Today I felt the brunt of DL’s and Adult Education’s negative reputation

Exactly!

In some of their (admittedly pervasive) advertising, UoP touts their for-profit status, correctly stating they're especially motivated to give good customer service.

 

I can speak with some level on authority on the police departments. Like Bruce said, they epitomize "non-profit" as generally the city's single biggest drain on a budget in many cases. They do not turn a profit, do not really generate revenue above operational expenses(I know some are thinking of tickets here but be serious), and lastly where a non-profit holds over an endowment police departments turn over a $0 budget. There is no reserve, you are going to be given what is spent period.

Comparing the profit...a police officer in Texas can expect to earn about mid $30K range per year. A chief of a large dept, of say Fort Worth, can expect about $150K per year. How do you think this compares to the average tenured professor's salary and the average Dean?

as for Preisma who wrote "If someone wants to get an MBA but is unable to score at least 600 on the GMAT (which will get you into many decent AACSB accredited programs) then a lower end school is probably a viable alternative. At the same time it is unreasonable to expect the same recognition for the MBA when taking that route."

I can only speak from my own experience at 1 school, but when I picked Ashford University for my MBA I was not required to take a GMAT, which at the time I thought was a good idea. After hitting the quantitative course hump which involved Quantitative Methods, Managerial Econ, Finance and then Accounting, I cursed the cruelty of the school for not having an upfront weed out process like the GMAT. The courses were pretty hairy and I really had to make a lot of personal life adjustments to pass. Namely hanging out in greasy spoons until sunrise studying or the like.

So should they have a weed process up front? I believe it would serve the student's interest but then I also understand and agree with their open enrollment policy which is part of the mission of the school, that everyone should enjoy the chance at a first class education. So there are 2 schools of thought and I tend to see the benefit of each. They make it easy to get in, but keep it tough to get through. Rigor has not been compromised either way.

Lastly I think it funny that the only place I ever hear or see the arguments of for profit vs. non-profit is here. I never see it in the workplace, not once. We are more likely to jive each other's football team than ever mention the profit status of our schools. Just a thought.


Oh one last thing...I've written this before but in comparing a for profit school, in my case Ashford University, there is a campus, residential students, athletic teams, fraternal organizations, alumni associations, etc. They look like a normal, small college.

On the non-profit side Southwestern could be an almost mirror image. The only difference is that Southwestern does not have a baseball team and Ashford does not have a football team. Other than that the schools could almost be the same. The student never sees the "for profit" or "non profit" aspects of the school, until you graduate at which time the non-profit hits you up for donations.

 

Great points. I always wondered how Fort Hays University for example could charge $175 a credit hour for their MSL but jump to $400 a credit for an MBA?

 

Because they can.

 

Universities in Australia engage in "for profit" activities. They usually create relationships with private colleges. These colleges run the courses and examinations and the universities issue the degree. The issuance of the degree from the university comes at a cost which, of course, is passed onto the student. This university and college relationship is also conducted in other countries in Asia. Sometimes the university gets a "blackeye" by associating with a less reputable college. University of Newcastle had an issue with foreign students that blew up on them some time ago. The "profit word" is no stranger here.

University Professors are "encouraged" to market their expertise to the private and government sectors to draw funds to the university. Students are often involved in these projects for "work in the real world". Education is a business and, like most businesses, there are many dimensions to it. Is this a bad thing? Without this, how many students would have access to higher education?

There are private universities in Australia. Bond University is one example. These universities, however, have a heavy government oversight so there may not be a significant variance in standards. I guess that might be the difference here. Primary accreditation is via government only. Any "unaccredited universitities" would be prosecuted very vigorously.

On the Policing Comments
Policing , here at least, contributes indirectly to business enterprises. The planning and resources that are drawn into the support of the "Indy" Car race on the Gold Coast is an example. This race contributes millions of dollars to the local economy, but could not occur without police operational support. The police coffers don't expand, but others do. I would be surprised if this was different anywhere else. Policing has an often understated economic value. Primary economic zones often have more police capability than others. Poorer (less contributing) areas are often underpoliced. I have worked in few of those!

 

Leadership programs

Heimer,
Any comments on the MSU SL program? I've been researching the internet for the right program since I'm paying for this. I'm also looking at Bellevue and Southwestern college. I've contacted all schools and interestingly I haven't heard back from MSU . . . thanks!