So I get this email today....

[devilmaster]

As of January 2006 our University has started a work experience degree program.
We can offer you 3 of the following choices:

- Associate Degree
- Bachelor's Degree
- Master's Degree

Our work experience / life experience degrees are the same degrees we give our full time students,
but we base them upon your past knowledge and therefore require no studying.

Due to back logs we will need 1-2 weeks to verify your information and send your degree with transcripts in the mail.

Our Education office has someone available 24 hours a day, 7 Days a week.

If you are still interested then call us at:

A degree for sitting around and doing nothing?!? That sounds great, that sounds awesome, that sounds like being a Buckeye or Longhorn.

:runs: ;)

[Sean O'Gorman]

God bless socialism. Must be a Canadian thing. ;)

[Andrew Longman]

Thomas Edison State College has been doing that and little else for 35 years.

http://www.tesc.edu/aboutus/mission.php

[Insomniac]

This isn't new. It actually caused quite the brouhaha at the company I work at. Some people got their "degrees" this way and a few people quit because of it. They felt it was unethical of the company to recognize the degrees and to lead customers to believe that their employees had them. They also did not like that people got the degrees without having to go earn them in the same way.

I don't have anything against the idea behind it, but they shouldn't be diplomas, or they should be identified as experience-based diplomas. There is no question that people can learn the things taught at a uni/college without going and some are more knowledgable than those with the degree. They've worked hard to be just as capable as the person with a diploma and shouldn't be stifled because they don't have one.

The rich and famous get "honorary" degrees, the average person should be able to get something.

[TravelGal]

^^^ completely agree. As long as they pass the identical tests. :irked:

[Ankf00]

There is no question that people can learn the things taught at a uni/college without going and some are more knowledgable than those with the degree. They've worked hard to be just as capable as the person with a diploma and shouldn't be stifled because they don't have one.

Don't need a diploma, they have resumes and references. I've worked under a few guys like that, supremely capable. But unless it was varied experience, the limited breadth of technical knowledge handicapped them once they rose to a certain level of responsibility.

And bs degrees piss me off as well. Everyone at LM Dallas goes to SMU for "masters of science, systems engineering" (nevermind the lack of a thesis, SMU labels it an MS none the less), if they're too lazy for even that program, they do the 1 year "Masters of Engineering Management" which is Sys Eng light. And of course this is recorded as a technical masters in the corp's database. Meanwhile I'm trying to start Mech/Aero Control Systems and I'm being grilled by a director on how it directly relates to my position and why they should pay for it :saywhat:

[Insomniac]

Don't need a diploma, they have resumes and references. I've worked under a few guys like that, supremely capable. But unless it was varied experience, the limited breadth of technical knowledge handicapped them once they rose to a certain level of responsibility.

And bs degrees piss me off as well. Everyone at LM Dallas goes to SMU for "masters of science, systems engineering" (nevermind the lack of a thesis, SMU labels it an MS none the less), if they're too lazy for even that program, they do the 1 year "Masters of Engineering Management" which is Sys Eng light. And of course this is recorded as a technical masters in the corp's database. Meanwhile I'm trying to start Mech/Aero Control Systems and I'm being grilled by a director on how it directly relates to my position and why they should pay for it :saywhat:

The diploma conveys a certain amount of knowledge. There are assumptions that come with the fact that you have a diploma. That person's experience and knowledge should cover the scope of the degree the diploma is for, not a small part. References and experience add to the diploma giving prospective employers an idea of what you have been doing. The diploma can tell them things that you should be capable of doing.

There are also a lot of places that do not require a Master's Thesis. Many Master's programs are only course based, although the trend is going towards Master's Thesis'.

[Insomniac]

Ohhh, not like this would happen. No University/College is going to start handing out Diplomas to people based on experience, even if they could easily pass every course in the curriculum.

They should start certifying diplomas though.

[Ankf00]

Master of Science != Master of Engineering was what I meant to point out. SMU tries to pass their junk off as an MS program when it is not.

[Insomniac]

Master of Science != Master of Engineering was what I meant to point out. SMU tries to pass their junk off as an MS program when it is not.

Ohhh, I see.

[Andrew Longman]

Ohhh, not like this would happen. No University/College is going to start handing out Diplomas to people based on experience, even if they could easily pass every course in the curriculum.

They should start certifying diplomas though.

That's actually what Thomas Edison College was founded to do. And they are one of the most stringent and respected at certifying courses from other universities and training organizations.

There are a lot of people who see little benefit taking on a lifetime of debt to get drunk at frat parties and attend football games. They want to acquire the knowledge and get credit for it as efficiently as possible. Other already went to school but life's circumstances took their career in another direction. They would like to get credit for what they learned along the way. It's fair so long as its done in a rigorous and transparent way.

OTOH I saw a study about 7 years ago that showed that the single highest correlation between lifetime earnings and educational factors was NOT what college you went to or the grades you got. In fact moving from a B average to A average had a reverse correlation.

The single best indicator of lifetime earning was the household income of your roommate. In other words, the opportunity to be friends and network with someone whose mom and dad are corporate muckety mucks and likely to help you get a good first job trumped everything else.

When why C student such as W Bush and Kerry are where they are.

And so why it may be more important to actually sit in a classroom for a few years.

[Insomniac]

That's actually what Thomas Edison College was founded to do. And they are one of the most stringent and respected at certifying courses from other universities and training organizations.

There are a lot of people who see little benefit taking on a lifetime of debt to get drunk at frat parties and attend football games. They want to acquire the knowledge and get credit for it as efficiently as possible. Other already went to school but life's circumstances took their career in another direction. They would like to get credit for what they learned along the way. It's fair so long as its done in a rigorous and transparent way.

OTOH I saw a study about 7 years ago that showed that the single highest correlation between lifetime earnings and educational factors was NOT what college you went to or the grades you got. In fact moving from a B average to A average had a reverse correlation.

The single best indicator of lifetime earning was the household income of your roommate. In other words, the opportunity to be friends and network with someone whose mom and dad are corporate muckety mucks and likely to help you get a good first job trumped everything else.

When why C student such as W Bush and Kerry are where they are.

And so why it may be more important to actually sit in a classroom for a few years.


That makes sense. Often it's who you know that helps you a lot more than anything else.