Bad website = Bad education?

In another thread we were talking about Aspen University's ugly web site and it got me thinking -- does the quality of school's website reflect the quality of the education at that school?

When HR looks up Aspen and sees their web site, do they see a world class institution of higher learning or a possible diploma mill?

 

I don't believe that a website reflects the education available at a school. It just means they picked the wrong person to make their website. I do agree that appearances may lead to a perception of inadequate education, but that also reflects poorly on the person making that judgment.

 

There are companies who are well-tuned in creating professional-looking websites. If I was a human resource professional and I looked at a website that was unorganized and unprofessional, it would have me thinking about the quality of its education.

 

What matters is the content that's displayed on the website. The presentation is just packaging.

Overelaborate website design can detract from how the school itself is presented. That happens a lot with art-schools. I guess that the assumption is that arty teenagers won't believe that an art school is credible unless it has an arty website. So schools pile on so many graphics and so much animation that the school's website won't even display on weaker internet devices. Locating useful details on programs and administrative policies is almost impossible. All that communicates is... attitude.

I greatly prefer old-school web-design -- a relatively simple homepage that displays clear links to where useful information can be found.

But ultimately, it's pretty much irrelevant. Just because a school overdoses (or underdoses) on web-design doesn't tell us anything about quality of instruction, program strengths and weaknesses, relative cost, administrative quirks or the school's professional reputation in the fields that it teaches.

There will always be the childlike people who throw aside the contents of their Christmas present and play with the colorful wrapping paper. Some of the best-designed school websites that I've seen have belonged to degree-mills.

If they saw either one of those things, would they really be perceiving what Aspen is?

My response to your question is that if an HR person is judging universities' academics on the basis of website aesthetics, then that HR person is probably incompetent.

 

What's the difference between that kind of thought and the thought about an online degree? If a HR person was using that kind of judgment to determine quality, that shows a bias on their part. It basically says "Something should look like this, or else it isn't good enough for me." That's a bad attitude when judging someone's education on things that don't pertain to that education. If you have a question about someone's education, there are plenty of other ways to get your answers than the appearance of a web site.

 

I know what you're saying, there's a lot to be said for not judging a book by its cover. However, if your lawyer's office is under a bridge and warmed by a garbage can fire or if you walk into a job interview shirtless with flip flops, people are going to judge. Perhaps the bridge-lawyer is the best in town and maybe the guy in flip flops is the next company superstar. Should you spend the time to find out or should you go by the mental heuristic of discarding those people or organizations that are outwardly unprofessional?

I see Aspen University's web site as unprofessional and malapropos. If they are unable to see that or if they do see it and simply don't care, I think it does potentially speak to the quality of their programs. It potentially speaks volumes.

 

Is this poll trying to ask whether the quality of a school's programs can be discerned from the quality of the school's website?

If so, I would ask for the definition of "quality of programs" and "quality of website," so I could evaluate whether those two variables could be measured and "equivocated" using the same level of measurement (categorical, ordinal, interval) or unit of analysis (student, class, degree program, school, university).

Please let me know, so I can think more about this...

 

With a university website, a clean, professional appearance should be assumed.

A good website does not equal a good school.

However, a poor website shows that the school is either unable or unwilling to produce a high-quality product.

ESPECIALLY for an online-focused institution, tolerance of a low-quality website is potentially damning.

 

Aspen's website is decidedly "Bush league," to use an informal description.

 

You're talking about two issues-- discerning quality from the marketing materials (the website) and the HR perception of such materials.

As to the first issues, it's much like any other marketing you encounter. Low quality marketing materials may lead a prospective customer to believe they would receive a low-quality product. In many cases, this perception will be bolstered by personal experience.

The second case-- HR folks may be less literate in terms of web marketing, and may not realize there is value behind what is presented. Add what I noted about perception in most other cases, and then focus that behind a highly selective HR lens.

Aspen's website design concerns me somewhat from the perspective of HR-- or worse, anti-DL hiring managers-- looking at the site and using it to judge the credentials of an applicant. It makes their program a harder sell.

 

What's with all the polls?

What kind of question is that anyways? Website content has nothing to do with the quality of the instructors who teach there.

 

Ah, spoken by someone who obviously knows statistics!

 

Maybe you should start a poll to find out what is up with all the polls?

 

Now that is funny!!

 

Looking at the wording, I would say the question is more about whether or not a website is suggestive of the quality of the programs -- not whether quality can be discerned from the website.

If we were trying to test a hypothesis about the correlation between these two variables, a precise definition of each variable would be essential.

 

You're suggesting what I think is an incorrect hypothesis:

Website quality says nothing of program quality.

So, if we were to come up with an agreed upon definition of "website quality" and also a definition of "program quality", you think there'd be no correlation between the two if we sampled universities around the world?

I'd say you're dead wrong, but it is certainly debatable without the evidence before us. That's why we're left with this "silly" poll.

 

This is a rather silly question and I assume you are asking it just for the fun of the responses. There is nothing wrong with that, why shouldn't DI also be fun? HR people will only look to see that the school is accredited, they don't care about the website. Aspen is a good school...even if their website is ugly!

Most people who have any experience with online schools would know that the look of the website has nothing to do with the quality of the program. In fact, it is sometimes the opposite. Take MUST University, an insidious degree mill, their website is pretty nice. Then look at Excelsior or Aspen, their websites are not as slick, but their programs are very good.

 

I make it a habit not to debate members, so I'll answer your statement and then drop out of this conversation. Aspen and Excelsior support my statement. Good programs; ugly websites. Most good universities have decent websites, but there are exceptions.

Please note also that I revised my "silly" comment slightly.

 

Two examples don't prove anything but they can possibly weaken the correlation if they were incorporated into the sample in this hypothetical study.

 

Michael, I don't think that the question is a bad one. While we all agree that a school's website has nothing to do with the quality of their academic programs, we cannot at the same time, dismiss a school's image, which is projected by their website. Dismissing this question as irrelevant is akin to saying that the appearance of an interviewee should not be factored into whether they are hired or not - we all know that it does influence hiring decisions.

In the case of Aspen University, before their old website was updated (not long ago) to what they have now, I used to think that the schools ceased to exist (that they closed). Why? because their old site was terrible. While their site today is not as bad, I think it still projects an image that makes a degree from there questionable (even though we all know it shouldn't). In the real world, image does really affect perceptions, and Aspen's logo calls into question the school seriousness and their commitment to program quality because of their web presence.

I think handing over or degree or transcript with Aspen's logo to HR folks at today's increasing skeptic pool of major employers who are already rejecting degrees from internet-only schools will seem to do one thing - yes, increase those rejections as well as confirm their fears. Understandably, when the decision to upgrade their website to what they have now was made, I read somewhere in this forum that a vote cast within the institution favored keeping the logo, and that the present management of school does not necessarily have the ability to change it as they wish. If there are proponents of Aspen's logo at the school, then it is only fair to call into question the overall institution's interests in improving the perception of internet-only schools and the product that they offer.

While I would still attend Aspen University because I believe they offer rigorous programs (probably, more rigorous and of value than many RA online-only schools today), and would also encourage others who seek my opinion to do so (which I have done quite a bit due to their current super low tuition - great value), improving the schools image through their website (which serves as the only campus that folks see), would be extremely beneficial to the school and their graduates.

Northcentral had this issue a while ago, their present website makes them look good (even though many here question their practices and the extent to which NCU is a degree mill or not). Aspen should seriously consider changing their logo and presenting a site that is in par with their high quality programs.