives are there in Parliament, in the CPC, and/or the country? And how many will there be following the coming election?

In several earlier threads we tried looked at MPs' voting records. There are at least fifty Conservatives in Parliament whose voting has been perfect from the perspective of the Campaign Life Coalition, a prolife advocacy group; there are about a dozen Liberals. There are ten or so socons who can be identified among CPC nominees and more no doubt in the future. But not all these will be elected, and some of them are replacing retiring MPs who might be socons.

So how many are we talking about? After the dust settles after the following election there will probably be roughly 75 socon MPs, or about 25% of Parliament. Is that too many? Perhaps for some. But I suspect that something in the order of 25% of Canada's population hold similar views. So my guess is that there is not much to see here.

Socons flex their muscle

Towards the end of the Toronto Star article on tensions within the Conservative party is this little tidbit:
[Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College] also made no apologies for Defend Marriage's political activism. The coalition and its members have signalled they will run independent candidates to oppose a trio of Tory MPs who voted for the government's marriage bill.
At the very least this shows that the Conservative Party and Defend Marriage are not coterminous.

Sunday, May 29, 2005

Conservative MPs with perfect socon records

Campaign Life (a pro-life group) keeps the voting records of all MPs on the issues that matter to them--legislation about marriage, abortion, and stem cell research (see here). Here are the current Conservative MPs who have 'perfect' records:
  1. Abbott, Jim (Kootenay—Columbia)
  2. Ablonczy, Diane (Calgary-Nose Hill)
  3. Anders, Rob (Calgary West)
  4. Anderson, David (Cypress Hills – Grasslands)
  5. Benoit, Leon (Lakeland)
  6. Breitkreuz, Garry (Yorkton-Melville)
  7. Casson, Rick (Lethbridge)
  8. *Chatters, David (Westlock-St. Paul)
  9. Cummins, John (Delta- Richmond East)
  10. Day, Stockwell (Okanagan-Coquihalla)
  11. Doyle, Norman (St. John’s North)
  12. *Duncan, John (Vancouver Island North)
  13. Epp, Ken (Edmonton-Sherwood Park)
  14. Fitzpatrick, Brian (Prince Albert)
  15. Forseth, Paul (New Westminster-Coquitlam)
  16. Gallant, Cheryl (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke)
  17. Goldring, Peter (Edmonton Centre-East)
  18. Gouk, Jim (Southern Interior)
  19. Grewal, Gurmant (Newton-North Delta)
  20. Hanger, Art (Calgary Northeast)
  21. Harper, Stephen (Calgary Southwest)
  22. Harris, Richard (Cariboo Prince George)
  23. Hearn, Loyola (St. John’s South)
  24. Hill, Jay (Prince George-Peace River)
  25. Hilstrom, Howard (Selkirk-Interlake)
  26. Hinton, Betty (Kamloops, Thompson )
  27. Johnston, Dale (Wetaskiwin)
  28. Kenney, Jason (Calgary Southeast)
  29. Lunn, Gary (Saanich-Gulf Islands)
  30. Lunney, James (Nanaimo-Alberni)
  31. Merrifield, Rob (Yellowhead)
  32. Mills, Bob (Red Deer)
  33. Obhrai, Deepak (Calgary East)
  34. Pallister, Brian (Portage-Lisgar)
  35. Penson, Charlie (Peace River)
  36. Rajotte, James (Edmonton Leduc)
  37. Reid, Scott (Lanark-Carleton)
  38. *Reynolds, John (Vancouver-Sunshine Coast)
  39. Ritz, Gerry (Battlefords-Lloydminster)
  40. Schellenberger, Gary (Perth-Middlesex)
  41. *Schmidt, Werner (Kelowna)
  42. Skelton, Carol (Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar)
  43. Solberg, Monte (Medicine Hat)
  44. Sorenson, Kevin (Crowfoot)
  45. *Stinson, Darrel (N. Okanagan-Shuswap)
  46. Strahl, Chuck (Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon)
  47. Thompson, Greg (St. Croix-Bellisle)
  48. Thompson, Myron (Wild Rose)
  49. Toews, Vic (Provencher)
  50. Vellacott, Maurice (Saskatoon-Wanuskewin)
  51. *White, Randy (Abbotsford)
  52. Williams, John (Edmonton - St. Albert)
  53. Yelich, Lynne (Blackstrap)

Liberal MPs with perfect socon voting records

Campaign Life (a pro-life group) keeps the voting records of all MPs on the issues that matter to them--legislation about marriage, abortion, and stem cell research (see here). Here are the current Liberal MPs who have 'perfect' records:

  1. Matthews, Bill (Random-Burin-St. George’s)
  2. Bonin, Raymond (Nickel Belt)
  3. Karygiannis, Jim (Scarborough-Agincourt)
  4. Longfield, Judi (Whitby-Oshawa)
  5. McTeague, Dan (Pickering-Scarb East)
  6. O’Brien, Pat (London-Fanshawe)
  7. Savoy, Andy (Tobique-Mactaquac)
  8. Steckle, Paul (Huron-Bruce)
  9. Szabo, Paul (Mississauga South)
  10. Ur, Rose-Marie (Middlesex -Kent-Lambton)
  11. Wappel, Tom (Scarborough Southwest)
  12. Gallaway, Roger (Sarnia-Lambton)
  13. MacAulay, Lawrence (Cardigan)
  14. Wilfert, Bryon (Richmond Hill)
  15. Cannis John (Scarborough Centre)
  16. Chamberlain, Brenda (Guelph)
  17. Malhi, Gurbax (Bramalea-Gore-Malton)
  18. McKay, John (Scarborough Guildwood)

Do socon nominees matter?

Over at Flash Point Canada an important question is raised: so what?
These people are right out front with their beliefs that I find abhorrent, it's not hidden. They oppose same-sex marriage. They oppose pro-choice causes. That's fine, I know it, everyone will know if an election comes.
FPC is raising in the context of the alleged hidden agenda of the CPC and points out that here are people whose agenda is clearly not hidden. I agree with this completely ... almost.

But there is another point here that needs to be raised. The Reform party changed conservative politics in many important ways. One of them was an emphasis on freely-voting MPs, an emphasis that was taken over by the Alliance and now the Conservative Party. Does the party have a hidden agenda on (say) abortion? Not at all. The party's position is quite clear. It has no position. Its MPs can vote freely.

Having freely-voting MPs puts an additional burden on us voters, since we do not merely have to look at the party platform and leadership when we make our decisions. We now also have to look at the personal positions of the MPs, something that Canadians have not had to do previously. Otherwise we run the risk--at least in theory--that the next parliament has (say) an anti-abortion majority, even though abortion itself did not come up during the election.

So, who are these socons? and is there any threat that their influence in Parliament might grow larger than that in the population as a whole?

Which Conservative MPs are not socons

A problem that has arisen in our count of socons within different parties within parliament is one of definition--who counts as a socon? With some, the identification is fairly easy, since they self-identify. Kevin Serviss, for example, is a Pentecostal minister and his acceptance speech at the Sudbury nomination meeted was greeted with cries of 'amen', 'that's right!', etc. (see here).

Campaign Life has published a record of parliamentary votes about the issues that they care about (here), and someone whose voting record is perfectly in accordance with Campaign Life's preferences is at least a possible socon.

It might be better, however, to remove those MPs whose record is not 'perfect'. Here are the Conservatives who in one way or another disappointed Campaign Life:

  1. Gerald Keddy, South Shore; voted for C-250 to include sexual orientation under hate speech; voted against M-83 to study the necessity of abortion; recently has voted for same-sex marriage

  2. Peter Mackay, Central Nova; voted for C-250; voted against M-83; voted for C-13 on reproductive technologies

  3. Loyola Hearn, St. John's South; voted for C-250

  4. James Moore, Port Moody-etc.; voted against M-83 (and recently for ssm)

  5. Bill Casey, North Nova.; voted against M-83

  6. Rahim Jaffer, Edmonton-Strathcona.; voted against M-83

  7. Inky Mark, Dauphin-etc.; voted against M-83

  8. Jim Prentice, Calgary-Centre.; (voted for ssm)
These Conservatives, we can perhaps assume, aren't socons. (Or can we? Hearn is disqualified for voting for C-250, which made hate-speech towards homosexuals illegal. But one might believe that homosexuality is morally wrong--a socon position--and still support such a law.)

(We shouldn't assume, however, that all the rest are. More on this later.)

How many evangelical-swallows make up a takeover-spring?

Yesterday's G&M articles (archived here and for the google link, try here) raise the question of whether CPC nominations are being captured by evangelical activists. A few examples are cited. But as several commentators have noted, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with evangelicals participating in politics, or in them organizing their own community politically. They are merely doing what many ethnic communities have been doing in urban centers for decades.

Is it a question of proportion? I'm sure many people would express dismay if every successful Conservative nominee were closely associated with groups like the 'Equipping Christians for the Public Square Centre', 'Focus on the Family', or the 'Defend Marriage Coalition'. Or even if it were 50% or even 33%.

But, frankly, so far something less than a dozen such nominees have been identified (here), and not all of these necessarily belong in a list of evangelical activists. (I have my doubts about Weston, for example.) So far, I suspect, there is no clear pattern. Some nominations are being won by evangelical 'machines'; in other ridings where evangelicals had carried the CPC-flag in recent elections (Meneer in London; Penell in Burlington), this year's nominees are coming from the 'mainstream'.

So, although I think this phenomenon bears watching, I don't think there is anything of concern yet.

[edited for clarity: Sat 12:16 pm]

Saturday, May 28, 2005

Who is a socon, anyway?

As you probably know, we've been constructing a running list of socon nominees. I've spent the last day or two trying to construct a similar list of MPs. But who counts?

A method that I've always subscribed to is to let someone else do the work. The good people over at the Campaign Life Coalition track voting of Parliamentarians on the issues that they care about--abortion, gay marriage, reproductive technology.

They list there five bills of recent years that are important to them.
  • The 1999 Definition of Marriage Vote.

  • The 2003 Definition of Marriage Vote.

  • Bill C-250 adding ‘sexual orientation’ to hate crime.

  • Motion M-83 asking for study on medical necessity of abortion.

  • Bill C-13 Reproductive technologies bill.
One would assume, I think, that anyone who would vote in keeping with the directive of the Campaign Life Coalition should count as a social conservative. (Of course, we should update the lists with those who have voted against same-sex marriage.)

Running list of so-con nominees

The story in the Globe & Mail about the success of social conservative activists in winning battles for Conservative nominations raises some interesting issues. The first point, of course, is that everyone should agree that so-cons are perfectly within their rights to organize politically. By the same token, of course, others are free to express concern about their influence and to decide whether or not to support them or their party.

It would be worth knowing how many ridings are affected. So this post will keep a running list, with references.
  1. Andrew House in Halifax

  2. Rakesh Khosla in Halifax West

  3. Paul Francis in Sackville-Eastern Shore

  4. Darrel Reid in Richmond (past president of Focus on the Family, Canada). On his nomination and its aftermath, see here and here

  5. Cindy Silver in North Vancouver (Legal Consultant (Public Policy) for Focus on the Family Canada)

  6. Marc Dalton in New Westminster-Burnaby (former pastor of a community church in Burnaby)

  7. Kevin Serviss in Sudbury (pentecostal preacher) here and here

  8. Ron Cannan in Kelowna

  9. Rondo Thomas in Ajax (VP of Canada Christian College)

  10. David Sweet in Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough (founding president of Promise Keepers Canada)

  11. Harold Albrecht in Kitchner-Conestoga (pastor of Pathway Community Church in Kitcher and organizer of anti-ssm-marriage rallies [here])


[Note: this post was originally posted at Buckets of Grewal. I decided, however, that Buckets should focus exclusively on the Grewal Affair. Several of the out-takes from that site are now here.]

Friday, May 27, 2005

Simpson (G&M): Why Stephen Harper is going to lose more sleep

By JEFFREY SIMPSON
Friday, May 27, 2005 Page A19

John Weston, federal Conservative candidate in West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast, has a bone to pick.

A recent column described his law firm as a "Christian law firm." It ascribed that description to the firm's website. These were wrong assertions. The firm's website makes no such reference.

Apology offered. The confusion arose, in the haste of writing, from articles that Mr. Weston had written that were posted on the Christian Legal Fellowship website -- articles he has since asked to be withdrawn from the site.

In one, Mr. Weston described the process of forming a "Christian law firm," including avoiding the use of the term in marketing in case "the label 'Christian' might backfire by embarrassing the Kingdom of God . . . and drive away clients who might be turned off or mystified by the spiritual connection."

His firm, Mr. Weston explains in an article, is distinguished from "other great firms where I have worked" by the "regularity and informality of prayer practised by the partners." Would everyone feel comfortable working in such surroundings? Mr. Weston says "we brought in the Christian head of a Christian development organization [who] suggested that hiring interviews could include allusion to the practices of professionals at the workplace such as prayer."

How Mr. Weston practises law is his own business and that of his partners. He's a Harvard graduate, after all. But he is a Conservative Party candidate, and his public religiosity illustrates a trend that is popping up elsewhere in Canada -- candidates from, or associated with, Christian faith movements or churches are winning more Conservative nominations than ever.

The result must be to give these religious conservatives at least greater influence in a party that already has several handfuls of such men and women in the parliamentary caucus. Their candidacies pose a difficult political challenge for Stephen Harper, who must give some solace to these conservatives on a few issues without appearing to be beholden to them.

Little could be more politically lethal for the party's chances of forming a national government than the perception that religious conservatives have disproportionate influence. But this sort of candidate has won nominations or is already a Conservative MP, so they cannot be utterly ignored.

Four such candidates, including Mr. Weston, recently won nominations in British Columbia's Lower Mainland. In Nova Scotia, three candidates with Christian affiliations have been nominated. And some are showing up as nomination winners in Ontario. The new candidates are interesting because they are not from traditional bedrock conservative rural areas, but from urban centres.

David Sweet, for example, is back as Conservative candidate in the Hamilton-area riding of Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale. He won a sharply contested nomination there before the last election; this time, it was by acclamation. When he sought the nomination the first time, his website underscored his six-year presidency of the Canadian chapter of Promise Keepers. This time, his website says only that he headed a "national non-profit organization." Promise Keepers, a huge and growing movement in the United States, describes its vision "to challenge Canadian men to discover the incredible life quest that God has for them as revealed by Christ and the Holy Scriptures."

In Ajax-Pickering, Rondo Thomas just won a contested nomination for the Conservatives. He's an official with the Canada Christian College.

In Nova Scotia, the three nominated candidates with published Christian links -- including Paul Francis, a minister in Lower Sackville -- insisted that the links had nothing to do with their nominations.

Maybe, but at a rally three weeks ago organized by the Annapolis Valley Fellowship, the roughly 700 attendees were encouraged to back the three in their nomination fights. According to a report in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, an information sheet circulated at the meeting stated: "We need strong Christian, pro-family people to become members of Parliament from our area to represent us in Ottawa."

The specific issue that animates these candidates and other social conservatives is gay marriage and, more broadly, what they see as an assault on the traditional family. They are furiously opposed to same-sex marriage on moral, religious and family grounds. Ultimately, they will discover that the only legal way to reverse gay marriage is using the notwithstanding clause in the Constitution. Mr. Harper must know this perfectly well, but he won't risk saying so.

In the last election, a handful of social conservative MPs blurted out comments that the Liberals seized on with telling effect. This time, Mr. Harper will have more of these candidates to worry about.

jsimpson@globeandmail.ca

Thursday, December 09, 2004

Dec. 9, 2004: The Nation (Pakistan): Fake degrees proliferate

The Nation (Pakistan)
December 9, 2004 Thursday
SECTION: Nationwide International News

LENGTH: 1021 words

HEADLINE: ARTICLE: A dime a dozen

DATELINE: DEC 09

BODY:
BY WAJAHAT LATIF - The generations, which went through college and university in the 50s and 60s will recall that education used to be a simple and straightforward matter. The first serious examination in a student's life was matriculation, at the end of ten years of school, normally at age 15. I studied in a high school affiliated to the University of Punjab. The University conducted the examinations in spring and the results were announced in summer and the college term began in the autumn. If you were not the failing type, it took four years for graduation and another two for MA. Any hanky panky in postgraduate research was unthinkable either for those who enrolled or those who supervised. And as a rule, both were intellectually exceptional. For that reason not many people enrolled for a Ph.D.

All that has changed. Unaccredited and fake institutions are multiplying. According to some reports, hundreds if not thousands of such outfits are dishing out fake degrees and making money all over the world. USA, and the UK are no exception.

Nor, indeed, is Pakistan. In Pakistan, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, an unaccredited Ph.D. degree can be had for $7,500 from American Branch of Preston University. Preston is accredited to the World Association of Universities and Colleges formed to accredit dubious institutions like the American World University. But WAUC itself is not recognised by the US Department of Education as an accreditation service.

Some weeks ago, a newspaper simultaneously carried the story of a raid on a degree depot in Sialkot, and an advertisement of a Washington International University, located in a shopping mall in America. WIU has a website and claims to give any degree in one year. The section on "accelerated degree program" states: "Revolutionary learning method: Core curriculum is bypassed to concentrate on new developments and trends in your field of study. There are no exams to pass. Book reports and research papers will be required as evidence of mastery of the subject matter".

Britain too has a problem of fake academic outfits. But recently, cases of a fake neurosurgeon and a nuclear safety engineer forced Her Majesty's Government to act. According to a report, the British Department of Education and Skills has referred these institutions to the Companies House, the regulatory body for the use of business names. The term 'University' is protected under the British law.

Dr Isa Daudpota, a Physicist working on a project in Comstech who chanced upon the problem of fake degrees in the higher academia some time back, and some parents, have been highlighting the issue in the press. As a result, the HEC has cautioned parents through newspaper ads to be careful against fake educational institutions and degrees. But no regulatory or coercive action has so far been taken to put such institutions out of business.Daudpota alleges that the National University of Modern Languages had awarded two Ph.D. in six months soon after obtaining a charter from the University Grants Commission on 29 May 2000. Before this date, NUML was the National Institute of Modern languages affiliated to Quaid-e-Azam University. The two PhDs were awarded to two Professors of English in NUML. The third PhD, Dr Daudpota says, was given in similar haste, to the Chairman UGC, which is now the Higher Education Commission. The three theses are available with the HEC but not the NUML, which is strange.If the work on the three theses started before NIML became a University, their outline of research required approval by the Board of Advanced Study and Research of QAU, of which NIML was an affiliated institute prior to May 2000. It appears that no reference to any NIML thesis exists at QAU. I find the above unbelievable. Scandals in education have been around for some years, but that they involve higher education is quite disturbing. PhD are being sold a dime a dozen! In a seminar held in the Sustainable Development Policy Institute on 'Quality of Higher Education; Accountability Questioned' last week, I was shocked to listen to Dr Daudpota and the concerns his presentation raised. Another distinguished member of the QAU reinforced what he said. The HEC rep made an articulate case for the Commission but did not really address the issue. One got the impression that the HEC did not have the power to stop what was going on. Although the consensus in the seminar was that there was no accountability in the academia, and it seemed clear that we were talking about fraud, deception, forgery and corruption etc., yet no one seemed really interested in making a formal complaint to the police or the NAB. According to Daudpota, he had kept the HEC informed of findings as he investigated deeper into his chance discovery, in the belief that the HEC would be able to act and arrest the rot in the higher education system. It appears that the only action that the HEC has taken so far is to put him on notice for termination of contract! Obviously, this is an urgent matter, causing all kinds of rumor. The Ministry of Education and the HEC should take it up at the earliest, go into Daudpota's allegations and put speculations at rest. What they can do is to form an international committee of eminent scholars who should go into the larger question of fake educational institutions and degrees, but immediately and specifically examine the theses that Dr Daudpota has identified, to determine their merit and make recommendations. None of them seems to have been a whole time student. Did they attend any classes or lectures? Who was supervising the research? Was any fieldwork undertaken? What was the quantity and quality of the data collected? What was the quality of analysis? Was the work original and did it meet PhD standards? These are some of the questions the committee will be faced with. In the meanwhile, Daudpota should retain his job because terminating his contract at this stage, before a proper enquiry, can be understood as bias. Depending on the result of the enquiry, either he goes home or some other heads begin to roll.

Friday, June 25, 2004

Chronicle for Higher Education report on dubious doctorates

From the issue dated June 25, 2004

DEGREES OF SUSPICION
Psst. Wanna Buy a Ph.D.?

Some professors have dubious doctorates, other professors sell them, and colleges often look the other way

By THOMAS BARTLETT and SCOTT SMALLWOOD

It was a revelation rich in irony: A member of a college accreditation board holds a Ph.D. from a "university" that sells doctorates to anyone with $1,500. This year The Chronicle reported that Michael Davis, a member of the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, received his doctorate from Saint Regis University, which claims recognition from the government of war-torn Liberia and requires little, if any, academic work. He has since been booted from the board.

Most people in higher education probably dismissed the news as a laughable aberration. Regrettable and embarrassing, but nothing more.

It turns out there are plenty of others like Mr. Davis, at all levels of higher education: A wrestling coach in Wisconsin. A librarian in Texas. An assistant dean at a Baptist university. Not to mention dozens of professors who hold degrees from unaccredited colleges, some of which require nothing more than a credit-card number and a mailing address.

And those are just the ones who can be found in the nooks and crannies of the Internet. Their true numbers are anybody's guess, although considering that unaccredited institutions rake in hundreds of millions of dollars each year, it's safe to say the problem isn't small.

Perhaps even more worrisome than the professors who "earn" degrees from such institutions are the professors who run them. For example, two professors at accredited colleges in New York State each operate an offshore university that awards an array of degrees, including doctorates. Neither operation comes close to meeting the standards of its accredited counterparts in the United States.

Academe has become home to a flourishing underground market in degrees -- and judging by the reaction of some administrators, legitimate colleges often don't seem to care, or at least not enough to thoroughly check the backgrounds of their professors. "That the people who hold these degrees make excuses doesn't surprise me," says David Linkletter, a program specialist with the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. "That institutions defend them does."

While experts on diploma mills -- broadly defined as unaccredited institutions that require students to do little or no work to earn degrees -- warn of the damage they do to the integrity of higher education, many satisfied customers say they get their money's worth. "Just the ability to put Ph.D. behind my name is what I was looking for," says Wayne J. del Corral, who teaches finance part time at Tulane University. "It'll make things a lot easier with respect to submitting papers to journals and so forth."

He also appreciates that his diploma from Lacrosse University looks so real. "The seal is very nice," he says.

Institutionalizing a Fraud

Valdosta State University's Web site lists an assistant professor of management as "Dr. Jack Malehorn."

What the Web site doesn't say, and what students and colleagues probably don't know, is that Mr. Malehorn's Ph.D. is from Shelbourne University.

Shelbourne does not exist. It never existed. It claimed to be based in Ireland, but actually was one of more than a dozen names used by an international diploma-mill company that sold degrees, beginning in the mid-1990s, for $500 to $2,500, according to an investigation last year by the Federal Trade Commission. The company, based in Romania, sent millions of unsolicited e-mail messages around the world, promising recipients that they could receive degrees without doing any academic work. Along with the diplomas, the company also provided fake transcripts and phony letters of recommendation.

When contacted by The Chronicle, Mr. Malehorn at first denies that his Ph.D. is from Shelbourne, even though his résumé says it is. "No, no, I'm sorry," he says. "I wish I could help you."

After further inquiries, Mr. Malehorn acknowledges that his doctorate is, in fact, from Shelbourne. He also contends that he did actual academic work to obtain it. "It was all through an Internet connection," he says. "My dissertation certainly seemed legitimate."

His boss doesn't think so. Kenneth L. Stanley, dean of the College of Business Administration, says he knew before hiring Mr. Malehorn that he had a fake Ph.D. "Hell, we knew it was worthless," says Mr. Stanley. "Give us a break!"

But he hired Mr. Malehorn anyway because, according to the dean, it's not uncommon for professors, or even top administrators, to have bogus credentials. "I've dealt with provosts with degrees from mail-order institutions here in the United States," Mr. Stanley says. (He declines to name any of those provosts or their institutions.)

What's important, he argues, is that Valdosta State does not recognize the degree, nor was it a factor in the decision to hire Mr. Malehorn. "If Jack had come here and we had hired him thinking, 'Oh, well, he's doctorally qualified,' and we're claiming that qualification, then we're idiots and he's wrong," says Mr. Stanley.

Contrary to the dean's insistence, however, it appears that Valdosta State does consider the degree valid. Why else would the professor be referred to as "Dr." in the bulletin that announced his hiring in 2002? Why else would he be listed as "Dr." in the university's telephone directory and on the management department's Web site? And why else would he be allowed to call himself "Dr. Jack Malehorn, Ph.D." when he contributes articles to the Journal of Business Forecasting?

When all that is brought to Mr. Stanley's attention, he is quiet for several seconds. "It's a little embarrassing," he admits. He recalls referring to Mr. Malehorn as "Dr." on several occasions, including in front of students. "I guess, you know, we're guilty of institutionalizing a fraud," says Mr. Stanley.

The dean pledges that references to Mr. Malehorn's Ph.D. will be deleted from official university material. Six weeks later, the management department's Web page still calls him "Dr."

For Love or Money?

On the Web site of Mercy College, in Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Benjamin B. Weisman, a professor of business, lists an honorary doctorate from the International University for Graduate Studies. The degree is there alongside his master's and Ph.D. from New York University.

Founded in 1979, International University is located in the Caribbean nation of Saint Kitts and Nevis. The university has four administrators and no faculty members, according to its Web site. It awards 11 graduate degrees, including doctorates in psychology, nursing science, and education. Students must complete a five-day residency on the island before receiving their diplomas.

When first questioned about his honorary degree from International University, Mr. Weisman says he can't remember much about the institution, other than that he is pretty sure it is accredited. "I think it's in Saint Kitts," he says. What Mr. Weisman, 68, fails to mention is that he, in fact, owns International University. In a later conversation, after acknowledging that he started and runs the university, he offers a spirited defense of the institution, which he says has been unfairly maligned by some state regulators.

Mr. Weisman says he and a partner started International to help graduate students who have trouble transferring credits from one university to another. International will accept those credits and allow students to complete their degrees. "We act as an umbrella," he says.

No one is admitted to the Ph.D. program who has not completed at least 70 graduate credit hours, according to Mr. Weisman. Nor does the university offer credit for so-called life experience, he says. "There is no way I would prostitute the degree that I give under any circumstances," says Mr. Weisman. "We give no credit for life experience. Zero."

An admissions counselor at International, however, tells a different story. Life experience does count toward a degree, she says. When a caller explains that he has done no doctoral-level work, she assures him that that doesn't have to be a problem. "You'd be surprised what would constitute credit," she says, adding that the caller could receive his Ph.D. in a few months.

When asked about those statements, Mr. Weisman says his employee was new and made a mistake. However, Edward Jackowski, who received a Ph.D. in behavioral management from International University, says his credits were based entirely on life experience. Mr. Jackowski, owner of a fitness company in Manhattan, took no courses and wrote a dissertation on "what motivates people to exercise." He liked the program, he says, because "it didn't take up much time."

Michael Hannigan saw an advertisement for International University in a magazine. An associate professor of social work at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, he had never finished the Ph.D. program in family therapy at Florida State University and was looking for a way to get his degree.

The professor calls International "lightweight" and says he is "used to a bit more rigor in academic things." Still, he believes that his degree from the university is legitimate. "They have the same accreditation as Oxford has," says Mr. Hannigan.

Not quite. According to Dale Gough, director of International Education Services at the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, the University of Oxford is recognized by the government of Britain, as are several colleges in the Caribbean. International University is not among them. Mr. Weisman says his institution is accredited by the government of Saint Kitts and Nevis, a recognition that experts like Mr. Gough and Alan Contreras, director of the Oregon Office of Degree Authorization, a state agency, consider meaningless. After all, the Caribbean nation once accredited a university that doled out degrees for watching I Love Lucy and other sitcoms.

Mr. Weisman says he didn't start International University to make money. But this year he expects it to graduate between 50 and 100 students, each of whom must pay $10,500 in tuition plus $1,500 for food, travel, and lodging. On the basis of those figures, International University should pull in between $500,000 and $1-million this year.

What do Mercy College officials think of Mr. Weisman's Caribbean operation? A college spokesman says the professor, who has tenure, can do whatever he likes as long as it does not interfere with his duties at Mercy. The spokesman notes, however, that the college would not accept transfer credits from International University, because "we do not recognize its accreditation."

Ph.D.'s for Less

Mr. Weisman's former boss at Mercy wouldn't be bothered in the least by his extracurricular activities. That's because Donald Grunewald, a onetime president of Mercy who is now a business professor at Iona College, runs his own unaccredited institution, called Adam Smith University.

Adam Smith's degrees are a bargain compared with International University's. Mr. Grunewald charges $2,500 for a bachelor's and $3,000 for a Ph.D. He declines to say how many students Adam Smith enrolls, only that the number is "very small." The university has no full-time professors, although some faculty members from other institutions sometimes read papers and help students, he says.

Mr. Contreras, the Oregon official, calls Adam Smith "a diploma mill with a long and unattractive history." Over the years it has been based in Hawaii, Louisiana, and South Dakota. Now its home is the ground floor of the girls' hostel at the Methodist Compound in Monrovia, Liberia. The American address is a mailbox in Saipan, a U.S. commonwealth in the Pacific.

All the while, Mr. Grunewald, now 70, has run the university from his home in Connecticut. He calls it a "labor of love" and bristles at the suggestion that it is disreputable. "My idea of a diploma mill is that you send in the money and they send you back a degree," he says. "That's not what we're doing at all. We like to feel that we have integrity. We have been accredited in Liberia."

What that particular accreditation means is unclear. A visit to the Liberian Embassy in Washington sheds little light on the matter. An embassy official, Abdullah Dunbar, doesn't know much about Adam Smith. When asked who can verify the Liberian accreditation, he searches among the papers on his desk and, after a few minutes, produces the name "Isaac B. Roland," who Mr. Dunbar says is in charge of the Ministry of Education, and a telephone number, which turns out to be disconnected. Mr. Dunbar says he has never spoken with Mr. Roland and doesn't know how to contact him.

Founded in 1991, Adam Smith was at one time accredited by the World Association of Universities and Colleges, a private group, unrecognized by the U.S. Department of Education, that has accredited colleges that the State of Oregon lists as diploma mills. Mr. Grunewald later helped found another unrecognized accreditor, the International Association of University and Schools. He says he now considers both of those to have been mistakes that may have sullied Adam Smith's reputation.

In the early 1990s, Adam Smith catered mostly to U.S. military personnel. Today it focuses on students who live in Africa and Asia. Courses generally involve reading a textbook and completing a simple exam, composed mostly of multiple-choice and true-false questions. A Chronicle reporter finished a year's course in English in about an hour. A semester of economics took 15 minutes.

An Iona spokesman says Mr. Grunewald is not violating any college policy by running Adam Smith. But the spokesman emphasizes that Iona does not want to associate itself with Mr. Grunewald's business: "Anything that would link us even in perception would be a problem," the spokesman says. "Clearly there is no tie to Iona, and we wouldn't tolerate it if there were."

Both Mr. Grunewald and Mr. Weisman take pains to separate their day jobs as professors from their moonlighting as operators of offshore universities. Mr. Grunewald does not mention his affiliation with Adam Smith when he writes letters to The Chronicle and other publications. When a caller to International University asks if Mr. Weisman is a professor at any other college, the admissions counselor says he isn't. "Oh, no," she says. "This is his baby."

Minimal Effort

Professors on the receiving end of unaccredited degrees cite many reasons for not attending one of the 3,500 legitimately accredited colleges in the United States.

Mr. del Corral, the Tulane instructor, had completed much of his doctoral work at Louisiana State University but wanted to avoid the hassle of facing a dissertation committee. So he called Lacrosse University, which was based in Louisiana until 2002, when state authorities declined to renew its license. (It is now based in Mississippi.) Lacrosse charges $2,200 for a Ph.D. An admissions counselor told a caller that he could receive a bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees, all in less than a year.

When informed that Mr. del Corral's doctorate is from Lacrosse, his supervisor, Paul A. Spindt, a professor of banking and finance, says he plans to discuss the issue with higher-ups at Tulane. "As a matter of policy, I wouldn't be very happy with people with degrees that are not fully accredited," he says.

Mr. del Corral never met the person at Lacrosse who reviewed his dissertation. He never talked to the person on the telephone. He never sent him an e-mail message. And he never took a single course. When asked if he thinks Lacrosse is a diploma mill, Mr. del Corral says it probably is. On the other hand, he explains, "it gave me what I needed."

Martin S. Roden got what he needed, too, when he attended the now-defunct Kensington University. "Primarily, I was just tired of having to correct students who would call me 'doctor,'" says Mr. Roden, associate dean of engineering at California State University at Los Angeles. He had joined the faculty there in 1968 and had already become a tenured full professor before he got his Kensington degree, in 1982.

Kensington moved from California to Hawaii after a statewide crackdown on unaccredited institutions in the early 1990s. Last year authorities in Hawaii forced Kensington to close and fined its owners $300,000. Mr. Roden calls Kensington "a second-rate, unrecognized place that basically is doing portfolio analysis."

Florida Community College at Jacksonville's Web site lists David Kier's master's degree from Cambridge State University, a spinoff of Columbia State University, which was shut down in 1998 by the FBI. Mr. Kier, an instructor at the community college, says he liked Cambridge State because it was possible to get a degree quickly, without "busting your hump" doing course work. "It was minimal effort," he says.

A spokeswoman says Florida Community College does not recognize his degree, but has no policy on how professors list their academic credentials on the college's Web site.

René A. Drouin, a student-loan official in New Hampshire, came under scrutiny last month when it was revealed that he earned his bachelor's from Kensington and his law degree from LaSalle University (a name that is easily confused with the venerable La Salle University in Philadelphia). The Louisiana institution made $36-million in seven years by offering degrees through the mail. Its owner was later sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to fraud and tax-evasion charges.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Drouin, who is a member of an advisory committee to the U.S. Department of Education, says he had no way to know that the universities he attended were not legitimate. Besides, his spokeswoman says, his degrees didn't help him get hired or promoted. He would have achieved just as much with only a high-school diploma, she says.

The argument that academic credentials don't matter is heard often from administrators and professors who defend unaccredited degrees.

In February it was revealed that Alan Williams, an associate professor of computer science at Southwestern Adventist University, in Keene, Tex., has a Ph.D. from Glencullen University, which is part of the same diploma-mill ring as Shelbourne. A spokeswoman for Southwestern Adventist says a doctorate is not required for the professor's position. Southwestern Adventist initially took no action against Mr. Williams, other than requiring that he stop saying he holds a Ph.D. Subsequently, he was asked to resign, the university's president says.

Other institutions seem not to care if faculty members claim unaccredited degrees. Tom Isbill, an adjunct professor of journalism at the University of Central Oklahoma, has two degrees, including a Ph.D., from Pacific Southern University, which is on Oregon's diploma-mill list. He says Central Oklahoma doesn't officially recognize the degrees. But the university still allows him to be called "Dr." on the journalism department's Web page.

While some colleges appear indifferent to the academic backgrounds of their professors, even Mr. Grunewald thinks the fuzzy line between diploma mills and real higher education has become a serious problem. "How do you separate the people who want to do this legitimately from the crooks?" wonders the owner of unaccredited Adam Smith University. "Because there are crooks out there."

Section: Special Report
Volume 50, Issue 42, Page A9

Monday, June 21, 2004

Chronicle for Higher Education: Accrediting your own university

DEGREES OF SUSPICION
Maxine Asher Has a Degree for You

Of course her university is accredited. She did it herself.

By THOMAS BARTLETT and SCOTT SMALLWOOD

Los Angeles
In a posh apartment building in the Westwood neighborhood here, a fax machine hums behind the front desk, spitting out pages on distinctive green paper.

No one would guess that it's the hub of American World University, an unaccredited institution with more than 7,000 students around the globe.

Maxine Asher, who lives up on the fourth floor with one of her four secretaries, is its fearless leader. The faxes are essential because Ms. Asher doesn't know how to use a computer. She can't even answer her own e-mail. Instead, secretaries around the country handle various parts of her business, faxing her reports and copies of messages. She issues orders from her apartment, telling her employees what to write.

If American World were all that Ms. Asher ran, she would be an interesting bit player in her industry. But in 1993 she founded the World Association of Universities and Colleges, an accrediting service unrecognized by the U.S. Department of Education, that gives its imprimatur to a host of alternative institutions. Almost every day Columbus University and Lacrosse University, both of which are considered diploma mills by some government regulators, advertise in the back pages of USA Today. In bold type, they tout their accreditation from the association. That makes Ms. Asher a central figure in the shadowy world of unaccredited higher education.

Now in her 70s, she says she is so hampered by fibromyalgia, a painful syndrome, that she struggles to walk down stairs or put on a sweater. But she remains a supremely confident person, and a spitfire when it comes to defending herself against those who would malign her and her university.

She will "swear up and down" that American World, despite having been pushed out of three states, is no diploma mill. The real problem, she contends, is with a system of accreditation and state laws that create prejudice against innovation.

Let American World stand or fall based on what kind of service it provides, not on some government regulation, she says: "If you go to buy a pair of shoes, isn't it up to you to decide where to go and if the quality is good? It's the American way. Why do we keep legislating what people can do in the field of education?"

Strong Vibrations

Maxine Asher bubbles with stories. She recounts her visit to the palace of a Saudi prince who had received a degree from American World. She casually mentions the Christmas gift she once got from Yasir Arafat (it was a model of Bethlehem). But eventually the tales come around to the topic that fascinates her the most: the mythical continent of Atlantis.

"I don't mean to sound like some kind of nut," she says, going on to claim that both "the Jews and the Catholics" are afraid to have the truth revealed because it would conflict with the Bible. "The world is not quite ready to face Atlantis," she says.

The route to her career as a world explorer began in Chicago, where Ms. Asher was born. Her family moved to Southern California, where she earned a bachelor's degree in psychology from the University of California at Los Angeles. She became a public-school teacher, got married, and had three daughters. She later returned to college, earning a master's degree in ancient history from California State University at Northridge.

That's when the Atlantis bug bit her. In 1973, at age 42, she led a research expedition to search for the legendary civilization off the coast of Spain.

As she told a New York Times reporter at the time: "I simply know we will find it because I am psychic. Oh, God, how strong the vibrations are these days, and I know that the highly civilized people of Atlantis also were very psychic."

That expedition didn't work out as planned. "We got involved in a Communist-Fascist squeeze play for control of Spain," she says.

She dodged murder attempts and a kidnapping, she says: "Somebody wanted to end this whole thing." A screenplay of the story -- she is looking for financing to make a thinly fictionalized account of her Atlantis research -- is chock-full of these adventures, she says. It's such tales that prompted the "female Indiana Jones" label she frequently cites. In the end, Ms. Asher says, she escaped her captors in Spain by jumping from a speeding car.

'Individualized' Instruction

Ms. Asher now looks more like the grandmother she is. Her short blonde hair is thinning and nearly white. She wears bright-red lipstick and nail polish. She moves slowly, looking for something to hold on to even when she steps off a curb.

Even so, she is up at 5 a.m. to telephone her American World University representatives overseas. One recent morning she called Britain, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates. Then she responded to e-mail messages until 10 a.m., directing her clutch of four assistants as they answered the 50 to 100 messages a day she gets from prospective students. Much of that work is done from her apartment, but on many afternoons she gets into her white Plymouth Breeze -- the license plate reads ATLANTS -- and drives to her office in the San Fernando Valley, where she puts in another few hours, checking in with answering services and reviewing faxes.

She founded American World to provide distance education that combines American ideas about higher education with Europe's more tutorial model, she says. Ms. Asher holds a doctorate in education from Walden University and a Ph.D. in linguistics from the University of Granada, in Spain, both of which are accredited by government-approved agencies. In the early days she advertised in the International Herald Tribune, struggling to enroll students.

Then she hit on the idea of hiring representatives in various countries for American World, paying them 50 percent of the tuition they brought in. In return, they handle local advertising and other costs. "Fifty percent of something is better than nothing," she says.

According to Ms. Asher, American World now enrolls more than 7,000 students, including about 2,000 in China. In some countries, students attend classes rather than complete the entire program through distance education, she says. Tuition varies with the country, but students in the United States pay $1,800 per degree.

When they apply, students submit transcripts and résumés, and Ms. Asher gives them credits toward their degrees for their life experience. All students complete some type of thesis or dissertation, she says, and papers are graded by "consultant faculty members." Students work in their native languages, and instruction is entirely "individualized," she adds. "If the guy is in Indonesia, I'm not going to ask him to do a paper on Abraham Lincoln."

Her university has had plenty of detractors. Her application for a license in Louisiana was rejected, and state law changes in Iowa and South Dakota prompted her to move the university repeatedly. The company is now based in Mississippi. In Hawaii the state sued her for not stating clearly that American World was not accredited by a recognized accreditor. She lost a $125,000 judgment.

The Hawaii case was simply a silly vendetta, she says, since she never has had a student from Hawaii. Indeed, fewer than 10 percent of her students are from the United States. About 1,000 are in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, a couple of hundred are in Germany, and another hundred in South Korea, she says. She just signed up a new foreign representative to handle students in Sudan and Syria.

It was the apparent expectations of all those foreign students that scared away Alanna Shaikh. She was finishing a master's degree in public health and living in Iowa City in 2000 when the employment agency she was working with assigned her to American World as an office temp.

At the time the business was housed in an office building there, sharing space with an H&R Block office and a manicurist. When Ms. Shaikh arrived, she found three desks and a conference room that seemed to be rarely used. She lasted just one day, making photocopies and doing some filing. At first, she says, the operation seemed "pretty sketchy."

Ms. Asher offered to hire her, Ms. Shaikh says, with a job grading papers and running the office: "She told me I just needed to read them and put some marks in the margins. She thought I could do the science papers as well."

Ms. Shaikh says she briefly considered the job offer because the money would have been better than other options presented. But she had noticed the many foreign students who had paid to enroll, including those from India and Pakistan, where her own family came from. At one point, flipping through files, she saw one student who shared her father's name. "That was what got me in the end," she says.

Ms. Asher emphatically denies that American World is anything but a reputable educational institution. As for Ms. Shaikh, she says, "I never heard of this woman."

Lawsuits and articles about unhappy employees may well have stymied some of her work, she acknowledges. On the Internet, stories of problems in Iowa can reach China instantaneously. Yet she plans to soldier on. "You can't stand up to people and say, 'I'm not a crook,'" she says. "All you do is go on and do your best work."

Make Your Own

After starting American World, Ms. Asher faced questions about its standards. "I realized that everybody wanted accreditation, and we couldn't get it from the regionals," she says. "They just weren't doing it."

Ms. Asher found a solution. She created her own accreditor.

She and other organizers sent out letters to 500 universities in 1993, inviting them to a meeting in Zurich to discuss the new accrediting agency. Thirteen showed up and paid $2,000 each, she says, to become members of the World Association of Universities and Colleges.

To join the group, an institution must have a legal license to operate in some state or country, she says. It then pays $1,000 to become a member but must file a separate application and pay an additional $4,000 to become accredited by the association. Each institution produces a "self-study," which includes its history, a list of faculty members, and information about the curriculum.

That report is reviewed by presidents of other member institutions. "If we think the self-study is worthwhile, we generally accredit them," Ms. Asher says. Site visits are made occasionally but are not required. The association now has more than 50 members, 27 of which it has accredited, she says.

Although some member institutions, like Columbus University and Madison University, have been labeled diploma mills by the state of Oregon, Ms. Asher defends her members, saying they generally provide more individual attention than traditional universities do. The real difference, she argues, is that they don't cost as much.

"If I were a businessman and I only needed a Ph.D. to show somebody and put on my wall," she says, "I'm not going to want to pay Harvard $20,000 for their M.B.A. program." (In fact, tuition at the Harvard Business School tops $60,000.)

She is not arguing that some unaccredited institutions are not scams. An institution of higher education should have more than just a mailbox, Ms. Asher says. It should have at least an office where it keeps student and accounting records. Students should stay away from operations offering degrees for $100, or based only on life experience. And they should avoid institutions that don't insist on a thesis for graduate degrees.

But isn't it a conflict that Ms. Asher runs the agency that claims to accredit her own operation? "I think that's a problem," she acknowledges. "I can see why people would be concerned. But again, I don't mean this in an egotistical way. I believe that I'm a very good educator, based on my background and what I've done, and I believe I can capably run both organizations."

She says that she doesn't draw a salary from the association, but that it does pay for some of her expenses. Money is a problem for the group, she says. Some members have quit over the dues, which run $3,500 a year for an accredited institution. The association, which employs a secretary, has several thousand dollars in expenses every month, Ms. Asher says.

Her newest revenue idea is asking students who have already graduated from member institutions to buy a seal for their diplomas "guaranteeing accreditation" of the issuing institution. She says the association will keep a permanent record of the degree and guarantee that students can document their diplomas through the group. The seal costs $50.

Through the association Ms. Asher has met numerous other operators of unaccredited institutions. She jokes that she knows where all the bodies are buried. Name an operator and she's got an opinion: Harry Boyer, a former community-college president who founded Lacrosse University, was a "great educator." She's not as fond of his widow, Colleen, who now runs Lacrosse. The two women had a disagreement over money recently, and Ms. Asher kicked Lacrosse out of the association.

She describes Donald Grunewald, president of Adam Smith University, as a friend, even though he now says being part of the association was a mistake. Ms. Asher, who holds an honorary degree from Mr. Grunewald's university, questions its new accreditation from Liberia. "That's ridiculous," she says. "I don't even know where that is."

'Trust Me'

It is her experience in the degree business that she can offer others.

Late one morning in May, the owner of one of the association's member institutions calls from London. He is having trouble with British authorities. Ms. Asher says she knows what to do:

"Listen to me. Tariq, Tariq. Listen to me now for a minute. I think you need to get licensed this year anyway in Mississippi, and then you should be able to use the name 'university.' That's not a problem. ... If you get an office in Mississippi and you're only operating a branch office in London, then that should be all right."

There's another pause as Ms. Asher listens before interrupting with more advice: "I got another idea. You start a different corporation under a different name, like I have -- International Educators. It doesn't have the word 'university' in it. You register it in London without the word 'university,' but you can still operate. Trust me. I did it myself."

Her colleague apparently remains uncertain. "Listen to me," she says again. "I'm 16 years in the business, and I've had all sorts of things like this happen. I'm telling you I know what to do."

After 10 minutes of back-and-forth, Ms. Asher becomes impatient. She is, after all, a busy woman, with her own university to run, an accrediting agency to manage, and maybe a lost continent to discover. She reminds her protégé that time is money.

"I'm not going any further," she says at last. "I would be glad to do anything in the world for you if you fax me a bank receipt tomorrow."

Section: Special Report
Volume 50, Issue 42, Page A12

Friday, September 05, 2003

Sept. 5. 2003 vigil over gay marriage

The Cambridge Reporter
September 5, 2003 Friday Final Edition
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A44

HEADLINE: MPs face prayer vigils over gay marriage

Local MPs will be the targets of fervent prayer on Sunday afternoon as opponents of proposed same-sex marriage legislation rally in front of constituency offices.

It's a two-pronged approach, according to Harold Albrecht, pastor of Pathway Community Church, which meets in Brigadoon Public School in Kitchener.

"We're praying and we're taking a public stand," he said. "The two need to go together.

"It's too easy for us to cloister ourselves in our holy huddles."

Albrecht is helping to organize a prayer rally in front of the St. Jacobs constituency office of Waterloo-Wellington MP Lynn Myers. It will be one of more than 150 prayer rallies across the country that have been co-ordinated in part by the Canada Family Action Coalition, a non-denominational Christian group based in Calgary.

So far, prayer rallies are planned outside the offices of more than 150 of the 301 members of Parliament across Canada.

The coalition has been working with other Christian groups -- including REAL Women of Canada and Canada Christian College in Toronto -- to plan the rallies. The coalition is urging opponents of the federal government's intention to legalize same-sex marriage to gather outside the politicians' offices at 3 p.m.

Albrecht said he will be praying for wisdom for government leaders.

"As a believer, I certainly feel that the source of our wisdom is God's Word," he said. "We will be praying that all of our leaders will be open to God's wisdom in this, and not bow to a very small group who currently have a different view.

"I want to make this very clear -- this is not an anti-homosexual rally. We're here to defend and support (heterosexual) marriage.

Albrecht said he believes it's important for family stability to keep marriage heterosexual.

Myers, in an interview Wednesday, said he was invited to the rally in front of his office but had a previous engagement so he won't be able to attend.

However, Myers said, he wasn't distressed by the gathering.

"That's the beauty of democracy," he said. "People have the right to meet and assemble and say what they want or do what they want -- in this case, pray as they see fit, which is very fine by me.

"I just hope it doesn't turn into what happened to my colleague (Kitchener-Waterloo MP) Andrew Telegdi, where it looked like a setup."

During a meeting last week in Waterloo with opponents of two pieces of federal legislation, Telegdi called one of the pastors in attendance a "liar" and stormed out.

Tuesday, March 25, 2003

Hutton: Alta. should split from Canada and buy nuclear subs

Archived news story:
    Canadian Press Newswire
    March 25, 2003

    Alta. should split from Canada and buy nuclear subs, says separatist group

    EDMONTON (CP) _ Nuclear submarines armed with long-range missiles could help Alberta gain international clout if the province were to secede from Canada, says the leader of a fledgling separatist group.

    ''One of the things that was suggested would be a couple of nuclear submarines moving around the world,'' Bruce Hutton told a news conference Tuesday.

    ''That makes us a formidable power. With the amount of money we've sent to Ottawa in the last six years, we could have nuclear submarines.''

    Hutton, a former Mountie who strongly opposed the national gun registry, said 5,000 signatures are still needed to give his Separation Party of Alberta official status in Alberta. Nonetheless, he is predicting they will win 11 seats in the next provincial election.

    Premier Ralph Klein has said he believes Albertans want to remain within the country.

    ''I strongly feel that Albertans want to be part of Canada and they want to be recognized as part of Canada. I don't think that they want to separate, they simply want their voice to be heard.''

    Although there is little desire for separation, Klein has said, his party will hold a panel discussion about it at its annual policy convention this weekend in Red Deer, Alta.

Friday, February 21, 2003

Minister battles military over faith: Jewish group joins Pentecostal in bid to diversify chaplaincy

Minister battles military over faith: Jewish group joins Pentecostal in bid to diversify chaplaincy

Tom Blackwell
National Post

21 February 2003
National Post
A05


Religious services in the Canadian forces are controlled exclusively by a few major Christian churches, discriminating against other faiths and minority Christian sects, a Pentecostal minister has charged in a human rights complaint.

The forces have 29 Anglican chaplains -- eight times the percentage of Anglicans in the general population -- but no Jews, Hindus or Muslims, Reverend Sheldon Johnston notes in his complaint.

The 35-year-old from Castlegar, B.C., is getting support from a major Jewish group, which says the Department of National Defence must better represent Canada's spiritual mosaic.

"What we have right now is a handful of religious groups that are judging other groups and saying that they are not worthy to be represented, which I think is wrong," Rev. Johnston said.

"I think it has a huge impact on minority groups. This is a primary reason why there isn't that much diversity."

Religions are supposed to be represented in the military chaplaincy based on the number of troops who declare themselves to be members of those churches.

But Rev. Johnston said the declarations may not accurately reflect the makeup of the army, navy and air force.

A Defence spokesman admitted yesterday the unit does not represent modern Canada and said officials are working on the problem, starting with the recruitment of the forces' first Muslim chaplain.

Imam Suleyman Demiray, a native of Turkey, is expected to get into basic training this fall.

"We know right now that we are not reflective of Canadian society, so we've got a lot of work to do and it's going to take some time," said Lieutenant-Colonel Dave Kettle, a chaplaincy spokesman.

Rev. Johnston, of the Church of God Canada, said the forces must go further and end for good their practice of having quotas for the number of chaplains from different Christian churches.

The chaplains' mission is broad: to bolster "operational effectiveness" by contributing to the moral and spiritual well-being of troops and their families.

The unit, with 144 regular force chaplains, is divided into two services: Catholic and Protestant.

According to figures Rev. Johnston obtained from the Defence Department, just under half are Catholic, 19% are Anglican, 11% are United Church and 4.4% are evangelical.

Catholics make up 41% of the general population, Anglicans -- 2.4%, United Church members -- 5.4% and evangelicals -- 9.5%. Non-Christian religions comprise 26% of Canadians, according to the figures.

Rev. Johnston said he has tried more than once to become a chaplain himself, but was effectively rejected because there were already three Pentecostals: the quota allotted the denomination.

He said Canada should adopt the system used in the United States, where an independent panel chooses chaplains based on their potential as spiritual advisors and officers, regardless of their religious affiliation.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission has told him that it was unable to mediate a resolution to the dispute, and plans to refer it to a human rights tribunal for trial, he said.

B'Nai Brith, the Jewish human rights organization, backs his crusade and is considering a formal intervention, said Anita Bromberg, a spokeswoman.

"The life of a soldier is a tough life," she said. "Not having access to the appropriate [religious] support mechanisms can make the life certainly more difficult."

Monday, May 13, 2002

Harold Albrecht's letter-to-the-editor

The Record (Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario)
May 13, 2002 Monday Final Edition
SECTION: OPINION; Pg. A10

LENGTH: 252 words

HEADLINE: I'm so embarrassed

BYLINE: Harold Albrecht

Where fans booed our Canadian national anthem at NBA and NHL playoff games in Detroit and New York, I am sure many American citizens are greatly embarrassed, or even ashamed of the behaviour of their fellow citizens.

The embarrassment caused by these immature sports fans cannot compare to the embarrassment I feel to be a citizen of a country whose moral behaviour has slid to an all-time low. Child pornography is considered to be an art form and now The Record uses half a page of its art section to publicize Puppetry of The Penis to be held at Centre in the Square on June 7.

Child pornography an art form? And now this? Where are the board members of the Centre in the Square? Where is our city council? Do they not see the mixed message this performance gives our citizens, especially young people?

A man exposing himself on the streets of Kitchener is rightly charged with indecent exposure, but two men from Australia are paid to use the Centre (facilities financed with my tax dollars) to bring a message that is diametrically opposite to the values of our community.

"We have no shame at all," says Jim McGregor. Exactly. So why do we allow these people to further destroy the conscience of our city? And why publicize it in our family newspaper?

Anyone has the right to swim in a septic tank if they choose, but please leave the lid on to spare the rest of us from the stench. I appeal to Kitchener council to "close the lid" and cancel this event.

Harold Albrecht

Petersburg

Wednesday, January 24, 2001

Andrew Coyne: Hmmm ... haven't I heard this before?

Wednesday, January 24, 2001
Hmmm ... haven't I heard this before?
Question 1: Who said, over the weekend, "we won't separate tomorrow, or next year.

Perhaps we can negotiate a new union with Canada ... but I'm not here to be soft. We're separatists." Was it a) Bernard Landry, candidate for leader of the Parti Quebecois, somehow managing to present himself as both a hard-line sovereigntist and an advocate of continued membership in a "confederal union," or b) Cory Morgan, a Calgary surveyor and interim leader of the fledgling Alberta Independence Party?

Question 2: Who said, in response to the foregoing, "this is the unfortunate outcome of years of Chretien federalism ... It is understandable that movements like [this] exist because of what is being offered by the national government, which plays one part of the nation against each other." Was it a) Joe Clark, deploring, yet again, Ottawa's failure to appease separatist sentiment with new constitutional offers, while neglecting to say a word against separatism itself, or b) Phil von Finckenstein, spokesman for the Canadian Alliance?

Question 3: Who said, "if this is a way to wake up [the federal] government and strengthen the provincial powers that should be in place, then [it] might have some value to it." Was it a) the late Robert Bourassa, former premier of Quebec, explaining his strategy of federalisme rentable and how the threat of separatism could be exploited to that end, or b) Myron Thompson, Canadian Alliance MP, after attending last week's founding meeting of the Alberta Independence Party?

Question 4: Who said, to which gathering of which separatist party, "I wish you every success." Was it a) Lucien Bouchard, then a minister in the federal government, in a telegram to the Parti Quebecois in 1990, or b) Bert Brown, member of the Canadian Alliance and "Senator-elect" for the province of Alberta, addressing the same Alberta Independence Party meeting that Mr. Thompson attended?

The answer to each, in case you were in any doubt, is b). Which raises a further query: What on earth were Mr. Thompson and Mr. Brown, as well as Darrel Stinson, MP, and Ted Morton, Alberta's other "Senator-elect," doing at a meeting of a party dedicated to the dismantling of Canada?

Were they there, as a senior Alliance official insisted, "to convince them that this is not the way to go"? Did they use the occasion, more robustly, to denounce separatism as illegitimate in principle and impossible in practice? They did not. Their presence seemed rather aimed, if not at encouraging the nascent movement, as in Mr. Brown's example, then at least at exploiting it.

And Stockwell Day? The Alliance leader took the opportunity of a nationally televised speech Monday, billed as a statement on "national unity," to issue a limp appeal to Western separatists to please, please, give Canada another chance. "I have met with some of these upset and alienated people myself," he disclosed, "and I am asking them to channel their energy of frustration into the hope of transformation." If you closed your eyes, you could swear it was Mr. Clark talking.

No one is suggesting that Mr. Day or his party are separatists, or even crypto-separatists.

But they seem quite willing to play that ancient game of Quebec federalists, separatist blackmail. There's a difference, of course: unlike Quebec, the West has some decent grievances. The National Energy Program may be ancient history, but there are any number of reforms to Parliament and its institutions -- Senate reform, free votes, and the rest -- that would be in the West's interests -- and more important, the country's. But the very worst reason to introduce such reforms is in response to separatist threats. In fact, it's a good reason not to.

This all may seem a bit of a fuss to be making over a "movement" that represents perhaps 3% of Western voters. But the Alliance will pay a heavy price for indulging them. It was one thing for the party to set up shop, more or less explicitly, as the wholly owned subsidiary of the provinces. But canoodling with separatists, in Quebec or the West -- the Canadian Dalliance? -- is hardly the way to win over Ontario voters.

It certainly won't do to threaten them. Yet, incredibly, that is what some Alliance supporters have taken to doing. This is perhaps the strangest version of separatist blackmail yet: After blaming the rise in Western separatism on Ontario's "rejection" of the Alliance in the recent election, they then invoke the separatist spectre to frighten Ontarians into voting Alliance next time. "Today the number of disillusioned Alliance members going to the AIP is a trickle," Mr. Morton warned yesterday in these pages.

"But another electoral shutout in Ontario in 2004 could turn that into a torrent." Now there's a catchy slogan: Vote for us, or we blow the place up. Vote for us or else.

Sounds like a government in waiting to me.

Sunday, March 21, 1999

Harold Albrecht's letter-to-the-editor

The Toronto Star
March 21, 1999, Sunday, Edition 1
SECTION: NEWS

HEADLINE: STAR'S VIEW IS SIMPLISTIC

Re 11 per cent solution (editorial, March 14).
I am continually amused by The Star's frustration at Alberta's unwillingness to adopt the economically destructive politics of envy, entitlement and class warfare it promotes in Ontario. The suggestions that Alberta's middle class favours simple-sounding flat taxes because they are somehow not as bright as The Star's readers and don't understand their own economic interests are pure bunkum.

They very well understand what The Star obviously does not. Encouraging, retaining and attracting successful and rich people is not altruistic, it is smart economics. It is The Star's view that is simplistic - not Albertans'.

Harold Albrecht
Oakville

Click here for more about Harold Albrecht, Conservative candidate in Kitchener-Conestoga.

Sunday, August 02, 1998

August 2, 1998: NYT: Easy Degrees Proliferate

The New York Times
August 2, 1998, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
Section 4A; Page 17; Column 1; Education Life Supplement

Easy Degrees Proliferate on the Web
By David Koeppel

Ira Doreen Donovan, an elementary school teacher in Miami, was 31 credits shy of a master's degree in special education when she saw an on-line advertisement for Columbia State University. After sending $800 as the first payment on a $2,000 degree, Ms. Donovan received a textbook to summarize and send back for grading.

Believing this was the first step of several, she was shocked when shortly after, a certificate not only for a master's but a doctorate arrived at her home. Along with the degrees came transcripts awarding her a 3.9 grade point average for classes never taken and credit for a completed thesis and dissertation.

"I called the school and told them if this degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on, I don't want to pay for it," Ms. Donovan said. "This degree mill made me look like a fool."

Columbia State returned her money, but others say they have not been so lucky.

After investigating 36 complaints, including one from Norway and one from Malaysia, the Louisiana Attorney General's office has filed for a preliminary injunction against Columbia, charging that it violates the state's Unfair Trade Practices Act and consumer protection laws. Last month the State of Illinois also filed suit seeking an injunction and restitution for consumers and the state.

Repeated calls to Columbia's office in Metairie, La., seeking comment were not returned.

The Internet has "rekindled the old-fashioned diploma mill," said Michael Lambert, the executive director of the Distance Education and Training Council, a recognized accrediting agency that has approved 65 on-line and home-study schools. "The Internet is a haven for these places."

Surfing the Web these days is like flipping through a virtual college catalogue. With its interactivity and accessibility, the Internet has sparked new interest in home-study programs, offering actual courses on line or just information.

Although many distance-learning schools have solid reputations and graduation requirements, hundreds of Web sites have popped up for schools charging between $200 and $7,000 for sheepskin that requires little or no work from students. Columbia, for instance, promises degrees within 27 days.

Elaborate home pages make schools look credible, Mr. Lambert said. The schools can operate in the anonymity of cyberspace, sometimes listing just an E-mail address or post office box. And on line, they can reach a global audience for minimal cost.

Eugene Sullivan, co-author with David W. Stewart and Henry Spille of "External Degrees in the Information Age," the American Council on Education's guide to correspondence programs, defines a diploma mill as an "organization that sells degrees without an academic base and without requiring sufficient academic achievement."

While perfectly legitimate schools might have an element or two of a diploma mill (say, credit for work experience), experts say there are multiple defining characteristics:

* The school emphasizes credit for work or life experience without appropriate mechanisms for assessing that experience in terms of college-level learning.

* Degrees are obtained in far less time than would be required at a legitimate institution. (A bachelor's degree typically takes four years of full-time course work, a master's one to two years, a Ph.D. dissertation several years to research and write.)

* Tuition and fees are on a per-degree basis instead of per semester or course.

* School brochures list faculty members who neither teach nor provide other services, and there is virtually no interaction with faculty members.

* The school is not accredited by an agency approved by the Department of Education, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation or other legitimate institutions.

Accreditation, however, is voluntary.

"From my experience it's not the blatantly fraudulent schools that are the real threat," Mr. Stewart said. "It's the academic frauds that have a little substance that are the problem."

He was referring to schools that require students to perform some academic exercises like writing a paper or taking an exam -- and some students might invest considerable effort -- but their degrees are unacceptable to established colleges and universities and unimpressive to prospective employers.

But experts admit that most such institutions cater to people who know exactly what they are getting into.

"Many people are well aware of what they are doing," Mr. Sullivan said. "They want a credential and they want to get it quickly. But others are busy people or foreign students who don't know much about higher education. They see these places as programs that fit their needs."

Joe Joyal of Atlanta said he had worked as an engineer for 20 years without a degree and applied to Columbia State for a joint bachelor's/master's degree in mechanical engineering. He received both degrees in under six months after summarizing two textbooks.

He said he suspected the degree was worthless but nonetheless listed it on his resume. Later he had second thoughts and took it off. He is pursuing a degree from an accredited distance-learning program.

Columbia State claims in Internet advertising that it is accredited by the International Accrediting Association, a "fictitious school accrediting agency," according to the Louisiana Attorney General's complaint. The owner of Columbia, Ronald Dante, was sentenced in February in Los Angeles to five-and-a-half years in prison for operating fraudulent schools in California. He jumped bail and is being sought by United States marshals, according to Michelle Muth, a spokeswoman for the Federal Trade Commission. Columbia continues to operate.

Perhaps the largest crackdown on schools took place from 1981 to 1991, when Operation Dipscam (for diploma scam) put 50 out of business on charges ranging from mail or wire fraud to conspiracy. "Sometimes we'd find phony accreditations or that we were able to negotiate a degree for a lower price," said Allen Ezell, a former agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation who oversaw Dipscam. "Some schools sent transcripts and diplomas to students for courses never taken."

States like New York and Illinois closely regulate academic institutions, requiring that they be authorized to operate. But many don't. Mr. Ezell said investigations often start by looking into schools incorporated in the states with the weakest laws, like Hawaii, Utah and Louisiana.

Hawaii has been wrangling with a few unaccredited schools lately. Its department of consumer affairs has sued Pacific Western and American State Universities, two distance-learning schools with offices there, for not making clear in advertisements that they are unaccredited. After agreeing to a settlement, American State decided to close. "The penalties were too substantial," the school's lawyer, Evan R. Shirley, said, specifically citing the requirement that every ad disclose its unaccredited status.

"My client never explicitly expressed wrongdoing," he added, "but a conclusion could be rationally made that there was wrongdoing."

Pacific Western's case is pending. Calls to its office and lawyers were not returned, but in answer to the complaint filed in circuit court in Honolulu, it denied allegations that it misleads consumers about its accreditation or suggests it is "somehow accredited or approved by the State of Hawaii to award academic degrees."

Another area of dispute that has caused considerable legal wrangling has been the similarity in names between accredited and unaccredited schools.

An unaccredited school called Washington University, which has an office in Bryn Mawr, Pa., but is incorporated in Hawaii and the British Virgin Islands, settled a suit in June filed by the more established Washington University of St. Louis. The suit charged that the unaccredited school infringed on its trademark and engaged in unfair competition.

The details of the settlement are confidential, but the consent judgment entered by the court told the school to come up with a new name, and one that separated the words "Washington" and "University" with a word of at least 10 characters.

Yil Karademir, who owns the unaccredited school, chose Washington International University. (Unaccredited schools tend to favor the word "International," as well as "America," "United" and "Pacific.")

The St. Louis school had complained that it had received inquiries from prospective students and alumni who were confused when they saw the other school's ads -- not to mention being the target of protests from human-rights activists after a businessman linked to Myanmar's military dictatorship bought an honorary doctorate.

"What they do bears no resemblance to the education we provide," said Lori Fox, the associate general counsel for Washington University in St. Louis. "Are they a diploma mill? You'll have to draw your own conclusions."

Mr. Karademir said he is not running a diploma mill.

"We are a young university," he said. "We didn't even know about them when we chose the name three years ago. They're not exactly Harvard. Calling us a degree mill is hitting below the belt in order to belittle and discredit us."

Mr. Karademir said his school is made up mostly of international students who are given academic credit for life experience, though he plans to add on-line courses in the fall. Washington International's Web site is extensive and promises to grant degrees in one year. "The academic comunity sic find our degree programs to be OUTSTANDING!" the Web site declares. "All Washington International University degrees are ATTESTED and sealed for authenticity by a Government appointed NOTARY!"

Costs range from $2,850 for a Bachelor of Science in business administration to $7,400 for a combination bachelor's and master's degree.

Meanwhile, the Pennsylvania Department of Education is investigating complaints about the school, according to Michelle Haskins, a department spokeswoman.

Last year, the Illinois Attorney General succeeded in shutting down an on-line school, Loyola State University, for violating consumer protection laws by confusing students into thinking it was Loyola University of Chicago. Patricia Kelly, division chief of consumer protection in the Attorney General's office, said that Lorie LaFata, who ran the school, created dummy transcripts with fictional class names, codes and grades. Students would receive diplomas after paying $2,800. "We were able to see she was not offering what she promised," Ms. Kelly said.

In her settlement with the Attorney General's office, which had filed suit against her, Ms. LaFata agreed to pay restitution to the state and not to conduct business on the Internet for five years, including having a Web site.

"The state and I came to a good understanding," said Ms. LaFata, who offered that she had been a Columbia State student. "I did have to admit to wrongdoing. It was an awful time for me. I hope to leave that behind."

Richard Mitchell, president of the New Orleans Better Business Bureau, advises prospective students to do their own investigating before signing up with a distance education school.

"Do some intelligent things like checking out a school with agencies that can give you more information," he said. "Don't just jump into a school because they have an impressive Web site. If you take time and do your homework, you can avoid a problem."

Mr. Lambert said it was easy for unsophisticated applicants to be fooled. "In mixing dollars and dreams," he said, "it's many of the true innocents that get trampled on."

How to Check School Credentials

Surfing the Web for a home-study school? The Department of Education suggests that thr first step is to check a school's accreditation - a process in which courses are reviewed, students surveyed and campuses inspected. For a list of agencies approved to accredit schools, write: Department of Education Accreditation and Eligibility Determination Division, 6000, Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20202-5244; (202) 708-7417; www.ifap.ed.gov/scb.html/agenc.htm.

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation, an organization of colleges and universities, also approves accrediting agencies. Write: One Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 854, Washington, D.C. 20036-1110; (202) 955-6126; www.chea.org.