Report From Columbia University's Senate Sharply Criticizes Spending for Online Venture. Chronicle article about Columbia University's online arm, Fathom, which is criticized for being disconnected from the university's mission and strategy. (Columbia also offers online programs in computer science and engineering though CVN.)
I guess it could be because donors like to have buildings named after them...I mean how is a donor to Columbia going to get recognition for a contribution to a distance education service---what is he going to get named after him, the mail server? I think that short sighted on the part of the CU Senate to be so critical of what usually is one of the most cost effective ways of delivering top notch education--distance education through cyberspace, or even through the more old fashioned "correspondence" method. Thanks for this information. Darren.
Re: Re: Hard to Fathom And now from the New York Times, we have this: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/technology/circuits/02DIST.html The main conclusions seem to be that: 1. It's hard to break into DL. (We know that.) 2. Some traditional schools are bailing out of DL. (Ditto.) 3. The University of Phoenix is a success. (Well, duh!) The article also takes pains to suggest that universities would be better off investing in their own infrastructures, rather than pumping money into for-proft businesses to do DL for them. Well, that would give them greater control, but I'd want business people running a business, not academics. While some traditional schools are scaling back their DL programs, many others are still steaming ahead. (They probably have better business plans.) And note how the for-profits seem to be weathering the storm nicely. The ones we talk about, Northcentral, Walden, Phoenix, et. al., seem to be carrying on. (None of my degrees--including the one I hope to finish next Spring--are from for-profit schools. But I still like 'em. )
