I doubt I’d hire anyone with a Computer Science degree from an online university. I don’t know how long that will remain true, but it is for now.
This article, about a $99 a month online college, got me thinking about exactly what I got from actually attending university in person. Barbara Solvig attended the $99 online school, and her daughter attended a local junior college:
And if Solvig needed any further proof that her online education was the real deal, she found it when her daughter came home from a local community college one day, complaining about her math course. When Solvig looked at the course materials, she realized that her daughter was using exactly the same learning modules that she was using at StraighterLine, both developed by textbook giant McGraw-Hill. The only difference was that her daughter was paying a lot more for them, and could only take them on the college’s schedule. And while she had a professor, he wasn’t doing much teaching. “He just stands there,” Solvig’s daughter said, while students worked through modules on their own.
So would I be satisfied if my children attended Straighterline – the online school offer $99 a month classes? I don’t know. College is more than just a degree. It is a chance to test your youthful wings in a relatively secure way. It is a chance to meet an awesome wife (like I did). College tests your stamina, your endurance, your “stick to it”. In other words, college is more than knowledge. The experience counts too.
So I think my kids will be going off to college. I do think StraighterLine has a valuable place, but I’m not willing to risk my kids future on it.
Of course, my kids have options. If you or yours don’t, but can afford StraighterLine, it sounds like a pretty good program – well worth the money.
I do think, however, that online courses should be used in public lower education. That is where most education money is spend in this country – and also where performance is worst.
September 14th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Extremely important for certain degrees. Science labs are the best example of this. Field work for biologists and anthropologists is
another. Primary education practice is a possible one. Business, admin, history and poly sci could meet monthly and work in their field at the bottom. Diversity and related studies? Don’t make me laugh!
September 15th, 2009 at 1:27 am
The answer to your question is wrapped up in your view of the purpose of a university. Rounding the young mind, career training, meeting one’s peers and establishing life-long links, discovering the higher intellectual life, discussing learning with other minds, meeting intelligent people from the wider world, proving the ability to learn, all of the above? Home/online/correspondence can be little more than one-on-one training for specific skills.
September 15th, 2009 at 9:06 am
Universities are for high IQ, smart people who risk elitism if it’s not checked early. Philosophy, in all it’s aspects, and history are the subjects. Science is actually the pursuit of philosophy from an empirical sense via reason. Scientific apparatus is expensive and complex these days, best shared and kept at a university’s college.
I see no reason for medical or legal training at a university. Hospitals and courts plus lots of reading are sufficient. Of course, expanding the physician base would reqire some teaching hospitals. No such need for barristers, one on one is enough. Everyone does not need
higher education, high school is enough. Keep the numbers down and foreigners out of public facilities. Screen for genius with ambition and fund a qualified university student after means testing their parents or guardians. This everybody deserves to go is B. S..
September 16th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Having got in the lifeboat, you are for pulling up the ladder?
September 16th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
#4 makes no sense in context of the post or any of the comments. Do you have a random comment generator?