Competing for the Cyber-Savvy; challenging the competitor you
never knew you had.
George M Brown
Academic Director – Le Cordon Bleu Australia Pty Ltd – http://www.lecordonbleu.com.au
Director - Degreeoftruth Pty Ltd – http://www.degreeoftruth.com.au
Days Road, Regency Park, South Australia, Australia 5010
Abstract
This paper, coupled with an online virtual presentation, seeks to provide tools and strategies
for Australian higher education providers to protect and differentiate their educational
products in an increasingly confusing online market. The presentation will argue that whilst
young prospective candidates for higher education may be perceived as being ‘cyber savvy’,
those seeking information and considering enrolment in online courses are still confused
about terms such as ‘accredited’, ‘approved,’ or ‘authorised’. The writer suggests that the
Internet has fuelled this problem by providing an anonymous, cost-effective marketing
environment whereby any individual may tap into this lucrative market and provide programs
of instruction which are not equivalent to those traditionally offered by established
universities.
As a policy background, the paper will profile the evolution of virtual universities, the
proliferation of these Internet providers, and the difficulties consumers are faced when trying
to differentiate legitimate virtual universities from online degree/diploma mills. In searching
for strategies to solve this dilemma, a selection of common characteristics degree/ diploma
mills possess will be provided. The paper will then explore the marketing strategies and
tactics employed by some of these organizations and discuss how Australian providers can
best learn from their online expertise.
The paper concludes by over viewing the steep increase in degree/diploma mill activity on the
Internet. Highlighting the new policy initiatives initiated by the Australian Government to
protect Australia's higher education sector, the paper will argue for further proactive
monitoring of virtual university activity on the Internet so as to ensure policy initiatives are
effectively implemented, monitored, and refined.
Key Words
Virtual Universities
Degree Mills
Diploma Mills
Accreditation
Online Marketing
Introduction
‘Low-rent unis spin Webs of secrecy’, ‘Not worth the paper’, ‘The plague of fake
unis’, ‘Mail-order Bachelors’, ‘Is your degree fake?’ These are but a few of the
myriad of headlines adorning the front pages of Australian education publications
over the past few years and, more recently, in the last six months. Is the media over-
1
reacting and trying to sensationalize a minor problem, or has the proliferation of
virtual degree/ diploma mills on the Internet seriously challenged the integrity of the
Australian higher education system? Without doubt, these online entrepreneurs are
profiting from these digital ventures, but at what cost to the integrity, credibility and
profitability of established Australian higher education providers?
This paper, along with the accompanying ‘virtual’ presentation, will seek to discuss
these issues and propose a set of proactive measures designed to educate and protect
potential students, Australian higher education providers and the Federal/ State higher
education agencies.
Virtual universities – sorting the wheat from the chaff.
In seeking to characterize the virtual university, it is interesting to analyze the literal
meaning of the nomenclature. The word virtual in an educational context is defined
by Dolence & Norris (1995: 53) as 'existing in intent and not form' whilst Silvio
(1999:1) sees virtualisation as, 'both the process and the result of processing and
communicating through computer data, information and knowledge'. Using the two
words together could therefore imply that a virtual university is a 'close to the real
thing' university provider. Such a simple definition, however, does not lend itself well
to the entrepreneurial providers of this new form of university and should be
challenged. For example, Gilbert (1996) disagreed with this simple analysis, asserting
that the terms 'real' and 'virtual' should not be used as contrasting concepts. Despite
this caveat, the definitions of Dolence & Norris (1995) and Silvio (1999) are useful
and clear for the purpose of this paper.
Clearly the virtual university has become a force to be reckoned with, though Heeger
(2000) asserts the online university will not replace the traditional brick-and-mortar
institution. Gilbert (1996), Vice Chancellor of the University of Melbourne, has
epitomized this view suggesting that, ‘the greatest universities of the twenty-first
century will be spatially definable communities that are nevertheless completely at
home in cyberspace'. Four years later, Gilbert's predictions became reality with his
announcement of Universitas 21 joining forces with News Corporation and Microsoft,
some of the most powerful multimedia conglomerates on the planet. Although this
proposed alliance did not finally eventuate, another large company, Thompson
Learning, embraced the opportunity to partake in this global venture.
Gladieux & Swail (1999) found virtual universities as having their roots in
correspondence schools (or non-traditional providers). Stuart (1994:3) saw the virtual
university as 'not one where virtual reality kits would be required, but the ability of
the home based student to experience all of the learning and personal development
experiences available to the student who is physically located in a university campus'.
Levine (2000:2) concurs, suggesting that with technology advancing at such a rapid
pace, this will soon become a reality. He reasons that 'instead of telling students
about 15th century Paris, for example, we will take them there. And when a student
can smell the smells - which must have been putrid, walk the cobblestones, go into
buildings, how will a stand-up lecture compete?' This may not yet be a reality,
however, the rapid advances in technology appear to suggest that such experiences
may soon be available to the 'virtual learner'. Young (2000) alludes to virtual
2
universities in the United States (namely Kentucky Virtual University, Magellan
University, Michigan Virtual University and the University of Texas TeleCampus)
creating 'virtual football teams', aimed at 'increasing spirit among virtual institutions'
(Young 2000:1). Susman (Young 2000:2) the CEO of Kentucky Virtual University,
believes the 'next phase is to figure out what games you can play with members
anywhere in the world to…create community, so students don't feel so isolated from
each other.'
Cunningham, Ryan, Stedman, Tapsall, Bagdon, Flew & Coldrake (2000) suggested
that the virtual university may be envisaged in two ways: an educational institution
offering all conventional university services via the latest communication
technologies or as a 'hollow' organisation which has unbundled its services and
subcontracted them to other organisations. Cornwell, Kimber & Lewis (1999) see a
virtual university as any institution that delivers higher education courses in distance
mode making use of electronic telecommunications. Other characteristics within their
definition include the lack of attendance of the student on campus, in some cases no
physical campus and in some models, the infrastructure and organisations is itself
deemed 'virtual' - existing entirely on-line. Furthermore, they suggest that the terms
'virtual university', ‘online university', 'cyber university' and 'global university' are
used interchangeably to define the 'university without walls'. Seeing 1995 as the
beginning of web based education Sclater (1998:1), suggests that the term 'virtual
university' is used to 'describe ventures ranging from the development of web-based
courses at 'bricks and mortar' universities to the creation of entirely new enterprises
dedicated solely to the delivery of online distance education'.
Such a plethora of attempts to characterize a virtual university clearly overlap and do
not easily lend themselves to defining what a virtual university is. The flexibility of
the Internet with regard to the amount and variety of information able to be
transmitted has permitted a diverse range of virtual university models to emerge. In
seeking to categorise the models, Krempl (1997) suggested two basic types: the single
mode, seen to be a totally virtual environment whereby students complete all course
requirements off campus and the dual mode, a model utilising a mix of virtual
learning in a traditional on campus setting. Sclater (1998:1) & Whittington & Slater
(1998:2) expanded these classifications and assert that virtual universities can be
classified under three broad headings; virtual front ends, collaborative ventures and
new institutions. In addition to these, Cunningham et al (1997, 2000) performed
exhaustive research in the area of the Corporate University model. Dissecting each of
these models is important in order to identify the core rationale of this paper:
1) Virtual front ends - these are defined as 'real' universities creating a web
presence for the purposes of providing information to staff and traditional
students. Phillips, Wellman & Merisotis (1998) call this model 'enhancements to
traditional campus-based instruction'. A separate site may be created to deliver
on-line courses from the university. There are many examples that may be found
on the Internet as traditional providers move to web based, distance education.
These models can be seen as 'going it alone', either using existing staff to convert
material for online delivery or employing specialist instructional designers to
3
convert material. Michigan State University (http://vu.msu.edu) and the University
of South Australia (http://www.unisa.edu.au) are but two examples of the
thousands of universities around the world that are venturing down this path.
2) Collaborative ventures - this model is a rapidly emerging trend whereby already
established traditional universities combine their marketing strength and academic
credibility at one main web entrance. Usually, each individual university in the
consortium provides the degree granting authority, accreditation and quality
assurance (Lewis 1999). A variation to this is Western Governors' University
(http://www.wgu.edu), founded in 1997, which draws upon academic institutions
from over 16 states in the USA. WGU has achieved Distance Education and
Training Council (DETC) accreditation and now has candidate status for Regional
Accreditation from a national consortium of accrediting agencies - an outcome on
this accreditation application is still not available. This collaborative model can be
seen as useful to devolve risk, whilst concurrently capitalizing on economies of
scale resulting from such ventures. Clyde Virtual University
(http://cvu.strath.ac.uk) was one of the first examples, bringing together four
traditional Scottish universities partly funded by the UK government in 1995. In
more recent times there has been a significant rise in this form of model; the most
recent examples are Universitas 21 (http://www.universitas.edu.au), University of
Phoenix, Western Governors, Next Ed (collaborating with Stanford University,
the University of Southern Queensland (of which 75% of its student body study
online), the Global University Alliance (http://www.gua.com) and the Australian
Catholic University and La Trobe University.
3) Corporate, non-award - Cunningham et al (1997 & 2000) concentrated the
majority of their research on these particular educational institutions,
hypothesising that this model posed a major threat to the market provision of
higher education in Australia. Their incisive research found that the term
'corporate university is an umbrella term which covers two different
manifestations of an organisations education/ training goals' (Cunningham et al,
2000; 13). This means that the corporate university is either a 'rebadged' internal
human resource training facility for multinational corporations or, more
significantly, a 're-visioned' human resource training facility 'with the goal of
achieving tighter control and ownership over the learning process by more clearly
linking learning programs to real business goals and strategies' (Meister 1998:ix).
Cunningham et al's (1997 & 2000) research concluded that this particular model
did not pose a significant threat to the traditional or virtual form of the established
university as the majority did not offer recognised degree programs; it may be
argued, however, that the use of the word ‘university’ by these organizations
further fuels confusion in the marketplace.
4) New institutions - these entities are universities created for the sole purpose of
developing their own courses and delivering them online. They generally have no
campus, physical library or significant physical facilities and, in most cases, the
number of full-time faculty can be counted on one hand (Newmann 1999).
Although Cunningham et al (2000) found no 'robust' examples of this particular
model, Jones International University http://jiu-weba.jonesinternational.edu/eprise/main/JIU/home.html is probably the most
prominent, accredited institution operating today, whilst the most controversial in
4
Australian higher education circles is Greenwich University
http://www.university.edu.nf . The remaining multitude of standalone, entirely
virtual universities fitting this particular model are difficult to delineate from the
emerging degree/diploma mills, outlined later in the paper. Sclater (1998) asserts
that the new institution model and those quality institutions that choose to adopt
this version, will have the greatest difficulty in bridging the credibility gap. The
writer concurs, suggesting that government agencies throughout the world have a
duty of care to provide significant online information for prospective consumers
of this type of educational model.
Of the models profiled in this study, perhaps the first two are the most reflective of
present, accredited virtual university activity on the Internet. However, as Gladieux &
Swail (1999) found, the lines blur between public and private, for-profit and not-forprofit and a variety of entrepreneurial combinations in between. Nevertheless,
consumer demand for either model of online provision does not seem to be curtailing.
Booker (1999) suggests that demographic, political, corporate and technological
forces will not allow a slow revolution towards virtual universities; moreover, he
claims that it is the demand for non-traditional education in an even more flexible
format that has catapulted the open, non-traditional university model into the domain
of the virtual university. With such demand and variety of providers available, it is
important for consumers of online education to understand how to differentiate
between legitimately accredited online providers and Internet degree/ diploma mills.
The following sections will address these important issues.
Accreditation – the good, the bad and the downright ugly.
The word ‘accreditation’ implies that an organisation or process has received some
form of endorsement and has reached a certain standard. In an education system,
accreditation indicates that a provider has met requirements laid down by an
independent, external body. The American higher education system ascribes to such a
definition, with accreditation of higher education providers underpinning the
credibility of various universities. Bear & Bear (1999:36) define accreditation from
such a context, being 'validation - a statement by a group of persons who are,
theoretically, impartial experts in higher education, that a given school, or department
within a school, has been thoroughly investigated and found worthy of approval'.
From an Australian perspective, the definition of accreditation is in a similar vein.
Woodhouse (Proposed Australian University Quality Assurance System 1999) defines
accreditation as an evaluation of whether an institution qualifies for approval. This
status may permit the institution to operate, enable its students to be eligible for grants
or qualify for certain employment. Anderson, Johnson & Milligan (2000:viii) define
accreditation as, 'the process whereby an authority, recognised by institutions and
government, determines that an institution offering courses in higher education may
become self-accrediting, or offer its own higher education awards subject to periodic
review. An accreditation agency certifies that the standards for a course are
appropriate for the award to which it leads; and that the methods are appropriate for
the purpose.'
5
Building on these definitions, Harman & Meek (2000:5) suggest accreditation has
developed three particular meanings in Australia:
1) The process, a review or assessment conducted by a government agency to
enable a Minister or an approved authority, acting under the authority of
appropriate legislation, to approve or recognise a higher education course and/
or award as being of an appropriate standard and being delivered in an
appropriate manner. In some cases accreditation of a higher education
institution means that from then on it is able to accredit or certify the quality of
its own courses, while in other cases accredited institutions must also seek
accreditation for each course.
2) Processes carried out by a government registration body to enable graduates of
a particular courses to practise in the State or Territory.
3) Assessment and recognition carried out by professional associations in such
areas as engineering, accounting, law, and architecture. If the course is
accredited, graduates are eligible for membership of the professional
association.
In order to try and put the term ‘accreditation’ into a global context, Dr John Bear, a
world reknowned writer and authority in non-traditional education and degree/
diploma mill fraud, has developed what are affectionately known as Generally
Accepted Accrediting Principles (GAAP). For an institution of higher learning to
possess globally 'recognised' accreditation, it must meet at least one of the following
criteria (Bear & Bear 1999:42):
•
•
•
•
The institution has been evaluated by British Royal Charter and an Act of
Parliament has been passed to enact the university's operation;
Accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S Department of Education;
Accredited by an agency recognized by CHEA (Council on Higher Education
Accreditation) Washington, U.S;
The institution is listed in one or more of the following publications:
Ø The International Handbook of Universities (a UNESCO publication);
Ø The Commonwealth Universities Yearbook;
Ø The World Education Series, published by PIER (Projects in International
Education Research), a joint venture of AACRAO (the American
Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers) and
NAFSA (the Association of International Educators) with the participation
of the College Board;
Ø The Countries Series (published by NOOSR, National Office for Overseas
Skills Recognition, Australia)
Although an informal classification system, GAAP provides an excellent checklist for
those who move in the circles of academia. However, what does accreditation really
mean to the prospective young, supposedly ‘cyber savvy’ online customer, seeking to
enroll in an online degree program? Greenwich University has already challenged the
6
standing of GAAP, as this university has an Act of Parliament assented to by both the
Norfolk Island Legislative and the Commonwealth of Australia. Greenwich
advertises itself throughout the world, particularly in Asia, as a ‘fully accredited
Australian university’. Institutionally, Greenwich certainly has an Act of Parliament
to authorize its operations, however the degrees it confers are, at present, not
Australian. Greenwich is not listed on the Australian Qualifications Framework
(AQF) register; the degrees it issues are, in essence, Norfolk Island degrees, not AQF
degrees. How acceptable are these in the world of academia and would other
universities around the world accept these as pre-requisites for other programs?
Whilst Greenwich University is certainly a rare exception to the case, there are
literally hundreds of virtual universities claiming accreditation from a myriad of
unrecognized accrediting agencies. The unfortunate reality is that any university can
be ‘accredited’ – it all depends by whom.
Examples abound with regard to unrecognized accreditation; the following are but a
few exemplars. The World Association of Universities and Colleges (www.webhed.com/wauc), is an unrecognized accrediting agency run out of a secretarial service
in Nevada, USA. The WAUC claims to accredit over twenty-two universities
worldwide, including the universities owned and managed by the founder of the
WAUC. In 1999, one of its members, Taft, sued the WAUC as it alleged the WAUC
had not performed a site visit upon its organization order to establish its bona-fides.
During discovery part of the lawsuit, the WAUC was unable to provide any evidence
suggesting it had conducted a site visit on any of its member institutions. With this
type of case, one would have thought that the agency would not be permitted to
operate. Unfortunately, due to the ease of online communication and the increase in
globalization, organizations such as the WAUC are able to accredit operations
throughout the world. For example, Bacani & Rohlfs (2000) found that the
Indonesian government does not recognize the diplomas awarded by one WAUC
member, the Distance Learning Institute in Jakarta. The two-year-old school,
however, is still allowed to operate. St Clements University
(http://www.stclements.edu) whose website is registered in Adelaide, South Australia
and legal entity is on the island of Grand Turk in the Turks and Caicos Islands in the
West Indies, is another accredited member of the WAUC and promotes it programs
heavily into Asia. In addition, another unrecognized agency, the ‘International
Accreditation for Universities, Colleges, Institutes, Organizations and Professionals’
(www.iauci.org) also accredits St Clements University, along with a string of other
unrecognized universities. Another Australian run university, The University of Asia,
which used to be run out of Darwin, Northern Territory and Adelaide, South Australia
claimed accreditation from the following accrediting agencies:
•
•
•
The Australian Universities Association (Australia) http://www.auaausuniversitiesasc.org
The Association of World Universities and Colleges (Switzerland)
http://www.wauc.ch
The Commonwealth Universities Association (United Kingdom)
http://www.cwlthuniversitiesassoc.org.uk &
http://www.cwlthuniversitiesassoc.org
7
•
•
The International Association of Accredited Universities (Europe)
Uniworld Association Inc. - An International Accreditation Organization of
Universities and Colleges http://www.uniworld.org
Coincidentally, each of the above agencies websites and domains belonged to the
University of Asia.
The above examples are mere snapshots of a disturbing increase in online activity –
the virtual-environment easily permits virtual activity. How can an online student
find a bona fide institution and how can they ensure that the degree they earn will be
recognised? Without doubt, recognized accreditation is imperative for the prospective
student, particularly those seeking to pursue an undergraduate degree and transfer this
qualification into a post-graduate program. A recent survey conducted by Dr John
Bear was presented to the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and
Admissions Officers at their national convention in April 2001, and confirms this
assertion. The survey sampled 335 registrars covering questions pertaining to 13
categories of schools, from regionally accredited to state-licensed. The results were
quite succinct; to the statement if a registrar would recognize a qualification issued by
a university that is: "Accredited by an agency that is not recognized by CHEA or the
U.S. Department of Education," one registrar said they "almost never" accept such
degrees; 16 said they "might possibly;" and 318 said "never."
Defining the Degree/ Diploma Mill
Porter (1972) suggests the term 'degree mill' has been loosely used to describe any
institution with questionable standards, lacking appropriate accreditation. Suggesting
they are the 'corrupters of degree integrity', Spille, Stuart & Sullivan (1997; p.vii),
further define a diploma mill as 'a person or an organisation that sells degrees or
awards degrees without an appropriate academic base and without requiring sufficient
academic achievement at the post secondary level' (Spille et al 1997; 28; Koepell
1998:2). Phillips (2000) provides a similar definition, allocating the term to any
university that operates primarily to make money or issue degrees/credentials without
any thought to ensuring that education occurs.
Some authors use the terms 'diploma mill' and 'degree mill' synonymously. For
example, SnoNet (2000) states that a ‘degree mill’ (or diploma mill) is an institution
that grants degrees with little or no work involved, whilst Laws (2000), suggests that a
diploma mill (or degree mill) is often defined as an illegal institution that grants bogus
degrees in exchange for money and without requiring the student to show proof of
course mastery, or to do any substantive coursework or testing.
A plethora of information exists pertaining to the degree/ diploma mill quandary,
emanating largely from the United States of America where the problem institutions
have festered since as early as 1876. This, according to the writer, is mainly due to
two reasons:
8
•
Accreditation of universities is a voluntary process in the United States of America.
As such, the US has been historically seen as the 'Mecca' for degree/ diploma mills,
the majority choosing not to lend themselves to independent verification of their
courses.
•
US jurisdictions such as South Dakota, Louisiana, Hawaii and now Montana have
historically possessed poor legislation governing the creation of universities and the
use of the word 'university' in business nomencla ture. Whilst jurisdictions such as
Hawaii have now passed appropriate legislation, it is only through active and
consistent enforcement (such as what is occurring there presently) will degree/
diploma mills be discouraged to ‘set-up-shop’ in these states.
In the United States, Geber (1999) suggests, diploma mills appear to be a unique post
World War Two phenomenon, capitalising on the then GI Bill which sparked
explosive demand for post-secondary education. In order to combat this problem, the
National Home Study Council was formed in 1926 'partly to identify the good schools
and set them apart from the charlatans'. During the 1960's, diploma mills lost
business due to the emergence of community colleges offering low tuition fees and
accessible higher education for all. However, the 'credentialism' era of the 80's saw
them once again flourish, whilst the onset of the Internet in the 90's has provided an
inexpensive means to reach millions of people (Geber 1999).
Degree/ diploma mills have become such a problem in the US, that some legitimate
universities have taught subjects on the topic. Miller (1991) recounts an
undergraduate subject called 'Diploma mills' where she was required to investigate
three diploma mills and report on her results. Her findings suggested that the main
force behind the prosperity of degree/ diploma mills was the confusion surrounding
accreditation, approval, authorization and licensing. This still appears to be the main
area diploma mills exploit due to the layperson's lack of knowledge and confusion
about accreditation. Phillips (2000) found diploma mills advertised widely as being
"fully accredited", "nationally accredited" or "accredited worldwide." Advertising
heavily in magazines, the Internet, newsgroups and providing impressive looking
Web sites, Phillips (2000) found that they are indeed "accredited", but by
unrecognised agencies often created by the institutions themselves.
This 'smokescreen' of legitimacy is what Bear & Bear (1999) suggest are the main
reason degree/ diploma mills are prospering, as it very difficult to legally define what
is meant by the term "diploma mill" or "degree mill". In addition, it is important to
note that many US institutions, which experts say mislead students 'do not appear to
have broken any state or federal law' (Guernsey 1997:6). Educators and law
enforcement officials are evidently reluctant to prosecute and slow to keep up with the
growing rate of online diploma mills (Mayfield 2000).
The terms 'degree mill' or 'diploma mill' are not found in any Australian literature;
however they are used commonly in American writings, particularly by various
education bodies. The Office of Degree Authorisation for the state of Oregon, USA,
cites Webster's Third New International Dictionary definition of a diploma mill, as:
'An institution of higher education operating without supervision of a state or
9
professional agency and granting diplomas which are either fraudulent or because of
the lack of proper standards, worthless’ (Oregon Student Assistance Commission,
2000). Similarly, the U.S. Office of Education in March 1974 defined a degree mill
as: "An organization that awards degrees without requiring its students to meet
educational standards for such degrees established and traditionally followed by
reputable institutions." (NCAHF 1997). Despite the US government having identified
the problem of degree mills, Arnstein (1982:552) suggests there are three main
reasons why authorities have done little to stamp out the problem:
1. The U.S has a strong tradition of pluralism, of encouraging diversity. This
makes it very difficult to categorise universities and colleges, no matter who
undertakes sorting this task.
2. A long tradition of state and local control operates in conjunction with the
pluralist tradition. At least two major federal laws enjoin federal officials
from interfering in the internal affairs of colleges.
3. At least one Cabinet member tried to stamp out diploma mills and failed. He
held a news conference and asked the U.S. commissioner of education for a
list of offending schools, only to learn that the problems of definition and due
process are so great that the list was terribly short and almost certainly
incomplete. The effort died quickly.
Clearly the existence of the degree/ diploma mill is a troubling barrier to the search
for legitimate online higher education, both for the student and the bona fide provider.
As such, in order to put the paper in perspective and provide strategies to detect
degree/ diploma mills, it is necessary to attempt to delineate between the two types of
models.
Criteria for defining a degree/ diploma mill
It is important to appreciate that there are many definitions and subsets of degree/
diploma mills; however, as the US Select Committee on the Ageing (Fraudulent
Credentials 1985) suggests, there are no definitive criteria to characterize the
constitution of a diploma/ degree mill as a variety of evidence must be presented to
form a conclusion. Nevertheless, in searching for a working typology, Snyder (1974)
and Patrick O'Neill (1991) suggest there are two types, which the writer ascribes to.
Firstly, citing the 'briefcase college' definition as espoused by Patrick O'Neill
(1991:82), or 'Type 1' as suggested by Snyder (1974), these particular organizations
operate from mailboxes, mail forwarding or telephone answering services. Offering
degrees at all levels in all disciplines, they sell degrees under fictitious names or sell
imitations that resemble degrees from bona fide institutions. In addition to this, some
sell transcripts, letters of recommendation (Spille & Stuart et al 1997), class rings,
graduation photos and yearbooks (Patrick O'Neill 1991).
10
The second type is those which pose as non-traditional (Arnsetin, 1982) or Type 2
institutions, sharing attributes of the Type 1 model, 'but with some token work
involved and all by correspondence' (Snyder, 1974:93). Defined as 'universities
without walls' these are difficult to differentiate from legitimate institutions as they
'emulate a legitimate non-traditional program, including accreditation from a phoney
agency, yet post standards' (Patrick O'Neill 1991:82).
Levicoff (2000) subscribes to the Type 1 and Type 2 definitions, suggesting the two
terms ‘degree mill’ and ‘diploma mill’ should be separated. He argues that a diploma
mill is a school that will sell a degree or diploma outright, or a school that requires
such a minimal amount of work (such as a ten-page dissertation for a doctorate). On
the other hand, he sees a degree mill as a school that actually requires some academic
work, perhaps even a substantial amount, but significantly less than comparable,
legitimately accredited programs (Levicoff, 2000).
An extensive body of literature exists covering the broad characteristics which typical
degree/ diploma mills possess; however none endeavour to break these down into the
Type 1 or Type 2 models as described above. Bear & Bear (1999) list, in alphabetical
order, over twenty-one pages of degree mills that have either been closed down due to
fraudulent activity or still operate and have been exposed by various publications;
there are, however, no explicit criteria on how they are classified in this section of
their publication. To assist in definitions, Levicoff (1992) suggests over 75 criteria
for identification of a degree/diploma mill, whilst Porter (1972) and Stewart and
Spille (1988) provide a comprehensive list of qualities most degree mills possess.
Whilst impossible to discuss each of the criteria in detail, the writer has developed the
following short list of compiled characteristics taken from leading authors in the field:
•
•
•
•
•
The organisation claims accreditation from an unrecognised accrediting agency and/
or agency that sounds like a legitimate accrediting agency (Fraudulent Credentials
1985; Levicoff, 1992; Askins, 1996:13; Stewart & Spille 1988; Guernsey, 1997;
Snyder 1974; Thomas, n.d; Rowh 1997; Kenyon 1999; Lord 1998; Better Business
Bureau of Hawaii in Omandam 1997).
The word 'authorised' is emphasised instead of 'accredited'; some organisations
criticize formal accreditation, stressing they are 'different, non-traditional and
alternative' thus implying they do not need to seek approval from a recognised
independent body (Patrick O'Neill, 1991; Better Business Bureau of Hawaii in
Omandam 1997)
Most claim to be associated with some obscure religious sect and on this basis claim
religious exemption (Spille & Stewart 1988; Snyder 1974; Rowh 1997; Hasenauer
1997)
The organisation has a name similar to a well-known college or university in addition
to using the words 'international' or 'US' to project prestige and far flung program
activity. (Fraudulent Credentials 1985; Stewart & Spille, 1988:29,30; McQuaid, 1988
in Patrick O'Neill, 1991; College is Possible - Legitimate Learning; Rowh 1997;
Kenyon 1999; American College Advisory Service.
The domain lookup of the universities website provides contact details of either a PO
Box, a mail forwarding company or fictitious location. Contact phone numbers are
either to a call centre, answering machine or mobile phone.
11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The website promoting the institution have the same elements as those of an
accredited college - a university seal, message from the president, links to catalogues
of courses and on-line application forms (Guernsey, 1997). In addition, they also
offer school rings, sweaters, pins and membership cards (Fraudulent Credentials
1985; Levicoff, 1992; Stewart & Spille, 1998; Snyder 1974).
The organisation frequently changes its address, sometimes moving from state to
state. (Levicoff, 1992; Stewart & Spille, 1988:30; College is Possible - Legitimate
Learning; American College Advisory Service).
The address may sound impressive, but mail is only received thorough a post office
box (Levicoff, 1992; Stewart & Spille, 1988; Better Business Bureau of Hawaii in
Omandam 1997).
Institutions use photos of other institutions and use P.O. Boxes and mail forwarding
services for correspondence (Porter 1972; Spille & Stewart 1988; Askins, 1996;
American College Advisory Service; Lord 1998).
Most claim to have libraries and classrooms and other essential facilities, but usually
they just have a desk and a telephone. (Porter, 1972:31). Campus facilities are either
of a poor standard or do not exist (Dejnozka & Kapel in Patrick O'Neill, 1991).
Operators of the degree mills usually have degrees from other degree mills and other
faculty members are usually non-existent or untrained (Porter, 1972:31). The
majority of staff have degrees from unaccredited institutions and/ or degrees from the
institution itself (Levicoff 1992).
Graduates' success is over emphasised, profiling excessive endorsements from alumni
and lists of organisations where students are employed (Levicoff, 1992; Stewart &
Spille, 1988).
Admission requirements are minimal or do not exist (Porter, 1972:31, Spille &
Stewart, 1988; College is Possible - Legitimate Learning; Thomas, n.d.; American
College Advisory Service).
Classrooms are often pictured but do not exist (Porter, 1972:31; American College
Advisory Service).
Advertisements are exaggerated by drastically enlarging bona fide curriculum
offerings (Porter: 1972:31, Dejnozka & Kapel in Patrick O'Neill, 1991; McQuaid in
Patrick O'Neill, 1991; Spille & Stewart 1988) whilst advertisements appear in
legitimate and prestigious magazines (Levicoff, 1992; Askins, 1996:11; Kenyon
1999).
Transcripts can be 'attested' by an official state or federal government (Spille &
Stewart 1988).
Credits for 'life experience' may comprise all, or most, of their requirements and are
given for almost everything imaginable (Fraudulent Credentials 1985; Tufts in Patrick
O'Neill, 1991; Arnstein, 1982; Snyder 1974; Spille & Stewart 1988; Kenyon 1999;
Lord 1998; Better Business Bureau of Hawaii in Omandam 1997).
Dissertations are 'a shallow analysis or descriptions of various aspects of a persons
job or current life situation', and are not defended (Spille & Stuart, 1988:30)
Sometimes an autobiography is sufficient work (Arnstein 1982) whilst quantity,
rather than quality is emphasised (Spille & Stuart 1988:32).
Narrative in the catalogue and promotional material is filled with errors in spelling,
grammar and syntax, whilst the overuse of Latin and extravagant, pretentious words
aims to impress the prospective student (Levicoff, 1992 ;Spille & Stewart 1988;
Salkever, 1999; College is Possible - Legitimate Learning; American College
Advisory Service; Lord 1998; Better Business Bureau of Hawaii in Omandam 1997 ).
Some call themselves 'pioneers in international education' or 'leaders in distance
education' (Guernsey, 1997).
12
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tuition is charged on a 'per degree' or 'flat fee' basis as opposed to normal per
semester, per subject process (Spille & Stuart 1988; Salkever 1999; College is
Possible - Legitimate Learning; American College Advisory Service; Lord 1998;
Better Business Bureau of Hawaii in Omandam 1997).
The school has an 'online catalogue' but no printed catalogue. (Levicoff 1992)
The schools website gives no physical address or phone number (Levicoff 1992)
Degrees can be obtained in a relatively short period of time (Dejnozka & Kapel in
Patrick O'Neill, 1991; Salkever 1999; Snyder 1974; Spille & Stewart 1988; College is
Possible - Legitimate Learning; Kenyon 1999; American College Advisory Service;
Lord 1998;Better Business Bureau of Hawaii in Omandam 1997).
Photographs of diplomas appear in catalogues; whilst sample copies are used in
promotional mailings and documents can be backdated (Levicoff, 1992; Spille &
Stewart 1988; College is Possible - Legitimate Learning; American College Advisory
Service). Certificates of incorporation and 'good standing' are also promoted to push
legitimacy.
Faculty listed in promotional material are either non-existent, or are from legitimate
organisations and do not know they are listed. An emphasis is made on degree
identification for individuals. For example John Doe, Chancellor, PhD, EdD, BSEd,
MAR, DD, LHD, LLD (Levicoff, 1992; Spille & Stewart, 1988:30; McQuaid in
Patrick O'Neill, 1991; American College Advisory Service; Lord 1998; Better
Business Bureau of Hawaii in Omandam 1997).
As previously mentioned, the above list is by no means exhaustive; however, within
the scope of this paper, it provides a useful checklist of the main characteristics of socalled degree/ diploma mills.
Perhaps the single most important factor explaining the increase of degree/ diploma
mill activity has been the advent of the Internet. This revolutionary communication
tool may permit any individual to perform the following steps for fewer than three
thousand dollars:
1. Incorporate a business name in an offshore tax haven, e.g. British Virgin
Islands, called ‘The University of Australia Pty Ltd’ and, through its own
articles of incorporation, empower the university to confer degrees from
Bachelor to PhD
2. Register domain names – one for the university e.g. http://www.university-ofaustralia-edu.org.au and one for an accrediting agency e.g.
http://www.austassocofuniversities.org.au
3. Create two websites, one for the university and one for the accrediting agency
that accredits The University of Australia. The publishing power of software
allows the ‘Chancellor’ to create the sites and maintain them with minimal
cost.
4. Print a range of glossy brochures, featuring pictures of Australian universities,
landmarks etc. Print application forms, referee forms and policies/ terms and
conditions
5. Open a PO Box and an answering service, in Australia, to accept all calls and
correspondence
6. Advertise heavily online over the Internet via free websites, and Australian
sites where advertisements are listed for free.
13
The anonymity and far reaching capabilities of this tool has made it increasingly
difficult to trace and monitor activity, and/ or to warn prospective students of the
problems of pursuing a degree/ diploma mill course. The following section will
profile such problems.
Degree/ diploma mills – new challenges on the Internet
Bear & Bear (1999) suggest that with the advent of new technology such as laser
printers, computers (and the Internet), diploma mills have multiplied. Mayfield
(2000) advocates that the Internet has spawned a new generation of cyber-degree
mills, which has 'rekindled the old fashioned diploma mill'. Ironically, Koepell
(1998) & Kenyon (1999) found degree/ diploma mills to be some of the first
institutions to set up business on the Internet, well before other types of business
activity. Guernsey (1997) suggests that the Internet has given new life to the degree
mill business, whilst Salkever (1999:2) claims it has proven to be '…a perfect vehicle
for degree programs that carry little weight in the job market'. Unfortunately, due to
the Internet and ease of publishing, 'no one really knows how many diploma mills
exist because new ones keep popping up and others re-name themselves or open
branches in new locations (Rowh 1997:1).
Cunningham et al (2000:143) acknowledge, 'that the US has been plagued for many
years by fraudulent operators in education delivery’, and that the advent of the
Internet has provided a new avenue for some of these 'diploma mills'', suggesting that
it is almost inevitable that their operations will bridge over into Australia. Citing the
Australasian Institute case (http://www.tai.edu.au) and other providers' loose use of
the term 'university', they showed concern that this problem was increasing. Certainly
forecasted figures on higher education and online delivery fuel these concerns. The
United States Internet Council (2000) forecasted spending on higher education
Internet related technologies would rise by 5 billion dollars in 2003, up from 3.1
billion in 1998, citing increased competition for students, the changing needs of these
students and the shifting missions of educational institutions. Presently 72% of
colleges offer some form of online distance education, up from 48% in 1998, whilst
forecasts for revenue from online education will rise to 2 billion dollars in 2003, up
from 350 million at present. Of more concern though, is the admission that the
number of online colleges offering accredited degrees is very low.
From another Australian perspective, Swannell (1999), Vice-Chancellor of the
University of Southern Queensland has expressed concern over the new Internet
paradigm, suggesting that existing universities and other higher education providers
have a responsibility to assist only quality providers of Internet-delivered education.
However, as Salkever (1999:2) highlights, the Internet increases the ability of degree
mills to cross borders and, 'reach millions of potential students quickly and easily'
whilst 'with so many colleges in operation, fake ones can lose themselves in the crowd
with relative ease' (Rowh, 1997:2).
14
Geber (1999) concurs with Rowh, citing the ease of creating authentic-looking web
pages; degree/ diploma mills can 'gull the unwary into assuming that the college
portrayed is genuine and accredited'. The anonymity of the Internet makes it virtually
impossible to find those that run fake virtual universities (Mayfield 2000).
Of the most notable degree mills to ever exist and thrive was Columbia State
University. On July 6, 1998, a US Federal Bureau of Investigation finally raided the
principal office of its operations in California. The owner, Ronald Pellar, was
sentenced to 67 months in federal prison, for fraud, but managed to escape and is a
federal fugitive apparently in Mexico. Evidence presented in the case found that
deposits to the university’s account in one year alone totaled more than US$16
million. How did such an elaborate façade manage to generate so much revenue? It
used the qualities that many established universities possess, and unfortunately,
degrees mills imitate. For instance, the "campus" photo on the front page of the
prospectus was that of Lyndhurst, a magnificent home in New York whilst it
advertised heavily in magazines and newspapers such as Time, The Economist, and
USA Today. With regard to accreditation, neither of the claimed accreditation
agencies ever existed, whilst the president, Austen Henry Leyard, was a famous
paleontologist who died over a century ago.
Without doubt, as Mayfield (2000) espouses, diploma mills threaten legitimate
distance-learning institutions, whose reputations and enrolments may suffer as they
lose students to bogus schools. But what do these 'diploma' and 'degree mills' look
like, and what do they offer? The following sections profile a few of the thousands
that operate on the Internet.
Examples of Internet diploma mills
Perhaps one of the most disturbing examples of Internet sites promoting the Type 1
'briefcase' model are those organizations providing instant degrees, transcripts and
associated paperwork for a fee. The following are examples of organizations
providing this service:
http://www.kaiserince.com/replacementservice.htm
http://www.geocities.com/davephilipau
http://www.geocities.com/hakers1000/fakedegree.HTM
http://www.photoidcards.com/moresamples.htm
http://www.professionaldegrees.com
http://www.replicadegree.com
http://www.diplomamakers.com/
http://www.blacksprofessional.com/
http://www.blackmarket-press.com
http://www.prestigious -images.com/
http://www.fake.to/cl/forums/
http://www.idhookupz.com/
http://www.replacementdiplomas.com
http://www.degreebank.com/
http://www.degree.freeserve.co.uk/index.html
http://www.buildinghopes.com/
http://www.cooldegree.com/
http://www.fakephotoid.com/private/frontpage.html
http://www.boxfreeconcepts.com
http://www.webspawner.com/ users/degree2
http://www.closedcollege.com
http://www.counterfeitcafe.com
http://www.fakeresumes.com
http://www.fakedegrees.com
http://www.virtualdegree.com/
http://www.phoneydiploma.com
http://www.fakediplomas.com/
http://www.counterfeitlibrary.com/
http://www.diplomas2go.com
http://www.myspace.co.uk/degree/index1.htm
http://www.bogusphd.com
http://paperbrain.tripod.com/
http://www.qualitydegrees.com/accessok.html
alt.2600.fake-id
http://www.virtualdegreesonline.com/
http://fake.to/cl/qual.asp
http://www.webspawner.com/users/fake21/
http://www.photoidcards.com
http://www.secretknowledge.com/index.htm
http://www.degreeconsulting.com/english.html
http://www.nashco.com/nashco/honorarydegree.html
http://newwritersguild.com/diplomas.html
15
http://www.idtemplates.com
http://www.factorydirectoutlet.com
http://www.globalidsite.com/index.html
http://members.tripod.com/~deed/
These organizations provide parchments from Bachelor to PhD level and
circumnavigate the legal issue of selling degrees by promoting the fact that they are
'novelty' products and should not be used for educational or employment purposes.
To demonstrate the ease of obtaining these degrees, Dr Bear purchased a fake Harvard
Law degree from a 'lost diploma replacement service' in Grants Pass, Oregon. For
$58.00 he obtained the degree and removed the peel off 'novelty item' sticker and
placed it not so proudly alongside his legitimately earned PhD from Michigan State
University.
In Australia, the most notable Type 1 organisation was 'Blacks Professionals', which
operated in Queensland until late 1999. Donaghy (1999) found this organisation was
selling "extremely authentic" degrees from universities around the world, particularly
established Australian universities, along with transcripts and associated paperwork.
The AVCC voiced concern about this operation and made inquiries, upon which it
promptly vanished from the Internet and set up a post office box in Spain. The
problem of these fake credential services has been highlighted by reseach conducted
in the area. ICC Commercial Crime Services (2000) profiled a six-month study
undertaken by a New York corporate investigation firm. This report found over a
quarter of 1,000 CVs analysed contained falsehoods, ranging to false claims supported
by fake documents obtained off the Internet. Experian, a company in the UK found
that lying in CVs about higher education qualifications accounted for 21 percent of
false information, second only to lies about previous employment. Further studies
have found that fake documentation has been a serious problem. Perhaps the most
prolific and perfect exemplar of the Type 1 model purporting to be an actual
university, is the following organization, which has used the below names over the
past four years:
University of San Moritz
University of Palmers Green
Harrington University http://www.harringtonuniv.org
Brentwick University http://www.brentwickuniv.org
University of Devonshire http://universityofdevonshire.org/
Shelbourne University http://henryheston.com/shelbourne/index.htm
University of Wexford http://www.universityofwexford.org
Ashford University http://www.ashforduniversity.org
Thornewood University http://thornewooduniversity.org
Parkwood University http://www.parkwooduniversity.org
Glencullen University http://www.henryheston.com/glencullen.htm
University of Ravenhurst http://64.55.192.251
Kingsfield University http://www.kingsfielduniversity.org
Westbourne University http://www.westbourneuniversity.org
This ‘university’ has used the following e-mail promotion which has circulated the
globe and found its way into the PC inbox of thousands of individuals:
16
------------------------------------------------UNIVERSITY
D I P L O M A S! ! !
Obtain a prosperous future, money earning power,
and the admiration of all.
Diplomas from prestigious non-accredited
universities based on your present knowledge
and life experience.
No required tests, classes, books, or interviews.
Bachelors, masters, MBA, and doctorate (PhD)
diplomas available in the field of your choice.
No one is turned down.
Confidentiality assured.
CALL NOW to receive your diploma
within days!!!
1 - 7 1 3 - 8 6 6 - XXXXX
Call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including
Sundays and holidays
------------------------------------------------
A myriad of articles have been published profiling the above organisation (Lloyd
2000; Mayfield 2000; Bresnahan 1999; Schulhof 1999; Keppeler 1998; Bruno & Chae
2000, Browne 2002; Singer 2002), all suggesting these universities do not exist, have
no campus, facilities or faculties. Moreover, articles published have found that the
organisation actually advises the consumer they are, indeed, a diploma mill as such
bypassing consumer protection laws. In a recent attempt to legitimise the
organisation, it appears the owners (who allegedly live in Jerusalem, with mail
forwarded from the US to Cyprus) have developed the "European Council for Open &
Distance Learning" http://www.ecdol.org and the Distance Learning Council of Europe
http://www.dlce.org designed to provide a form of accreditation for the above
universities. This accrediting organization is not recognized under GAAP, but lists
other established universities on its websites such as the University of Bradford,
Bristol and Cambridge in order to lend credibility.
Examples of Internet degree mills
Providing exemplars of the Type 2 model is perhaps, the most difficult challenge of
this paper. As discussed previously, it is very complicated to define what actually
constitutes a degree mill as many non-traditional programs (particularly totally online
virtual universities) are legally established with incorporated business names, but do
not however choose to seek any form of legitimate accreditation. Some are very
17
sincere in their endeavors, whist the majority and designed to defraud. In addition,
this type of institution requires the student to do some academic work, which may
vary in depth and duration, depending on how it is operated. In an attempt to
categorize these types of institutions, Bear & Bear (1999) list over eighteen pages of
'Other schools with Non residential Programs'. The following is a selection of these
types of universities, which the author does not label Internet degree mills, but have
been featured in the Australian media. The reader may visit, online and form their
own conclusions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
American Coastline University http://www.amercoastuniv.edu
Chancery International University http://www.chanceryiu.net
Golden State University http://www.goldenstateuniversity.edu
Greenwich University http://www.greenwich.edu.nf
International University of America http://www.merc-iua.ac
International University of Fundamental Studies http://www.iufs.edu
Kensington International University http://www.kensington.edu
Knightsbridge University http://www.knightsbridge-university.co.uk
St Clements University http://www.stclements.edu
St Regis University http://www.saintregisedu.org
Southern Pacific University http://www.spuni.edu
University of Asia http://www.uniasia -thailand.net
University of the Seven Rays http://www.sevenray.com
Warnborough University http://www.warnborough.edu
Washington International University http://www.wash.edu
Australia’s moves to eradicate the degree/ diploma mill problem
The former Federal Minister for Education, Dr David Kemp found, amongst other
major weaknesses in the current accreditation/ quality assurance framework that there
was 'a lack of coherence in policies and procedures for the accreditation of institutions
and courses' (Kemp 1999:5). As such, The National Protocols for Higher Education
Approval processes were developed, which, according to DETYA (2000), were
endorsed by the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth
Affairs on the 31st March 2000. Seen to be an integral part of the new national quality
assurance framework, the protocols were required to be written into of the mainland
state and territory Higher Education Acts by the 30th June 2001.
The protocols are designed to ensure two main outcomes:
1) to protect the title 'university' across all states and territories of Australia and
ensure its use is commensurate with a nationally agreed definition;
2) establish uniform processes for the creation and ongoing accreditation/ quality
assurance of universities in Australia and other providers seeking to offer
higher education awards in Australia.
At the writing of this paper, Victoria appears to be the only state that has met the
requirements, whilst New South Wales is close to having their new legislation passed.
18
Since 2001, there have been over six overseas institutions delivering higher education
courses into Australia without approval. This is of major concern to the community
and urgent action is required to protect the reputation of Australia’s burgeoning higher
education industry. The following section will provide strategies for various
stakeholders to be proactive and ensure due process is followed.
Summary and recommendations for the future
Australian educational providers
Clearly, based on the preceding information, the Internet is clouded with a plethora of
online deliverers and promotion of programs that are difficult to determine from
legitmate university providers. The slow integration of the National Protocols is of a
concern; in the interim, the following recommendations are made for established,
recognized providers of higher education in Australia:
•
•
•
•
Emphasize legitimate Australian accreditation – whilst this is a requirement under
the ESOS Act for providers delivering to overseas students, it is important to provide
as much information as possible. It is recommended that providers list e-mail
addresses and links to the online CRICOS database, DEST and the state accrediting
board that governs the providers registration and accreditation. Australian
universities should place online links to copies of their enacting Acts of Parliament to
re-assure the legitimacy of their programs to overseas students.
Promote the Australian ‘.edu.au’ domain name – To obtain such a domain suffix is
extremely difficult, and is a useful tool to differentiate credible Australian providers
from other online providers. The world-wide, generic ‘.edu’ suffix is extremely easy
to obtain, and many established degree mills posses such a domain. It is suggested
that providers warn students of such online institutions and thorough check the bona
fides of such providers.
Fraudulent credentials are rife - Ensure your institution implements tight document
verification procedures for parchments and transcripts of results. Use watermarks,
embedded logos and original verification features on all paperwork issued by your
organization.
Insist that overseas student who seek advanced standing in an Australian institution,
provide original copies of results and parchments which have been sent directly from
the host provider.
Federal and state governments
A recent Internet scam involving the online sale of inflated rugby and opera tickets
drew the ire of federal law enforcement agencies around the world, determined to
close these operations down. Why then, has there been such ignorance to the blatant
sale of worthless degrees, which has the potential to ruin the academic futures of so
many people? The Federal and State governments are implored to implement the
following measures:
•
The National Office of Overseas Skills Recognition (NOOSR) should make its
Country Series available online, free of charge, to all Australian Universities and
19
•
•
•
RTO’s. The availability of this invaluable resource would provide instant verification
of bona fide institutions.
The AVCC re-launch the degree verification service proposed by Degreeoftruth Pty
Ltd (http://www.degreeoftruth.com.au) or similar model. The steep rise in credential
fraud and availability of parchments from any university in the world via the Internet
is of major concern to the Australian higher education community.
Each state and territory seek to urgently address the integration of the National
Protocols into their higher education Acts.
DEST to create a centralised, online database, of unrecognised providers attempting
to deliver programs into Australia without approval. This information source should
also make links to student-orientated discussion sites such as Degreeinfo
(http://www.degreeinfo.com) and other online resources providing information on
degree mills and fraudulent online activity. The US State of Oregon’s Office of
Degree Authorisation model is a perfect model to follow.
These are indeed new times – and there is an urgent need to take new approaches reregulatory control to protect all stakeholders in the Australian higher education
system. For Australia to be seen as a credible competitor in the global education
market, it must be seen to be proactive in this area – not reactive, or suffer the same
fate as many of our Asian partners are encountering. These recommendations are but
a first step in ensuring we remain the wheat in a plethora of online chaff.
20
References
American College Advisory Service. Characteristics of a Diploma Mill in Corporate
University Review. [Online, accessed 20th July, 1999] URL:
http://www.traininguniversity.com/magazine/jan_feb99/front1a.html
Anderson, D & Johnson, R & Milligan, B (2000) Quality Assurance and
Accreditation in Australian Higher Education: An assessment of Australian and
international practice. DETYA, AGPS, Canberra.
Arnstein, G (1982) Credentialism: Why We Have Diploma Mills. Phi Delta Kappan.
Vol. 63, no.8, p.550-552.
Askins, P (ed.) (1996) Misrepresentation in the Marketplace and Beyond: Ethics
Under Siege. American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions
Officers (AACRAO) Task Force on Credential Fraud. Magna Publications,
Madison Wisconsin.
Bacani, C & Rohlfs, O (2000) Click Here for a Diploma. Get Ready for a deluge of
online degrees - and regulation issues. AsiaWeek.com, Special Report. [Online,
accessed 30th December, 2000]
URL:http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/features/universities2000/artic_online.ht
ml
Bear, J & Bear M (1999) Bears' guide to earning degrees non-traditionally. 13th ed.
Degree. Net Books, El Cerrito, California.
Booker, D (1999) Virtual Universities: Impact on Higher Education. Columbus State
University. [Online, accessed 22nd November, 1999]
URL:http://afis.colstate.edu/stephens/cis425/bookthes.html
Bresnahan, D (1999) The story of one booming diploma mill. The campus of the
University of San Moritz is a little hard to find. WorldNetDaily Exclusive, Friday
25th June 1999. [Online, accessed 15nd November, 1999]
URL:http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_bresnahan/19990625_xex_the_story
_br.shtml
Browne, H (2002) ‘Irish’ university is mobile phoney. Education and Living online
with the Irish Times. [Online, accessed 18th August, 2002]
URL:http://www.ireland.com/education/el/news4.htm
Bruno, A & Chae, S (2000) Diploma mill isn't smart investment. Mercury Center,
March 22, 2000.[Online, accessed 11th April, 2000]
URL:http://www.mercurycenter.com/columnists/actionline/docs/068080.htm
21
College is Possible - Legitimate Learning. [Online, accessed 25th April, 2000]
URL:http://www.collegeispossible.org/adults/adults_legitimate.htm
Cornwell, A & Kimber, I & Lewis, S (1999) Accreditation of Courses Offered by
Virtual Universities. Publication details unknown.
Cunningham, S & Tapsall, S & Ryan, Y & Stedman, L & Bagdon, K & Flew, T
(1997) New Media and Borderless Education: A Review of the Convergence
between Global Media Networks and Higher Education Provision. DETYA,
AGPS, Canberra.
Cunningham, S & Ryan, Y & Stedman, L & Tapsall, S & Bagdon, K & Flew, T &
Coaldrake, P (2000) The Business Borderless Education. DETYA, AGPS,
Canberra
DETYA (2000) MCEETYA's National Protocols for Higher Education Approval
Processes. [Online, accessed 24th July, 2000]
URL:http://www.detya.gov.au/highered/mceetya_cop.htm
Dolence, M & Norris, D (1995) Transforming Higher Education: A Vision for
Learning in the 21st Century, Society for College and University Planning, Ann
Arbour, Michigan in Cunningham, S & Ryan, Y & Stedman, L & Tapsall, S &
Bagdon, K & Flew, T & Coaldrake, P (2000) The Business Borderless Education.
DETYA, AGPS, Canberra.
Donaghy, B (1999) 'Wanna buy a university degree, mate?' Campus Review,
September 1 - 7, p.1
Fraudulent Credentials (1985); A joint report by the Chairmen of the Subcommittee
on Health and Long-term Care and the Subcommittee on Housing and Consumer
Interests of the Select Committee on Ageing. US House of Representatives,
Ninety Ninth Congress; First Session. Loompanics Unlimited, Port Townsend.
Geber, B. (1999) Diploma mills in the cyberage. Training, Volume 36 i6, p.48 (6)
Gilbert, A, D (1996) The Virtual and the Real in the Idea of a University 'The Virtual
University Symposium?' The University of Melbourne. [Online, accessed 6th
December, 1999] URL:http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/virtu/vc.htm
Gladieux, L. E & Swail, W. S. (1999) The Virtual University & Educational
Opportunity: Issues of Equity and Access for the Next Generation. The College
Entrance Examination Board, Washington D.C.
Guernsey, L (1997) Is the Internet Becoming a Bonanza for Diploma Mills? The
Chronicle of Higher Education. [Online, accessed 18th May, 1999]
URL:http://chronicle.com/data/articl-44.dir/issue-17.dir/17a02201.htm
22
Harman, G & Meek, V. Lynn (2000). Repositioning Quality Assurance and
Accreditation in Australian Higher Education. DETYA, AGPS, Canberra.
Hasenauer, H (1997) A Degree of Doubt. [Online, accessed 10th August, 1999]
URL:http://www.dtic.mil/soldiers/feb97/text/doubt1t.html
Heeger, G (2000) All Universities (will be) e-universities, Christian Science Monitor,
31st October 2000 [Online, accessed 5th November 2000] Available
email:EDUCAUSE@EDUCAUSE.EDU
ICC Commercial Crime Services (2000) Fake degrees a serious problem for
employers. London, 4th February 2000. [Online, accessed 27th July, 2000]
URL:http://www.iccwbo.org/ccs/news_archives/2000/fake_degrees.asp
Kemp, D (1999) Quality Assured: A new Australian quality assurance framework for
university education. Seminar on the New Quality Assurance Framework,
Canberra 10th December 1999.
Koepell, D. (1998) 'Easy Degrees Proliferate on the Web'. August 2nd 1998. The New
York Times on the Web. [Online, accessed 18th August, 1999]
URL:http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/08/biztech/articles/02internetdegrees-educ.html
Kenyon, H. (1999) Modern-day diploma mills continue to churn out trouble.
Corporate University Review. [Online, accessed 20th July, 1999]
URL:http://www.traininguniversity.com/magazine/jan_feb99/front1.html
Keppeler, T (1998) Service offers degrees for $200. The Daily Free Press; The
Independent Student Newspaper at Boston University. [Online, accessed 15th
November, 1999] URL:http://www.dfp.org/frontpage/1015982.html
Krempl, S (1997) The Virtual University: Education in the Cross Light between
Economy, Politics and Society. Proceedings of the International Conference:
"Role of Universities in the Information Society", RUFIS'97, Prague, Czech
Republic. [Online, accessed 10th September, 2000]
URL:http://dellsp2.vc.cvut.cz/cp1250/cc/icsc/NII/papers/krempl.html
Laws, R (2000) The Official alt.education.distance FAQ (Frequently Asked
Questions) v.8.0 [Online, accessed 22nd March, 2000]
URL:http://personalpages.tds.net/~rlaws/dlfaqv8.html
Levicoff, S (1992) The NIFI Criteria or How to Spot a Degree Mill in 75 Easy Steps.
[Online, accessed 17th April, 2000] URL:http://levicoff.tripod.com/criteria.htm
Levicoff, S (2000) Distance Education: The Unofficial FAQ [Online, accessed 16th
May, 2000] URL:http://levicoff.tripod.com/de-unfaq.htm
23
Levine, A (2000) The Soul of a New University. The New York Times, March 13th ,
2000. [Online, accessed 20th March, 2000]
URL:http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/early/03130013levi.html
Lewis, L & Snow, K & Farris, E & Levin, D (1999) Distance Education at
Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1997-98. U.S Department of Education,
National Centre for Education Statistics.
Lloyd, M (2000) Diploma mill has taken its pitch to the Internet. Seattle Times, 6th
April 2000.
Lord, M (1998) Top 10 signs you may be dealing with a diploma mill - 9/28/98. US
News Online. [Online, accessed 28th April, 1999]
URL:http://www.usnews.com/usnews/nycu/28dipbox.htm
Mayfield, K (2000) Phony Degrees a Hot Net Scam. Wired News, 23 March.
[Online, accessed 26th March, 2000]
URL:http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,35068,00.html
Meister, J (1998) Corporate Universities: Lessons in building a world-class workforce, McGraw Hill, New York. 2nd Ed in Cunningham, S & Ryan, Y & Stedman,
L & Tapsall, S & Bagdon, K & Flew, T & Coaldrake, P (2000) The Business
Borderless Education. DETYA, AGPS, Canberra.
Miller, D (1991) No classes, no campus, no problem: non-traditional degree-granting
programs (how diploma mills operate). Adult Learning, November 1991, v3 n3
p17 (3)
NCAHF (1997) Position Paper on Nutrition Diploma Mills in California
[Online, accessed 16th May, 2000] URL:http://www.hcrc.org/ncahf/pospap/dipmill.html
Newman (1999) Virtual Universities: Revolutionising Education or Just Digital
Diploma Mills. Government Technology, August 1999. [Online, accessed 16th
May, 2000]
URL:http://www.govtech.net/publications/gt/1999/aug/coverstoryfldr/coverstory.s
htm
Omandam, P (1997) When B.S. doesn't mean 'bachelor of science' It could stand for
'big scam,' because Hawaii is rife with diploma mills. Honolulu Star - Bulletin
Local News. [Online, accessed 5th September, 2000]
URL:http://starbulletin.com/97/03/25/news/story3.html
Oregon Student Assistance Commission; Office of Degree Authorisation (2000)
Diploma Mills. Want an "easy' college degree? Beware of illegal diploma mills!
[Online, accessed 3rd April, 2000]
URL:http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/diploma_mill.html
24
Patrick O'Neill, G (1991) The Diploma Mill Trap. Canadian Journal of Counselling,
Vol. 25: 1. pgs. 81-90.
Phillips, V (2000) Distance Learning, College Degrees and Accreditation FAQ
[Online, accessed 16th May, 2000]
URL:http://www.geteducated.com/articles/dlfaq.htm#Q9
Phillips, R & Wellman, J & Merisotis, J (1998) Assuring Quality in Distance
Learning. A Preliminary Review. A report prepared for the Council of Higher
Education Accreditation. Washington DC: The Institute for Higher Education
Policy (http://www.ihep.com/difference.pdf) in Lewis, L & Snow, K & Farris, E
& Levin, D (1999) Distance Education at Postsecondary Education Institutions:
1997-98. U.S Department of Education, National Centre for Education Statistics.
Porter, L. (1972) Degrees for Sale. Arco Publishing Company Inc, New York.
Rowh, M. (1997) Degrees of Guilt. The American Legion Magazine. April Issue,
Vol.142, No.4. [Online, accessed 8th September, 1999]
URL:http://www.legion.org/pubs/1997/guilt
Salkever, A. (1999) Looking at colleges on the Web? Let the buyer beware.
Christian Science Monitor, PSA-2297 p.2-3.
Schulhof, M (1999) How our man earned an advanced degree for $460 and no effort.
Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine, August 1999. [Online, accessed 15th
November 1999]
URL:http://kiplinger1.worldweb.net/magazine/archives/1999/August/Pf.htm
Sclater, N (1998) Migrating to the Virtual University: Issues and Strategies. Paper
presented at the LTN98: Implementing Learning Technologies: Strategies and
Experience, 6-8 April 1998, University of Southampton. [Online, accessed 19th
November 1999] URL:http://cvu.strath.ac.uk/niall/papers/ltn98.html
Singer, Z (2002) Dialling for diplomas. The Ottowa Citizen. Saturday, June 29th
2002. . [Online, accessed 2nd July, 2002]
URL:http://www.canada.com/components/printstory/printstory.asp
Silvio, J (1999) The Virtual Paradigm in Higher Education: Implications on Equity,
Quality and Relevance. Paper presented at the conference
SnoNet (2000) Distance Learning - Frequently asked questions [Online, accessed 16th
May, 2000] URL: http://www.snonet.org/learning/dl.htm#What's a "degree mill"
Snyder, P. (1974) A classification of diploma mills in the United States. College
Student Journal. Vol. 8, No.1 pgs. 92-95.
25
Spille, H & Stewart, D & Sullivan, E (1997) External degrees in the information age:
legitimate choices. American Council on Education and The Oryx Press, Phoenix
- Arizona.
Stewart, D & Spille, H (1988) Diploma mills: degrees of fraud. American Council on
Education and Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
Stuart, G. L (1994) The virtual university: Some practical considerations. In J. Steele
and J.G.Hedberg 9eds), Learning Environment Technology: Selected papers from
LETA 94, 332-337. Canberra: AJET Publications. [Online, accessed 22nd
November 1999]
URL:http://wwwtlc1.murdoch.edu.au/gen/aset/confs/edtech94/rw/stuart.html
Swannell, P (1999) 'Internet traps for eager players', The Australian, 24th March, p.35
The Daily News (2001) Fake doctor worked at Mpilo hospital. The Daily News,
Zimbabwe – Monday 5th November, 2001 7:42:31am (GMT +2) [Online, accessed
14th January, 2002]
URL:http://www.dailynews.co.zw/daily/2001/November/November5/2939.html
Thomas, C n.d., Red Flags to Watch When Choosing Distance Education Programs.
Will you get what you're paying for? [Online, accessed 1st November, 1999]
URL:http://www.lifelonglearning.com/distancelearnquality5.html
United States Internet Council (2000) State of the Internet Report 2000. Report
prepared by the International Technology and Trade Associates (ITTA) Inc,
September 1st , 2000. [Online, accessed 25th September, 2000]
URL:http://www.usic.org
Whittington, C & Sclater, N (1998). A Virtual University Model. In: WebNet 98
World Conference of the WWW, Internet and Intranet Proceedings (3rd Orlando
FL, November 7-12 1998)
Young, J. R (2000) Virtual-University Students Vie for Spots on Fantasy Football
Teams. Chronicle of Higher Education, Friday September 8th 2000 [Online, accessed
9th September 2000] URL:http://chronicle.com/free/2000/09/2000090801u.htm
26