David Barton Contradicts Oral Roberts on ORU's Basketball Program

Yesterday on his Wallbuilders Live show, David Barton said the sports program at Oral Roberts University in the 1970s was “where the drug culture was” and was filled with sexual promiscuity and illegal activities.  Listen again to his defamation of the ORU basketball program in the 1970s.

In an earlier part of the show, Oklahoma Wesleyan University president Everett Piper said the sports programs should be aligned with the rest of the college mission. In response, at 34 seconds into the above segment, David Barton began talking about “the school I attended.” Barton attended Oral Roberts University and said his program was different than Piper’s.
Transcript (starting at 34 seconds)

But the school where I attended, when I attended there that was not their thing. Their thing was to have the best program ever. So even though I went to a religious school, it was not about faith and character, it was about how high you were in the nation. So in basketball, talking before with the team there and what we did, and we made it to the Elite Eight in the tournament, but the character was so bad that, that’s a period I remember very clearly in my experience because in outing some things that were going on in the basketball team, that was where the drug culture was, that was where it was really promiscuous, that’s where a lot of illegal stuff, and outing that I ended getting death threats and I had to have cops carry me from class to class across campus because of the death threats on a Christian university, for outing things that violated the honor code that we all signed to go to the university.

These claims were denied by Glenn “Smitty” Smith, head athletic trainer at ORU who came to the school in 1972 (the same year Barton did). Smith said he did the drug testing and no one in that era failed. Barton’s rant also is contradicted by news reports from that era which quote Oral Roberts about the basketball program. Roberts had the same stated values and goals as Everett Piper. From the NYT, 12/5/71, page 9:
oru basketball screen
A 1972 NYT article points out that most of the basketball team was African-American and occasionally complained about the religious zeal of other students. However, there was no description of a different behavioral standard for the team.
A 1973 article addressed both the code of conduct and the racial differences.
ORU Basketball screen 2
I fully understand that Roberts assessment might not have been accurate but I can’t find any evidence of what Barton claimed either, especially as school policy.

Note to Life Christian University: Use of False or Misleading Degrees is Illegal in Some States

Triggered by my research into Life Christian University, I have discovered that some states make it illegal to use degrees from unaccredited schools or degrees which are not based on actual academic work. This post provides a look at Nevada’s law which requires evidence that work was done to get a degree. I start with this one because it addresses degrees which are awarded based on life experience. Here is the law:

NRS 394.700  Prohibition; penalty.

      1.  It is unlawful for a person knowingly to use or attempt to use:

      (a) A false or misleading degree or honorary degree conferred by a private entity, regardless of whether that entity is located in this State and regardless of whether that entity is authorized to operate in this State; or

      (b) A degree or honorary degree conferred by a private entity in a false or misleading manner, regardless of whether that entity is located in this State and regardless of whether that entity is authorized to operate in this State,

in connection with admission to any institution of higher education or in connection with any business, employment, occupation, profession, trade or public office.

      2.  Unless a greater penalty is provided by specific statute, a person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than $5,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 6 months, or by both fine and imprisonment.

      3.  In addition to any criminal penalty imposed pursuant to subsection 2, a person who violates the provisions of this section is subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for each violation. The Attorney General or any district attorney of this State may recover the penalty in a civil action brought in the name of the State of Nevada in any court of competent jurisdiction.

      4.  For the purposes of this section, a degree or honorary degree is false or misleading or is used in a false or misleading manner if it:

      (a) States or suggests that the person named in the degree or honorary degree has completed the requirements of an academic or professional program of study in a particular field of endeavor beyond the secondary school level and the person has not, in fact, completed the requirements of the program of study;

      (b) Is offered as his or her own by a person other than the person who completed the requirements of the program of study; or

      (c) Is awarded, bestowed, conferred, given, granted, conveyed or sold:

             (1) Based upon more than 10 percent of the recipient’s documented life experience and not based upon actual completion of academic work;

             (2) By a person or entity located in this State in violation of this chapter, as determined by the Commission; or

             (3) By a person or entity located outside this State which would be a violation of this chapter if the person or entity were located in this State, as determined by the Commission. (emphasis added)

      5.  As used in this section:

      (a) “Degree” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 394.620.

      (b) “Honorary degree” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 394.620.

Joyce Meyer, David Barton and the other Life Christian University “distinguished degree holders” should be careful when in Nevada. According to Douglas Wingate, the PhDs given to “distinguished degree holders” are given solely in consideration of their life and ministry experience. Nevada forbids that kind of degree to be used in the state. If more than 10% of the work for a degree is based on life experience, it is considered “false or misleading.” Even honorary degrees cannot be portrayed as having been earned. Clearly, the definition of “earned degree” as used by LCU would be considered false and misleading in Nevada.

I am compiling a list of states which penalize the improper use of degrees and applying those findings to some of “distinguished degree holders.” Stay tuned.

Life Christian University and the Federal Definition of a Diploma Mill

Life Christian University is a school in Lutz, FL which awarded what school founder Douglas Wingate calls “earned degrees” to “big name” preachers who never attended the school. Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyer, Kenneth Copeland, and a host of other “distinguished degree holders” were given PhD degrees in recognition of their work. According to LCU, these degrees are earned.
Additionally, LCU’s requirements for a bachelor’s degree are much lower than at an accredited school. LCU doesn’t match the state requirements on how many hours a person should attend classes to get a degree.
LCU’s accreditation is with a group — Accreditation Commission International — that has a checkered past and allows LCU to simply add branch campuses without an accreditation visit. In fact, LCU switched to ACI for that reason. ACI is not recognized by the Department of Education as an acceptable accreditation body.
Now let’s look at the federal definition of a diploma mill:

‘‘(20) DIPLOMA MILL.—The term ‘diploma mill’ means an entity that—
‘‘(A)(i) offers, for a fee, degrees, diplomas, or certificates, that may be used to represent to the general public that the individual possessing such a degree, diploma, or certificate has completed a program of postsecondary education or training; and ‘‘(ii) requires such individual to complete little or no education or coursework to obtain such degree, diploma, or certificate; and
‘‘(B) lacks accreditation by an accrediting agency or association that is recognized as an accrediting agency or association of institutions of higher education (as such term is defined in section 102) by— ‘‘(i) the Secretary pursuant to subpart 2 of part H of title IV; or ‘‘(ii) a Federal agency, State government, or other organization or association that recognizes accrediting agencies or associations.

LCU’s degrees require much less work for achievement of a bachelor’s than the law demands for a traditional bachelor’s. And as we have learned, some degree recipients have an “earned degree” for no work whatsoever. LCU’s accrediting body (ACI) is not recognized by the Secretary or any other entity named in the law.
Let me be clear, LCU students do attend classes (3 hours/week). However, it would take about 12 years to get a degree at an accredited school while it only takes them 4 years and less if the degree is earned online. The PhD degrees to the distinguished degree holders are the main indicator of a diploma mill. These are given to people who don’t even attend the school.
For more on LCU, read these posts.
UPDATE: The state of Missouri responded to my complaint about Joyce Meyer’s fraudulent LCU degree. She has since started calling it an honorary degree.

Eric Metaxas Likes Christian Colleges, Blocks Christian College Profs

Today, Eric Metaxas published an article at CNSNews talking up Christian colleges. The major talking point is that Christian colleges are well rounded while secular schools are one-dimensional. Actually, in the article, he reported the views of NY Times columnist David Brooks. Speaking of Ivy League students, Brooks says:

“They’ve been raised in a culture,” Brooks says, “that encourages them to pay attention to the résumé virtues of how to have a great career but leaves by the wayside … time to think about the eulogy virtues: the things they’ll say about you after you’re dead. They go through their school with the mixture of complete self-confidence and utter terror, afraid of a single false step off the achievement machine.” It’s flat, lifeless, and soul-killing.
But Christian schools attempt to educate their charges in three dimensions. Brooks told Christian college leaders that Christian universities “are the avant-garde of 21st century culture.” Christian colleges “have a way of talking about and educating the human person in a way that integrates faith, emotion and intellect. [They] have a recipe to nurture human beings who have a devoted heart, a courageous mind and a purposeful soul. Almost no other set of institutions in American society has that, and everyone wants it.”

I can’t agree or disagree with Brooks about Ivy League students, but I can say he is close to the mark on the place where I teach.
It interests me that Metaxas resonates with Brooks observations. Recently on Twitter, Metaxas has blocked several Christian college professors who have publicly expressed concerns with his newest book, as well as his support for Donald Trump. To David Brooks observations, I would add that several of the Christian colleges that I know well are not intimidated by the celebrity culture which marks evangelical Christianity.  We encourage students to question the status quo both in and outside the church.
Over the past couple of months, Metaxas has blocked Messiah College history prof John Fea, Oklahoma Baptist University English prof Alan Noble (recently unblocked), Tyndale University College Philosophy prof Paul Franks and me. There are others but these are the ones who came to mind. It isn’t a major thing to be blocked and my point isn’t to gripe about that. My point is that in addition to the virtues identified by Brooks, many profs at Christian colleges seek the truth wherever it leads, even when that upsets a few big name apple carts.

CA Bill Will Require Disclosure of Title IX Exemptions by Religious Colleges

Religious colleges can request an exemption from Title IX which forbids sex discrimination in colleges accepting federal funds or students who pay tuition with federal grants. Exemptions often relate to policies concerning sexual orientation or gender identity. A recent legislative effort in California (SB 1146) would have required exempt religious colleges which accept students with CA student aid to conform to most conditions of the state’s anti-discrimination statute. The bill also gave students who believe they have been discriminated against a right to sue a college on that basis. In response, religious colleges and other groups (e.g., the Southern Baptist’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission) opposed the bill because their representatives believed they would have to alter critical elements of their program in violation of their religious views.
Last week, the author of the bill, Rep. Lara (D-Bell Gardens) promised to remove the language allowing lawsuits and requiring conformity to CA’s anti-discrimination statute. Now the bill requires little more than disclosure of the exemption and any actions taken against students allowed by the exemption.  Late yesterday, the new language was posted on Assembly’s website:

SECTION 1. Section 66290.1 is added to the Education Code, to read:
66290.1. (a) Each postsecondary educational institution in this state that claims an exemption pursuant to Section 901(a)(3) of the federal Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1681(a)(3)) or Section 66271 shall disclose to current and prospective students, faculty members, and employees the basis for claiming the exemption and the scope of the allowable activities provided by the exemption.
(b) The disclosure required in subdivision (a) shall be made in all of the following ways:
(1) The disclosure shall be displayed in a prominent location of the campus or school site. “Prominent location” means that location, or those locations, in the main administrative building or other area where notices regarding the institution’s rules, regulations, procedures, and standards of conduct are posted.
(2) The disclosure shall be included in written materials sent to prospective students seeking admission to the institution.
(3) The disclosure shall be provided as part of orientation programs conducted for new students at the beginning of each quarter, semester, or summer session, as applicable.
(4) The disclosure shall be provided to each faculty member, member of the administrative staff, and member of the support staff at the beginning of the first quarter or semester of each school year. The disclosure shall be provided to each new employee upon his or her hire.
(5) The disclosure shall be included in any publication of the institution that sets forth the comprehensive rules, regulations, procedures, and standards of conduct for the institution.
SEC. 2. Section 66290.2 is added to the Education Code, to read:
66290.2. (a) Each postsecondary educational institution in this state that claims an exemption pursuant to Section 901(a)(3) of the federal Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1681(a)(3)) or Section 66271 shall submit to the Student Aid Commission copies of all materials submitted to, and received from, a state or federal agency concerning the granting of the exemption.
(b) The Student Aid Commission shall collect the information received pursuant to subdivision (a) and post and maintain a list on the commission’s Internet Web site of the institutions that have claimed the exemption with their respective bases for claiming the exemption.
SEC. 3. Section 66290.3 is added to the Education Code, to read:
66290.3. Each postsecondary educational institution in this state that claims an exemption pursuant to Section 901(a)(3) of the federal Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1681(a)(3)) or Section 66271 shall submit a quarterly report to the Student Aid Commission that includes both of the following:
(a) A detailed explanation of the reason for each student suspension or expulsion that occurred during the preceding quarter, including on explanation of the policy the student violated and whether that policy is authorized under the exemption.
(b) Whether the student was a Cal Grant recipient.
SEC. 4. The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

I post this in order to promote awareness that the perceived threat to religious liberty has been addressed for now. I think everyone should be aware of these exemptions. Some students have gone to religious schools unaware that they could be expelled for coming out as gay. Students should know in advance what they are getting into. The last section will keep track of how many students are expelled.