Phoenix university graduates bad rep?

My supervisor is interviewing for jr security analyst and stated that he doesn't usually take candidates who graduated from Phoenix university serious, do many employers in IT feel like this about graduates from Phoenix? I have heard this before from others in the past and wanted to know whether anybody personally experienced or heard from their employers about graduates from this school.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

Jon_Cisco

I like the ad for University of Phoenix at the bottom of this thread!
I have never attended UoP but I know one relative that did and my wife looked into when she wanted to pursue an online degree.

The relative that went to UoP completed his masters to be eligible for promotions in his current company at the time. His big complaint was the students were placed into 4 person groups and he had to do the majority of the work to maintain his grade while some of the others barely participated.

My wife talked to UoP but decided against them because of their poor reputation. She choose Post University which is still a for profit university but the program fit her goals better. While it was not perfect she was satisfied with most of the course work but again she put 100% into it. I don't know how they handle failing students.

I am personally pursuing an Associates degree at my local community college. The students they accept are not always the best suited for technical positions but they sell them on the big paycheck and fill the first semester classrooms. This keeps the government money flowing. By the end of the program most of the remaining students are at least interested in IT and familiar with the systems. Again you only get out of an education what you put into it.

I don't think anyone should look down on someone for trying to pursue and education and better their lives. It might not be the best choice of schools but it might be just what some people needed at the time they joined.

I do find it perfectly acceptable to be more skeptical of an online degree compared to a traditional education but that should be part of reviewing the entire candidate. Schools get rated on the quality of education all the time which can give you a guide of what to expect from a candidate. However they are looking at averages. Good students can still excel in the bottom 90% of the schools out there. It is just up to them to step up and get the job done.

AverageJoe

Thankfully, it appears that one trend in this thread is that the folks who say they would simply not consider UoP or for-prophet schools are the ones who don't currently have any controlling influence in hiring. The folks who do seem to have direct influence in the hiring process seem to be much more open minded about which school was attended. That says a lot, I think.

And of those out there who do think badly of UoP, I think mostly it's because it's seen as a quick-and-easy DL school, not because it's a for-profit. In that regard, AMU and WGU suffer from the same lack of respect.

Cisc0kidd

daviddws wrote: »

I hate to break it to everyone, but all schools are for profit. Its just that some get subsidies and others don't. Accreditation is far more an important indicator.

What do you think a public university does with it's "profit"? They invest it in their campus, staff, and program. Meanwhile UofP, Devry, ITT, etc are under the gun to earn the largest possible return to their owners. You think that is a non issue?! We'll have to agree to disagree.

AverageJoe

You don't think public universities are under the gun to earn the largest possible return?

Cisc0kidd

AverageJoe wrote: »

You don't think public universities are under the gun to earn the largest possible return?

In the same way UofP et al are? Absolutely not!

ratbuddy

Wow, this thread really took off

1. I said 'probably.' That doesn't meant everyone who went to UoP has bad critical thinking skills, just most of them

2. I was using hyperbole when I said the resumes would go in the trash instantly. UoP is 100% without question a bottom-rung school (among those with regional accreditation), and while that isn't an instant-DQ, it sure isn't great on a resume.
3. Don't worry, Iris, I don't have anything against a WGU degree. I'm earning one myself. I know it's not a great degree to have on a resume, but I paid $38/CU for my first term, and I won't be graduating with $60k+ in student loans.

That said, the biggest problem I have with UoP is abuse of taxpayer dollars. If recipients of the various military tuition aids, pell grants, and federally backed students loans were required to select a non-profit school, we would not be having this conversation. UoP and similar schools exist solely to take advantage of these programs. I have a problem with that, and I think the federal aid programs should have a 'non-profit schools only' clause.

UoP spent over $150 million dollars for the naming rights to the stadium where the Arizona Cardinals play. The vast majority of those dollars were once taken out of your paycheck as taxes, one way or another. I think it's rubbish that we should support such wasteful uses of tax dollars in the name of 'education.' I guess some of my bitterness towards the for-profit schools rubs off on graduates of UoP, whether that's fair or not. Sorry if that makes me a bad person

daviddws

The Irony here is that completion rates for college ( both for profit and public ) are so low. Most people are ready to tear down anyone who has accomplished it. For profits and public schools are too easy, Ivy Leagues are rigged for the wealthy and well connected. These debates Im afraid will never die. The sad truth is that when you complete a degree or graduate degree you have a target on your back by the masses. In the end its what the student gains from the experience.

Cisc0kidd

daviddws wrote: »

The Irony here is that completion rates for college ( both for profit and public ) are so low. Most people are ready to tear down anyone who has accomplished it. For profits and public schools are too easy, Ivy Leagues are rigged for the wealthy and well connected. These debates Im afraid will never die. The sad truth is that when you complete a degree or graduate degree you have a target on your back by the masses. In the end its what the student gains from the experience.

What are you talking about? Target? Are you joking? Lol.

AverageJoe

Cisc0kidd wrote: »

In the same way UofP et al are? Absolutely not!

No, perhaps not the same way.

It seems like there's an awful lot of pressure on many public universities with emphasis on everything from ensuring racial and ethnic diversity targets are met across the student body to ensuring the right students are recruited for college football and basketball teams. Somewhere in there I would hope there's some focus on academics, but in the end it's all to ensure the largest possible return.

N2IT

daviddws wrote: »

I hate to break it to everyone, but all schools are for profit. Its just that some get subsidies and others don't. Accreditation is far more an important indicator.

That can be a farce as well to be honest, accreditations are given out by private organizations that may or may not be ethical in their own right. There isn't enough information out there IMO to say if these accreditations are legit. For example the AACSB. Really this is just a another layer of governance. You have the federal education system, state system, accreditations (regional, national) Then you have schools with their own accreditations like COBA and AACSB.

Ratings are another farce. Hospital and school ratings in US News and other publications. These ratings are based on how much money they invest into their program and or research, not the quality of education or health care too the student or patient.

Sounds like the whole things is in need of a douching.

Cisc0kidd

AverageJoe wrote: »

No, perhaps not the same way. Perhaps in a worse way.

It seems like there's an awful lot of pressure on many public universities with emphasis on everything from ensuring racial and ethnic diversity targets are met across the student body to ensuring the right students are recruited for college football and basketball teams. Somewhere in there I would hope there's some focus on academics, but in the end it's all to ensure the largest possible return.

I am pretty sure for profit schools have those requirements to some degree also. Maybe not. More importantly I think you hit the real issue in bring up focus on academics. Public and private nonprofit schools do put a heavy emphasis on this. UofP, Devry, ITT, etc not much at all. UofP especially has developed a reputation for enrolling and passing people they should not. They are not alone in doing so. Are they Regional accredited like other reputable schools? Yes. If an organization is only looking to check the box next to BA/BS degree will they do? Yes. Is their degree equal to every other RA degree? No.

AverageJoe

Cisc0kidd wrote: »

Is their degree equal to every other RA degree? No.

Well, what school degree is equal to every other RA degree? Every school has its own merits. My local community college certainly isn't equal to every other RA degree, but it does have some advantages (perhaps location, staff, price, and 100% acceptance policy). Others point out that the 100% acceptance policy is a detractor, for the same reasons that UoP's is. And for some that's true.

In my area some say George Mason University is just a hack school. Wow! I mean, to me it's very prestigious, but compared to some other local schools like the George Washington University and Georgetown University, perhaps GMU isn't as well regarded. Obviously their degrees are not equal in the eyes of some. Meanwhile there are those who would say GWU and Georgetown can't be compared to Harvard or Yale.

So instead of celebrating the fact that people are trying to improve themselves we have a lot of people who are so elitist that they'd rather dis someone for the school they went to instead of congratulating them for their accomplishment.

I have a friend who is married to a military member, they're stationed in Japan, and they have two young children. She just completed her UoP degree! Wow! How awesome!

I know she put a lot of work into it, and sometimes she was the one who carried her group (yes, the group projects are something I personally wouldn't be able to stand at UoP), but she did it and has graduated. It's not Yale or Harvard, but is it on par with WGU, University of Southern New Hampshire, Eastern New Mexico University, or other non-ivy schools across the country? I don't know, and I doubt most of us here know, but certainly it's better than not having a degree.

What's even funnier than some bashing others' degrees, though, is that frequently it's someone who has no degree at all that's passing judgment (and I do not mean anyone in particular here -- I'm not tracking who here has degrees). It's just kind of crazy that so many people who don't have degrees themselves will criticize the quality of a degree someone else has earned.

Just my 2 cents.
Joe

curtisc83

I would not throw out a resume with a UOPX degree or any for-profit/100% online school. I would measure the candidates education as equally as possible. If I had two resumes in front of me and one had a for-profit/100% online degree the other had a degree from a large B&M school and all experience/certifications are equal I would pick the B&M school resume. If one of those resumes did not have any formal education the UOPX/100% online degree would win out. I think that would be a fair way to measure things on paper. The interview would be the thing that makes or breaks a candidate in the end.

Cisc0kidd

AverageJoe wrote: »

Well, what school degree is equal to every other RA degree? Every school has its own merits. My local community college certainly isn't equal to every other RA degree, but it does have some advantages (perhaps location, staff, price, and 100% acceptance policy). Others point out that the 100% acceptance policy is a detractor, for the same reasons that UoP's is. And for some that's true.

In my area some say George Mason University is just a hack school. Wow! I mean, to me it's very prestigious, but compared to some other local schools like the George Washington University and Georgetown University, perhaps GMU isn't as well regarded. Obviously their degrees are not equal in the eyes of some. Meanwhile there are those who would say GWU and Georgetown can't be compared to Harvard or Yale.

So instead of celebrating the fact that people are trying to improve themselves we have a lot of people who are so elitist that they'd rather dis someone for the school they went to instead of congratulating them for their accomplishment.

I have a friend who is married to a military member, they're stationed in Japan, and they have two young children. She just completed her UoP degree! Wow! How awesome!

I know she put a lot of work into it, and sometimes she was the one who carried her group (yes, the group projects are something I personally wouldn't be able to stand at UoP), but she did it and has graduated. It's not Yale or Harvard, but is it on par with WGU, University of Southern New Hampshire, Eastern New Mexico University, or other non-ivy schools across the country? I don't know, and I doubt most of us here know, but certainly it's better than not having a degree.

What's even funnier than some bashing others' degrees, though, is that frequently it's someone who has no degree at all that's passing judgment (and I do not mean anyone in particular here -- I'm not tracking who here has degrees). It's just kind of crazy that so many people who don't have degrees themselves will criticize the quality of a degree someone else has earned.

Just my 2 cents.
Joe

I really haven't heard any one bashing UofP. I have heard people saying how great it is and others rightly pointing out its limitations. That is not bashing it is a discussion. Yes, there are people who believe any RA degree is equal or even more in accurately any accredited degree is equal. Like you said that isn't true. And like Ratbuddy I think UofP takes advantage of both their students and ultimately the US taxpayer. Does it make me think most UofP students are not good decision makers or are pretty gullible? Yes. Sorry if that makes you think I am elitist. You are entitled to you opinion right or wrong.

AverageJoe

Cisc0kidd wrote: »

I really haven't heard any one bashing UofP. I have heard people saying how great it is and others rightly pointing out its limitations. That is not bashing it is a discussion. Yes, there are people who believe any RA degree is equal or even more in accurately any accredited degree is equal. Like you said that isn't true. And like Ratbuddy I think UofP takes advantage of both their students and ultimately the US taxpayer. Does it make me think most UofP students are not good decision makers or are pretty gullible? Yes. Sorry if that makes you think I am elitist. You are entitled to you opinion right or wrong.

Sorry, Cisc0kidd, I wasn't saying that you in particular were an elitist or bashing. Frankly, I do think there's been UoP bashing in this thread (you really don't?). It's not my school and I don't have any personal stake in it, but people saying they'd throw away any resume that said UoP or even you saying that most UoP students are bad decision makers or gullible does indeed sound like bashing to me. That doesn't by itself make me think you are an elitist, but someone making such a judgment without any hint of circumstances or reasoning does sound elitist. It's kind of like saying people who shop at Wal-mart, eat at McDonald's, or drive a Kia are cheap.

Shoot, even if it is a poor decision to go to UoP, does one bad choice make someone a bad decision maker in general? I think we all make bad decisions, or, in terms of cybersecurity, we consider our vulnerabilities, weigh the threats, and take calculated actions to manage risk. Sometimes we get the risk wrong and sometimes we get it right. Just because someone accepts a particular risk doesn't mean they're gullible or a bad decision maker in general. It just means that at that point in time, with the circumstances and resources as they were, that a particular option seemed best (or least bad).

Anyway, I'm just pointing out some opposing views regarding generalized assertions that any person should be looked down upon just because of the school they attended. But thanks for allowing me my opinion.

You can have yours too

Seriously, it's just discussion and I didn't mean to offend you.
Joe

Iristheangel

@ratbuddy - no worries. I didn't really think you were bashing WGU or anything. The reality is that some employers may not like my degree and that's fine. I'm realistic. So far, I've haven't had a problem with gaining employment yet but it may come up down the road. I completely agree with you though in regard to UoP's practices. I don't fault the graduates (my mother is a graduate of UoP) but I think in a fair marketplace where they weren't lying to their students, targeting minorities and veterans, and living off the taxpayer dime, their business model would fail hard or they would be forced to spend more money to legitimize themselves a bit more.

Either way, good luck to the graduates with their degrees. I'm sure the OP has figured out the answer to their question by now: Yes, UoP does have a bad rep among SOME people. Whether that reputation is fairly earned or not is a matter of hot debate and strong opinion.

Cisc0kidd

Joe

The school a person chooses for their degree is one of the biggest decisions of their life. So, yes some one who makes a poor choice of that is very like a poor decision maker on the whole. It's not a crime to attend or graduate from UofP. It just reflects very poorly on a person. If an employer is looking for such a person it may well help them get a job. Most of your post is arguing against logic. If you want to believe in such a line of thinking be my guest. We'll have to agree to disagree. No harm, no foul.

AverageJoe

Well, maybe some people think where they go to school is one of their biggest decisions, but the rest of us do not think a person is defined by their choice of school. That's okay, though. It takes a lot of kinds of people to make a world, and if we all thought the same it'd be a pretty boring place.

Cisc0kidd

Wow, you think you speak for tons of people? Based on what pray tell?

AverageJoe

Ummm, no. I don't speak for tons of people. I speak for myself and never claimed otherwise. Some people feel one way, the rest of us feel another -- there was nothing quantifying which group was bigger or anything. Really, no reason to be so sensitive about everything I say. The only point was that some people might agree with you but not everyone does. Sheesshh.

Cisc0kidd

AverageJoe wrote: »

Ummm, no. I don't speak for tons of people. I speak for myself and never claimed otherwise. Some people feel one way, the rest of us feel another -- there was nothing quantifying which group was bigger or anything. Really, no reason to be so sensitive about everything I say. The only point was that some people might agree with you but not everyone does. Sheesshh.

Actually, Joe when you phrase it that way it does make it sound like you are characterized the size of groups. Some vs the rest. Good to know that isn't what you were saying. You may want to back off the rest of the comment though.

AverageJoe

I really just don't know what you're getting at. Let's see: There were people in a room and some left. The rest of us stayed.

1) There were 20 people in a room and thirteen left. The rest of us stayed.

2) There were 20 people in a room and seven left. The rest of us stayed.

The rest of us is just whatever part of the set didn't leave. There's simply nothing else to it. You've made a mountain out of a mole hill.

In any event, I apologize. You were obviously offended, but that was not my intent.

networker050184

QHalo wrote: »

OP I think this horse is dead.

Indeed. Just like anything else in life some people frown upon it, some don't. When I sift through a stack of resumes whether a person has a degree or not (no matter the school) has nothing to do with it. I honestly could not tell you whether anyone I have been involved in the hiring process had a degree or not. I'm not involved with hiring entry level people though so I can see it coming into play there. Once you have a few years of experience it's pretty irrelevant though in my experience.

mokaiba

AverageJoe wrote: »

It's not Yale or Harvard, but is it on par withWGU, University of Southern New Hampshire, Eastern New Mexico University, or other non-ivy schools across the country? I don't know, and I doubt most of us here know, but certainly it's better than not having a degree.

Its not on par. There is a difference between all of those schools.

networker050184

Well as you can see mokaiba, it's all a matter of opinion. If AverageJoe where the one reading your resume he'd have them on par. The only opinion that matters in the end is the person reading your resume.

AverageJoe

NOTE: my mistake -- down below I said SNHU is a for-profit, but it's not. It's a private school, non-public, but not categorized as for-private. Sorry for the confusion. --Joe

mokaiba wrote: »

Its not on par. There is a difference between all of those schools.

Yes, there is a difference, but they all have a great deal in common. WGU is DL and pretty much requires you to self-teach and is not thought of well in some circles (such as its teacher education program); SNHU (whoops, I accidently referred to it as USNH in my earlier post -- I meant SNHU) is both B&M and DL (kind of a UoP, but perhaps done better -- but both more expensive and less well known), and ENMU is a state school that offers in-state tuition rates to DL students anywhere so it attracts a lot of DL students but usually for its interdisciplinary degree which receives criticism for not having a more defined major.

Like UoP, all are frowned upon in some circles, but all have some distinct advantages if you're interested in a DL education. So is a SNHU degree more or less valuable than a UoP degree? Both have B&M components, and both have big DL programs. UoP is better known and has more students. What SNHU probably has going for it is that many assume it's a state school, but it's not (it's private, but not for-profit). It has also had a trend of hiring more and more adjunct professors to meet online demands while investing less and less in its B&M facilities and staff, so that is a negative to some who attend in person.

ENMU is a great deal but only if you take 6 or fewer credits per semester, so it takes a long time for people to get through it, which stretches things out and just increases the odds of dropping out before you finish. The classes are reportedly very hit or miss, with the teachers often having to teach both the in-res classes and then also teach the DL classes, and some (probably to no fault of their own) aren't able to give both the attention they deserve, so there's often a focus on the in-res programs, causing some to say the DL program is poor.

WGU enjoys a great reputation in this web forum, but that's certainly not universal. Right or wrong, a lot of people look at it as a DL school on par with UoP. The number of people who drop out because they are not disciplined enough to self-teach does not help that reputation, and they lead aspiring teachers to think their teacher prep program will earn them state certification, but that's not correct (or wasn't last time I looked). In that community some folks have been burned and spread the word, just as good word spreads here regarding the IT degrees they offer.

So while they're all different, depending on one's knowledge or experience with some, all, or none of the schools, which ones are bad and which ones are good can vary greatly.

Just my 2 cents.
Joe

mokaiba

networker050184 wrote: »

Well as you can see mokaiba, it's all a matter of opinion. If AverageJoe where the one reading your resume he'd have them on par. The only opinion that matters in the end is the person reading your resume.

There are many reasons as to why they are not on par with each other. Some schools are better for medical degrees, others for engineering, some for technical, business, chemistry, etc. That is what I meant by they are not par. par assumes they are all equal, which is untrue.

Assuming you have the educational merits to attend both MIT and UOP with no restrictions preventing you from attending either for a computer/engineering degree, which would you choose? If you say UOP, then youre a dumbass as MIT is better in every regard for those degrees than UOP. Same applies for any college. What is the colleges strong points? Are they what you want? Or have you accepted that you can do nothing by attending UOP and get a degree. Honestly, if thats all you want then UOP is the easy way to a degree if you only want to do the bare minimum. Now, thats not to say all from UOP are like that. You can easily see that the ones who put in the effort stand out from those who did not, just like anything else in life.

I used to work for companies who did things for UOP to the point I could have attended it for free. I chose not to go after one class. I could see that I would pass with an A without any effort. I like to have a challenge and feel like Ive accomplished something with hard work. UOP was not for me, however, WGU is different. The self-taught method of the school requires me to learn in ways I have never attempted in the past and makes me feel like I have accomplished something.

For UOP, its rep developed because of the easy route people. Those who did nothing then went to get a job and were found out to be dumbasses. They ruined a good thing. Yes, the cost is horrible, but it is still a good idea to have online schools....they just need more regulation. Guess im rambling now...if you want to go to UOP, do a business degree. Its courses can be done online from any school. I find it silly more colleges dont offer the business degree online....once you have that degree take the GMAT and pass it (730 or higher). No one would question you then when you start on your MBA.

Danielm7

AverageJoe wrote: »

WGU enjoys a great reputation in this web forum, but that's certainly not universal. Right or wrong, a lot of people look at it as a DL school on par with UoP. The number of people who drop out because they are not disciplined enough to self-teach does not help that reputation, and they lead aspiring teachers to think their teacher prep program will earn them state certification, but that's not correct (or wasn't last time I looked).

I've heard differently about the teachers program, from teachers who had great experiences with their WGU student teachers and teachers they hired from there. As far as I understand no school gives you certification by just going to the school, you still need to take the state board exams for your area to gain the certification no matter where you go.

curtisc83

AverageJoe wrote: »

Yes, there is a difference, but they all have a great deal in common. WGU is DL and pretty much requires you to self-teach and is not thought of well in some circles (such as its teacher education program); SNHU (whoops, I accidently referred to it as USNH in my earlier post -- I meant SNHU) is another for-profit that is both B&M and DL (kind of a UoP, but perhaps done better -- but both more expensive and less well known), and ENMU is a state school that offers in-state tuition rates to DL students anywhere so it attracts a lot of DL students but usually for its interdisciplinary degree which receives criticism for not having a more defined major.

Like UoP, all are frowned upon in some circles, but all have some distinct advantages if you're interested in a DL education. So is a SNHU degree more or less valuable than a UoP degree? Both are for-profits, both have B&M components, and both have big DL programs. UoP is better known and has more students. What SNHU probably has going for it is that many assume it's a state school, but it's not. It has also had a trend of hiring more and more adjunct professors to meet online demands while investing less and less in its B&M facilities and staff, so that is a negative to some who attend in person.

ENMU is a great deal but only if you take 6 or fewer credits per semester, so it takes a long time for people to get through it, which stretches things out and just increases the odds of dropping out before you finish. The classes are reportedly very hit or miss, with the teachers often having to teach both the in-res classes and then also teach the DL classes, and some (probably to no fault of their own) aren't able to give both the attention they deserve, so there's often a focus on the in-res programs, causing some to say the DL program is poor.

WGU enjoys a great reputation in this web forum, but that's certainly not universal. Right or wrong, a lot of people look at it as a DL school on par with UoP. The number of people who drop out because they are not disciplined enough to self-teach does not help that reputation, and they lead aspiring teachers to think their teacher prep program will earn them state certification, but that's not correct (or wasn't last time I looked). In that community some folks have been burned and spread the word, just as good word spreads here regarding the IT degrees they offer.

So while they're all different, depending on one's knowledge or experience with some, all, or none of the schools, which ones are bad and which ones are good can vary greatly.

Just my 2 cents.
Joe

SNHU is not a for-profit.

AverageJoe

Danielm7 wrote: »

I've heard differently about the teachers program, from teachers who had great experiences with their WGU student teachers and teachers they hired from there. As far as I understand no school gives you certification by just going to the school, you still need to take the state board exams for your area to gain the certification no matter where you go.

Not disputing that some people have different results, and as I said, I haven't looked at it recently. Either way, if you go in knowing it won't end with certification you can plan for that; some wind up surprised because WGU makes it sound like (or used to make it sound like) its program would lead to state certification when it doesn't.

As far as no school leading to certification, no, that's completely incorrect. Many if not most B&M teaching programs lead to teacher certification for that state. It usually is a cooperative effort with the state, but the school will validate you've met the requirements for teacher certification and submit it to the state for final endorsement. The state will usually have a list of schools with approved certification programs, so graduating from one of the approved degree programs from one of those schools equals certification. While many states do require you to take certification exams (usually the Praxis series), those are also graduation requirements at many schools... again, graduating means certification.

Unfortunately, different states have slightly (or sometimes drastically) different requirements for initial certification, and it goes beyond just the exams. There are certain classes you have to take, and at least one semester of student teaching is usually required. That's usually all part of the college program, but if it's missing some of the components that your state requires then you wind up not getting certified in your state (at least until you finish the additional requirements). WGU would give you a general teacher education but did not match it against individual state requirements, so you wound up not getting certified in your state.

Today WGU may be better, and there are probably more reciprocal agreements between states, so it might be that you could get certified in one state and more easily transfer it to another state. Still, you have to know the rules and plan for them.

Joe