Yet Another Thought on Rigor

Andy

"One concern I do have, however, is his comment that DL programs don't need to be limited in enrollment."

My general point is that enrolment in a DL (as opposed to a CT or DT) programme there are few normal physical constraints (buildings or faculty) on the admission to numerous people purchasing one course. The exam regime acts as the constraint. Those that pass, continue, those that don't, er, don't (allowing for two attempts only).

With dissertation degrees (DBA, PhD) there is a prior constraint in the self-selection of the candidates on whether to try for the degree. Even among the so-called 'top ten' US universities, there are no unlimited applications. There is some cross-over but in the main, candidates self-select to go for Harvard but not Stanford (and vice versa), and so on through all ten. Similarly, with gaduate degree programmes in reputable universities outside the 'top ten'. Everybody does not apply for every possible degree programme open to them.

In our DL DBA (first year of it) applications for brochures about 800, applications to join the programme about 240, successful candidates about 140, actual candidates commencing the (DL) classes, 100. How many could we take of those who survive the self-selection (i.e., the number left after those who think about it, find out more about it, and decide not to continue)? In part 1, that could be a very high number (we examine thousands on our DL courses for the MBA). In Part 2, the supervised dissertation? Perhaps several hundred (I'll let you know when we get to that stage).

I know of other Schools that have stopped recruiting DBA students - it has long been practice in most universities to recruit for their PhDs less than a handful each year, perhaps as many as 10 in some cases, and I know of one School in Scotland (Glasgow) that has wound down its DBA.

If there is a natural limit for dissertation entry, then a 'rationing' scheme will be needed. I think that having to pass eleven course exams (under our rigorous exam regime, discussed several times earlier and on other threads), and three Research Modules, which includes the dissertation definition, there will be sufficient 'exit' paths, plus self-selection not to continue, that we may not have a rationing problem under a quite high number in equilibrium mode.

 

Andy,

"In the US, however, the schools we talk about most here are, IMHO, less than stellar."

Which schools, what aspects, what data, recommendations for improvement? Why allude, when specifics can merit action?

As an individual who states a level of evaluation of doctoral review your opinion may carry some weight if the students on this board carry forward a positive repsonse to the school administration.

Admission standards will only be brought up with the for profits when they have more applicants than ability to supervise. i.e. Touro. Once again, I believe the accreditor must do their job to ensure the integrity of the system.

As pointed out competitive admissions can not accurately be measured until you find out all the data on the applicants and how many schools denied them as opposed to how many accepted them. More importantly, you argue competitive admissions and yet I would venture that these admissions are tainted by various statistical admittees who were selected on other than merit. University of Michigan policy and others ensures a cross cultural mix regardless of merit. My position is that a standard is not a standard if you make one exception. Hence my lack of concern for admission standards and more a concern for graduates and outcomes.

 

My apologies. I assumed that they were the same as the USQ handbook for 2004 for: http://www.usq.edu.au/handbook/current/DBAD.html

I also based my assumption from two people chose USQ. One was initially accepted into USQ but later chose Nova's programs. One submitted a proposal from his masters and was in. Both said that the admissions were a complete joke. This was before the "restructured" DBA for 2005 that I see on the application. Looks like USQ will become selective. Good for them and lucky for you and anyone who got in before this change. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to slam it. I think that USQ is a very decent Aussie school. Good luck with it, and thanks for wishing me luck.

-S

 

Thanks Sulla, Are you in the PhD in IT Management at Capella? This is my favorite MIS DL program, too bad they charge a small fortune for this. I agree that comments can be offensive for some people that are doing effort to better themselves, at the end it is not the degree but the individual that will make a difference. However, Andy's comments should be taken as criticism and not as offence, some schools like NCU and Capella are increasing their standards thanks to criticism, Touro is also increasing standards. I believe that these institutions will become strong in the near future and well respected, it is a matter of time. But it is in our best interest to make DL credible.

 

Excellent points, Bill!

 

RFValve,

"...some schools like NCU and Capella are increasing their standards thanks to criticism..."

yep, just got another notice this morning about additional requirements for student-mentor contact at NCU. I am sure that you meant "criticism" as constructive and it would appear that at least on the face NCU is soliciting and listening to valid articulated criticism.

I am also receiving at least two surveys a month related to various issues within courses and the school itself. At least one of these seems to derive from data collection requirements placed upon NCU by the US Govt as part of the DL project in which NCU was asked to participate. It will be interesting to see what changes continue to take place.

Additionally, each course has both a pre and a post course survey addressing many of the issues posted in this thread.

 

Good point. I've been thinking of this solely from the perspective of "rigor" or the perception of rigor, and not from a more global what-are-we-trying-to-do perspective.
Jack

 

RFValve wrote:

I'm in the industrial organizational psychology program. I don't have much information on their IT management program.

Fair enough. I'll go with that.

-S

 

I just have to add my thoughts to this conversation.

I am not as big into the academic world as some other members.

I just feel that rigor can come from different angles. I am not trying to be defensive, I have been thinking of this for a few days. I have completed a BS AST in Nuclear Engineering Technology from TESC. Most of my core credits came from Navy Nuclear Power School, arguably one of the most demanding military training programs.

The rest of my credits came from a local community college and TESC guided study/online courses. Personally, I did not take any CLEPS/DANTES etc...

I have some people close to me who are attending a local college. It is a good school. Of course it is RA and its business programs are AACSB, and its engineering programs are ABET and almost all the other programs have appropriate accreditation.

This person recently took physics class, which I thought was much less intense than what I have learned. I could have aced every test, even though it has been years since I took physics. From following this persons studies, I believe every class I took contained at least as much rigor as the local college classes.

If someone puts a lot of effort and learns a lot through professional experience or self-study, is that different from the person who learns it through a tough class? Maybe, I don’t know.

All, I am saying is that “rigor” in learning can come from different angles. This local college I mentioned is over an hour away, and with working rotating shifts makes attending this college impossible for me. Therefore, I have enrolled in Eastern Michigan University MS in Engineering Management distance education program. After talking to the program director, I am confident that it is of the same rigor as there traditional MSEM program. I also believe that traditional schools who offer some DL programs are very likely to have those programs follow there traditional programs in rigor and content closely.

Yes, some schools are tougher than others. All I am saying is that MOST B&M colleges have about the same rigor as MOST RA DL programs. Yes, IV league schools are harder. Yes, TESC is easier than Notre Dame, Univ of Michigan, Michigan State, Princeton, Yale, Havard, etc… However, most B&M colleges are easier than these same said schools as well. Schools like Western Michigan U, Eastern Michigan U, University of Central Florida are schools that nobody hears about unless they live in those local areas. They are good schools but from my experience are no tougher than the DL programs I have been a part of.

I do not have the diverse academic background that many members of this site have. So, because of that my thoughts are based on my own experience. I am not trying to be defensive, just expressing my point of view. With that said, if I had a local university that was in driving distance on a daily basis, I would attend that school over DL. I do not have that ability.

 

"Admission standards will only be brought up with the for profits when they have more applicants than ability to supervise. i.e. Touro. Once again, I believe the accreditor must do their job to ensure the integrity of the system."

Just to be clear, Touro is NOT "for-profit" ... like USQ,
the school encountered 'growing pains' which then
required other changes. Interesting from reading the
various posts, how many programs ARE raising their
bar across many parameters of measurement.

Billy
Touro learner

 

Billy,

bad wording on my part? My comparison was the issue related to the PhD programs at Touro University International and sufficient numbers of faculty for the applicants. Sorry if I confused.