Would a Harvard Extension School degree hold the same weight as a Harvard degree?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Harvard University
101

<p>
[quote]
I have to agree with RockerDad. I have had the good fortune to know some owners of Fortune whatevernumber companies personally, and most of them do operate mostly with integrity. There may be the occasional business deal that is a bit rough or heartless, but there is no shade of deception there

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I am not advocating deception. Saying that you went to Harvard when you went to HES is not a lie.</p>

<p>As far as companies operating with 'integrity', I suppose it's all in how you define 'integrity'. I think we can agree that every company in the world employs marketing and public relations to some degree. Well, honestly, what is marketing and PR? It's basically the positioning of your company to look as good as possible to your customers and business partners. I see nothing wrong with that. But one could argue that that's basically nothing more than 'fancy deception'. Think about all of the ads you've seen on TV just today: how many of them can you really say are truly 100% "honest"? For example, when McDonalds tries to sell me a Big Mac, they're going to make it look as delicious as possible, and of course won't want me to know how many calories it has. That's how marketing works. </p>

<p>So if it's fine for companies to carefully market their products in a manner that makes them look as desirable as possible, then what exactly is wrong with somebody carefully marketing his resume to make himself look as desirable as possible? It's the same idea. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And seriously, quoting Adam Smith? Yeah a philosopher who, while influential, has been partially discredited and besides that lived hundreds of years ago can totally give a modern perspective on business transactions. Right.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fine - would you rather that I invoke Bill Gates? Or Steve Jobs? Or Larry Ellison? These guys clearly know quite a bit about modern business. What do you think they would have to say about the role of "deception" in the modern business context? In particular, one only has to consider the long and painful history that IBM has had with Microsoft in which Microsoft has essentially swindled IBM time and time again. {But note, that's not to say that IBM has behaved any better.}</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you mislead an employer on a resume, you will lose your job. There is a difference between omitting information (like not mentioning a DUI if they don't ask for criminal history) and putting down a college you didn't go to

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, but you DID go. HES=Harvard, as others have been saying. Hence, it's not a lie. Therefore, they have no grounds for dismissal.</p>

102

<p>
[quote]
As a Harvard University (My AB is from Radcliffe and Harvard College) grad who also has worked in H-R of a Fortune 500, I would consider someone who simply described themselves as a Harvard U grad when they graduated from HES as lying by omission.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Look, I consider 99.9% of all corporate marketing to be basically lying (or at least deception) by omission. Whenever I see an ad, I'm not getting the full truth, nor do I expect to. Companies always use marketing to make themselves look more impressive than they really are. That's business. </p>

<p>Similarly, the act of hiring is also about business, nothing more, nothing less. If companies are perfectly allowed to aggressively market themselves, why can't individuals?</p>

103

<p>same classes, same professors, same gradig standards, different way of getting into the program</p>

<p>isn't it swell how honest the people judging others about their schooling are- oh, you didn't go to HaHvard, you Just went to HES_ you had the same classes, but tsk tsk, didn't go through the "traditional path"....not everyon can do it the "right" way, and if its good enough for harvard you give you the degree through whatever program, then it is good enough</p>

<p>I just don't get this, well, if an IVy accepted you, then, you are great...not necessarily by any stretch....great people aren't accepted to the ivies all the time and take different paths....too bad some just can't see past a Name</p>

104

<p>
[quote]
I've been hiring college grads for years, and I think it is incumbent on the applicant to make clear any qualifications related to a degree. If it was earned by distance learning, I'd like to know that - an undergrad degree in particular isn't just about facts learned, but by the whole basket of social skills, coping ability, etc. In addition, if the degree is from an elite school, I'd assume that the candidate went through that institution's selective recruiting process.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, then to take that argument further, a person who got into Harvard through the help of legacy admissions should disclose that fact. Somebody who got in because he was recruited for sports should disclose that fact. Somebody who got in because Daddy donated a bunch of cash should disclose that fact. After all, all of these circumstances are effectively backdoors to the school's selective recruiting process. Yet, honestly, how many such people would really disclose these details? I'm going to go with the number zero, and I don't think I will be far off. </p>

<p>
[quote]
It might not totally disqualify the candidate if the resume was accurate and honest, e.g., the degree listed according to the school's guidelines. Nevertheless, that would be one point where I'd believe the applicant was doing some credential inflation. If I found a job title that had been upgraded, or a position listed prominently that the applicant had held only for a few weeks (without stating that), I'd know that the candidate would probably BS me after being hired, too.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>See, there's the notion again of 'credential inflation'. Again, I see it as nothing more than good, hard-nosed aggressive self-marketing. Companies market themselves aggressively all the time. </p>

<p>Look, this is not about integrity. This is just business. In your religion, in your family, in your relationships with your friends, you can (and should) hold yourself to whatever standards of integrity that you want. I can agree that you should be completely truthful with your friends or your family. </p>

<p>But business is different. Companies are not your friends. You are not required to be completely truthful to companies, because frankly, you never know if companies are being completely truthful to you. That's business. </p>

<p>
[quote]
For graduate school, I don't think there is "daddy's money"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, yeah there is. It still happens. Harvard Business School, for example, will still bend their admissions rules in return for a big chunk of 'daddy's money'. </p>

<p>
[quote]
and their graduate school admission is very competitive.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But since you mentioned it, I think it bears stating that the Harvard grad programs vary widely in admissions selectivity. Some of them are far easier to get into than others. Yet they all fall under the Harvard brand. </p>

<p>To give you an example, I know a few Harvard grad students in engineering, and all of them freely admit that they don't think their program is as hard to get into relative to many of the other Harvard grad programs, and also not as hard as getting into one of the top eng grad programs. Several of them have said that they would have preferred to go to MIT instead, but didn't get in. Yet at the end of the day, they will still be able to call themselves "Harvard graduates".</p>

105

<p>
[quote]
I am very surprised that Harvard sanctions the portrayal of its HES grads as graduates of Harvard University. I'm sure there are many unsuspecting employers who think (like I would) that merely by hiring a "Harvard" grad they are getting something rare and special. Yes, that is a lazy man's thinking, but oftentimes employers don't have the time or resources to examine every detail of an applicant's life, and it would be comforting to be able to assume that Harvard already did the initital screening of at least the first two decades of the applicant's life.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I think that only proves the point that others (and myself) have made: that there are indeed a lot of stupid employers out there who are too lazy or too foolish to do the research for themselves, and hence the Peter Principle is still alive and well. </p>

<p>The way I see it is this: if an employer is simply too lazy to do the research, then it deserves what it gets. </p>

<p>
[quote]
This discussion kind of reminds me of the Barnard question raised once in a while: "Since a Barnard degree is officially a Columbia University degree, can I just put 'Columbia University' on my resume?" My response would be the same - if you have to ask, don't do it. Be proud of the degree you earned, and don't try to misrepresent it to employers. Cutting a corner now might look expedient, but might raise doubts later. Either state the nature of the degree clearly on the resume, or be sure to provide any elaboration early in the interview process. Even the latter approach might irritate some employers, but it's better to do it yourself than be outed later.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Because people do make the distinction between Harvard College and Harvard Extension, rightly or wrongly, I think it's important to get out in front of it so as not to have the appearance of trying to sneak one by.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This sort of mentality makes me wonder exactly what sort of business skill-set is a company trying to bring in. Can you imagine somebody like Bill Gates providing "full disclosure" to IBM about exactly how Microsoft was planning to build MS-DOS? Or, before winning the OS-2 contract, that Microsoft was secretly developing Windows? I think in each case, IBM would have simply decided to instead transact with somebody else (i.e. with Tim Paterson, who was the original developer of DOS), and hence Gates would not be a billionaire right now. Gates is filthy rich precisely because it had information that IBM did not have. </p>

<p>Somebody (I think ClassicRockDad) mentioned that he thought Warren Buffett has high integrity. Well, does he? Think about what his business model is. It is identifying and buying undervalued firms. In other words, Buffett has information that leads him to believe that certain firms are undervalued. Now, does Buffett tell people what that information is? No, he does not. He keeps it to himself. In fact, he has to. If everybody knew what he knew, then they would buy ahead of Buffett, hence destroying the very source of value that Buffett is attempting to exploit. In other words, the very premise of Berkshire rests on not only having better information than others, but also in not telling others what that information is. To paraphrase Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz: It is precisely because information is not perfect that provides opportunities for firms to make extranormal profits. </p>

<p>The point is, business success is not and never has been based on an ethic of full information disclosure, and I don't see why it should be so in this case. Like I've been saying throughout this thread, business is business.</p>

106

<p>Pinging sakky. </p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/454967-hardest-colleges-stay-2.html?highlight=sakky#post1059736137%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/454967-hardest-colleges-stay-2.html?highlight=sakky#post1059736137&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

107

<p>
[quote]
You are not required to be completely truthful to companies, because frankly, you never know if companies are being completely truthful to you. That's business.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sakky, I don't know why this is so hard for you to grasp, you seem like a bright guy. However, with all due respect, you're all over the place and your attitude is immature. Of course business is competitive and you don't disclose competitive information to your competitors. That's just common sense. </p>

<p>However, the employment relationship that you have with your direct supervisor, the individual, is special and needs to be based on mutual trust for both of you to be successful. It's not that different from the professor/graduate student relationship. If they lie to you, you should find a better opportunity, and if you're good enough you can. If he/she doesn't trust you, you either won't get the job, or if they lose their trust in you after you have the job, don't expect mentoring, promotions, raises or even good assignments with increasing responsibility. Put yourself in your supervisor's shoes. Why would you give an assignment that you are ultimately responsible for to someone that you don't trust. Why would you invest your time to develop somebody that you don't trust. You may not get fired but you would get marginalized; it would not be the kind of situation that you want.</p>

108

<p>Is it just me or is Sakky's really trying to make his/her degree from HES looks like one from Harvard College? If you're proud of the education of you get from HES, then demonstrate that it's HES. He/she is spending all his/her times defending thet quality of a HES education, and I believe HES offers very high quality education, yet when it comes to disclosing your alma mater, it's borderling hush-hush. HES is one of the Harvard colleges after all, right? Then why hide the fact that's HES. Wouldn't employers, if they have brains worth beans, have the mental capacity to evaluate your education on its own merit rather than where you get your degree from. What's wrong with full disclosure?</p>

<p>"You are not required to be completely truthful to companies"</p>

<p>Are you kidding me? Wow! This is completely unethical. You will get fire for this kind of thing. Is deception your kind of thing Sakky?</p>

109

<p>If you were Professor at a university and someone asks you where you got your training, and you replied, "I went to Harvard," that implies you got your Ph.D at Harvard.</p>

<p>If you were a lawyer, and your client asked you where did you get your legal education, and you said, "I went to Harvard," that implies Harvard Law School.</p>

<p>If someone asked you where you got your undergraduate degree from, and you replied, "I went to Harvard," that implies Harvard College, and not HES. Saying "I went to Harvard," in this context qualified as a deceive because the common understanding of an undergraduate degree from Harvard is Harvard College and not HES. This does mean Harvard College has better education than HES, but it's how people understand, "I went to Harvard," and it needs further extrapolation if you're graduate of HES instead of Harvard College.</p>

110

<p>"This does mean Harvard College "</p>

<p>I meant to say,</p>

<p>"This does NOT mean Harvard College..." Excuse the missing word.</p>

111

<p>I'll have to agree with sakky on one point: a resume is nothing more than a marketing document, and that point can be confirmed by any California Labor attorney (we're a labor-friendly state on the left coast). Thus, omissions are to be expected on a marketing resume, and it is the employer's responsiblity to verify it. Indeed, that is why nearly every large company out here requires an applicant to complete their own internal employment application; false statements on the ER application can be grounds for dismissal, but not necessarily false statements on a resume.</p>

<p>Now, the practical part: few employers outside of NY-Boston even know that Harvard extension even offers a degree, bcos I would guess that such practice is rare among major Unis. Thus, 'BS/BA, Harvard University' will be perceived as the same as 'BS/BA, Harvard College'. </p>

<p>Think about the vast majority of degrees which are awarded by public Unis. Students do not list their 'college' very often, unless it is really relevant (Film School); instead, their resume will read: 'AB, English, UCLA'. Or, 'EE&CS, Univ. of California, Berkeley' -- in the latter case, the College of Engineering is just assumed. Or, even, 'AB, English, Yale'. (The word 'college' or 'university' is not necessary.</p>

<p>I respect and agree with RockerDad's pov, but the fact is that the transcripts will be sent to HR who will verify them and 'check off the box'; since transcripts can be considered confidential, the actual hiring manager will not see them, at least in organizations where I've worked.</p>

112

<p>It has already been pointed out in the thread that the degrees from Harvard Extension School and the degrees from Harvard College have different names, which abbreviate differently, so any employer in the know should be able to distinguish the source of the degrees.</p>

113

<p>
[quote]
so any employer in the know...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Agreed, but that is my point (and that of sakky). Outside of the NE, I just don't think that many employers are "in the know" of the organizational makeup of Harvard University. Why would they? How would they know (unless they attended H)?</p>

114

<p>
[quote]
Of course business is competitive and you don't disclose competitive information to your competitors. That's just common sense.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And similarly, I am arguing that it is common sense to not disclose full information to your employer, because they might use it against you. I'm quite certain that we can both come up with numerous examples where this has happened. </p>

<p>Again, to give you my quite simple one that I mentioned before: consider the middle-aged woman who makes herself up to look much younger when she interviews, because she is trying to avoid age discrimination. Is that wrong? One could certainly argue that she is "deceiving" employers about her real age. But of course if they knew her real age, they might not hire her. </p>

<p>Of course one could argue that she should just go find a employer where age discrimination doesn't occur. Yeah, well, that's nice to say in theory, but she has to live in the real world where she has bills to pay right now . Hence, she can't always be waiting around for the perfect employer to show up. Sometimes you have to take a job at an employer who you don't really like and don't really trust because you need the money. She has to be pragmatic. </p>

<p>
[quote]
However, the employment relationship that you have with your direct supervisor, the individual, is special and needs to be based on mutual trust for both of you to be successful.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, why? Supervisors lie to (or at least deceive) their employees all the time. For example, I know plenty of managers who suspected that layoffs were coming but didn't tell any of their people. </p>

<p>Again, this is business, whether like it or not. That's how business works. </p>

<p>
[quote]
If they lie to you, you should find a better opportunity, and if you're good enough you can. If he/she doesn't trust you, you either won't get the job, or if they lose their trust in you after you have the job, don't expect mentoring, promotions, raises or even good assignments with increasing responsibility. Put yourself in your supervisor's shoes. Why would you give an assignment that you are ultimately responsible for to someone that you don't trust. Why would you invest your time to develop somebody that you don't trust. You may not get fired but you would get marginalized; it would not be the kind of situation that you want.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And that's precisely the fundamental problem I have with your analysis. I've said it before, I'll say it again. The act of employment is a business relationship, nothing more, nothing less. Your supervisor is not your friend. Your employees are not your friends. They are effectively your business partners. </p>

<p>After all, just think of it this way. Sprint Nextel just announced 4000 layoffs. Yahoo announced 1000 layoffs. Is this what people do to their friends? I don't know about anybody else, but I certainly don't go around hurting the lifestyles of any of my friends, which is what layoffs will do. But that happens all the time in business. Business is business. </p>

<p>ClassicRockerDad, what you seem to be talking about is a world where supervisors really are your friends. And sure, in such a world, I would agree with you that you should behave completely truthfully at all times to your friends. But I would then also expect reciprocity. For example, it would then not be unreasonable for me to expect to never be laid off. Why not? Like I said, friends don't go around hurting their friends livelihoods, right? But I can't expect that in the context of business. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Is it just me or is Sakky's really trying to make his/her degree from HES looks like one from Harvard College?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ah, here we go with the ad-hominem attacks. Since when did I say that I had a HES degree? Please point to the quote where I said so. Oh, can't do it, can you?</p>

<p>I am simply saying that I see nothing wrong with somebody who has such a degree in calling themselves a fully-fledged Harvard graduate. They are. </p>

<p>
[quote]
"You are not required to be completely truthful to companies"</p>

<p>Are you kidding me? Wow! This is completely unethical. You will get fire for this kind of thing. Is deception your kind of thing Sakky?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, why? Are companies being completely truthful to me? Is it really true that if I drink Budweiser beer, that I will immediately be surrounded by beautiful models in bikinis? Hey, after all, that's what always happens in the commercials, and companies always tell us the complete truth in commercials, right? Oh wait, maybe not. </p>

<p>If companies are not telling you the complete truth, then why are you required to do so? That's business. </p>

<p>
[quote]
If someone asked you where you got your undergraduate degree from, and you replied, "I went to Harvard," that implies Harvard College, and not HES. Saying "I went to Harvard," in this context qualified as a deceive because the common understanding of an undergraduate degree from Harvard is Harvard College and not HES. This does mean Harvard College has better education than HES, but it's how people understand, "I went to Harvard," and it needs further extrapolation if you're graduate of HES instead of Harvard College.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, it doesn't "need" any further extrapolation, just like advertising rarely includes further extrapolation. Again, I don't see any asterisk or any other sort of extrapolation that says that I actually won't be surrounded by beautiful models in bikinis if I drink beer. </p>

<p>The point is, you are not required to state the full truth within a business context. Business success is based on the control of information. Just like the woman I mentioned above does not want to reveal (with good reason) her real age to employers because she is afraid it may be used against her. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Indeed, that is why nearly every large company out here requires an applicant to complete their own internal employment application;

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, I've worked with several large employers, and not one has ever asked me to complete an internal employment application. Nor have most of my friends who have also worked at large companies. (Granted, a few of them did).</p>

<p>But, more importantly, the vast majority of employers are not large companies. Most companies out there are small-to-medium sized. Many of the jobs they offer are very good ones.</p>

115

<p>Let me save everyone from reading sakky copy-paste attempt from his/her previous posts:</p>

<p>Companies deceive people = I can decieve them too. The End. You know, you can just write that. I was reading your post and expected some brilliant argumentive insight because it's so damn long.</p>

116

<p>Sakky, I think you are wrong about this. It needs to be noted on the resume' that it is a Harvard Extension School the resume' it degree. </p>

<p>I saw a special on TV where a person put a degree on their resume' that was one of those "degree mills." Like, the person wrote a couple of papers and the rest of the degree was for "life experience." The person put the degree on their resume'. This person was fired even though technically there was nothing false on their resume'. Also, the person had the job they were fired from for years before she got the extra degree, so the degree didn't even help her at all. </p>

<p>So I wouldn't try to represent yourself as a full-fledged Harvard graduate.</p>

117

<p>^ I think you are thinking of Laura Callahan who put down Hamilton University, a diploma mill, as where she got her Ph.D. She worked for the Clinton Administration. And as sakky would argue, since the Clintons are the biggest liars in politics, it's legitimate for Mrs. Callahan to deceive the them in return and make the tax payers pay her underserved salary.</p>

118

<p>
[quote]
I respect and agree with RockerDad's pov,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think I should interject that I also respect his point of view, and I wish that what he was describing the world as it really is everywhere Sadly, I believe he is only perhaps describing a small subset of highly highly ethical employers. </p>

<p>The truth of the matter is, the vast majority of companies out there are not highly highly ethical. Most of them will lie to or deceive their employees. Most of them don't treat their employees particularly well. I wish it wasn't true, but it is true. For example, if a mass layoff is being considered, or a division sale or merger may occur, most bosses won't tell their employees that. One can also simply consider all of the workforce discrimination or whistle-blower retaliation legal cases that have occurred recently. That is how business is. I don't like it, but that is unfortunately how it is. </p>

<p>Furthermore, while it's all well and good to say that you should just find an employer who will treat you properly, the reality that that is often times quite unrealistic. After all, just think of the market asymmetry involved. There are far fewer employers than there are potential employees. What that means is that it is far easier for any employer to replace any individual employee than vice versa. I just think back to my sleepy hometown, where there are really maybe only 3-4 important employers in town (unless you just want to work at the mall). Hence, it's not exactly that easy to switch employers. Sure, if you happen to be in an area where there are plenty of employers vying for your services (or you have the means to easily move to such an area), then sure, go right ahead and do what ClassicRockDad is advising and just work for only the most ethical employer in town. But let's face it. Many (probably most) people don't have that choice. They gotta do what they gotta do. </p>

<p>Hence, I can see people in my hometown portraying a HES degree as a Harvard degree in order to get a decent job. Ok, sure, maybe the supervisor finds out later that his degree is just an HES degree and so sidelines him due to a 'lack of trust'. But so what? At least the guy has a decent job. It's a heck of a lot better than having no job at all (or being stuck working in the mall).</p>

119

<p>
[quote]
Let me save everyone from reading sakky copy-paste attempt from his/her previous posts:

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If people don't want to read my posts, then they don't have to read them. I don't have a gun to anybody's head. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Companies deceive people = I can decieve them too. The End. You know, you can just write that. I was reading your post and expected some brilliant argumentive insight because it's so damn long.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, I think it's more that companies will deceive people, hence people HAVE to deceive companies, if for nothing else, then as a matter of self-protection. Again, a woman who fears age discrimination is fully within her rights in deceiving employers about her age by looking as young as possible. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Sakky, I think you are wrong about this. It needs to be noted on the resume' that it is a Harvard Extension School the resume' it degree.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, I don't think that's true. I believe it has been shown in this thread by others that no such requirement exists. </p>

<p>Besides, let me put it to you this way. I know a bunch of guys who have master's degrees from Harvard. Their degrees are actually MPA degrees from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government (KSG). Are they actually required to say "KSG" on their resume? I don't think so. I think they are well within their rights to simply say that they have master's degrees from Harvard with no additional explication. Similarly, if you have a degree from the Harvard School of Public Health, or the Harvard Divinity School, or the Harvard Graduate School of Education, or the Harvard Graduate School of Design, do you actually have to state that specific school on your resume? Again, I don't think so.</p>

<p>
[quote]
So I wouldn't try to represent yourself as a full-fledged Harvard graduate.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But they ARE fully-fledged Harvard graduates. Why? Because Harvard says so. Look, HES grads are invited to alumni clubs. They are in the alumni database. They get an alumni email forwarding address. They participate in commencement ceremonies. So, as far as Harvard is concerned, they are graduates.</p>

<p>Now, you might say that perhaps Harvard is just being dumb in not properly separating the HES from the normal Harvard brand. Sure, maybe they are. But be that as it may, Harvard has the right to do whatever they want with their brand. If Harvard says that you are a graduate, then you are a graduate. Maybe we don't agree with the criteria. But what can I say? That's Harvard's decision to make.</p>

120

<p>
[quote]
I saw a special on TV where a person put a degree on their resume' that was one of those "degree mills." Like, the person wrote a couple of papers and the rest of the degree was for "life experience." The person put the degree on their resume'. This person was fired even though technically there was nothing false on their resume'. Also, the person had the job they were fired from for years before she got the extra degree, so the degree didn't even help her at all.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
^ I think you are thinking of Laura Callahan who put down Hamilton University, a diploma mill, as where she got her Ph.D. She worked for the Clinton Administration. And as sakky would argue, since the Clintons are the biggest liars in politics, it's legitimate for Mrs. Callahan to deceive the them in return and make the tax payers pay her underserved salary.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You guys don't have your facts straight.</p>

<p>First off, Callahan didn't just get only her PhD from a diploma mill. She also got her bachelor's and master's at that same diploma mill. </p>

<p>And the REAL problem is that the rule for OPM (the office in which she worked) SPECIFICALLY stated that the job required a degree from an ACCREDITED school, which that diploma mill was clearly not. Hence, she violated an actual rule, and that is clearly grounds for dismissal. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/22779-1.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/22779-1.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I have never once advocated the violation of any actual rules. But what I have said is that when no rules exist to the contrary, you are allowed to market yourself aggressively. After all, companies do that all the time. Since there are no rules that bar beer companies from having beautiful models prancing around in bikinis in their ads, then that is what beer companies will use. </p>

<p>Similarly, Harvard says that a HES degree is an actual Harvard degree whether we like it or not. Hence, stating it to be so does not violate any rules.</p>