AACSB teaching revisited

There is a discussion on online short duration MBAs in another thread. Since I did not want to get that one off track I decided to ask my question in a new thread. The program in question is the University of Florida’s online MBA program.

http://www.floridamba.ufl.edu/prosp_stu/imbaover.asp

They go one step further…they are BOTH AACSB and EQUIS accredited! Take that you merely AACSB schools.


Seriously, I took a look at this program. Cost is fairly high at:

Internet MBA (1-Year) Program
Projected Budget All Students
Fees for 16-month Program $28,185
Books, Materials and Administrative Costs $1,265
Computer Hardware and Software $2,550
Total Program Fees* $32,000

But that is not what caught my attention. Looking at the sixteen faculty members listed under Marketing (my love) I noticed that at least half do not hold a doctorate in marketing, including the department chair! None of the dept chair’s degrees are in a field governed by the AACSB. They are all in psychology:

Dr. Joseph W. (Joe) Alba
Chair, Marketing Department; Distinguished Professor
Education: PHD - Experimental Psychology, 1981 Temple University
BA - Psychology, 1976 State University of New York

Three others have Ph Ds in Psychology. One has a JD, two in economics, and one in Engineer & Public Policy. This in the Marketing department and out of a total of 16 listed.

The chair of the management department has a JD:
Dr. Larry A. Di Matteo
Chair, Management Department; Associate Professor
JD - Law, 1982 Cornell University

Yet I read here that you need an MBA from an AACSB school to teach etc etc. The above seems to contradict this constantly repeated advice given here. Clearly Dr. Alba does not hold a single AACSB degree yet is the dept chair of marketing. Dr. DiMatteo is the management department chair yet he has a law degree.

The University of Florida is a top notch school IMHO. My mention of the above individuals is only in the context of my question. I sincerely believe each of the above earned their position and I have nothing but respect for each of their accomplishments.

My question is this: Why are we told here one needs an AACSB degree to teach at an AACSB school when clearly the above proves it is not true?

Just my opinion

 

you will note that not everybody holds the position that you need an AACSB accredited degree to teach at AACSB schools. If you have substantial credentials elsewhere then it is possible. In my observation not having a degree in a particular field has not stopped folks from advancing to other areas. I also would not make the assumption that lacking a field degree does not mean the individual does not have considerable coursework or expertise in the area of question. In another thread a poster demonstrated to me that a particular shool did require the applicant to have an AACSB degree to apply for consideration. The schools set the policy within the limits established by the accreditor. If you go to the SACS and AACSB websites you will see their standards for UoF.

 

Well, Marketing is a unique area, as OB is as well. You will find instructors in marketing hold degrees outside of business, since so much of the discpline is in behavior. Much like you will see student holding a law degree teach and hold positions for business law classes. Not really a surprise.

You named someone from Cornell. There is plenty of debate about Ivy league schools not needing the accreditation. I think they are the exception. (do a search here, there has been debates about Harvard)

If you are world renowned, if you are from an ivy league school, if you know the right people, etc. etc. you could probably teach at an AACSB school without an AACSB degree.

I think you are looking for an absolute answeer for all cases, and it just does not exist. I think it is a fair assumption to say that an AACSB degree is the norm for AACSB schools. Some hold to the line more than others.

 

Good question - but as has been pointed out, there are fields (like OB, marketing and management science) where faculty may come from non-business backgrounds.

The point that has been made and is largely valid, is that if you have a business academic background (e.g. PhD/DBA, MBA) there can be some snobbery with respect to where you went to school when it comes to employment.

No one is going to give a person with a PhD in organizational psychology from Cornell and relevant research in organizational behavior a hassle about teaching in an AACSB school.

However, try teaching in an AACSB school with a DBA/PhD from a DL school. You might get a job - there are some examples. However, many folks at AACSB schools - especially the top ranked ones - that won't take you in. Your likelyhood of success probably goes down if all of your credentials are from DL institutions.

Snobbery? Perhaps a little. But don't think for a second that a PhD or DBA from a DL school comes close to the experience one gets in a five year, full-time bricks and mortar school. Kid yourself if you want - the letters may be the same, but the experience is a lot different.

Regards - Andy

 

Just find it interesting that the AACSB rules can vary so. From what I read here the Chair, Marketing Department and Distinguished Professor at the First Tier University of Florida couldn't even apply for a teaching position at a California school that requires a degree from an AACSB school.

How can this possibly be in the best interests of the students?


Just my opinion

 

Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

Hi Andy, in this statement about the experience of a b-and-m PhD/DBA and a DL one, are you referring to the b-and-m school being much like an 'academic boot-camp' in attitude and mission, whereas the DL school is geared more toward working professionals? If that's what you mean, I agree. The experience is a lot different, but the quality of education is not necessarily so.

Regards,
Adrienne

 

I just had this discussion today with an international student in a B&M in Europe. He said that the US is traditionally a "hand holding" experience. You go to class, you get day to day "mentoring", etc.

In Europe and in many DL programs, it is more independant, more new research, more individual. There is no babysitting, no hand holding, you get puclished, you do primary research, you status, and report actual results.

I thought it was pretty accurate, though I have not thought of it that way, b ut similar to Andy's comments

 

Re: Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

Adrienne - The point I was making is this. DL programs are aimed at mid-career folks that can afford to pursue graduate study. Most DL programs are not very selective about who they accept. Such programs typically don't involve the depth of research or rigor that top B&M schools involve. Faculty are often part-time which doesn't lead to a strong research focus.

B&M schools tend to be much more selective and their programs are much more intense. For one, in business they all require the GMAT and typically only admit students with high scores and very high GPAs. The B&M schools I looked at regularly flunk out a percentage of their students (while DL school attritiion is mostly self inflicted). They demand their students study 4+ years full-time and work with full-time faculty. Their students complete far more rigorous methods courses than the DL crowd does.

How can one possibly complete a DL program part-time in 3-4 years and come out with the depth of education that one gets from 4+ years in a full-time program? Is it possible to "gain" with "no pain"?

Is there a difference in the quality of the education between DL and traditional schools? I think so.

Want evidence? Take a look at a recent publication from a well regarded journal - Journal of Finance, Journal of Marketing, MIS Quarterly, etc. Read the bios of the authors. Show me one that graduated from a DL program. Where do these authors come from? B&M institutions.

Why is this so? Some may say it is snobbery - but then journal articles are reviewed blind. The reviewers don't know who wrote the articles or where they went to school.

I'm not saying that DL institutions are of no value. My NSU degree has served me well. But I recognize some serious limitations. The odds that I'll teach at a top B&M school are nearly 0. My research isn't good enough, and my DL education didn't give me the depth or connections in the research world to reach the top.

But then I'm fine where I am....

Regards - Andy

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

I disagree, I think DL is for any age group.

Where do you get this?? Is there data to back this up. I know that Case Western has hundreds apply, and accepts on a VERY few less than 10. Henley accepts less than 1%. Is this a generalization base done any facts?

Again, incorrect. The schools offering the DL programs are top B&M schools (Case Western for example).

Sorry, wrong again. These schools have AACSB accreditation, so do not have a majority of part time faculty members. And, these full time faculty, must be published as well.

DL programs require the GMAT, and high GPA's as well.

Sorry, we do that too.

Selecting the right candidates, working in depth in research, spending less time in the "hand holding" that is seen in the US programs. Not requiring teaching as a part of the program, which is what takes up a great deal of the US B&M students time. They are bascially lacky's to full timers, and high ranking DL programs don't have time to waste on it, as they are mostly in the workforce.

Me too, but I think the opposite, DL programs require indepedent and in depth research. I am not knocking the B&M, if you need that day to day help, go for it, but don't knock DL based on a bunch of inaccurate thoughts.

I can give you examples of highly regarded publications with DL students publishing (and graduating), the reason they are not dominating these publications, is because DL is still not a large offering, though changing as we speak!!

I now undertstand, you are a NSU grad. I think the limitation may be the accreditation, not the delivery being DL (though I don't know a great deal about NCU). In academia, it has been said again and again, the gold standard is AACSB, and NSU doesn't hold it, so I understand now (I should have read the entire post before commenting on each statement, I assumed you were referring to the AACSB DL schools, you did not differentiate).

I think this post goes to show the need for AACSB accreditation, or something that ranks schools according to what their degree menas, what did they do for that degree.

I have found in depth research methods, mentoring when needed, and the students in these "gold standard" programs do publish in the above mentioned programs.

I think others can too in RA programs, but it is based on the student, not the program. More clearly, a NCU grad could publish in these journals, but may need to be more independent in their investigation of how it works. Everybody that tries may get the degree at NCU (I don't know about the program, so I can't comment on this statement from you), but in the higher standards of accreditation, I don't think so, nor do I think they can get by withouth understanding research methods, which does not seem to be a part of the program you were a part of.

Doctorates are not for everybody, and maybe a criteria for selecting a school should be looking at their graduates, to see if they are in the academic journals. I hate to sound harsh, but Andy, maybe you did get the degree, but with comments like you have made, maybe this is the reason some see a need for a higher standard. It is sad you can go through a doctorate level education and make a comment like "My research isn't good enough, and my DL education didn't give me the depth or connections in the research world to reach the top. "

 

Han - Sorry for any confusion - My comments were based on the popular doctoral DL business programs - e.g. Capella, NSU, Walden, Argosy, NCU, etc. - that are talked about here frequently.

I totally agree that Case Western is a top notch program - the best I know for mid-career folks. They are AACSB as is Henley. They require the GMAT and have top notch full-time faculty. They are selective, extremely demanding and rigorous as well.

But the other DL business doctoral programs that we talk about here in a different league. No GMAT (except NSU), almost all part-time faculty (except NSU) and not selective. I've seen (and worked) on dissertation committees from some of these programs. Some of the dissertations are good, but others are pretty weak compared to what comes out of AACSB programs.

I'm not saying that such programs aren't credible. They have a place in this world. But the point of the thread is "why do folks need AACSB degrees to teach in AACSB schools?" The point I'm trying to make is that non-AACSB schools are not producing doctoral students of the same caliber.

Henley and Case Western are good examples of what DL programs should be, but in too many cases aren't today.

Regards - Andy

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

Andy,

On many of your points I'd agree. However, something to consider on these:

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

Oh, but you will get connections. Likely, they will be invaluable connections that will serve you when needed. Anyone that suggests DL is “disconnected” has likely very limited first hand experience. The learners and faculty you meet, as well as the research you are conducting, will provide you with a network of opportunity that is not at all dissimilar to any B&M experience. While B&M students may gain contacts through primarily academic connections, mid career professionals in a doctoral program similar to Capella’s have academic connections but also have significant corporate networking opportunities that are unavailable to mid twenty year old B&M students.

Glad to hear you are enjoying your doctoral journey. The reward that comes at the end is really just the beginning of another exciting journey.

Here is my philosophy in a nutshell. If you are good at what you do, and you become known for that, you will be in demand so long as your academic credentials are respectable. If you are not good at what you do, a PhD from Northwestern will only open opportunities for you to be exposed for your incompetence.

Sure, there is some greater challenge to attaining your professional/academic objectives with a DL degree. But if the DL school is appropriately accredited, where you end up will be far more attributed to how good you are at what you do. Get your legitimate degree then simply be better than anyone else at what you do. That is a guarantee for success.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

What a great philosophy! The real business world is full of very successful people that have no college degrees at all. Some of the more successful businesspeople I have spoken with consider college a waste of time unless you want to be a medical doctor or lawyer, careers that require college.

In my very limited discussions I have found the real movers and shakers of the businessworld I know have very little respect for full time business instructors. Right or wrong many still have the "those who can do, those who can't teach full time" attitude.

A most interesting thread.

Just my opinion

 

I read the article at:

Andy Borchers in the Chronicle of H.E.

I don't care what the AACSB thinks. Andy is the kind of instructor I would love to have. Excellent combination of real world and education.

Just my opinion

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AACSB teaching revisited

Paul, that is an excellent point. I guess what I was trying to say didn't come out correctly, as I am so excited about the connections I've made so far, and the chance to interact with some of my fellow learners and faculty at the residencies (got one next month). I was really referring to academic old-guard connections, if you will.

Your philosophy is wonderful, and I would agree -- I can't honestly remember ever giving something my all, getting really good at it, and then not getting respect/recognition/new opportunities from it.

Regards,
Adrienne

 

To start with, it's probably not a good idea to base your question on a miniscule sample. What holds true there may not hold true for the other 99.9999999% of schools.

It also looks as if the people cited are senior academics (based on when they completed their Ph.D.s. If they have had their current positions that long, it's impossible to compare it to what may be the job requirements in today's market. When the job market changes, typically they don't start firing people who didn't graduate from AACSB schools.

And, importantly, there are always going to be exceptions to every rule.


Tom Nixon

 

I think a great response to your questions carlosb is the posting by Andy. He states he didn't get in depth research methodology, and his is from an RA school. Wouldn't that lend itself to the AACSB degree holding a higher standard, one in which you do learan those methods, both for teaching and research.

 

Another thought - why would s chool go through AACSB accreditation, if they don't require the same standard for their instructors. The logic just does not hold.

I can see the exception with international degrees and international professors, the world gap is closing, but there are numerous examples otherwise.

I do have a question, does any US school hold EQUIS? Just curious. I know there are european schools that hold AACSB.

 

Not necessarily. It appears that other areas of education that do not fall under the control of the AACSB are quite capable of conducting research. Law, education, medical, etc manage quite well without the AACSB telling them what to do. I would image a highly self motivated person could master the techniques of research and teaching if they put forth the effort today. I like what you said about the European programs. Why do we in the US need the “hand holding” in order to learn how to research or teach? How many of the traditional European business schools are AACSB?

What about forth tier AACSB Ph Ds? Will they be received with open arms by the top tier schools?

The University of Florida is both AACSB and EQUIS.

Just my opinion