Phoenix's Unusual Way of Crafting Courses

The Chronicle (in its subscribers-only section) has a great article on how U. of Phoenix crafts its courses, and how it maintains standardization among its 17,000 instructors. (17,000!) It is an exciting process, one not left to individual instructors. It reminds1 me of corporate training development.

Roger Schank suggests there's no difference between training and education, and I mostly agree. (Actually, I think education is training as much structure and purpose, a lazy, inculcated approach to learning.) With its emphasis on designing courses around learning objectives, Phoenix has applied the model that leads to solid learning outcomes, as opposed to the traditional scene of following professors around and taking what they throw away....

 

Apparently Mr. "me again" dropped out of University of Phoenix because he prefers to take only what professors throw away .
Seriously, I believe that UoP teaching model leads to solid learning outcomes because I know a few people that graduated from the program. It appears that the only students that criticize the model are those that did not have the opportunity to complete the program. I also think that former U of P professors that criticize the model are those that feel that they can't inject their preferred approach into the University of Phoenix model.

Ike

 

Re: Re: Phoenix's Unusual Way of Crafting Courses

Ike - Perhaps the point is that some faculty have a different view of what teaching is. The UoP approach brings unifomity to education much as McDonald's (or a more upscale example Applebee's) brings uniformity to dining. This isn't bad - in a mass market approach to education. However, who would consider McDonald's or Applebee's to be the "best" dining experience in the world? The most uniform perhaps, but certainly not the best. By parallel - UoP doesn't make anyone's ranking list for its academic quality. It is, however, accessible and uniform.

Regards - Andy

 

Re: Re: Re: Phoenix's Unusual Way of Crafting Courses

I understand your point of view. As a professor, I prefer a flexible model because it allows me to research and try new ideas. The University of Phoenix model has been tested. It is effective but it is unfortunately too rigid. But rigidity does not mean inferiority.

 

Rigid? Depends on how you look at it. I see their curricula as "standardized." Does it inhibit the creative professors? Perhaps, but they're still free to customize the courses they teach, provided they cover all of the learning objectives and course elements.

But how many instructors anywhere are truly creative? I wonder if this standardizing doesn't also provide a nice safety net to keep a poor teacher from just killing a class, or taking it off in some weird direction.

I took an American History class as an undergraduate going to night school. The professor had just finished his master's in that field, specializing in the Plymouth Colony. We spent 7 of the 11 weeks for the course on that subject! (The course went from the colonial days through the Civil War.) Ugh!

Phoenix's structure reminds me of my Air Force ROTC days. We were given the text book and a set of lesson plans for each academic course we taught. (I taught National Policy, then later Leadership and Management). Each of 148 AFROTC detachments received the same setup for each course taught. But we were free to customize and enhance the courses (which we did, liberally), provided the learning objectives were covered. The structure kept us out of trouble--and kept us moving--while the flexibility allowed for some creativity. Like the time I taught a class on delegation and performance management dressed in a full gorilla suit. The folks at headquarters were never told about that one....

 

Rigidity may be a strong word but from all indications, the U of P model is inflexible. Like you said, the U of P model helps prevent some professors from veering off the track. I think that the size of U of P market calls for some kind of uniformity or standard that allows for flexibility.

 

Referring to me again ?

Are you referring to me? Again?

 

Re: Referring to me again ?

Yes, I was referring to Mr. Me and Mr. Again

 

We now return to our regularly scheduled program "The University of Phoenix, Online."

 

This type of format is similar to public education in a number of countries. Curriculum is all planned at the national level and little deviation is allowed. It does make for a uniform education, if lacking some in creativity.

And, as a sidenote, the reason why that system wouldn't work in the U.S. is that there are folks that advocate, for many valid and less-valid reasons, the primacy of states rights. There are quite a few folks that wouldn't sit still for the U.S. Department of Education dictating what is to be taught (whether at the elementary, secondary, or post-secondary levels).



Tom Nixon

 

One of the nicest things about higher education in this country is that it is not limited to just one model--although there are many who would impose such a limitation if they could. The University of Phoenix model may not be every student or faculty's "cup of tea", but it is a viable model that has every indication of being successful.

Pressure from the likes of UoP has stimulated the development and enlargement of distance learning programs at many institutions of higher education. The competition that UoP and others promote has caused more than one institution to "clean up its act" regarding distance learning and to start taking DL seriously. One of the reasons why U.S. higher education is the envy of the world is that we have choices and competition.

Phoenix certainly was not welcomed by those institutions with whom it competes and much time and effort has been spent to try to limit Phoenix's influence (e.g. trying to block its accreditation, ranking it low in opinion polls, etc.). It's funny how competitors tend not to like their competition (duh). I'm seeing the same thing in the K-12 arena in California, where there is a tremendous amount of opposition from professional educrats and unions again charter schools (there's that competition again).

I have known several graduates from UoP programs in three states. They have been successful in their careers and do not appear to have suffered any education disadvantage by virtue of their UoP education.

Tony Piña
Faculty, California State University, San Bernardino

 

UoP rigid?

I attend on-site classes at the UoP in Bakersfield, Ca; students are required to download a class module before the first night of each class. The module ALWAYS requires a written essay of some sort on the modules topic. This assignment is due the first night of class.
It is so common for the instructor to throw out the module that it has become part of the student culture to refrain from doing the first assignment alltogether. If in fact the instructor decideds to follow the module, and does build the class syllabus around said module, the instructor will allow the first assignment due the next week.
That is not what I consider inflexible. I have completed two classes through UoP online, and those classes were the same as the on-site classes.
The instructors are mandated to teach what is in the UoP module, but they are allowed to do it in anyway they see fit.
Point being,,,,,UoP is as flexible as is healthy IMHO.

 

Re: UoP rigid?

I taught online for a few years for UoP and used the modules. I thought the modules were quite good and covered appropriate material and competencies. What I didn't like about UoP were many of the corporate policies to work under. I needed to move on because doing something part-time for UoP was fast becoming nearly fulltime when adhering to the imposed structure. My other criticism is that in some 6 week courses students were moved along too rapidly whereas in other courses I think the 6 week course was adequate.

John