Please give me advice

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by EricW34, Apr 7, 2005.

Loading...
  1. EricW34

    EricW34 New Member

    Hello,

    I presently work as a field manager for an international corporation. I am 37 years old and feel as though I have the potential to achieve higher corporate and executive positions. I have 3 years experience working as a manager in this field that I understand and truly enjoy working within.
    Recently I contacted my HR Rep. regarding corporate level positions. She informed me of the requirements; most of which require a 4 year degree in business. I also learned that my employer will pay $2,500 per calendar year of tuition and 50% of the cost of books and supplies.

    I want to go back to school and obtain a 4 year degree in business/finance and or international business. I believe the corporation I work for will consider me for a corporate level position. If not, I would still receive a Bachelor's Degree that I can use to look into other job possibilities. Something I am really interested in doing would be travelling and seeing new cultures. I have been told that if that is what I like than to look into majoring in International Business.

    It is impossible for me to quit my present full-time job in order to attend school. I have been looking into obtaining my degree online. Two Universities that I spoke with were Walden University and Strayer University. Could you tell me and advise me on these two schools or any other schools that you would suggest I look into attending?

    Thank you for your time and help.

    Eric
     
  2. jagmct1

    jagmct1 New Member

    Eric,

    Check out Columbia Southern University (http://www.colsouth.edu).

    I just recently graduated with my MBA at CSU. They offer flexible programs, affordable tuition and accreditation.

    You've probably read a lot about "regional vs. national accreditation." CSU is nationally accredited. Some say, which can be true at times, that national accreditation has less utility and transferability. But, national accreditation is recognized by the U.S. Dept of Education and CHEA.

    As for me, I work in government and utilized the tuition reimbursement program. I would not have received this tuition reimbursement if CSU was not fully accredited.

    If you want to learn more about national accrediation you can read about it at their website http://www.detc.org.

    Jamie Gauthier

    MBA/Public Administration - Columbia Southern University
    BSBA/Human Resource Mgmt - Columbia Southern University
     
  3. marilynd

    marilynd New Member

    Eric,

    Since you are looking at tuition reimbursement, you should ask your employer if there are accreditation requirements in the reimbursement program. You should also make sure that the particular school you choose is eligible for reimbursement from your company before you sign on the dotted line.

    Hope this helps,

    marilynd
     
  4. marilynd

    marilynd New Member

    Eric,

    I don't know much about either Walden or Strayer, but both have been discussed on this forum.

    Use the search function, and you should find plenty of opinion about both, I would think.

    marilynd
     
  5. EricW34

    EricW34 New Member

    Thank you all for the information! I truly appreciate it.

    My emplyer will pay part of the tuitition for any accredited school as long as I maintain a "b" average.

    I am coming close to decision on what school to attend. I think this will be a great move on my part and I am looking forward to my future. Unfortunately I still need will need to spend time in central PA while I learn and earn this degree. Again, thank you all for the responses.

    Eric
     
  6. Marylars

    Marylars New Member

    Eric-

    There are a lot of good business programs available through DL. I am currently working on an MBA through Amberton (www.amberton.edu) nd have been very pleased so far. It is regionally accredited and the price is right ($200 per credit hour). They have several business related bachelor's degrees.

    Your boss will not only appreciate the fact that you are getting a degree, but will likely be impressed by your attention to the bottom line.

    Good luck!

    Mary
     
  7. unixman

    unixman New Member

    Check my signature line for a link to my "Oddysey" into getting my BS in Business from TESC (Thomas Edison State College).

    TESC offers a BS in Business with an area of concentration in International Business.

    www.tesc.edu

    From the sound of your professional experience, it sounds like you could earn some credits through validation of your experiential learning (portfolio assessment) - an area in which TESC specializes.

    If you are ex-military, you can earn elective credits based on your experiences there.

    Again, check the thread in my sig for more info.

    Cheers, and good luck, mate!
     
  8. DesElms

    DesElms New Member

    With eyes wide open...

    But make sure to find out precisely what kind of "accredited." Specifically, find out if the school must be "regionally-accredited," or if it may, alternatively (or in addition), be "nationally" accredited. If the word "regional" or "regionally" appears anywhere in the description of what "accredited" means, and there's no mention of "national" accreditation also being okay, then "national" accreditation may not be acceptable. On the other hand, if the wording is something like "Accredited by an agency approved by the United States Departement of Education (USDE) and/or its Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)" or something like that, then both regional and national accreditation would probably be okay. But by all means, find out first!

    You should know that the vast majority of colleges and universities in the U.S. that are accredited by an agency approved to do so by either the USDE or CHEA (or both) are, in fact, regionally- (and not nationally-) accredited. Moreover, because most people don't really know much about what "accreditation" actually means, when most people say "accredited," they actually mean regionally-accredited (and not nationally-accredited... whether they realize it or not); and, so, therefore, if your degree is nationally-accredited, and if someone asks you if your degree is accredited, then you should probably make sure that you know precisely what they mean, and that they know preciselly what you mean.

    Which, Eric, is NATIONALLY (and not "regionally") accredited. See above.

    And it does. Make no mistake about that, Eric...

    ...and do not be misled into believing it makes little or no difference, as jagmct1's words, above, would seem to suggest.

    The evidence to the contrary -- which evidence has been cited here many times in other threads -- is incontrovertable and overwhelming: A nationally-accredited degree has extremely limited utility. The overwhelming majority of regionally-accredited universities in the U.S. will not give a nationally-accredited degree the time of day when it comes to transfer of its credits into a regionally-accredited program; and especially if the nationally-accredited degree is proffered as requisite to a teaching position at a regionally-accredited school. And that's just a fact.

    That said, there's interesting language on the CHEA web site which would appear to encourage all institutions to be as liberal as possible when it comes to awarding transfer credit and/or honoring all degrees that are accredited by a USDE-and/or CHEA-approved agency, regardless whether it's a "regional" accreditor. But, alas, most regionally-accredited institutions won't honor anything but regionally-accredited degrees or coursework... like it or not.

    And, Eric, that, right there, is the only reason jagmct1 has had no problems with his nationally-accredited degree. Much of government, generally -- and especially the federal government, specifically -- honors all degrees and coursework as long as its accredited by any agency (and that means any agency) approved to accredit by USDE and/or CHEA... and, of course, that would include both regional and national accreditors. But, sadly, that's not the way it is in the non-governmental world... or even with alot of state and local governments. While nationally-accredited degrees are most certainly honored by some non-federal government agencies and all federal govenment agencies; and while nationally-accredited degrees are probably okay with a great many -- maybe even most -- private employers; the fact is that it's tough to get regionally-accredited colleges and universities to honor nationally-accredited degrees and coursework, period. Many, many of them will -- maybe enough of them to make a nationally-accredited degree worth your while. But most will not. Your eyes need to be wide open about that.

    Again, Eric, jagmct1 is in govenment... so that makes sense. But just realize that outside of government, things are different. Maybe they're not different enough to scare you away from a nationally-accredited degree and, if so, that's fine. Just make sure you understand the pitfalls.

    Wrong! The absolutely worst place to learn about accreditaion is on an accreditor's web site. Well... okay... I take that back. The worst place would be on the web site of an unaccredited institution or a diploma/degree mill -- or the web site of a shill of such an institution. The second worst place is on an accreditor web site. They have a bias.

    The best place to learn about accreditation is on the US Department of Education's web site, or on the CHEA web site.

    Just choose wisely. Make sure it's accredited -- regionally accredited, if possible -- and don't let people who think national accreditation is just as good mislead you. It is not. I mean, in terms of quality it is; but not in terms of usefulness or utility, generally. Never forget that. Hopefully that will change soon; but until it does, don't forget it and act accordingly.

    Good for you! I'm sure it will be exciting if you get a good education.

    Which, if the school from which you'd like to get your degree is not nearby, makes distance learning your obvious best option. So you're asking the right questions and considering the right things.

    Good luck!
     
  9. EricW34

    EricW34 New Member

    Awesome information and advise. Thank you Gregg!
    And thank you to everyone.

    Yes, I am looking at schools that are regionally accredited.
    I talked with my HR Director today and I will be recieving tuition reimbursement and they will also pay for 50% of course books and supplies.
    I am going to do this and do well. I feel very confident in this decision. Whatever the future holds I am sure it will be a fun filled and educational adventure.
    Again thank you all.
    Eric
     
  10. scotty

    scotty New Member

    Do this...
    http://www.umassonline.net/degrees/show.cfm?degree_ID=43

    ...then apply it to this...
    http://www.umassonline.net/degrees/show.cfm?degree_ID=42

    ...that way, you get a certificate to put on your resume, and hopefully impress your employer, before you finish the whole program. They are both Bachelor level programs. You get verifiable evidence in a third or half the time it will take you to finish the whole program. Getting into an MBA program after that should be no problem, if you decide to go that route.

    Cheers,
    Scott
     
  11. suelaine

    suelaine Member

    Eric,
    I highly recommend Walden if they have a Bachelor's program that meets your goals. Good luck!
     
  12. PaulC

    PaulC Member

    Re: With eyes wide open...

    What is this “extreme limited utility”? I have seen no evidence of this. RA academe is a very small fish in a very large pond of opportunities. As far as I have seen, the only area in which the term “extreme” could be supported is in RA academe. I hope you were not categorically identifying the “extreme limited utility” to only one very small area.

    I have a RA BS a NA MS and a RA PhD. I work full time in academe and adjunct for two B&M RA schools on the side. My NA MS has never presented a single limitation to my academic or professional interests.

    The opportunities not available to an NA program grad are extremely limited. If you want to be a researcher at large company, you probably want something other than an NA degree. It has extreme limitation in opening those doors. If you want to be a tenured prof at most B&M, getting an NA degree offers extremely limited chances of this happening.

    For, oh, about 90% of all other uses for which one might get a degree, where is the evidence that an NA degree has such extreme limitation. I mean, if it is incontrovertible, there must be significant evidence. There can be policies of this or that company offered, but these are meaningless ss unless offered in a relative way to the number of potential opportunities on the whole. Boeing was once cited as a company not accepting NA degrees – this while at the very time it was cited, an NA school was involved with them in providing cohorts of Boeing employees a customized MBA program.

    Because I have both a long time interest in accreditation issues, and also have an NA degree experience, I know many, many other NA grads. I have yet to meet even one that expressed this “extreme limited utility” I often see those less personally connected to the experience raise.

    I am at the front of the line with everyone else in indicating to those seeking degree opportunities that an NA degree has less utility than an RA degree. I would never posit that this limitation is extreme as, in the real world, far removed from internet forums, the NA grads keep going, merrily along there way, apparently bereft of this notion.
     
  13. dlady

    dlady Active Member

    Okay, I’ve seen this statement a lot in arguments around accreditation. I would like to challenge it. How on earth can anyone purport to know what people mean when they say "accreditation" if they in fact don’t know much about accreditation? This is not a valid argument and IMHO weakens, not strengthens, the argumentation position that uses it!
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Read my dissertation. Or read about it on these very pages.

    Employers don't, generally, have any idea what they're talking about when they mention accreditation. That's why unrecognized forms of accreditation (including made-up ones) are sported by degree mills.

    Listen to the students who enroll in schools with fake accreditation (or who tout state licensure to be something more than it really is). They find out the truth and then wail. But it was a general ignorance of accreditation that got them into it in the first place. (Anyone who's read the Kennedy-Western forum has witnessed this.)

    No, there's plenty of evidence regarding ignorance of accreditation.

    I think this affects DETC and other national accreditors both positively and negatively. Positively, because it (NA) provides a simple answer ("yes") to the question, "Is it accredited"? Negatively, because some closed minds aren't ready to accept something (like DETC) with which they are not really familiar.
     
  15. aic712

    aic712 Member

    I would choose Walden over Strayer due to the horror stories I have heard about them in the area of Academics and Advisement.

    Strayer is big in Northern VA, and although they are RA, we have had numerous students transfer over to here and to George Mason due to problems there.

    Walden looks to have a very good program and academic reputation, I have a few collegues attending their PH.D programs and they have spoken highly of the school.


    You ultimately have to make the choice yourself, just make sure the school is accredited, and if your employer requires it to be Regional or National. Also, Walden and Strayer are VERY expensive, there may well be cheaper options out there considering the small amount of tuition reimbursement you receive.

    Some other good options:

    Amberton University
    Excelsior College
    Charter Oak State College
    Thomas Edison State University
    Bellvue University
    UMASS Lowell
    NorthCentral U (no federal aid though)
    Grand Canyon U
    Liberty U


    Also, check out this site:

    http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Haven/2386/distance.html
     
  16. jagmct1

    jagmct1 New Member

    Eric,

    Bottom line. Choose the school that's right for you.

    I've had no utility problems whatsoever with my NA undergraduate and graduate degree. Millions upon millions of students have attended NA schools including business executives and former U.S. Presidents.

    I have many options to go to a RA school for my Ph.D if I choose too. Sure, certain schools might not accept my NA degree. I just won't go there nor would I want to go there. I'm honestly thinking about attending a NA Ph.D program when it becomes available. The RA / NA degree snobery is just plain ridiculous and is it's getting old. People like Greg will never accept the fact that NA degrees are just as worthy as RA. If you have never attended or have gotten a degree from a NA school, you have no place in talking about the rigor, quality or utility of that degree. The quality and academic rigor between NA and RA have proven to be equal time and time again.

    My issue was recognized accreditation, flexibility and cost savings. NA degree programs offer all of that. If you feel it's worth spending $900-$2000.00 per course at an RA institution vs. $300-$400 at a NA institution, than by all means go for it.
     
  17. DesElms

    DesElms New Member

    Re: With eyes wide open...

    Then you're not paying attention.

    Well, that is quite true.

    Please re-read the very paragraphs of mine to which you refer. On the whole, I thought I differentiated between utility as a teaching credential, versus as transfer credit, versus private employment. I even took pains to differentiate between state and local government employment on one hand, and federal employment on the other. I fear your sensitivity to criticism of national accreditation has caused you to zero-in on only one part of my thesis without allowing any other parts to provide necessary and appropriate balance.

    Make no mistake about it: I'm a national accreditation fan. If I had my way there would be a federal law which prohibited regionally-accredited institutions from looking down their noses at national accreditation and vice versa; and all accreditation -- as long as it was USDE- and/or CHEA-approved -- would get more or less equal respect. So you're preachin' to the choir, here. My previous admonitions merely reflect the reality of the situation....

    ...a reality which you seem unwilling to acknowledge (despite my heart being right there with ya' wishing it were so).

    Again, I believe that I adequately differentiated between the various areas of degree usefulness and utility in my earlier statements; and said statements adequately stated my beliefs regarding what most employers probably won't much care about -- and, moreover, if you read them carefully, they suggest agreement with the very thing you've written here... though I don't know if I'd go as high as ninety percent.

    Your defense is an overly-defensive one. I was clear about in what areas the extremely limited utility lay, and general private employment wasn't one of them... so, again, you're preachin' to the choir and are making an argument where one isn't necessary. I explained my position, but you seem stuck on the word "extreme" and are hell-bent on suggesting that I was painting the entire picture with its color when, in fact, I was not. This feels like an overreaction to me -- the overreaction of someone who's sick and tired of people dissing national accreditation... a situation about which I believe you and I are of one mind.

    I get it. See my above.

    At long last... see my above.

    People who dare to draw their swords in the arena of debate critique should first bother to know the difference between validity and soundness. There isn't a single thing that is inherently invalid in any of my arguments. Intending to convey not the slightest bit of humility whatsoever, and wearing my arrogance like the badge of honor that I truly consider it to be, I dare say there rarely is. Though I don't quite understand why you've chosen to nitpick it (other than, perhaps, you've just completed a debate or logic or philosophy class or something and so you're in "question everything" mode), but what you are actually saying is that you believe my thesis unsound. Fine. Let's examine that...

    You seem to begrudge me the common practice of generalizing about what most people mean when they talk about accreditation; but, interestingly, based not on my ignorance of what they do or do not know but, rather, on what they do not, in fact, know. That's intriguing but, in this case, self-defeating. The very infirmity of theirs which you cite to bolster your position is the very quality which supports mine. And the maxim that helps to illustrate it is "a little information is a dangerous thing." They know about accreditation; but, like most subjects in the universe, they don't realize how much about accreditation they don't actually know. It is a fact that the vast majority of the colleges and universities around us in the everyday world are regionally accredited -- so much so, in fact, that for most Americans it is the only kind of accreditation they know. That you and others with your understanding of things might happen to know should not be projected onto the general population. The ubiquity of regional accreditation causes most people outside of our little world, here (where we do understand the differences), don't even mention the "regional" classification -- heck, they don't even know they're not mentioning it because they don't realize that it exists to mention in the first place -- and they refer to it, simply, as "accreditation." Ergo, when most people who are not as up the subject as are we say "accreditation," they actually -- whether they realize it or not -- mean regional accreditation... but almost exclusively because they simply didn't know there was any other kind.

    This does not speak to or in support of a prevailing and insensible public bias toward regional accreditation at the intentional expense of national accreditation -- as so irritates national accreditation supporters (including myself and, it would seem, you, too), and as actually exists among many registrars and HR personnel at regionally-accredited institutions -- but, rather, it is a simple statement of regrettable fact of which we must all remain mindful as we navigate the waters of the perceived credibility of our educational credentials. It is nothing less, and nothing more.

    The general public out there which doesn't realize that there's more than one kind of USDE/CHEA-approved accreditation -- and which doesn't understand the subtleties and consequences of that, in any case -- means "regional" accreditation when they say, simply, "accreditation" not because they prefer regional accreditation but, rather, because they don't realize there's any other kind. And that's just a fact.

    I believe, therefore, that it is incumbent on people who do know the difference to educate those who don't wherever it is both possible and appropriate -- which, to my mind, should be just about every time "accreditation" is discussed, but that's just me. Only by so doing will those who, like I (and I'm pretty sure you, dlady), believe that national accreditation is getting short shrift ever hope to change the public perception.... thereby, of course, making national accreditation more acceptable.

    See also what Rich Douglas wrote about this subject, above.
     
  18. DesElms

    DesElms New Member

    Painting with a broad brush

    Sage wisdom and advice... no matter who proffers it.

    And what part of "because you're in government" (a paraphrase, despite the quotes) did I not make sufficiently clear in my earlier post?

    Agreed. Moreover, they've done quite well with them and have not experienced a single problem. You left that part out.

    Most (regionally-accredited) schools will not accept your nationally-accredited degree... and tragically, I might add. But that's a fact. Please stop soft-selling it. It's misleading.

    Please don't paint me with such a broad brush; nor, in my case, characterize my warnings -- based on truth and facts -- as mere "snobbery." A thoughtful re-read of my body of postings here will verify that I don't deserve that and I'll thank you not to lump me in with those around here who really do turn-up their noses at anything but regional accreditation.

    Again you lump.

    Okay, stop right there. For someone with your education, you read most sloppily. None of this discussion has been about the comparative quality of nationally- and regionally-accredited degrees. In fact, if you go back and re-read my posting with which you now take such issue -- this time more carefully, thankyouverymuch -- you'll find that I quite clearly stated, and I quote:
    • "...and don't let people who think national accreditation is just as good mislead you. It is not. I mean, in terms of quality it is; but not in terms of usefulness or utility, generally. Never forget that. Hopefully that will change soon; but until it does, don't forget it and act accordingly."
    To quote Chandler Bing: Could I have been more clear? But, alas, clearly, I wasn't. So let me unequivocate: Nationally-accredited degrees are just as, to use your word, "worthy" as regionally-accredited degrees. Of that there is not doubt; and from me there has been no assertion to the contrary... ever. So please stop talking about "people like Greg[g]" like I've got a big, green, drippy thing growing out of the side of my face or something. It's undeserved, and it really [/b]pisses[/b] me off!

    Ah, yes... the old, "if you've never walked in my shoes, then you couldn't possibly understand" argument. I've never jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, either... but I know from watching what happens to those who have that it's probably not a good idea. You couldn't come up with better logic than that? Gimmee a break.

    That is indisputable. We are in complete agreement; and I've always known (possibly even before you did, I dare suggest) and have always said (or written, as the case may be) as much. So please excuse me if I become indignant about your having inaccurately -- and I'll even add "carelessly" -- painted me as someone who doesn't get that.

    This is an unassailable argument. Not only is the cost of national accreditation less for the institution, but it imposes upon it fewer expenses for such things as permanent, full-time, full-professor-type faculty (as opposed to the merely adjunct type) and costly physical libraries and all kinds-o-stuff like that. Therefore, nationally-accredited institutions can afford to keep the price down... which is a good thing. This should also be a consideration in one's choice of a school, as you've so eloquently pointed out.

    Please, Jamie... before you treat me like the enemy -- or, perhaps worse, paint me as a "snob" -- bother to make sure that I actually am either or both of those things. Look, I realize and agree with you -- and possibly dlady, and definitely PaulC -- that national accreditation gets swatted around pretty good in these fora; and I further agree with you (all) that that's unfortunate and, moreover, that at least in terms of the inherent quality argument, it's unwarranted. But when national accreditation gets a swat around here, it tends not to have anything to do with quality and, rather, is usually confined, strictly, to practical utility in the real world. Period.

    I fear that your understandable frustration with said swats is causing you to insensibly deny the facts with regard to the whole practical utility thing. There is no question that national accreditation is wrongly (and I stress the word "wrongly") perceived (and I stress the word "perceived") by the general public perhaps to a point, but by the world of regionally-accredited academia in general, as sub-standard. Let's have no confusion about this: National accreditation is not sub-standard. But to say that most of the world out there both sees and agrees with that is just folly. And, believe me, I hate that as much as you do. But it is what it is... and wishing won't change that.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 8, 2005
  19. PaulC

    PaulC Member

    If my position was skewed as a result of missing some context amongst the parts and sub-parts, my error.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 8, 2005
  20. BlueMason

    BlueMason Audaces fortuna juvat

    And with yet another thread going into RA-vs-NA we've lost sight of the big picture...

    What school was finally chosen by the author of the thread? :)
     

Share This Page