Talk:DeVry University/Archive 1

NOTE: This is a partially duplicated archive page. Talk:DeVry University/Archive 2 contains the same material, but some is missing on this page, so Archive 2 is a complete archive of the main talk page from August 2005 through 23 April 2007, though not including edits that may have removed text prior to archiving. For complete history see the history of the main talk page. This page (Archive 1) is retained for completeness in case there remains some difference here that was not found during the archiving process. So this page can be considered a "backup" to make sure nothing is lost.

NOTE: The text archived here was copied from the main talk page without changes. Some of these discussions are not in chronological sequence, which matches the way they were originally entered on the talk page.

On the best interest of the readers
The undocumented calamities and barbarisms take time to be reveled, sometimes several lifetimes, but injustices find their way regardless in the [neutrally documented] history and regardless and somehow so often these injustices repeat themselves even our own knowledge or negative experiences about them but of course without our permission, think in here about those serial killers, or the child molesters and abusers, now think about of our educational system and especially in institutions like DeVry Inc., what do they need to do everyday to survive?, and how they do survive everyday? Selling? Teaching? what is the kind of equipment they have to train people in the fields in which they do advertise everyday? Microsoft Word 2003 or Windows XP or Google? Can we really and completely trust the media who are being paid to advertise these institutions and the reporters, who are paid as well everyday? what are they going to write about? Some senators might have these and other questions in a statistical documentation form right now at their desks and all the lawyers of their fraudulent sub-world would not be enough to protect these institutions and the "evil-doers" that manage them of their misdeeds. There are officials representing the interest of people, the people of United States of America, and they are  already smelling this conspicuous "monkey [educational] business". DeVry Inc. Management and other similar "for profit institutions" officials agents would most likely face similar destinies as their counterparts in Enron or at least they should resign and these institutions should be closed. The other people’s money or those investors have limits and these boundaries come when the legislation intervene to remind them that not all is about some people’s money. Bias? Over the last years the abundance of documented evidence in official records against DeVry Inc.’s business and marketing practices has rapidly and alarmingly increased. These complaints are not only about the education of its teachers or their ability to teach but the complaints have come from different types of individuals and from all sorts of sources. For instance corporations that have been aggravated by DeVry Inc. or more precisely by its management' decision makers; from parents, spouses and other students' relatives that have been disgusted by DeVry Inc.'s broken promises, from students who have and are not being able to both find a decent job, and pay their students loans and also other maladies such as their privacy being taking away in its entirety from them by the DeVry Inc.'s associates, i.e., collection agencies, car dealers, and other interested third parties. These individuals have not only experienced how their dreams and illusion have been stolen, but are being unfairly castigated and punished by the rough 'business practices' of this institution too. The list includes: Professors who are still working inside DeVry but fearful of losing their jobs and so prefer to remain anonymous, Professors and evenly Deans who have been fired unjustifiably just because they did want more and better resources for their students and thus they only wanted to do a better job. The malpractices of this institution are significant; in effect they represent a waking call for legislation to change the education accreditation and reaccredidation process. As more documentation about DeVry Inc.’s abuses are being posted by more people, so more prospect students, professors and other stakeholders will be able to form their own ideas about supporting or participating into these “business practices” of these so-called "educational" institutions doing business in United States of North America. DeVry Inc. until now still operating legally and is poised as a "technical" school advertising as University in many states in USA.--Veritas Longa 16:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

G'day, I've a suggestion for improvement of this page. I've checked a around other university pages and have found a fairly standard list of sections, some of which we have. To de-stub this article we might want to add some of this information including:
 * Academics
 * Student life
 * Campuses (Got this)
 * Complete list of colleges and divisions (We have most of that but can we add to it and organize it?)
 * History (Got this)
 * Senior Officers of the university
 * Noted faculty
 * Noted graduates
 * See also
 * Student Societies
 * Student Clubs and Organizations

Flehmen 16:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Accreditation and Educational Associations
The paragraphs here strike me as POV; the author is acting as an apologist for Devry against "traditional" schools. --Mister Tog 02:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Wow. Added NPOV warning and cite requests. Scrutchfield 19:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

That paragraph can be deleted. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 19:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

The Higher Learning Commission reports that it has scheduled a focused visit in 2006-2007 regarding DeVry's request to offer a MSEE program. This is especially significant (or in error) because it appears to be for an engineering curriculum rather than an Engineering Technology curriculum. HLC's Affiliated Institution report for DeVry University

Deleted spam. Watch for POV. Hechung 14:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

ownership
Is DeVry owned by General Electric?


 * No, it's owned by its stockholders. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 22:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


 * An 'Engineering technology' degree is not the same thing as an engineering degree. The ET degree does not have the mathematical and scientific rigor of engineering, and omits many of the foundation science courses that an engineer simply needs to have. This is why DeVry and other technology schools cannot call the degree a "BSEE/ME/CE", etc (Bachelor of Science in Engineering) but rather must use the term "in Engineering Technology (Electrical engineering technology, etc.). In my experience, holders of ET degrees did not rise much above a technician or junior engineer level, also, if you plan to sit for your state's PE (Professional Engineer) exam, some states do not allow ET degree holders to take the exam. Those that do require much more extensive experience and supervision than holders of an ABET-accredited engineering (that is, without the "technology" disclaimer) degree. &mdash; —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.75.243.187 (talk • contribs).

Actually, this is not true anymore for DeVry...DeVry Technical has since become an accredited 4yr college or University, hence the name change. --- watch for vandalism on this site --

Do we need all the locations and links to locations?
I just caught an anon-IP coming directly out of DeVry (User_talk:65.172.197.33) making external links out of the individual locations. Ugh. Should this be just cut out? --Bobak 22:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the campus deserves one link form wikipedia to the main site. Individual campus links are not necessary. Hechung 18:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

POV
Is it just me, or does this read like an advertisement for DeVry?
 * The sad thing is its now better than it was not too long ago. A lot of for-profit schools have hacks and/or PR people who actually come on here and create (or "maintain") the articles.  I've caught an employee of the Career Education Corporation (by the anon's IP address) making similarly "spam" edits to schools owned by that company.  Remember the Wikipedia pillar of "Be Bold" (WP:BOLD), go forth and edit that which reads like advertising.  You will have supporters.  --Bobak 01:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "purveyor of e-mail spam" : does that sound like an advertisment to you?? Berchemboy 11:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I've split the curriculum and accreditation sections, as I believe the accreditation details were neutral. I removed some of the worst language in curriculum but it is still skewed and certainly a stub. Vagary 04:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

devry blog
Has anyone found a devry blog? Does this belong on the external links? Hechung 18:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Beware of vandalism on this page Hechung 22:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I have heard that a notable General Electric official attended Devry. Can someone verify this?

Don't Forget
As I understood, the wiki and GFDL are based on the spirit of fairness, in this regard, all the free and open minded-people, we need to do as much a possible to preserve and defend our noble and practical aims. The Wiki is of course one of the best efforts in this regard. We need to tell the facts, regardless of other more mudane interests, in a fair and neutral way, and the fact will eventually lead other minds to have their own conclussions, the "DeVry entry" it is -for me- and insult if we are allowed to left its WikiEntry as is, please let us review it and minimize it, and take all the advertising from the wikipeadia. If we are going to be fair, then let us mantain the information by not leavin misinformation in that entry. What really the "DeVry entry" contents must be written about? what are those uncautioned and curious minds of the WikiWorld, who are use to visit for looking for open, free and shareable information, should read? TV and media advertising. We all know to well what so obviously this Devry Inc. is about. Does DeVry support or either encourage the use of freesoftware or do the use Encarta instead? I do believe there is not exceptions we need to Boldly edit this one. and institutions as DeVry, constitute one of the greatest dangers that our country is facing for its near future. So WikiEducators, is Devry Inc. about Education? Please regardles less please reedit this page properly and make sure we state its stock market values and its Financial Symbol, let us name its official and other trouble during its existance. Our future recursively need us or probably Bill Joy was right, Our future does not need us? I bet we are making the future by describing the concurrent history, this is our anthropoly and we need the truth for survival. Let us do our best. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Codeplowed (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

References and Advertising
add value to the content, therefore, links to the entry's sites should be eliminated.
 * Please, be aware of advertising, an external link cannot refer to a site that is recursively referring to the same entry, does not


 * please, be aware of the employees and dubious PR, employees and marketing people, they do not discriminate to exploit well-intentioned collaborative efforts [like this] to fit their monetary ends. The bottom line.


 * We need to discuss how to properly offer to the readers access to primary sources no otherwise accessible to them, [I fear for our democratic system] in the most neutral way, yes the sources should be reliable and verifiable but also need to be refreshed with some more options to access those important concurrent consumers' concern and their generated feedback and information as well. Meaning this encyclopedia needs to be updated continually and neutrally for certain entries that are in progress or are effecting their histories at the present moment. For instance thee have been many documented incidences of people being fire unjustly at different institutions whose only voice have being via their blog, Blogs and forums are testimonials, we need somehow to create a system to measure the verifiability of the statements, descriptions or information about people, institutions or places written in those places.


 * Diderot, probably would not understand how such a thing could be possibly admissible in any encyclopedic knowledge but he was not exposed to the GNU's GPL and GFDL either.


 * The sad thing is that there are people profiting from the mere spirit of the Wikipedia, and they even do not care to destroyed or ruined it as well with misinformation, we know this.


 * In many ways, credibility is what content management and access represent for the user/reader. Encarta or Britannic or the American Biographical Society or any source whatsoever in the final analysis are used and judged not by their claims if not by their contents. The WikiWay, appears to me, has super passed those encyclopedias because its tremendous flexibility and cross-interactivity to respond to changes as not other way of publishing and sharing knowledge.


 * Let us expedite the process even further by digesting valid information more wikiwiki. This comment is more applicable for businesses such as DeVry Inc. and individuals that only are looking into how advertise their grandiose, products, and services for profit and/or glory purposes, and for that same greedy reason are failing big time in delivering their promises or claims to their publics.


 * we shouldn't care so much about the individual "experts" who claim to be disciples of some non plus ultra "Sapa Gurus", because they want to inflate their empty ego so they advertise in here with their contributions, but we should do care about those many individuals in the corporate world who basically are exploiting all kind of people with advertising claiming they are doing great when there are many substantiated evidences that are clearly indicating otherwise, These evidences and records take years to find their way into the public eye, sometimes they remain silent forever because the powerful mechanisms of repressive practices of some of these institutions.


 * Wikipedia must neutrally inform, yes but its success and growth only depend in how fast [or Wiki] facts can be translated into concurrent and verifiable knowledge and this has more to do with ethics and determination than with what is accepted by the pockets or stomachs of the so-called trained or domesticated "experts" in anything. 24.90.244.160 18:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

References and Advertising
add value to the content, therefore, links to the entry's sites should be eliminated.
 * Please, be aware of advertising, an external link cannot refer to a site that is recursively referring to the same entry, does not


 * please, be aware of the employees and dubious PR, employees and marketing people, they do not discriminate to exploit well-intentioned collaborative efforts [like this] to fit their monetary ends. The bottom line.


 * We need to discuss how to properly offer to the readers access to primary sources no otherwise accessible to them, [I fear for our democratic system] in the most neutral way, yes the sources should be reliable and verifiable but also need to be refreshed with some more options to access those important concurrent consumers' concern and their generated feedback and information as well. Meaning this encyclopedia needs to be updated continually and neutrally for certain entries that are in progress or are effecting their histories at the present moment. For instance thee have been many documented incidences of people being fire unjustly at different institutions whose only voice have being via their blog, Blogs and forums are testimonials, we need somehow to create a system to measure the verifiability of the statements, descriptions or information about people, institutions or places written in those places.


 * Diderot, probably would not understand how such a thing could be possibly admissible in any encyclopedic knowledge but he was not exposed to the GNU's GPL and GFDL either.


 * The sad thing is that there are people profiting from the mere spirit of the Wikipedia, and they even do not care to destroyed or ruined it as well with misinformation, we know this.


 * In many ways, credibility is what content management and access represent for the user/reader. Encarta or Britannic or the American Biographical Society or any source whatsoever in the final analysis are used and judged not by their claims if not by their contents. The WikiWay, appears to me, has super passed those encyclopedias because its tremendous flexibility and cross-interactivity to respond to changes as not other way of publishing and sharing knowledge.


 * Let us expedite the process even further by digesting valid information more wikiwiki. This comment is more applicable for businesses such as DeVry Inc. and individuals that only are looking into how advertise their grandiose, products, and services for profit and/or glory purposes, and for that same greedy reason are failing big time in delivering their promises or claims to their publics.


 * we shouldn't care so much about the individual "experts" who claim to be disciples of some non plus ultra "Sapa Gurus", because they want to inflate their empty ego so they advertise in here with their contributions, but we should do care about those many individuals in the corporate world who basically are exploiting all kind of people with advertising claiming they are doing great when there are many substantiated evidences that are clearly indicating otherwise, These evidences and records take years to find their way into the public eye, sometimes they remain silent forever because the powerful mechanisms of repressive practices of some of these institutions.


 * Wikipedia must neutrally inform, yes but its success and growth only depend in how fast [or Wiki] facts can be translated into concurrent and verifiable knowledge and this has more to do with ethics and determination than with what is accepted by the pockets or stomachs of the so-called trained or domesticated "experts" in anything. 24.90.244.160 18:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Predators and enemies of WikiState
The following IP address user is from obt.devry.edu:

DEVRY INSTITUTE FON-345507584088177 (NET-205-240-70-0-1) 205.240.70.0 - 205.240.70.255


 * 1) ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2007-03-21 19:10
 * 2) Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database

IP address:                    205.240.70.10 Reverse DNS:                   obt.devry.net. Reverse DNS authenticity:      [Verified] ASN:                           19258 ASN Name:                      DEVRY-INC IP range connectivity:         2 Registrar (per ASN):           ARIN Country (per IP registrar):    US [United States] Country Currency:              USD [United States Dollars] Country IP Range:              205.240.0.0 to 205.247.255.255 Country fraud profile:         Normal City (per outside source):     Carol Stream, Illinois Country (per outside source):  US [United States] Private (internal) IP? No IP address registrar:          whois.arin.net Known Proxy? No Link for WHOIS:                205.240.70.10

15:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Request for additional editors
As a student and employee of DeVry, I do not feel as though I can edit this entry in an unbiased way, and therefore I won't. But can I request that someone review the edits by the user "codeplowed"? I agree that this entry should be made more neutral (as should all company and product websites) and am also disturbed about editing from inside the organization (and thus won't do it myself), but adding negative and unsourced comments doesn't seem like an improvement. Talk comments in particular seem unrelated to the entry itself. The comment, "institutions as DeVry, constitute one of the greatest dangers that our country is facing for its near future" is particularly of concern. Wikipedia isn't meant for advertising, but it's not a soapbox, either.

Consider looking up DeVry in unbiased sources such as ipeds (Integrated Postsecondary Education Database) at http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/ or via accreditation agencies. There are plenty of sources out there of verifiable information about DeVry, as an educational institution and as a company, that will cover both positive and negative aspects of the organization. 208.0.29.250 23:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Otterzero

Wiki Predators using other IP addresses
WHOIS results for 71.194.178.71 Generated by www.DNSstuff.com

Location: United States [City: Dekalb, Illinois]

Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. ATT-COMCAST (NET-71-192-0-0-1) 71.192.0.0 - 71.207.255.255 Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. ILLINOIS-24 (NET-71-194-0-0-1) 71.194.0.0 - 71.194.255.255


 * 1) ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2007-04-13 19:10
 * 2) Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.