University of California System Bans Fully Online Degrees

[davewill]

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023...ne-degrees

The 10-campus system closes a loophole that could have let undergraduates piece together a degree. Experts and some inside the system say that in justifying its decision, UC perpetuated outdated claims about online learning.

The article is written from the slant that online degrees are more acceptable than the UC system seems to think. Nice read.

It must be the degree nerd in me, but I kept asking myself, what exactly was the loophole that a student might have used to get the online degree?

[ss20ts]

Online degrees will become more common not less common. Adult learners don't have many options. So many people don't finish their degree straight out of high school. Others are working or taking care of family so class schedules don't work well. Then there's the cost of tuition, fees, books, and room & board.

Everyone who attends college doesn't get the same thing out of it. Plenty of people go sit in class and do nothing. They get the same degree as the people working their tails off in online classes. In my experience, generally most online courses are more work than in person courses. We use the same books. Write papers and discussions, have quizzes and exams.

[Pats20]

It’s all about $$$$. California doesn’t have a legitimate beef against online degrees. They’re just broke. What happened to being inclusive ?

[jsd]

Online classes aren't cheaper than in person classes at the UCs, doesn't make much sense if money is the goal here. You'd think they'd want to increase online offerings if that was the case.

[Pats20]

Online programs don’t generate any additional revenue other than tuition. That may not even be the reason, but in my opinion money is most likely at the core of it one way or another. Just about every other institution in the country has adopted online programs even the Ivys.

[Johann]

Online programs don’t generate any additional revenue other than tuition. That may not even be the reason, but in my opinion money is most likely at the core of it one way or another. Just about every other institution in the country has adopted online programs even the Ivys.

The UC System's hinting that online programs aren't as good is the height of hypocrisy. They're hawking online courses themselves, at top dollar, yet refusing to grant the same transfer credit as for B&M courses? SHAME on them. Forever.

[dfrecore]

It’s all about $$$$. California doesn’t have a legitimate beef against online degrees. They’re just broke. What happened to being inclusive ?

It's definitely NOT money, if you're comparing the cost of offering online courses vs. offering in-person courses - in-person, with the cost of hosting courses on a physical campus, is WAY more expensive.  The way to make more money is to offer MORE online courses, not fewer.

My guess is, it IS about money, but not in the way you're thinking.  In order to keep more people OUT, you have to have a good way to do so - and the best way to do that is to make people go to a physical campus.  When you do that, you keep out a significant portion of people who can't do that, either due to being too far away from campus, or having other commitments.

The best thing to do here, is for many, many people to decide that the UC system is not a great option for them, and to not go there.  That's the only way to get out of the spiral; to have demand go so low that they have to start offering more of what people want.  But until that happens, they'll continue to do things like this.

[Insert Name]

Living in California, my guess is that it is a community driven decision. I can think of 3 UCs off the top of my head where the school basically is the town’s economy, then you throw in the fact that since Covid, even the CC parking lots are empty because people are switching to online courses even at B&M schools, and you get failing economies. This rule would force people to at a minimum, commute to the school for 2 semesters. Again, just my guess.

[Pats20]

It’s all about $$$$. California doesn’t have a legitimate beef against online degrees. They’re just broke. What happened to being inclusive ?

It's definitely NOT money, if you're comparing the cost of offering online courses vs. offering in-person courses - in-person, with the cost of hosting courses on a physical campus, is WAY more expensive.  The way to make more money is to offer MORE online courses, not fewer.

My guess is, it IS about money, but not in the way you're thinking.  In order to keep more people OUT, you have to have a good way to do so - and the best way to do that is to make people go to a physical campus.  When you do that, you keep out a significant portion of people who can't do that, either due to being too far away from campus, or having other commitments.

The best thing to do here, is for many, many people to decide that the UC system is not a great option for them, and to not go there.  That's the only way to get out of the spiral; to have demand go so low that they have to start offering more of what people want.  But until that happens, they'll continue to do things like this.

I wasn’t comparing the cost of online courses vs in person. I said it was about the money. Follow the money one way or another. Either by less revenue in the cities and greater area  that UC exist. Or by disenfranchisement. The need for a permanent underclass. There could be all kinds of motives. But money is at the root of it.

[ss20ts]

Living in California, my guess is that it is a community driven decision. I can think of 3 UCs off the top of my head where the school basically is the town’s economy, then you throw in the fact that since Covid, even the CC parking lots are empty because people are switching to online courses even at B&M schools, and you get failing economies. This rule would force people to at a minimum, commute to the school for 2 semesters. Again, just my guess.

The smart ones will seek out online programs and attend them. There's a reason WGU and SNHU are so successful.