Thoughts?
13 replies (most recent on top)
So typical - sounds like a decision made in the absence of research.
But the influx would be 1/2 every 6 weeks. Why not just get the full 12 weeks right away?
Oh, duh! I just figured it out! An influx of $$$ every 6 weeks rather than every 12!!!! That has got to be it!
January.......good one!!
"Otherwise, why are the geniuses at the top making any plans for January?" lol
I guess this is predicated upon a sale? Otherwise, why are the geniuses at the top making any plans for January? According to DOE, Corinthian will not exist after end of December, and therefore, Everest won't. Are we adopting a buyer's model?
Six week courses are currently the kiss of death for our students. They require significant participation and workload -- two areas where we students are having difficulty (show up and do work). I can see the advantage of having a single, standard format. I hope that the expectation is one course.
OP -- any other info. about the logic behind it and exactly who is going to execute this?
So they will take like 2 -4 classes over 12 week period?? Either 1 or 2 in each 6 week term???? The mini is the least successful term Interesting decision. Looks good on paper but disregards the students profiles. They really struggle in 6 week terms, get discouraged. Maybe those other schools gave a different demographic.
Some of my friends take classes at other online schools. Their classes are6 weeks.
How will they redesign hundreds of classes in 4 months?
Double the work will result in even lower retention. Ensuring more failure.
January? Ha!
Planning for January is like planning to paint a house that is currently on fire.
Is there a stated reason? My guess is that it is the following:
-
May be easier for students to focus on only one or two courses at a time rather than 3-4.
-
More class flexibility since the mini-starts offer a small percentage of the quarter-start classes
-
Potentially heavier class loads (16 credits over 12).
Just a guess though.