The professor of this course is practicing some great blended learning techniques incorporating contemporary messages appropriate to this learning group. Moreover, she is using YouTube as an educational tool, which shows perspective into how people learn and will learn.

Admittedly, I just began using YouTube for some family videos of my daughter for family living out of my vicinity. I still think a lot of it is bunk but still some messages are delivered well here and it can be a tool if used properly. Still, I am not able to embed the clips in the Doc Blog. So here is a link to this week’s posted clip.

A Vision of Today’s Student

Since this is along the lines of my own research, I have a plethora of materials about the subject of the gap growing between students and teachers in terms of learning preferences and techniques. So, I posted the need for learning leaders to develop curriculum that is more aligned to the needs and preferences of the digital generation.

A colleague from the class posted a rebuttal. Her concerns were for those students that did not have access, availability, or literacy in computing due to socio-economic conditions. This prompted some reflection and discussion in my home about the matter. As my wife and I discussed the matter we arrived at a variety of related results:

• Education as a privilege, not a right
• A famous Caddyshack quote, “Well, the world needs ditch diggers too
• Give people what they want

I wanted to address the question in the classroom but wanted to substantiate my thoughts with peer-reviewed journals. I found an interesting article that discussed the notion of not needing to address the digital divide. Essentially arriving at the conclusion that it is the advocates of those without things that cry foul but not those living without the thing in question. This is evidenced by research that asked members of groups without certain things others feel they need if the items were needed. The response was “no”. In fact members of subgroups often want only to become the best within that subgroup and achieve an excellence that is application to their lives. The article continued to follow the advocates line of logic to include needing large tracks of cattle grazing in New York City because people there are not afforded the opportunity to become cattle ranchers. Good point, I thought.

The article deconstructed the advocates logic and concluded that the society and economy needs people at varying levels of skills and education in order to be sustainable. Suggesting that if everyone were at the highest order of skillset the economy would collapse.

Here is the reference if you want to read the article:

Block, W. (2004, Sep). The “digital divide” is not a problem in need of rectifying. Journal of Business Ethics. 53(4), 393-406. Retrieved January 25, 2008 from EBSCOhost.

Certainly I agree that there is a digital divide. I also agree that measuring merely access to technology is not sufficient to capture the accurate width of the gap. I submit, though, that closing the gap by forcing digital technology on those that do not desire it will only spend good money on a bad result (ultimately the advocates would feel better but find some other reason the group is not attaining some prejudiced attainment).

I support people in the excellence they desire. I support people in learning in a way that is conducive and attainable to them as individuals.

I was reading an blog about someone’s decision to enroll in an MBA program over at The Finance Journey. I wanted to comment but the commenting option appears disabled, so I am commenting on my own blog in hopes that Chuck, the blogger at The Finance Journey, finds my post. And, for the frequent readers, you know I blogged about my decision to go to UOP before.

Chuck writes, of University of Phoenix:

There are also distance learning options at various schools. Flexo at Consumerism Commentary had a nice series on his decision and experiences at the University of Phoenix Online. I can’t help to feel though that employers look down at this place and see it as not a real university.

I’ve been in the adult education and human resources game long enough to know that most employers don’t consider the location of a degree unless they also graduated from that school. In speaking with many HR professionals about a University of Phoenix degree, because I had similar reservations when I started my Master’s (now in my doctoral journey), the comments included:

• I don’t even read the school’s name
• University of Phoenix is a fine school
• I prefer distance learning, it shows me the dedication of the worker to work and study full time
• University of Phoenix has proven itself

Here is an article from the Society of Human Resource Management, HR Magazine, titled Employers Warm Up to Online Education.

Don’t take my word for it, go ask HR professionals, search the HR literature for distance learning and online degrees. Do the research, don’t just speculate.

I submit the stigma still exists about distance learning. In fact, Chuck alludes to this:

No “top” schools offer a distance learning program… well Carnegie Melon does but its only for businesses really and you need 8 people to start a remote site. Syracuse University is in the third tier and offers one, however you have to attend classes on campus for a week every semester then you spend the rest of the time at home. I’m sure that would be very difficult for those with a full time job. Plus its labeled as an EMBA which I’m not sure if employers would look down upon.

Apart from this being a little outdated, the future of education is in distance learning. A close friend, Irene, eMailed me a link that discusses distance learning school rankings.  It talks about the Top 10 prograns, University of Phoenix being #3 in the World. Now as for the traditional “top” schools Chuck writes about, University of London is ranked #1. University of London is a world leader in education, check it out, it is the home of the London School of Economics and Political Science, world renowned.

Of course, looking in the US reveals so-called “top” schools offering distance learning

• Duke University
• Harvard
• UMUC

My point? Well, that distance learning has come into its own now. Gone are the days of fly-by night operations. When you get beyond perceptions and mis-perceptions you are left with the facts.

• Regionally accredited schools are highly regulated
• Regionally accredited schools are carefully screened
• University of Phoenix is pubicly traded which equates to even more scrutiny from
  • SEC
  • Market Analysts
  • Shareholders
• University of Phoenix  has some impressive stats that mean a lot.

Like anything in life, it get out of it what you put into it. If you approach your studies, with any school, in a lazy fashion, you will get nothing out of it.

GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

If you dedicate yourself to putting in effort, time and resource; you will be wonderfully amazed, like I was (and am), at how valuable the education really is at University of Phoenix.

Other schools are following UOP’s lead, why? It works, it is impressive, it is effective. If they weren’t mimicking, I would be worried.  It is a business model that revolutionized education and is still leading the way in innovation and scholarship.

• Most bought dissertations
• Expanded program offerings
• Distinguished alumni

To Chuck, good luck in your search for a school that fits your mindset, preferences and desires. Ultimately it is important that you go to school; no matter where you choose to go. Everyday you are not in classes is another day further from your dream of an MBA.

Your comments are welcome here.

So, I have to develop a PowerPoint presentation for my dissertation prospectus. The template is simple but the request for content is not. The information required for this assignment is so detailed that PowerPoint is pushed beyond effective to complicated. I’ve drafted 2 versions and just cannot find a comfortable level of information on the slides for my experience with PowerPoint.

Ironically, this post and assignment are on the heels of a presentation about bad PowerPoint presentation for an education audience. Funny how the universe works.

The debate in my mind is about the on-screen portion of the assignment. The template instructions are clear about not altering the template. There are some areas where it is expressly clear that additions can be made for the sake of clarity. It is a cookie cutter template designed to keep things uniform. But uniform for who? Students? No. Audience members? No.

I am guessing that this is an attempt to make things uniform for the attending faculty members. Such a faculty-centric model is  unlike UOP. However, many of the classes are becoming more automated and robotic in nature, perhaps this is an extension of that.

Whatever the reason, I don’t like the PowerPoint assignment. I feel that a better test of the students’ preparation for the dissertation prospectus would be to develop a 10-12 minute speech and written prospectus for the audience. Even better would be to allow for questions, comments, workshops on how to improve the prospectus. This would be student-centric and preferred.

Now, back to the PowerPoint. I am debating on adding slides to make the PowerPoint more effective for the whole audience. As a professional speake, I am geared to an audience-centric style and have the skills to make this an effective and engaging presentation.

What do you think? Your comments are most appreciated.  Don’t wait too long, I am scheduled to deliver this on June 22nd and I want to wrap up the assignment by June 16th.

Howe and Strauss (2000, p. 414) estimate that 100.2 million Millennials exist U.S. (born or born and immigrated from 1982 to 2002.

This is a staggering number and I was so  happy to find it. Since finding it I have seen it listed in a number of peer-reviewed sources and this makes me feel more confident that the 100.2 million population number is more widely accepted.

BLS estimates that nearly 14 million people between the ages of 20 and 24 are employed in the U.S. job market. This is a harbinger of things to come, with nearly 84 million potential employees aging into employment, the world had better get ready.

My significant find, to me at least, was welcome as I build my prospectus and ready my presentations for residency in 2 weeks.

I’ve been looking all over the Internet for a list of schools under investigation by the NYS Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo. It is impossible to find.

So I pieced together a list of schools from the NYS Attorney General’s Press Releases. Here is a list of schools being investigated in the Student Loan Scandal (in some fashion)

• Baylor University
• Boston University
• Capella University
• Career Education Corporation
• City College
• Clemson University
• Columbia University
• DeVry University
• Dowling College
• Drexel University
• Duquesne University
• Fordham University
• Grazidio School of Business
• Iona College
• James Madison University
• Johns Hopkins University
• Juilliard School
• Le Moyne College
• Long Island University
• Lewis & Clark College
• Manhattan College
• Manhattanville College
• Marist College
• Mercy College
• Molloy College
• New York Institute of Technology
• New York University
• Niagara University
• Old Dominion University
• Pace University
• Pepperdine University
• Pratt Institute
• Salve Regina University
• San Jose State University
• St. Lawrence University
• St. John’s University
• State University of New York Colleges & Universities (29 Total)
  • Specifically Mentioned: Buffalo, Cortland, Fredonia, Upstate Medical Center
• Syracuse University
• Texas Christian University
• University of California – Riverside
• University of Illinois
• University of Mississippi
• University of Pennsylvania
• University of Southern California
• University of Texas
• Washington University – St. Louis
• Widener University

I suggest you seriously reconsider taking any courses from these schools. How can an institution of higher education provide a sound education when internal ethics are severely compromised by conflicts of interest, bribery, theft, and collusion?

Ethics and honesty are important in education. It is the cornerstone of a quality education and the dream of every parent to see their children exude honesty and ethics each day. This is a shameful display for so-called thinkers and leaders to provide.

On a related aside, people often ask me about my experiences at University of Phoenix. One thing is for sure, the sheer size and massive educational impact of University of Phoenix makes it a popular target for investigations of many kinds. You don’t see University of Phoenix on this list though, do you? The amount of scrutiny that UOP endures helps provide checks and balances keeping the education, faculty, students, staff, and administration all providing a quality, ethical, practitioner-leader, and important education for over 300,000 students.

In the past couple of weeks I had a conversation with a student from Erie Community College that was discussing her latest assignment in a paralegal/legal information systems degree program. The assignment was a 30-page paper due that week. I expressed my shock at the length of the paper for a 100/200 level course. She rebutted that it was okay because she was instructed to copy & paste from the Internet and book for the majority of the paper.

“Plagiarism”, I cried.

She rebutted that she was following the instructions of the professor and looked up plagiarism to mean “copying only quotes from other people”.

“Plagiarism”, I cried.

She rebutted, again, that the professor confirmed the definition and assured the students it was a legit practice.

“Plagiarism”, I cried.

“You must be citing the source and putting the large chucks of information you are lifting in quotes of some kind, right?” I asked.

“No”, she responded, “the professor said we don’t need to do that, it isn’t necessary.

Let me assure you, plagiarism is taking anyone’s work and representing as your own. If you don’t believe me go to Wikipedia and check it out.

I am shocked at the display of academic dishonesty exhibited by both the professor and school. As a distance learning student in a doctoral program, I take considerable heat about plagiarism potential at the school. I defend the program, the work, and the school honorably and with facts. My school, University of Phoenix, goes above and beyond to protect students from academic dishonesty. Further, UOP, spends time, money, and resource to make sure students understand plagiarism and that it does not occur in any class.

That a New York State school not only condones but promotes plagiarism is shocking and hard to believe. More poignantly, this is a law course. If any group should understand the consequences of dishonesty it is the law department.

To Erie Community College, the department, the professor, and the student, “Shame!”

As always, comments are most welcome and appreciated (cite your sources <wink>)

CNN is reporting the play-by-play of the student loan scandal. It is a shame that this happened, students were misled by trusted advisors at major universities.

Thanks to the new New York State Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo. Many of this institutions will be paying students back for the school’s impropriety. In addition, these student lending organizations, like Sallie Mae, will be setting up a $2,000,000 fund to educate people on student finance and lending. It is this item that leads me to some dissonance.

The crux of the investigation is that colleges and universities were getting kickbacks and incentives for steering students into higher loan amounts, etc. It was a way for officials to find a friendly partner in the world of student finance and get paid by outside agencies to do their job in a manner that is both unethical and unprofessional.

Student loan companies paid school officials to sell more/bigger loans.

Now, the same institution is setting up a fund to educate parents, students, and school administrators about the student loan industry and the student finance options (A job that school officials should have been doing and should be doing now).

So, where student loan companies were paying school officials outright to provide information about student lending and finance, now there is a student lending industry underwritten fund to provide monies to do that. This is the rub. Where before it was all hush hush; now it is all out in the open. Is that okay?

Sure, there are promises of ethical practice and assurances of non-repeating. Sure, there are apologies and gray area comments. Sure, people are getting some refunds to help offset the bad practice of trusted advisors. Sure, there have been firings and resignations.

Setting up a fund to educate people about student finance leaves room for more obvious bribery and kickbacks. It seems a little like hide in plain sight to me. Call me a skeptic if you want; but, I foresee student loan companies setting up methods to pay student financial aid offices to host seminars, provide information, answer question and all with the companies’ money. Doesn’t that seem like a different kind of kickback, offsetting a budget line. So instead of the individual person making money, the institution spends less money (read increases margin/profit).

I could be wrong about the intentions, but my Mom always told me a leopard never changes it’s spots.

Rather than summarily punish wrong doer’s, the investigation headed by New York’s Attorney General pandered to corporations that have defied the public good. A much more suitable course of action would be to punish these trusted advisors more severely than complimenting their leadership in the face of scrutiny.

What should happen is that all the overages charged to the borrower be refunded with interest (after all the companies made money on something that was obtained unethically. Or, some zero interest on the remainder of money owed to the lenders. Or, since these company defied the public interest and the trust of the people a revocation of the incorporation status bestowed upon them on behalf of the very people they stole from in this scandal.

As for school officials and schools, a ban on enrollments until monies are repaid, processes fixed, and satisfaction of the people is agreed upon.

Too severe? No way! Corruption is taking a strangle hold on our economy. Media reports on the rise of student loans, the costs of education, and the burden placed on our students. Combine the two, corruption and reported burden, and it is a recipe for disaster.

Too often governments pander to those with deeper pockets, even in the face of ethical violations. You can almost here them say, “Oh well, thanks for the heads up, we’ll be more careful”. Well, tough cookies kids.

These companies stole money.

These schools stole money.

If that were a gunpoint stick-up the perpetrators would be going to jail; but, because the violations involve multiple people and complex systems, not to mention fat pockets, it is viewed as less of a crime.

Speak up. Demand action. Demand statisfaction.