Fake Qualification, Bought ones too Options

[SarahSax1986]

So, does anyone on here have any fake qualifications that mean they can put letters after their name, or qualifications they have bought?

I myself am able to put letters after my name....

Sarah ?????? Hkt.B

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Edit/ Also does anyone know of qualifications than one can simply buy?

[jonathanquinn]

Well, this topic has lain dormant for many years, but I stumbled upon it and thought that it raised an interesting point which I am sure that I made on another forum, only to find that my entire post had mysteriously disappeared (I am not sure whether it was removed for being controversial or whether there was a genuine technical error).

In asking this question I'd like to make it clear that I am not judging or criticising anybody; I am genuinely interested to know what people have to say.

The question is (and I think it comes in several parts!), what is the motivation behind the acquisition of a new qualification? What is the motivation behind the acquisition of a "qualification" for which one has, arguably, not had to put in a great amount of work, or which perhaps has required a certain amount of work, but which has significant overlap with an existing qualification at the same level? What benefits, personal or professional, have people gained from holding qualifications, especially where the qualification has little practical use?

It is fairly obvious to me what point there is in taking university degrees, diplomas awarded by universities or other accredited examination boards, and professional qualifications. I also see the point of holding honours that genuinely reward excellence (honorary degrees, Royal Academician, Fellow of the British Academy, Fellow of the Royal Society, etc), but there are other strings of letters that people use that don't actually seem to represent much of an achievement at all.

For example, one of my old university tutors, a woman internationally renowned as one of the finest scholars in her field, became an FRAS (Fellow of the Royal Asiatic Society). I was rather surprised to find that, too, could become one of these ("The normal method of application is to be proposed and seconded by current Fellows. However, those who do not know any Fellows can submit a short CV and the names of two referees who can vouch for their interest in Asian studies." -- With a master's degree in Asian studies I think I could easily fulfil those criteria.) The FRSA is rather similar: "Fellowship is open to anyone anywhere in the world who shares or demonstrates a commitment to positive social change in their professional, civic or personal life." Fellows of the RSA do often try to claim that it is some kind of an honour, or that the entry requirements are very stringent, but I believe that it is widely accepted that one just has to pay for it. As pointed out above, the Royal Institution really does just let members of the public buy some letters. In my own field, there is something called the Royal Historical Society, which confers FRHistS. This is open to anybody who has published a book or a series of articles in the field of history, or who has organised exhibitions, collections, or conferences, or edited a local history publication. Should my thesis ever get published (either as a book or a series of articles) I'm in two minds as to whether I'd go for this one. On the one hand, it does recognise actual achievement, or some distinguished scholars do hold the fellowship, but on the other hand it is just something for which one applies, if one has met the criteria, and then pays for on an annual basis, and which a majority of published historians do not bother with. It looks a little like vanity to me, and may be a case of less being more.

In the musical field there is the FASC and the junior qualification of AASC, though as anybody who is enthusiastic about early music and who is willing to promote the Academy can become an FASC I'm not sure what the point is of there being an AASC. I would certainly be qualified for FASC, but I don't think I'd ever take it up as I would just feel silly writing 'FASC' after my name, especially when I had to tell people that it just meant that I am enthusiastic about early music and that I am willing to promote the ASC. I even wonder whether some people are actually taken in and think that somebody really is very distinguished for having one of these sets of letters. When I first saw the FASC and AASC distinctions I actually assumed that they were high honours bestowed by the Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia. Fellow of the Metropolitan College of Music is a somewhat opaque one: it recognises anybody who has made a contribution to the world of music. But the main thing is, who is recognising it? I could set up my own music college and start awarding diplomas and telling people that they can wear academic dress, but it would mean nothing. There is a wide array of these organisations that seem to be of dubious standing: Faculty of Liturgical Musicians, Faculty of Young Musicians, Irish Guild of Organists and Choristers, Guild of Musicians and Singers, Norwich School of Church Music, etc. Many seem to be connected with church music and to have some crossover in membership with the Burgon Society.

Then there are the unaccredited examination boards. How worthwhile is it to hold diplomas from the North and Midlands School of Music, National College of Music, Victoria College of Music, etc?

And why do people feel the need to gain, say, the FRSM diploma, and then to follow it up with FTCL and FLCM, and even FVCM etc?