Also-Rans?

Walter

I view Walter's entry as a shallow perspective for what the human spirit is capable of achieving with a DL education. I know of many cases where individuals achieve high honors that are far beyond their documented capabilities.

 

Being born to the right well heeled parents who can afford the best education for their 18 years olds is much like being born beautiful. Only a very small percentage of us are beautiful by society's standards. The rest of us just 'are'. And the rest of us make up the back bone of the working world. I think we'll all do just fine, whether the powers that be in big business think we will, or not. Education is just part of the puzzle, not the whole picture. Work ethic and 'knowing someone' and heck, just plain luck, play into our lives at least as much as education if not much more.

I think Walter may have too many high life friends and acquaintances who may have given him an inferiority complex.

Anyway, you'll be just fine too, Walter.

 

I think your argument, or at least the conclusion you seem to be implying is flawed.

If the perception was self fulfilling, you would see 2 things:
First, you would see fewer and a lower quality of student going into DL.
Second, you would see fewer and fewer schools, specifically top tier schools, offering DL based programs.

In both cases the opposite is occuring. People keep mentioning Harvard Extension, but that is not a good example. Since I started looking at this around 6 years ago, the following schools have develeloped DL based programs.
Stanford: Master's in several engineering disiplines.
MIT: Masters's degree in systems design (I think that is the name).
Johns Hopkins. Master's in public health. Masters of Science in Biotechnology.
Columbia University: Several Masters degrees in engineering disiplines.
Harvard Medical School: Masters in Health Management (for physicians and dentists only).

Now all of these programs have the same admission standards as the residential version of the degree (except Harvard's, I believe it is only offered via distance).

Your comparision was not really a comparison of a B&M program with a DL program. It was a comparison between top tier schools and 3rd and 4th tier schools. That has little to do with DL other than that DL programs PREVIOUSLY were almost always in lower tier schools.

now lets make some other comparisons. Compare a person with a master's in electrical engineering or computer science from some tier 1 or 2 state school with someone with a master's in electrical engineering or computer science via DL from Stanford. In case you didn't know Stanford is almost always ranked in the top 3 (often number 1) in these fields. Who has the advantage now?

Now if the comparison was between two stanford grads, one with a degree via DL, the other residential, it gets more complicated. On one hand the residential grad has made more connections on campus, on the other hand, the DL grad has been able to continue to work in the industry.

In fact, the main reason behind top schools such as Stanford, Harvard Medical School, MIT, Columbia, and John's Hopkins creating these DL programs has been that the real movers and overachievers in these fields can less and less afford to leave the industry for a year or two to persue a degree. In many cases, going away for 2 years to get a masters from stanford would do MORE damage to their career than staying in industry, especially technology, where things change so quickly. This is probably why you see such a preponderance of engineering subjects among courses being taught via distance at top schools.

Jon

 

I agree with Jon that the real current comparison is between 1st and 3/4th tier schools, because those are the ones currently dominating the DL space, not between FT and DL.

The degree to which DL has a "self-fulfilling" element of mediocrity is a historical anomoly which is being rapidly changed as better institutions and students recognise the benefits this approach offers. This will impact on the elitist area of the business world that Walter refers to. I don't think, by the way, that he has a poor self-perception, merely that he recognises the way the game is played in a certain area, and is clear on how equipped or well-performing (or not) he is in that particular game.

Where will this leave the current big providors of DL? They need to ensure they offer more than "just" DL, because everyone will do more of that as time goes on. For them to benefit from their initial footprint by continuing to dominate will be tough.....

 

I agree with the good professor here. Perhaps more damaging than the reality (if it is one?) that only the privileged few have a chance to be the “movers and shakers” in the business world, is the perception that this is the case, especially among those who admit they aren’t part of this elite club in the first place. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot before you’ve even begun.

As many have mentioned, this idea is not about DL per se. It seems to be more a long-entrenched and now transplanted sociological/class argument. I think it’s unfair to place DL in the breach, since it’s such a relatively new phenomenon. Let’s pick up the debate again in about 25 years. Then maybe we can see how many CEO’s have roots in DL. Moreover, the vast majority of graduates from elite schools and elite programs are not movers and shakers, if for no other reason than there just aren’t enough slots for them. As for those who do “make it” (whatever that means), there’s plenty who may have earned the position, and probably just as many who didn’t. In many cases it’s the triumph of luck over skill.

I also completely agree with Bill Dayson’s reasoned view that so many of us are doing DL for the sheet enjoyment and personal satisfaction of it. I know that applies to me. Though I have spent many years in the corporate world, and reasonably well-placed at that (though by no means a mover or a shaker), I am not studying DL to move up the corporate ladder. I never took much interest in the ladder in my younger days, and I really couldn’t care less where the friggin ladder is these days. It’s a vastly overrated pursuit in my opinion. I would venture that the majority of DegreeInfo folk are not even involved in business studies. Certainly there are a good many here who are not.

Like many others here, I enjoy the process more than the end result. I just got an email that my UoL materials are on their way, and, hey, I’m excited. Now let me check with UPS and see where they are….left Southhampton a few hours ago, and just arrived in East Midlands, UK. Can’t wait.

 

Er, I mean "sheer" enjoyment. I don't really like my sheets that much.

 

No problem, Professor. You have a history here and a good one.

BTW - should EBS ever offer "How to be a millionaire in 28 days" then please give us first shot at it.