The value of residencies in online doctoral programs

Some schools offering online doctoral programs require short residencies (e.g. Walden, Capella, UoP); some are 100% online with no residencies required (e.g. NCU).

I'm interested to know what you think of these short residencies? Do you think they have any value? Have you had any such experience? Please share with us.

 

I went to 2 residencies when I was at Walden. The first was when I was in their Ed.D program and the second one was when I was in Walden's DBA program. The Ed.D program residency was the only one for that particular program that was required, it was helpful in terms of planning my research topic and my plan of study. The DBA residency was ok, but it was more of an initial one. From other friends and colleagues who are enrolled at Capella, Walden, and Regent for their doctorates, they have all stated that the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th residencies are of more value than the initial one and they are really helpful. In my experience I think I could have learned the same thing via a web conference and if you work full time its hard to make time to go for a week or even 4 days.

 

Thanks for the feedback, scaredrain. Yes I agree, it's hard to make time to go for a week, especially when you lives thousands of miles away. However, the decision to pursue a doctoral degree is a very serious one, and I'm willing to take the time and spend money if these residencies will add value to my studies.

Now let me add another dimension to my initial question: do online doctoral programs with residencies add credibility to the degree? Isn't this the general perception?

 

My residencies in the Valdosta State DPA program have been interesting. I fly to Valdosta, GA from Washington State for a long weekend every semester. Most of the students in the DPA (at least in my year-group) live in driving distance. While I do not feel like I get much in the way of academic content at the residencies, I believe the interaction is a great mechanism to reconnect, balance the work and re-energize for the next semester.

Having a group to share the experience with has been good for me. I left NCU to to go to VSU for several reasons, but one of the main ones was that I did not really feel like I was part of anything at NCU in the DBA program. At Valdosta, I feel like I am part of a group sharing an experience as the first DPA class at VSU.

Just my .02. Personnally, I firmly believe that a residency adds credibility to a Doctoral degree. If I had a choice, I probably would not opt going to a residency, but my choice of a school and program was more of a consideration. A couple of weekends a year for a DPA from a NASPAA accredited state-school is a small price to pay IMO.

 

When you are writing the dissertation, remember that even though you may not go to the school, you may need to travel or do focus groups depending on your topic. For example to complete my NCU DBA I traveled all over the country, to about 15 state capitals, and held many hours of focus group meetings. So even though the oversight was DL, the study was very much face-to-face.

 

I think that residencies are there partly for this reason, to add credibility. However, I doubt that any future employer or customer is going to ask about them. At the end of the day, it is the reputation of the institution and publications that add credibility to the degree and not the DL, residencies, etc.
The issue with online schools is not the fact that they lack residencies, their issue is that the perception of them in the academic environment is that they are not Universities but businesses. Some online schools are trying to gain respect by conducting serious research, I think Walden is working hard in this aspect.

You gain credibility with your doctorate with publications, in this case some online schools fail as they allow PhD graduations with zero publications.

 

I agree with RFValve. I'm not in a doctoral program, however. From talking with various academics, an online program that has residencies is really no more accepted in academia than one that does not have residencies. As for acceptance outside of academia, I'm not sure any employers would really ask.

As for personal benefit, I suppose residencies could make one feel more connected to the program and their advisers.

 

I cannot express how much I appreciated and valued my "residencies" in my PhD Capella program. I enrolled in 12/98 and completed in 6/02. My residencies provided invaluable networking with other learners and faculty. I selected my program mentor/chair while at a residency. I benefited greatly from the long hours of discussions with other learners on dissertation proposal activities and the various research methods being contemplated. It was a great frame of reference for the year spent on my dissertation.

I have a hard time buying into the argument against a program because it requires a few weeks over a potential 3+ year long program. Well worth it.

 

Thanks for the feedback ...

truckie270, David, RFValve & bazonkers,

Thanks for your feedback.

Paul,
Thanks for the feedback. I’m glad you enjoyed and benefited from your residencies.

 

Big Fan of Residencies

Folks - I'm a big fan of residencies. In my NSU program I spent some 42 days over 4.5 years in residencies. I'd prefer to have more - but of course, a career and family puts some limit on available time.

Face to face time with faculty and peers adds so much above email and conference calls. It isn't just the formal material that is presented - it is the side chats during breaks, the expression on a profs (or peers) face, amd the interactiveness that convinces me that short residencies really do matter.

DL programs are typically lonely experiences. Face to face time gives a sense of community.

Of course NSU's facilities in Ft. Lauderdale - located right next to a huge reference library - help as well. During my residency periods I found I could concentrate on my studies.

Regards - Andy

 

I also feel that residencies are an important part of all forms of distance education. First and foremost, it adds credibility. If a potential employer asks if you completed the program online, the proper answer would be "it was and external research doctorate with regular residency periods..." The residencies do not make it an "online" program anymore, and people see it more as a part-time program.

It also allows for good networking. You will meet people that you might publish with, you will actually meet your research supervisor, some of the administration and other interesting people. It is also a great opportunity to socialise and make new friends.

 

I totally agree. Some people may disagree but, to me, a sense of community is very important. Thanks Andy.

Oh, I LIKE that

Thanks for the contribution, Scott.

 

I agree with Scott, the word "online" is not very well received in academia. The word "external" is a better approach to present your degree. External doctorates have been followed by academics in the UK, SA and Australia for decades and they are accepted as equivalent.

There is a huge difference between "external" and "online". The first one means that the student follows exactly the same program as the on campus student but externally. Here there is no compromise of quality of education as the student needs to satisfy the same requirements as on campus students.

"Online" on the other hand, means that the program has been adapted to the internet environment. As it is not the same program as the face to face, there is always the issue of lack of quality due to the adaptation to a different environment.

An external degree from a traditional school is the safest way to go in terms of credibility. However, schools that follow this approach are mainly in Europe, South Africa and Australia so you would need to live also with the foreign degree factor that seems to affect Americans as many employers have the perception that foreign degrees are "easier".

 

I'm not saying that online programs are less just that the general perception in academia is that they are different. External programs basically follow the same paradigm of exams, dissertation defense, etc of traditional programs. As a mater of fact, most traditional schools use the same on campus exams for external students.

A traditional academic will be less likely to question external programs than online programs. Some academics don't like for example the lack of proctored exams, different formats, accelerated schedules and so on. It is just a different paradigm and the traditionalist might be more resistant to it.

Unfortunately, the general perception of academics is that online = fast, no exams, easy admission, etc. It is better not to mention that you earned it online but just by using external study as the first one can cause the wrong impression. I'm not saying that I agree, it is just that online programs are too new and there is a lot of discrimination still for this type of degrees. Eventually as the online paradigm becomes more accepted, they won't be any bias but I think we are still far from it.

 

The best policy, for this you need to finish your degree at a University that offers the same program for distance and on-campus. The prospect employer would never know that was earned distance.
Check the program below:

http://www.international.qut.edu.au/courses/course-major.jsp?major-id=4047


This is an AACSB accredited PhD that can be earned externally or face to face. I think this is the type of program that one should be aiming if a tenure track position is the ultimate goal.

 

Interesting. Does Walden employ full time faculty to allow them time to conduct research?

 

I Like the definition "Distance Learning" over "online". I valued very much the period of residency, although not compulsory there are seminars organized by my University and I founded that the attendance gives you a perception of being part of the community.
It is not always possible to participate at this events for us "distance learners" but when it is, I founded well worth it.

 

Yes they do, they have full time faculty on staff.