01-21-2013, 03:55 PM
Hey Mike.. Finally got around to replying, I was playing to much google ingress this weekend and forgot to reply again.
Okay to start, you do make many good points. And personally I love capitalism, hell I even earned a paycheck back in the day as an instrucot from a for profit IT place, that taught Sun Microsystems education classes. The biggest difference for me is that 99% of the people who attended, did so at the cost to the company, then turned around, passed a certification, and ultimately made money at no cost to them.
As for football at schools though, most institutions with football along with other sports actually do not produce a profit. Only the big popular programs accomplish that.
And I am all for things such as pell grants, those programs were designed to help afford college for many people. I do however think the way in which the $36B is used for 9.6 M students is massively flawed. This is because the total US projected enrollment was only 20M, so were saying 1/2 of all students need aide?! Yes! Because traditional education is overpriced, and hence why places like SL were created, so I understand the need for more affordable education, typically colleges and universities are burdened with bureaucracy, which drive the costs up.
We do agree on the perpetuated over hype of college degrees in general.
Where I depart is in your comment of not able to be accomplished by a traditional school, and only someone like SL could do this. As mentioned above, yes SL is a good idea, but with mal intentions. MIT open courseware has been around for a long time, not to mention many other avenues of free knowledge. And while you can not directly get credit, you can use the knowledge for things like clep and dsst. And your certainly correct in noting that ALEKS is indeed for profit, but they are able to provide a limited number of math courses at $20 a month for the same exact credit at ACE that SL has for $99 a month plus $49 a class? For me there is a clear delineation between profiting and what SL is doing. They are both based on book publisher technology and both require employees, yet one can operate at less than 1/10 the cost? Also, you mention, it took a little financial backing and entrepreneurial spirit to pull it off? I gotta question your thought on this! He sold his former for profit education company, to start a new for profit education company which just happens use the tutorial service he originally sold!? You then go on to compare it to Saylor, which yes was also founded on profit, but not from exploiting education like the people at SL. Saylor who made his money from IT selling to corporations, wanted the knowledge to be free, and is now getting classes certified through the same ACE that SL does. They do not profit even from the proctored exams to get that credit. Oh yeah and unlike the folks a SL, they offer $20K to professors willing to write a college textbook. Again, the last time I checked, saylor has employees just like SL, and therefore are capable of pulling off a true not for profit education system. Even Sal Kahn used his profits from outside education to get rid of the profit for education, again proving the people at SL are not as interested in making education free, just cheaper than a college to entice you. The final nail in the coffin is that SL is venture capital based, having been part of a venture backed startup, the venture guys never get involved unless there is a good business case for a large ROI. Don't get me wrong, I wanted to take SL courses, and was willing to pay their price, was also offered frequent learner points for helping solve their unsecured website problem. But now that I am informed of their background and recent behavior, I find them deplorable. As such, I now tell my coworkers, employees, and anyone else trying to complete online college is to avoid them if possible.
But we also agree on UoP! Google the founders "Executive package" you will find $5M + $70k a month for life, makes you even madder at them.
Another recent read.
Education reform as a business
Okay to start, you do make many good points. And personally I love capitalism, hell I even earned a paycheck back in the day as an instrucot from a for profit IT place, that taught Sun Microsystems education classes. The biggest difference for me is that 99% of the people who attended, did so at the cost to the company, then turned around, passed a certification, and ultimately made money at no cost to them.
As for football at schools though, most institutions with football along with other sports actually do not produce a profit. Only the big popular programs accomplish that.
And I am all for things such as pell grants, those programs were designed to help afford college for many people. I do however think the way in which the $36B is used for 9.6 M students is massively flawed. This is because the total US projected enrollment was only 20M, so were saying 1/2 of all students need aide?! Yes! Because traditional education is overpriced, and hence why places like SL were created, so I understand the need for more affordable education, typically colleges and universities are burdened with bureaucracy, which drive the costs up.
We do agree on the perpetuated over hype of college degrees in general.
Where I depart is in your comment of not able to be accomplished by a traditional school, and only someone like SL could do this. As mentioned above, yes SL is a good idea, but with mal intentions. MIT open courseware has been around for a long time, not to mention many other avenues of free knowledge. And while you can not directly get credit, you can use the knowledge for things like clep and dsst. And your certainly correct in noting that ALEKS is indeed for profit, but they are able to provide a limited number of math courses at $20 a month for the same exact credit at ACE that SL has for $99 a month plus $49 a class? For me there is a clear delineation between profiting and what SL is doing. They are both based on book publisher technology and both require employees, yet one can operate at less than 1/10 the cost? Also, you mention, it took a little financial backing and entrepreneurial spirit to pull it off? I gotta question your thought on this! He sold his former for profit education company, to start a new for profit education company which just happens use the tutorial service he originally sold!? You then go on to compare it to Saylor, which yes was also founded on profit, but not from exploiting education like the people at SL. Saylor who made his money from IT selling to corporations, wanted the knowledge to be free, and is now getting classes certified through the same ACE that SL does. They do not profit even from the proctored exams to get that credit. Oh yeah and unlike the folks a SL, they offer $20K to professors willing to write a college textbook. Again, the last time I checked, saylor has employees just like SL, and therefore are capable of pulling off a true not for profit education system. Even Sal Kahn used his profits from outside education to get rid of the profit for education, again proving the people at SL are not as interested in making education free, just cheaper than a college to entice you. The final nail in the coffin is that SL is venture capital based, having been part of a venture backed startup, the venture guys never get involved unless there is a good business case for a large ROI. Don't get me wrong, I wanted to take SL courses, and was willing to pay their price, was also offered frequent learner points for helping solve their unsecured website problem. But now that I am informed of their background and recent behavior, I find them deplorable. As such, I now tell my coworkers, employees, and anyone else trying to complete online college is to avoid them if possible.
But we also agree on UoP! Google the founders "Executive package" you will find $5M + $70k a month for life, makes you even madder at them.
Another recent read.
Education reform as a business
DSST- General Anthropology - 52, Intro to Computer - 469, Technical Writing - 54, DSST Ethics in America - 59 (1996),
CLEP- Sociology -54, College Math - 550(1996), CLEP Principles of Management - 60 (1996)
Aleks Beg Alg,
CLEP- Sociology -54, College Math - 550(1996), CLEP Principles of Management - 60 (1996)
Aleks Beg Alg,
![[-]](https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/images/collapse.png)