Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

Education vs. College

bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
kasmic
Posts: 1,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.
"Liberalism Defined" http://www.debate.org...
"The Social Contract" http://www.debate.org...
"Intro to IR An Open Discussion" http://www.debate.org...

Check out my website, the Sensible Soapbox http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
My latest article: http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
kasmic
Posts: 1,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 1:48:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago

*A degree does not just "represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.
"Liberalism Defined" http://www.debate.org...
"The Social Contract" http://www.debate.org...
"Intro to IR An Open Discussion" http://www.debate.org...

Check out my website, the Sensible Soapbox http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
My latest article: http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
kasmic
Posts: 1,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 2:36:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

I agree that it gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage. I also think that education should not only be only for employment...
"Liberalism Defined" http://www.debate.org...
"The Social Contract" http://www.debate.org...
"Intro to IR An Open Discussion" http://www.debate.org...

Check out my website, the Sensible Soapbox http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
My latest article: http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 2:56:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

Degrees can be so broad that allowing one to obtain a degree via a few tests is probably a bad idea.

Look at all the courses required to become an English major: http://tulane.edu...
It would be impossible to make one test that determines whether or not an individual is proficient in all this material. Moreover, as people become familiar with the way tests to obtain a bachelor's degree work, the tests will become easier to pass. Through guides from Princeton review, I could likely get a 5 on the AP world exam after less than a month of studying. I understand that tests that would allow people to obtain bachelor's degrees would be of a much higher caliber, but the same concept applies because It is almost impossible to make a perfect test that tests whether or not a potential English major knows everything they would have learned without a college education.

Colleges allow students who show proficiency in subjects to opt out of most classes any way. Students can do that through AP exams (in high school) because one does not need to take an AP class to take an AP exam. In both high school and college, students can take slightly easier CLEP exams to opt out of taking certain classes. If I worked hard enough, I might only have to go to college for one year to get a bachelor's degree in English just via AP exams, CLEP exams, and concurrent enrollment. Taking measures like this would prove me to be significantly more proficient than simply passing a test, if that makes sense.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:08:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 2:56:49 PM, debatability wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

Degrees can be so broad that allowing one to obtain a degree via a few tests is probably a bad idea.

Look at all the courses required to become an English major: http://tulane.edu...
It would be impossible to make one test that determines whether or not an individual is proficient in all this material.

All classes determine scores through exams. So I don't see how it would be "impossible". Onerous, to be sure, if we're going for comprehensive, possibly needing to be a multi-day test, but not impossible.

Moreover, as people become familiar with the way tests to obtain a bachelor's degree work, the tests will become easier to pass.

How is that any different than individual classes now?

Through guides from Princeton review, I could likely get a 5 on the AP world exam after less than a month of studying. I understand that tests that would allow people to obtain bachelor's degrees would be of a much higher caliber, but the same concept applies because It is almost impossible to make a perfect test that tests whether or not a potential English major knows everything they would have learned without a college education.

Not to be repetitious, but we're back in the same boat as with classes now.

Colleges allow students who show proficiency in subjects to opt out of most classes any way. Students can do that through AP exams (in high school) because one does not need to take an AP class to take an AP exam. In both high school and college, students can take slightly easier CLEP exams to opt out of taking certain classes. If I worked hard enough, I might only have to go to college for one year to get a bachelor's degree in English just via AP exams, CLEP exams, and concurrent enrollment. Taking measures like this would prove me to be significantly more proficient than simply passing a test, if that makes sense.

It does, but bear in mind that a lot of those don't give you full CREDITS, so you have to "make it up" somewhere. For example, you can test out of languages at the local state college, if you can demonstrate proficiency. But you still have to take an equivalent number of credit-horus, it can just be in anything you want. That makes no sense.

I get what you're saying, that one comprehensive test may be unfeasible. I'm not necessarily advocating a SINGLE test, but more just "some way" that isn't "take a whole bunch of classes even if you already have the knowledge we're claiming to give you".

To return to the languages thing, if you could really test out completely of languages, that would be in my opinion a step in the right direction. "You're fluent in 2 languages, which is what we require, therefore you don't have to take these 12 credits at all, because they're earmarked for language and you don't need it".
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:11:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 2:56:49 PM, debatability wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

Degrees can be so broad that allowing one to obtain a degree via a few tests is probably a bad idea.

Look at all the courses required to become an English major: http://tulane.edu...
It would be impossible to make one test that determines whether or not an individual is proficient in all this material. Moreover, as people become familiar with the way tests to obtain a bachelor's degree work, the tests will become easier to pass. Through guides from Princeton review, I could likely get a 5 on the AP world exam after less than a month of studying. I understand that tests that would allow people to obtain bachelor's degrees would be of a much higher caliber, but the same concept applies because It is almost impossible to make a perfect test that tests whether or not a potential English major knows everything they would have learned without a college education.
It's not much harder to pass classes - it's just more tedious. It's entirely possible to do the bare minimum, only memorizing things for tests, and still pass a class with flying colours. There's really no way to judge knowledge at all outside of things like dissertations.
Colleges allow students who show proficiency in subjects to opt out of most classes any way. Students can do that through AP exams (in high school) because one does not need to take an AP class to take an AP exam. In both high school and college, students can take slightly easier CLEP exams to opt out of taking certain classes. If I worked hard enough, I might only have to go to college for one year to get a bachelor's degree in English just via AP exams, CLEP exams, and concurrent enrollment. Taking measures like this would prove me to be significantly more proficient than simply passing a test, if that makes sense.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz

"No aspect of your facial structure suggests Filipino descent."
~ YYW
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz

"No aspect of your facial structure suggests Filipino descent."
~ YYW
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:31:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.

My wife didn't even have to do that to obtain her Master's degree.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 3:34:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:31:43 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.

My wife didn't even have to do that to obtain her Master's degree.

Didn't have to pass a panel? Not that it was really new for me since I had to endure a panel evaluation to pass Naval Nuclear Power school some years before I went back to college to finish my undergrad degree.
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 4:08:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:08:07 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 2:56:49 PM, debatability wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

Degrees can be so broad that allowing one to obtain a degree via a few tests is probably a bad idea.

Look at all the courses required to become an English major: http://tulane.edu...
It would be impossible to make one test that determines whether or not an individual is proficient in all this material.

All classes determine scores through exams. So I don't see how it would be "impossible". Onerous, to be sure, if we're going for comprehensive, possibly needing to be a multi-day test, but not impossible.

It's still impossible to make a test that tests the equivalent of 10 - 20 classes.


Moreover, as people become familiar with the way tests to obtain a bachelor's degree work, the tests will become easier to pass.

How is that any different than individual classes now?

Here's an example. I am wanting to become a history major and I have to take a US history, European History, and African History classes. I choose to take a CLEP test to exempt these classes. In studying for the CLEP exams, I gain a comprehensive background in all of these subjects. However, if I was able to take a test for a bachelor's degree in history, the test may only consist of 5-10% questions on each of those catagories. In studying for a test to obtain a major in history, I would have to do way less work because I wouldn't need comprehensive knowledge on all of those subjects like I might have if I decided to exempt each class individually.

I mean, it depends on how these tests you're proposing would be made, I guess.


Through guides from Princeton review, I could likely get a 5 on the AP world exam after less than a month of studying. I understand that tests that would allow people to obtain bachelor's degrees would be of a much higher caliber, but the same concept applies because It is almost impossible to make a perfect test that tests whether or not a potential English major knows everything they would have learned without a college education.

Not to be repetitious, but we're back in the same boat as with classes now.

Colleges allow students who show proficiency in subjects to opt out of most classes any way. Students can do that through AP exams (in high school) because one does not need to take an AP class to take an AP exam. In both high school and college, students can take slightly easier CLEP exams to opt out of taking certain classes. If I worked hard enough, I might only have to go to college for one year to get a bachelor's degree in English just via AP exams, CLEP exams, and concurrent enrollment. Taking measures like this would prove me to be significantly more proficient than simply passing a test, if that makes sense.

It does, but bear in mind that a lot of those don't give you full CREDITS, so you have to "make it up" somewhere. For example, you can test out of languages at the local state college, if you can demonstrate proficiency. But you still have to take an equivalent number of credit-horus, it can just be in anything you want. That makes no sense.

Not necessarily. You still get credit hours for AP and concurrent enrollment in highschool. I'm not sure about CLEP exams, but there are means of substantially shortening college time. I'll be going into college as either a second semester sophmore or a junior based on the amount of credits I am projected to earn. Maybe it varies from state to state, I don't know.


I get what you're saying, that one comprehensive test may be unfeasible. I'm not necessarily advocating a SINGLE test, but more just "some way" that isn't "take a whole bunch of classes even if you already have the knowledge we're claiming to give you".

Possibly. Although, how many people are fully prepared to gain a bachelors degree in a subject without taking any classes. How many people would want to take a test like this if it truly was just as hard as taking a bunch of classes?


To return to the languages thing, if you could really test out completely of languages, that would be in my opinion a step in the right direction. "You're fluent in 2 languages, which is what we require, therefore you don't have to take these 12 credits at all, because they're earmarked for language and you don't need it".

Through AP tests, one can become a minor in a language before entering college actually.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 6:38:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 4:08:38 PM, debatability wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:08:07 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 2:56:49 PM, debatability wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

Degrees can be so broad that allowing one to obtain a degree via a few tests is probably a bad idea.

Look at all the courses required to become an English major: http://tulane.edu...
It would be impossible to make one test that determines whether or not an individual is proficient in all this material.

All classes determine scores through exams. So I don't see how it would be "impossible". Onerous, to be sure, if we're going for comprehensive, possibly needing to be a multi-day test, but not impossible.

It's still impossible to make a test that tests the equivalent of 10 - 20 classes.

I completely disagree. It may be unfeasible but, again, those classes already use testing. I can't believe combining them is impossible. Obviously, I haven't outline a practical plan to do so, and "possible" and "feasible" are two different things.

Moreover, as people become familiar with the way tests to obtain a bachelor's degree work, the tests will become easier to pass.

How is that any different than individual classes now?

Here's an example. I am wanting to become a history major and I have to take a US history, European History, and African History classes. I choose to take a CLEP test to exempt these classes. In studying for the CLEP exams, I gain a comprehensive background in all of these subjects. However, if I was able to take a test for a bachelor's degree in history, the test may only consist of 5-10% questions on each of those catagories. In studying for a test to obtain a major in history, I would have to do way less work because I wouldn't need comprehensive knowledge on all of those subjects like I might have if I decided to exempt each class individually.

And when you take a class, the exams for that class would be the same thing--no test truly measures literally everything, they all take a sampling.

I mean, it depends on how these tests you're proposing would be made, I guess.

Well, right.

And I think it would be a better idea to break it into subtests, but the point would be that you could independent your way to a degree, rather than having to take their coursework.

Through guides from Princeton review, I could likely get a 5 on the AP world exam after less than a month of studying. I understand that tests that would allow people to obtain bachelor's degrees would be of a much higher caliber, but the same concept applies because It is almost impossible to make a perfect test that tests whether or not a potential English major knows everything they would have learned without a college education.

Not to be repetitious, but we're back in the same boat as with classes now.

Colleges allow students who show proficiency in subjects to opt out of most classes any way. Students can do that through AP exams (in high school) because one does not need to take an AP class to take an AP exam. In both high school and college, students can take slightly easier CLEP exams to opt out of taking certain classes. If I worked hard enough, I might only have to go to college for one year to get a bachelor's degree in English just via AP exams, CLEP exams, and concurrent enrollment. Taking measures like this would prove me to be significantly more proficient than simply passing a test, if that makes sense.

It does, but bear in mind that a lot of those don't give you full CREDITS, so you have to "make it up" somewhere. For example, you can test out of languages at the local state college, if you can demonstrate proficiency. But you still have to take an equivalent number of credit-horus, it can just be in anything you want. That makes no sense.

Not necessarily. You still get credit hours for AP and concurrent enrollment in highschool. I'm not sure about CLEP exams, but there are means of substantially shortening college time. I'll be going into college as either a second semester sophmore or a junior based on the amount of credits I am projected to earn. Maybe it varies from state to state, I don't know.

It varies from school to school more than state to state.

I get what you're saying, that one comprehensive test may be unfeasible. I'm not necessarily advocating a SINGLE test, but more just "some way" that isn't "take a whole bunch of classes even if you already have the knowledge we're claiming to give you".

Possibly. Although, how many people are fully prepared to gain a bachelors degree in a subject without taking any classes. How many people would want to take a test like this if it truly was just as hard as taking a bunch of classes?

Since it's not an option now, i don't know; but I'm saying I think it should be an option. The issue is not <Em>the material, it's the hoops they make you jump through. My proposal shouldn't be any easier than the "standard" way, in fact I would concede that it should probably be harder. But it should be a thing that exists and, if it was broken into sections, I think a lot of people would take advantage at least partially.

To return to the languages thing, if you could really test out completely of languages, that would be in my opinion a step in the right direction. "You're fluent in 2 languages, which is what we require, therefore you don't have to take these 12 credits at all, because they're earmarked for language and you don't need it".

Through AP tests, one can become a minor in a language before entering college actually.

I'm not sure what you mean here. A minor is part of your curriculum, but if you're saying you can fulfill all the requirements of your minor merely through AP tests, I believe you to be mistaken.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 6:48:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:34:26 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:31:43 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.

My wife didn't even have to do that to obtain her Master's degree.

Didn't have to pass a panel? Not that it was really new for me since I had to endure a panel evaluation to pass Naval Nuclear Power school some years before I went back to college to finish my undergrad degree.

She did not. No panel. No real "final" to speak of, either. She got it in Library Sciences.

I am actually degree-less. I have enough credits that if it weren't for red tape I'd have at least an associate's, if not be close to a bachelor's, but the state schools out here are just clusters-o-fun and I haven't been able to get them to corral everything together.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 7:18:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:31:43 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.

My wife didn't even have to do that to obtain her Master's degree.

No defence for a master's degree? What about a disseratation? Can I ask what field it was in?
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 7:19:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

You may not want to generalize so broadly. Many colleges and universities in the world still offer excellent education.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 7:21:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 7:18:45 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:31:43 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.

My wife didn't even have to do that to obtain her Master's degree.

No defence for a master's degree? What about a disseratation? Can I ask what field it was in?

No dissertation, either. And *cough*IsaiditintheverynextpostImade*cough* It was in Library Science. Though I think it's technically "Information Resources and Library Science" IIRC. M...A, I believe, despite it being a Library SCIENCE.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 7:22:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 7:19:53 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

You may not want to generalize so broadly. Many colleges and universities in the world still offer excellent education.

I can hardly think of an area where so much time and money is wasted on irrelevant things. Sure, Harvard will give you a good education, but at a price that is arguably ridiculous for the benefits.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz

"No aspect of your facial structure suggests Filipino descent."
~ YYW
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 7:24:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 7:21:10 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 7:18:45 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:31:43 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:24:02 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:17:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

I don't know about "frauds" per se.

Certainly, there are major issues.

I don't know where you got your degree, but at my school, I had to write a very long paper for my graduation encompassing everything I learned and then present it in a closed session of deans for their approval before I was allowed to graduate. They spent an hour Q and A to make sure I wasn't talking out of my assole.

My wife didn't even have to do that to obtain her Master's degree.

No defence for a master's degree? What about a disseratation? Can I ask what field it was in?

No dissertation, either. And *cough*IsaiditintheverynextpostImade*cough* It was in Library Science. Though I think it's technically "Information Resources and Library Science" IIRC. M...A, I believe, despite it being a Library SCIENCE.

Ah, whoops. I didn't read the entire thread before asking (I know, i was like 2 or 3 sentences away too).

I guess I can understand that then. Library sciences isn't a master's degree in the same way most others are. It's almost like a trade or a professional diploma or something of that category. It's a course-based master's, isn't it?
UndeniableReality
Posts: 1,897
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 7:29:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 7:22:22 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 7:19:53 PM, UndeniableReality wrote:
At 5/29/2015 3:13:09 PM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:52:05 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:47:12 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

This isn't a good reason per se...

A degree does not just show "if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount;" It shows longevity, an ability to see things through. To commit for years to something.

So the value of a degree may be knowledge, but it also indicates other desirable traits in an employee.

But education is not only for employment, and it's not a "bachelor of arts and stick-to-it'veness".

Plus thinking of it that way gives wealthier people an unnecessary advantage...if you can affort to take 6 years off of work to take a nice easy courseload, you get the same "checkmark" in that category as someone who works their butt off for 4 years with a full time job and a full course load, and you're better off than someone who can't find a job that allows them to do that.

Colleges haven't been for education for a long time. They're almost entirely frauds. It's a matter of money, not anything else.

You may not want to generalize so broadly. Many colleges and universities in the world still offer excellent education.

I can hardly think of an area where so much time and money is wasted on irrelevant things. Sure, Harvard will give you a good education, but at a price that is arguably ridiculous for the benefits.

Now it seems like you're generalizing across degrees. I think it would be also useful to note that there are universities in the world outside of USA. Everything you're saying seems to about some programs in some universities in USA, where tuition is extremely high.

Sure, you can "waste" a lot of time and money in university. But to generalize and imply that is the norm requires some more analysis. For example, I certainly don't feel like I wasted my time or money (I was fully covered by scholarship anyway). I use most of what I learned, and I use it just about every day. Many people come out of university with that kind of experience as well.
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 9:13:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

I'm really worried about the degree inflation that will cause. Degrees will be far more accessible than they are now, and it will be much harder to find jobs with the same degree. These days even masters are starting to inflate, and the situation will only worsen as more and more people get bachelors' degrees.

I know the tests can just be more rigorous, but as long as it's standardised testing, people will figure out how to pass it with less effort. Here in Hong Kong, passing the HKDSE (the exam that is the main, and usually only, criterion for university admission) is a multimillion-dollar industry, with teachers and students dedicated to maximising results with minimum time. That's fine at the secondary level since secondary level is still basic, essential education - but I don't want that to extend to tertiary education.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 9:17:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 9:13:46 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

I'm really worried about the degree inflation that will cause. Degrees will be far more accessible than they are now, and it will be much harder to find jobs with the same degree. These days even masters are starting to inflate, and the situation will only worsen as more and more people get bachelors' degrees.

I know the tests can just be more rigorous, but as long as it's standardised testing, people will figure out how to pass it with less effort. Here in Hong Kong, passing the HKDSE (the exam that is the main, and usually only, criterion for university admission) is a multimillion-dollar industry, with teachers and students dedicated to maximising results with minimum time. That's fine at the secondary level since secondary level is still basic, essential education - but I don't want that to extend to tertiary education.

Why not, though? That kind of smacks of elitism--a desire to be "better" than the others, to want advantages over them.

What are degrees for, if not as a measure of knowledge? I get the objection that people will just find a way to pass it--but I think that can be dealt with. Philosophically, assuming it IS as good a measure as the going-to-classes route, what's the objection?

Obviously, of course, if a feasible system that's as good as the going-to-classes route can't be done, I'd immediately agree. But inflation already exists. It already is the case that people find ways to "skate" through. The system as it is isn't perfect, so it seems unreasonable to hold my proposal to a higher standard--that only means that we're creating barriers that don't have to do with the knowledge involved.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 10:20:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 9:17:44 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 5/29/2015 9:13:46 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 5/29/2015 1:35:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
I wish there were a way to "test" to a degree--that is, to demonstrate you deserve a bachelor's degree in a subject. Besides the profit motive, is there any good reason that ISN'T a thing? After all, we have the GED for high school, in principle you don't have to go to high school at all (of course there's truancy laws, but that's a separate thing). I've never understood why there are these set class/hour requirements, if the degree is supposed to represent a discrete knowledge amount; by doing that and ignoring what knowledge people already have, or acquire on their own, it seems to invalidate the degree as a discrete measure of knowledge.

Anyone have a good reason?

I'm really worried about the degree inflation that will cause. Degrees will be far more accessible than they are now, and it will be much harder to find jobs with the same degree. These days even masters are starting to inflate, and the situation will only worsen as more and more people get bachelors' degrees.

I know the tests can just be more rigorous, but as long as it's standardised testing, people will figure out how to pass it with less effort. Here in Hong Kong, passing the HKDSE (the exam that is the main, and usually only, criterion for university admission) is a multimillion-dollar industry, with teachers and students dedicated to maximising results with minimum time. That's fine at the secondary level since secondary level is still basic, essential education - but I don't want that to extend to tertiary education.

Why not, though? That kind of smacks of elitism--a desire to be "better" than the others, to want advantages over them.
I wouldn't call it elitism. You can see it that way, but there has to be a limit on the number of degrees in society. It's division of labour. We need some people in all industries. People without a degree get worse-off blue-collar jobs, usually requiring manual work, but society needs those. A limit on the number of degree holders keeps the labour markets healthy.
What are degrees for, if not as a measure of knowledge? I get the objection that people will just find a way to pass it--but I think that can be dealt with.
It's much harder than you think, though.

The HKEAA, the sole exam board in Hong Kong set up by statute, has a love-hate relationship with the said multimillion dollar industry, since they get a plenty of money in royalties for reprinting past papers. The exam board has a tendency of playing cat-and-mouse with the tutorial chains, which constantly have to adapt to the ever-changing standards of the HKEAA, but the good tutors always manage to keep up.
Philosophically, assuming it IS as good a measure as the going-to-classes route, what's the objection?
Still degree inflation.
Obviously, of course, if a feasible system that's as good as the going-to-classes route can't be done, I'd immediately agree. But inflation already exists. It already is the case that people find ways to "skate" through. The system as it is isn't perfect, so it seems unreasonable to hold my proposal to a higher standard--that only means that we're creating barriers that don't have to do with the knowledge involved.
Yes, inflation already exists, but we shouldn't make it worse IMO. My point is that your proposal will worsen it to a great degree. The current system may still cause inflation, but to a lesser degree.

I think the change you propose is already happening, although less radically than you say. I'm speaking of MOOCs. I know, in MOOCs, you still have to attend lectures and all that, but those are not the same as going through the entire university course where you have to do group projects and stuff. Let's look at the impacts of MOOCs (which remain to be seen, as they are a recent phenomenon) and then maybe we could decide on the merits of your proposal. :)
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Silversterrachel
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 5:22:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Bachelor of Architecture (B.Arch.) is the first professional degree in architecture and can be a step towards building a career as an architect. Aspiring architects will have the opportunity to develop their drawing and design techniques. They can also learn how to consider the community and environment surrounding their designs.