Online grads sue USC

[dfrecore]

I'm not sure that a USC master's in teaching opens you up to many opportunities to actually teach; and if it does, you are still 100% tied to the pay scale of the school you're teaching in; so really, it could only possibly open up opportunities to do something other than teaching.  But, I'm here to tell you, the online school is not giving you these same opportunities; USC alumni are generally snobs, and they're not going to be impressed with someone who wasn't walking around on campus for classes.

---

I get your general position on USC and appreciate your opinion on USC graduates being snobs. Since the numbers show teachers leave the industry at a high percentage, leveraging the alums can matter if you are open to opportunities outside the classroom. I have read multiple times about the online vs. campus issue, and as with all of us here, it is rare that the question of online even comes up. I've spent time on the USC campus as a non-graduate, and you can establish the relationships needed with enough effort. If your talent backs your interest, opportunities will always be getable. You nailed the income opportunities if someone stays in teaching for Califonia. I am considering outside options in teaching through corporate training, where there are considerably higher pay-scale opportunities to tap into. 
Side note– my USC colleague are not snobs; however, I have met snobs who happen to have graduated from USC. 

Actually, you have no idea what my general position on USC is, so I'll enlighten you.  My general position on USC  is that it's a great school, it has a great reputation, yada yada.  I'm fine with them (except the whole blatant fraud that they encouraged - see Lori Loughlin).  My position on these online master's degree programs is 180º different though - I think they are ripping people off, that these degrees don't do what they claimed, that the "USC graduate" is not rubbing off on these people, etc.  They put people in enormous debt, with little to show for these degrees.

[KSoul]

So I have no idea; however, my assumption was:

USC online is a ripoff
Debt is Bad
USC Alum are snobs

Oddly, I nailed it. As for USC being an excellent school with a solid reputation as an alternative narrative is equal to saying Standford is good ...but Blah Blah Blah.

[HogwartsSchool]

I found and read the filed complaint with the court. The majority of this group keeps discussing the $60K to $100K online tuition price tag. Question. Would it be fraud if it was only $10K to $15K for the same experience at USC? The online tuition price tag isn't a main component of the lawsuit, and I don't understand why everyone keeps discussing it. The lawsuit is about false rankings and paying for USC education and not receiving it, instead it was outsourced to 2U.
Here is the court filing. https://defendstudents.org/news/body/202...plaint.pdf

[smartdegree]

I found and read the filed complaint with the court. The majority of this group keeps discussing the $60K to $100K online tuition price tag. Question. Would it be fraud if it was only $10K to $15K for the same experience at USC? The online tuition price tag isn't a main component of the lawsuit, and I don't understand why everyone keeps discussing it. The lawsuit is about false rankings and paying for USC education and not receiving it, instead it was outsourced to 2U.
Here is the court filing. https://defendstudents.org/news/body/202...plaint.pdf

The fraud lawsuit is directly tied to the tuition cost because the ranking and advertising allowed them to charge top dollar for tuition.  In other words, the assumption is the students would not have paid the 60K to 100K in tuition if they had known better (see page 5 section 10 of the court filing you shared which explains in detail).  Part of the fraud is making it seem that the online program was sharing the reputation of the on-campus / in-person ranking (see page 4 section 8).

My personal view is that online programs should cost significantly less (at a huge discount) vs the regular on-campus degrees within the same university. I know the universities say that it's all the same yada yada yada. But let's be honest - online programs require a lot less physical resources to run and are cheaper to maintain and scale. So where are the savings from online going? Obviously that isn't going to the USC online students, but to USC itself.

[michaeladsmith2]

I found and read the filed complaint with the court. The majority of this group keeps discussing the $60K to $100K online tuition price tag. Question. Would it be fraud if it was only $10K to $15K for the same experience at USC? The online tuition price tag isn't a main component of the lawsuit, and I don't understand why everyone keeps discussing it. The lawsuit is about false rankings and paying for USC education and not receiving it, instead it was outsourced to 2U.
Here is the court filing. https://defendstudents.org/news/body/202...plaint.pdf

The fraud lawsuit is directly tied to the tuition cost because the ranking and advertising allowed them to charge top dollar for tuition.  In other words, the assumption is the students would not have paid the 60K to 100K in tuition if they had known better (see page 5 section 10 of the court filing you shared which explains in detail).  Part of the fraud is making it seem that the online program was sharing the reputation of the on-campus / in-person ranking (see page 4 section 8).

My personal view is that online programs should cost significantly less (at a huge discount) vs the regular on-campus degrees within the same university.  I know the universities say that it's all the same yada yada yada.  But let's be honest - online programs require a lot less physical resources to run and are cheaper to maintain and scale.  So where are the savings from online going?  Obviously that isn't going to the USC online students, but to USC itself.

In a related opinion concerning online education, I agree that it often comes across as a HUGE RIPOFF when schools charge the same tuition for "in-residence" as they charge for online. Here's my position. I HATE IT! Most people know that when you place a course in the LMS Platform, no matter the level, with very slight variations in quality, it costs less to manage, implement and deliver than it is to teach in the physical classroom. First, the school buys the rights and access to an (LMS) Learning Management Platform. We all know it's usually a one-time/lifetime fee, or very minimal annual fee, for something like MOODLE or BLACKBOARD, etc. 

Second, an IT team often manages the coursework, NOT the paid professor. Third, the material/coursework within the LMS is usually static and redundant, often used for up to 5 years by the same professor or rotating professors using the same material, with very few modifications. They may change the syllabus once or twice and require an updated textbook sporadically. But by and large, the LMS is "cookie-cutter education." 

Finally, and this is where the money comes in, they will either hire a part-time adjunct professor or instructor or ask an institutional professor (tenured or not) to begin teaching courses online. The LMS (or institution) often cares little about the qualifications and quality of the instructor. I've seen major universities hire community college adjunct "professors" or "instructors" to teach courses with minimal teaching experience, no research experience, or recent (graduate school) graduates. I've even seen Teaching Assistants teach within an LMS platform. 

With all of that, the school then charges very close to, or just under, the "regular tuition" because they know they can get away with 1. packing the course with 25 - 30 (or more) students paying (say $350/credit hour) x 3 credits = $1,050/per course. And 2, with 30 students, the school gets $30,000+ per course, and if you multiply that by 400 courses taught online, you can see how the $$$ can add up! Managing the MOODLE course costs $100 just to keep the course material updated and the annual fee (as an example), they charge the student ON TOP OF TUITION, a "technology fee", and then get an astronomical ROI when you take into account how many students are enrolled in one online course.

Not to mention when they duplicate the course (called SECTIONS), and have 25 ENGLISH 101 courses per semester, using the same MOODLE LMS Platform. Again, different instructors, maybe different syllabus, maybe different textbooks, but same LMS. YOU DO THE MATH on how much money they make each semester, each academic year! And they can pay an adjunct professor 10% on each course they teach (usually 3 - 4 courses per semester), and the school keeps 90% of the tuition. So Liberty University and many schools with 40,000+ students enrolled are making BILLIONS on online LMS platforms.

An example of the top 4 Schools with the highest enrollment (mostly using online LMS):  Total Enrollment for 2023

WGU: 150,116
SNHU: 145,533
Grand Canyon U: 103,072
Liberty U: 93,349

Source: https://www.collegeraptor.com/college-ra...nrollment/

[smartdegree]

This is a nice follow-up article on the USC 2U lawsuit. The article covers similar issues we've been discussing in this thread.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton...474a2755e9

[HogwartsSchool]

This is a nice follow-up article on the USC 2U lawsuit.  The article covers similar issues we've been discussing in this thread.  

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton...474a2755e9

Quote from the article "But the real news from this legal challenge is the inherent implication that USC’s online program is not as good as its in-person one. If it was the same or better, where’s the basis for the legal complaint? But the suit makes it clear that what USC and 2U were selling and delivering were not – are not – the same. "

The article quote perfectly sums up what I have been saying the entire time in this thread.

[michaeladsmith2]

This is a nice follow-up article on the USC 2U lawsuit.  The article covers similar issues we've been discussing in this thread.  

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton...474a2755e9

Quote from the article "But the real news from this legal challenge is the inherent implication that USC’s online program is not as good as its in-person one. If it was the same or better, where’s the basis for the legal complaint? But the suit makes it clear that what USC and 2U were selling and delivering were not – are not – the same. "

The article quote perfectly sums up what I have been saying the entire time in this thread.

But, here is a concern I have about this statement. Don't we understand that "online education" IS INDEED "not the same" as in-person delivery? I mean, outside USC's deception and fraudulent activities [hence this lawsuit], isn't the purpose of online education to provide the following:

1. An asynchronous education to students NOT in the physical classroom (online education especially created due to the rise in working adults since the 1990s)
2. A self-paced, flexibly scheduled curriculum
3. A professor monitored curriculum [for competency in the subject/field]
4. a connection to a cohort and fellow learners through the discussion boards environment
5. fair grading system [equal to in-person students] that correctly challenges the assignments turned in as if one WAS in the physical classroom. (I only add this because of the inferred argument of difference between the two, though I don't see a difference in the work submitted online vs. in-person)

The issue for me is this. I've been taking online courses for quite some time. While yes, I miss the in-person debates, personal connection, study groups, and ability to share ideas and work together as a team, there are very few times that I have found the quality of the online environment less rigorous and challenging than in-person. I would go so far as to submit it is even more stringent and demanding. An entire series can be written on this subject. Still, anyone with a job, family, obligations, and other full-time tasks who can balance their demanding daily schedule with online schooling is far more skilled than in-person students. 

I'm not sure I 100% agree with the idea that the USC "online offerings" are "less than" or "not as good as" in-person. Try taking the Harvard Extension School for a semester, and you'll learn very quickly that Harvard "online" is just as rigorous, and MANY Extension School students drop out or never finish due to this fact. And I tell you, Georgetown, Penn World Campus, many CA online Law Schools, and some of the top state schools that offer online degrees are just as tough. Self-motivation, self-discipline, and Independent learning are very challenging by themselves.

I probably wouldn't question USC's quality of its Graduate programs. However, I would question their tactics in promoting a ranking and standing they advertised under false pretenses and fraudulent practices. 

Let me add one last caveat to my current experience online in a doctoral program. This DHA Program at VUL is no joke. It's not likely Ivy League, but they use the Harvard Business School model. It is a very demanding, fast-paced (intensive 1-year program), and the professors are no joke when measuring your competency in the subject, assignments, and field.

[ThatBankDude]

I found and read the filed complaint with the court. The majority of this group keeps discussing the $60K to $100K online tuition price tag. Question. Would it be fraud if it was only $10K to $15K for the same experience at USC? The online tuition price tag isn't a main component of the lawsuit, and I don't understand why everyone keeps discussing it. The lawsuit is about false rankings and paying for USC education and not receiving it, instead it was outsourced to 2U.
Here is the court filing. https://defendstudents.org/news/body/202...plaint.pdf

The fraud lawsuit is directly tied to the tuition cost because the ranking and advertising allowed them to charge top dollar for tuition.  In other words, the assumption is the students would not have paid the 60K to 100K in tuition if they had known better (see page 5 section 10 of the court filing you shared which explains in detail).  Part of the fraud is making it seem that the online program was sharing the reputation of the on-campus / in-person ranking (see page 4 section 8).

My personal view is that online programs should cost significantly less (at a huge discount) vs the regular on-campus degrees within the same university.  I know the universities say that it's all the same yada yada yada.  But let's be honest - online programs require a lot less physical resources to run and are cheaper to maintain and scale.  So where are the savings from online going?  Obviously that isn't going to the USC online students, but to USC itself.

In a related opinion concerning online education, I agree that it often comes across as a HUGE RIPOFF when schools charge the same tuition for "in-residence" as they charge for online. Here's my position. I HATE IT! Most people know that when you place a course in the LMS Platform, no matter the level, with very slight variations in quality, it costs less to manage, implement and deliver than it is to teach in the physical classroom. First, the school buys the rights and access to an (LMS) Learning Management Platform. We all know it's usually a one-time/lifetime fee, or very minimal annual fee, for something like MOODLE or BLACKBOARD, etc. 

Second, an IT team often manages the coursework, NOT the paid professor. Third, the material/coursework within the LMS is usually static and redundant, often used for up to 5 years by the same professor or rotating professors using the same material, with very few modifications. They may change the syllabus once or twice and require an updated textbook sporadically. But by and large, the LMS is "cookie-cutter education." 

Finally, and this is where the money comes in, they will either hire a part-time adjunct professor or instructor or ask an institutional professor (tenured or not) to begin teaching courses online. The LMS (or institution) often cares little about the qualifications and quality of the instructor. I've seen major universities hire community college adjunct "professors" or "instructors" to teach courses with minimal teaching experience, no research experience, or recent (graduate school) graduates. I've even seen Teaching Assistants teach within an LMS platform. 

With all of that, the school then charges very close to, or just under, the "regular tuition" because they know they can get away with 1. packing the course with 25 - 30 (or more) students paying (say $350/credit hour) x 3 credits = $1,050/per course. And 2, with 30 students, the school gets $30,000+ per course, and if you multiply that by 400 courses taught online, you can see how the $$$ can add up! Managing the MOODLE course costs $100 just to keep the course material updated and the annual fee (as an example), they charge the student ON TOP OF TUITION, a "technology fee", and then get an astronomical ROI when you take into account how many students are enrolled in one online course.

Not to mention when they duplicate the course (called SECTIONS), and have 25 ENGLISH 101 courses per semester, using the same MOODLE LMS Platform. Again, different instructors, maybe different syllabus, maybe different textbooks, but same LMS. YOU DO THE MATH on how much money they make each semester, each academic year! And they can pay an adjunct professor 10% on each course they teach (usually 3 - 4 courses per semester), and the school keeps 90% of the tuition. So Liberty University and many schools with 40,000+ students enrolled are making BILLIONS on online LMS platforms.

An example of the top 4 Schools with the highest enrollment (mostly using online LMS):  Total Enrollment for 2023

WGU: 150,116
SNHU: 145,533
Grand Canyon U: 103,072
Liberty U: 93,349

Source: https://www.collegeraptor.com/college-ra...nrollment/

This is probably true for online programs that are done in conjunction with 2U, Coursera, EdX. From my experience, the coursework in my MBA was all developed by the Professor I had and managed by the Professor. That said, it was all asynchronous and cost about $11,000. With my MS at Duke, it has recorded lectures that look A LOT of time to create. They had an entire team help design them. The coursework itself is created, and changed for each cohort, by the Professor. They often make changes as they need throughout the semester. It is very high touch with all interaction going through the Professor. Office hours, live lectures, etc. make it a great experience.

Honestly, I feel I have got a better education in this manner versus my on-campus bachelors and my asynchronous MBA.

The on-campus program is $75,500 and the online program is somewhere around $68,700.

My courses and the teaching professors credentials:

-Programming for Data Analytics and Visualization - Lecturing Fellow with MS Statistics from Duke University

-Applied Probability and Statistics - Tenured Professor with PhD in Statistics from Rutgers University

-Managerial Economics - Tenured Professor with PhD in Economics from Northwestern University

-Accounting and Finance - Joint Taught by (2) Tenured Professors with PhD in Accounting from University of Chicago and Finance from University of California, Berkeley

-Marketing and Strategy - Joint Taught by (2) Tenured Professors with PhD from Duke University in Marketing and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Strategy

-Data Analytics and Applications - Consulting Professor with PhD in Statistics from Carnegie Mellon University

-Operations Management - Consulting Professor with PhD in Operations Research from Carnegie Mellon University

-Digital Marketing - Joint Taught by (1) Tenured Professor with PhD in Marketing from Carnegie Mellon University and (1) Executive in Residence with PhD in Cognitive Psychology from Rutgers University

-Financial Risk Management - Tenured Professor with PhD in Economics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

-Business Communication - Tenured Professor with PhD in Communication from University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

-Navigating Organizations - Tenured Professor with PhD in Social Psychology from the University if Michigan, Ann Arbor

-Fraud Analytics - Executive in Residence and Faculty with PhD in Computer Science from Duke University

-Decision Models - Tenured Professor with PhD in Operations Research from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

I have (3) courses this Spring 2023 that I will know who professors are soon. So overall, you can see that, at least in my case, my professors are highly intelligent with terminal degrees from some of the best universities in the world. I think your example is specific towards universities that have virtually open admissions with no cap on the number of students they allow in the program. I am hesitant to say more reputable but many institutions that charge a large amount in tuition for an online degree that they also offer full-time on-campus do so but give you access to the same professors and the same quality.

[sanantone]

I found and read the filed complaint with the court. The majority of this group keeps discussing the $60K to $100K online tuition price tag. Question. Would it be fraud if it was only $10K to $15K for the same experience at USC? The online tuition price tag isn't a main component of the lawsuit, and I don't understand why everyone keeps discussing it. The lawsuit is about false rankings and paying for USC education and not receiving it, instead it was outsourced to 2U.
Here is the court filing. https://defendstudents.org/news/body/202...plaint.pdf

Did you read this?

"10. Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit on behalf of themselves and the class of similarly situated 
USC Rossier students who paid tuition that they would not have otherwise paid (or would have paid 
substantially less), had they not been drawn in by USC Rossier’s fraudulently obtained US News 
ranking. Defendants’ misleading, years-long scheme to boost USC Rossier’s US News ranking and 
related efforts to disseminate that ranking via a long-term false advertising campaign, violated 
California’s False Advertising Law (“FAL”) (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500), California’s Unfair 
Competition Law (“UCL”) (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200), and California’s Consumer Legal 
Remedies Act (the “CLRA”) (Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750 et seq.)."

---