DR ANATIDAE Wrote:Many clear thinking people would agree that JB had a very direct involvement with RCD's 'research' and if you read RCD's dissertation much of it has JB written all over it. But we must remember that RCD did not know JB before he commenced his 'research'. YEAH RIGHT!
We must also remember that in 2002-2003 JB had not yet got the knife in to unaccredited schools, but it all changed very suddenly and I'm sure this is a major reason why they attempted to hide RCD's dissertation - the facts were far too revealing!.
It seems very likely that Bear was involved with the survey, as his use of the term, "We gave" indicates. Either that or Bear is claiming credit for something he had no hand in, which I seriously doubt. The Las Vegas Mercury obviously believed it was a Bear survey he was describing to them. As Dr. Hayes has indicated, and I agree, much of the work sounded like warmed over Bear to start with.
There was an effort by Douglas to get both John Bear and his wife on the MIGS committee, not right either, so that shows he intended to do whatever was necessary to get a doctorate, including cutting the corners too sharply. John Bear was going to be on any committee that Douglas formed. He intended to get him a Ph.D. from some RA school and he did. He contacted Union offered to guarantee the money and Union let Douglas back in their program long after all the material was outdated and not supposed to be acceptable. He got a special exemption due to Bear's influence with Union.
All this sneaking about, deal cutting, breaking of university rules and standards finally paid off by delivering a Ph.D. to someone obviously not qualified, even at a low quality institution like Union. And it certainly appears that Bear himself was involved not only in guaranteeing payment, allowing his own work to be included, but also in doing part of the survey work itself. It is very likely he even helped design the survey, this while he was supposed to be on the committee guaranteeing the qulaity and value of the effort, NOT, doing part of it himself.
In fact, as Neil says, they don't even accurately quote the dissertation. The paper showed that degrees earned from state licensed schools work many times and have good value. Hell, 96% of the business managers said that viewed state licensed schools in a positive manner and yet Bear and Pet both deny that it says this by deliberately misquoting and falsely pretending to analyze the results fairly.
I think Bear allowed his own work to be included and that he helped do it!!! The dissertation was not, in my opinion, done entriely by Douglas but was a collaborative effort by Bear and Douglas. But, Bear can put this growing story to an end by releasing the study he claims to have done and who the other part of the "we" was. If he can show that a separate study, nothing to do with the Douglas survey, was done, then he can prove that there were indeed two separate studies, which I sincerely doubt. Just how likely is it that two studies were done at the same time by both men (Bear /Douglas) and that both asked the same questions of personnel managers and that Columbia State University came up at the top of both studies, very unlikely. But I'm open to written proof that two surveys exist. I just don't think they did. The descriptions are just too similar and the results too similar. We shall see.
1- Who was the other person/persons in the Bear study?
2- Exactly what did the Bear study ask and who did it ask?
3- Let's see the two studies side by side.