TUI once again

You point out a reason why some people are reticent to hire those with degrees from for-profits: the perception is they weren't smart enough to make it into a better program. This is of course not always the case, but the taint is still there, and sometimes it's justified.

Let's say that Jim Dull is a hard-worker and a nice guy, street-smart, but perhaps a bit on the slow side when it comes to books. He wants to go to B-school. He got his Bachelor's from Excelsior, 2.3 GPA and got 390 on the GMAT. He's rejected at every good B&M program in the country, even the small-time ones. So he applies for admission--and is of course accepted--at For-Profit U; they're glad to take his $30K. Even if Jim perseveres at For-Profit U and paid a lot of money for his degree and gets the MBA finally, why in the world should that allow him to be considered alongside Jim Smart who went to Purdue or Indiana or Duke to get his online/DL MBA and got a 650 GMAT?

Don't you think Mr. Smart got challenged by better profs and smarter online colleagues than Mr. Dull? Didn't he likely get a more rigorous education--and likely learn more? Didn't he demonstrate, merely by being accepted at a highly selective school, that he was one of those top 5% minds in the first place? Why shouldn't that carry more weight?

I'm attending a good, nationally-ranked MBA program online, I have a decent CV to this point, I'll likely get a teaching post at a small college or dinky local university--maybe even tenure-track--that I covet next year when I finish the MBA and add it to the JD I already have, but will my perseverance and financial outlay mean anything alongside someone who's truly tip-top, who went to a prestige program like Mr. Smart? No, of course not, hiring committees won't look at my CV in the same way as they look at the CV of a truly elite candidate. If I'm up against Mr. Smart, I won't get the job, who cares how much I've paid or persevered? But if I'm up against Mr. Dull, I'll get the job, because my background will simply be better.

 

I am presently in the NCU PhD in Business Administration program with a concentration in management of engineering and technology. The PhD2B handle is my way of staying positive so as to complete [get through] the program. I wasn’t sure what to expect from an online university, but I have been pleasantly pleased thus far.

Since my other degrees are hard science degrees, I don't plan on going into academia, and I live in a rural area [which translates to not much in the way of choices in doctorate programs], an online PhD in BA is the best way to round out my education and add a little dressing to my resume. It might all be for nothing, but I enjoy the coursework anyways.

What about you? I assume that by you being a member of this forum, you have an interest in DL.

 

You are one of those that had no real choice in the U.S., as you well know, there are no B&M DL Business Administration PhDs or DBAs available in the U.S. (other than Nova). The only option is European programs such as Aston, Grenoble, Manchester.

As you point out, the name on the degree may not mean that much once you're established in industry--means a lot in academia, though.

The only B&M DL program that comes to mind that's even close to your area of interest would be Indiana State's PhD in Technology Management. I don't know if this would fit the bill at all for you, don't know if they transfer credits, you'd have to decide yourself if this program is of any interest. http://web.indstate.edu/ConsortPhD/

I'm studying online in an MBA program that's ranked towards the end of USN's list of top business programs. I have a J.D. already from a top-50. I want to teach business and business law at a small college or university, but I've been made painfully aware that without something more than just a J.D., too many doors are closed to me. If all goes well, I'll be finsihed with the M.B.A. next year.

Best to you!

 

Going to a top tier school and being successful academically doesn't always transfer into the workplace. I've had many Ivy grads work under me over the years that were incompetent. Some of the most talented business people I've ever known happened to graduate from average state schools.

I don't care if a person goes to a "top tier" school, spends 60k+ on tuition, and spends several grueling years at the school of hard knocks. The bottom line is if their incompetent on the job, I won't hire them.

I would be much more impressed with someone who choose to go to a solid state mba program, that only cost 12-20k. Their rationale was to keep themselves out of debt while at the same time building a solid business foundation. If they have the right experience and right attitude, I won't hold it against them that they only went to an average school.

 

I think there are two distinct arguments and discussions that always seem to get mingled - What is accepted, best, the trends, etc in academia and industry. The two are very different. I think most of the postings above have started with the statement of which side, then the discussion ping pongs back to the other.

 

Of course the right education isn't a guarantee of success, but it sure opens doors--and that's what we're talking about here. Once you're there, your success is up to you, your degree won't help you a bit if you're lazy or dimwitted in whatever field you choose.

But if all else is equal, it sure would help to have a DL degree with "Duke-Fuqua" blazing brightly across it than "For Profit U"--it's just undeniable. The guy who went the lower-ranked or for-profit route may be just as smart or capable as the Duke grad--maybe more so--but he's still at a distinct disadvantage in his job search.

 

Well its not just the for-profits. Graduates from 3rd or 4th tier programs at BM schools are not going to be regarded as smart as those from Duke or Harvard. Yes, I will agree that this is not always true though but that is the perception. And btw, in case you didn't know, there are online non-profit business programs that charge just as much as the for-profits, don't have a Harvard reputation and can be completed online. TUI is an example, and it is not-for-profit.

Just a note. Again, there are plenty of open admission programs at BM schools. A low GPA and low GMAT would mean nothing if he applied to many schools that only require a RA bachelors and 2 years of work experience. Nova and FMU are among these.
And now I believe that the University of Miami is no longer requiring the GMAT for its new MBA (at least that is how they have it advertised).

You have to look at his experience too. Like Dan said, academic smarts don't always translate into high work performance.
I don't know how many employers from IBM I ran across who complained about these "college morons" and the infamous "Harvard morons". Obviously, a person from a reputable school will get my attention more than one from UoP, but my point is that the name of the school is not always everything.

Of course that carries weight. Mr. Harvard will carry much more weight than lets say your degree, and you just have to live with that. And some people still regard an online degree as inferior regardless of the school because they simply don't think that a DL format really works, period. And you just have to live with that and not blame it all on the for-profits or the online schools.

Just by reading your other post, you think that for-profits are entirely to blame for DL's fragile reputation in academia.
Similarly, many people believe that all JD and lawyers are blood thirsty parasites. Many people share that belief yet I'm sure it is far from the truth in many cases. I'm sure you've heard the typical "those damn laywers, they always go for the big bucks".
Your bias against for-profits is understandable, but I think that they take too much heat for much of what is wrong with all academia per se. Non-profit academia has also exploited their students, raised tuition to record levels, sold them overpriced textbooks, etc. Yeah, your tuition goes back "into" the institution, but exactly where? You, as a student, do not have control of where the money goes.

For profits have actually pushed the rest of academica to design more practical curriculums that are more in tune with current market demands. In order to gain a greater edge from the non-profits, for-profits became better at providing students with the tools they need in today's market place and at getting them situated in jobs. Non-profits are now catching up to them in this area.
Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly like UoP and there are many things that I don't like about for-profits, but these tend to be the same things that I don't like about non-profits and academia in general.

The biggest threat to DL are degree mills. Schools like KW and Barrington are what I would be worried about. With these traditional sounding names, graduates from these "schools" do a very good job competing for your position. These are the ones that you seldom see coming your way.

Anyway, these are my thoughts.

S

 

No, actually, this part is true; all of us meet the criteria for "blood thirsty parasites" and we are just going for the "big bucks".

However, while I may be somewhat parasitic, I'm unlike all of my brethren in that I'm not just in it for the money. In fact, should you wish to sue some attorney you know who meets this description particularly well and hit them in the pocketbook where it hurts, I'd be glad to represent you in an action against them, just pay me a $10,000 retainer and $350/hr, we'll go get 'em.

 

Its a done deal! Lets go get them then!

Take care,

S