University of Phoenix May Be Placed on Probation by Accreditor

[Prancer]

Do they bug IT more for online classes than not online ones?

Are you asking about rfisher's school? I don't know.

If you are asking about mine, no. We do not allow students to take online classes until they have completed University 101, a course which requires them to use ANGEL to at least basic proficiency, among other things.

[Vash01]

I am a late comer to this thread and may have missed some of the posts.

What happens to those who have already graduated from UOP? Are their degrees still valid?

[MacMadame]

Are you asking about rfisher's school? I don't know.

I was asking about yours. I have to say, my personal experience is that taking that class won't stop some of them from being royal PITA for IT and I bet some of your fellow teachers are too.

But it sounds like your school doesn't have some sort of weird chargeback to IT for online classes so it doesn't really matter.

[bek]

The one school you mentioned is a non-profit, but it's privately owned. And because of the way it awards credit, its degrees may not be recognized as legitimate by every employer.

Well that's a point against it. I"m still doing my research. I'm actually leaning towards another school.

[Prancer]

I am a late comer to this thread and may have missed some of the posts.

What happens to those who have already graduated from UOP? Are their degrees still valid?

Yes, technically. If they were awarded degrees while the school was accredited, the degrees came from an accredited institution.

This can sometimes lead to interesting situations. Look up the case of John Gray, author of Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus and read about his education credentials. He is entitled to call himself a Ph.D and he is a licensed therapist. Had he been a few weeks behind on his "degree program," that would not be the case.

What generally happens, though, is that the worth of your degree goes down. A friend of mine got an MLS from an accredited university, worked for a couple of years, and then took some time off to have kids. Somewhere between the time she quit work and decided to go back, her university program lost accreditation. No one would touch her, even though her degree was technically good.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

I graduated college in 2011, and from my experience with both online and on-campus classes (though I've only taken like 3 or 4 online classes), I didn't find online classes to be any more difficult.

Yes, a few online classes may have required more online postings on blackboard or assignments, but I wouldn't necessarily call it more difficult. Every class I've taken required me to stay on top of the syllabus and hand-in assignments, papers, take mid-terms, and final examinations throughout the semester. Actually, now that I think about it, I am not sure if my online classes were any busier than my on-campus ones. In fact, some of my on-campus classes made me do extra assignments online, such as my Astronomy class that not only made us take 4 exams in the semester and take daily quizzes through use of a clicker, but we had to do an online, very in-depth quiz every time we started a new chapter that could have ranged from 80-120 questions. Some portions were tricky multiple choice while others had interactive diagrams for us to label and others had matching, etc. Those chapter quizzes seriously took me 4-5 hours to do some times (which seems sort of like nothing now, but as an undergraduate, it felt like forever). One of my history courses required us to submit weekly written assignments electronically on top of a final 10-page paper, etc.

I mean, I'm sure online classes may require more work in some/many peoples' experience, but from my experience with on-campus classes (I was a political science major with a minor in sociology and geography), I sure as heck read a lot and turned in many assignments throughout the semester, so it's hard for me to imagine that an online class would be that much more busy since my own experience with online classes didn't seem to be that much more hectic. Not only that, but taking classes on-campus gives the student the extra challenge of participation and making sure you really know what you're talking about when asked a question. Of course, it's college and some classes are easy to BS, but others aren't.

The truth is that I miss that assessment throughout the semester. Law school is my first experience with having only one examination at the very end, and I have to say it is so far the most trying experience of my educational experience. The only indication of whether my study plan is working is if I can follow the active discussions in class, and if I don't look like an absolute fool when cold-called (or if I can tell if the other student being cold-called is just wrong ).

[PDilemma]

I don't think online coursework is necessarily more difficult, but some here claimed that it is infinitely easier and requires no accountability from students. A stereotype I think is associated with old notions of fly by night buy a diploma from an ad in the back of a magazine sorts of scams. And that is absolutely not the case. I have had people tell me that I am not really learning anything (as if they are inside my head and know) and am not really in school at all.

Reality is that online education is here to stay. Those who have nothing but opposition are typically older people with no experience with the medium. Students or recent graduates in traditional programs rarely criticize because they have often taken online courses or at least interacted with Blackboard or similar tools and know how interactive an online class
can be. In my program, students are overwhelmingly non-traditional and have families, jobs and other obligations that do not allow them to study on campus. Often distance is an issue as well--students simply do not geographically have access to affordable programs and turned to a new medium so that they can still meet educational goals.

[Skittl1321]

I am a late comer to this thread and may have missed some of the posts.

What happens to those who have already graduated from UOP? Are their degrees still valid?

Yes, if they were earned while the school was accreditted, they are still accreditted degrees, but of course, it will hurt people holding those degrees, because people do not think highly of the school, and a lot of value in degree is reputation. However, UoP has always had that issue, acredidation or not.

[CDANN1013]

Oh, we still have plenty of faculty who won't even post their syllabi online, and many people still give printed exams. I don't give exams, but if I did, I wouldn't put them online for several reasons, so that makes sense to me. Papers are another story. School policy is that faculty are supposed to require students to submit papers through TurnItIn for plagiarism checks. Most of us do this; some do not. Most students appreciate this, as it means they don't have to worry about finding printers or paying to print the pages. I also post quizzes and exercises online; some of them are automatically graded, which is nice, and some of them I have to grade manually, but either way, the grade goes directly into the electronic gradebook, complete with comments if I choose to add them, which is available to the students at all times. I also post class notes, videos, assignments to read between classes, articles or other information I find that I think is interesting and relevant but don't have time to cover in class or that isn't actually related to class but is information students can use--all kinds of things.

Colleges across the board are moving more and more online; if nothing else, it saves tremendously on printing costs. We don't even print the syllabus out any more; if students want hard copies, they have to print out their own.



If ANGEL goes down, there is also a lot of pressure to get it back up--not because of the online classes in particular, but because we are all dependent on it. I don't think we have ever had an unannounced interruption of more than two hours. Planned interruptions take place during school vacations and the faculty all bitch mightily because IT always takes the system down right before the term starts when we are all uploading course material.

So I am quite sure that IT does a lot to keep ANGEL running; I just don't see any exceptional need in terms of online classes.

Schools do vary, of course, but......



I subscribe to all kinds of Tech in Higher Ed publications and see stats on the subject all the time. You may not be able to make a lot of generalizations, but if the stats are to be believed, my school falls somewhere in the middle in terms of tech use.

I have a few students who complain about this because they are completely tech-phobic and often struggle with very basic things, but most of them greatly prefer the classes with faculty take advantage of the online tools to classes where the professors do not.

Prancer,

Do you teach at Penn State? The Angel comment made me curious.

[agalisgv]

I don't think online coursework is necessarily more difficult, but some here claimed that it is infinitely easier and requires no accountability from students. A stereotype I think is associated with old notions of fly by night buy a diploma from an ad in the back of a magazine sorts of scams. And that is absolutely not the case. I have had people tell me that I am not really learning anything (as if they are inside my head and know) and am not really in school at all.

Reality is that online education is here to stay. Those who have nothing but opposition are typically older people with no experience with the medium. Students or recent graduates in traditional programs rarely criticize because they have often taken online courses or at least interacted with Blackboard or similar tools and know how interactive an online class
can be. In my program, students are overwhelmingly non-traditional and have families, jobs and other obligations that do not allow them to study on campus. Often distance is an issue as well--students simply do not geographically have access to affordable programs and turned to a new medium so that they can still meet educational goals.

I do think one has to differentiate between online programs, and online coursework. The studies I've seen show when you combine in-person classes with online components, they result in higher retention of course content compared to in-person alone, or online alone.

So I agree there's a substantive difference between students enrolled in regular programs who take some coursework online during their studies, and students enrolled in online-only programs. The issue I've seen is what overedge mentioned--too many students in too many online-only programs simply don't have the skill sets necessary to excel in academic studies. I teach only at the graduate level, so my experience is likely different than others. Some of my students completed the entirety of their undergraduate degrees through online-only programs. And they are just not ready for prime-time. Unfortunately, they were top students as undergrads, and are mystified why they have so much trouble in graduate school compared to others.

In my area, the two big trends are expansion through greater inclusion of online education, and greater admission of international students. But in the case of international students, schools are lowering their TOEFL standards to bring more in, so students invariably don't have the necessary language skills to do well. It's a great money-booster for the institution, but it comes at the cost of international students. With online-only programs, the level of academic preparedness I've seen in students has been woefully inadequate. And those students get set-up for failure at the graduate level much as do international students--but not before they've paid at least a full academic year of tuition and fees.

As I've said, I'm sure it varies. I don't teach praxis courses, so the emphasis is on more traditional academic skill-sets. And that's not an area where I see online-only programs excel. Anyhow, that's just been my experience.

ETA: Not Prancer, but she's based in OH--not PA

[Vash01]

Yes, if they were earned while the school was accreditted, they are still accreditted degrees, but of course, it will hurt people holding those degrees, because people do not think highly of the school, and a lot of value in degree is reputation. However, UoP has always had that issue, acredidation or not.

Thanks. I know a few people that went to UOP and got degrees there (on line or otherwise). Good to know their degrees are still recognized. I personally don't particularly favor the UOP degrees but I can see why it would be a good option for working people that want to get more education.

[heckles]

It's very different, and for you to suggest it isn't shows that you either know very little about questionable for-profit schools or about traditional brick and mortar schools.

So, how exactly are the admissions counselors at for-profit schools different from those at brick-and-mortar schools? Universities are businesses regardless of their IRS designations, and as such have the goal to get paying customers.

[overedge]

duplicate post

[overedge]

Brick-and-mortar schools don't generally train their admissions counsellors in sales techniques, don't give them quotas or targets for closed sales or $$$ amounts of downpayments to reach, and don't harangue their admissions staff if they aren't reaching those quotas or targets. You might find this story enlightening.
http://www.propublica.org/article/at...s-persist-1103

[heckles]

Brick-and-mortar schools don't generally train their admissions counsellors in sales techniques, don't give them quotas or targets for closed sales or $$$ amounts of downpayments to reach, and don't harangue their admissions staff if they aren't reaching those quotas or targets.

That's idealistic at best. Admissions departments at "non-profit" colleges actively keep statistics regarding how many prospects are converted into paying customers, and which admission counselor worked with each of those customers. If an admissions counselor doesn't have a satisfactory conversion rate, he or she will be shown the door. The biggest mistake that the admissions department at the University of Phoenix made was upfront about their methods.

[overedge]

That's idealistic at best. Admissions departments at "non-profit" colleges actively keep statistics regarding how many prospects are converted into paying customers, and which admission counselor worked with each of those customers. If an admissions counselor doesn't have a satisfactory conversion rate, he or she will be shown the door. The biggest mistake that the admissions department at the University of Phoenix made was upfront about their methods.

There's a huge difference between keeping statistics on how many expressions of interest turn into actual enrollments, and setting sales quotas and targets with dollar values attached, and the article I linked to gives a very clear discussion of those differences. I'm sorry you aren't able to see that distinction.

[heckles]

There's a huge difference between keeping statistics on how many expressions of interest turn into actual enrollments, and setting sales quotas and targets with dollar values attached, and the article I linked to gives a very clear discussion of those differences.

The difference is that one school dances around the final goal, while the other is open about it. The goal is the same.

The article seems to imply that University of Phoenix is the only school that dupes incoming students into believing that a major they offer is a reasonable facsimile of what the student requested. Hello? Brick-and-mortar admissions counselors are longtime masters at that game. Call any admissions department asking if they offer an unusual major and they shift into full conman mode. "No, we don't have a Deaf Education major but we do have a Marine Biology major and they're practically twins! After all, marine scientists use hand signals underwater, and that's just like sign language! You'll qualify for the exact same jobs!"

[Prancer]

Prancer,

Do you teach at Penn State? The Angel comment made me curious.

No . ANGEL is the second most popular education software program; a lot of schools use it.

As I've said, I'm sure it varies. I don't teach praxis courses, so the emphasis is on more traditional academic skill-sets. And that's not an area where I see online-only programs excel. Anyhow, that's just been my experience.

And I don't think that's an isolated experience, either. I have to go back to:

Having said that, a lot of schools, particularly the all-online schools, hire only part-time instructors and pay them dirt, which means that most online instructors are too busy and/or too underpaid (and often too lazy) to put this much effort into it. There are programs that require almost nothing from instructors and almost nothing is what they do. It is much more work to do an online class the right way than it is to do a traditional class, at least for me.

There are a LOT of instructors, however, who like teaching online because they are lazy. Lazy instructors put together some half-assed course, post it and then pretty much ignore the online students. I know teachers like that; I've taken online classes from teachers like that.

This a widespread problem in online programs. Many colleges see online classes as easy money--many students sign up, relatively few finish, and the classes are cheaper to run. Many professors and adminstrators see online classes as inferior and don't even try to require equivalent standards. The problem is even worse in all-online schools.

I think it was Aceon6 who said that she had been told that all the scrutiny of all-online schools came from traditional college moving into online programs and trying to eliminate the competition. And there is truth to that. However, that is beginning to backfire on the brick and mortars, as their own online programs are coming under scrutiny and often don't measure up. Much handwringing has ensued--what can we do about these online classes? I do think there has been improvement, and I expect that will continue as more colleges start seeing online classes as the graveyard of lessers. But that attitude is still out there.

On the other hand, there are good online programs and I think most programs are improving. The demands of competition are forcing schools to step it up.

[rfisher]

Our affiliate university has started a peer review program for online courses in order identify and eliminate issues before HLC casts a squinty eye their way. Peer reviewers are required to actually complete an online certification process. My overachiever faculty just did it.

As to the cost associated with online courses, I doubt most instructors know. I wouldn't have if the Dean of the College of Health Related Professions hadn't told me. And the cost came out of his budget, now ours.

[agalisgv]

Our affiliate university has started a peer review program for online courses in order identify and eliminate issues before HLC casts a squinty eye their way. Peer reviewers are required to actually complete an online certification process.

The governing credential body for my field and affiliated areas has implemented stringent online standards that prohibit online-only schools and severely curtailed online instruction at all.

For Prancer, I get the sense that many of the students in online-only undergrad programs would not meet the admissions criteria for most regular colleges/universities. At least here, there seems to be a concerted effort to recruit students of color and vets with minimal skill sets, and bilk them for every financial aid dollar they can.

For heckles, I'd say the higher caliber the school, the more admissions counselors are concerned with proper fit rather than signing up students. Public universities in general aren't at a loss for students, so they don't have quota expectations. At low-tiered private schools, there is a lot of selling involved. But in higher-tiered private schools, admissions acts as more of a gatekeeper than salesperson. The problem with most for-profit schools IMO is that they are low-tiered.