I recently discussed the controversies involving for-profit “universities” associated with both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton. I have long been a critic of online programs and particularly for-profit universities. I have been vocal in my opposition to online courses at my law school, though many of my colleagues are highly supportive of the courses and their record. Now, a class action has been filed against George Washington University.
My criticism is that these online courses deny students the benefits of a traditional “brick-and-mortar” education and often produce a highly doctrinal and poor quality product. Students are denied the interaction with other students and teachers on campus. Online courses are on the rise with schools because they sell education (and degrees) at the lowest possible cost for schools. In my view, the trend will undermine traditional educational institutions and I have repeatedly objected that schools like GWU are courting their own demise in following for-profit companies in offering these online degrees.
Online programs offer universities a windfall in tuition with far less overhead and costs. The programs allow schools to maximize the number of students, minimize the involvement of faculty, and cash in on a market seeking more easily obtainable degrees. Clearly, these online courses accommodate many who work and cannot easily come to campus, even for evening programs. Moreover, some courses strive to offer high quality lesson plans and interactive programs. Yet, even in the best programs, students lose the critical dynamic of a classroom and experience on a campus with faculty and students. There is, in my opinion, greater depth and spontaneity in such classes. Finally, while online programs insist that they are competitive in terms of scores and graduation rates, those are not the metrics that define a top ranked education. Indeed, these programs are creating a two-tier educational system for the elite (who will attend traditional schools) and the remainder who will secure online degrees.
Four graduates of GW’s online master’s degree program in security and safety leadership filed a class-action lawsuit in the District of Columbia Superior Court. They allege that the “Security and Safety Leadership” is a fraudulent enterprise designed to take people’s money and supply substandard online offerings. They are suing the university for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and violation of D.C. consumer protection laws. The students describe the 16-month, 12-course program as low grade with little real participation by the instructor. The complaint states:
“The misrepresentations are designed to present the program as something that it is not: a credible, longstanding program, with courses and content specifically designed for the online learning environment. In reality, at the time the plaintiffs applied for the online program, there were no graduates of the program and the ‘content’ mostly consisted of scanned-in PDFs of textbooks (with blurry pages and sentences cut off) and PowerPoint slides taken from the in-class courses, without any narration or explication.”
The description of the shallow course materials and low faculty involvement in the program mirror the objections that many of us have raised for years about online courses. GWU President Steven Knapp was sent a letter from roughly a dozen students saying that they felt “cheated out of the quality education that attracted [them] to GWU.” Reportedly, the university expressed regret but the students alleged that GWU did “nothing to rectify the situation.”
What is particularly surprising is that the online program costs an estimated $33,000. That is reportedly $4,000 more than a traditional education, which (in my view) is manifestly superior for the education of students.
In defense of the program, Candace Smith, assistant vice president of media relations, insisted that “Since the security and safety leadership program began in 2009, 341 students have graduated, and many have gone onto successful careers in the military, law enforcement and other government agencies.” That is not a complete response to the concerns of course over the quality of such programs. The university obviously will have its day on court and an opportunity to refute these allegations. However, for those of us who believe that GWU is eviscerating its reputation with such degree programs, the lawsuit is a matter of considerable concern. In the end, I believe that the quick infusion of revenue sought by GWU and other universities will come at a prohibitive cost. It puts this school in the same league as Laureate University, University of Phoenix, and for-profit companies. The desire to maximize our revenue will ultimately succeed in devaluing our reputation. In the end, we will be competing with the lowest quality programs, including online programs for law school courses. Indeed, while this is portrayed as a new model or “alternative education,” it seems little more than a technological upgrade to correspondence courses that once offered degrees to people who wanted to be educated by mail.
Once again, in fairness to those who advocate online courses or programs (including colleagues on my law school faculty), there are many who view the Internet as the new reality of education. The fear is that schools like GWU must either yield to the market demand or risk the gradual loss of revenue (with corresponding rising costs). There are also great differences in the quality of programs or courses. Finally, some of my colleagues view critics like myself as a bit of academic dinosaurs unwilling to recognize new technologies and new realities in education. Most importantly, GW has a right to be heard fully on these allegations in defense of its programs.
With the permission of the university, I am including the statement sent to faculty by the head of this program:
Dear Faculty,
You may be aware that four graduates of GW’s College of Professional
Studies recently filed a lawsuit against GW claiming that they
experienced certain problems with the Security and Safety Leadership
Program during the 2012-2013 period.Please be aware that the university disagrees with these former
students’ allegations and does not believe they have any valid legal
claims against GW. Consistent with its standard procedures, the
university will respond to the allegations in the legal papers it
files and related court proceedings.Please also be aware that the Security and Safety Leadership Program
has been extremely worthwhile for many of our students. Since the
program began in 2009, 341 students have graduated, and many have gone
on to challenging and rewarding careers in the military, in law
enforcement, and with intelligence agencies. The quality and
reputation of our program continue to attract faculty members who are
accomplished leaders in the field of homeland security.In closing, I want to assure you that the university is fully
committed to the success of this program. We are pleased that each of
our faculty members and students has placed their confidence in the
university and we will continue to work very hard to ensure that we
earn it.If you have any questions or concerns, do not hesitate to contact me.
Best regards,
Frederic Lemieux
Professor and Program Director
College of Professional Studies
The George Washington University
LB
I concur that it can depend on the school and even the program or class within the school. As noted by others, on line courses allow those who
I’m an adjunct professor at a SoCal law school. I teach both JD and LLM candidates. I don’t think I could ever teach my course there on line.
I used to be an adjunct professor at another school that catered to CPAs. They switched to teaching my class on line, and I said no thanks. I don’t think it works well for my subject matter.
But i have spoken to one person who is obtaining a tax LLM from NYU entirely on line. They were happy with the program generally. And they could not have obtained an LLM by any method other than on line due to their personal circumstances.
As a generalization, I think that on line classes are generally not as high quality as in person classes. But a good or bad professor can turn that generalization on its head.
Professor Turley,
Enjoy reading all your postings and agree 99% of the time with your perspective. But not regarding online education – it depends both on the school and the field of study. It is up to the student to do her/his research to find out if it is accredited and check out the faculty in the program. I wanted to pursue an MA in International Relations which was not offered locally so I looked at online options and decided on Webster University. My experience was excellent. The coursework was rigorous, the professors had real life experience in their fields of expertise in addition to their PhDs and every one I had was accessible and responsive. To be sure, as you stated, “Students are denied the interaction with other students and teachers on campus”; however, the online interaction is actually more in depth and intense in comparison to the real-world classroom. Students in that program must actively participate in discussion on the topics/issues, and these go on for days if not weeks. And a response such as “I agree” does not cut it – we had major debates and were required to back up our assertions. The MA in IR offered by Webster is demanding and while I’m glad that I finally finished my degree, I really miss the constant interaction with my classmates and many of my professors.
Ralph, Thanks for the heads up on the Post op-ed.
I took 17 accounting classes from UCLA Extension while working in Washington D.C. I thought it was a great program and that I was lucky to be able to attend. After completing the accounting certificate, students are elgible to sit for the rigorous Calif CPA exam. The instructors were first rate and we used the same books as did on-campus students. All the instructors were very involved with the discussions, and I had the great experience of interacting with fellow students from Russia, Japan, Germany and elsewhere. The students were competitive and serious.
By contrast, I also earned a certificate in Forensic Accounting from Georgetown’s extension program (I don’t recall the name of it – College of Prof’l Studies – I think.) the classes were held Saturdays at their CPS classroom and I thought it was of marginal quality. One instructor taught the entire program and the single text was written at about a high school level. Many of the students were rich kids from Third World countries who were here to party and their families could pay expensive tuition for a program they had no interest in. Most didn’t even bother to buy the book, although they didn’t need to as there were no tests.
So all in all, it depends on the school. At UCLA it was a rigorous programs with weekly tests, mid-terms, finals, papers and highly involved instructors. The students were interesting and highly motivated. At Georgetown’s program, you could learn if you wanted to, but didn’t have to.
My two accounting certificates probably carry equal weight on my resume, but the educational quality was vastly different.
On a separate matter, congratulations to Jonathan Turley for press coverage of his article on Laureate International Universities in the New York Post. As the Post said: “Kudos to George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley for asking why the media aren’t asking about the $16.5 million paid to Bill Clinton by Laureate International Universities.” http://nypost.com/2016/06/12/the-clinton-university-scandal/
Online courses are appropriate for people who want to expand their horizons and learn new things – much like watching a documentary or checking out a book from a library. They’re also great for traffic school.
As it currently stands, it is not a sufficient method of college instruction for a degree. Online courses have become so popular that they’ve become a bit of a scam, preying on people’s hopes to better their lives while offering degrees that are not competitive. Plus how could you prevent people from cheating on the tests unless they went to a testing center?
It is possible that it could become a viable education platform, but just like brick and mortar schools, they have to establish their reputation and value. And of course they would have to find some way to prevent cheating on the testing. The classes would have to be challenging enough that passing them would have some value. Already, some online classes have better quality than others.
Perhaps online education is the way of the future, and this is just the beta test phase. Perhaps lectures would be done in some type of conference call forum, where students would benefit from hearing each other’s questions and interacting. Although you do lose something from a lack of physical interaction.
İ would not hire a single mother who has some BS or AB or BA in business to work in my corporation if her degree was online. Maybe she can work online and remain a stay at home mom.
Some people cannot move there to go to GWU. On-line courses allow them to get a good education without having to uproot and move. A lot of single mothers utilize on-line classes.
That 33 thousand dollars goes to pay the high salaries of Professors who teach the classes and sing their own praises far and wide across this great land on television and web sites. If every class given was given on line we would not need to support these rich professors. I say: All the way with on line and end the oppression of having to show up in class and salute the high faluten professor.
It may just be that degree program at GW. ASU has gone full-bore with Starbucks to offer online degrees to their staff, with Starbucks underwriting some of the cost. I am sure they have limited the degree fields. Some classes could not be done online. I have taken courses at the UoP and found them to be competitive with courses at ASU. Just the set up was different. I had class for a full week end (starting Friday evening) and then we had 2 weeks to turn in a major project (and the project was major).
Online education helps keep students from being immersed in the PC anti 1st Amendment atmosphere of brick and mortar campuses. For that reason alone I support them. My son-in-law got his Masters in nursing from an online university in Informatix. It is valuable and well worth the expense. He was smart in choosing a graduate degree program that will be highly marketable for many years.
“As such, there’s no question the online degree is an inferior product at best
Proof, please.
For example, where is the supposed “quality” in an “education” degree?
Their graduates are the lowest IQ and their classes were the easiest and mostly useless.
Abe Lincoln was self-educated and became a lawyer.
I no longer see the value in brick and mortar schools.
US colleges have become so bloated with garbage classes and useless degrees that students are now stupider for having attended.
Same with high schools. Too much multi-culti diversity social justice nonsense.
No one disputes that the average student is now far less educated compared with 50 years ago.
The modern university product is now a whiny entitled ignorant protester unfit for work or voting.
The lawsuit is misplaced. The online school is no more or less useless than Mizzou.
An ideal education would be where the most knowledgeable individuals develop the highest quality online education and provide it at very low cost to anyone who is motivated to use it. Those who develop the courses must have a way to constantly improve the online material based on student feed-back. Students of online courses typically form discussion groups with other students, can contact professors at will, and can offer ideas at will. There is no stigma if a student is physically or mentally handicapped or lives in a mud hut.
Traditional education was good for those who gained financial and social status from that model, but not as good for students, as where they can fully participate on their own terms.
It’s the relentless drive for profit that is at fault (that and each successive crop of modern MBAs who are essentially highly trained thieves that have overwhelmed colleges, universities, hospitals, every aspect of public life with the dystopian ideology of profit above all else). Profit, as it has developed in monopoly/crony capitalism always means an iterative reduction in value of product and/or service compensated for by an increase in pied piper advertising and corruption inducing lobbying. The trade agreements that are not really trade agreements at all but rather ways to hand national sovereignty over to un-elected international corporations, are an excellent examples of that overall effort.
Most gains in technology, at least up until the crash of 2008, were neutral in that they could be used for ill or for good and that included on line training as a supplement – but with a few exceptions not a substitution – to traditional classroom education.
Since 9/11, the design of technology has intrinsically shifted to more specifically profit driven ends. Just about every nook and cranny of technology has become oriented to provide the maximum rental extraction, massive data gathering, and human control value for the least amount of service or product value to the consumer (note, we no longer have citizens – we have become consumers) instead. Education is very much a part of this extraction scheme where one pays yearly/by semester/monthly fees less and less for education and more and more for certificates that can hopefully be exchanged for paying work. Of course there will remain a few institutions that are reserved for classes of people, dynasties such as the Clintons or the Bushes, who will indeed receive an education but who will be guaranteed a career regardless. Go Chelsea!
People will suddenly realize they don’t want to rent self driving cars (ownership will be only for the very rich), reeking of someone else’s puke from the night before, telling them they’re late for work and are not permitted to go anywhere else. They won’t enjoy their toaster telling them doctors orders are no toast this morning or their heaters shutting down because they live in a bronze neighborhood and have exceeded their “warmth” quota. By then it will be too late and they can pay through the nose for online courses that are essentially nothing but propaganda outlets extolling the virtues of dynasties, reinforcing the worthlessness of the “inherently lazy” worker class and producing education certificates that are indeed worthless except that they allow the bearer to get slightly better paying jobs in return for a lifetime of unshakable debt.
Georgetown University was named after Who?
George Washington was named after our slave owner first President.
To name a university after a slave owner says something.
For a good university to go to Hell in a handbasket is… well… too bad, so sad, your dad.
Time for people who work in the so called university to stand up against the so called online school within the school.
If I had a business and needed some qualified law enforcement dork I would not hire one who had been dumb enough to spend 33 thousand dollars on an online school.
Lemieux….
Went in dumb, come out dumb too.
Much of college is a scam …… and it can be fun ……sex , rock and roll
This is interesting. I am enrolled at a community college in Kentucky. I have had to take a couple of courses online, and some in the classroom. Some of the online courses were OK. In a couple of them, the instructor was available in his office for in-person help if necessary. However, I started one on web page design about 3 weeks ago where the instructor does not have an office or even a phone number available for students. I emailed him and told him I would like to get on the phone and discuss some questions I had about the material, and he responded that he preferred to answer questions by email. I was very tempted to email him back and ask him point-blank “so if I want to get help over the phone, you refuse to do that, yes or no?” but instead I just dropped the course. They have it in the fall in a classroom, so I will take it then.
I don’t think there is any doubt that online degrees are not the same as traditional education degrees. Online course do rob the students of the interactive experience of learning that is a combination only achieved by the students and professor being in the same place, at the same time, focsing on the shared experience in a particular classroom. As such, there’s no question the online degree is an inferior product at best—a poor imitation of actual instruction and learning on the university and graduate level. Personally, I think it should be ended across the board and agree that these programs undermine traditional and far superior education in the name of the almighty buck. Even worse than traditional universities offering courses online are these alleged “universities” like WGU that is some sort of scam that “gives you credit for what you already know” completley bypassing the education part at the outset based on some sort of assessment of knowledge and/or skill. WGU has a commercial with a jingle to the tuner of “I wish I had a brain” from the Wizard of Oz stating “A degree is a degree. You’ll want someone like me.” And, of course, any degree is not interchangeable with any other degree. It’s terrible that bottom line thinking has so invaded the most important work in society: teaching nad learning.