The Regional Accreditation System is the Reason that Online Classes are So Expensive

The article brought up by BobbyJim raises another interesting idea: Regional accreditors are the reason that online schools must charge so much. According to Burke Smith, regulation by the government that was designed for B&M schools is forced upon any online school that wishes to be RA. This regulation forces online schools to charge the same prices as a B&M school, even though the B&M school has a much higher overhead.

Here's the article BobbyJim found again: Let's Deregulate Online Learning - Online Learning - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Do you agree? Is that why RA online classes are no cheaper than B&M even though online classes cost any school much less to offer?

 

Yes and no.

1. Any business is going to want to maximize cash flow and profit. It's in the online school's best interest to be able to charge as much as they can.
2. If there's a solid reason to charge as much as possible by stating that a school needs to be RA to be of real value (due to credit transfer requirements) all the better.

 

I don't buy it. I think it's just an excuse for online schools to charge alot of money. If all online classes (both from online-only schools and B & M schools) are suppose to be expensive, how come RA schools like APU/AMU can charge low tuition and still be in business. Or is it possible that APU/AMU is not going through the alleged "throat-cutting regulations?"

Deregulating online classes will further take down the quality of education that students pay high tuition for, and as such, online classes should not be deregulated. If anything, I think RA accreditors should mandate that all online classes have a video/voice component (either pre-recorded classes or synchronous activity) to address excessive passivity which currently plagues majority of online classes to the extent that they become mere correspondence/independent study/courses.

 

I agree, and tests or papers should be based partially on the video presentations. A number of online classes I have taken have offered a video, but I have never been in a class where the video was tied to some sort of assessment. Therefore, you could get by just fine if you never viewed the videos. This signals to the student that the videos are not very important.

 

I think that in the future, there will be learning and certification. Classes and grades will no longer exist.
I can tell you for a fact that most computer science graduates do not know how to program to save their lives after exiting college. Those who do learned the skills they need outside of their coursework.
Certification is a means to prove what one knows. Learning may occur in many ways and need not be restricted to a classroom or synchronous video-backed online format.
Call me old school but I think that Frederick Taylor had it right when he studied by correspondence.

 

I don't think it matters much at the undergrad level, but I would agree at the graduate level. I remember being excited when Northcentral became the first 100% non-resident doctoral school approved by a regional accreditor, but my enthusiasm has been a bit tempered over the years, which is why I chose a doctoral program that requires residencies....I think it adds legitimacy to the program.

Oh, and please, no one think that's the only reason I didn't go with NCU; the main reason was that I didn't want to end up with a Ph.D. in Business Administration with a concentration in Criminal Justice....I have no prior education/training in business, and to me, the two fields are mutually exclusive, so IMO it would have created too many questions/headaches for me. NCU is and has been a great option for many, many people. It just didn't work for my very specialized situation.

 

I've been starting to think lately that Plato's model of classroom teaching is overrated, and I'm also starting to think that anyone who insists on a face-to-face component for every course is willfully ignoring statistics that prove online learners have fared better.

 

Taylor did correspondence courses through Harvard. He later earned a Mechanical Engineer degree in 1883 from Stevens Institute of Technology (there is a mystery around how he earned that degree). He later enrolled as a special student at the University of Pennsylvania studying metallurgy and fuels.

Taylor also help found a tennis organization that became the USTA, and with a partner became the first US national doubles tennis champion.

"The One Best Way" by Kanigel is a great read.

 

Well, they do say what's old is new after all. The old European models of education was much more free form and students were evaluated on their level of mastery of material before being allowed to graduate.

There is a model out there called mastery learning where a student, in order to progress further into a subject, must demonstrate mastery of a subject or parts of a subject.

In my profession, EMS, there are certifications that can be earned after formative education and licensure. these are typically rigorous and completion demonstrates thorough knowledge of a particular subject.

 

Can you provide a link to those statistics?

 

Taylor: father of 'scientific management'

If I remember my long ago production engineering management courses correctly he was the 'father of scientific management' and really upset management types when he 'did what he was hired to do'.:bigeyes:

Do you think his correspondence courses were RA accredited?:thinking:

 

For me the technology fee is the one that causes me the biggest concern. Some schools charged tech fees higher than other schools' tuition. It is like your dentist charging a fee for his service then tech fee for his drill.