Do you think that DL doctorate programs are doomed?

By this logic, people should only talk about programs they’ve been through (and I assume, completed successfully). Because Bill D. has demonstrated specific knowledge in academic programs in the sciences, I’m very interested in hearing what he has to say about this, similar to Han’s posts relating to the academic side of the business world.

 

I can assure you that it is true, since for each class I have had in the program we have lost many cohort members and added new ones from other cohorts so they can have at least 30 students in each course. I just checked enrollment in the fourth course of the program, which starts next Friday, and instead of 30 students, its down to 14 students, so that means we have lost students once again. I am sure they will reorganize the cohorts once again and there will be new students in the class next week. The cohort group that is one class behind my cohort group has only 3 classes or 90 students.

 

Don't you think it would be beneficial to actually attend some of these DL doctoral programs, before issuing a blanket statement on their inherent shortcomings? Seems somewhat bias, to say the least.

 

I read it as bias along with his statement that: "The point is that if a DL doctoral program developed a reputation as a leader in something, then I expect that its degrees would be competitive with B&M degrees."

Call it what you want, but I see the redundant attacks on DL degrees being inferior to B&M degrees, as bias. Moreover, the stigma it creates reflects badly on all DL schools, its students and holder of those degrees.

 

The point that Lerner made and that I agreed with was that it isn't a DL/B&M issue so much as it's a program-strength issue. Strong DL programs will likely to be competitive with similarly strong B&M programs.

Then make a case for whatever DL doctoral program you like. Show some areas of research and scholarship in which it's a leader, recognized by its professional peers for doing important work. If job applicants can do that, and if employers need specialists with that particular sort of expertise, then graduates of that DL program will likely fare well in competitive hiring.

 

To a degree (pardon the pun), this might be true. There will always be people out there that will want a flexible DL doctorate for variety of reasons. These people may or may not care about utility, accreditation or reputation.

However, obtaining a doctorate used to be reserved for the elite few that could (1) afford the degree, (2) get into the degree, (3) complete the degree.

Point 1 is still an issue; a doctorate will cost money. Point 2 is no longer an issue; quite frankly, anyone can get into one doctorate or another (not necessarily a good doctorate). Point 3 is less an issue than it was; a for-profit motive may increase the chance of completion.

This will result in more holders of doctorates in the market. The supply will be high. Regardless of demand, with a higher supply, organizations (i.e. universities, businesses) that require doctoral holders can be MUCH more selective. Ultimately there will be a "glut" of low-quality doctorate holders out there that are effectively unable to find work for which a doctorate was intended for (tenure-track academia, high-end research organizations).

Ultimately... this will put competitive pressure on these DL schools to (1) raise the quality of their product or (2) go out of business.

Looking into the future, it is quite possible that many current holders of doctorates may have their alma-maters disappear or change names, rendering the doctorate with even less utility.

So, if one is looking to obtain a doctorate, it is probably a good idea to go with an established, accredited university that has been around for at least a few decades (preferable a couple of centuries), that has a campus, and all the appropriate accreditatations (i.e. AACSB, RA, Provincial Charter, Royal Charter, etc...). Most importantly, it is good to have graduates in positions of influence in academia and industry already out there. This is how one gets the most value out of a doctorate.

 

I do not agree with this statement. Ultimately, academic elites are going to revert to elitism to meet their needs. It may get to the point when universities and organizations will only hire from top-ranked schools. With a glut of doctorate out there from various "online" schools, it's going to get to the point when enough is enough and these low-end doctorates will be effectively dismissed.

 

A red herring to avoid the original question I asked, which was "And exactly how many 'DL doctoral programs' have you been through or is this just your personal bias of such programs, absent any practical or factual basis?." In otherwords, I think people that have actually been a through DL doctoral program might be able to offer some practical and factual insight on the subject.

 

Okay, thank you for the clarification.

 

Some years ago, when I worked in Southern California, I was approached by a high school business teacher who was interested in getting his doctorate, but had some reservations about a certain school, so he came to me. Sure enough, it was a mill, so we discussed a number of legit options. He selected Nova Southeastern's Ed.D. in Instructional Technology & Distance Education. He completed his doctorate and, soon after, was promoted to Department Chair and landed a nice adjunct teaching position with Walden. A happy ending, indeed.

 

This is likely what will happen. Certain individuals will say "I just would not hire anyone with a degree from Capella, Walden, NCU, TUI, Jones International, UMUC, etc." Others will unknowlingly hire people with online degrees from B&M institutions. Others will hire based on the candidate's qualifications, regardles of where they received the degree. The online schools have not yet produced so many doctorates that the market has become flooded.

I agree that doctoral programs need to show that they are making contributions to the field. Some are doing far better than others. I see presentations at conferences done by folks from Capella, Walden and UMUC, but not yet by Northcentral or TUI.

 

As long as there are schools that are willing to take your money there will always be DL Doctorate programs!

 

Well Bill makes a great point. You need to know the market(why are you getting this degree and what is it going to do for you). Every individual's reasoning to get a doctorate may be different. In may cases it can be for a raise or because your employer is paying for it and then I see no reason not to get a DL doctorate(as long as the institution is properly accredited). Some people may do it for personal reasons( but that can be a costly hobby depending on where you attend). Remember Jack Welch said he got his doctorate because he wanted to be called doctor.

For Most people it simply will not be cost effective. In the majority of positions available doctorates are not needed and will not get you a raise. So the incentive to go through such a program for little or not return on the intensive investment would be small to non existent. So Although the degree may become more available resulting in a larger number of doctorates they will still be a small percentage of people over all in the general population.

 

My dream come true, right there.

 

Yes, I'm not too sure if there will be always be people with piles of money willing to spend it in a doctorate that might not report any return of investment at some point.

 

Not really DL doctorates but virtual DL institutions offering doctoral programs. You will have more institutions offering doctorates in DL format in the future but for the same reason I don't see the Capellas, NCU, TUI, etc being in business once more solid institutions start offering doctoral programs in DL format.

 

Actually, this is already happening, I worked for few online for profit schools with faculty working from India. This makes sense as you can hire people in India with PhDs from top institutions willing to work for peanuts for an online institution.

 

I agree. I once took a criminology course from a professor with a ph.d from UCLA who never spent a day in his life investigating a crime, patrolling a neighborhood or working in a prison. But he authored many articles and professional papers.