Opponents argue that online programs are among the most cost-effective for students. Often by paying only $1,000 – $5,000, a student in an online program can obtain a credential that will get them a higher paying job. They argue that an additional accessibility advantage is that the online program schedules are more flexible. Much of the work can be done at a time and place convenient to the student and doesn’t require the added time commitment of commuting. They argue that these considerations make the access tradeoff that comes with eliminating totally online programs especially stark.
Opponents suggest that the fact that some types of programs aren’t appropriate for 100% online training doesn’t mean that all online programs should be prohibited. In fact, fully online programs may be quite appropriate for programs in growing fields like cybersecurity, IT, finance, and software development whose core skillsets involve high levels of computer and technological fluency. The other approaches to quality assurance, they suggest, should be able to screen out programs that can’t be done effectively online.