I didn't realize how inexpensive CCU is. Or am I reading their web site wrong? They ARE accredited, after all...
Undergraduate : $85 per unit ($255 per course) for US residents. $105 per unit ($315 per course) for non-US residents. Graduate: $170 per credit ($510 per course) for US residents. $190 per credit ($570 per course) for non-US residents. 126 units for a or BS. 39 units for MS business or MS psych and 36 units for MS Ed.
Yep! It's relatively cheap alright. But if you're gonna' go DETC-accredited -- at least at the associates or masters level -- why not save some serious money and go with Ashworth? Or, at the bachelor's level, Andrew Jackson University? Either of them -- both DETC-accredited -- is somewhat cheaper than CCU... and, from what I can tell, Andrew Jackson University may be (and I stress the word "may," 'cause I'm not really sure, but I'm kinda' thinkin' that it may be) a bit better school than CCU, just generally. It's priced around the same as Ashworth, except that for that same money, Ashworth includes texts and all other study materials, whereas Andrew Jackson requires you to purchase such things additionally. But except for that, they're similarly priced... and Andrew Jackson may be an inherently better school than Ashworth. Andrew Jackson's certainly been DETC-accredited longer than CCU... and alot of people around here swear by it (Andrew Jackson), for what that's worth. Of course, then again, alot of people around here swear by CCU, too. And it would appear that CCU's a pretty decent school, all things considered; and as nationally-accredited, distance-learning-only schools go. That said, Levicoff appears to remain wholly unimpressed with CCU... not withstanding the fact that it's finally now nationally-accredited. Who knows... he may be right. I don't really know enough about CCU to really say. All I can say is that it looks pretty good; was generally thought of as legitimate and credible even before it was accredited; and I trust the fact that it is now accredited. But that's just me. Just chimin' in.
you know why CCU is so inexpensive? Cause they dont offer student aid! If this school offered financial aid their prices would sky rocket!
This is absurd. Offering financial aid adds almost nothing to the school's administrative costs. As someone who wants to tout the efficacy of free markets, certainly you can understand that CCU's tuition rates reflect what the market will bear.
OK Rich, be prepared to read my full viewpoint. I think that what is considered prudent in this analogy of increased tuition costs is the sense of tuition opportunities, especially for profits, to increase tuition with offering financial aid due to utilizing this additional financing feature as a selling feature for the school. It is kind of like the car salesman ideology selling the consumer the idea based on the car payment tricks rather than discussing the actual total cost plus interest that the consumer will end up paying after the term closes, or even in my hotel field with " Direct billing" , which I am obsurd with. I can sell room rates at a higher rate with a company as long as I choose to extend credit and have to bill them as they look at it as a convenience piece and in a sense, I see their point. Offering financial aid to students with minimal current flexible cash access allows most students to think of the " Now" rather than the actual costs in the " future ". Thus, a school can obtain more students through financial aid and increased tution costs as they can still " make the sale ", especially to the students who, without the financial aid, would otherwise not be able to attend unless they qualified for a scholarship or something. Just my 2 cents worth. In your comments to what the market can bear... I AGREE WITH YOU. I think CCU is priced in their market with a fair tuition cost for the style and quality of education one is seeking to obtain. Being a CCU graduate, I will say I feel they are still a great value currently as well. GO CCU!!!!!
The California State University charges its regular in-state students a flat fee, depending on whether or not they are full-time (in this case defined as taking more than 6.1 units). Adding up all the charges, a full-time in-state graduate student pays $1,497 a semester, after the recent fee increases. So if he or she is taking 12 units, say, that's $125/unit. For 9 units, it's $166/unit. Cheaper than Cal Coast. http://www.csudh.edu/admfin/AS/fee%20increases%20page.html
I should add that the CSUDH HUX DL program in the humanities currently charges $185/unit to students anywhere in the world. The fees are different from the normal CSU fee structure because it's self-funded. http://www.csudh.edu/hux/reginfo.html When I was enrolled in it, it was $140/unit, so my whole MA cost me approximately $4,200. I stretched it out over several years, taking one or two classes a semester, and graduated with no debt. HUX does participate in the federal student loan programs. I don't think that doing that represents any burden to them, apart from a small clerical cost perhaps.
Does the presence of financial aid prop up prices? Perhaps. I haven't read the literature, but it is a teasing concept. However.... Financial aid is a great leveler. It makes educational opportunities available to populations that would otherwise go without. A less-educated populace isn't a good thing, and it tends to freeze people into their economic classes. That can't be good, either. Eliminating financial aid wouldn't drop prices--it would drop entire schools. With so few students who could afford to attend, many schools would simply close. With fewer schools, we might even see an increase in costs, reflecting a lower level of competition and a target population with a much higher ability to pay. The Economist just came out with its education issue. It noted that the U.S. has the best higher education system in the world. It has 17 of the top 20-ranked universities, and 35 of the top 50. And this is while maintaining a university system where students bear a huge brunt of the cost. And unlike its European counterparts, the U.S. has a much greater level of economic diversity in its student bodies. Why? Financial aid.
Yes, CCU is inexpensive, however you CANNOT pay for one course at a time. One must either: A) Pay for the entire degree upfront. B) Pay for half of the degree up front, and make monthly payments. OR C) Pay a $500 deposit, and make $100 monthly payments, until the degree is paid off. See my last post in the following thread: http://www.degreeinfo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20632 - Tom
Although there may be some legitimacy to the argument, the application of financial aid has created a higher demand therefore causing higher prices. The issue of course is that there are many public institutions that are subsidized by the government (state colleges and universities) albeit there may not be as many they would still likely exist with out Financial Aid (in other words they would continue to serve a segment of the population with a more reasonable educational cost). Of course there are exceptions, colleges that charge about the same as state run organizations. I graduated from a small private liberal arts college and it cost me $30 more per class than had I gone to the local state run institution and I had much smaller classes(yet, the community college was cheaper that the private college).The fact that Financial Aid may also drive up prices by allowing colleges to charge more because it allows people to finance their education is interesting but there is no evidence of this the majority of institutions are non-profit and do not have large endowments(Yes Harvard, et. al . are exceptions not the rule). Although the argument that the poor student does pay more because they are more likely to pay interest on their loans does mean that the total cost of education is more expensive for those who can not afford to pay for college out of pocket.
I have to disagree about financial aid causing a jump in price. It may cause a slight increase, but primarily to pay the administrative handling of the fin. aid. A good example of this is the school's already willingness to finance the students interest free at $100 a month. A contrary example would be CSU who charges in the vicinity of $250 an hour with the same type of accreditation and no title IV support. But...being the noob that I am, I'll sit back and watch the big boys slug it out. Now to the original post...I agree that CCU is a school worthy of taking a look at. I myself have considered attending their BSBA program for 3 reasons: 1.) Price...really, who can argue with that price for a BS? 2.) Flexibility of the transfer credits...seriously, 42 semester hours in electives? Awesome. 3.) I don't have enough background in accounting and economics to shoot for an MBA yet...my major was CJ, where if you could balance a check book, you passed math...thus I now find myself lusting after a St. Joe's MBA (as DesElms is painfully aware) but with not enough undergrad work in business to be comfortable with my ability to get a graduate business degree...YET!!! I do plan on attending St. Joe's to get a MBA eventually....but that's another story. As a second BS degree, CCU has got the market cornered in my book.
Title IV is a double-edged sword Title IV may increase access to higher education, but it also distorts the marketplace and not always in favorable ways. The for-profit school, e.g. Phoenix, Strayer, AIU, have tuition rates that are all remarkably similar and which bear a striking resemblance to the maximum available under Title IV. This is not a coincidence. Moreover, in many cases these schools prey on the lack of sophistication of their prospective students, who don't understand that when they graduate with their Bachelor's they'll also be in debt to the tune of sixty grand. It's a huge industry, and it's all fueled by Title IV. -=Steve=-
As much as I disagree with LL on, well, everything, he's right about that fact that offering federal money raises tuition costs. Here is an excerpt from my present managerial accounting course book... Garrison, R. H., Noreen, E. W., & Brewer, P. C. (2006). Managerial Accounting (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Rich: Certainly as an MBA you understand that price is a function of what the market can bear rather than of costs. Having financial aid available will mean that tuition will tend to gravitate toward the financial aid maximum. On the other hand, I do agree that financial aid can be a great equalizer.
Sometimes I wonder if I could write a J.S.D. dissertation on the California system of legal education. It's such an interesting laboratory for experiment and observation. Like for instance: SOME CalBar accredited schools are WASC accredited; most are not. An important difference to the student is that the WASC schools offer title IV federal financial aid but the non WASC schools do not. Now, my PERCEPTION is that tuition and fees at WASC schools are noticeably higher than at the non WASC schools. 1) Is maintaining WASC accreditation enough of an additional expense to the school to explain the difference? Or 2) Do the WASC schools charge more because their students can borrow more? The money is available so why not? 3) Do WASC schools offer a better educational program than the non WASC schools? And is the difference significant enough to jusitfy the extra cost to the student given that the utility of the degrees is nearly identical? 4) IS the utility of the degrees actually nearly identical or does the WASC degree holder have an advantage in the professional, business, or academic marketplace?