Diploma Mill Coverage: Unfair?
By Tom Shoop | Monday, August 25, 2008 | 03:02 PM
By Tom Shoop | Monday, August 25, 2008 | 03:02 PM
The Interagency Ethics Council Journal makes the case today that recent coverage of an investigation of an alleged diploma mill based in Spokane, Wash., was skewed to highlight potential malfeasance by federal employees.
"The diploma mill contained about 9,000 names in its customer database," IEC Journal notes. "Though only about a hundred or so of these names could be identified as federal employees, the headline for the USA Today story focused on those few: 'Probe: Fed employees may have bought fake degrees.' By this time, the news media pattern should be clear: Federal employees are favorite targets."
At the risk of being an apologist for the news media in general, I think there's a simple reason for the way this story has been covered. There's not much public interest at stake in the case of someone in the private sector who happens to buy a fake degree. But Americans have every right to be concerned about people who may have padded their resumes to win appointment to federal jobs for which they aren't actually qualified -- or to receive higher pay for higher education they don't actually have. That's defrauding the taxpayers, and focusing on it seems justified to me.
Comments
The usps Postmaster in Elizabeth City lied and padded her resume to get her position. I contacted USPS personel and USPS OIG and they blew me off. Ms. Holifield paid for her bachelor and masters degree from Hamilton University to get into the 2006 Postal Intern program and is now a USPS PostMaster. It must be nice to just lie and pry you don't get caught, she has been lucky. It stated that if you falsify your application you will be terminated...USPS doesn't give a shit'
steven johnson | Saturday, December 27, 2008 | 06:36 PMIt certainly adds to the reality that having a degree does not make a better or more qualified employee...I think we would be better off hiring/promoting folks based on their work experience and evaluated potential vs. having a framed piece of paper that means next to nothing...Think about this, with the falsification issue aside, what level of knowledge/experience changed when it was discovered that employee x possessed a 'diploma mill degree'...Lastly, I am certainly not defending these employees from their dishonesty, merely pointing out that in many cases, we hire/promote for the wrong reason...
bob s. | Wednesday, August 27, 2008 | 09:04 AMThe assumption that all 100 (out of 1.87 million civil servants) were committing fraud by having unaccredited degrees seems a stretch. Most online schools require some coursework, however cursory, and claim some accreditation, however bogus. The report does not make clear whether the "graduates" were intentionally trying to cheat the government or were gullible victims of the diploma mill while trying to improve their lot in life. I suggest that it was a mixed bag and case specific penalties probably ran the gamut from terminations on down.
Ted Bean | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 01:22 PMIm my federal career, I know of two people who claimed to have earned doctorates and did not have them. One, a staff member, was told that if he did not leave, he would be fired. He got a job in another agency and contiunued to fake his doctorate. The other, an SESer, got away with it because SESers reporting to him invented excuses for his behavior.
Vic | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 12:42 PMFake degrees in the private sector raise prices for us all. How many employees of banks etc have fake degrees? I bet plenty.
They are quietly let go to avoid embarresing the employer.
Wise Old Owl | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 12:17 PMFake degrees in the private sector raise prices for us all. How many employees of banks etc have fake degrees? I bet plenty.
They are quietly let go to avoid embarresing the employer.
Wise Old Owl | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 12:17 PMI'm not clear on the definiton of Government Employee. Did we count just Civil Servents, or did we count contratcors who had fake degrees who worked under contract for the Federal Government? It would also be interesting to know th percentage of Federal Government fake degress, versus private industry fake degrees. You know, just to see if we're doing better or worse in a most dubious comparison.
US | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 12:07 PMThis story was obviously meant to skew public opinion against federal employees. Why else would the story focus on one hundred names out of about 9,000 names in its customer database? Everyone needs to be careful about where they take classes. If something sounds too good to be true: it probably is.
Suzanne | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 11:35 AMFake degrees in the private sector raise prices for us all. How many employees of banks etc have fake degrees? I bet plenty.
They are quietly let go to avoid embarresing the employer.
Wise Old Owl | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 11:25 AMMr. Shoop is correct that people have a right to expect integrity from federal employees. Bad public servants are newsworthy. But when a journalist turns one percent of the facts into a headline it is simply bad journalism. Working in an agency that is frequently in the news, I all too often see journalists (and bloggers) go for the easy story. Rather than try to explain something that is complicated, they write the easy story that can be run under a salacious headline. How many accountants, bankers, lawyers, and journalists were on that list?
Ted | Tuesday, August 26, 2008 | 08:39 AMEven in the federal government, lying on your application for a job is immediate grounds for termination. And I know for a fact that it does and has happened.
Raven | Monday, August 25, 2008 | 07:29 PMI once had an MBA working for me in the private sector, yet his reasoning and writing skills were suspect of someone from a prestigious university. In time it came to light that his wife worked in admissions and had created his BS and MBA. He was immediately terminated. The most the taxpayers can hope for is a letter of reprimand and termination is out of the question
dan ketter | Monday, August 25, 2008 | 05:02 PMABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Editor Tom Shoop takes a look at news and events affecting the federal bureaucracy, from the perspective of a longtime observer of government.
feedARCHIVES
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
CATEGORIES
- Benefits
- Budget
- Comings and Goings
- Congress
- Defense
- Factoid of the Day
- Fedblog
- General News
- Government Operations
- Headline of the Day
- Homeland Security
- Intelligence
- Management
- Non-Profits
- Oversight
- Pay and Benefits
- Photo of the Day
- Political Appointees
- Press Release of the Day
- Procurement
- Quote of the Day
- The White House
- The Workforce
- The Workplace
- Transition