More pearls of wisdom from Australia

The following is a follow up to two reports into virtual online education which were predominately focused on the corporate university model. Haven't read this yet, but could be good.
http://www.detya.gov.au/highered/eippubs/eip01_7/default.htm

Cheers,

George

 

A lot of interesting stuff. In the Q&A following article 3 (Concept of a university in the 21st century), Prof. Chipman is asked about the acceptance of corporate universities (those created by software companies and other publishers, such as Microsoft U.) were accepted by industry. His answer was that he knew of no research in this area.

It sounds like something Rich could cover, if he's interested. If he's in the neighborhood asking about unaccredited or marginally accredited schools, perhaps he could also ask about 100% online schools and corporate schools.

 

The term "corporate university" is used to connote a more wholistic and rounded approach to employee development. But it is unrelated to collegiate study and the awarding of degrees. I always found the use of the term unfortunate, even though I work for one myself (GRC University, the training department of GRC International, an AT&T company).

The acceptance of training (not education, training) done outside a corporation is strictly up to that corporation. For example, we offer several certificate tracks for our employees, each requiring a number of courses. These courses are offered by our department, but we're willing to allow employees to substitute previous training acquired elsewhere.

I'm not sure I understand what question would be researched and answered?

Rich Douglas

 

This wouldn't be the first time a US educational term had a different meaning than an Ozian, UK, or South African term. Perhaps he was using the term occasionally.

Quoting directly: "Publishers and software corporations--for example, Microsoft--are now also creating their own for-profit corporate university subsidiaries--although it is important to realise that not all corporate universitires are for-profit entities--to obtain a further yield on the vast assets they now hold in the form of intellectual property." (Prof. Lauchlan Chipman, Vice Chancellor, CQU)

Later in the Q&A: "The other question asked to what extent 'corporate universites' were accepted by employers and employees; Professor Chipman replied that he was not aware of epirical reserch on this matter."

 

Yu no wat I ment.

But now that I have the floor, the statement quoted emphasizes for-profit subsidiaries, which distinguishes them from internal training programs.