AMU Idiocy

[Yancy Derringer]

This comes to me directly from an AMU admin, who for obvious reasons shall remain nameless.

This is an actual weekly "forum" assignment in AMU class INTL 506 Analytics II. I'm told this is a required course in the AMU Intelligence Studies masters program.

This week you read two authors who discussed reforming the way we "do" intelligence analysis.

Please do the following:

1. Reply to the post.

2. Assess the arguments of each other and explain why you agree or disagree.

3. Answer the following question. Drawing on your own personal experience analyzing problems, do beleive that all "good" analysts need to behave the way the authors say they do? Why or why not?

4. Reply to the posts of two of your classmates.

Presumably they meant assess the work of each "author," not each "other," but it's anybody's guess. "Believe" is spelled incorrectly, and if it is a question it is "do you believe," not "do beleive." You don't read authors, you read the work of authors.

Now is there anybody out there that thinks this is appropriate academic writing at any level (including elementary school and kindergarten), let alone for graduate level courses? This obviously was written by an idiot, and it apparently is part of multiple courses taught by multiple different instructors, none of whom has bothered to correct it or even noticed it.

This isn't the only example I've received, and I'll be sharing some more in the next few posts. I'm glad to see AMU getting the notoriety it deserves here and hope that they clean house soon, before somebody notices that they are ripping off US miltary personnel with crap programs.

[Don Dresden]

...they are ripping off US miltary personnel with crap programs.

Good point Yancy. Both AMU and NCU cater to military, presumably because soldiers are trained to do what they are told and not question the competency of their superiors. Makes it all the more unlikely anyone is going to challenge the admin about their terrible courses and instructors. But the cat is out of the bag now.

Anyone who takes unfair advantage of US military personnel is on my permanent shit list. And I know we get lots of hits here from US military worldwide. But anyone--military or not-- thinking about an APU/AMU or NCU program really ought to think again. There's plenty of better (less fouled up, more prestigious) programs out there for the same or less money.

[Yancy Derringer]

Here's another gem I received from the aforementioned AMU admin.? This apparently also was posted in an INTL 506 Analytics II course by the same professor Valerie E Davis about whom a poster complained in another thread.?

Unlike some of the course materials, this apparently is the prof's own work, i.e., not just copied from the form syllabus.? I'm told this was the prof's discussion board post in direct response (i.e., not just a general comment) to another student's post, apparently intended as an act of intimidation because the prof disagreed with the student's take:

Hello Class,

We must step back and think about how we perceive or stereotype other people.? According to webster, he concepts of stereotype and prejudice are often confused with many other different meanings.? Also, it is defined as a simplistic, firmly held belief, often negative, about individual characteristics generalized to all people within that group.? This video not only highlight stereotypes but biases we may have on different groups.

Prof Davis

Wow.? That is really just sad.? Four obvious errors in grammar or spelling in four short sentences:?

1. A proper noun begins with a capital letter; i.e., "Webster"? not "webster."?? (Ironically, she claims to have attended Webster University.? You would think she might have it figured out by now.)

2. The phrase "he concepts"? may have been intended as either "his concepts"? or "the concepts,"? but it's your guess which, if either, because the author can't communicate her thoughts intelligently.

3. The number of the verb does not agree with the number of the subject; i.e., either "video highlights"? or "videos highlight,"? not "video highlight."?

4. "Bias" is used in the sentence as a noun, not a verb.? Hence we have biases "about"? or ""regarding"? different groups; we don't have biases "on"? different groups.

Also note that the attempted Webster quote is verbatim from Wikipedia!? Oops, apparently what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.

Grad level work or pure illiterate crap?

[Armando Ramos]

I'm told this is a required course in the AMU Intelligence Studies masters program.

The only intelligence degree that has any real meaning is one from the National Defense Intelligence College. You have to be military or a fed to even get in.

The only civilian intelligence designation that means anything is the SCIP CIP offered through the Fuld Gilad Herring Academy of Competitive Intelligence (ACI). There's a few others out there (e.g., ICI) but they have little weight to insiders. The CIP has far more real world value than anything you can get at APUS.

AMU/APUS offers nothing remotely similar to either one of these. Anybody thinking of taking an intelligence program there ought to make a go-around instead. If you are in such a program there, drop it unless you are close to graduating.

[Yancy Derringer]

Here's another one, this time from AMU's course INTL 635 Indications & Warnings. The prof here is alleged to be a PhD, but apparently she went to the beach the day they covered course administration.

This course is so convoluted it's almost impossible to explain. The course docs included two conflicting syllabi--plus a third doc that conflicted with the other two! It was impossible to tell when the study week ended (Saturday or Sunday), when forum responses were due (Tuesday, Saturday or Sunday), or when (or if) replies to other students' posts were due.

One week's discussion assignment included a video but no questions. Then it was "corrected" to include questions but no video.

When a student asked the prof about that assignment she was told by the prof it wasn't required, but the course gradebook and at least one syllabus still showed it as 50 points out of 1000, or 5% of the course grade.

The course discussions originally were posted as worth 100 points, but after students complained about getting only 50 out of 100 the prof finally did the math and revised the available points to 50.

I'm told that the course isn't over yet, so there might be some more follies to report on this one. Seems like the "Indications & Warnings" that students should be getting here would be to stay away from AMU.

[Dickie Billericay]

This course is so convoluted it's almost impossible to explain....Seems like the "Indications & Warnings" that students should be getting here would be to stay away from AMU.

Just the tip of the iceberg. I took some classes there back when it was DETC only and it was great. None of that ridiculous "discussion" nonsense. Completely went in the dumper when they got RA.

Of course the NCACS doesn't give a shit, but somebody ought to complain to DETC about the quality issues. Not that AMU cares about DETC any more, but it would be funny to see them lose the DETC accreditation and keep the regional. More proof of what we've been saying all along, that when it comes to DL the DETC has a lot more on the ball than RA does.

DETC Complaint Form

[Albert Hidel]

Completely went in the dumper when they got RA.

Sad but true. All in all, just another brick in the wall.

[Little Arminius]

Completely went in the dumper when they got RA.

Sad but true. All in all, just another brick in the wall.

On the other hand, by getting RA they also received the John Bear Gold Seal of Approval.

[Albert Hidel]

On the other hand, by getting RA they also received the John Bear Gold Seal of Approval.

And no one has died yet? Those Death Cartel games don't sell as well at DL schools.

[Yancy Derringer]

Attorneys General in 10 States Mount Joint Investigation Into For-Profit Colleges

The article doesn't specifically mention whether they are investigating APUS/AMU or Northcentral--but they should be! Not because they are for-profits but because they suck. Let's encourage AGs to investigate all these RA fraud mills, whether for-profit or not.

Why aren't the regionals looking into their own problems? Because they don't care! RA is a scam, there are no standards other than "can you afford it?"