Did Bear do Part of the Paper? Sounds like it.

[Randall Flagg]

"Bear surveyed personnel managers on which schools impressed them. "WE gave a list of 10 schools, five of them fake, and asked which ones they were likely to accept. Columbia State came out better than the accredited schools."
--Las Vegas Mercury--2004  

Bear's Survey? or Douglas' Survey?  

The Douglas dissertation was finished in 2003, just before this was published in the Las Vegas Mercury. The survey sounds just like the one Douglas did for his paper. Now here is the interesting thing. Did one of the committee members (John Bear) actually do part of the work? He says, "We gave a list", not he gave a list.  If Douglas is not part of the we, then who did Bear do a survey of Personnel Managers with?  Sounds to me as if one of the committee members (at Union-for Rich Douglas) went beyond his supposed unbiased position and actually participated in the doing of the paper itself.  That's a no-no.
  

[Brian Crawford]

"Bear surveyed personnel managers on which schools impressed them. "WE gave a list of 10 schools, five of them fake, and asked which ones they were likely to accept. Columbia State came out better than the accredited schools."
--Las Vegas Mercury--2004  

Bear's Survey? or Douglas' Survey?  

The Douglas dissertation was finished in 2003, just before this was published in the Las Vegas Mercury. The survey sounds just like the one Douglas did for his paper. Now here is the interesting thing. Did one of the committee members (John Bear) actually do part of the work? He says, "We gave a list", not he gave a list.  If Douglas is not part of the we, then who did Bear do a survey of Personnel Managers with?  Sounds to me as if one of the committee members (at Union-for Rich Douglas) went beyond his supposed unbiased position and actually participated in the doing of the paper itself.  That's a no-no.
  

Well Douglas kissed Bear's ass enough that Bear probably cut and pasted all of his work for Douglas to drop into his dissertation.

[DR ANATIDAE]

"Bear surveyed personnel managers on which schools impressed them. "WE gave a list of 10 schools, five of them fake, and asked which ones they were likely to accept. Columbia State came out better than the accredited schools."
--Las Vegas Mercury--2004  
Bear's Survey? or Douglas' Survey?  
The Douglas dissertation was finished in 2003, just before this was published in the Las Vegas Mercury. The survey sounds just like the one Douglas did for his paper. Now here is the interesting thing. Did one of the committee members (John Bear) actually do part of the work? He says, "We gave a list", not he gave a list.  If Douglas is not part of the we, then who did Bear do a survey of Personnel Managers with?  Sounds to me as if one of the committee members (at Union-for Rich Douglas) went beyond his supposed unbiased position and actually participated in the doing of the paper itself.  That's a no-no.
  

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!.

[Randall Flagg]

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.

[Randall Flagg]

By the time the SECOND committee was reformed in 2002 at Union it had been dead for years. In fact Douglas had moved all his work to MIGS and an entirely NEW committee formed. The old one at Union was defunct. You can't have two doctoral committees on the same subject and using the same material at the SAME time. So the Union committee was closed out and no longer existed. Douglas and Bear were both at MIGS (not Union) trying for all they were worth to close the deal and get the diploma for Richie. By the time Douglas moved back to Union, thanks to Papa Bear, and reformed the old committee, Bear had been both employer and friend for many years. So indeed Rich and John had known each other for almost 20 years when the NEW committee was assembled.

Here is the main point to take from this. You can't have two active committees at the same time using the same material for the same degree at two different colleges.  I can't get the same degree from Penn. State and the University of Tennessee based on the same work, therefore, the Union committee was no longer in existence, the MIGS committee was.  The old committee was started fresh, again, at Union for the final push. But it was not still in existence while Douglas was doing his MIGS song and dance.

[Ben Johnson]

Three things supporting thesis.

Douglas's dissertation was totally different from the first one prepared for Union.

Bear seems to have been willing to do anything to get a doctorate for Douglas.

Douglas obviously lacks the ability to do doctoral quality work.



One thing opposing thesis:

The research and dissertation were pretty simple, below the quality of work expected from Bear so it may have been Douglas.

[ham]

Three things supporting thesis.

Douglas's dissertation was totally different from the first one prepared for Union.

Bear seems to have been willing to do anything to get a doctorate for Douglas.

Douglas obviously lacks the ability to do doctoral quality work.



One thing opposing thesis:

The research and dissertation were pretty simple, below the quality of work expected from Bear so it may have been Douglas.

hell, there are loads of "do-my-homework" services over the net, plus data banks to order copies of dissertations from around the world for under $100 +s-h

[Randall Flagg]

Three things supporting thesis.

Douglas's dissertation was totally different from the first one prepared for Union.

Bear seems to have been willing to do anything to get a doctorate for Douglas.

Douglas obviously lacks the ability to do doctoral quality work.



One thing opposing thesis:

The research and dissertation were pretty simple, below the quality of work expected from Bear so it may have been Douglas.

All good points, Ben.  To the opposing point thesis. It is pretty easy for a smart man to dumb down something but it is hard as hell to be smarter than you really are. I doubt Bear would risk doing much of it. As you say Bear is a smart man. He, more than most, would know the limitations that Douglas has and displays every time he opens his mouth.  I believe he would deliberately not try to make major changes and adjustments to the work that would reflect too much skill. I think he just helped enough to make sure that the paper was presentable and would pass a minimum level.  At least that's my idea how it could be simple and basic and still have Bear paw prints all over it.

It's like a parent helping a kid write a term paper. It has to be good enough to pass without showing skills beyond the student's abilities. You want just enough but not too much, and, in this particular case, the Douglas doctorate, that is just what we have.  We are at the upper end of Douglas's skills and the bottom end of Bear's.