Covering the business of education and training

Hi Bill, in launching, you have a very lofty set of discussion questions! I'm hoping that you will consider opposing views on these issues since the two camps, not-for- profit and for-profit appear very polarized at this point. I wish you well on all counts!

Thanks for visiting and for your comments, Robyn.

Opposing views is what it is all about with this topic.

I hope I can generate discussions from both sides of the fence.

Of course, for good or for bad, it is a HUGE business as well.

Great line-up here Bill - and since I teach for both traditional and for profit universities -- I'll be a steady to learn here!

One question: Will any of your key areas address specific curriculum concerns -- I was surprised not to see the term used in the line-up and there are some interesting developments about how for profits standardize curriculum more and more for more fixed financial results... What do you think?

Thanks for dropping by Ellen.

There is so much to talk about...and if I take it overseas...well, then.

I value your input so please do drop by whenever you can.

You have a very interesting blog. Most of the schools I have worked for in Taiwan are for profit; with mixed results. I will keep checking out your blog.

Bill,

My name is Rags and I am an education junky. If I could find someone to pay me 6 figures to go to school, I would be in my perfect job. For most of my college career I was a nontraditional student.

As a graduate of two for-profit universities, one for-profit career school and a former student of 3 not-for-profit traditional universities/colleges I have a significant interest in your topic(s) of choice.

I hold a BSEET (Electronics Engineering Technology) from DeVry (Phoenix) and an MBA from UoP (Online). 97 hours of my undergrad work are from traditional not-for-profit universities/colleges. (Northern Arizona University/Texas State University - San Marcos/Austin Community College)

I also hold a certificate of training in Data Processing from the unaccredited and now defunct Durham-Nixon-Clay Business College (formerly in Austin TX).

In my experience the critical quality element of a degree is not the for-profit vs. not-for-profit designation but the accreditations of the institution awarding the degree. Accreditation by one of the 5 regional accrediting bodies is the key quality differentiator. IMO.

The quality of course content and instruction at the unaccredited school (DNCBC)was far below that of the accredited institutions (UoP/DeVry/ACC/TSU/NAU).

My personal experience indicates that the course content and quality of instruction between accredited not-for-profit and accredited for-profit institutions is comparable.

I did not find a significant difference in the transferability of credits between traditional and accredited for-profit schools. DeVry accepted all of my transfer hours. However, only 32 applied to my degree program. I had the same experience when transferring hours between NAU, TSU and ACC. Most of my hours were accepted but not all transferred directly. There are two elements to transferability of credits. The first is the accreditation of the school; the second is how the credits align with the degree program you are transferring to. With few exceptions schools rarely accept the majority of transferred hours as direct substitutions for their own classes. Schools, whether they are for-profit or not-for-profit, do not gain revenue from transferred hours. There is a reason why most schools have a residency requirement for the number of hours that must be taken from the school in order to receive a degree from that school. The reason is money.

During my pre graduation job search I did find some companies that would not accept a BSEET as an engineering degree. This was not a for-profit vs. not-for-profit thing. Those companies did not accept BSEETs from traditional schools as engineers either

Most of the differences I found in acceptability of degrees from for-profit schools were perception problems that were overcome by educating my audience. The basic message is that a degree, is a degree, is a degree (pick your flavor), if it is attained from an institution accredited by a reputable and appropriately recognized accrediting organization. Of course some programs are better than others. If rankings are important to you, go to a school ranked in your program of interest.

During my academic and professional careers I have experienced several noticeable differences between the accredited for-profit institutions and the traditional institutions.

There can be a difference in pay between for-profit and not-for-profit degree holders at entry level jobs. Starting salaries were ~5% higher for not-for-profit graduates at my first post graduation employer. The salary curves converged at 5 years post graduation. Since most for-profit institutions offer accelerated degree programs the difference in starting salaries is more than made up by the income earned during the early entry into the job market. In most cases a 22 year old DeVry grad has been out of school for a year and in the job market earning a salary while the 22 year old traditional grad is just finishing their degree.

Another difference is in the admissions requirements and initial capability of students. In addition to the traditional schools I attended, I was accepted to but did not attend Princeton University. The application /admissions process at the traditional schools, both private and state, was significantly more complex and rigorous than at the accredited for-profit schools. In my experience, the entry level students at the traditional schools had better academic preparation than many of the entry level students at the accredited for-profit schools.

The third difference I experienced is that the requirements for adequate demonstration of competency in course material were more rigorous at the accredited for-profit schools than at the traditional schools. There was significantly more homework, more lab work, more group projects and testing was harder at the accredited for-profit schools than at the traditional schools.

The fourth difference is that the accredited for-profit schools are focused specifically on educating students towards degrees. The traditional schools are more interested in creating an experience where students obtain an education while developing a broad portfolio of personal growth experiences. I have benefited used my experiences from both systems. Which is more valuable is situational

The fifth difference is that the accredited for-profit schools have significantly more student focused registration, counciling and graduation processes. At traditional schools my academic advisors would give a huge list of classes to choose from and give my little specific input. It was never clear exactly what I should take. At the traditional schools I stood in line for hours to register for classes that may or may not have been available when I got to the front of the line. Many of my professional and personal friends who attended traditional schools have told of nightmare experiences in having to delay graduation for a year or more because classes critical to their degree plan would not be offered for multiple semesters. At the accredited for-profit schools I knew exactly what classes I had to take, when I had to take them, exactly when I would graduate and the classes were available when I needed them If my work schedule prevented me from taking a full course load (or if I dropped a course) there was a class immediately behind me that had to take exactly what I had to take. Any out of sequence classes I needed were available with the groups in the semesters behind me. In summary, accredited for-profits have the courses you need when you need them. Traditional schools may not have what you need for an extended period of time.

The last difference is in grad placement. My BSEET graduating class from DeVry had 35 graduates. 32 of us had accepted job offers prior to graduation most of us with Fortune 500 employers. I had 5 offers for employment with quality employers prior to graduation. My experience was the norm for my class rather than the exception.

My mother had an interesting experience when she was preparing to travel to Phoenix for our graduation (My brother and I graduated together). She was at a salon getting her hair cut when she overheard a group of ladies discussing their children’s college experiences and upcoming graduations. My mother joined the conversation and informed the group that her sons were graduating in a few days. One of the discussion participants told my mother that graduation was not the big deal. Getting a job after graduation was the big deal. Her son had graduated two years before from a prestigious Ivy League school and had been waiting tables for two years while looking for a professional job and while his parents paid most of his bills. Several of the women present mirrored that experience. My mother informed the group that both of my brother and I had already accepted engineering jobs with full benefits and professional salaries.

I believe that all education is valuable with education from accredited schools being the best value. Not-for-profit vs. for-profit is not a key differentiator in the value of an education. The value is in the effort, in the experience and in how the degree aligns with the prevailing employment market.

At my wife’s undergrad graduation, the key note speaker expressed the following message; Most of the specifics learned in school will be forgotten. The value of an education is not in the specifics of the course content but in the graduate’s ability to locate information and apply it in solving problems.

An education trains you to apply information in the solution of problems.

I look forward to the growth of your blog.

Regards,
Rags

I am trying to get a trasncript from NIxon-Clay Commercial College. Knowing it is defunct do you have any suggestions? Sharon

It is a very astute point that you make regarding the value of for-profit schools. In a recent study produced by the Imagine America Foundation found that for-profit schools will pay a significant role in solving America's skilled worker shortage. With millions of jobs opening up career schools, the study found that roughly 22% of these jobs could filled by career colleges graduates. To check the study, go to www.imagine-america.org.