==I don't see how you can say that his credentials (degrees) are "questionable". He could not have gotten a job teaching (adjunct or fulltime) at Chicago Law School, regardless of his connections, if he did not at least have a Masters degree (he holds a JD from Harvard). Accreditation would have hit Chicago hard for that. Believe me, I know, the accreditation people look at professor/instructor credentials.
Oh..... you mean like 'accreditation' as in meeting certain standards?
Yes...... I've participated in hospital accreditations..... from the clinical and medical records viewpoint, and I know there are pre-annoucements before visits: Visits are with an interview board examining the documentations, random pulling of records, credentials of personnel in licensed positions, interviews with staff, patients, departments, various types of reports. The credential agency is paid by the institution and considers the institution as its customer...... although the public personna is that of assurrance that a high standard of care according to measured criteria and comparison with other similar institutions is verifiable.
Schools, colleges, and universities are also 'clients' or customers of certifying agencies. Usually, the first several investigations or examinations by a credentialing agency are the most critical..... and may be tenative with recommendations for areas of improvement, or may be conditional with similar recommendations...... with intermediate review follow up resulting in a score. Later review may follow, depending upon the importance of 'certification'. In the case of a hospital.... third party payers and particularly medicare and medicaid criteria may be dependant as well as the pr of public confidence placed in high scores.
With learning institutions..... public grants and funds may also be at stake as well as the confidence of students that their academics meet a standard which will transfer with acceptance into other programs and be recognized as work towards their degrees. This does not mean, however, that there is no room for fudging.
After an institution has gained a consistant reputation with the certifying board..... there is the tendancy for the board to relax some in the intensity of the annual or semi annual investigation..... but remarks or complaints from either within or without may intensify focus in areas of complaints. (Need I remind here of the SEC's repeated reviews of Madoff before the discorvery.... or ENRON's reviews before their scandals became apparent.. There is probably not a reviewing agency which is removed from politics of money or other persuasions, or a way to elude them if one is familiar with their habits of investigation and determine a detour to hide a flaw.) Administration follows the experiences shared within the community of its peer groups (Institutions such as hospitals and universities have their own specialized 'industry' journals) as to changes in weight given to differing criteria, or new areas of focus not heretofore broached .......and as information is shared, within each is self examinations and discussions with changes to dress up or address those areas.
Often the examining officials are known by their strengths and areas of expertise as well as the grapevine sharing of pet-peeves which some give away during their circuit of review. Given the likelihood that the University is already credentialed and well reputed with few if any provoking complaints or any significant and major published changes, it is quite likely that a politically placed person given a temporary position as an adjunt who is not required to be officially recognized as a professor...... with or without a personal office.... and having no or few classes or student contact hours assigned to him.... could be hid 'under the wire' of scrutiny during a critical time of accreditation review. Once the person has exited...... even if a later review or complaint revealed that a previous flaw had existed.... the current one would show a correction and likely as not, it might be skipped or at most placed under comments.... with no punitive action taken.
Did this happen with Obama? ....... I don't know. The link in the OP shows that it is the author's position that Obama was not the 'professor' that he reports himself to be: He was given a position as adjunct for political reasons. Futhermore, if he ever was a professor of constitutional law.... which he reports himself to be...... how is it that he refers to something in the Declaration of Independence as coming from the Constitution......while delivering the State of the Union Address? Shouldn't he know the difference and wouldn't a professor expect that distinction in his own students? This is a true fact regarding his 'mis-speak' as I heard it my self and wondered about it at the time as very strange for a person well acquainted with the constitution.
As to his academics..... though it seems unlikely..... yet is it possible that a substitute took classes or sat for exams or that forged documents were created if there was a planned ascendency to his career by others? I do well remember taking my own practical and written exams for licensure in NC.... and the documents which I submitted had to include enough verifiable information along with a photograph and transcripts.... which would have made it difficult but not inconceivably impossible for an imposter to take my exams.
For me..... the search for the truth is still open: I guess for some.... they would label that a witch hunt. Perhaps time will tell.
