A study in the April 2012 issue of The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist finds that online I/O degrees are viewed less favorably than their traditional counterparts when it comes to the likelihood of receiving an interview, likelihood of being hired, and starting salary.

The study only received 23 responses, and does not indicate whether the respondents were or were not themselves online grads.

In their discussion the authors also distinguish between "reputable online programs" and "enormous online universities that may be perceived as degree mills," although the study itself does not. If, as the authors state, it's "an important question to ask," maybe someone will ask it next time.

So if you believe the authors (and you can swing it financially and logistically), you can improve your odds of getting an I/O psych job with a traditional F2F degree, preferrably a PhD with an internship.

Quote:The Effect of Degree Characteristics on Hiring Outcomes for I-O Psychologists
Alexandra M. Rechlin and Kurt Kraiger
Colorado State University

The purpose of this paper is to inform discussion on the relative merits of three factors on the hiring outcomes of students graduating from I-O programs: degree type (online versus face-to-face), degree level (master’s versus PhD), and whether or not an internship is completed. We do this through empirical research. We recognize that an increasing number of online master’s and PhD programs in I-O psychology are being offered, yet there is little to no research on the perceived value (in I-O psychology) of online degrees. In addition, some individuals have a difficult time deciding whether or not to pursue a master’s degree or a PhD, and students often wonder about the importance of obtaining an internship while in graduate school. This study addresses these important questions.

Online Versus Traditional Degrees

Undergraduate and graduate courses are increasingly being taught online. In the fall of 2002, 9.6% of undergraduate enrollment was online; by the fall of 2009, that number had risen to 29.3%. In 2007–2008, 22% of postbaccalaureate students (800,000) were enrolled in an online course (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Degrees offered entirely online have also become popular. From 2007–2008, 9% of postbaccalaureate students took their degree entirely online (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).

Due to the recent increase in online degrees, in 2009 SIOP’s Education and Training (E&T) committee formed a subcommittee to study existing online master’s and PhD I-O programs. The subcommittee identified 12 different master’s or PhD programs from 10 universities. To examine employers’ reactions to online degrees, the subcommittee distributed a short survey to organizations recruiting through the SIOP website. Although only six people responded, the subcommittee found that employers overall were neutral to slightly negative in their perceptions of online degrees (Dahling et al., 2010).

Further, in 2010, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) conducted a poll of HR professionals’ hiring practices and attitudes regarding online versus traditional degrees. The majority of respondents agreed that job applicants with traditional degrees were preferred by their organizations, although 87% of respondents agreed that online degrees were viewed more favorably than they were 5 years ago (SHRM, 2010).

Based on these survey findings, it is predicted that job applicants from a traditional university (that is, offering face-to-face classes) will be viewed more favorably than applicants with online I-O degrees.

Hypothesis 1: Applicants with degrees from a traditional university will be viewed more favorably (in terms of likelihood of receiving an interview, likelihood of being hired, and starting salary) than applicants with degrees from an online university.

Master’s Versus PhD

Master’s degree programs in I-O have become increasingly popular over the last 20 years (Roch, 2009). Traditionally, there has been a bias against master’s graduates, and master’s programs have striven for legitimacy (Koppes, 1991). Due to this traditionally negative bias towards master’s degrees in I-O, it is expected that applicants with a PhD will be viewed more favorably than those with master’s degrees.

In practice, master’s degree or PhD graduates may perform similar work. However, there are still a number of differences in roles and responsibilities (Schippmann, Hawthorne, & Schmitt, 1992), and these differences are reflected in relative salaries. According to the 2009 SIOP income survey, the weighted mean salary for someone with a PhD in I-O was $112,728, compared to a weighted mean salary for someone with a master’s degree in I-O of just $77,591 (Khanna & Medsker, 2010). It therefore is expected that applicants with a PhD will be offered higher starting salaries than applicants with master’s degrees.

Hypothesis 2: Applicants with PhDs will be viewed more favorably (in terms of likelihood of receiving an interview, likelihood of being hired, and starting salary) than applicants with master’s degrees.

Internship Experience

Many graduate students are interested in obtaining internships in order to help them acquire jobs after graduation, and many graduate programs require formal internships. SIOP data indicate that approximately 25% of PhD programs and 37% of master’s programs require supervised internships (Cassidy, 2010). Although there is anecdotal evidence that internship experience is helpful in obtaining one’s first I-O job, to our knowledge there is no supporting empirical evidence. However, Cassidy surveyed I-O psychologists and found that nearly 83% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that “work/internship experience acquired before, or during, graduate school results in greater employment opportunities upon graduation.”

There is substantial evidence, however, that internships are beneficial for undergraduates. For example, Gault, Leach, and Duey (2010) found that undergraduates in a business school were more likely to receive job offers if they had completed an internship, and Gault, Redington, and Schlager (2000) reported that intern alumni had higher salaries than non-intern alumni. Based on the empirical evidence from undergraduates and the anecdotal evidence in the I-O community, it is expected that applicants who completed an internship will be viewed more favorably than applicants without internship experience.

Hypothesis 3: Applicants with one year of internship experience will be viewed more favorably (in terms of likelihood of receiving an interview, likelihood of being hired, and starting salary) than applicants without internship experience.

Method

Participants

Participants were 23 psychologists working in I-O psychology consulting firms and responsible for hiring other I-O psychologists. Of the 23, 19 were male, 3 were female, and 1 did not provide gender information. Participants ranged in age from 35 to 65 years old (M = 47.9, SD = 9.80) and were primarily White (20 White, 2 Hispanic/Latino, 1 did not respond). Nearly all participants (n = 19) had completed their PhD, one had a master’s degree, one had a PsyD, and two did not provide degree information. Nineteen participants had obtained their highest degree in I-O psychology, one in social/personality, one in experimental psychology, and two did not respond. Participants completed their highest degree between 1971 and 2005 (M = 1991, SD = 10.75).

Companies in the study employed 0–80 full-time PhDs (M = 12.87,
SD = 18.20), 0–6 part-time PhDs (M = 3.15, SD = 4.36), 0–160 full-time master’s-level I-O practitioners (M = 15.3, SD = 34.61), and 1–40 part-time master’s-level I-O practitioners (M = 3.57, SD = 8.30).

Procedure

Participants were e-mailed and asked to participate in a research project examining the effect of different characteristics of an I-O psychologist’s training on hiring outcomes. Participants were also told that the applicant profiles were fictional but intended to portray characteristics that might actually be used in a hiring decision. They were then provided a link to the online survey.

Upon clicking the survey link, participants were presented with an online informed consent. Then participants viewed eight different applicant profiles representing potential recent graduates from I-O psychology programs applying for a job with their organization. After viewing a one-sentence description of each applicant, participants rated the applicant on the three outcome variables (described below). After responding to the applicant profiles, participants completed an optional demographics survey.

Stimuli and measures. Participants viewed eight different brief applicant profiles, ensuring that each combination of the three independent variables (online vs. traditional degree, master’s vs. PhD, internship vs. no internship) was rated once. For example, two applicant profiles were: “This applicant received his/her master’s degree in I-O psychology from an online program and did not complete an internship during graduate school,” and “This applicant received his/her PhD in I-O psychology from a traditional terminal degree program (i.e., not online) and completed a 1-year internship during graduate school.”

Based on the applicant information, participants rated the applicant on the three outcome variables. The first question was, “What is the likelihood that you would invite this applicant for an interview?” and the second question was, “What is the likelihood that you would hire this applicant?” Participants responded to both questions using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = very unlikely, 5 = very likely). The third question was “If you did hire the applicant, what is the starting salary that would likely be offered to this applicant?” and participants responded using a 9-point Likert-type scale (1 = less than $30,000, 5 = $60,000 to $70,000, 9 = greater than $100,000).

Results

A doubly multivariate repeated measures MANOVA was conducted to analyze the data. The dependent variables were the likelihood that the applicant would be invited to interview, the likelihood of the applicant being hired, and the starting salary offered to the applicant. The within-subjects variables were the applicant’s degree (master’s or PhD), type of degree (online or traditional), and whether or not the applicant had internship experience.

Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1 predicted that applicants with degrees from a traditional university would be viewed more favorably than applicants with degrees from an online university. Estimated marginal means and standard errors can be found in Table 1. All tests were significant. If applicants had a traditional degree, they were more likely to be invited to interview [F(1, 22) = 6.37, p = .000, η2 = .76], more likely to be hired [F(1, 22) = 37.07, p = .000, η2 = .63], and more likely to be given a higher starting salary [F(1, 22) = 24.30, p = .000, η2 = .53] than were applicants with online degrees. Hypothesis 1 therefore was fully supported.

Table 1
[omitted]

Hypothesis 2 predicted that applicants with PhDs would be viewed more favorably than applicants with master’s degrees. Estimated marginal means and standard errors can be found in Table 2. All tests were significant. Applicants with PhDs were more likely to be invited to interview [F(1, 22) = 33.52, p = .000, η2 = .60], more likely to be hired [F(1, 22) = 14.97, p = .000, η2 = .41], and more likely to be given a higher starting salary [F(1, 22) = 107.89, p = .000, η2 = .83] than were applicants with master’s degrees. Hypothesis 2 therefore was fully supported.

Table 2
[omitted]

Hypothesis 3

Hypothesis 3 predicted that applicants with 1 year of internship experience would be viewed more favorably than applicants without internship experience. Estimated marginal means and standard errors can be found in Table 3. All tests were significant. If applicants had internship experience, they were more likely to be invited to interview [F(1, 22) = 26.49, p = .000, η2 = .55], to be hired [F(1, 22) = 34.38, p = .000, η2 = .61], and to be offered a higher starting salary [F(1, 22) = 13.07, p = .001, η2 = .38] than were applicants without internship experience. Hypothesis 3 therefore was fully supported.

Table 3
[omitted]

Discussion

The goal of this study was to inform debate about the extent to which various characteristics of I-O applicants affect hiring outcomes for applied positions. Specifically, we examined whether an applicant’s degree (master’s or PhD), type of degree (online or traditional), and internship experience would affect the applicant’s likelihood of being invited to interview, likelihood of being hired, and starting salary offered. Although many of the results for this study were anticipated, this study is the first attempt at quantifying the effects of degree level, degree type, and internship experience on hiring outcomes.

Accordingly, our results should be of great interest both to potential applicants and to professionals who advise them (e.g., advisors of undergraduates). Individuals who choose a master’s program over a doctoral program or an online program over a traditional program may have valid reasons for doing so but should understand up front the possible negative consequences of their choice.

The Online Degree Debate

For potential employers, and for purposes of professional debate, it is not unexpected that graduates of traditional programs received better hiring outcomes than graduates of online programs. However, what remains unknown is whether this result is from differences in the perceived quality or the actual quality of online programs. While distance learning degrees appear to be as effective as traditional degrees in terms of student learning (Allen et al., 2004; Sitzmann, Kraiger, Stewart, & Wisher, 2006), potential employers still viewed online graduates more poorly. Is this simply an issue of inaccurate perceptions by employers of the quality of online education? If so, then online programs (and their students and graduates) need to work systematically to improve these perceptions. For example, programs could reach out to potential employers to increase understanding of the nature of online programs, the courses provided, and the rigor of those courses. Online graduates could tout their experience collaborating with others using electronic means (an important skill in today’s work environment) and the self-discipline necessary to succeed in an online program. Instructors in online programs could also aim to change perceptions of online degrees.

On the other hand, our results could reflect lower actual quality of online programs compared to traditional programs. Such differences would be difficult to quantify. Just as there is no universally accepted ranking system of traditional programs, there are no clear criteria by which online programs could be compared to traditional programs in terms of the quality of their graduates. Some criteria may be comparisons of “raw input” (e.g., mean GRE scores of incoming students), the research productivity of program faculty (e.g., Oliver, Blair, Gorman, & Woehr, 2005), the extent to which graduate training corresponds to an accepted model of practitioner training (see Belar & Perry, 1992; Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1999), or the success rate of students passing state licensing exams (though the proportion of I-O psychologists who seek licensing is slight).

Note too that the quality of online programs also differs by the school offering it. An important question to ask is if employers view an online degree from a more reputable online program, such as those based on traditional programs (e.g., Kansas State University or Colorado State University), differently than they view degrees from enormous online universities that may be perceived as degree mills. It is possible that online graduates from more reputable programs may be viewed similarly to traditional graduates. In that case, the results of this study may have been driven by poor perceptions of less reputable programs.

In combination with initial work by SIOP’s E&T committee, we see our results as leading to important discussions as to why graduates of online programs may fair worse in the job market than graduates of traditional programs, as well as more basic discussion and debate as to the skill sets expected of graduates (e.g., Fink et al., 2010) and how both graduate curriculums and program graduates can be meaningfully compared across delivery media.

One result of such discussion is a better understanding of the comparative skill sets acquired in different types of programs. For example, graduates from traditional programs may be more likely to be perceived as being able to conduct research. However, online graduates may obtain skills that may set them apart from traditional graduates. Online graduates need to be very self-disciplined to be able to achieve, and they must be able to work independently and also be able to work collaboratively using electronic means.

These results suggest that employers perceive graduates of traditional programs as more qualified or better than graduates of online programs, when the more critical question may be, how do they differ?

Other Findings

We also found that applicants with PhDs were viewed more favorably than applicants with master’s degrees. This result was not a surprise, as it is logical that applicants with more education would see better hiring outcomes. We know from the SIOP income survey that I-O psychologists with PhDs make, on average, far more money than I-O practitioners with master’s degrees (Khanna & Medsker, 2010), and PhDs are likely more qualified due to their additional years of education. A major reason that many students pursue a PhD is to have a better chance of obtaining a good job, so it is perhaps reassuring to many that PhDs are indeed more likely to experience positive hiring outcomes. Nonetheless, a better understanding of which advantages ascribed to PhDs are perceptual and which can be attributed to agreed upon criteria can help both employers and potential applicants make more informed decisions.

Finally, we found that applicants who had completed a 1-year internship were viewed more favorably than applicants who had not completed an internship. This is consistent with prior research with undergraduates indicating that students with internship experience are more likely to be offered a job (Gault et al., 2010) and have higher salaries (Gault et al., 2000). However, this is the first study to extend this effect to I-O graduates.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

As with all research, there were some limitations to this study. First, the sample size was small. However, it was an interesting, relevant sample made up of psychologists at least partially responsible for hiring I-O psychologists in their firms. Further, despite the small sample size, significant support was found for the three hypotheses. A second limitation is that participants rated short, one-sentence descriptions of applicants instead of viewing complete and realistic resumés. Participants obviously were aware that they were not rating real applicants. Further, without the full details of actual resumés, the manipulated characteristics may be more salient than they would be in real-life scenarios. Future research should focus on hiring outcomes for real applicants (and/or more realistic resumés) to determine if the effects found in this study hold up for actual job applicants (and may shed additional light on the underlying factors on which we speculated).

Implications

Online degrees in I-O are becoming increasingly prevalent. The findings in this study, however, indicate that applicants with online degrees are viewed less favorably than are applicants with traditional degrees. If students do indeed achieve the same learning outcomes regardless of the type of degree they have, as the literature on distance learning suggests, then employers should more carefully consider the relative merits of face-to-face versus online curricula, and administrators and instructors of online programs should more assertively market the knowledge and skills of their graduates. It is our hope that this paper will stimulate research and considerable discussion regarding traditional versus online I-O programs.

References
[omitted]

http://www.cimea.it/files/fileusers/Sorbon.pdf

It appears (15 OCT 2011) that the wonderful Sorbo franchise (UNIVERSITE' FRANCOPHONE ROBERT DE SORBON, ECOLE SUPERIEURE ROBERT DE SORBON).
CHRISTIAN PRADE is fined euro 15.000 by a French court for fraud.
It is interesting to know the great seat of learning was...in a farm in the French countryside.
PFFT!

Oregon's former ODA head, the adjudicated civil rights violator and anti-Christian bigot Alan Contreras, has moved to Medford and started up some sort of....business? consultancy?? expert opinion service??? general bullshit vendor????

Here's a copy of his letter to NACIQI, where he advocates nationalizing accreditation, which shows his new address and contact info:

  contreras-hea.pdf (Size: 82.53 KB / Downloads: 4)

Quote:

Alan L. Contreras
College Evaluations • Higher Education Policy
818 Grant Avenue, Medford Oregon 97501 • (541) 510-6161 • acontrer56@gmail.com

November 6, 2011

Melissa Lewis, Director, NACIQI
U.S. Department of Education
Room 8060
1990 K Street NW
Washington DC 20006

Dear Ms. Lewis:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the NACIQI discussion draft, Higher Education Accreditation Reauthorization Policy Considerations. This is an excellent, well-written and very useful document.

I recently retired after fifteen years working for state agencies that were responsible for postsecondary oversight and college approvals. Most of this time was as administrator of the Oregon Office of Degree Authorization. I am also serving as a member of the drafting team for the efforts currently underway through the Council of State Governments to produce a viable interstate compact for the authorization of colleges that would have the effect of making it easier for colleges to operate in multiple states. Thus I have worked with many of the issues discussed in the draft.

Linkages between academic quality and consumer protection

One of the difficulties that you have addressed in the draft is that there are good reasons for the three "triad" functions to overlap. One of these that is perhaps not well understood is that consumer protection covers more than obvious fraud and fakery. It also covers academic quality and many technical issues subsumed within the idea of quality.

For example, it is fairly common for colleges that expand into multiple states to be lax in their determination of how their programs are classified under the laws of that state. This is expecially true in licensed professions. A college may decide to offer a program in a state without realizing that graduates of the program do not meet the requirements to practice a profession in that state. I am not sure that this situation can be classified solely as consumer protection or as academic quality--it has elements of both.

Oversight of program content in this situation seems to me primarily a state function, as the state is best situated to most easily deal with interagency issues such as licensure. Consumer protection includes the need for state action to ensure that colleges do not offer programs that are decoupled from state licensing requirements.

For this reason I suggest that any final version of the NACIQI document expressly recognize that the issue of program content as it relates to legal requirements for professional practice be considered primarily a state function under the triad theory.

The nature of responsibility for colleges

At a basic level, the entity that is responsible for the quality of what a college does is the entity that authorizes the college to operate as a degree-granter. In most cases this is a state. For example, Harvard is allowed to issue degrees because it has a charter from Massachusetts that says that it can do so. The rather elaborate methods used to convert its Royal charter to a state charter at the time of U.S. independence make for humorous reading, but the principle is absolutely clear. In a few cases, the legal responsibility for a college's degree authority arises from the federal government or from a sovereign Indian tribe.

Because this is true, the triad is not always exactly the same configuration. The federal government has a much greater responsibility for its own institutions (e.g., the service academies) and those it may charter, e.g. Gallaudet, which holds a Congressional charter as a degree granter. Likewise, the ultimate responsibility for qualitative oversight of a tribally chartered college such as Sinte Gleska or Salish Kootenai rests with tribal authorities.

The triad must therefore be viewed as having slightly adjustable legs. The functions that we customarily think of as belonging to "states" in fact belong to the chartering or "home" licensing entity. This is usually a state, but can be another source of governmental authority.

Funding for oversight

One of the issues that we face in looking at these issues is that although federal needs may add to what an accreditor (or even a state) is expected to do, these expectations do not come with a check enclosed. If accreditors or states are to perform functions because the federal government needs them to, then the federal government needs to cover the cost of doing that. This is done today at least in part in at least two somewhat similar situations, Veteran's approving offices (in which the state-based staff doing the screening is subsidized with federal funds) and IPEDS data gathering (in which costs of necessary national meetings are paid for from federal sources). It is not appropriate for the federal government to simply dump a function onto the states when the function is federal in nature.

Other issues

I concur that there is no particular reason for institutional accreditors to be regional in nature, with one exception that relates to other goals mentioned in the document. If closer working ties between states and accreditors are desirable, which I think they are, then having accreditation done nationally based on institution type in effect makes closer working ties somewhat more difficult.

I think a review of the cost of accreditation is appropriate, but it must necessarily be done as part of a consideration of the cost of existing and potential alternative processes. Information about the cost of accreditation is not very useful viewed in isolation.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this draft.

Sincerely,

Alan Contreras

Quote:CHEA director George Gollin will host the nation's largest Koran burning at his home at 813 W University Avenue, Champaign, Illinois, on April 1, 2012. It is believed George Gollin will burn 25,000 copies of the sacred Muslim book to demonstrate his solidarity with anti-religious civil rights violators.

George Gollin is well known for his Marxist and racist rhetoric, as well as his questionable relationships with gay boy pornographers and cultists seeking to destroy the American free enterprise system.

George Gollin claims to hold a doctoral degree from an Ivy League university, but informed sources in higher education believe that claim may be false. George Gollin has admitted that the dissertation he submitted was authored by 15 other students, an inappropriate collaboration for which no reputable university would award a doctoral degree.

George Gollin's domestic partner, Mel Loots, was cited by the FDA for selling mutant lab pigs to the public for food.

Self-anointed "expert" Gus Sainz used to boast of having "two RA degrees" and posted a link to a list of online MBA degrees in his sig. Then it was discovered one of his vaunted RA degrees was an AA from his local juco, and the other was a humanities BA acquired a mere 110 days later from TESC.

It looks like the rotten apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Check out NickSainz.com and click on his resume. Or just check the copy attached below. Nick Sainz is Nicholas D. Sainz, Goose's adult son, who recently graduated from Carnegie Mellon with a BS in Computer Science.


  Nicholas Sainz Resume.pdf (Size: 109.99 KB / Downloads: 31)

Looks like he did it the old fashioned, cheeks-in-seats way, and it took him four years, not 110 days. So far, so good.

But wait, what's with this claimed work experience? If the kid is in college in Pittsburgh from 2007 to 2011, how is it he was working for this "NewMed Corporation" in Miami from 2003 to 2009?

Well, in fact, "NewMed Corporation" is a DBA for another company--Sainz Medical Systems, Inc. Yup, the same one operated by dear old dad himself.

"This is Me!"

  NewMed Fictitious Name.PDF (Size: 36.64 KB / Downloads: 4)

And it seems that not only did that DBA expire in 2004, but Sainz Medical Systems itself expired in 2005 when it was administratively dissolved by the Florida Secretary of State for failing to file its annual report.

http://ccfcorp.dos.state.fl.us/scripts/f...9208900178

http://ccfcorp.dos.state.fl.us/scripts/c...ling_type=

So how is it exactly that you work two years in another state for a company that doesn't exist?

It looks like whoever wrote that resume was playing a little fast and loose with the facts.

And just who was the author of that document?

For the answer, click on "File" in Adobe and then "Properties." The author is shown as......none other than Gus Sainz, the King of Cantinfleando himself!

And the title of the document is "Leslie Ann Sainz." That seems like an odd title for a document purporting to be the resume of Nick Sainz. Who is Leslie Ann Sainz? Why Goose's adult daughter, of course.

LinkedIn tells us that lovely Leslie Ann Sainz also attends Carnegie Mellon, where she is majoring in......Creative Writing. It must be in her genes, because when it comes to pulp fiction few are more creative than dear old daddy Goose.


Leslie Ann Sainz
Pulp fiction in her genes?

Quote:Students told Indian consulate officials that they were searched, treated rudely and handcuffed before being taken into immigration offices for questioning, Thomas said.

Many have been forced to wear ankle bracelets to track their movements with radio frequency signals, and they must report to immigration officials regularly while they go through deportation proceedings, Gongulee Thomas said.

Now is this really PhD level thinking? Rich Douglas believes his boss doesn't know what she's doing and needs an excuse. His boss doesn't have a PhD, came from the operations side of the house and has the same pay grade he has, all of which apparently makes her inept, inferior and "not an expert"--in his eyes.

So.....he puts it out on the internet where everyone in the world can read it.

Well let's just hope that nobody directs it to the Boss Lady's attention, or somebody might need to start tuning up that "expert" resume.

Rich Douglas Wrote:On a related note, I work with someone who also holds a Ph.D. We are subject-matter experts in our organization's mission, but our supervisor isn't. She got put in the position from the operations side of the house and we later got slid under her (even though we're all the same pay grade). Anyway, she occasionally refers to us as "the doctors," and it's meant to imply we're too theoretical and not practical enough. In fact, she just doesn't know what she's doing and needs an excuse. In reality, my colleague and I are long-time practitioners, not academics. It's one of those times I would just as soon not be called "doctor."

Quote:Executive Director, CHCO Council: Kathryn Medina



Office of Personnel Management

Phone: (202) 606-2076 Fax: 202-271-4314

Email: Kathryn.Medina@opm.gov


Kathryn Medina serves as the Executive Director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council. In this role, she coordinates and oversees the broad portfolio of Council activities and works closely with Council members and other stakeholders to support its mission and implementation of its goals and objectives. She also serves as a liaison to the CIO, CFO and CAO Councils.

Ms. Medina has over fourteen years of experience in human resources and administration, with a primary focus on organizational and HR development. She joins the Office of Personnel Management from the global law firm of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, where she was a key member of the global HR team, and managed the human resources department for the Washington, DC office. Her work at Paul Hastings focused on the strategic development and implementation of HR and administrative best practices, as well as the oversight of human resources programs and policies for the DC office of over 230 employees.

Prior to her time at Paul Hastings, she spent over 8 years managing law firms in Washington, DC and Chicago. During that time, she was responsible for building, supporting and directing efficient administrative systems that included: strategic management of human resources; strategic planning and accountability for results oriented performance; management of budgeting and accounting functions; delivery of technical and administrative support training; direction of space and related logistical functions; automated office support systems, information technology and information resources management; telecommunication, records management; and litigation support.

In 2004, she earned her CLM (Certified Legal Manager) certification, the highest industry distinction for a legal administrator. She has been a member of the ALA (Association of Legal Administrators) since 2006. In 2009 she chaired the Media and Communications Committee of the Capital Chapter of the ALA. As Chair, she was the Editor-in-Chief for the Capital Connection, the Chapter’s award-winning newsletter.

Ms. Medina earned her Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, summa cum laude. She holds a Master of Education in Global Human Resource Development from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She is also a certified Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) through the HR Certification Institute.

Ms. Medina is a member of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and the Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD). She currently serves on the Executive Advisory Committee of the Interagency Resource Management Conference (IRMCO).

I read this in a doctoral candidate's thesis:

This is to certify that I am responsible for the work submitted in this thesis, that the original work is my own except as specified in acknowledgements, and that neither the thesis nor the original work contained therein has been submitted to this or any other institution for a higher degree. (Emphasis added.)

Intriguing. The university (a top 15 UK uni), prohibits a student from submitting work that had previously been submitted towards a degree. So, if someone submitted his work to a school for a degree and later submitted the same work to another school for a degree, wouldn't that be unethical? It sure seems so.

"I receive a great many letters from people who ask essentially the same question. You have written about a great many schools. Please tell me which one is best of all."

"Here, then, are my personal six favorite schools in each of five categories. There are many other "GOOD" schools and programs as well."

Non-Residential Programs
Doctorate

1-University of South Africa
2-Columbia Pacific University
3-Pacific Western University
4-International Institute for Advanced Studies
5-California Coast University
6-Kensington University

--John Bear, Ph.D. "How to Earn an American University Degree Without Ever Going to America"--1982, California, Mendocino Book Company--Page 111-112, Section 63