Also-Rans?

Forgive the slightly inflammatory nature of this thread, but I invite comments on my perspective on DL in the "real world" of the business jungle:

DL has a 2nd/3rd tier label not so much becasue of the quality of the programmes and/or schools, but because of the quality of the individuals pursuing the programmes. Very few of these individuals can honestly consider themselves high-flyers in their fields of endevour.

While people can argue the accreditation case ad nauseam, the real "tickets to play", in a multitude of fields, have been handed out long before the earnest, freshly-scrubbed DL graduate appears, accredited degree in hand, seeking employment. Accredited DL says "I'm a hard luck case, but I'm a hard worker, and I play by the rules, please let me be in your team." Hardly a tremendous sell. All it is is better than nothing at all. So you prob. get to play, but not in the A team.

I'm not denying that DL provides access to education, gives people a chance in life (sometimes a 2nd chance) etc, the real action is with the people who did mot of their studying up front full time at prestigious universities, or who can afford to go back to such places later in life. Thus most of the DL debate is postioning to pick up a good number of the crumbs that are left after the party has moved on.

The DL insitution that can develop a brand that can attract 1st class students for whom the qualification is absolutely the first choice, not part-time 2nd tier, is the one that will break this model. (If?)

 

Depends on circumstances...

Walter,
I think you have raised some points that are thought provoking and certainly contain an element of truth. However, I do think that each person's circumstances greatly affect how a DL degree is perceived. For example, in my own case, I've already attained very senior positions in academia with "only" a bachelor's degree and extensive post-graduate coursework. My goal at this point is to add a "terminal or professional degree" to my resume, on top of my proven experience, as additional credibility in my chosen field - higher education administration. I believe that having a credible, RA post-graduate degree on top of what I already have achieved without it will indicate (a) a strong commitment to continuing professional and academic education and (b) a "check-box" item for future job searches (many positions that I have sought in the past few years required a minimum of a master's level degree, regardless of a person's experience level or posts that they have already held in other institutions equal to or in advance of the position one is seeking).

On the other hand, if I could afford to just take two years off work and go to Duke, I would.

Thanks for raising this topic.

 

Walter,
Upon reading your post, I would have to agree with your statement, " While people can argue the accreditation case ad nauseam, the real "tickets to play", in a multitude of fields, have been handed out long before the earnest, freshly-scrubbed DL graduate appears, accredited degree in hand, seeking employment." This has been the case since long before the arrival of DL. There has always been an A, B and C list of educational institutions, and of students within those institutions.

As far as your remark regarding the "quality of the individuals pursuing the programmes," I'll have to reserve judgement, as I still don't know enough about your thoughts and opinions to label you an elitist, however, it does appear, at least on the surface, that you are of the opinion that anyone who doesn't attend the right college immediately after high school is somehow, inferior.

 

or is inferior in the eyes of the business world?!?!?

I have to say that the people who accelerate through the ranks in blue-chip firms do, in general, match the profile you sketch. DL students fit the "solid citizens" profile a bit more.

Most people, particularly those outside the business world, will find the tone elitist, but in a world where first price grabs a disproportionately large amount of the takings, I think its a fair perception. I don't think DL itself is more suitable for non-fast-trackers, but DL as currently conceived and marketed does not attract sufficient candidates to challenge the perception.

Here is an extreme example: Natal University (now Kwa-Zulu Natal) advertises jobs on its MBA website for autoteller technicians. Hardly boosts the schools image, now does it?

I don't think university leaders are sufficiently aware of the "snob" issues that drive business perception, or they deride them, thereby failing to manage the perceptions of their institutions and thereby improve the value of their product. For example, too much advertising is aimed at prospective students, and not enough at the market for their graduates.

 

I think ANY degree is only a check of the box, unless it is from the best of the best schools. Everything is political, and getting into a great position, school in general is not a key, only an obsticle if you don't have it.

 

BUT, the schools that aren't "best of the best" could do a whole lot better in developing a product that is more that a "tick in the box". Good corporate-type marketing, an active and co-supportive alumni network, access to good research, and interaction with university staff on consulting assignments can all do wonders.

How many schools do it? They mostly market to students, telling them how great the program is, and get the program accredited. Big deal. The kids from the best schools bring have a great brand and generally do their fair bit of pushing that, and they are often immediately positioned for the top jobs.

 

I can see in marketing that getting an ivy league education, will not get you more than an entry level position or a great beginning marketing posiiton, in which you will have to show your stuff - but without some vital on the job experience you will only get in the door. Contacts are a key area as well. Conversley, you can get that same foot in the door, with starting as an intern, knowing somebody in that company / industry, attending job fairs, submitting resumes with something more than just a degree.... etc.

I know the big schools do have a great job placement - like Chelsea Clinton - I think she started at $100k. But she had other things going for her as well.

Our local University has a great relationship with the local businesses, and it is pretty likely that you can get an internship, which is that foot in the door. One of our engineering interns said "You have to be kidding me, I am getting great engineering experience and I am gettin paid!!"


I would have to disagree in the aerospace business - we go to several schools during job fairs, support the local schools with internships, and the schools seem pretty proactive to work with us.

When I went to the student services group, they had plenty of info for interning as well - not a top tier school.

Maybe other industries are different.

 

Walter,

Certainly the case could be made with appropriate data. However, as with all posters that offer thoughts without the “just my opinion” caveat, I would have to ask from where your empirical data for the premise was developed? You have used a rather novel approach commenting on sub-standard students.

Stanford, MIT, Harvard, all have DL programs. Do you believe that these institutions consider the students that are admitted to these programs as lacking in admissible quality?

More importantly the AACSB (or other professional) accreditation on any DL program speaks for itself. Would a sub-standard individual successfully complete this type of program?

Provide me with some facts and I will the first to say you are right.

Otherwise, I prefer to think that DL learners are internally motivated, independent, and successful. Try working, raising family, competing for promotions, traveling around the world, and in your part time completing another degree.

 

Walter,
An excellent point. However may I add my two cents worth to this debate. Earning a degree from an ivy league school does have prestige. Employers usually jump at candidates who've graduated from schools like Yale, Duke, UCLA, etc.

Earning a degree by distance learning can be just as prestigious. You put in the long hours, write the exams and submit papers and in the end you are granted a degree. It's not a question of first or second class status. It's a question of how one uses the degree in real life.

The reality of all this is can be mere "window dressing". Sure, having an MBA, LLB or a graduate degree is essential in today's business world. I actually don't see DL degrees as inferior to B&M earned degrees. But making it into management (especially General Manager, CEO. CIO, CFO) still comes down to who you blow not what you know regardless of which school you graduated from.

Please don't be offended by my statement. This is just how the real business world works.

regards,

 

This thread seems to be an attack on the whole concept of adult continuing education. (It has little to do with DL specifically.)

Continuing education appeals to adults who want to improve themselves in some way. It appeals to those for whom university courses and degree programs have utility and value.

It's of much less interest to those who believe that they already occupy a pinnacle. It offers nothing to those who have nothing left to gain.

Walter can call me an inferior "also-ran" if he likes. Imperfection is just the human condition. I feel no need to apologise to anyone here (on an education group!) for retaining my intellectual curiosity and for my continued desire to learn. I continue to hope and pray that growth is still possible for me.

Perhaps not all of us are running in the same race that Walter believes he's competing in.

 

Re: Re: Also-Rans?

The reason I think it has departed, is that I don't see it as a DL issue, more of a world/academic issue.

 

I agree with most of the comments in this thread. But I beg to differ with a couple.

Kristie7 wrote:

> I think ANY degree is only a check of the box, unless it is
> from the best of the best schools.

I think that most employers, considering a recent graduate for a technical position, place more weight on grades than on which school. (For a "visibility" position, it might go the other way.) So I think "Any degree is only a check of the box, unless it is with the highest of GPAs" -- is a truer statement than Kristie's.

Fed wrote:

> Stanford, MIT, Harvard, all have DL programs. Do you believe
> that these institutions consider the students that are admitted
> to these programs as lacking in admissible quality?

Yes, I do. Anyone can sign up for a Harvard Extension course. (Harvard advertises them on the Boston subway: "Discover Harvard in the evenings.") There is no comparison to be made with the extremely competitive admissions at the rest of Harvard.

 

[email protected],

no argument on "course", hence my use of "programs". Graduate admissions is the same for both DL and B&M "programs". Sorry I did not place emphasis on this issue. You are of course correct, especially when dealing with not for credit or in some cases independent study "courses".

 

I think Bill has just opened up the discussion in an interesting way. I'm not sure I view an either/or to Bill's stance or Walter's stance, but this discussion does indeed have something to do with one's age. If we are speaking of degree utility in the workplace, we are speaking largely of the corporate, hierarchical America. A very age-restrictive arena, rewarding the young. (And white and male, while we're at it.)

Many people in the DL community are returning to studies at a later age. They are often in their 30s, 40s, and 50s. Such folks are probably not going to become the corporate titans Walter seems to admire. For some it is personal pride to complete a degree, for others it is a ticket to a job change, for others it is intellectual challenge. Often it is a combination of motivations.

(Aside: Try applying to an Ivy League school when you are in your 50s, to do a BA. I doubt they'd take you, although it would make their campuses more interesting places if they did.)

Peter

 

There are plenty of people that post on here that went to top undergrads and grad schools before going on for DL degrees.

I doubt a DL would dilute the degrees they've already received.

Likewise, elite schools are already offering DL programs...Harvard Extension, Duke MBA, Columbia Engineering, Stanford Engineering and UIUC MSCS come to mind. Likewise, UIUC's Master of Library Science is ranked number 1. I doubt many people doing their program at a distance consider it a second choice or alternate to many other programs in that field.

 

Not everyone will be accepted into a Hardard DL program even if they can enroll in an extension class. Also, if those classes are acceptable as part of a Harvard degree program (brick & mortar, or DL), then the caliber of student who passes them should be similar to the caliber of student who passes a regular Harvard University course.

The value of a DL degree is based on where the credit is coming from. At any of the big 3, you can accumulate credit, but they certify that it is of collegiate level. In most cases, if you pass a standardized test, it is because you have relevant life experience that exposed you to the material that would have been covered in such a class. That practical experience may be even more valuable than sitting in a class learning theory.

Further, if you don't test out, but accumulate credit from various other schools, you have still taken your courses from a series of RA schools. The utility of the DL degree in this case is the abiliy to tailor your major or concentration to your personal needs.

If you have a specific job you are tailoring those courses to, your degree may be of more use to your employer than a standard cookie-cutter degree from even the best school.

 

I would not concede to a busines degree in which grades amtter, but maybe in the technical field - I should have made this clear that I only meant in a business dergee situtation.

 

I do take issue regarding the statement of the quality of people who pursue DL degrees and find it to be a naive comment. I find DL students highly motivated and typically adult students who are pursuing a degree later in life because they see the value in it. To complete a degree while still working and more than likely supporting a family is a noble endeavor and often takes sacrifice. It has nothing to do with an individual being considered inferior.

John

 

Mel wrote:

> Also, if those classes are acceptable as part of a Harvard
> degree program (brick & mortar, or DL), then the caliber of
> student who passes them should be similar to the caliber of
> student who passes a regular Harvard University course.

Nope. Haven't you heard of the grade inflation at Harvard? Getting admitted as a Harvard undergraduate is much tougher than passing the courses once you're there.

 

LOL That is a great point!