Religious v. Public College -- What do you think?

I am considering which way to go with regard to furthering my education. I have the choice between going to a college that is religious (private) and a public college. I am concerned with regard to what potential employers and people would think if presenting a degree from a school that is religious v. a degree from a public college that is part of the state university system. Both colleges are regionally accredited and so as far as the accreditation is concerned that is not an issue. I just think that sometimes when a person graduates from a religious institution that sometimes this might cause people who don’t care for religion or are bias to not consider you when applying for future employment. What do you think about this? Has anybody had any experience on this matter? Would it be better to graduate from a religious institution or a public institution? Or do you think it doesn’t matter? Please help me in this as I would welcome your feedback. Thanks.

 

I graduated from TU, and have never had it questioned, I don't think it would be questioned by an employer or school for employment.

I don't think it is a concern, but others may know better.

Also - it depends on the degree - something like Business isn't an issue, but religous studies might be?!?

 

While I believe that I understand the general nature of your question(s) I also believe that you have stated them in too general a manner. As an illustration I would reply to your question this way,
BC vs BU ?
BC vs UMass ?
Regis vs U Colorado ?
Regis vs Fort Lewis ?
Holy Cross vs Worcester St. ?
Holy Cross vs Worcester Polytech ?
Creighton vs U Nebraska ?
Creighton vs York ?
Fairfield vs U Bridgeport ?
Fairfield vs Yale ?
Georgetown vs Columbia Union ?
Georgetown vs Johns Hopkins ?
Marquette vs Alverno ?
Marquette vs U Wisconsin ?
U San Francisco vs Azsusa Pacific ?
U San Francisco vs Stanford ?
The comparisons are almost endless.
The devil (pardon the pun) is in the details.
Jack

 

I have attended two public universities (Arizona State and California State), but my degrees are from church-affiliated universities (Brigham Young and La Sierra). I have never been denied an academic or career opportunity because I have a degree from a "private religious college". While at BYU, I saw recruiters from Fortune 500 corporations and from the top grad schools in the country on campus on a weekly basis.

My BYU degrees have opened many doors for me and, to my knowledge, have never closed any. Of course, I have never applied to teach at a Southern Baptist Seminary

As Jack said, it really depends on the two schools in question. In a comparison of prestige, Notre Dame (religious) would certainly beat out, say, Cal State Bakersfield (state), while the University of Virginia (State) would beat out Biola (religious).

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino

 

Now ya lost me. BC & BU, along with Marquette & Alverno, are all "religious" schools.

 

You're right, of course, about Alverno. I had never heard of it before and just pulled it off a list. An unfortunate choice in this case. Boston University on the other hand is not a religious school.
Jack

 

I love semantics. Boston University, of course, is historically Methodist.

But I found the comparison between Georgetown and Columbia Union funnier. Again, both are religious - Georgetown is Roman Catholic, and Columbia Union is pervasively Seventh Day Adventist.

The issue, then, is perhaps whether a school is historically religious (Boston U., Georgetown and, for that matter, most Roman Catholic schools) or pervasively religious (Liberty, Regent, Bob Jones, Moody, Oral Roberts, Columbia Union, and even BYU). Ditto whether the school has primarily a religious curriculum (Bible colleges and seminaries) or, even if the religious feel is pervasive, is also known for secular curricula (BYU, Liberty).

My guess is that the original writer was perhaps dealing with traditional religious stereotypes, which exist primarily in regard to evangelical, Fundamentalist, and Pentecostal schools. One does not think religion when the school is Georgetown or Marquette; one tends to have a religious impression when the school is Liberty, ORU, BJU, etc.

Back in the years when I was an H.R. manager, I adhered to some of these stereotypes myself. For example, I thought twice when talking to a BJU grad as opposed to a Marquette grad. Why? Because Catholics use salty language, but Fundies do not. (Okay, kiddies, I know that's a stereotype, but it happens to be an accurate one.) Likewise, Notre Dame grads (primarily Irish Catholic) get drunk more often than BYU or BJU grads, who abstain. The stereotype goes past the point of the religion itself, and extends to the school - BYU grads don't smoke or drink coffee, Columbia Union grads are vegetarians, MIU/MSIM (Maharishi) grads are whacked out zombies who meditate, and Lesley grads are all lesbians (even the guys who graduate from Lesley are lesbians). Okay, that's stereotyping taken to the extreme, but you get he point.

Kristie and Tony are also correct - the only time a specific religious orientation matters is if your field is religion, because schools that recruit teachers want to find those who are doctrinally compatable. This matters far less in secular fields like business, although the stereotype factor still holds.

You want the truth? It's simple: Some companies tend to favor applicants who graduated from the schools from which senior management or hiring managers graduated. (I tried a new optometrist last week, and wasn't impressed with him . . . until I found out that he was a Norwich grad.) It's still an old boys' network out there, so if you didn't graduate from one of their schools, don't sweat it - go where you feel comfortable.

 

I know exactly what you mean!!! I had the same questions in my mind when I first began my educational endeavors. And for that reason, I chose to pursue my non-religious degrees from secular colleges and universities.

I was concerned that if I presented a degree from an overly religious school, then it might "turn off" a potential employer e.g. they might be biased against that particular religious viewpoint.

On the other hand, if you are seeking a "religious degree," then a denominational university is probably a better bet, as opposted to a public university, due to the vastly different doctrinal positions.

To recap: if I were getting a secular non-religious degree, such as in business or criminal justice, then I'd choose a secular university for the sake of "perceived utility vs. potential bias or religious stigma." On the other hand, if I were seeking religious training, then I'd choose a specific religious university for the purpose of receiving scriptural training that is closer to my own theological perspective.

 

me again reiterates a good point: If you want to become a pastor or teacher (at any level), most denominations want (1) one of their own, who was (2) trained in one of their own schools. A Baptist seminary is unlikely to hire a Methodist for their faculty, and all that . . .

There is, however, one notable exception: Many religious professionals earn their doctorate degrees at secular institutions, and this does not hurt their careers, even in denominational higher education. The theory is that you should study "with your own" through the masters level so you receive sound doctrinal teaching, for lack of a better term. By the time you have earned a master's degree, you are presumed to have the maturity, wisdom, and sufficient foundation to deal with the secular educational environment. Thus, even at pervasively sectarian schools like BJU, Moody, Penascola Christian, Tennessee Temple, etc., you'll find that many (if not most) of the faculty who hold doctorates earned them at secular universities. (When I was teaching at the graduate school of Philadelphia Biblical University, two of their key faculty were pursuing their doctorates at Union.)

Moreover, even though schools like their faculties to be doctrinally compatable with the institution, they do not want to stack their faculties with persons who have home-grown doctorates (especially schools that have regional accreditation).

Thus, if you were to look at the faculty listings of most sectarian schools, you would find that the bachelor's-master's-doctoral track reads religious-religious-secular.

 

A distinction needs to be made between "religious schools" and "religious affiliation." A religious school typically focuses on religious studies. Schools with religious affiliations typically offer complete liberal arts curriculums and were started by a particular denomination. Some of the best universities in the US have religious affiliations (e.g. Duke, Brigham Young, Notre Dame, Yeshiva, Georgetown, etc.)

John

 

This is facinating information that comes from one who has "been there & done that." I never previously considered this, until you mentioned it!!!

While I was facinated with Steve's entire post, I particularly noted the following:

 

Yes, well, errr, ummm...this seems to be an excellent example of what happens when you don't do the proper research. Like my Alverno mistake, I simply pulled Columbia Union off a list without checking it out. Oh well. I think my point was clear even if I muddied the waters myself. Perhaps there's some salvage here though (if I'm not stretching it too far that is). Perhaps people are not especially knowledgeable about whether particular schools are religious, "historically religious," or non-religious. If you're looking for a job in Boston and you have a degree from Columbia Union, maybe few people even realize it is a religious school. Having been born and raised in the Greater Boston area I never knew that BU was "historically Methodist." All I ever knew is that they describe them selves as non-sectarian. So maybe these distinctions don't mean as much as you might guess. Maybe it just depends on the background of the HR director. I'll do some research and get back to you on that
Jack

 

Historically Religious vs. Pervasively Religious

I took about 24 external credits through Columbia Union College and, even though it has been described as "pervasively religious," not once did I ever encounter any topic or discussion of a religious nature while I was in their external program. Granted, my courses were in such topics as algebra, literature (Charles Dickens & Mark Twain), English 102, statistics, etc.

However, it is entirely possible that there is an air of "pervasive religiosity" at Columbia Union's traditional campus. But I wouldn't know because I've never been there.

 

Hi again Jack: BU has a United Methodist seminary, so the connection isn't merely historic. Best acronym in the seminary biz, too (BUST).

 

Hi Uncle - Thanks for the research update. You are a true pitbull for the details. In that regard you may recall that it was Steve who said that BU was "historically Methodist, although I don't believe he made mention of what it is. I believe that my contention was that BU is non-sectarian. Now you seem to be indicating that some third status might prevail in this question. I trust that your continued research will reveal the reality of the situation. Keep us updated.
Jack

 

Jack, I remember reading Methodist canon law* as a spinoff from catechism class when I was a kid, but as memory fades and the putting away of childish things recedes more and more into the past, my ability to chart the relationship between reality and United Methodism has diminished precipitously. I can do no more, and must leave you to dance with Mr Wesley alone.

*The slightly outré-titled “Book of Discipline”

 

Re: Historically Religious vs. Pervasively Religious

Interesting . . . I made the same observation about BYU, through which I took a physial science course almost 20 years ago (back in the days of rather mundane correspondence courses). There was nothing pervasively sectarian about the course itself but, while I've never been to the BYU campus, I have been to Utah - which is pervasively sectarian throughout the state (right down to the Book of Mormon instead of the KJV Bible in motel room night stands).

When I did my portfolio challenges at TESC, I also recall using one course description from Oral Roberts University. I think it may have been Advanced Writing - Academic Forms. And while I didn't actually take the course from this pervasively sectarian school, I would think that they were not teaching "writing in tongues."

As for the debate of pervasive vs. historical (which, granted, I brought up in the first place), my ultimate position is, um, who cares?

The subject has arisen here about taking secular degrees through religious schools. I did quite the opposite - both of my graduate degrees are in church-state issues, and I did them through secular schools (Norwich and Union). Neither to my detriment, since I ended up teaching in RA religious grad schools.

So how, then, did I choose where to pursue my degrees? I looked at a bunch of schools, said to myself, "Hey! These look like fun programs," and made my choices. No big whoop.

 

Re: Re: Historically Religious vs. Pervasively Religious

Steve,

My story is almost the opposite of yours. I received degrees in secular topics from religious universities and most of my faculty work has been at public non-religious schools (Rio Salado College, College of the Desert, California State University)

Tony