Looking for a DL Doctorate of Management Program

I'm painfully aware of the negative thinking that some folks have against DL doctorates. Nova - being the largest program around gets its share of criticism.

The question that I have for Lewchuk is this - what makes you think that a DL doctorate from an Australian school will be any less criticized? Further, what evidence is there that the education received from these schools is any better?

Thanks - Andy

 

I am not sure what "that bad" means, obviously they are RA which ensures a minimal level of quality/acceptance. However in my travels I haven't received any positive endorsements concerning them (business programs only). My point is, if there are other better options... take them!

 

Tom,
In the US you roughly have 3 levels of schools. The top tier... a wide band of large RA state schools... and a third band of vocational, weak private schools and JuCos.
Foreign schools tend to be either levels 1 or two.
Simply, if you have the option of taking a program from a more recognized school, why wouldn't you do it.

Seldom are there discussions like, "Tom, I can't believe you went to that degree mill CSDH". Why... because it is CSDH! Or, "I can't believe you went to the University of London... what a joke that is". The "is it dirty" questions always center around the same folks... yes they are RA but they just don't smell right.
Again, you may have more difficulty with an Aussy public school than with a big US state school but I would sleep better at night with an Aussy degree than one from a weak private US school.

 

Hey Andy,

I see your point. It is as I have said before, people can find any one of a number of reasons for "dissing" a university. I have heard it. I have heard people say of a respected 4th tier institution where I was stationed, that it was going to loose it's accreditation (utter nonsense). As I have mentioned before I have heard young Ph.D.'s laugh (not a good word..act horrified) that anyone could earn an accredited DL doctorate. So, the best thing for someone to do is to pick an accredited program which meets their needs. Foreign schools are not without problems, 4th tier US schools are not without problems. In some cases as I said earlier you may do better with a well respected foreign school depending on the field and intended use (eg. I might prefer to hire as faculty someone with a UNISA Th.D. over a Union Institute degree tailored to theology). That does not mean you are not going to face questions about how you earned the degree. In any case, NSU is a large accredited residential school and someone who graduates from it with a doctorate (to paraphrase another quote about medical school) is still called "Dr.".

As for the issue of quality. Who knows. We have the respected standards in some countries to use as guides. Much of the rest of it is anecdotal. There are guides but they often use different criteria and rate differently (eg Gorman Report is pretty harsh on some schools). Some schools disagree with US NEWS & World Report. I read a Canadian article where a University said it was getting tired of being messed over in the MacLean's annual ranking and so was going to tailor their school situation specifically to some of the criteria used by the organziation so as to bring themselves up in the rankings. They noted that minor adjustments of a percentage of two in some areas could significantly increase ranking.

Personally, I have nothing negative to say about NOVA. Large, residential, and accredited. No it's not Harvard but neither is the Edingurgh School of Business or USQ or UNIZUL or PUCHE or UNISA or Oxford (no wait...I went to far with that ).

North

 

If I investigate a program and find out:
1) 2 Business school deans from reputable universities advise against it.
2) A professional consultant (prior University dean) made disparaging marks against it.
3) A respected colleague who took the program was disappointed with the the rigor of the school.
4) A fortune 500 school refused to sponsor it.
5) Several contributors attest to weak acceptance of low ranked private US schools.
6) Weak University rankings.

Granted, this is only 6 reasons... however these 6 reasons should be enough for anyone to "proceed with caution".

 

By the way, when did you graduate from Nova?

 

Frankly, I think the issue is how "mainstream" your doctoral work is.
Lets use a commonly discussed masters degree as an example... CSDH Humanities. The degree is from a traditional, medium-sized state school. The degree earned is the same as the on-campus degree. It is distance but traditional. True, it isn't "presitigious" but no knowledgable person would ever question the degree... it is about as solid as you can get.
Australia has a reputation for high standards. The schools are traditional public universities with generally traditional programs. Again, the programs/schools are distance but traditional. I think this model is generally a better option.

Again, if you could get a traditional DL PhD from a better US state school... that may be the best option for US students (not considering cost). However those options don't exist.

 

Okay, lets look at this. Some people perceive an MBA degree from a reputable and middle ranking British University in Scotland as follows:

1. It is viewed as an equivalent of a trade certificate by three credential evaluators in the U.S.
2. It is considered to be less than a bachelor’s degree by some Universities in the U.S.
3. It was considered a rip off by a disgruntled former student who couldn’t pass a single exam in the program
4. It is viewed as a trade certificate by 5 deans of reputable universities in the U.S.
5. It was reject when a holder of this MBA applied for adjunct teaching
6. Many Fortune 500 companies refuse to reimburse their employees the tuition for this MBA program
7. It was not viewed favorably by many HR departments because admission to this program does not require a bachelor’s degree

Do I think that the MBA program from this Scottish University is substandard? The answer is NO, because the people that reject the MBA from this very Scottish university are simply ignorant and they are biased against DL in general. Once again, you have failed to convince me that Nova DBA is as bad as you have always portrayed it, but of course you are entitled to your opinion no matter how illogical it may be.

Ike

 

I have never argued that Nova enjoys the same reputation as Harvard. I have rather argued that Nova is not alone because there are more than 5000 GAAP universities/colleges that are not in the same class as Harvard University. I also want to let you know that a Nova Ph.D. in Psychology is a member of Harvard Psychology faculty. Many first and second tier universities are busy hiring Nova Ph.Ds while we continue to argue and bicker endlessly here about the quality of Nova's doctoral degrees.

Ike

 

I want to add that I am serious when I stated that many reputable universities have hired Nova Ph.Ds and other doctoral degrees holders. Lewchuk, why don't you go to http://www.google.com and search for "Ph.D. Nova". After that you may also search separatly for "Ph.D Nova", "D.B.A Nova", "DBA Nova", "Ed.D. Nova", and "Ed.D Nova" . If it is true (and it is) that Nova doctoral degree holders are being hired by many first and second tier universities, it follows that those laughing their ass off about Nova Ph.Ds are under the influence of laughing gas and I have no option than to conclude that they need some medical help.

Ike

 

According to US News... Nova Southeastern has the lowest academic reputation score of all 4th tier universities.

You go Ike... woo, woo.

 

It is an outright fallacy. US news ranking of Nova's undergraduate program is low but it is not the lowest (check 2000 ranking). The lowest on the list was 1.4. But we are talking about graduate programs. Some Nova's graduate programs were ranked high by the same magazine.
People who are still living in DL "dark ages" will continue to be wrong about DL and Nova. If you have an axe to grind you have to better say so. Those making faculty-hiring decisions in US universities and colleges are not living in the same world with you. Either they are collectively crazy or ..., because Nova alumni have permeated American academia. Remember that the physician in charge of medical operations in Antarctica is a Nova alumnus. The representative of the U.S government that appointed the guy must be crazy or …

Ike


Ike

 

Ike,
This brings us back to an earlier string where it seemed to be generally agreed that NSU is better than its reputation. But unless the university addresses this "perception gap" and promotes itself both nationally and internationally as being more than just a "we go the distance" operation, their reputation will never improve. No matter how you cut it, there ranking in the US News does them and their students no good.

 

The USNews rankings are undergraduate rankings. Their relevance to graduate programs is questionable.

What's more, the criteria that USNews employ are loaded against non-traditional education. Imagine what would happen if they were employed on something like the H-W MBA program.

USNews wants highly selective admissions. H-W has open admissions. USNews wants high incoming test scores. Not only does H-W not require the GMAT, it doesn't even require a bachelors degree. USNews wants a low attrition rate. But by all accounts few of those that purchase a first H-W module continue on to a final degree. USNews wants students to graduate in a time frame defined by full-time enrollment. H-W's students probably take considerably longer. USNews wants a low student/faculty classroom ratio. H-W doesn't even offer instruction.

In other words, if H-W's MBA program were one of the undergraduate programs that USNews ranks, it would definitely be fourth tier. Does that make it a bad program? Of course not. But the same thing can probably be said for Nova.

I think that these kinds of considerations probably apply to most DL programs. They are usually less selective than traditional programs. Since they recruit adult students, they place less emphasis on GPAs and test scores. The reason most DL students are DL students is the fact that they have job and family responsibilities, so most of them are part-time and many drop out. Most distance education students pursue vocational or job oriented programs rather than the more high-toned liberal arts.

Distance education is going to be supplied disproportinately by institutions that are committed to increasing educational opportunity. But despite all their "progressive" posturing, increasing educational opportunity is not the way build academic reputation in traditional academia.

 

Some UK universities have their off-campus MBA programs in foreign countries, especially in Asian countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and China. They claim that the standard of qualification is the same as that of internal qualification. It seems to me that they concern more about profit making than the control of quality, especially those programs conducted through private and profit-making agencies. Of course, many UK DL programs such as that offered by U of Warwick, London, Henley and those in the AMBA's list are in high standard.

 

@ Ike: Which Scottish school are you talking about? (or did I just overread it?).

Best Greetings,
Trigger


Okay, lets look at this. Some people perceive an MBA degree from a reputable and middle ranking British University in Scotland as follows:

 

I was talking about HW. This information was posted by an alumnus of HW on his web page and Lewchuk is quite familiar with the story.

Ike

 

@ Ike: I thought so. HW also does not really have the best reputation in Europe either, though I´ve heard that their exams are not as easy as many people think...
(I wouldn´t make a HW MBA anyway, there are better options)

Greets,
Trigger

 

I'm a grad of Fielding. Sorry to disappoint.