Talk:Intercultural Open University Foundation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Universities (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Can anyone give me a step-by-step breakdown on how to insert a university template, WP:UNI/TEMP, into this article. I have found descriptions and definitions, but not what actually needs to be typed within the article to make it happen. Thanks.Stretch call (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


List of names removed from article[edit]

Need to establish the notability of each name. Lame Name (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


  • Sandra Hurlong, PhD, Interim President
  • Anton M. Pieters, MS, Registrar
  • Roxanne K. Toothman, MS, Assistant to the President
  • Rene Goris, PhD, Consultant (Asia) and Holistic Medical Studies,[1]
  • Gulab Kothari, PhD, Consultant for Institutional Development
  • Charles Mercieca, PhD, Political Consultant (USA)
  • Dagmar Vermeer, PhD, Consultant (North America)
  • Muneo Yoshikawa, PhD, Resident Representative (Japan)
comment--the president is always included. DGG (talk) 17:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Core Faculty[edit]

External Scholars[edit]

Distinguished Graduates[edit]

  • Dr. Sohan L. Gandhi, Honorary President of Anuvhiba Global Organization, a transnational center for peace and nonviolent action associated with UN-DPI[2]
  • Dr. Ann Goldsmith, Social Activist with Auroville-a utopian community in South India
  • Dr. Kittiphun Khongsawatkiat, Finance Faculty Rangsit University (Thailand)[3]
  • Dr. John Knight, Professional Counselor, LMHC "Coastal Care Counseling"
  • Dr. Gulab Kothari, Editor and Managing Director of Rajasthan Patrika "Patrika-About Us"
  • Dr. Serguei Krivov, Assistant Research Professor, University of Vermont [4]
  • Dr. Rudi Jansma, Social Activist with the Jain Community "Evolution in the Vishu Purana"
  • Anton Pieters, MS, Web Technology and Design, Registrar for the Intercultural Open University Foundation
  • Dr. Lisa Shaffner, Social Science Faculty, Goldey-Beacom College (USA), National Board Certified Counselor, NBCC [5]
  • Dr. Christopher Thomas, Social Activist with the Dalit Population (India)
  • Dr. Dagmar Vermeer, Marketing Manager for International Law at Brill Academic Publishers (NL/Canada)
Note that the title "dr." is protected by Dutch law, and using it based on a degree/title from a non-accredited insitution is in violation of Dutch law. The suffix PhD is not proteced. I.e. if these "doctors" only have a PhD degree from IOU, they can be listed as X Y, PhD, but listing those people as Dr X Y is in violation of Dutch law. Arnoutf (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I think that she knows that, and that she also knows that although it is a crime, it won't be prosecuted. See principle of opportunity for an explanation. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed prosecution is unlikely unless the person actively start to use the rights of a doctor to the damage of others. Nevertheless we should not list such illegal titles in Wikipedia. Arnoutf (talk) 15:43, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


Please read notes on Verifiability and Neutral point of view. Links to the IOU website do not count as reliable references. If no reliable, third-party sources can be found featuring significant coverage of a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. Lame Name (talk) 16:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


As originating authors, we agree with you that this article should not appear in Wikipedia. How do we remove entire article and stop this process? Stretch call (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

As the main author of the article you can request a Speedy Deletion by placing this {{db-author}} at the top of the article page. The administrators will then deal with it. Lame Name (talk) 16:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


As reviewing administrator, I will not delete it under this provision. This only applies if there has been no substantial editing from anyone else than the originator, and that is not the case here. There appears to be no applicable speedy delete criterion.

It not uncommonly happens that someone starts a flattering article about themselves or their organization; often, after some objective editing, it is no longer quite as flattering, and the original author wants it removed, preferring in such a case to have nothing at all here. This is a violation of our core principle of Neutral Point of View. We have various provisions to assure a balanced and fair article, but we do not remove articles because of disputes over conflict. If we removed articles under these circumstances, we would become an advertising medium, not an encyclopedia, for all organizations would have control over their articles on them. They don;'t. Nobody owns an article. I suggest a reading of WP:Conflict of Interest, which explains our general policies, and also of our FAQ (on businesses and other organisations)

Any real degree granting institute, is usually considered notable at Wikipedia, accredited or unaccredited. This does not necessarily apply if the school is in essence a trade school, or if it does not actually have any students, or if sufficient reliable information for an NPOV article. is unavailable. Various suggestion that we cover schools that have no accreditation have been rejected, for it is just as important to provide information on them.

As for content, I do not think the current arrticle is expressed in a neutral fashion,; we do not usually have two different sections on accreditation. I will look atthe material later today.

However, anyone can propose deletion of an article via WP:AFD according to our WP:Deletion policy, and the community will judge. If one wishes to propose deletion, one is expected to say why, in terms of Wikipedia policies. DGG (talk) 17:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

As a contributor, I wish to have this article speedily deleted. It does not belong in Wikipedia. Boskhouse (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

As a contributor, I wish to have this article speedily deleted. It does not belong in Wikipedia. Shurlong (talk) 19:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

As a contributor, I wish to have this article speedily deleted. It does not belong in Wikipedia. Shurlong (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

As a contributor, I wish to have this article speedily deleted. It does not belong in Wikipedia. Shurlong (talk) 19:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

see WP:AFD. It does not meet the rules for WP:CSD, as I have said, & at least two other administrators, have said just the same. DGG (talk) 22:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Bears' IOU article[edit]

From Bears' guide to earning degrees by distance learning (page 204) ISBN 1580084311 published in 2003:

They claim to have been "internationally accredited" since 1983. None of the listed accreditors is recognized. One is at the same address as the university. Prof. J. R. Hakemulder informed us via email that "accreditation is a typical national American business, therefore, not so interesting for an international university such as IOU." The U.S. Campus is said to be Auburn, Washington, but there is no listed telephone number there. The U.S. "CyberCampus" turns out to be for Smith Chapel Bible College of Tallahassee, Florida, whose founder has two IOU doctorates, and all his staff members have either Smith Chapel degrees or IOU degrees. Prof Dr. Hakemulder informed us that these two campuses were both "cancelled for a long time" - yet the information remains on the Web site. The U.S. Vice president has run several unaccredited Louisiana universities. Degrees are offered in a wide range of fields, and or affiliated schools are listed for many countries. Once also known as International Open Distance University.

For the record. Lame Name (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

to the comment that "accreditation is a typical American business" - Well as a business it may be, but in the Netherlands the government accredites all recognised schools, from junior high school all the way to universities. And IOU has never been accredited by Dutch govt. Arnoutf (talk) 20:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

From my point of view[edit]

Firstly: I would broadly consider myself an Inclusionist. With nothing better to do I am happy to sit down with a cup of coffee and trawl through the AFDs and try and save something with a reference here or a copy edit there. This was my attitude when I came upon this article. It was, in formatting terms, a mess. Just by looking at it I suspected (rightly ;-) that chunks of it were cut and pasted copyright violations. But I was happy to sit down and start cleaning it up (roughly (on and off) from 2pm to 6:30pm).

Now: those blue links in the above paragraph are links that enable anyone who is interested to go and check that what I said was indeed the case. I could have said that I am entering the Miss World competition this year but I would not be able to provide a link to verify that fact.

As hard as I looked (and I have looked pretty hard) I am unable to find anything that would make a good blue link in this article. I can find a lot of disparaging/scam like observations about the IOU. We shall ignore the Hakemulder connection which only clouds the whole thing further.

It is claimed that the IOU is registered. When? Where? Registration number? Reference number? It is claimed that it is "highly credentialed with earned doctorates" What? Where? Who? Etc. You are now saying that it is reformed but made no mention of this in the article. The Status section is relevant to the History section as supplied. If you want to expand the History section and denounce what had gone on before by incorporating the Status section and then provide some evidence that things have changed please do. But I can find nothing to suggest that things are any different now. The News section of the IOU website boasts associations with the "Mobius Human Capital Graduate School" / formerly known as "International Mentorship Graduate School". These do not inspire confidence.

If we look for "Suzanne Drury" phd we only find an IOU connection. So she is no different from you or me or anyone else doing their regular everyday job. We do not qualify for a mention in Wikipedia and neither should she. Notability is a basic requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia . Anyone Googling "Suzanne Drury" will now see a Wikipedia connection which may suggest that she is in someway notable and, by association, implies that the IOU is also notable. I am yet to be convinced that it is. Lame Name (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

trying to do the right thing[edit]

I am going to address your issues. I think you and I can agree to disagree when necessary. The contributors of this article are all educators with impeccable credentials, and you can be assured that we did not cut and paste. The prose used was a combination of all of our efforts. The two articles you found through the search engines are basically the only negative press about IOU. We spend considerable time looking on various search engines looking for such articles. We want to thank you for going to the website and we are sorry that your interpertation was more of the same---whatever that means. Over the past two years we have placed considerable time and energy devloping a crediable presence for IOU in adult based distance education. We feel strong enough about our changes that we have made application for validation from the Open University Validation Services (OUVS). Our President and faculty are all experienced in distance education with exceptional credentials. We added the Curriculum Vitae(s) to the article today. The contributors looked at the requirements to meet the notability requirement for academics and felt that our faculty did meet that requirement. Your reference to Dr. Drury and also me as "just regular people on the street" left us with some questions? Dr. Drury is a graduate of the University of Chicago, one of the top psychology universities, is a licensed clinical psychologist, well published, academic appointments above the assistant professor level, numerous awards, and an IOU professor. Yes, she would add to the crediabilty of IOU just as all the faculty would do. I also add my academic credentials for the use of IOU. Is that not how you build a University? The NEWS section that you looked at on the website that announced the merger of the International Mentorship Graduate School was not something that would compromise the crediabilty of IOU as you implied. Dr. Muneo Yoshikawa is a core faculty member and also serves on the Board of Governors for IOU. He also is Professor Emeritus at the University of Hawaii. Dr. Yoshikawa is a well respected scholar in Japan and is well published. You should google him... We will add our Dutch registeration to the article: Stichting Intercultural Open University Foundation KvK 41003178. I keep holding out hope that we can work together.Stretch call (talk) 04:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Notability & Verifiability[edit]

This is not a personal matter or opinion it is the criteria by which all content qualifies to be added to Wikipedia. Please fully read the guidelines on Notability with particular regard to Notability of Academics.

If it can be established that a subject is notable enough to be added to Wikipedia any claims made in the article need to have verifiable references from reliable sources.

This is nothing to do with me. This is how Wikipedia works. I, and millions of other editors, manage to work with it. I am more than happy to work with you on the article but the requirements for notability and verifiability are the foundations upon which we build. Lame Name (talk) 16:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


Thank you very much for your reply. I did look at the notability section as it relates to academics and my interpertation was that our faculty met the notability requirement in that they are all highly qualified academics with well documented Curriculum Vitae(s) with numerous academic appointments and plenty of well established research. This faculty was selected because they were notable for their work in alternative and distance education. Not to mention a particular faculty name but one of the faculty members could easily be considered the leading figure in the field of distance eduaction. The problem IOU would have with the article is that without our faculty being considered notable enough for Wikepedia requirements we basically have nothing in terms of what it is to define our university. I assume our distingushied graduate list was dropped for the lack of notabilty? Again the contributors looked at the notability requirements for distinguished graduates and felt that our graduates did indeed meet the requirement. We included their URL(s), webpages where appropiate, publications, and the like. Our graduates included research professors, newspaper publishers, promient social activists, community organizers, and many had numerous publications and one had over 110+ scientific publications. I think I have made my argument, and since we have little if any controls on the article I assume you as the editor can make whatever changes that are appropiate for Wikepedia. It may just come down to what Wikepedia considers notable and what we as contributors call notable in supporting our article.Stretch call (talk) 21:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Firstly - the article can be edited by anybody. It does not belong to anyone. Nobody has control of the article and everyone is encouraged to edit it boldly.
Yes the notion of notability is one that is often discussed but we have to live with what is broadly agreed by consensus within Wikipedia. I do not see your claims of notability. When I look (for example) for Raynond Miller I find a couple of links to the IOU site and then a link back to this article. I am not seeing people discussing his research, publications, or ideas about distance education. So how do you see him meeting any of the criteria for notability? Compare with (for example) Barry Barnes who produces page after page of books, conferences, articles etc. etc. Lame Name (talk) 22:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

notability revisted[edit]

Ray Miller was selected for the years that he put into developing Wilmington University in the USA. He was instrumental in taking this grass root university to a substantial accredited university. He was also selected for his creativity in his play productions and for his ability to edit and supervise dissertation research. He is published and you have to admit he has excellent academic credentials. If we go with your argument then I doubt that only a very few universities would have the type of notable faculty you are referencing. All you would have in Wikepedia would be just the top research universities. Educational foundations like IOU would never deserve a listing. I think Dr. Miller is notable as is all the remaining faculty based on the academic notability section you referenced---meeting one criteria.Stretch call (talk) 22:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Back to Notability[edit]

I have read the Wikepedia requirements for notabilty again and I still beleive that the IOU faculty meets the academic/professor criteria and if not that the possible exception that can be made when a professor dedicates a life time of work to academics. The contributors to this article want you to know that these notable(?) professors at IOU are all volunteers. The President, the adminstration,and the faculty do not receive a salary. In fact the Dutch Government has designated IOU a tax-exempt charity. Our professors have come from emertius professorships, and some still have professorships at other universities and serve as external scholars, and others are still involved in social change/social activism programs. We are very fortunate to have this highly credentialed faculty.Stretch call (talk) 01:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

How unfortunate that notability is limited to web citations and that professors in institutions of higher learning are not considered notable by Wikipedia editors. Many academics in the US do not have web pages as their audience is their students and the public at large that attends their lectures and reads their publications. Their notability stems from their role in their universities. To have the rank of Professor in a US institution is indeed notable as the rank is reserved for the most acclaimed scholars and takes a minimum of eight years of teaching and publishing to achieve, and is only awarded if one's academic peers judge the teacher sufficiently notable in their field.Puntero1 (talk) 01:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Notability is not limited to web citations. It does need to be verifiable. Wikipedia has an article on Wilmington University. That article does not mention Raymond Miller. Wilmington University has a web site. That web site has a search page. That search page produces nothing for Raymond Miller. If I Google "Raymond Miller" "Wilmington I find nothing except..........wait for it.......... a link to the IOU website. Lame Name (talk) 03:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

    • FWIW, our criteria of notability is at WP:PROF. In general, full professors at major us research universities do qualify, but it is not automatic, and depends on the criteria given there. Full professor at other US universities sometimes qualify, sometimes not, depending on their particular records. I would not say that everyone holding the rank of professor at a university in the US is "an acclaimed scholar"In traditional European universities where there is a single professor in each department, they almost always do qualify. It is however true that many older distinguished scholars do not have web pages--but if they are distinguished, they will have distinguished publication records (it's hard to say precisely what counts because it depends on the subject, but two or three well reviewed books from first rate academic presses is the usual standard in the humanities). The criterion of being mentioned at the university page is not however correct; it's circular, because our criterion for being listed in the university page is being notable enough to have a WP article. And I point out that Wilmington University is by no stretch of the imagination a major research university. I would be very pleasantly surprised if more than a few of its faculty met the WP:PROF standard. DGG ( talk ) 07:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

again notability[edit]

As a contributor to the IOU article and holding the rank of professor in a USA university, I agree with the user talk (Punterol) in their interpertation of notability. In regards to Dr. Miller you would have to look at his CV and not just google his name but at least some of his publications. I found relatively easy a leading book on folklore that he wrote with a James F. McCloy entitled The Jersey Devil by James F. McCloy and Ray Miller. I also found on google that the book had been devloped as a movie script and the film was indeed produced and released. The Wilmington University site reads exactly like an advertisement---there is nothing there on that site that could get you little, if any, information. Some of these links that you discuss must come from information in the CV(s). I think you would agree that professors and CV(s) are linked in history. Now if you find something that is inaccurate on the CV, then that is another matter. I still contend that there is a rush to judgement on this article. Dr. Miller is indeed a respected and notable professor with publications that are verifiable using various search providers.Stretch call (talk) 14:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

it is irrelevant who agrees with who and what interpretations they use. Wikipedia has a criteria for notability by which we have to abide.
If you have verifiable information please do add it to the article. CVs are not a reliable source of information but they are worth checking. You need to supply a reference that a reader can use to check the details provided. Something to link the book (ISBN 0912608110) to the IOU Ray Miller would be good - and don't forget to link it into the Jersey Devil article and the 13th Child film's article - which references with this review. Miller is also listed here - another non IOU source. Lame Name (talk) 14:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry that was Serguei Krivov listed not Miller Lame Name (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


One of the contributors will add the ISBN number for all of Dr. Miller's publications. Thank you very much for this help. We are all trying to make this article fair and balanced.Stretch call (talk) 15:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


I nominated this for AFD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Intercultural_Open_University. I think the above makes clear AFD is the right forum for deciding whether this article should be deleted or not. My personal opinion is yes (for reasons I have written there), but I stumbled across this by accident and have little true insight. Martinp (talk) 15:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


As a contributor to this article I did not have any intentions of creating I assume what you call a "coatrack". All the contributors were aware of the UNESCO and the Bear's article about the university. We simply made the decision that for one the Bear article (2003) was outdated and if it was to be placed in the article then it needed to stated in a fair and balanced manner. Like the Bear article the UNESCO article has been out there for years. We have asked them to remove us from this list and cannot even get a reply. The editor who was helping us with the article placed both references in a developed section called status, and we responded with a updated status. We felt that this balanced the UNESCO claim and the Bear article. The contributors are fine with the status/update status. It has been suggested by our consulting editor that we combine these two sections into a history of the university from 1981 to the present. The reason we decided to list this article with Wikepedia was to get a fair and balanced article with web linkage to our university. It is obvious that we are not a dubious institution with dubious professors as stated in the UNESCO article. Since the President, adminstration, and faculty all are volunteers we felt that we occupied a special place in distance education. Naturally, we wanted the distance education universities and others to be able to see the notability of our faculty. Since we have been working with an editor we have already found numerous links to our university and faculty. We have felt that we have been making progress with the article. Obviously statement like "coatrack", deception, fraud, etc. are hurtful and demeaning to the contributors as well as the university. Because of this language directed toward us from Wikepedia the original contributors agreed to ask for deletion, and it was for that reason alone that we made that request and it was denied.Stretch call (talk) 18:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

If you want an article on Wikipedia now is the time to write it. I would suggest cutting the article down to what is verifiable (using the "numerous links to our university and faculty" as references). A short referenced article is going to be stronger than a lengthy article with a lot of unverifiable claims. The article can be expanded later as more material becomes available. You will not save the article by arguing points on this discussion page. Lame Name (talk) 19:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


The reference to a Coatrack refers to this essay. The sections from But it's true onwards are perhaps the most apposite in this case. Lame Name (talk) 19:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

brief note[edit]

Thank you for the suggestion as to a short article. The contributors will give it a try---hopefully we will get a chance to work on it tonight. Thanks again for all your help.Stretch call (talk) 20:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I suggest adding some more details of the faculty members where you consider them notable and there are verifiable source. A paragraph along the lines of ... "The faculty includes... Miller author of "Jersey Devil" , etc. etc."
Perhaps some details of numbers of students, how the IOU attracts students etc.
Rewrite things like "devoted to social change and research in a global perspective" which sound more marketing than encyclopedic.

Lame Name (talk) 10:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

a note of appreciation[edit]

Looks like we all are on the same page now. Thank you for educating us on how to write a Wikepedia article. I know we were reluctant students and we do appreciate your patience.Stretch call (talk) 19:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to leave a note on the AFD page. Start a comment with a *'''Keep''' and then argue your case for keeping the article. It is not a vote but a gathering of opinions which should arrive at some consensus as to whether the article stays or goes. Lame Name (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

editing thanks and questions[edit]

Thanks for adding the "Double Swing" theory reference for Dr. Yoshikawa and the continued clean-up. The contributors are aware that a university template is needed and we are not sure as to how to place it onto the article?, or do you think that this is something that we should wait on? We do have our enrollement figures and how we attract our students. Should this information be a seperate heading or placed elsewhere? ThanksStretch call (talk) 21:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations for a notable article. I have renamed the History section as Profile. You can add information there and expand it until it becomes too long and needs to be broken down into separate headings. Lame Name (talk) 13:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for everything[edit]

We would of never made it without your help. You can be assured we will continue to strengthen this article.Stretch call (talk) 20:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

clarification and help[edit]

Can you help us understand why the reference to the UNESCO (Nairobi)article should remain since it no longer exists? They killed the link upon request. It seems that we are referencing something that has no link to it and cannot be verified. How can we make this work? Thank you.Stretch call (talk) 14:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I did not realise that it was just a dead link. I assumed they had retracted their comments. I fear these things cannot be unsaid and that it will be easy to replace the link with a working one - I just did. Lame Name (talk) 15:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Puzzling to us[edit]

The UNESCO Nairobi link was removed at the request of our emails to the Nairobi office. The Italian article that you replaced the dead link with is a quote from the original UNESCO (Nairobi) article. What we do not understand is why would we need to have this article referenced since the source has been retracted? The Italian article did not attribute their reference to the Nairobi office, they only mentioned UNESCO which is not an accurate reference. If you insist on leaving this article, we think, to be accurate, it needs to say UNESCO (Nairobi).Stretch call (talk) 19:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

We are back to our old friend verifiability. When you say "the source has been retracted" can this be verified? Did they issue some notification that they got it wrong and no longer consider their comments valid? Lame Name (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


You are right, our old friend is back. The problem we have had with the UNESCO(Nairobi) article is that it was undated, unsigned, unreferenced, and unverifiable. We began email correspondence with the Nariobi office soon after this article was accepted by Wikipedia. In February 2009, the Nairobi office of UNESCO was re-organized with a new staff and director. We were then ready to go directly to UNESCO with our case when we found that the article had been deleted.We thought this was the end of it, and we were delighted. We knew the Italian PDF file was on the web, but felt that since it was a quote from the UNESCO (Nairobi) article that it would not merit inclusion in our Wikipedia article.Stretch call (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Secondary vs Primary Sources[edit]

When the primary source of information has been removed from circulation by the publisher, why would the secondary source be important to list in a Wikipedia article? The Italian article is a secondary source of information. Scholarly research normally requires the listing of primary sources of information.Puntero1 (talk) 16:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia it is not the place for original research and as such secondary sources are preferred. Lame Name (talk)

Vandalism by User:Stretch call[edit]

Dear User:Stretch call, although that it may be your university, it is not your encyclopedia. Stop vandalizing the articles or you'll get banned from Wikipedia. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Biased Editing[edit]

User Tgeorgescu, I was just trying to cope with your bias editing involved in this article. In no way was I trying to vandalize the article. I believe that the article needed a neutral and civilized tone that represent a fair and balanced picture using both negative and positive verifiability articles. In your references I noticed that you selected the "worst of the worst" to get your point across about the negative nature of this foundation. The reader of these references should have access to all the ideas expressed in these articles and not just quotes that you personally deem worthy. As an editor of this article I do not have trouble with the references even though I am not sure the 2008 Dutch newspaper article meet the verifiability requirement? The linked reference to Jesus was very puzzling and I simply "did not get it". I made some editing changes in the hope that we can reach some agreements on a fair and balanced article. I have also asked another editor at Wikipedia for help in addition to an adminstrator. Hopefully we can all work toward resolving these issues.Stretch call (talk) 06:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I was asked for help by both you and Tgeorgescu.
I took a quick look, and although I recognize the validity of some of your concerns, my impression is that fundamentally Tgeorgescu's material is based on sources, and offers a balanced view of the subject to counter-act the pure promotionalism that was originally in the article. What the article now needs is integration, since separation into a criticism section is not the ideal way of doing it. I do have some concerns: I am not happy with the detailed wording, including that in the example you have mentioned. I am also aware of some possibly questionable statements-- are all the 2010 faculty of high reputation--only two are mentioned; and, for the ones that are, are they in fact active at the university and do they acknowledge it in their own CV? --it is not unheard of for organizations to claim distinguished members that they do not actually have on staff. And has the 2008 reorganization succeeded in "breaking from past manifestations." If the difference can be documented, perhaps the article should be reorganized to talk about the earlier and the later universities. If it can not be documented, it's mere puffery. We need to check on the reputation of the organizations it claims to be affiliated with. Do any of them have articles on wikipedia? Os there any actual verifiable information about exactly how many students and faculty the university has in the various years, or at least currently? especially full time students and faculty? How mny degrees have actually been awarded at the various programs and campuses? It may not be correct just to refer to "degrees"--degrees not recognized by national accrediting bodies must not be specified as degree without a qualification. I call both your attention to our rules about Conflict of Interest If either of you you are in any way affiliated with the university, it would be better for you not to edit the actual article, but answer these questions and submit other desired changes on the article talk page, so the information can be integrated in the article. Let's continue here, please, not on user talk pages. DGG ( talk ) 06:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Learner-centered Pedagogy[edit]

I participated in some of the original editing of this page. I am experienced in peer review of academic programs. The Graduate School of IOU Foundation is currently a candidate for peer review and certification of its Graduate School. I include below a brief description of how the university functions.

IOU Foundation is a small degree-offering organization that operates as a charitable educational foundation. There is an administrative staff of 5, and a faculty of 15 members who serve as mentors to the adult graduate learners. At its peak, the Graduate School of IOU Foundation enrollment is approximately 50 learners. The institution is staffed completely with volunteers. A sliding scale of modest tuition and a modest endowment maintain operational costs, such as professional dues and the headquarters in The Netherlands and the USA. Tuition is based on individual need and the economy of the country of residence. Each faculty member has over 25 years experience in distance education and learner-centered adult pedagogy. Through IOU Foundation’s graduate program, faculty members offer the legacy of professional insight, research competency and learner-centered distance education experience to each learner. The faculty volunteer their service as mentors to the graduate learners because they are committed to the pedagogy that IOU Foundation promotes. IOU Foundation is not a conventional institution. The most obvious deviations from the conventional are that courses and grades are not provided. The Graduate School focuses on learners acquiring the knowledge, skills and proficiencies needed based on its clearly defined learner and institution quality assurance methods. In cooperation with a faculty mentor, learners engage in a two prong learning experience. Prong 1: Each learner creates an individualized curriculum of proficiency areas that are relevant to his/her specialization. Prong 2: Each learner identifies a capstone research project and develop the skills and understandings needed to conduct that research. Learners are mentored to investigate important practical problems, to disseminate their research results to varied appropriate audiences who can benefit, and to work with practitioners to implement and test research findings in their fields. Graduates perform important and socially relevant work in a variety of fields. In Higher Education graduates hold the following possitions:Research Assistant Professor at the University of Vermont (USA); Licensed therapist and psychology faculty at Goldey Beacom College (USA);Professor of Finance at Rangist University (Thailand)President, Oriental College, Amsterdam. A recent graduate is continuing the work of Mother Teresa with the Dalits in India. Many additional graduates are listed on our Web site.Puntero1 (talk) 14:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

in my experience editing university articles here, an innovative distance educational program may quite possibly be one, or it may sometimes be a façade to conceal the absence of an actual educational program. I ask once more: how many doctorates have actually been awarded? DGG ( talk ) 05:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Foundation Doctorates[edit]

As one of the three editors of this article I feel that I can give some clarity to the number of doctorates that the IOU Foundation has awarded. From late 2007 to the present 2010 the following doctorates were awarded: (1)Lisa Shaffner 07 under the direction of Jan Hakmulder, PhD (NL), (2), Ann Goldsmith,08 under the direction of Sandra Hurlong, PhD (USA), (3), Rene Goris, 09 under the direction of Ray Miller, PhD (USA) and (4) Christopher Thomas, 08 under the direction of John M. Toothman, PhD (USA). You can check the doctoral guidlines for the foundation at: content&task=view&id=281&Itemid=254

All dissertations are kept with the foundation registrar in the Netherlands in both electronic and hard copy format.Stretch call (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The IOU is allowed to bestow PhD degrees (not protected by Dutch law), but not doctorates, as the latter title is protected by Dutch law and can only be granted by accredited institutions. I.e. the IOU has awarded 0 doctorates.... ever.... Arnoutf (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Professional Memberships and Faculty[edit]

The foundation is a full member of the leading E-Learning professional organizations that Europe has to offer. They include the European Distance Education and E-Learning Network (EDEN), the Observatory of Borderless Higher Education (OBHE), the European Foundation for Quality in E-Learning (EFQUEL), and Hextlearn (a part of the EDEN network). Dr. Hurlong, the President of IOU and Dr. Yoshikawa, a core faculty member were keynote speakers and workshops leaders at the 2009 EFQUEL conference in Finland. This information is aviable on the web. The faculty at the foundation include a core faculty and external scholars. They all hold doctorates from some of the very best universities in the world; the University of Delaware(USA), Ohio State University(USA), University of Hawaii(USA), Union Institute(USA), Alliant International University(USA), New York University(USA), University of Chicago(USA), Aukland University(NZ), Rajasthan University(India), University of Oregon(USA), and the faculty includes three members who hold doctorate awarded by the foundation. They all have many years of experince in non-traditional adult based distance education. Some of them have been consultants for the foundation since the beginning in 1981. They donate their time and energy in keeping with the charitable nature of the foundation. Hopefully this is helpful information and we can begin work on making this article neutral, and in particular in tone. We are ready for any help or suggestions as to how to proceed.Stretch call (talk) 17:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Faculty and Reference Citings[edit]

I looked at all the CV listings of the IOU Foundation faculty and did find that they all listed their association with the foundation. The same can be said for the staff, and Board of Governors. I checked some of the references under both the history section and the new criticism section. I found that the Unesco(Nairobi) pdf reference could not be found anywhere on their site. I am assuming if this reference existed it is no longer anywhere to be found? The Dutch newspaper article as I understood it was a reference to a school in the Netherlands that was under the direction of an IOU Foundation graduate and the faculty mentioned was associatded with that school and not a member of the IOU Foundation faculty. I could not find any faculty member of that name ever associated with this foundation. The Skeptic article also mentions a faculty member that I cannot find an association for with the exception of a name that is close but spelled in a reverse order? I looked at the IOU Foundation disclaimer section on their website and it appears that the Skeptic article used information that is at least ten years old, and the foundation had addressed many of these associations in their disclaimer section. I agree with you that it is okay to use any reference(s) that has verfiability and can be used in a neutral manner. I think much of this is designed by the user to support a very negative biaed agenda.Stretch call (talk) 13:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


The link from the Chamber of Commerce is free (while extra administrative information has to be paid for) and it does not work overnight (night according to Dutch time). Such link states that it is a foundation and bears a certain name, and mentions its headquarters. Actually it says little else than that it is a legal person.

There is another source reporting about this university:

The article by Lantero says: "h) dubious professors with dubious titles that somehow connect them to Unesco are mentioned – for instance, Intercultural Open University;". It is a reliable source since it is published on the site of CIMEA, which is the Italian ENIC/NARIC authority. Such authority is the center which provides reliable information about the recognition status of universities from outside Italy. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

It is strange that the Chamber of Commerce reference is used at the top of the article and the fact that the Dutch Education ministry has not recognised it is at the bottom - possibly a need for integration or a case of WP:UNDUE.Autarch (talk) 22:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Not so strange I think. It is used as a claim to legitimacy. They are registered in the Chamber of Commerce, you cannot be a foundation without doing so. However, the Chamber of Commerce does not do any checks on what is actually going on in a foundation. They might as well state that they have a subscription to a scientific journal, although the latter is probably more expensive and more relevant to an institute for higher learning, so I doubt they have such subscriptions. Arnoutf (talk) 20:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Cimea PDF File Reference[edit]

I beg to differ in that the reference used for the Unesco(Nairobi) on this PDF file from the Italian CIMEA does not exist. I have searched this particular reference on this PDF article and I find no article on the NairobI link that mentions dubious professors with questional connections to the UN. My take on this is that it is a dead link. I found this same idea of dubious professors as a generalization quote in the Skeptis magazine article and again I could not find the reference that was used. Therefore, as one of the editors of this article I question the relability/verfiabilty of these references.Stretch call (talk) 23:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Mentored Higher Education[edit]

As a peer reviewer of institutions of Higher Education, I can attest to the academic quality of the work of IOU Foundation learners and graduates. If those of you who are arguing about quality and legitimacy would take the time to review the institution's web site, you would find detailed information about faculty best practices and a Learner Handbook that provides details of academic approaches used by learners and faculty.Puntero1 (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia advises editors to be careful about using self-published sources as sources of information about a subject - see WP:SELFPUB. There may be two institutions that have very similar websites in terms of best practices, information and other material listed, but one may live up to the claims and the other may not. This is why Wikipedia editors should be cautious and try to include independent secondary sources.Autarch (talk) 18:50, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Concern about a comment[edit]

Stretch call made edit that contained the following: If you looked at the IOU website you could easily see that we have fully credentialed faculty with full CV's from major universities in Europe and the USA. All of us at IOU Foundation are quite aware that we do not have Dutch Ministry approval. We are a graduate mentoring educational foundation and do not have a curriculum for the ministry to evaluate. We have no objections to this listing other than the manner in which you have posted it. This sounds like there may be a WP:COI problem - specifically Close relationships. I orginally referred Stretch Call to WP:COI on 10 June 2010, then asked if Stretch Call had read it on 21 June 2010, with no response to either. What do other editors think?Autarch (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes Stretch calls likely has a COI here... but, I would not include this procedural information on this talk. This should be only about the article content. If you think Stretch call goes too far you should take it to one of the admin noticeboards. Arnoutf (talk) 17:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

August 2 Deletion of Dutch Accreditation Board[edit]

Please note -- rationale for the deletion of the reference to the Dutch accreditation board NVAO along with the statement that IOUF is not allowed to bestow academic titles under Dutch law is as follows: IOUF is a global foundation and its interests are not geographically limited to one location. It appears that IOUF is no more interested in applying for and receiving Dutch accreditation than it is interested in applying for or receiving Russian, Spanish or Indian accreditation, for example. Making the statement that it is not accredited under Dutch law, therefore, is illogical and unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomanq (talkcontribs) 15:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't agree, it is located in the Netherlands, hence subjected to Dutch (not Russian, Spanish or Indian) law. Arnoutf (talk) 17:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2 Deletion of Reference to Edward Chan[edit]

Sentence was deleted due to the fact that it was irrelevant. An academic institution is not responsible for the misdeeds of the people it has educated. Ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff, for example, went to Hofstra College but there is no reason to connect his criminal activities with that College; not is Mr. Madoff's disgraceful behavior highlighted on the Hofstra College Wikipedia entry. In addition, as one of countless people attempting to mislead others in the world it does not appear that Edward Chan is notable in any way other than the fact that he was dishonest and found so to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomanq (talkcontribs) 15:35, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree, the "so-called" misdeed here is that this guy presented himself using the title bestowed upon him in an IOU diploma. The guy may actually not have realised that the diploma was worth less than the paper it was printed upon, and that using credentials given by this so-called university would get him into trouble. I.e. the misdeed is directly related to an action of the IOU - the granting of an non-accredited title. This makes this case highly relevant as it shows the problems institutions like IOU are creating. Arnoutf (talk) 17:39, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
I disagree on several points and I invite you to consider the following: Edward Chan’s qualifications from the Intercultural Open University Foundation were actually brought up as mitigating factors in his punishment because, as the investigators noted in their report, “the qualifications were ‘real’ and not ‘sham.’” Mitigation was turned down because of the severity of Chan’s deception.
A close reading of the British Psychological Society’s Conduct Committee Hearing report also shows up the fact that the IOUF accreditation was unrelated to Chan’s bad behavior. Rather, he was found to have willfully neglected the next part of education that he would have needed in order to practice legitimately, namely the effort to obtain licensing from the appropriate agency. In most jurisdictions this involves internships, supervised practice, examinations, and sometimes years of effort. Chan did not obtain accreditation from a body competent to declare him capable of practising as a clinical psychologist and IOUF makes no claim to provide that type of accreditation. In truth, it provided him with the education necessary to prepare him to take that next step.
It could be that the language of the BPS report is helping to confuse the issue. The word “competency” has numerous definitions and the committee is using it here, quite rightly, to denote medical legality, rather than to describe capability. In noting that IOUF was not competent to license Chan for clinical practice the Committee was not calling IOUF “incompetent,” but rather it was noting that IOUF was not an appropriate licensing body qualified to give Chan the green light for practising clinical psychology.
Again, an academic institution is not responsible for the actions or misdeeds of the people it has educated, nor is it in the business of policing the actions of its graduates. We could explain all of this in the text of the IOUF entry itself but I’ve simply deleted the mention entirely because it distracts attention from the overall subject matter we’re dealing with here and it provides Edward Chan with more notoriety than he appears to have earned.{{subst:Unsigned|
Ok that makes sense as an argument, I have to admit I did not delve that deep into the case. PS please sign your comments using four tildes ~~~~ which will be automatically replaced with user id and time stamp. Arnoutf (talk) 19:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Oops and will do! Thomanq (talk) 19:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
The above arguments for deleting references to Mr. Chan are wrong.

The Committee finds that after January 2003, the Respondent described himself as principal consultant psychologist and stated that he held postgraduate qualifications. In doing so the Committee finds that the Respondent breached Clause 2.1 of the Code of Conduct. As he held himself out as being competent (that is adequately qualified) by reason of those degrees to practice psychology when the qualifications in question were not awarded by a competent body.

— The British Psychological Society, Conduct Committee Hearing
So, the issue is specifically making use of postgraduate degrees in psychology which were not awarded by an accredited body. This is confirmed in the following quote:


(a) Edward Chan describes himself as Principal Consultant Psychologist on a business card stating that he holds a Postgraduate Diploma in Clinical Psychology and a PhD from the Intercultural Open University, thus holding himself out as being competent by reason of these degrees to practice psychology, when these qualifications were not awarded by a competent body.

and in so doing Mr Chan's conduct rendered him guilty of professional misconduct within the meaning of Statute 15(12) of the Royal Charter, Statutes and Rules.
— The British Psychological Society, Conduct Committee Hearing
It says specifically that the problem was with using degrees awarded by an incompetent body. I will restore the reference to Mr. Chan. Tgeorgescu (talk) 14:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Such institutions are not listed in the International Handbook of Universities or the World List of Universities as being recognised national competent authorities. The courses run at these institutions are not accredited or recognised by the Society. Reference to these organisations on his business card indicated that Mr Chan was holding himself out to be qualified to practice psychology when he is not.

— The British Psychological Society, Conduct Committee Hearing

No, the issue is not that Chan used a postgraduate degree awarded by a body the BPS felt was inadequately accredited (which, by the way, they do not appear to have felt at all, see additional comments below). The issue is that he did not decide to obtain the additional training and licensing from a body that was competent to judge whether or not he was capable of delivering appropriate psychological consulting services.
It takes much more than a PhD degree to become a clinical psychologist, no matter who provides the PhD. Becoming a licensed clinical psychologist requires internships, supervision, and thousands of hours of work in a clinic or private practice setting that provides mental health services. According to Wikipedia, for example, to become a licensed clinical psychologist in the United States, a graduate of a PhD program must also spend 1-2 years in supervised training before becoming licensed, a 3,000 hour commitment. Candidates must also write additional exams, including state exams, in order to be fully accredited for practice.
The practice of clinical psychology requires a license in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and many other countries. The three common elements required for licensing, according to Wikipedia, are:
1.Graduation from an accredited school with the appropriate degree
2.Completion of supervised clinical experience or internship
3.Passing a written examination and, in some cases, an oral examination
In the UK, also according to Wikipedia, clinical psychologists undertake a Doctorate of Clinical Psychology (D.Clin.Psych.), that involves both clinical and research components. Both the British Psychological Society and the Health Professions Council provide accreditation for these programs.
IOUF makes no pretense of offering clinical supervision as it is a foundation that is involved in education, not licensing. They are separate functions and while some educational institutions offer both, IOUF does not.
A plain reading of the situation shows that while Chan satisfied the first requirement, his problems arose because he neglected to satisfy the other two, in direct defiance of the rules.
Given that the IOUF provides simply a degree program and not the additional qualifications of supervised clinical experience, internship or examinations leading to accreditation, it is illogical and unjustifiable to hold the IOUF responsible for Chan’s behaviour.
Regarding the reputation of the IOUF as an educational institution, the issue is not that the British Psychological Society deemed IOUF incompetent, the issue is that it determined that IOUF is not competent to deem an individual capable of practicing in a clinical setting as a licensed psychologist and, as noted above, it makes no claim so to do. Quite the contrary, BPS lends weight to the IOUF’s credibility as an academic institution in several instances, specifically, in addressing Chan, the ruling reads:

...your qualifications, though affiliated to the Intercultural Open University, are not the ones accredited by the Society as there is no element of supervised practice as required by all Society accredited patterns of training. They are not, therefore valid qualifications for independent practice.

(emphasis added)
And further, BPS declares the IOUF PhD designation to be valid when it states that:

In deciding to take these courses of action, the Committee took into account all matters raised in mitigation of Mr. Chan’s behalf in particular, that the qualifications were ‘real’ and not ‘sham’...

(emphasis added)
As for the lack of a listing in the International Handbook of Universities or the World List of Universities that is not surprising given the IOUF is a small Foundation. In addition, it serves a specific clientele who are looking for a dedicated, mentored and distributed learning experience that will help them generate social changes in their home countries.

It is not surprising that there is confusion surrounding licensing of clinical psychologists as the field or psychology itself is very complicated with many different types of practitioners holding many different types of qualifications. Unless we want to get into a world where an educational institution polices the activities of its graduates after the fact, however, we are left with a situation where graduates are free to do what they want to do and very regrettably, sometimes these actions are not admirable. Thomanq (talk) 20:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

It hinges in part on requirement (1) Graduation from an accredited school with the appropriate degree. Since IOU is not accredited, the BPS does not allow someone to refer to themselves as psychologist based on IOU degrees. This makes the degree worth less than the paper it is printed upon, although the complicated education structures may hide this for many. One part of the complication is caused by institutes awarding non-accredited degrees. If an institute want to be of real service to its graduates it should gets its degrees accredited. Following the Bologna protocol and subsequent regulations, an institute based in the EU (as IOU is) could get its degrees accredited across Europe following a single accreditation. Arnoutf (talk) 21:03, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Dispute resolution[edit]

I want to let you know that I have initiated a dispute resolution procedure at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Intercultural Open University Foundation. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2 Addition of Notable People[edit]

Extended the list of notable people back to the list originally included on the grounds that as faculty and graduates of IOUF they are notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomanq (talkcontribs) 15:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Notability should conform to notability standard of Wikipedia, most of these people don't. Arnoutf (talk) 17:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Added Bremley Lyngdoh back into Notable People section (Graduates) because of his notability. It's understandable that he might not be well known in Europe or even in circles outside of the field of global sustainable development but he is a giant in the world of economic development and environmental sustainability in many impoverished areas of the world. A native of India, he has built an impressive career as a social activist with impeccable credentials. At a very young age he participated in the Rio Earth Summit, the Consortium of Indian Scientists for Sustainable Development and a project designed to both combat decertification and regenerate the desert ecosystem in Rajasthan, India, an area known for substantial economic and environmental challenges. Winner of numerous awards and scholarships, he has since his early years worked on a vast array of biodiversity projects throughout the world, including a stint in New York as a member of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development Secretariat (Agenda 21).
Rigorous analysis and analytical evaluation of policy challenges and opportunities with the Environment Department of the World Bank helped him establish links between poverty reduction and environmental management – finding the solid ground between fiction and truth was a key part of his focus.
Lyngdoh also spearheaded project development and management for the Education Development Center in Boston, which coordinated projects for the 75-country network of the Youth Employment Summit Campaign. Because of his reputation as a global leader in the field, he was also invited to address world leaders at the 2000 Millenium Assembly.
Lyngdoh has post graduate degrees from the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University in America, the Development Studies Institute at the London School of Economics in the UK, the University of Geneva in Switzerland and the Intercultural Open University in the Netherlands.
He is the Founder and CEO of Worldview Impact, the Co-Founder of the Global Youth Action Network (an organization, incidentally, which is endorsed by famed primatologist Dr. Jane Goodall and former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan); he also sits on the Board of Directors of PCI Media Impact. I have additional links for Bremley Lyngdoh which might bolster the entry and add interest for readers -- if so should we consider adding them in?: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomanq (talkcontribs) 20:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

No argument, this guy appears to be notable. He is likely worth to have his own page on the project (which is indeed biased towards Anglophonic and US in particular people), so you may consider writing such an article. By the way, the Biography project is very active in checking notability, so any notable person with a relatively long time article present on Wikipedia (like Muneo Jay Yoshikawa) can be considered notable without further discussion (that is why I left that person in the first place). (PS try to make a habit out of the four tilde signature whenever contributing to talk pages, although bots more or less sign afterwards, it is considered polity to consistently sign every discussion page entry)Arnoutf (talk) 20:44, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry about that tilde issue -- thought I had done it that time. Good idea about giving Bremley Lyngdoh his own page -- I'll put it on my list for a future project.Thomanq (talk) 21:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)


While a HEXTLEARN peer review focuses primarily on ICT this is not its only area of concern. Distributed and alternative learning institutions that are sincerely intent on providing quality educational experiences view a successful HEXTLEARN peer review report as important for establishing credibility. It involves a rigorous process that examines "peripheral" issues such as pedagogy, faculty credentials and teaching philosophy. All of that's important in any learning environment, but distributed education cannot succeed without adherence to an exacting standard of technological excellence and, in fact, the two are intricately connected. HEXTLEARN has been working diligently for many years to develop standards for higher education institutions that deliver distributed education to lifelong learners precisely because these institutions are unique and quality cannot be measured in the same way as at traditional universities. Institutions such as the IOUF don't fit the mould but they do meet an important need in the world. Accreditation, such as HEXTLEARN provides, is imortant to keep out the fly-by-nighters that have dishonorable intentions. HEXTLEARN provides an interesting discussion of the importance of ICT for all academic institutions and unfortunately highlights how far behind the curve traditional academics tend to be when it comes to integrating information and communications technologies into traditional programs -- see: Of additional importance is the fact that HEXTLEARN itself is not narrowly focused on simply improving the technological efficiency of higher education institutions, but rather its stated goal is to improve education as a whole/ I invite you to consider the discussion in light of the fact that, as the EFQUEL site notes, many academics are rooted in a bureaucratic and traditional method of delivering education. They have a hard time making the intellectual leap to a form of education that is entirely dependent on technology for success. This does not make the education, or rather, the learning, less effective. But it does mean that a successful institutional peer review of ICT is in effect a review of overall educational quality. The two are synonymous. Thomanq (talk) 19:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that distant learning institutes require excellent quality of ICT (in the current ERA atb least). I agree the are (and should be) ahead of this compared to traditional institutions (by a considerable margin. Quality control based on ICT services can indeed separate opportunists from institutes honestly aiming to contribute.
However, and this is a big thing, the ICT quality does not tell us anything about the quality of the content of the educational programs. Evidence based content, (self)critical evaluation of the relevance and truth, open and transparent examination criteria are demands for a high level academic program. The quality of ICT does not relate to these, as ICT is about transmitting the content, not the content itself (e.g. Scientology is very succesful in transmitting its message, but fails acamdemic criteria... and of course site like Facebook have top of the line ICT - but no relevant academic content).
Thus the ICT quality is an important but not sufficient condition to assess overall educational quality. Arnoutf (talk) 17:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
We are in agreement on that point as well – an educational organization needs to be committed at all levels to a rigorous pursuit of truth as well as open and transparent academic integrity. EFQUEL would be swiftly discredited if it provided accreditation to organizations that maintained low standards in this area, no matter how impressive their ICT delivery systems were. In fact, it would be a complete waste of resources to undertake a HEXTLEARN evaluation of an institute of higher learning that offered little in the way of serious academics, particularly given EFQUEL’s stated purpose of enhancing educational standards.
If you’re interested, EFQUEL has a very interesting discussion of quality and open education practices in a paper entitled “Open Educational Practices: Unleasing the power of OER” – it shows quite definitively that the organization is highly focused on quality in education.
The problem for this article being that the HEXTLEARN ICT report is the only quality criterion used in the article. EFQUEL is only mentioned ver briefly. We should make more of other reviews to support quality rather than speculating that the specific HEXTLEARN report is more comprehensive than it is, which would be overinterpretation of the source. Arnoutf (talk) 20:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Addition of Gulab Kothari to Notable People -- Graduates[edit]

I’ve reinserted Gulab Kothari as an IOUF Notable Graduate because he has established a solid track record throughout the world, most particularly in Asia, as a literary and spiritual authority of repute. Although he may not be well known in much of the developed world, as editor of the Rajasthan Patrika Group in India, Dr. Kothari oversees a news publishing empire with a daily circulation of 2,466,204 (; the publication itself is also available online). The Rajasthan Patrika Group is the largest Hindi-language news portal in India, a country where 80% of the 1.2 billion residents speak that language (literacy rate in India is 74% (see

Dr. Kothari has won numerous awards during his long association with Rajasthan Patrika ( and is highly respected as a famous writer (see the Wikipedia entry on Rajasthan Patrika where he is referred to as a famous writer).

Probably his most famous literary success has been the publication of the two-volume set, “Manas – Patterns in the Human Mind,” an intellectual journey and examination of the Vedas, a large body of texts originating in ancient India and originally composed, when they were finally put into written form, in Vedic Sanskrit. The texts are widely reputed to be the oldest layer of Sanskrit literature and the oldest scriptures in Hinduism itself, having been written between 1500 and 500 BCE. In a country where 80% of the population ascribe to the Hindu religion, the Vedas are monumentally important and Dr. Kothari’s scholarship on the topic has earned him great repute in India and elsewhere.

Here are a few more references to Dr. Kothari and his work. If you feel these would be more appropriate to include in the text itself, perhaps we should consider doing so?:

Thomanq (talk) 20:21, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Did Kothari get his PhD from IOU (and no other university), the Dutch institute? If that is the case, he is NOT allowed to use or being referred using the dr. title as the right to bestow the "dr" title is reserved to accredited universities under Dutch law, making it illegal to use that (similar to the Chan case discussed above). (the PhD title is not so protected as this is a non-Dutch equivalent, so weirdly you may call yourself a PhD graduated at IOU but never a dr graduated at IOU).
Also, it is expected to editors to publish books, so that in itself is no enough for a claim to notability. The provided sources also seem not very reliable and secondary. Altogehter I feel the argument for inclusion of Kothari are rather weak (actually based on these criteria Edward Chan appears to be the more notable of the two). Arnoutf (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution[edit]

I would like to let you to know that I have initiated a dispute resolution procedure at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#IOUF--re:GulabeKothari Thomanq (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I am open to discussing his relevance, although my search on Google was rather inconclusive (although that may partially a language thing). BUT (1) Not through Dispute Resolution AND (2) You can not call him Dr based on a non-accredited degree awarded from a Netherlands based institute. Arnoutf (talk) 19:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality and legal rights of the 'PhD' program[edit]

On the dispute resolution Thomanq posts the following in relation to the PhD program (I quote).

"Re: illegal acts and PhD degrees. I would appreciate a deeper explanation here as I have to admit that I’m still not clear on this one. The IOUF has the legal right of a Foundation to provide a PhD degree and based on the references I’ve seen, it appears to be doing so with academic integrity and rigor on an international level. Witness the fact that the only two of its graduates that we have mentioned in this discussion, Bremley Lyngdoh and Gulab Kothari, are two highly notable individuals who have attained a substantial degree of success in the world. Success, in fact, that has enabled them to affect the lives of millions of people. Both sought and attained a PhD designation from the IOUF. So I’m not sure why this specifically Dutch issue is so important? "

I will try to give the explanation.

  • "The IOUF has the legal right of a Foundation to provide a PhD degree " - I agree, but then again, my garbage collector has the same right, as PhD is not a protected title in the Netherlands. Netherlands law is relevant here, as that is the home base of the institute, and hence the relevant law.
"based on the references I’ve seen, it appears to be doing so with academic integrity and rigor on an international level". I have looked at their website, and find little to support this claim. European institutes that bestow PhD's hold more or less similar requirements that are something like:
(1) The student has shown that (s)he is able to conduct and report scientific research at a level that lives up to international peer reviewed scientific publication (i.e. scientific journals, books etc.)
(2) The work of the student is examined by a full professor from another university/institute. In the Netherlands the requirement of examination board that there is a full professor supporting the work as principal supervisor, and that the work is accepted by an examining board of at least four examiner of which at least one is full professor from an institute that is not the PhD bestowing institute AND at least one full professor of the host institute but not involved in the project
I know of no evidence that IOU follows either of these requirement at the "international level".
  • "are two highly notable individuals who have attained a substantial degree of success in the world. Success, in fact, that has enabled them to affect the lives of millions of people." While this is very good for them and the people who have been helped by them, this has nothing to do with a PhD degree. Many musicians, movie stars, or other artists have a lot of success and make the world a better place for millions. Most of them do not have a PhD, or need one.
  • "Both sought and attained a PhD designation from the IOUF. So I’m not sure why this specifically Dutch issue is so important?" The Dutch issue is relevant since the IOUF is operating from the Netherlands, and thus falls under Dutch law. While (under Dutch law) there is no regulation aroung giving out PhD diplomas (as this is not a Dutch title), the latin title DOCTOR (dr.) is howewever legally protected under Dutch law; that this is verbatim the same as the Dr title in the PhD title indeed results in the weird situation that the title PhD is not protected, but the use of dr. doctor. Dr. is. Thus a PhD or any other diploma from a Dutch institute that is not accredited can never have any relation, or provide the suggestion that such a diploma gives the bearer the right to use the title Doctor or Dr. and if it would give these rights, the institute would commit a criminal act. The IOU PhD diploma gives therefore exactly the same right to use the "Dr." title as a kindergarten diploma, frequent flyer pass, or the gift wrapping of a CD.... None at all.

In sum: IOU is allowed to bestow PhD titles as these are not protected under the relevant Dutch law, but these PhD titles do NOT come with any rights to use the title "doctor". Arnoutf (talk) 09:11, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Seahorse7 added the followin: "As an international university foundation, however, the IOUF has the legal right of a Foundation to award a PhD degree and in countries other than the Netherlands, the Foundation's PhD gives graduates the privilege of being addressed as "Dr."
This raises multiple questions
(1) As an international university foundation the IOUF has the legal right of a Foundation to award a PhD degree ---- According to which law?? I am pretty sure Dutch law does not explicitly allows foundation to award any degrees. On the other hand Dutch law does not forbid anyone, (including a convicted murderer and fraud who is serving a sentence) to award a PhD degree; but such an implicit right is far removed from the explicit legal right claimed above.
(2) "The foundations PhD gives the privilege of being addressed as Dr" ---- According to which laws is this. If the institute is based under Dutch law, those laws should have international competence; i.e. if the PhD degree is awarded under a law that explicitly forbids associating the Dr title with that "degree" we need a convincing source to claim that it is ok to violate that condition abroad. (Of course this is irrelevant for countries where the use of the Dr title is not protected at all, but then again, in such countries everyone can claim the privilege to be addressed as Dr. Whether anyone else should accept that claim is something else entirely, but then again, the same goes for the IOUF PhD. So please provide a reference that supports exactly that. Arnoutf (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Addition of Serguei Krivov as a Notable Graduate[edit]

Serguei Krivov obtained his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the Intercultural Open University Foundation in 1999 and joined the Gund Institute for Ecological Economics as an Assistant Research Scientist in 2001. (See In his Ph.D. thesis he developed the multiagent ecological simulator LEM (Logic for Eco-Modelling), a logic-based conceptual framework for modeling complex systems. It’s been used in a wide range of applications, ranging from the analytical assessment of protein folding ( to the energy landscape of model proteins ( and the analysis of routine peafowl movements (

Sergey Krivov and his work have been a key componenet of the Gund Institute's ARies Project, (ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services), a next-generation web application that was designed to make environmental decisions easier and more effective, while minimizing the possibility of negative environmental impacts. (,, and

Additional references for Sergey Krivov:

Thomanq (talk) 15:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Good that you spilled the beans about Mr. Krivov. Now everybody knows that he is not a real doctor. Tgeorgescu (talk) 17:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


It looks like editors will want to read up on what a Foundation (non-profit) is. Foundations are generally charitable organizations, but they have no legal right to confer academic diplomas. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a foundation, but they are not permitted to confer an academic diploma. Because it is unaccredited, in some places, if you tell an employer that you have a PhD from a place like this, you can actually be prosecuted for fraud. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

My point exactly, although Dutch law does not recognise the title PhD (which is not a Dutch term) any claims associated with a doctoral degree would constitute fraud under Dutch law. Arnoutf (talk) 11:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Notable Faculty -- Marvin Surkin[edit]

Marvin Surkin is noted for his knowledge and understanding of the development of the Detroit labour challenges of the last century and the book he wrote with Dan Georgakas, “Detroit I do Mind Dying,” is still being referenced today as an important publication.

See: --’s list of the most important books about Detroit as assembled on The Detroit Blog by Darrel Dawsey -- the University of California’s Berkley Labor Centre recommends “Detroit I Do Mind Dying” as an important black worker resource as do the Academic Workers for a Democratic Union (AWDU, UCLA Chapter) – see reference under “Relevant Books”

Humanity and Social Sciences online has a review of the book in which the reviewer states that “the insights offered by the League--and discussed by Georgakas and Surkin--about capitalism, labor organizing, racism, solidarity and working class power remain as urgent and relevant today as they were in the 1970s.”

In addition, New York University currently teaches a course called “Motown Matrix: Race, Gender and Class Identity in ‘The Sound of Young America’” that lists “Detroit I do Mind Dying” as a key reference resource.

Marvin Surkin previously taught at The Union Institute but is now a professor of political science with the Intercultural Open University Foundation.

He obtained his PhD from New York University.

Other references for Marvin Surkin: Review of “The Journal of Politics” (see mention under section labeled “The communist league” and first reference

Out of the revolution: the development of Africana studies By Delores P. Aldridge, Carlene Young see reference #45 for Surkin and Georgakas

Thomanq (talk) 16:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Notable Faculty -- Leena Parmar[edit]

I probably should have included this when I added Leena Parmar back in to the Notable Faculty section? Not sure about protocol, so sorry if I erred but here is the information I have about her:

Dr. Leena Parmar is an Indian sociologist renowned for her long-standing connections to the Indian army and her personal knowledge of its complex operations in India’s sensitive border regions. (See “Challenge and Change for the Military” by David Last, page 3 at; the book itself can be viewed at . She received her PhD from the University of Rajasthan in 1992 with a doctoral thesis on Military Sociology, the first on the subject in India’s history . (Ibid) In addition, she was the first Indian to be selected by the government of Germany to study the International Military System (invitation from NATO) ( Dr. Parmar has written seven books, written chapters for many others, and published dozens of articles on her topic. She has been awarded AMBASSADOR FOR PEACE by Universal Peace Federation and "YOU INSPIRE US" award from Women's Peace-power Foundation, Inc. Florida, USA, for her research. Among many other commitments, she is a member of the Board of the International Sociological Association (, a member of the International Advisory Council of Engender, a South African-based organization focused on changing patterns of violence (including gender-based violence) and inequality in South African society ( and she is Convenor of the Indian Sociological Society’s Research Committee on Military Sociology, the Armed Forces and Conflict Resolution. (

Here are a few more references for Dr. Parmar:

Thomanq (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Notable Graduates -- Sohan Lal Gandhi[edit]

Sohan Lal Gandhi is noted for a global career that has been focused on promoting peace, non-violence and inter-faith and intercultural understanding. (

A devotee of Jainism, he is currently the Honorary President of the ANUVRAT Global Organization (ANUBIS), a transnational Center for Peace and Nonviolent Action associated with the UN-DPI. ( In this and other capacities, he has spoken to government, academic and spiritually-based gatherings around the world, including:

• the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Cape Town South Africa (1999) the World Council for Peace in Japan in 2006

• the UN General Assembly

• the UN’s “High-Level Dialogue and Informal Interactive Hearing with Civil Society on Interreligious and Intercultural Understanding and Cooperation for Peace” (2007) and

• the Parliament of the World's Religions in Melbourne, Australia

• a council of World Religions held in Nicosia, Cyprus (2008)

• a conference at Southern Methodist University in the United States (2008)

• the UN Conference for Peace in Mexico City (2009)

• many others

Mr. Gandhi was the Scholar-in-Residence for the Jain Vishwa Bharati Centre’s Non-Violence Training Camp in London, UK (2009) and he is affiliated with the United Religions Initiative

Other references for Mr. Gandhi: Thomanq (talk) 19:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Notable Faculty -- Raymond Miller Jr. Thomanq (talk) 09:40, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[edit]

Raymond Miller is known as an expert in the folkloric phenomenon of a mythical creature known as “The Jersey Devil” and he has co-written two books on the topic. and see also where the follow up book “Phantom of the Pines – More Tales of the Jersey Devil” was described as “long overdue” and a “must have.”

"The Jersey Devil" formed the basis of the movie "The 13th Child".

See also and

Raymond Miller has written many articles and given many lectures and interviews on the topic of the Jersey Devil ( and in 2002 the book was made into a movie called “The 13th Child.” He has also written a number of plays and he co-wrote the memoirs of a German SS agent whose traumatic war experiences were told in “A Dog’s Lfe” by Hans Bayer, Raymond Miller and John Toothman: (record Nummer 22)^DB/CATALOG.db&eqSKUdata=081919140X

Dr. Miller is also on staff at the University of Delaware, from which university he obtained his PhD degree in English.

More references for Raymond Miller Jr.:,+phantom+of+the+pines&source=bl&ots=ReaM1B5PhU&sig=VgYMphah9ZYJuhaYcY1wNbKS6zY&hl=en&ei=hOoJTrDSLMmEsAK7ssmVAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

I think this one should be checked against notability criteria: Wikipedia:Notability (academics) here, as it is the claim to Academic notability that is most important. Other relevant issue might be Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals Arnoutf (talk) 09:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I disagree that the claim to Academic notability should supersede all else here as Dr. Miller obviously conforms to Wikipedia's Notability criteria #3, to whit: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Dr. Miller's "Jersey Devil," "Thirteenth Child" and "Dog's Life" efforts might not be all that relevant for a physics professor but as a professor of modern literature and drama his experiences as a writer and playwright would bring key insights to his work as a professor and academic mentor. Thomanq (talk) 19:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
If you look up the book it received some local attention, and the movie was a direct-to-video local enterprise as well. So I challenge the book is "significant" or "well known" beyond a local audience. Arnoutf (talk) 08:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Notable Faculty -- Rudolph Pasler[edit]

Rudolph Pasler co-wrote “The New Jersey Federalists” with his wife, Magaret Pasler, contributing what has been referred to as the only book available that deals with the topic of America’s first political party. The book contains a detailed history of the Party and its actions and is cited widely in many academic and other publications, for example:

I think this would not suffice for being a notable academic (and here you do claim academic notability). Being cited is part of the normal job of an academic. Arnoutf (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I disagree. This man has written the only reference book on the first political party of what has been, like it or not, for many years the most influential nation on Earth. The United States has consistently sought to export its political system to other countries at every opportunity. That renders the historical significance of the material in this book substantial and therefore its author is notable Thomanq (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Notable Faculty -- Rudi Jansma[edit]

Rudi Jansma is a leading expert on Jainism and the Jain Community and he has a significant background in neotropical vegetation science and nature preservation. He has worked for various environmental groups concerned with tropical ecosystems and he has done intensive studies in Theosophy and Eastern and other non-occidental thought systems.

He is Associate editor of the Anuvibha Reporter, a publication focused on peace studies and based in Jaipur, India.

He has published many books and articles on the subjects of Jainism, religion and theosophy (some of them mentioned here: and one of his more notable books, “Global Philosophical and Ecological Concepts — Cycles, Causality, Ecology and Evolution in Various Traditions and their Impact on Modern Biology” can be found in more than 37 libraries worldwide (, including the University of Heidelberg Library (, the University of Berkeley Library ( and the University of Washington Library (

He is mentioned as a resource on Jainism for the School of International and Public Affairs of the Department of religious studies of the Florida International University. (

Other references for Rudi Jansma:

Thomanq (talk) 21:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

A published book that is listed in 37 libraries, hardly a claim to notability
All sources mentioned appear biased (e.g. or otherwise unreliable. This person is not referenced in reliable 3rd sources and hence not notable. Arnoutf (talk) 08:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Notable Faculty -- Sandra Hurlong[edit]

It follows that as President of the Intercultural Open University Foundation, Dr. Sandra Hurlong should be included in the listing of notable faculty as a matter of course.

But for the record, here is some additional information I’ve tracked down about her academic background.

  • She co-chaired, with Muneo Yoshikawa, an EFQUEL session on Quality for Open Educational Resources and User Generated Content Thomanq (talk) 19:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

The things you name here are normal functions for an academic and does not make the person notable at all in themselves (most full professors have a more convincing list than this and those are not notable). Arnoutf (talk) 08:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
It is illogical to exclude the president of an organization notable enough to merit a Wikipedia listing. Thomanq (talk) 17:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
This is a flawed argument, we are not talking about the notability of an organisation, but of the notability of a person. Merely being the chairperson of a notable organisation, does not make the chairperson notable on their own account. Arnoutf (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
While I disagree on that point as well, it is possible you missed the reference cited above for the Human Dignity and Humiliation Studies Organization which referred to Dr. Hurlong as “a renowned educator and scholar in learner centered adult education” and someone who is “at the forefront of innovation in e-learning and higher education” ( She is clearly notable.
Also notable in that citation are the references to her work at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania (an Ivy League University), Wilmington College, the School for International Training (SIT) in Vermont and the Union Institute & University (a pioneering organization in innovation in higher education, where she also served as the Assistant Dean).

In addition, it appears that Dr. Hurlong’s work at most of these organizations has had a strong global focus (e.g. the SIT is renowned for its role in the development and service of the American Peace Corps movement); not the mark of a standard academic at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomanq (talkcontribs) 23:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

As academic I myself have been working with NATO and FAO (UN), I have been mentioned at several sites of organisations (e.g. ILSI, CEFIC, EU, Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences, etc etc). I am NOT a notable academic, in fact if I had not been listed at such places I would not even have gotten a job. These are NOT claims to notability in academia. Arnoutf (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I have taken a closer look at Wikipedia’s notability guidelines on the basis of your comments and think now that perhaps you are right on this issue. Thank you for your insights.

Thomanq (talk) 20:44, 25 October 2011 (UTC) (Sorry I forgot to sign again!)

Questionable references[edit]

Some of the references seem rather odd, either showing lack of familiarity with how to cite work on Wikipedia or citations in general:

  • [6] Partial Publication List - this is a link to a search on - this might be an example of WP:REFSPAM, however it is odd, not to mention prone to finding works by namesakes.
  • [7] Partial publication list - points to a publishers website, possible WP:REFSPAM, definitely prone to changes on publishers site.
  • [8]See section on OBHE - not at all clear what is being cited here - the home page of doesn't seem to be the citation, yet the Wikipedia article linked to doesn't seem to mention the subject of this article.
  • [9] - not clear what's being cited here - possibly referred to item once in the news, but no mention of the organisation made.
  • [10] HEXTLEARN Website - slightly different URL, but same result both in terms of content and relevance.
  • [11] - cited as an affiliation, but actual page mentions subject of article as an example of distance education without mentioning affiliation.
  • Washington Benevolent Societies See citation No. 5 - not clear whether citation no. 5 refers to article citation is in, or to Washington Benevolent Societies article.
  • League of Revolutionary Black Workers - this is a separate citation - not clear what it's doing in citations. Maybe it should be in the article in relation to the faculty member in question.
  • [12] Another link to EFQUEL that links to "What's Hot".
  • [13] - this link may not be a WP:RS, as the tone is hagiographic, perhaps WP:FANSITE.
  • [14] - while there isn't a blanket ban on YouTube videos, this looks like WP:SPS and is at best marginal relevance to the article, which is about the Intercultural Open University.
  • [15] - marginal relevance, possible linkspam.

Looking at the links, it seems that, at best, whoever added some of them had a very unclear idea of what references are. Adding every link that is even marginally linked to a faculty member, using links to other Wikipedia articles as references, unclear references. These need to be sorted out.Autarch (talk) 03:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)


Unenclyopedic tone: Jan Hakemulder was a respected scholar with a global outlook who devoted his career to the development of programs designed to help the world's poor. - some WP:WEASEL here. Autarch (talk) 03:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Some interesting links[edit]

Are these WP:RS?

  • Genealogies of Shamanism - Illustrative of his his ineffective positioning as a shaman-scholar in the academic field is that he acquired his "professorship" from Hackemulders diploma mill, the Intercultural Open University
  • [16] - h) dubious professors with dubious titles that somehow connect them to Unesco are mentioned – for instance, Intercultural Open University;

Autarch (talk) 15:14, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Not sure this one probably is (in Dutch) [17]
This is a resilient institute which moved to USA/Spain where it is not strictly illegal to give out unaccredited academic titles and went out of the Netherlands (where it is). Should tell you something.... Arnoutf (talk) 15:47, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Their own site is telling [18]. It states that "degree PhD Programs are accredited through the international partnership with the Universidad Azteca (UAzteca) and the Universidad Central de Nicaragua (UCN)." - which means no more that PhD students in the so-called partnership with UAzteca and UCN receive a PhD accredited to those organisations (Mexico, Nicaragua) but that IOU itself is not accredited. Continue quote "In addition IOUF is a charitable educational Foundation registered in the Netherlands and United States." This means little, it is very easy to register foundation. "Our academic programs have been peer reviewed by HEXTLEARN" which has only looked at ICT system use and has no relevance for content. In other words - IOU is not accredited but they create a smoke screen of legitimacy by raising posh terms. Arnoutf (talk) 16:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

I am puzzled why Wikipedia editors question the legitimacy of an American Educational Consortium in which all doctoral faculty have PhD's from US or foreign accredited Universities. Also, isn't "posh language" the required norm for higher educational scholarship?˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfusco.LLD (talkcontribs) 16:58, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

(1) It is (or used to be) registered in the Netherlands - and regardless of registration - non accredited institutions reduce the value of real diplomas - so their legitimacy should questioned wherever based. (2) It is not evident that the faculty has PhD from accredited universities. (3) Posh language is not a norm for higher education scholarship (although much poor scholarship is dressed up with posh language to hide how poor it is). Arnoutf (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
The document at quotes IOU's own website for the claim "g. Dubious professors belonging to dubious institutions declare to hold qualifications or to have experiences that are somehow related to UNESCO - ex. Intercultural Open University15;
15" Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure what point you want to make here. If I look at this, it is more of a reference to an example where IOU website implies status by association than a true quote. Arnoutf (talk) 19:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
It was about the quote discussed above. So CIMEA reiterated is claim (see article) about the IOU and it quoted the IOU website for sourcing such claim. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

I am going to list here the universities that have issued the faculty PhD's as indicated on the foundation's Webpage:All listed teaching faculty at IOU Foundation have PhD degrees from accredited Universities: Universities listed are: US: University of Chicago: North Central Accrediting Commision Union Institute and University—North Central Accrediting Commision University of Delaware: Middle States Accrediting Association New York University: Middle States Accrediting Association University of Hawaii: Western States Accrediting Commission University of Oregon: Western States Accrediting Commission Ohio University: North Central Accrediting Commision Alliant International University: Western States Accrediting Foreign: University of Rajasthan: Accredited by Gov. of India University of Aukland: Accredited by ACU, APAIE, APRU Universidad Central de Nicaragua: Accredited by Gov. of Nicaragua ˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfusco.LLD (talkcontribs) 21:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll grant you that indeed those listed have PhDs from at accredited universities (although one of them lists an IOU PhD next to a PhD from its (accredited) Mexican/Nicaraguan partners. That does not make for any quality or accreditation for their institute though. So what is your point? Arnoutf (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion....” ― Noam Chomsky, The Common Good. When mature and well known scholars volunteer to teach without compensation at an institution of higher learning, it generally has valid and innovative learning opportunities that are not available elsewhere, accreditation or not. ˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfusco.LLD (talkcontribs) 22:24, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

(1) What is the point you want to make with this statement by Chomsky? (2) I guess with the second part of your statement you suggest that the IOU faculty not only has a PhD degree from an accredited institute (there are literally millions of those peoples) but are in addition "mature and well known scholars" - of whom there are far less. (3) I am fine with learning opportunities; for whomever thinks a course should be giving. But giving out unaccredited degrees claiming the course fits opportunities elsewhere is a major issue. Arnoutf (talk) 07:52, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Edits by Arnoutf[edit]

Dear Arnoutf, I want to draw your attention here that the citations from IOUF website are allowed as per WP:SELFSOURCE. The citations were already there and I retained them only in places where there is no exceptional claim and no reasonable doubt to its authenticity. Also please point out weasel words, NPOV issues where you find it. Cheers Mr RD 13:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Examples: This sentence from the lead "Jan Hakemulder was a respected scholar with a global outlook who devoted his career to the development of programs designed to help the world's poor.[3] "
Global outlook - weasel words - a scholar who does not have such an outlook is not a respectable scholar.
The same sentence is clearly non neutral and highly promotional
The source is a listing of books in Amazon. Amazon listings are not reliable secondary sources. Synthesising anything from that link in support of the sentence before is original research (I will not list it as an issue, as the requires additional sources for verification problem somewhat covers that.)
This all from a single sentence in the lead section.
The pages of IOU tend to be highly contentious and self serving and hence generally fail the first requirement for labelling a self sourcing as reliable.
It is not to me to remove the mess that supporters of this institute have made of it. However, the tags that notify readers of this mess should only be removed after every single problem in every line is solved. I think this article is unsalvageable, but if you want to have a try, please go for it. But leave the tags up until finished or at least consensus is reached they can go (per e.g. WP:BRD). Cheers Arnoutf (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Dear Arnoutf, I have removed the weasel words pointed out by you. If you see any other words as weasel please notify me so that we can remove them too and make this page a better source of information for people. Cheers Mr RD 11:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Article is indeed better now. Problematic issues remain, especially the implied claim that hextlearn has any relevance for the content quality of the programs (it does not, it only says something about the ICT implementation). Also the notable people is problematic as it seems that according to notable people guidelines only one, or perhaps a few, are indeed notable. Arnoutf (talk) 17:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Dear Arnoutf, I have removed the 'weasel words' tag from the page and shall soon review the Hextlearn case as soon as I get time. Thanks for your support and precious reviews. Cheers, Mr RD 15:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Dear Arnoutf, I read the Hextlearn peer review on ICT and found out that you were right from the beginning. This report is regarding quality of Information and communications technology used by IOUF and not about the IOUF itself. I have fixed the issue, please review it. Thanks for going to such details and pointing out things that most people often miss. I shall also review the notability of the people mentioned in the page but according to me the notability of people comes to issue when a Wikipedia page is to be created about the person itself and not while mentioning him as a notable person in a University's page. I am also in objection to this because of the following reasons-
  1. Notability of every person (specially alumni like bureaucrats, academicians) can't be measured by just online coverage but they deserve to be there,
  2. There are many Wikipedia pages where notable alumni are mentioned who do not have much online coverage and an individual Wikipedia page. See here and here
  3. As IOUF is a distance education foundation, it's hard to track the notability of the person in native language. Hope you understand my point. Cheers Mr RD 17:23, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Intercultural Open University Foundation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 11 April 2017 (UTC)