Why Charter Oak State College is better than Thomas Edison State College

[Exfactor]

Your use of gifs to demonstrate your points, by the way, are rather... interesting. I've already stated that Excelsior would have been viable from a price/utility standpoint if it had more lax policies on transferring credits in, and their price which is generally much higher. You're still hounding a minor issue which I've already addressed in previous posts as well demonstrating your preconceptions of people of the Indian subcontinent. And for the record, you get what you pay for –*you're condensing a 4 year degree into possibly less than a year mainly through no exams in degrees that are generally fluff (liberal arts, general studies, etc.). Most of us are getting the degrees mainly for career promotion/$$$ reasons (why else are we spending several thousands on a degree?) – in the end you do get what you pay for. You get a regionally accredited degree from ANY of these institutions but none of them are exactly name brands by any means. But for the purpose of getting a regionally accredited degree, it suits its purposes for many of us. Best of luck to you!

My Excelsior degree has me siting next to an Olympic medalist whose a Stanford graduate, a Yale graduate, along with various state and university graduates in my graduate program. It has also opened the door to an abundance of job offers I received after my conferal. So much for a lame school with a lame name. Have a blessed day.

[Prloko]

Is itt and Everest RA accredited?

No, but UoP, and Devry are, and you'll likely get the same result. Heck, like I said earlier, I'm sure there were a company or two who saw my RA TESC degree, crumbled my resume, air dribbled once or twice and shot the best jump shot in their life. I'm not quite sure what your point was there.

Why do some people choose to nitpick things rather than accepting an argument as plausible.

[videogamesrock]

Because nobody likes to lose an argument, that's why we are 6 pages deep on this subject

No, but UoP, and Devry are, and you'll likely get the same result. Heck, like I said earlier, I'm sure there were a company or two who saw my RA TESC degree, crumbled my resume, air dribbled once or twice and shot the best jump shot in their life. I'm not quite sure what your point was there.

Why do some people choose to nitpick things rather than accepting an argument as plausible.

[Prloko]

Because nobody likes to lose an argument, that's why we are 6 pages deep on this subject

touche!

[SteveFoerster]

Good luck getting into Harvard Law, Wharton School of Business, or any top tier institution from a “no name” “general” college.

I guess some people are just lucky, since the list of graduate school acceptances for Charter Oak alumni includes the law schools at Georgetown and the University of Pennsylvania, Yale's medical school, and Harvard's business school. (And in my case, GWU's school of education.)

[sanantone]

Yes, absolutely! Of course, not solely because of the name alone, and due to its reputation nonetheless. Having a $40,000 Hyundai Azera may be a better car but because of the lack of "brand factor" it will depreciate more than say a Mercedes or BMW, even if I know the Hyundai is a better deal when I can buy a Mercedes or BMW that may be less powerful, have lower quality materials, smaller, etc.

You're missing the whole point that I'm making about the college name game that even bain4weeks.com describes here –*The College Name Game - BA in 4 weeks . Tell me do you think George Bush Jr. or John Kerry, or Kennedys or Hillary Clinton (*cough* her husband) get to their levels... is it because of education or brains alone? How did they get into Yale or Harvard? Was it become of merit alone? Extremely unlikely.

If there are no other factors available, and all you've got is just the name of the college, would you go to "Mango College" or "Birmingham College"? There are certain buzz words that have an affect on people and how they perceive things. There are polls on what words politicians should use (anyone watch House of Cards Season 3 regarding this ) to interest watchers, as well as what baby names are the most popular.

How you say something matters as much as what you have to say as well. A man who dresses like a bum could be a neurosurgeon, but on first impression, you may think that the slick looking well-dressed doctor is a better doctor. Yes, impressions certainly count. Now as far as whether or not Excelsior College sounds "good" or "not" is not my real concern, though I personally think the name "Excelsior College" is a little odd –*it reminds me Al Gore from South Park saying, Excelsior! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otOARxAOp2g ), but to each his/her own.

You're missing the point. George Bush didn't get to where he was because the name of his school didn't sound funny; he got to where he was because the reputation of the school that has absolutely no connection to the sound of its name. With that said, Excelsior is on the same level as the other two of the Big 3.

Is itt and Everest RA accredited?

Some Everest campuses are RA.

[KittenMittens]

If name of the school is important the go to an Ivy League school.

I'm also a firm believer of it's not what you know but who you know.

And an Ivy League School is about networking with people who are of significance i.e. "who you know." Your alumni network and name recognition from these schools open doors. The two are not mutually exclusive of each other, but rather they go hand in hand with each other. This is particularly relevant when it comes to business and law schools – where your school name/rank quite often goes hand in hand with your starting pay, and where you work (whether it be a more desirable area like a metropolitan area/city, or the boondocks).

Of course, in general, it's about who you know – but many/most of us don't have the network and the opportunity to be on the "inside" of things. The good news is that through merit, hard work, and talent, a person can prove their worth through a company, and/or through performance in a good school program. Furthermore, there are always exceptions to these "rules" but it gives an idea.

[KittenMittens]

I guess some people are just lucky, since the list of graduate school acceptances for Charter Oak alumni includes the law schools at Georgetown and the University of Pennsylvania, Yale's medical school, and Harvard's business school. (And in my case, GWU's school of education.)

Yes, for all intents and purposes, they got in more because of luck – just simply given how extremely competitive it is to get into these top tier programs. Those are exceptions that prove the rule. Charter Oak states they've awarded over 11,000 degrees –there are 4-5 schools on that list of interest, let's say, 5/11,000 = .05% got into "the best" programs.

Now look at how many students from Harvard Undergrad are going into top tier programs. Is it 1% or 10%? I think we can all agree that it is. Just because one person was able to get into Harvard Business School doesn't mean you or I can do it with the same stats. Maybe he/she was politically connected, or a minority candidate (i.e. affirmative action), or did something truly groundbreaking, or just filthy rich and donated millions to Harvard.

More importantly, I would put eggs in the basket of the person who comes from an ivy league undergrad, perhaps with a slightly lower GPA will time after time secure more "high tier" spots. This isn't really up to debate –*and it's more like winning the lottery, where just because someone can doesn't mean that it will happen again.

Also – something to keep in mind is that going to Harvard for Business, Medicine, or Law is very different than getting into Harvard Grad in something like Peruvian History. The most competitive degrees already have less than 10% chances of getting in (and it's probably far less than that if you're a regular person from a regular school), and the odds do go up a bit for the lesser known/less popular programs.

[sanantone]

Right, and when that happens then it will become a more attractive option. Until then, it currently isn't that popular, and the data that is out there suggests that as well (from instantcert.com, degreeforum student advice, practice exams).

Even if the test fees are $111 per TECEP exam, comparing that to UExcel’s which are $145/each – it’s not a deal breaker. It’s $34 difference, which isn’t a deal breaker at least for the type of student this is geared to. I think most students would be fine paying the extra $34 knowing that there are practice exams, instantcert materials, and forum advice for those topics. Right now the way TECEP exists, there are practically no materials available and like I mentioned earlier, they only have flash cards for 3 subjects versus UExcel which has 10 or 11.

The popularity of a test is not based on Instantcert. Hardly anyone who takes DSSTs and CLEPs even know that Instantcert exists. Uexcel's science tests are very popular among their nursing students, but there are no IC flashcards for those. The proof that TECEPs are becoming increasingly popular lies in TESC creating more exams. They wouldn't create them if there wasn't demand. You have to remember that TECEPs are made for their enrolled students who are mostly taking courses. This forum is a small world. Most TESC students don't know this forum exists.

Depends on the test you’re taking. There is a place for coursework and there is a place for standardized exams. There is more personal discretion in how a grade is given out particularly in less technical subjects (i.e. liberal arts) and how a professor feels at any given moment. With a standardized exam, everyone is compared to the same standard. Exams like the medical college test, MCAT, law school test LSAT, graduate level test, GRE, GMAT, the USMLE, SAT, etc. are known for being extremely rigorous and challenging and I don’t think anyone would make the argument that they are irrelevant. Certainly top tier programs put a lot of emphasis on them and they are producing leaders, visionaries, and innovators. I think both matter and a healthy balance of the two are important. Standardized exams DO test logical/analytical/comprehension ability under timed/pressurized conditions.

GPA has more correlation to college success than the SAT. The SAT has been changed several times because of problems with predicting college success. You're assuming that all of these tests are good predictors without even looking for the evidence to support that assertion.

That’s highly debatable. Good luck getting into Harvard Law, Wharton School of Business, or any top tier institution from a “no name” “general” college. Where you went matters far more in most subjects (with the exception to some degree for hard sciences and engineering). If you want to go into law school, business school, or medical school, I can say with certainty that where you went has more of an impact than your GPA (within reason of course – i.e. 3.1 GPA from Harvard in Sociology >>> 4.0 from Charter Oak for reason). If I was an employer, I would gladly take a 2.8 –*3.3 student from UC Berkeley, Harvard, MIT, etc. compared to one that went to any of the 3 schools I mentioned above, and the trend clearly shows that as well.

Steve Foerster already proved you wrong on this.

Most people will not be doing the “per credit” option like you because they won’t take 8 credit exams through TECEP. The data shows that again on instantcert.com (they show the pass rates for each subjects and more students at this point in time are taking UExcel exams for whatever reasons)

Why is IC the be-all and end-all for you? The world is much bigger than IC and this forum. There are companies doing very well selling books for CLEPs.

Well, what subset of the population are we talking about? I’d say it’s more doable, and likely that people can do the plan I (& others have done too) did more easily simply for the fact that A) there are documentable practice exams, flash cards, student advice on the subjects & B) FEMA credits that can be transferred in C) easy Penn Foster coursework.

You have no proof that your plan is doable by most people. Even if your plan is more doable than mine, you have no proof that my plan is not doable by most people. But, it really doesn't matter. Students who test out of the majority of their degrees are a very small minority of college students.

I would say with certainty that more people are likely to pass the UExcel exams I described in the wiki compared to the TECEP ones because A) they are more documented thanks to the practice exams, flash cards, student forum advice B) Excelsior College like you mentioned has far more students than either COSC or TESC combined so it will naturally have far more students taking the exams.

Let me know when you have actual proof.

Yes, in the foreseeable future, for now I don’t think the $34 difference is enough of a deal breaker for most students to go for a TECEP exam where you’ll have to crack open a textbook to prepare for compared to concise, short, and precise study guides through instantcert.com, the instantcert forum, and practice exams. In fact, the original pioneers of the rapid bachelor’s degree programs (like bain4weeks.com) specifically mention the use of CLEP, DSST, and Excelsior exams.

The price difference adds up the more tests you take. You also have to factor in gas and time of travel (remember when you said time is money?). I live 30 min. away from the nearest Pearson test center. I'd rather save the money on test fees and gas by taking a TECEP at home.

We’re in a time period where 5 - 10 years ago, you couldn’t even get a college degree online, or even in many cases, take coursework online for credit. This has changed become of the advances in computer software and technology. The other trend that has been happening and perhaps already happened is that as the bachelor’s degree becomes more widely accessible for people, the less valuable it becomes, so the Master’s will naturally become the new Bachelor’s degree and the Ph.D. the new Master’s (indeed this trend has already happened over a decade ago).

Online degree programs have been around for over 20 years. They became very accessible in the late 90s.

Well – PayScale often gives pay ranges that are so inaccurate sometimes that don’t properly reflect their markets. Sometimes less is more –*you have to be able to evaluate each and every data point with a grain of salt – all I’m saying is that I would never really rely on income reports from colleges who are advocating for themselves or even USNews rankings. Anyone can google how skewed the incomes are for college graduates. Payscale’s report shows, “Among college graduates nationwide,Excelsior College earned the top overall ranking when it comes to the highest median salary for those with a bachelor’s degree in liberal arts – $79,000 by mid-career (an increase from a median starting pay of $47,000).” Like you said the typical Excelsior College graduate tends to be mid-career and probably in their 30s or 40s and that’s why their median salary is already higher. It would be unfair to compare a liberal arts degree from Harvard (for the sake of exaggeration/argument) with one from Excelsior, where one individual is 22 and the other say 45.

We're not comparing Excelsior to Harvard; we're comparing it to the other two of the Big 3 that don't have "lame names." Where is your proof that PayScale's data is inaccurate? If you take a statistics course, you will learn that self selection bias creates unreliable data.

Ah, I forgot to add the application fee – I’ll correct/adjust that in a bit. I was just doing an apples to apples comparison doing the Enrolled Options Plan using the same coursework I did/detailed for COSC (forgoing the TECEP exams based on the aforementioned reasons of lack of prep materials) with the addition of Penn Foster’s Strategic Management course. The cost hits $6,900 for TESC with my plan idea because of the use of 4 Penn Foster Exams (PF Financial Management, PF Strategic Management, PF Employee Benefits, and Penn Foster Microeconomics).

Why would you do that when there are easy DSSTs to take instead? Human Resources, MIS, and Organizational Behavior are generally not viewed as being difficult. What you forgot are some of the fees at COSC.

Like I said, my course outline isn’t the cheapest, but it’s not the most expensive – it’s around $6,000, but it can be cheaper forgoes the Penn Foster courses and goes with Straighterline instead of Penn Foster. My plan is about not going intensely like yours with the 8 TECEP exams which I felt was much riskier.

Your plan can't be properly critiqued because it's not very well organized. You're missing a couple of fees, but it's difficult to tell if you're missing anything else. None of Straighterline's courses are upper level at COSC. Would you only replace lower level Penn Foster courses? Seven of Straighterline's courses are upper level at TESC.

[sanantone]

Yes, for all intents and purposes, they got in more because of luck – just simply given how extremely competitive it is to get into these top tier programs. Those are exceptions that prove the rule. Charter Oak states they've awarded over 11,000 degrees –there are 4-5 schools on that list of interest, let's say, 5/11,000 = .05% got into "the best" programs.

Your calculations are not based on anything. COSC has not tracked all of their students who have gone on to graduate school. You don't get into a prestigious graduate program because of luck.

Now look at how many students from Harvard Undergrad are going into top tier programs. Is it 1% or 10%? I think we can all agree that it is. Just because one person was able to get into Harvard Business School doesn't mean you or I can do it with the same stats. Maybe he/she was politically connected, or a minority candidate (i.e. affirmative action), or did something truly groundbreaking, or just filthy rich and donated millions to Harvard.

Do you have anything to back this up your claim that a COSC graduate with similar stats would be much less competitive than a graduate of a higher-ranked school? You throw all of this information out there with nothing to back it up. It doesn't even make logical sense. More Harvard students are going to the top graduate schools because they have high GPAs and high test scores. Harvard is known for grade inflation, but since they only admit highly-intelligent students in the first place, these students score higher on graduate admissions exams. They also are more likely to have the money for tutors and preparation courses.