[quote]
i also fail to understand why you are so fierce in your defense of all things ce while at the same time dissing every non-name brand school. what’s your deal? why is this such a personal issue for you?[ /quote]</p>
<p>I don’t know why you’re so fierce to ‘diss’ every CE school with such deliberately and outlandishly inflammatory statements as ‘if i saw someone with a degree from one i would think nothing of it. there is no prestige with that at all. it would be 1000x better to go to a real university.’ What’s your deal? Why is this such a personal issue to you? </p>
<p>Look, nobody is saying that CE programs are perfect. But nor are ‘regular’ university programs. The problems that have been pointed out regarding the CE’s can be just as easily applied to many regular programs.</p>
<p>say if i plan to pursue a phd in public policy, would a master of arts in public policy from northwestern school of continuing studies be more preferable to the one from the school of public policy at a second tier school like rutgers?</p>
<p>I’m in the same boat as collegeprep11… with one twist…</p>
<p>Basically I’m looking for an academic framework to the work I’m already doing in communications, and I’ve found a part-time program at Columbia CE that I’m interested in. It actually sounds perfect for me - the program focus, the variety, the location - but the one major question mark for me is that “CE”. </p>
<p>The twist here is that I’m currently in Asia. To get to Columbia, I’d have to get a work visa and find a job in NYC. I think I have already worked a way to do this through my current employer, which could put me in the NYC office of the US firm, which is where our head office is. </p>
<p>I’m really twisted up about this because so much hinges on whether or not the program is worthwhile… It’d be great to get US work experience anyway, but one major objective is getting a top-notch education to up the chances of me becoming really great at what I do.</p>
<p>I’m starting to feel pretty lost!!! Anyone have any advice on this?</p>
<p>sakky,
this was my attempt to explain to the original poster that getting a degree from ce would not be considered the same as getting a degree from the university under which the ce operates. I get this information from the fact that i have been a professional for many years and i know how these things work first hand. i was not dismissing the ce experience, on the contrary, i was outlining exactly what and how ce degrees are considered = professional degrees. this is perfectly fine, if you are going for that angle, or if you want to take a little extra courses to gain some proficiencies.
however, it is an entirely different experience than going to a normal university.</p>
<p>mutation, does that mean that you feel a “professional” degree would be considered somehow lesser than a… “non-professional”/“academic” degree? (whatever dichotomy we set up here will be fraught with danger, I suspect.)</p>
<p>First off, that’s not what you said. What you said is:</p>
<p>if i saw someone with a degree from one i would think nothing of it. there is no prestige with that at all. it would be 1000x better to go to a real university.</p>
<p>…meaning that somebody would be far better off going to a ‘real’ university - any ‘real’ university - rather than to a CE program. Again, I’d rather go to an Ivy CE than to Northwest Oklahoma State University, even though the latter is ostensibly ‘real’. I daresay that almost everybody would. </p>
<p>Now, if you want to modify your story to mean that an Ivy CE program may not be as good as one of the other programs within the university proper, then that may well be true. But that’s a false choice for most people, as many people can’t get into one of the ‘regular’ Ivy programs. For example, if you can get into one of the other Harvard graduate programs, then sure, just do that. But what if you can’t? </p>
<p>The bottom line is that, whatever resources an Ivy CE program may lack relative to the rest of the administrating Ivy school, it’s still almost certainly going to offer more resources than most other university programs out there. Let’s face it - there are thousands upon thousands of schools out there, most being lower-tier, no-name schools with few resources.</p>
<p>As heated as it is in here, I was wondering if I may interject a question of my own on this subject:</p>
<p>While I know CE is geared towards professionals wanting to further their academic horizons, is it possible to take CE in lieu of a traditional 4-year institution? I have heard this suggested by a handbook before but have not heard of it actually done in practice.</p>
<p>For background information, I just finished my first year at an unreasonably priced school out of state that I thought I would be comfortable with, but ended up being surrounded by a party school atmosphere (I didn’t research well into a school that “fit” and jumped at the acceptance letter), paying it through loans entirely. I will be transferring with no set school in mind, though, save my state school that I have a scholarship at, that covers almost all of tuition. My state school is not remarkable.</p>
<p>It is what sakky described: a low-tier, resource-barren school with a sticker price I couldn’t come to terms with. My professors were all right, but many of the students were, for the most part, uninformed and unwilling to grasp life outside a drinking schedule. I know it is a gross overstatement, but I was most displeased with the price.</p>
<p>I would not mind paying the same amount or a little less than what I paid at my last school (50k) if I knew I would fit well but cannot directly transfer because it is either too late / my GPA isn’t stellar for other circumstances save another discussion.</p>
<p>I have considered the CE route but my goal is to go to law school- can I do CE and still go to law school? Is this a bad idea?</p>
<p>sakky, i am glad that you know what i mean better than i do. this conversation is not productive to the people with genuine questions- so i have nothing further to add.</p>
<p>comparing ce programs at top schools, what are some main different in master of liberal studies type degrees and more traditional master of arts/master of science degrees?</p>
<p>“The format of the classes are generally poor, often 2-3 hours an evening once a week - which is impressively bad for actually learning anything.”</p>
<p>That statement is shocking in its stupidity and naivete. Masters-level programs all teach this way as well - are they all to be considered “generally poor… and impressively bad for learning anything” too?</p>
<p>First of all, where do you get the idea that “Masters-level programs all teach this way?” Outside of continuing ed programs and select lab courses I am unaware of any major universities that offer regular classes for full-time students in this format. Here are typical grad-level formats at a few major universities:</p>
<p>MIT: 1.5 hrs 2x per week
UIUC: 1 hr 3x per week, or 1.5 hrs 2x per week
PSU: 1 hr 3-4x per week, or 1.5 hrs 2x per week
UT Austin: 1.5 hrs 2-3x per week
Columbia: 1.25 hrs 2x per week, or 2.5 hrs 1x per week
Johns Hopkins: 1.25 hrs 2x per week
Northwestern: 1.33-1.5 hrs 2x per week
Ohio State: 1 hr 3x per week, or 1.5 hrs 2x per week</p>
<p>To summarize of all the schools I looked at, only 1 (Columbia) offered a single-course-per-week format for some (not most) non-laboratory classes, and almost all of those are offered from 4pm on! Can you give me some examples where this format is commonly used in graduate education OUTSIDE of evening classes?</p>
<p>Second, my statement was focused on the format, not the programs, and I stand behind it - students taking a class in a more spread-out format generally learn and retain more than students taking courses once per week, all else being equal. I would consider a program that focuses on this kind of format to offer an inferior education compared to a similar school with a better format.</p>
<p>Third, thank you for the “stupid” and “naive” comments - lit up my morning no end. Sorry I shocked you.</p>
<p>at the harvard extension school (at least for the undergraduate) you have a “concentration” which is analgous to a major, and you can have something analgous to a minor as well. i looked up the degree requirements for an ALB(their bachelor of arts degree) and if you choose to have a concentration you take basically the same sort of course load and distribution of classes as you would at a traditional undergraduate school, ie a certain amount of science and math credits required, 30-35 credits or so of credits completed in your concentration area of study, a certain number of humanities, etc. over 70% of the classes are also taught by harvard faculty as well. doesn’t look that different from the normal degree process to me.</p>
<p>Graduate of the Extension School are also admitted as full members to the Harvard University Alumni Association and are regualrly accepted to the Law/Medical/Graduate schools at Harvard and the other Ivies. If the program was as substandard as many of you are claiming, there is no way someone with an undergraduate degree from the Harvard Extension School would be admitted to schools such as Yale or Princeton Law.</p>
<p>Harvard Extension School
Hey Everyone! I know this is mostly about graduate work. I do have q question though. I have the chance to do my undergrad at either Arizona State University or Harvard Extension School. I am 26, money is not a huge issue and I am looking for the best education I can get. I have already taken classes at HES and loved it. That being said, I would like to go to law school. So if given the chance which school would be better to get my undergrad in and which one, grades and LSAT score permitting, would give me the best chance to get into a top tier law school?</p>
<p>SAIS, Georgetown, GW and American all offer their MA classes for IR students in this format (daytime and evening, too, and full-time students can take all evening classes if they so desire). Do they offer an “inferior” education? That’s a very broad statement to make across all disciplines, you know.</p>
<p>I had trouble navigating Georgetown & American’s course listings, but JHU (SAIS’s parent school) and GW both largely skip this format for their other departments - scanning through I overwhelmingly saw shorter classes multiple times per week.</p>
<p>This format may be a peculiarity of IR in general, but I suspect that it largely due to geography: the schools you mentioned are all in the DC area, and I suspect the courses are designed to cause minimum interference with work schedules - much like continuing ed courses. The excellence of these programs is tied to the resources of their host city, not the format of the classes.</p>
<p>Yes, it is a very broad statement, but IR in DC is the 1st graduate area I have ever heard of where this policy is the norm.</p>
<p>i am not sure about some of these schools such as harvard, but several in the chicago area are the real deal, and the degree is conferred by weinberg arts and sciences for instance at northwestern… similar at depaul and loyola… there is nothing about continuing studies on the degree, its the same… BPhil instead of BA in case of Northwestern… is that a problem for academia?</p>
<p>I think it is just a big city thing, and there are some adults or over 24 year olds going back to school that don’t want to be around 18 year olds. </p>
<p>If anybody has anything saying otherwise on this feel free to let me know.</p>
<p>What’s the problem with the time the classes are being taught? Is it really different if, provided their contents are identical (i.e. course titles/numbers on your transcript are the same), one section is taught from 6-9pm on Tues, and one section is taught from 2-3:30pm Mon/Wed? </p>
<p>Are you implying that the section from 6-9pm on Tuesday teach less material than the the other section taught from 2-3:30pm MW? Are you implying it’s easier to get an A if you enroll in the section from 6-9pm on Tuesday than if you enroll in the section from 2-3:30pm MW, even though students in these 2 sections will be learning the same material/doing the same homework/taking the same exams ??? </p>
<p>This is even more stupid than saying Harvard Extension degree, where students who meet minimum requirement are admitted (without even having to take SAT/GRE) is the regarded as prestigious as Harvard College degree, where admission is ultra competitive and admitted students have much, much higher credential than minimum requirement.</p>
<p>I’m not sure that this statement is even true, but presuming that it is, I highly suspect that the effect size is small. How much you retain is almost certainly affected far more by other factors, most notably the inherent motivation and talent of the individual student. </p>
<p>As a case in point, I would point to my brother, who for many courses at Caltech would practically never go to lecture. Nor was he the only one - Caltech is notorious for having many students who rarely attend class (often times because the lectures are poorly taught, but that’s a different story). Hence, forget about going to class 1 vs. 2 times a week: these students were going to class zero times a week. </p>
<p>But it’s hard to argue with the results, as he and his cohort all graduated with honors (again, from Caltech mind you), and those who wanted to do so all were admitted to top grad programs. To further the story, my brother continued his habits of rarely showing up to many of his graduate courses as well, yet his grades continued to be impeccable. </p>
<p>Granted, maybe if had actually showed up, his grades might have been even better. But that simply demonstrates how weak the relationship seems to be in terms of knowledge and the periodicity of lecture. He performed far better than most students who actually did show up to class. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would argue that there is no way that somebody with an undergraduate degree from HES would be admitted to Princeton Law.</p>