I know this is an old thread, but I wanted to add some thoughts that I feel fit here perfectly instead of starting a new one.
From reading around this forum, there seems to be a pretty staunch anti-online learning stance. Given that, I wonder what many here think of Harvard's many online degree programs including their Masters in Psychology? I have serious doubts that their programs are subpar, it is Harvard after all, and I'd wager that many detractors didn't go to a school nearly as good/prestigious as Harvard (neither did I, btw). Obviously, all of these programs are not on the level of a Harvard, but I mention that because this approach of throwing the baby out with the bathwater just isn't rational and should be replaced with a more rational approach of examining things on a case-by-case basis.
Programming may be the most difficult thing to do on planet earth and I learned to program entirely online and earned a degree in Computer Science online. I hear the argument that online learning lacks hands-on experience, but the school I learned from actually used a live video system, and for our robotics elective we were able to interact with the Professor live while controlling the robotic parts via computer through the internet the same as we would have if we were sitting in the physical classroom. Through that degree, I earned a credited position at Electronic Arts working on one of their largest games. I earned three separate contracts with them (for the same game).
I mention that experience because I think many people who are so vehemently against online learning are often people who are unaware of the fact that much of what they claim are limitations of online learning have already been defeated by various technologies, granted, some schools use them and some schools don't. Others are people who've never even actually taken an online college course before or took a bad one and therefore categorize them all as bad.
Now, I'm not going to say that most programs have a setup like the one I had for my programming education, but I am aware of others. One I saw recently was AchievePrep for RNs that uses a similar tech setup to the one I mentioned going through. What's astonishing is that while there are detractors, those programs are turning out professionals with comparable and often higher licensing exam pass rates as those that learned in a physical classroom setting. I'm of the belief that if the goal and necessity is to become licensed, the program you took is legally recognized as making you eligible to take the licensing exam, and you pass that exam, then you are qualified in your field. How you obtained that knowledge is irrelevant (as long as it meets the requirements), all that matters is that you obtained it. And that brings me to my last point of thought:
I agree 100% with those who say that a degree in Clinical Psychology that doesn't mandate residency (California Southen University comes to mind) is certainly questionable, but if one does the residency is it still just as questionable? I saw an extreme response to it from one poster saying that "I don't recommend any therapists with a degree earned online, the minute I see it possibly came from an online program I ignore their listing" but, should all online programs of its kind be dismissed? Even ones that come from some of the best schools on the planet? Even the ones that require the same residency period as a 100% physical classroom program? They are out there after all, in fact I saw one Doctoral Psychology program that was 180+ credits with a crazy long residency requirement, so even those should be dismissed?
With practically every school on the planet offering online education, I just worry that the old guard of thinking--while well-meaning--is doing a lot of dismissing without much if any fair examination of individual cases.