Southern New Hampshire University

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by dwilson, Apr 28, 2006.

Loading...
  1. dwilson

    dwilson New Member

    Has anyone had any experience with this school?? I was thinking about registering there I did a search and didnt find much info on it. Is it a good respected school??? Thank you for any help.

    Dave
     
  2. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    It's a regionally accredited, private, non-profit school that seems serviceable if relatively unknown outside its area. I don't see anything wrong with it.

    -=Steve=-
     
  3. Bob Fiske

    Bob Fiske Member

    I live in NH and I've never heard anything bad about it.
     
  4. PaulC

    PaulC Member

    I have never personaly seen a private school that was non-profit, despite what words or legal mechanics they may use. All private schools must have income that exceeds their expenses - that is what for-profits call profit and non-profits pretend is something else in order to avoid taxation.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2006
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    They're different structurally in that non-profits don't have to divert students' tuition to pay dividends to shareholders. They're different philosophically in that for-profits exist to do that, and educating students is simply a means to that goal, whereas for non-profits education is the goal.

    I'm not saying that for-profits don't educate people or that the profit motive is a bad thing. I'm just saying that those of us who have worked for a for-profit know that when there's a conflict between education and the botton line, the latter usually triumphs.

    -=Steve=-
     
  6. sshuang

    sshuang New Member

    Capella Recognizes DETC Credits???

    Hi PaulC,

    Couldn't help noticing your credentials...

    You graduated from Aspen U, a national accredited, with a MS degree and attended Capella U, a regional accredited, for your PhD.

    Is it common for a regional accredited school to accept credits from a national accredited one?
     
  7. aic712

    aic712 Member

    "Hi PaulC,

    Couldn't help noticing your credentials...

    You graduated from Aspen U, a national accredited, with a MS degree and attended Capella U, a regional accredited, for your PhD.

    Is it common for a regional accredited school to accept credits from a national accredited one?"


    It is completely dependant on the school, some will, some will not. You have to check with the school, most have their policies on accepting transfer credits posted on their websites. Some say they will only accept credits from other regionally accredited schools, while some say an "accredited" school, which usually (not always) means they will accept credits from NA schools.
     
  8. PaulC

    PaulC Member

    Re: Capella Recognizes DETC Credits???

    Capella has an official policy to accept only regionally accredited degrees. However, Aspen established an articulation agreement with them back in 1998. It was a process they went through in submiting their program to Capella for review and acceptance. I don't know if there are other nationally accredited programs that transfer in or not.
     
  9. PaulC

    PaulC Member

    I've worked for both and found the pressure to return a positive cash flow at the private not-for-profit to be just as motivating as the pressure to turn a "profit" was for the for-profit. That is just my experience.
     
  10. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Steve: For-profit and non-profit schools are not different, except in that, if the for-profit school makes a profit, they actually pay taxes while, if the non-profit school makes what would otherwise have been called a profit, they pay it out to the executive director and a few of his select buddies as bonuses and they pay no taxes at all. As for your allegation that profit is a first consideration at a for-profit school, that would be incredibly foolish of them if that were so, inasmuch as anyone who has had at least one good b-school prof should know the old dictum of people first, product second, and profit third. In short, take care of your people and, in turn, the rest should take care of itself. Moreover, I'm still astonished that people would be shocked at the notion of other people making a profit on education. There are, simply put, four factors of production - labor, land, capital, and entrepreneurial skills - and four methods of compensation - wages, rents, interest, and profits. Those of you who contribute your labor power to the economy expect your wages (or salaries) and would not likely willingly forego same if your labor power were contributed to a college or university or other educational enterprise. Those of you who have land to contribute to the economy would not likely forego the rent if your property managers leased out all your land and buildings to schools. Those of you wheeler-dealers who have all kinds of money to lend would not likely refuse to collect your interest checks if your investment managers had invested in bonds floated by schools and colleges. Why, then, would you expect people who have invested their money in a business that is providing you with a product and/or a service (a degree or an education or both) to forego their profit checks, which you would not complain about if it were any other product/service?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2006
  11. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Steve: For-profit and non-profit schools are not different, except in that, if the for-profit school makes a profit, they actually pay taxes while, if the non-profit school makes what would otherwise have been called a profit, they pay it out to the executive director and a few of his select buddies as bonuses and they pay no taxes at all.

    I've worked at both, and I saw a difference, and that's not it. I saw a fundamental philosophical difference in the corporate cultures of the two.

    Economists don't know everything. The other social sciences do occasionally have their points to make as well, and I think this is one of those times.

    As for your allegation that profit is a first consideration at a for-profit school, that would be incredibly foolish of them if that were so, inasmuch as anyone who has had at least one good b-school prof should know the old dictum of people first, product second, and profit third. In short, take care of your people and, in turn, the rest should take care of itself.

    It wasn't an allegation; it was an observation. And it's not foolish of them if it works. I think one of your assumptions is that university students want to learn things, when in reality many of them just want the credential -- not the same thing at all. Besides, much of what you say depends on an actual free market in education, and the market is so hopelessly distorted by Title IV funding that we really don't have any data.

    Have you ever read Machinery of Freedom, by David D. Friedman? It's a collection of explanations of how various societal institutions would work without government. The chapter "Adam Smith U." might interest you.

    Moreover, I'm still astonished that people would be shocked at the notion of other people making a profit on education. {libertarian screed elided}

    I'm not astonished given the reputations of some of the for-profit schools out there, but I do disagree with the astonished people and agree with you. That's why I said, "I'm not saying... that the profit motive is a bad thing."

    PaulC, I respect that we've had different experiences. I'm not saying that that the non-profit school is perfect, just that the culture is different and more conducive to students being the priority. I guess your mileage may vary?

    -=Steve=-
     
  12. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

     
  13. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I may be getting too flippant in my old age....

    And Ted replies: ... If I might ask, which schools have you worked for? Which were for-profit and which were non-profit? I'd be interested to hear about which non-profits really didn't want to make a profit, because, in the real world, any organization that wants to continue to exist for very long has got to find ways and means to make sure that more money is coming in than is going out.

    I used to work for Keiser College in Florida, and now work for Southeastern University in Washington, D.C. Southeastern's not disinterested in making ends meet, but their institutional culture is dramatically different in terms of where student needs are on the list of priorities. Now, am I fallaciously taking the specific case and generalizing from it? Perhaps. However, it fits in with the preponderance of what people at other institutions have said to me about the environments where they work.

    By the way, if you'll notice my signature line, my undergrad degree is in history and political science. I never said that the social sciences (other than economics) didn't have a valid perspective.

    That's very true, you didn't. I only said that because it seemed like the economic analysis was the only one you were considering, and I think there's a cultural one as well that has to be considered to really see the general difference between the two environments.

    And Ted replies: ... Thanks for the book recommendation ... I'll check it out at www.amazon.com . And, if you'd explain please, is it actually possible to get a credential without (even if only accidentally) actually learning something along the way?

    Sure, if one is simply going through the motions to demonstrate what one already knows. I didn't study for most of the CLEP tests I took, yet I still got a year's worth of credit for them. But that's probably not usually the case. Most people probably don't escape learning something accidentally, even if they're just in a program to get "that piece of paper". But I think that people who have that attitude end up getting a lot less out of it, even if their piece of paper says the same thing as the enthusiastic learner.

    And Ted replies ... Personally, I find that bit about "libertarian screed elided" rather a bit rude, arrogant, and insulting. For starters, it is not the "sole property" of any particular ideological perspective to say that laborers make wages, landholders make rent money, moneylenders make interest income, and entrepreneurs make profits... it's just simple economics. And, by the way, I do consider myself one rather pi$$ed-off left-winger, so don't be calling me a libertarian (or any other kind of rightie!!!)

    Sorry, Ted. I guess I'm used to it being libertarians who discuss economics so enthusiastically. If it helps, I'm one myself, so it wasn't meant to be insulting, even if it turns out you'd rather die than join our pernicious inimical cabal. :D

    -=Steve=-
     
  14. PaulC

    PaulC Member

    I would agree with the observation that the culture is different between the two. I think the philosophical differences have much to do with the not for profit faculty and their traditional priviledges and protections, and not so much from the administration or the tax status.
     

Share This Page