Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You seem somewhat knowledgeable about these programs...do you also work in the for-profit industry? It's okay...don't be ashamed...there are support groups to help you with the coming out process.
Nah, I'm with the competition- community college offering limited bachelor's programs. (And all for about $80-$90 per credit hour at this time.)
If you want to talk non-traditional students in other programs, I've actually got a good number of colleagues who have gone the online/mostly online route for graduate degrees because bricks and mortar is problematic here, and they almost always go for the SACS-accredited non-profits like Troy State, St. Leo's, or Nova Southeastern.
Hi. Just for disclosure, I work as a career counselor at a private, highly ranked, non-profit university. I have a B.A., M.A., and an MSEd, all from private non-profits.
When I first completed my MSEd in Counseling/Mental Health and was looking for jobs in higher ed, I came across many positions at both real universities and for-profits. I thought it was very interesting that at the real universities, for academic and career counseling, they were looking for people with an appropriate counseling background.
At for-profits, they specified they were looking for a marketing and sales background.
I also think it is kind of slimy that the OP came on here appearing that they merely wanted to "discuss" the issue of for-profits without revealing (at first) that they worked at one. That says something.
Quote:
I am sticking to my original question. Considering there are so many claiming that for-profits offer an inferior product, it is only appropriate that someone provide evidence to support this claim.
The evidence has been presented. It is overwhelming and I'm not going to repeat it.
Quote:
To your indicators. How are entrance requirements related to the quality of a program?
They show that students have to have a history of accomplishment before entering. Quality students create a rigorous learning environment of discussion and research in the classroom. Quality students also are prepared to do challenging work.
Quote:
...accreditation does not gurantee quality.
Actually, that is exactly what accreditation does. I have been a part of the accreditation process at both the private high school and university level. During the process, every aspect of a program - academic rigor, teaching, course offerings, appropriate training related to the career, etc are evaluated by an impartial panel. An evaluation is given and standards have to be met.
Because this quality control is vital in most professions, not only is a degree from an accredited institution of higher quality, it is a MANDATORY PRERQUISITE to a) being licensed in a profession (such as counseling, psychology, or teaching) b) further graduate study.
A "bachelors" from a for-profit will not be able to get you into graduate school because it is not accredited. A "masters" or "doctorate" from a for profit will, in most instances, not qualify you for licensure or certification in most professions.
So yes, the lack of accreditation does make a program lower quality, both because it cannot reach certain standards, and because it is useless as professional preparation.
Quote:
...employment rates speak to the prestige of a program/institution, but not necessarily the quality.
Prestige is usually the result of years of quality graduates being turned out by a program. Programs tend to graduate excellent graduates when they have high admissions standards and a rigorous curriculum. And if getting a job is a goal, then the presitge of your degree is going to be an important measure of your ability to get a job, and therefore, the quality of your program.
Quote:
...rate of acceptance into grad programs...once again, prestige and name of program, not necessarily the quality.
See above. Your program is worthless if you cannot get into graduate school with it. I would say that directly affects quality.
If these for-profit programs are of equal quality, then why don't they get accredited, build some prestige, and lead to licensure or certification?
As to customers being able to go else where if they do a poor job, that is true - but that is why the predatory recruiting practices are so widespread. They know they have an uneducated customer base that doesn't necessarily know all of their options.
Finally, the comment about liberal arts are worthless is ignorant. The entire point of college is to get a well rounded cultural education enroute to the qualifications for a profession. For educated people, the liberal arts are not worthless. A liberal arts degree is the foundation for further graduate and professional work in many fields. And while I am all for true vocational education and apprenticeships in trades, it should not be under the guise of "college" unless it includes a liberal arts component, especially at the high price for-profits charge.
The sad thing is that some students probably waste time and money at for-profits because they don't even know, because they are from lower SES and haven't had the career and college guidance that an middle or upper class kid has. And yet there are great opportunities available to these same kids, for much less, at public universities or community colleges.
I get a little frustrated when people draw broad and derisive conclusions about my profession; and that so many of you are willing to discard the entire industry over a few bad actors.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again: the economic incentives at work in the market today do not - in my view - provide adequate motivation for quality education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by csbjornstad
To your indicators. How are entrance requirements related to the quality of a program?
I'm not a big fan of selectivity as a proxy for quality. However, there are people out there who simply are not capable of doing college-level work. If an institution admits unqualified applicants, that indicates one of two things: a) the school is happy to take students' money and then let them fail or b) the curriculum doesn't meet acceptable standards for academic rigor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by csbjornstad
...accreditation does not gurantee quality.
Not 100%, perhaps, but it is a pretty strong indicator. I'm not familiar with all major accreditation bodies. But I know that ABET engineering and engineering tech requirements, for example, are quite rigorous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by csbjornstad
...employment rates speak to the prestige of a program/institution, but not necessarily the quality.
...median income...don't see the connection to quality of programs.
...rate of acceptance into grad programs...once again, prestige and name of program, not necessarily the quality.
1. How is industry prestige developed? If a company chooses to recruit from a school, usually that indicates that they have had success with graduates of that school in the past.
2. Graduate acceptances are not just based on prestige. In some cases, prestige may be close to irrelevant. The reality is that fairly objective indicators including test scores and research experience can play a big role in graduate admissions.
I attended UoP about ten years ago, my experience at the school was great. I was overcharged, the classes were easy, and my final consisted of a powerpoint presentation. Fortunately I didn't graduate, but I did get student loans, plus a separate fee owed to the school because student loans didn't cover the entire tuition.
I ended up graduating from a private college, and looking back, I'm happy that I never stayed at UoP or any other for-profit school. Having said that, the entire industry is for-profit, which isn't bad in the sense of making money, but just like anything else in life, some things (or schools) are better than others. I look at it this way, Harvard, MIT, Yale, etc, people know their names, they do make a difference, at least on paper. People also know names like UoP, Strayer, ITT, they also make a difference on paper. I like the schools in the middle, the "no-name" school that isn't really special.
Obviously a Yale graduate isn't guaranteed a great career, just like a UoP graduate isn't guaranteed a dismal career, it really comes down to what you do after school; of course most people would prefer the Yale graduate for obvious reasons, but there are exceptions to everything.
I would not immediately look down on a for-profit graduate, some people have more hurdles when they start (could be self inflicted hurdles), and they don't always go the traditional route. With that said, there are so many schools that offer the flexibility of a UoP or any other for-profit school at far less the cost. I could understand people going to for-profit schools when they first started (fools like me), because of the flexibility, but since so many other schools offer the same flexibility at a discount, I don't understand why someone would attend a for-profit in this day and age.
One of the posters mentioned taking useless classes at traditional schools, and I'm somewhat torn on this issue. I'm in IT, so subjects like math and various computer courses are really all I need to perform my job. Even though accounting and history are not part of my daily job, or subjects like International relations and business; having taken those courses, I feel, even if it's at the most basic level, somewhat knowledgeable about different aspects of the world. Obviously those other courses were required, and they cost money, so I don't like spending extra money (loans) for extra classes, but I do feel that I learned something worthwhile from those "extra" courses. I just had to digress for a moment because I do feel that you can benefit from courses that are not directly job related.
Ok, to sum all of this up, All schools are "for-profit", but avoid the ones with a ticker symbol, Yale graduates could end up working at starbucks, student loans are bad, so keep them to a minimum, and have a plan after you finish school.
Plenty of traditional four-year schools have online programs. When you get your degree, it will have the name of THAT school, not "UNC Online University". I'd go that route before I attended a for-profit school. It's probably cheaper, too.
I heard from a hiring manager that traditional school grads will win out over for-profit schools as well.
These schools are extremely expensive, and many of them engage in unethical practices.
For "career colleges" that the above poster mentions, most of the programs are offered at a community college, and those credits can transfer to a four-year college in many instances. An aquaintance attended a such school to be a surgical tech. It was ridiculously expensive for some college credits that she can't transfer. Now she is talking about going to nursing school. So she basically wasted two years of her life.
Unfortunately, this is the "thing" to do with all of my friends in my age range (late 20s/early 30s). They are going to these for-profit schools for Master's--one even for her Ph.D--in DROVES. One friend is $100,000 in debt, with few job prospects.
I totally agree! Many traditional schools have online programs.
I would like to chip in here on this subject. I go to DeVry, and I am, so far (mostly) pleased with the experience.
I do think that traditional schools are better overall. But, in some cases, some people will better themselves, and their resume/job propects, by going to an online schol.
BUT - it has to be the RIGHT school.
The only online school I like, is DeVry. The other ones (UofP, Argosy, Full Sail, etc) just seem cheesy and flimsy...like diploma mills, as others have said.
When I was 18, I went to a traditional school (Wright State University, BS in Accountancy) but only went for two years...didnt fnish. I wasnt in the right mindset, at the time, to finish. I did get the "campus" experience which was important to have. But then, "life" happened, and I never returned. Meanwhile, I found a good job in IT that, as it so happens, offers to pay for school and they do recommend DeVry (especially for IT and nursing - we are a health insurance company). My bosses bosses boss went to DeVry. And, we recruit our interns from DeVry, who then in turn, are able to work for us full time later on (I work for one of the biggest health insurance companies in Chicago, and we are Fortune 500).
Plus, DeVry does offer classes on their campus, complete with classrooms, and professors, as well as online, but they just do not offer the "traditional" campus experience with frats and football teams...which I admit, that experience is good to have, if you are 18 to 25 and have no kids, etc. If you are older, have kids, etc and just need a skillset to make you marketable, and do not have a lot of time for the BS of the traditional setting, then DeVry is good.
The curriculum there is pretty much the same as you would get at a place like, OSU or Wright State, and remember, the knowledge is the same no matter where you go to school anyway (2+2 will always equals 4, even at Harvard). Even though I work in IT, I am finishing my Accountancy degree. I know that it might not be as prestigious as, say, U of I in Chicago, but many employers do respect DeVry. So, my plan is to finish at deVry, JUST TO HAVE THE DEGREE, and then apply and get accepted to University of Texas at Dallas (YES, A REAL, TRADITIONAL SCHOOL WITH A CAMPUS) which, just happens to be offering an online Masters of Accountancy! So, the Devry is just to get me to the point where I can get a Masters from a "real" university.
I would like to chip in here on this subject. I go to DeVry, and I am, so far (mostly) pleased with the experience.
I do think that traditional schools are better overall. But, in some cases, some people will better themselves, and their resume/job propects, by going to an online schol.
BUT - it has to be the RIGHT school.
The only online school I like, is DeVry. The other ones (UofP, Argosy, Full Sail, etc) just seem cheesy and flimsy...like diploma mills, as others have said.
When I was 18, I went to a traditional school (Wright State University, BS in Accountancy) but only went for two years...didnt fnish. I wasnt in the right mindset, at the time, to finish. I did get the "campus" experience which was important to have. But then, "life" happened, and I never returned. Meanwhile, I found a good job in IT that, as it so happens, offers to pay for school and they do recommend DeVry (especially for IT and nursing - we are a health insurance company). My bosses bosses boss went to DeVry. And, we recruit our interns from DeVry, who then in turn, are able to work for us full time later on (I work for one of the biggest health insurance companies in Chicago, and we are Fortune 500).
Plus, DeVry does offer classes on their campus, complete with classrooms, and professors, as well as online, but they just do not offer the "traditional" campus experience with frats and football teams...which I admit, that experience is good to have, if you are 18 to 25 and have no kids, etc. If you are older, have kids, etc and just need a skillset to make you marketable, and do not have a lot of time for the BS of the traditional setting, then DeVry is good.
The curriculum there is pretty much the same as you would get at a place like, OSU or Wright State, and remember, the knowledge is the same no matter where you go to school anyway (2+2 will always equals 4, even at Harvard). Even though I work in IT, I am finishing my Accountancy degree. I know that it might not be as prestigious as, say, U of I in Chicago, but many employers do respect DeVry. So, my plan is to finish at deVry, JUST TO HAVE THE DEGREE, and then apply and get accepted to University of Texas at Dallas (YES, A REAL, TRADITIONAL SCHOOL WITH A CAMPUS) which, just happens to be offering an online Masters of Accountancy! So, the Devry is just to get me to the point where I can get a Masters from a "real" university.
Thank you. I appreciate the anecdotal perspective and wish that more people would come out and talk about their positive experiences at a for-profit institutions.
Seriously? All schools are equal in quality of education? No. Just...no. What's taught, how well it's taught, how well you're tested, these vary widely.
This whole thread is a sham with the way this alt pretty much didn't mention oh hey I work in the industry.
Seriously? All schools are equal in quality of education? No. Just...no. What's taught, how well it's taught, how well you're tested, these vary widely.
This whole thread is a sham with the way this alt pretty much didn't mention oh hey I work in the industry.
I agree that all schools are not equal. Yet, quality is not determined soley based upon the type of accreditation, the type (for-profit or public), or its prestige.
So this thread is a sham because I work at a for-profit? Sad that your ability to debate a position is so limited. Do you feel swindled some how by participating in this discussion?
I should have quoted but I wasn't talking to you. Partly about you but not to you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Been there
I'd go that route before I attended a for-profit school. It's probably cheaper, too.
