UOPsucks.com is a website that shows a clear bias. Calling it good information is a little erroneous. Perhaps calling it one-side of the story would be more appropriate.

As a graduate and student, I don’t pretend everything is roses. In fact, no school I’ve looked was all good news. Thinking that would be wrong and result in much frustration.

I’ve looked at the site, several times, and find that the information is presented in an all or nothing fashion. That is to say that the incidents on the site are widespread and function as the rule versus the exception. Consider if your thinking about major, traditional, schools is altered because of fraudulent and unethical action in the recent financial aid scandal. Likely it is not. It is the exception, not the rule.

Thanks for the reply and the comment over on The Doc Blog. I found your post in the spam filter, as you thought, and rescued it for the readers to see.

You began with a comment, “First off, I find it preposterous that a good HR employee would not even be thorough even to look at the schools name ” I wouldn’t disagree. Perhaps it was my own data set that gave the response. I submit that comment might be that they don’t dig further into the name, such as checking out accreditation, etc.

Your research is something I commonly here; however, I called 2 Adecco offices locally and asked the question, “are online degrees looked upon less, the same, or more favorable than traditional degrees”. The answer both times was “the same”.

But I submit that the difference is not online vs. traditional/offline. It is local vs. non-local. I talk about this almost everyday and that is typically the difference. Even “local” programs likely offer a distance component, are those individual components seen in such a negative light?

It is an aspect of familiarity. HR pros are seasoned and tenured veterans, likely have degrees from pre-online, and are not looking for degrees. Thus, lack familiarity with the programs and the rigor required. Being a distance education student requires discipline and dedication. For me, going to a classroom 1x or 2x a week is a scheduling issue not a matter of dedication. Not to mention that is something comes up, I can skip a night and catch up at my next free moment, provided my deadlines are hit.

You make some interesting points regarding the Intel situation. To be clear, Intel won’t fund the program with tuition assistance and they won’t fund any non-AACSB programs. It is not a “looking so lowly” upon situation; because UOP is as big as it is, it draws more fire. Bill alludes to the scope of the problem for UOP.

I’ve got my own conjecture about Intel’s choice but I would send you back to the story and read between the lines on it. Look at other issues like lack of upward mobility, attrition, discretionary spending, etc.

AACSB has various requirements that favor traditional programs. UOP, a non-traditional schools, wouldn’t fit the traditional requirements of AACSB. As far as I can tell, UOP is still working with AACSB.

Moreover, don’t confuse accreditation with certification (although called accreditation). AACSB is not an accrediting body, it is a professional organization that has standards of its own and therefore certifies programs and schools. This is not meant to belittle AACSB.

Accreditation comes from the Higher Learning Commission of the U.S. Department of Education and is administered through regional associations. The difference is subtle but present. UOP is regionally accredited; a process that should not be taken lightly.

Accrediting schools is serious business and the amount of standards an institution must adhere to and uphold are staggering. Not to mention, UOP being the largest school in North America is constantly under scrutiny simply to maintain the standards. Make no mistake, if the degree were invalid or junk, the school would be shut down in a flash.

You commented on the networking aspect of traditional schools/brick & mortar, “You miss out on the networking aspect of the education which can be looked down upon for higher positions.” I disagree, my network has me in touch with ranking members of government agencies, international organizations, big companies. Not only that, but my network is global not local or regional. This has helped me in my work too. It is something that I would like to see UOP expand. The potential exists for a massive social/professional networking program that could provide students more value.

I read your comments about HR professionals turning their noses up at UOP and distance learning programs. I’ve got a fair amount of exposure to HR professionals in my career and current occupation. I would hazard a guess that HR professionals are not providing an evidence-based opinion. That said, perception is reality. It is proponents of distance education that are moving the needle. Concerns from HR range from cheating to learning styles. The amount of work I do for UOP classes provides evidence that cheating is not possible (that is having someone else do my work). There are systems and checks in place that catch plagiarism and the sort. As for the learning styles and notion of being alone in learning, pish-posh. I have so much interaction that the conversations are far more valuable than most classrooms.

Is it for everyone? No.

You final thought, “My is point not that you will not get a good education out of the program, but rather your career prospects afterwards could be hampered.” I wrote about GIGO on my post. Like any degree, if you put GI you get GO. This is the same for Harvard as it is for UOP. Perception is ours to control, we shape how others perceive our work, dedication, etc. Because I know, first hand, the level of work and education that I get out of the program I know the value of the degrees.

Chuck, I enjoy the discourse! Thanks.