
Online Degrees That Are Seen as Official - Futurebot
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/upshot/true-reform-in-higher-education-when-online-degrees-are-seen-as-official.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region&abt=0002&abg=0
======
sago
I think the problem is fundamentally that two separate concerns are entangled:
education, and certification.

The certification is what you need. But to get it, the university can require
you to purchase a whole bunch of very expensive education you may not need.

Only by separating the two will this problem be solved: having certification
authorities that are independent of educational providers.

In that utopia, even a regular university can't grant you the certification.
They can market themselves as the best and most cost effective way for you to
reach the competency needed to achieve your certificate. But, perhaps MOOCs
are better, or intensive library study, or perhaps you're already that
competent, and don't need any education to get there.

It is only that which can solve the scandal of indebting vast swathes of young
people by tens of thousands of dollars.

So I'm suspicious of this article, because the solutions described still make
the same mistakes. The body that provides you with the education, certifies
you as having had that education. Okay there may be more evidence as metadata,
but still, the incentive is there for providers to bias their certification
towards the educational products they want to sell.

~~~
vertex-four
Of course... various industries have found that certifications without an
education path tie-in are near-pointless. Why? Because nobody can figure out
how to do certification exams very well.

What a useful certification usually _actually_ says isn't "this person can use
this tool", it's "this person has been educated in a certain way and paid
attention during that education, leading to the ability to use this tool".

For the vast, vast majority of certs out there where you don't have to take a
course to take the exam, you can knowledge-cram for a comparatively short
period of time, then take the exam without actually having much experience,
even if "only" in a lab, then forget most of what you've learned shortly
afterwards. As a result, few employers care about them.

If you want to do certs separate from education paths, you have to figure out
a better way of testing people - possibly real-world (or at least lab-based,
scenario-oriented) testing over a period of time.

~~~
Chathamization
Being a CFA carries a lot of weight. It seems like certifications
(unsurprisingly) work when a lot of effort has been made to set up the
certifications properly. The reason why we haven't seen such an effort in a
lot of areas is probably because most places are relying on college degrees.

~~~
ghaff
It also helps when a certification is testing to a relative specific and
concrete set of knowledge. Some IT certs are certainly better than others and
they probably speak more to some base level of knowledge as opposed to real
competence. That said, it's easier to use a test (preferably with a hands-on
component) to test for $TECH administration competence than it is to test for
computer science competence in a broad sense.

------
missn
The University of Waterloo is a good example of getting an official degree all
while doing courses online. Their transcripts do not differentiate between
online courses and regular courses so if you get a BA in English or Philosophy
for example (degrees fully offered online -
[http://cel.uwaterloo.ca/undergraduate.html](http://cel.uwaterloo.ca/undergraduate.html)),
nobody will know you took it entirely online.

Love that flexibility when I was there. The cost per credit was the same
whether I took the course online or on campus.

Did three semesters online before switching to the regular campus (my program
wasn't fully online). The education was top-notch too with responsive profs
and (for the most part) a good pace even though you're doing a lot of self-
studying. My final exams were either held at colleges near my area or
proctored at public libraries (the latter though I had to arrange on my own
and the school just mailed the exams directly to the library).

~~~
sdenton4
Waterloo is also quite notable for their extensive 'co-op' program, which
places students in internships at a really high rate.

~~~
missn
Definitely. I think that's one of the reasons they have such flexible online
course offerings (gives their co-op students a lot of flexibility).

At the end of my second year, I transferred to McGill and I was a bit
disappointed at the state of their online course offerings (barely had any,
apart from some electives, that could count for my degree). Also felt the
school had a misguided bias against online courses (if you take one
externally, there's a limit of 2 courses that you can apply to your degree -
[http://www.mcgill.ca/oasis/away/online-
courses](http://www.mcgill.ca/oasis/away/online-courses)). When I was trying
to get transfer credits, any mention of the course being taken online got my
advisor telling me that my course would probably be denied. It was a good
thing Waterloo didn't differentiate in my transcript between the two or else a
lot of my credits might have not transferred over.

This was such a stark contrast to Waterloo where I really felt they considered
their online courses to be just as comparable to their on-campus ones. I
suppose though it's the whole culture of the instition. It helps too that
Waterloo has a whole department dedicated to just the creation, design,
development and testing of online-based courses - where they have
designers/devs/subject/qa spcialists working closely with professors to design
the courses (both for credit courses and professional development/continuing
education courses). I don't believe my school has such a department to rely
on.

------
eranation
I'm paying ~ $7,000 for an online degree from a top 10 CS masters program
(Georgia Tech). The degree is identical to the on-campus one. If this doesn't
disrupt the system then I don't know what will. This is as "real" as it gets.
I really wish more universities will follow. In the meantime UC Berkley and
Stanford both offer CS master degrees for $60K and $50K respectively. I rather
pay about 10th of that and get "just" a 9th ranked program than a 1st ranked
one and use all of my kids college fund to pay for it.

~~~
iandanforth
Identical is a strong word. Can you give an overview of how group projects are
structured?

~~~
eranation
Well, the given degree (I mean, the diploma) is identical. Take two students,
an on campus one and an online one (hopefully the first will graduate around
end of 2015 beginning of 2016) and compare them, (except the name of the
student), it will be identical.

Regarding the degree program itself, the material and rigor (assignments,
tests etc), is also identical. However the process it's obviously different.
We use Piazza for collaboration, and for group projects google hangouts. I had
a great project last semester with a team of people all around the US (the
course staff puts people together by timezone and native language spoken to
make it more feasible). It worked great! Just like today's workplace is
distributed, working with remote teams or working from home is no longer a
niche, then why should education be any different? If I had the time (and
budget), I would prefer an on-campus program, mostly due to the social aspect,
networking, and fun aspect of it. But I'm not in my 20s. I have kids and a day
job, and what GT did was simply the only way I would go for a graduate degree.
(I didn't need it per-se, I do it because it's fun and interesting and cost
effective at their current price range. had it been higher, I don't think I
would go for it)

------
phamilton
I'm surprised the Georgia Tech Online Masters in Computer Science[1] isn't
mentioned in the article.

[1] [http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/](http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/)

~~~
repsilat
I was too, though it doesn't really fit with the author's thesis -- it's
actually very similar to traditional distance programs. The price and the
class sizes are crazy, and the impact on the market is probably going to be
huge, but if anything it'll reinforce the stranglehold of traditional
institutions providing traditional degrees.

~~~
fnayr
The class size for the one course I enrolled in this semester actually wasn't
crazy (unless by crazy you meant crazy small). It was ~30 students.

~~~
nkozyra
I believe they're capped at 200 but I also get the impression they're
accepting at a rate that assumes a lot of attrition prior to "full" acceptance
(completion of foundational courses with a b or better).

For example, this last semester saw a lot of people accepted without compsci
or math experience. That would make the prospect pretty daunting.

------
nickstefan12
Unless the online degrees can signal prestige they'll never be seen as
official by employers. Traditional Employers don't actually care about what
impractical academic stuff you learned. They like that "you're like me" and
that's what college really serves as: the Harry potter sorting hat.

It's time we do something else though. Paying 100k just to signal to employers
your socioeconomic background is bankrupting everyone.

~~~
Futurebot
Yeah. Some other angles on this would be "people who are able to go 4-6 years
without needing an income" and below the top-end "people who have living
parents and/or family members/people who receive(d) familial support." The
system we have here in the US is a fantastic way to exclude potentially very
smart people form non-traditional and poor backgrounds from pursuing higher
education. Contrast all this with the Danish model:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_Denmark](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loans_in_Denmark)

Seems like there's a lot we could learn from a system like that.

------
lucaspiller
For anyone wondering about Europe, my wife is studying a BSc Psychology with
the Open University, which is accredited by the British Psychological Society.
The fees are pretty much the same as a regular university though, which isn't
great.

[http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/qualifications/q07](http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/qualifications/q07)

As per other UK universities, you can transfer the credits you've earned to
brick & mortar universities, so she'll probably do that for the final year.

~~~
wbillingsley
In Australia, I teach at a university that offers degrees both on-campus and
off-campus. Many do. The courses are regular university courses (not even a
different offering -- off campus students enrol in classes with the on campus
students) so naturally that means they are regulated and accredited by the
same national bodies as for on-campus students.

(Technically they are "off campus" rather than "online", as the exam component
of the assessment is an invigilated written exam, not an online exam)

------
tim333
The CFA institute provide exams of approximately degree standard for about
$630/exam times 3 exams to get the CFA qualification. That also includes a
kind of text book. I don't know if that kind of stuff is the way forward. I've
done exam 1 and 2 and it's a bit tedious compared to a regular degree but
fairly rigorous.

~~~
theVirginian
If you want to become a financial analyst it is fairly important to get. The
CFA is nothing new, one of my parents got theirs years ago and a few of my
friends are in the program now.

------
fche
Bleedin' passive voice... "seen as official" \- seen by whom? - suitable for
what office?

------
bruceb
Shameless plug. Before open badges can work we need standardization of
listings.

This is what we are working at
[http://www.CourseBuffet.com](http://www.CourseBuffet.com)

Like courses are given the same classification and fall under the same
CourseBuffet title.

------
PhoenixWright
Even regular degrees aren't seen as "official." I'm tempted to pursue a
graduate degree but I'm afraid it's just another scam.

Education in America is over. Public schools are completely underfunded,
mismanaged and ignored. Universities have become businesses that offer a
horrendous ROI. If your lucky enough to get in an Ivy or you'd like to work in
academia (good luck in both cases), go. Otherwise save your money and figure
out your own path because our previous highway to middle-class has crumbled.

~~~
ianstallings
That's quite a cynical take. I didn't go to college but I think if people have
the opportunity and they want to learn they should take the chance. The
resources at a college for learning are second to none. That should be your
goal. That knowledge will help you find riches, but it's up to you. You have
to put the work in just like you would if you skip college. Nothing comes
easy.

------
Chevalier
"The new digital credentials can solve this problem by providing exponentially
more information. Think about all the work you did in college. Unless you’re a
recent college graduate, how much of it was saved and archived in a way that
you can access now? What about the skills you acquired in various jobs?
Digital learning environments can save and organize almost everything. Here,
in the “unlabeled” folder, are all of my notes, tests, homework, syllabus and
grades from the edX genetics course. My “real” college courses, by contrast,
are lost to history, with only an inscrutable abbreviation on a paper
transcript suggesting that they ever happened at all."

Exactly. On the merits, a MOOC degree ought to be infinitely more worthwhile
than any traditional college degree. MOOC completion (quite literally)
demonstrates project work, practical skills, attendance, and interaction. The
courses themselves are the highest quality in the world and the rigor and
impartiality is available for all the world to see. In a sane world, MOOCs
will inherit global education.

But the world hasn't caught up yet. Right now the only commonly understood
credential is the college degree, which everyone knows can be accomplished
through registering for bullshit courses, skipping class, plagiarizing
occasional essays nobody will ever read, and earning a one-word major that
does nothing to prove any actual skills. Historically, this is as good as
we've been able to do. No longer.

Give it time. There are entrenched interests here -- not only the massive and
powerful education industry, which is now obsolete, but also every existing
college graduate whose expensive credentials are now threatened by the
radically superior MOOC certificate. Not to pick on teacher unions in
particular, but several states require infamously pointless masters degrees in
education before you can teach. Lawyers likewise REALLY don't need a three-
year JD before we can practice... and the US stands alone in requiring
bachelor's degrees prior to legal training or bar passage (with the exception
of California). Virtually any non-STEM job that requires a bachelor's can be
filled without the aid of expensive four-year certificates in poetry or
pottery or communications. That's an enormous threat to basically every
working professional in the United States.

Employ the D.E.N.N.I.S. system here.

First, demonstrate the value of MOOC certificates to employers.

Second, engage employers with hiring pipelines direct from
Coursera/Udacity/edX.

Third, nurture these pipelines and grow them into a viable Github-for-
employment.

Fourth, neglect protests from existing interests that have demanded advanced
degrees in "teaching MOOCs" (seriously) or jeers that MOOC completion rates
are low.

Fifth, inspire students with visible examples of success through MOOCs. Thiel
fellows are the closest to this, but the project more closely resembles a
lottery than a structured path.

Sixth, separate MOOCs entirely from their current aping of traditional
courses. There is no reason whatsoever to release courses on a real-time
basis, or to rely on artisanal videotaped lectures. (Though MOOCs have
admittedly improved dramatically on the latter, with faster speeds,
transcripts, open courseware, etc.)

Or... just withdraw federal subsidies for student loans and make host
institutions partially liable for student defaults. I'd love to see the
argument to pay $50k/year to attend no-name for-profit ripoffs in the middle
of nowhere, versus free attendance in every Harvard course at any Starbucks in
New York City.

~~~
dalke
I question your statement "a MOOC degree ought to be infinitely more
worthwhile than any traditional college degree". (Taking "infinitely" to mean
"at least twice".)

Do you have any evidence for that? That is, there's very little research to
back that up. For example,
[http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1902/300...](http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1902/3009)
compared the two systems and found that they were roughly the same, in terms
of outcomes.

However, that's based on completing the course. From the paper, "Although
approximately 17,000 people signed-up for 8.MReV, most dropped out with no
sign of commitment to the course; only 1500 students were “passing” or on-
track to earn a certificate after the second assignment. For the IRT analysis
we included only the 1,080 students who attempted more than 50% of the
questions in the course, 95% of whom earned certificates. Most of those
completing less than 50% of the homework and quiz problems dropped out during
the course and did not take the posttest, so their learning could not be
measured."

Further, "It is also important to note the many gross differences between
8.MReV and on-campus education. Our self-selected online students are
interested in learning, considerably older, and generally have many more years
of college education than the on-campus freshmen with whom they have been
compared. The on-campus students are taking a required course that most have
failed to pass in a previous attempt. Moreover, there are more dropouts in the
online course (but over 50% of students making a serious attempt at the second
weekly test received certificates) and these dropouts may well be students
learning less than those who remained. The pre- and posttest analysis is
further blurred by the fact that the MOOC students could consult resources
before answering, and, in fact, did consult within course resources
significantly more during the posttest than in the pretest."

This reads like _if_ a student finishes a course then there isn't much
difference based on how they learned the material. Hardly the sign of a
'radically superior' education system.

~~~
viscanti
'Radically Superior' could mean equal quality of education for:

1) Free (or nearly free) 2) Open to anyone 3) flexible to fit anyone's
schedule 4) Easier to show the actual work completed (because there is a
digital copy).

Generally, any student who needed special considerations for any of the above
(a likely non-trivial amount of students), they had to compromise on the
quality of education. For those students, I'd argue that it a significant
improvement.

~~~
dalke
I am pleased to see an increasing uptake in mass higher education, except like
the OP I think we have confused liberal education with job training. But it
would be unwise to ignore the history of distance learning, which started with
correspondence colleges in the 1800s. Certainly anything which was done by
post can be done now by computer, so I have no doubt that MOOCs can work. The
question is how judge if they are "radically superior".

California used to have (1). The GI bill also meant (1) for many veterans.
Germany, Sweden, and some other countries still have (1). Which makes it easy
to judge if current US universities are radically inferior to tuition-free
universities. The Open University in the UK is a decades old example of (2)
and (3), though not (1).

It's therefore hard for me to accept that MOOCs are significantly more radical
and superior than existing systems which already incorporate most of the
points that are supposed to make it radical and superior.

And, (4) Seriously? What, some employer is going to come and insist seeing my
individual assignments for partial differential equations before hiring me?
And read through my essays for sociology class? And my term papers for
introductory philosophy? Embrace the Panopticon!

For that matter, my wife's college (she takes online courses) is focused on
team projects, so most of her assignments are done with 2-3 other people. How
is the outside world supposed to figure out which part is hers? How much time
are they willing to spend to disentangle this?

And finally, if this were useful then a pen-and-paper correspondence college
could add a small surcharge per course to hire someone to scan incoming mail
and put it in a file for future reference. That that hasn't happened, nor that
there's been a call for it, suggests that it isn't so useful.

------
nlawalker
The real customers of these MOOCs and other programs are employers, not
students. What are these programs doing to work with employers and appeal
directly to them?

------
jkot
There is long tradition of evening schools.

~~~
VLM
Those are a resume stain along the lines of the paragraph beginning with
"Traditional college degrees represent several different kinds of
information." and ending with "tell the job market almost exactly the same
thing: “This person was good enough to get into Harvard.”"

A traditional student trajectory tells the HR lady the following positive
(from the point of view of corporate HR) things:

1) Came from a social / economic / racial class able to afford schooling
instead of work in early years

2) Dedication to a pointless goal (graduate in 4 years vs 5+, or in the
corporate world this would be pointless grinding optimization of meaningless
numerical metric goals)

3) Able to take on huge debt load (see #1 above) and has a huge debt load thus
easier to mistreat because they've got that loan payment hanging over them
(see also the reason why companies love when employees take out a mortgage or
car loan, welcome to mandatory unpaid overtime LOL)

4) applicant is a follower not a leader and does whatever people tell them.
Once that meant taking out $100K in loans to get a piece of paper, after
hiring it'll mean helping the boss "smooth over" some regulations and
accounting issues or whatever other form of corruption as long as it comes
from above. Because authority wouldn't be authority unless it was correct,
right?

~~~
sago
I'd like to think your points are unnecessarily and viciously cynical.

I'd like to think that, but actually I suspect you are dead right.

