next »

[mtnlover]

Let me start by stating I am not for or against these Universities, in fact I teach in a medical field that has little to no on-line involvement so I don't really have dog in the fight.  My question is simply this: will the traditional US Universities see a dramatic drop in enrollment (and the loss of a lot of professor jobs) in the next 10-20 years.

I just read that Univ. of Phoenix now has over 200,000 enrolled and plans to have almost 5,000 employees soley for recuiting.

[mustbecrazy]

From the point of view of a lurking nontrad distance student... I don't see that happening.  I do not attend U of Pheonix as they don't have a program in my field and are ridiculously expensive for the distance education market, but I do spend a fair amount of time on distance education boards.  By and large people interested in distance programs and programs such as U of Phoenix offers aren't traditional aged students who would otherwise be attending on campus programs.  By and large we wouldn't be in school at all if not for distance programs.

In other words, I don't think they are going to make a significant dent in the traditional college student market.  They are after a different demographic that just happens to be returning to school in droves lately. 

What will be even more interesting, however, is seeing how they handle having major corporations such as Intel refuse to provide tuition asssitance for non-AACSB accredited MBA's and non-ABET accredited engineering degrees.  From the people I know in business, this has already shifted the benefit equation to doing professionally accredited degrees even if one does not work for Intel.

Elizabeth

(I apologize in advance for typos and other errors, but I really should be writing an assignmnet not double proofing posts to a message board.)

[zharkov]

I think that online schools draw mostly from the evening/continuing ed market, not the traditional age undergrad market, or even the full time grad market.

That said, it is more and more important for workers to have at least some college background, so online ed is one way to meet this need.

[roubai]

Old thread, but some might be interested in this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/education/11phoenix.html?ex=1328850000&en=ae463a0295e4bffd&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

[misterx]

I think there are three reasons one would want to attend Harvard

1.  The Library
      Well, Google put the nail in that coffin.

2.  The faculty.
      Harvard now releases its course notes on the web.

3.  The connections.
     TODAY, we go there for the connections... but tomorrow's students will make
     connections on their own via the web.

Profits from On line universities are about 10  billion and growing.

There is now a school in Denver.
you go there and choose what courses you want from any university in the country.
They register you.  You get the degree from that school.

Traditional universities are in big trouble.

I think there was a bill before congress a few months ago to force universities to
accept on line credit.  I am not sure it passed.  But eventually... it will.

I see no reason for me to pay Harvard tuition for my daughter (who is now 3).
In a few years... it will all change.

[zharkov]

I think there are three reasons one would want to attend Harvard
.......

Reason four for Harvard or any ivy league school is that they are very selective.  Going to Harvard, say, is a sort of talisman that says "I'm real smart."  (Ditto for other top schools, Chicago, Michigan, Cal, Bowdoin, etc.)

Until now, online schools have been open admissions and appeal to people who would have otherwise been taking night courses at the local CC or at East West State College or Hometown SLAC. 

Will we ever have selective online programs?  Will they compete with the likes of Harvard or Bowdoin?  I have no idea, but until they do, online schools are no threat to Harvard.

[kishter]

2.  The faculty.
      Harvard now releases its course notes on the web.

Course notes don't and can't reproduce the classroom dynamic.  I'm not entirely opposed to online learning--in fact, I think hybrid classroom-online courses can be really valuable--but it's a mistake to think you're getting the same thing from course notes that you would from lectures, discussions, and other classroom activities. 

[misterx]

2.  The faculty.
      Harvard now releases its course notes on the web.

Course notes don't and can't reproduce the classroom dynamic.  I'm not entirely opposed to online learning--in fact, I think hybrid classroom-online courses can be really valuable--but it's a mistake to think you're getting the same thing from course notes that you would from lectures, discussions, and other classroom activities. 

Why should they?  I do not mean to sound aggressive.... simply the
advocate of satan...  But so what?
Is this notion about "Course notes cannot reproduce the... dynamic.."
just the bellowing of a dying dinosaur?  (not you... the university)

Besides... classrooms cannot reproduce the electronic dynamic.
And which one of the two is in the future (and not of US, but of
our children?)

[kishter]

Besides... classrooms cannot reproduce the electronic dynamic.

But a "traditional" course can, indeed, "reproduce" the electronic dynamic by incorporating many of the best elements of online learning to supplement the in-class lectures, discussions, and activities. 

I say this as someone with extensive experience with online teaching and learning, including hybrid classes.  Even my non-hybrid classes all include significant online discussions, wikis, research, etc., and the students *must* interact with eachother online as well as in the classroom. 

The key is the last part--in a hybrid class or in a traditional class with online elements, students get BOTH.  An online-only course can, by definition, accomplish only half. 

[misterx]

Besides... classrooms cannot reproduce the electronic dynamic.

But a "traditional" course can, indeed, "reproduce" the electronic dynamic by incorporating many of the best elements of online learning to supplement the in-class lectures, discussions, and activities. 

OK... how about this:
But a "electronic" course can, indeed, "reproduce" the classroom dynamic by incorporating many of the best elements of wiki's and multi-media.


It can be said... someone will find a way...  It is just time, now.
I have yet to hear a single argument why I should spend $50,000
per year to send my daughter to Harvard (in 15 years), when I can spend a tenth of that to send her to Phoenix?

It is just a matter of time before those schools kick the big ones in
the shins.

And this argument about "hybrid" seems nothing more than a last ditch effort to salvage a sinking ship.

Do not get me wrong... I am HOPING that someone can prove me wrong to indicate anything that demonstrates why the traditional classroom is better (and NOT TODAY! in a few  more years, when this myspace generation matures). 

[bio_prof_]

Not a single online university will ever be able to teach hands-on techniques.  There is a big difference, in the sciences, between knowing the theory of a laboratory technique and actually being able to do it. I think this applies to mediacl procedures as well, but my field is not medicine.

[misterx]

Not a single online university will ever be able to teach hands-on techniques.  There is a big difference, in the sciences, between knowing the theory of a laboratory technique and actually being able to do it. I think this applies to mediacl procedures as well, but my field is not medicine.

Good answer...
Now, if I were the president of an on-line university, I would ask my students to: 1) enroll in one or two lab classes from a big goliath dinosaur universitye; 2) create an 18-wheeler that drives around and beomes a "local lab" for the day (hey! I just gave myself an idea to start a company :-)


This way, I give students the lab they need.

Besides, I might also add, that robotics will offset a great deal of lab tedium.  Then, the students need to understand the lab material and how to control a robot via the web.

Again... not trying to be argumentative (although it appears as such); but I do think these on-line Universities are the future and I have yet to read a cogent argument why I am wrong.  And I want to.

[bio_prof_]

You make very good points, misterx, and if your lab truck proves lucrative, I have developed many labs in a variety of subjects and have an outstanding CV. You know where to find me (big grin).

Robotics has already replaced lab tedium, but misses the crucial aspect of a skilled technician: troubleshooting. Robots only work when things go right. A human skilled in the theory and practice of the procedure is irreplaceable.

[misterx]

You make very good points, misterx, and if your lab truck proves lucrative, I have developed many labs in a variety of subjects and have an outstanding CV. You know where to find me (big grin).

Robotics has already replaced lab tedium, but misses the crucial aspect of a skilled technician: troubleshooting. Robots only work when things go right. A human skilled in the theory and practice of the procedure is irreplaceable.

Again... only intending to play the devil...

So, I am a company wanting to hire a graduating student in bio.
(Yes, yes, I hate that academia is whoring itself to companies... but
that is the way it is--let's be blunt, shall we?)...
Do I hire: 1) a student who has had lots of lab classes at Big Dinosaur U. or 2) a student who took Troubleshooting 101 on-line...
learned the theory... and is willing to intern to learn the details.

yes. you are right, troubleshooting is important.  But then the only
thing a University should teach is the  basics...  The rest- you learn from experience in the company, but not on line and not in a classroom.


So while the objection is valid in theory, in practice it is a non-issue.

Again... I cannot see why I should pay Harvard level tuition.
(do their professors really grade the students in those classes anyway?  or is it teaching assistants?)

[big_giant_head]

The reason Intel Corp. stopped paying tuition assistance to its employees who wanted to attend the U of Phoenix was that the graduates of that program could not actually do their jobs at the level Intel expected of college graduates.  Phoenix seems to be much more interested in getting bodies on the rolls and checks in the bank than with providing a real education.  You can see more specific problems with that program--complaints by students and by faculty-- by googling Phoenix and "sucks".

I teach online (as well as in traditional classrooms); have done so for a CC and for a flagship university.  I like doing it and I think it's a great alternative, especially for students who cannot physically attend face-to-face classes.

I am constantly amazed at the advances in the tech, that allow me, for instacce, to take over a student's PC and draw a diagram on his or her screen.  I expect technology to get better and better.

If I had known about Phoenix when I was first starting school, I would absolutely have chosen that option.

But here's the thing: I am so, so, so glad I didn't.  What I got from being _in a classroom_ with intelligent, interested, prepared students (they do exist!) and witty, brilliant, quick-minded, well-prepared professors and instructors...I just cannot imagine that happening in an online environment. 

A classroom is not just a platform for delivering content.  We have a different name for those: we call them "books."  From what I have seen so far, the online environment cannot (yet) compete with a roomful of good students and an engaged professor.

If I had a daughter and could afford it, I'd send her to Harvard over Phoenix.  Heck, I'd send her to Fort Hays State over Phoenix.