Opinion: US Students should stick with RA programs

David Yamada writes:

"Someday I hope that I will be able to enroll in an RA DL Ph.D. or ABA DL LL.M. program that
meets what I'm looking for in terms of content, convenience, credential value, and
affordability. I think those days of more graduate-level options are coming, but it may take
another 5-10 years."

Amen and amen.
Nosborne

 

I don't think the issue is so much RA as residency; for example, I'm sure you wouldn't mind saying in a job interview that you spent six years in England to earn an Oxford D.Phil., and there are folks who wouldn't mind saying that they spent four years and earned a residential doctorate from Bob Jones University, even though it holds no accreditation at all. As the weirdness factor goes, I think this is relatively easy to explain. What gets tricky is a situation, like the one I'm looking at, where you're effectively saying "Yeah, I earned my Ph.D. from Australia, but I've never been to Australia." And you're right that this could be very hard to explain in a job interview.

But I can only see this as important in a situation where I'm applying to teach full-time at a traditional university, and I wouldn't do that cold turkey, especially in a humanities field. I'd either start as an adjunct and work my way up, or rely primarily on my publications in the relevant field(s). The chances of my earning, say, a nonresidential Ph.D. in English, an then immediately applying as Associate Professor of English at Mississippi State University, are slim--but if I did a nonresidential Ph.D. in English, wrote several highly respected and widely used books, taught as an adjunct for a few years, and then moved up to a full professorship, I doubt the nonresidential nature of the degree would really hurt me all that much.


Cheers,

------------------
Tom Head
www.tomhead.net

co-author, Bears' Guide to the Best Education Degrees by Distance Learning (Ten Speed Press)
co-author, Get Your IT Degree and Get Ahead (Osborne/McGraw-Hill)

 

Tom, yes on residency. A residential degree from a quality non-U.S. school certainly flies just about everywhere.

The posts re the educational value of some kind of residency are right on target. My only regret about my Empire State College M.A. (my intro to DL) is that the residencies were only for required core courses. The students in the program were diverse, smart, and interesting, but our paths crossed too infrequently to take fuller advantage of those great qualities.

 

Hi Neil. I appreciate your comments. I agree wholeheartedly that DL has application throughout the world. But let me say it again: My ramblings are directed *only* towards US students. I'm not qualified to make suggestions for anyplace else. Why don't you take a crack at rounding out the picture for non-US students? I'd be interested in understanding the theme from the perspective of other nations.

I'd be also curious where I've mentioned the US RA model as something for the rest of the world? I don't believe that. How would I know?

NEXT WEEK: Why I think the term "distance learning / education" is inadequate to describe the emerging adult learning models - DL / DE is a antiquated term that needs to be put in a museum. (I'm kidding ... I've already spent too much time on this .... but I do believe it!)

Barry Foster

 

You can take the finest DL model available and couple it with a poor school and you end up with poor quality at a distance.

The UK and most other countries have their own form of "baggage" (a.k.a. quality control). RA is a unique expression of quality control but the point of it is the same as others: separate the wheat from the chaff. Someone chooses an RA+DL program instead of a RA+unaccredited program for the same reason that someone selects UoL over Earlscroft...the reasonable expectation that the quality is better.

There is nothing to say that FTF meetings cannot be coupled with email. That said, email has the following attributes:

1) email is asynchronous

2) email permits a more thoughtful response to a question than FTF interaction. Questionable points may be researched at leisure before responding.

3)email permits multiple threads of simultaneous inquiry with the same person without confusion, each with independent asynchronicity. These threads may flow within the same "conversation"/email container, or may be separated into distinct containers.

4)email conversations may suddenly include other correspondents as needed. (It is a multicast medium of sorts.)

5)email includes a record of the conversation, whereas voice recording is somewhat more uncomfortable for many people

6)you can work on your Ph.D. in your skivvies if you wish

 

Regarding the original question:

Thanks for the discussion.

IMHO, most people offer advice on this forum based on the parameters of the question posed.

Further, I think they generally respond appropriately considering the apparent DL experience of the person making the request.

Rarely is someone looking for a AA degree (in the US) directed to an AA program in distant lands (there are some non-US AAs), unless they specifically ask for it.

When a US solution is requestion and none are known or all have been exhausted, THEN other options are offered.

The above are generalizations; you will easily find contradictory threads. There is considerable discussion about non-US DL graduate programs among the denizens here; these should not be thrown in the same basket with the answers given to the casual visitors.

 

A 7th attribute of e-mail, Bill, is that if the Ph.D. candidate disagrees with his/her mentor over some small nuance of the dissertation, the mentor cannot, in a moment of haste, physically attack the student for rejecting his/her guidance. This gives the mentor time to regain his/her composure before proceeding with the dissertation process.

Just another benefit of DISTANCE learning!

Russell

 

Tom,

In some posts here and on AED, the issue has been RA versus all the others, whether at a distance, residentially, or semi-residentially. This, of course, is without taking into account world class institutions like the University of London, Cambridge University, Oxford University, etc. Admitting that residency is better in all cases (even at least for the people who care), some proponents believe that it is better to study, for instance, via distance mode at the virtual but RA "University of Phoenix" than via internal mode at the brick-and-mortar and GAAP "University of Aberdeen" in Britain. Whithout taking into consideration the quality of the "University of Aberdeen" (it could be excellent), people in the United Stases invariably identify more easily with the "University of Phoenix" than with the "University of Aberdeen".

My best regards,


Karlos Alberto Lacaye
[email protected]

 

Except, of course, that the University of Phoenix is very much "brick and mortar." Phoenix has been offering classroom-based instruction since it broke away from St Mary's in the late 1970's. There are U. of Phoenix learning centers in locations around the U.S.

Perhaps a better example would be Touro or Jones International.

Rich Douglas

 

...Someone chooses an RA+DL program instead of a unaccredited+DL program for the same reason that someone selects UoL over Earlscroft...the reasonable expectation that the quality is better.

 

On the matter of residency, why must residency be conducted only at a university? Are the smartest people and best laboratories located only at universities? I've worked along side many bright engineers/physicists, many with PhD’s, and many who hold patents. I’ve worked in state of the art private sector & government R & D labs developing a wide range of communication technologies and products. It seems that a good case can be made for conducting a “residency” at an IBM, Cisco, MCI, GE, Nortel, AT&T, NASA, or a host of other private sector/government run labs. One’s work could be published in any number of the usual pier-reviewed journals. And, one need only look at some of the more progressive organizations that provide DL opportunities to its employees – Cisco, Nortel, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical – and realize they are probably further along in course development and delivery than many of the DL institutions (particularly RA).

Kind regards,
Bob

 

FWIW, Malaysia just decided NO LONGER to accept the University of London external LLB as a qualifying law degree.
UoL is different, though. It isn't really a D/L operation so much as a system of degree granting through strict examinations. Most LLB students actually attend resident schools in their local communities and are merely examined at a distance by UoL.
Nosborne

 

Bob, this is a *great* point. It reflects the kind of innovative thinking that marks the emerging adult learning models - far above and beyond e-mail, snail-mail, phone calls and simplistic networking practices that marks much of DL/DE.

The combination of the theoretical emphasis of the academy with the hands-on nature of successful practitioners incorporates the best of both worlds. Both sides benefit and the potential for deep learning is increased. Practice is informed by theory, which in turn informs practice.

Fielding refers to this as the scholar/practitioner model. It is a most effective, adaptive and exciting way to transform. You've describe the model that I was permitted to use - with all three of my RA schools (even undergrad).


Barry Foster

 

Barry,

I'm glad to hear it worked out for you - the idea seems to make a lot of sense. Years ago, around 1993, I was considering completing a Masters degree program through Greenwich University (I was influenced by John Bear's College Degrees by Mail). I was working in the private sector with a PhD in the area of fiber optic networking technology that was later patented. This work required a considerable effort on my part in both the theoretical and practical sides of the technology - a "great" experience. It seemed like a good idea to go the Greenwich path as I had already completed most of my graduate coursework at 3 different universities (the difficulties in transfering RA grad credits from one institution to another is a sore point with me). In the end, I really believed that a non-RA masters would not suit my purposes and didn't want to have the potential of tainting my work (or career) with a non-accredited degree.

Bob

 

So, is it the consensus here that a person with a DL doctorate would be highly unlikely to obtain a teaching position in a college or university?

 

I should have said a "foreign DL doctorate."

 

No flame, although I find the post rather bewildering. The post appears to primarily address two issues, foreign degrees and residency.

Regarding foreign degrees, the author seems to assert that they lack utility, acceptance and credibility in comparision with US degrees. On an individual school vs school comparison this could well be true but as a general statement it is contrary to both my personal experience within both academia and business in the US and widely observable facts.

I have known many students to take advantage of foreign exchange opportunities to complete credits abroad, complete undergraduate degrees abroad or pursue graduate studies abroad. In every case the students desire was to return to the US with a credential of greater utility (for them) than what they would obtain in the US. In some cases this was due to gaining international experience on their resume, in others it was going to a more suitable school/faculty (if you want to pursue German studies you may want to study in…), in others it was financial and in some a combination of the above. I have been on selection committees that have addressed individuals with foreign doctorates and the “nationality” of the degree was never an issue. I have also known individuals with foreign doctorates and this has never been a concern they have expressed to me. Similarly, in business I have been involved in team interviews of foreign candidates and have met many associates with foreign credentials and have never I seen a bias against foreign degrees. Barry’s comments are so contrary to my personal experience I have difficulty accepting them.

However one may also consider observable evidence. I am sure if one were to research the number of students studying outside the country (most do return), the number of work visas, the number of foreign credentialed faculty on staff at US universities, etc., I believe you would paint a picture which shows a very wide acceptance of foreign credentials.

Regarding DL degrees, I do not understand the argument that “I have never been to London” is worse than the “I have never been to Dominquez Hills”. My experience has been that any DL degree on a cv/resume is a red flag because of the association of such degrees with “less-than-wonderful” institutions (whatever the accreditation status). What is important is the quality of the institution backing up the DL degree. For example, at the university where I taught if we had two candidates: 1) MBA from Rice and a DM from University of Phoenix 2) MBA from Heriot-Watt and DBA from Glasgow. Candidate 1 would be considered to lecture undergrad (depending on experience) based on the MBA but a UoP doctorate would not be considered an appropriate credential for tenure track. Candidate 2 would be considered a candidate for tenure track. Since the doctorate was earned at a distance, it is likely that some additional scrutiny would be applied, however the “who it is from” will compensate greatly for “how it was obtained”.

When should an American DL student pursue a foreign degree:
Opportunity: Sometimes foreign universities offer programs not available in the US.
Quality: You can study through a higher quality school / faculty than is available in the US.
Pedagogy: I foreign program is more appropriate to your learning style.
Cost: You can achieve a degree that would otherwise be unobtainable due to cost.

When should an American DL student not pursue a foreign degree:
Opportunity: You have an equivalent program available in the US.
Quality: The program in the US is of equivalent quality to foreign alternatives.
Pedagogy: The US program is appropriate for your learning style.
Cost: The US program is affordable.


Of course, you could make the argument that in time like these some “foreign study” might do us all some good.

 

Jake: I'm not downgrading foreign degrees. I'm trying to make a point about a trend on *this* particular board. (For sure, the thread has meandered some, but that is what makes life fun.)

How about if I asked you a question?

For the average *US* educational consumer - a newbie to accreditation issues - seeking a degree, what would you tend to recommend?

From my own perspective, I gave my thoughts to most of your objections in follow-up posts in this thread, so please forgive me for not being energized about re-dredging old material.

Barry Foster

 

Dear Rich,

Thank you very much for your information.

I was mentioning Phoenix because everybody in the United States knows what Phoenix is as opposed to Aberdeen.

Regarding studying internally at the University of Phoenix, do they have a main campus? I thought that what they had were outreach centers. Regardless, in essence, you are right: it offers classroom-based instruction.

Best wishes,


Karlos Alberto Lacaye
[email protected]

 

Dear Bob,

You are certainly right. As a matter of fact, the "University of Leeds" in Britain offers (or used to offer) its PhD in Marketing this route, meaning that residency could be taken at one's business place of work.

Sincerely yours,


Karlos Alberto Lacaye
[email protected]