ITT Tech shuts down

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

In my 15 years in IT have have only worked with 2 Devry grads, but both have been very good employees. I went to MRC, not UofC for the explicit reason that the UofC MGIS at the time (early 2000) was basically MGMT with a few "turn on a computer get an A" courses. They really were built for people who were MGMT but wanted to bluff computer proficiency to IT companies who were the rage at the time. "I can manage nerds, I took a VB Script class"

I wanted to learn something deeper and MRC had the best program available. I managed to learn programming design, ASP.NET, distributed computing, Business Analysis along with Sales and Marketing. It was great.

When it comes to IT the school is less relevant. I know lots of SAIT, MRC, and even a few Devry folks who were smart people and did as good if not better than any University grads. Really it comes down to the curriculum and how good the person can use it in the real world.

I agree that when it comes to IT it's more about what you've worked with on your own time than what you learned in school. You just need a piece of paper to say that you are indeed qualified.

That said, you are basically buying a degree with schools like DeVry as they won't teach you anything. My buddy took their software development program and it was a joke. He had a math class that was 6th grade level and I'm not even exaggerating. And that was 10 grand a semester...

I took the IT program at SAIT and there were several people in the program who had recently taken computer science at UofC. They mentioned that without a doubt they learned more in 1 semester at SAIT then an entire year at UofC. That program may only be 2 years, but they shove a whole lot of knowledge down your throat in that span. All of their instructors have worked in the industry before and are very knowledgeable teachers.

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

I took the IT program at SAIT and there were several people in the program who had recently taken computer science at UofC. They mentioned that without a doubt they learned more in 1 semester at SAIT then an entire year at UofC. That program may only be 2 years, but they shove a whole lot of knowledge down your throat in that span. All of their instructors have worked in the industry before and are very knowledgeable teachers.

Yes, I think the people I knew most likely would have been just as good coming from any other school. I do remember one of them gripping about cost, my total applied degree was $12,000 and his was that for about a year.

I took the exact same curriculum as you but at MRC. I also did the applied degree which was 1 more year with another 1 year work co-op. I really enjoyed it. You are right, they taught way more than UofC would have in Management Info Sys (MGIS).

I found MRC to react to tech trends a lot faster too. ASP.NET 1.0 was still in beta and we were learning the next wave of web technology. Same with distributed computing. Just a really great program that taught you a lot of practical things to help get you working as opposed to theory.

You wouldn't want a doctor doing that, but for tech it really is ideal.

[peter12]

Yeah, I think the Universities really only benefit the top 1% of talented students. Otherwise, why pay $38,000 to be a sub-par coder? You won't have a job in 10 years anyway.

[Hack&Lube]

IT as an industry recognizes industry/vendor certifications, not technical diploma mill pieces of paper.

In the 90s/2000s, they may have served a purpose as place to get the hands on experience but in today's online age, you can teach yourself everything online and get the certifications on your own.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

I agree that when it comes to IT it's more about what you've worked with on your own time than what you learned in school. You just need a piece of paper to say that you are indeed qualified.

That said, you are basically buying a degree with schools like DeVry as they won't teach you anything. My buddy took their software development program and it was a joke. He had a math class that was 6th grade level and I'm not even exaggerating. And that was 10 grand a semester...

I took the IT program at SAIT and there were several people in the program who had recently taken computer science at UofC. They mentioned that without a doubt they learned more in 1 semester at SAIT then an entire year at UofC. That program may only be 2 years, but they shove a whole lot of knowledge down your throat in that span. All of their instructors have worked in the industry before and are very knowledgeable teachers.

I'm assuming that first of all you meant no insult, but I didn't buy my degree I worked my a$$ off for my degree when I went, now things have probably changed from the early 90's. But the courses that we took with the exception of some English lit type courses were pretty tough and a lot of people failed out by the end of the second semester.

[temple5]

To bad 6K employees are soon to be jobless, should have transitioned to online tech learning and start to add other disciplines like accounting. Had a great name brand, should have been able to do something other than shutter the doors.

No reason to spend that much capital on stagnant infrastructure for anything other than marketing reasons.

Probably should have spent some money on transitioning to the health market.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm assuming that first of all you meant no insult, but I didn't buy my degree I worked my a$$ off for my degree when I went, now things have probably changed from the early 90's. But the courses that we took with the exception of some English lit type courses were pretty tough and a lot of people failed out by the end of the second semester.

If you went during the early 90's than my statement wouldn't apply to you. As far as I've heard, the University of Phoenix had good intentions initially and hired knowledgeable professionals with a legitimate curriculum. Something changed in the early 2000's to destroy the legitimacy of the institution.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

If you went during the early 90's than my statement wouldn't apply to you. As far as I've heard, the University of Phoenix had good intentions initially and hired knowledgeable professionals with a legitimate curriculum. Something changed in the early 2000's to destroy the legitimacy of the institution.

University of Phoenix and ITT Tech went public in 1994. DeVry in 1991, one needs look no further. The profit motive overrode the desire to provide good education.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by driveway

University of Phoenix and ITT Tech went public in 1994. DeVry in 1991, one needs look no further. The profit motive overrode the desire to provide good education.

Which pretty much sums up the American Education system in a nice little nutshell right there.

[You Need a Thneed]

Eventually all post secondary institutions are going to end up like this.

[CliffFletcher]

I'm all for more private delivery of post-secondary education if it means disruption and reform of the badly outdated and increasingly expensive public system we have now. The fact that in 2016 students pay thousands of dollars to sit in an auditorium with 400 other students and listen to a guy on stage read out of a book is astonishing. Is there anyone who thinks that's the way we would deliver content if the university were invented today?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I'm all for more private delivery of post-secondary education if it means disruption and reform of the badly outdated and increasingly expensive public system we have now. The fact that in 2016 students pay thousands of dollars to sit in an auditorium with 400 other students and listen to a guy on stage read out of a book is astonishing. Is there anyone who thinks that's the way we would deliver content if the university were invented today?

I actually think we should ban the term "disruption." What it normally means is monopolizing content to benefit a very few, while providing subpar product to the many.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Eventually all post secondary institutions are going to end up like this.

I dont think thats necessarily true. I still like the Post-Secondary model that we have in Canada, although in fairness it has been slowly deviating from it's original purpose and is becoming more and more exclusive.

Your average kid can go through University and come out the other side with a degree and reasonable debt-load depedning on their choices. That debt-load is gradually becoming higher and higher and thats something that needs to be addressed.

But I dont think we need a system of elite schools that few are admitted to and even fewer can afford.