Sorry, but I don’t see why you think using “Phoenix” in a college name is deceptive, even if they only use Phoenix as a mail drop (and I think it’s been established that they have a much stronger connection than that).
I could see your point if they called themselves the “University of Oxford” or something, but I’m really struggling to understand what academic reputation Phoenix has that would make anyone think they’re trying to pull a fast one. They have to be from somewhere, and no offense to Phoenix, but if I wanted to bask in reflected academic glory, it would not be near the top of my list.
Since the thread is open, I wanted to ask if anyone knew whether the Western Governors University in Washington state was actually accredited or was just some kind of diploma mill. They claim to be accredited but claiming something is fairly easy.
I get tons of spam from these people and was wondering what kind of place it was.
Western Governors University is based in Salt Lake City, and yes, it’s accredited. It’s a non-profit private school and I wouldn’t call it a diploma mill; it’s respectable.
Here is an article about a study showing students at for-profit colleges earn less than students at nonprofit colleges.
And another.
For profit colleges seem to serve as excellent conduits of money from the government into their coffers, with the students accumulating the debt. Which they may not be able to repay.
Now certainly a motivated student can finish a degree there - but a motivated student might also be able to get into a traditional college. My son-in-laws sister did UofP classes, and never quite finished. Mostly her fault, true, but there was certainly no one interested in pushing her along. Even big state schools are quite interested in having you graduate.
One should recognize that DeVry and University of Phoenix were ahead of their time in recognizing the demand for adult learners. You now see traditional Universities peeling off of the foresight of DeVry and UoP to draw consumers their way. I served in the U.S. Air Force and have attended learning institutions from Community Colleges, Military Tech Schools and large State Universities depending on my location and the times I could attend classes. Honestly, the ones I felt were least effective were the large state Universities that provided classes to over 250 students or more at a time. My perspective is that now that they have realized the equitability in serving these adult learners, they work to diminish DeVry and UoP degree earners. Traditional Universities could be arrogant some years ago, but recognizing the change in demographics and the revenue to be realized there, enlightenment has dawned and they are now pursuing the market DeVry and UoP has been serving for at least a decade. That they were so slow to catch on is representative of how late they are to the game. I earned my MBA from University of Phoenix and just to satisfy the concern of those who would fear the students and degrees are inferior, one of my classmates actually wrote one of the chapters to the Biology text books utilized in the state universities curriculum from which she earned her B.S. in Biology.
I am not a Human Resources Executive, but if I were, I think I would actively seek out DeVry and UoP graduates. I understand the commitment and discipline it takes to earn these degrees while performing in the workforce fulltime. It’s not a minor feat.
In considering the discussion of “non-profit” and “for-profit” education, one might compare it to “non-profit” and “for-profit” medicine. Competition is driven by Capitalism in any industry. Be assured the “non-profit” sector has to show a profit on their End of Year Financial Summary. If an Income Statement is continually negative, there is no service and there is no mission. While I would agree, Capitalism should not be considered in education or medicine, they have been prevalent, competitive business models in both industries. What is notable and valuable is that they see a need and serve the need before other entities. We must be cognitive of the forerunners so that we are not mislead by those who would diminish their success and foresight only to usurp the equitable market of those who saw and met the demand initially. I am grateful for them.
Not really: traditional universities have had adult-education and continuing-education programs for decades. What’s new is the large-scale distance learning concept that internet technology makes possible.
The first sentence is true, but not for the reason the second sentence implies. In the case of both healthcare and education, there is not a functioning market. Students mostly pay with loans and/or grants, scholarships, or at the very least, their parents’ money, usually at a time in their life when those financial decisions mean nothing to them. Patients don’t usually pay for their own healthcare either, they have insurance or just use the ER. In both cases there are high costs to switching providers. The fact that the consumers of these services are mostly isolated from the costs and competition means that prices do not accurately signal value.
This means the incentives are out of whack. Colleges must convince parents that their school is prestigious while convincing students that they’ll have an awesome time and get a cool job. Actual educational outcomes are often secondary. Hospitals have no compunction against spending a million dollars attempting to extend an 85 year old cancer patient’s life by a few months, while reducing their quality of life significantly. In neither case is there an incentive to compete on price, and only minimal incentives to compete on quality. These are not the free markets of capitalism. They are distorted caricatures of a market.