Another Thought on "Rigor"

These are at least the two things we know with absolute certainty regarding "rigor" and the BM/DL debate:


1. Anecdotally, personal experience and reasonable inference dictates that the vast generality of B&M programs constitutes greater "rigor" than the generality of DL programs.

2. Anecdotally, personal experience and reasonable inference dictates that the vast generality of B&M programs do not constitute greater "rigor" than DL programs.

3. For a forum that takes on the challenge of discussing the relative rigor of research based, academic programs, there is a remarkable willingness to posit on both sides of this argument using anecdote and inference.

 

I agree with Rich.

A program that's routinely producing good work is doing something right, no matter what the process. If it isn't, then no amount of process will hide that fact.

 

First let me note that I have no experience whatsoever in DL graduate education. My interest in this discussion is purely educational. So please accept my arguments as purely discussion points.

The bisness model of schools in question is, among other things, to remain credible educational institutions, is it not?

So those programs do not expell weaker students. But do you have evidence that they actually graduate them? In other words, hand out PhDs to anyone who hang along long enough? This would make them nothing more than overpriced diploma mills, and I'm under impression that no accredited institution in U. S. actually deserves such designation.

 

Again, for the sake of discussion:
1)This assumption seems fair. It is the direct mission of top schools to produce quality research, and graduate students these days are the ones actually doing it. I've read the "guide" to the graduate study written by students in MIT AI Lab (definitely top 3 - if not number 1 in the country). They mention "machismo attitude" and the fact that MIT AI students routinely produce theses and dissertations that are far better that what is actually required to graduate.
2)Your second guess seems non-obvious to me. I suspect that your "bottom of the ranking" would comprise a sizable majority of all dissertations, and DL dissertations will be mixed almost uniformly with work from all kinds of schools (maybe except the very best and exclusive). That is, if you actually could devise a rating for pieces of work in separate, extremely specialised fields.

 

Thanks for your overt statement related to "discussion points." I don't think that anyone has "facts" on the questions being asked here. I think it's all opinion and so while it may be interesting, I don't think there will be any definitive statements made in this thread.

The evidence you speak of, that of graduating weaker students, might be found by surveying all dissertations, or whatever might be considered to be a representative sample, and determining the "quality" of these research projects (B&M v. DL). If I am wrong, there should be a proportionately larger number of "quality" dissertations coming out of the DL schools since they admit virtually anyone who meets the minimum qualifications (as opposed to more selective, competitive admissions criteria used in the B&M schools). Larger number of students (proprtionately) should equal larger number of "quality" dissertations. No?
We all know the answer is, "No." There is no data on either side of this issue (AFAIK). I'm not saying DL schools are bad, if I'm very lucky, I'll be one of those people getting a DL PhD, but the best research comes out of the B&M schools. The DL schools meet minimum standards and sometimes exceed those standards. This is good for a start-up enterprise. It will get better as time goes on and I believe that DL schools may surpass their B&M brethran (or should I say sistran?)

Jack

 

Paul and All - perhaps we all should spend some time reviewing the GRE site http://www.gre.org/respredict.html. What's covered there is far more than anecdotes and personal experience.

Regards - Andy

 

JoAnn,

Having enrolled and taken courses at three different DL institutions whilst searching for the right fit, I can say that my experience with my fellow learners was nothing like you describe. While some, yes, seemed to have some work to do in learning critical analysis skills, writing skills, and the like, these students were aware of their shortcomings, and were working hard to overcome them as to produce quality, doctoral-level work. There is a fellow learner in a current class I'm taking that has made such comments in our discussions; our instructor is holding him to the high standards required of us all, and he is seeking outside help to get up to standard.

Of course, it could also depend on the degree in question, and the focus. I have switched from one school in Capella into another, and find the rigor required in my now current school (Business) to be much higher than in my old school (Education). For example, the Organization and Management Ph.D. requires four research methods courses; the School of Ed. requires one.

I would also echo Bruce's statement of:

This describes me to a "T". I have high GRE scores, a 3.95 grad GPA and a 3.92 undergrad GPA, and over the past two years, have been accepted into 3 B&M Ph.D. programs, including a very highly regarded one -- top 5 in the field, to be specific. However, I live and work overseas, and after my husband's health issues earlier this spring, I have decided to carry on with my Capella education, as I'm no longer willing to endure the separation that a B&M program would entail. However, I am very satisfied with what I'm doing in Capella, and in my particular circumstances, do not see any lowering of standards.

So, to make a tremendously long posting . . . erm, long (sorry, must be the flu meds, I'm starting to ramble), don't pre-paint a picture of DL based on your experiences at FSU. DL experiences will have the same variances as B&M.

Good luck,
Adrienne

 

"[T]he limitations of graduate school admissions tests in the face of the complexity of the graduate education process have long been recognized…[the] critical skills associated with scholarly and professional competence…are not currently measured by graduate admissions tests." (Enright, M. K. & Gitorner, D. (1989). Toward a description of successful graduate students. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.)


The ability of the GRE to predict first-year graduate grades is incredibly weak, according to data from the test's manufacturer. In one ETS study of 12,000 test takers, the exam accounted for a mere 9% of the differences (or variation) among students' first-year grades.(Educational Testing Service. (1998). GRE Guide to the Use of Scores, 1998-1999. Princeton, NJ)

Undergraduate grades proved to be a stronger predictor of academic success, explaining 14% of the variation in graduate school grades. An independent non-ETS study found an even weaker relationship between test scores and academic achievement - just 6% of the variation in grades could be predicted by GRE scores.( Morrison, T. & Morrison, M. (1995). A Meta-Analytic Assessment of the Predictive Validity of the Quantitative and Verbal Components of the Graduate Record Examination with Graduate Grade Point Averages Representing the Criterion of Graduate Success. Educational and Psychological Measurement, v. 55 (no. 2) pp. 309-316.)


There is a lot of good data and info at the GRE site. There is an equally significant body of research demonstrating the lack of direct or at least definitive correlation between postgraduate success and GRE test scores.

 

GRE as a tool for exclusion

One study in the Journal of Negro Education revealed that at the University of Florida, Black graduate students with low GRE scores were compared to White peers with high test scores. The Black students attained higher GPAs during graduate study than did the Whites, leading researchers to conclude that the GRE is insensitive to how Black students' skills and resources translate into performance.(Scott, R.R. & Shaw, M.E. (1985). Black and White Performance in Graduate School and Policy Implications For Using GRE Scores in Admission. Journal of Negro Education, v. 54 (no. 1), pp. 14-23.)

Might this phenomenon manifest itself in a variety of other ways? I would think it would.

 

Interesting thread so far.

One question that perhaps is relevant is whether all B&M PhD's are created equal across disciplines. Forget, for the moment, whether dissertations from MIT are gnerally superior to those from Kansas State. Is an education PhD as hard as one in physics or comparitive literature? (I draw those from a theoretical hat). If there is a difference, does it have to do with rigor? I don't know.

Back to the DL PhD issue. I would wager that there are certain PhD's that absolutely cannot now, or ever, be done exclusively by DL. A math PhD, for example would be near impossible. It takes years before one can build up the machinery to even figure out what question to ask, and for that, one needs an advisor who is working at the cutting edge, something not likely to be found from an adjunct. Again, does this have to do with rigor, ultimately (or rigor mortis, perhaps?).

Again, I don't know. Just food for thought.

 

It would seem to make sense that some PhD areas lend themselves more readily to DL than others. There have been a number of comments made over the years about how some disciplines such as History or Philosophy might be perfect for distance learning. Despite this there are few, if any, programs in these sorts of areas. The reason, AFAIK, is that there's not enough students for the program to sustain itself. On the other hand, look at the number of MBA programs offered through DL. They've popped up like weeds and as a result I think the guy who delivers the newspaper to my home has an MBA (specializing in "Distribution and PR") Education is a business like any other, development occurs where there's money to be made.
Jack
BTW, as to your above comment about "...not now, or ever..." don't shortchange technology. The day will come where these current problems will disappear.
Jack

 

Fortunately, these academic people are a dying breed. I work in a research environment in government that produces most of what those in acadmic use for their teaching. A degree from accredited school is all that is required and we have a lot of academics joining and in some cases on leave from thier schoool to peform research.


I can't possibly see a situation where schools might reject a person with my environment background. We have staff serving as full faculties across the United States on "loan" or detail as it is called.

Those opposed to virtual learning will be left behind. They need to come to the government and industry to see how businesses are being conducted in the 21st century and they will quickly find out how their school is being outdated.

On the other hand, a good accredited PhD should take no less than three years full time attendance - online or not- including the dissertation.

 

I realize I am fighting an uphill battle on this "virtual" business. But consider the number one definition of "virtual":

vir·tu·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vûrch-l) adj.
1. Existing or resulting in essence or effect though not in actual fact, form, or name: the virtual extinction of the buffalo.

There is really nothing "virtual" about learning, no matter how or where it takes place. I think this virtual moniker is one of those 1990's marketing hypes that does more damage to online learning than it does good. It connotes exactly what the word means - learning that appears to be real, but has no substance.

I would love to see the term "virtual" never appear in context with distance learning. Pardon me, it is just my personal crusade.

 

I think that rigor is being confused with seat time. I also think that individuals with many years of experience that embark on a PhD in thier chosen profession have less of a learning and assimilation curve. Therefore, time spent or seat time may not measure the "rigor" of the program. I agree with Rich's assessment of outcomes. If your PhD is of sufficient quality to merit peer acceptance, or better yet, use as a tool, then you have made the grade, regardless of your learning methodology.

I can appreciate those of you who are full-time academics having to suffer the inequities of perception regarding Distance degrees. Time and quality of outcomes will change these perceptions.

Admission standards have waivers for specific individuals, circumstances, policies, politics, and therefore are no standards at all. Also, for adult learners who have been out of school for a period of years, GMAT/GRE tests may not be a true measure of potential. I do like the thought of evaluating a student's performance over a number of courses and making continuation or fitness decisions based upon performance.



Paul,

I believe the "virtual" moniker was intended for classrooms not the learning. But misinterpretation or use is common, especially when it serves the individual who wants to bolster a B&M position. I am on the same crusade.

 

I understand what you are saying, there. I too have no problem with the use of the word "virtual" when placed in specific context of a simulated classroom or building. Too often I see it related to the processes, learning, faculty, instruction, etc., all of which I see as fostering a negative conotation.

I know of no RA accredited “virtual” universities. All that I am aware of do exist in fact and substance.

 

How about those students that claim that are attending a "full-time" PhD while they are working full time and have families to take care?. Is it possible to work full time and still be able to finish your doctorate in three years? I would say that if a student takes a minimum of three years full time, this should be a minimum of five to six years part time to come up with something meaningful but of course that there are exceptions. Many students are just "genious" , I know the case of a student that completed a PhD in two years full time.

I know that some people have argued that there are students attending "full time" to DL PhD program at DL schools. However, I find this hard to believe since it wouldn't make sense for a student to pay a small fortune for a DL doctorate when you can go to many schools for free for a PhD. Of course that there are exceptions as the case of
of the wife of an army official that is doing service in a remote location.

 

RFValve wrote:

If you are a masochist, then its possible. IMO it makes it easier if you incorporate your studies/research into your work and vice-versa among other things. Most DL students work in the field of their doctoral studies, and work can be a great place for gathering data.

So how many people attend "full time" at Aussie DL schools? And DL UK doctorates?
It seems as though most of their DBAs are doable in 3 years part-time (according to what you and Andy define as part-time).

-S

 

RFValve wrote:

They probably meant *full-time* or *part time* in terms of credits taken per semester.

-S

 

Minimum requirements and actual time spent in the program are different issues. Most of the PhD programs have a minimum requirement of two years full time but in general you cannot finish them in less than 3 years.

In my case, I registered in 2000 and this is already my fifth year in the program. I agree that I'm not perhaps the best example but I have made good progress. I expect to finish it by the end of this year so it would be a total of five years. It took me a year just to get the proposal together and approved by the university.

Andy also says that the average time of completion is 5 years at Nova.

DBAs are normally a lot more structured than PhDs and can be completed a bit faster. However, it is almost impossible to finish them in less than four years part time.

Another issue is that american PhDs are normally a bit larger than the average UK and Aussie doctorate. Does this mean that are less rigorous?

Also, as you point out. DBAs are designed to be aligned with the work environment so this helps. However, PhDs are normally not aligned with work
environments since you are required to create new theory and not jut business application of existing theory. On the other hand, it is very hard to align work with a DBA dissertation unless you are in a position where you can actually gather data.

DBAs were not meant for academics but for professional practicioners. So DBAs were designed to be completed part time while you work full time. However, many DBAs teach full time while many PhDs work in industry.

The DBA in Australia was really meant as a natural transition between the MBA to a Doctorate. The main issue was that the MBA was considered a terminal degree and if an MBA wanted to do a PhD, he was required to finish first a M.Phil and the MBA would not be taked into consideration. On the othere hand, in the US and Canada the MBA is accepted for admission into a PhD. So you can say that in a way, the PhDs from Capella or Touro would be comparable to the DBAs in Australia since both of them are meant for working professionals rathen than academics.