Degrees for work experience

I have seen the many postings on this board regarding Oregon’s rules for legal degrees and the negatives of degrees for work experience, and I have to ask “what’s wrong with that”? I certainly don’t condone degree mills that require absolutely nothing to BUY a degree, but like some European countries we should also give credit for experience.

I am a VP for a major U.S. brokerage firm. I have been in this business for 14 years, but I do not have a 4 year degree I only have an Associates Degree. I married young and was unable to finish the 4 years, but I have done very well with what I have. There is actually no reason for me to get a degree except for the strange looks that I get from people when they hear that I don’t have a BA or better.

Here’s why I question this… I enrolled in a college and I was bored to death. Here I was spending my time (after my 60 hour week) being taught things that were elementary to me. In fact on several occasions I had to correct the professor when he gave inaccurate information to the class. I had students coming to ME for help. Why should I pay for that?? My company trusts me to analyze companies, create budgets, hire employees, evaluate other executives etc… and I’m sitting there getting instruction from someone that knows less than I do. The only difference is that instead of sitting in a class reading a book, I learned the hard way “under fire” and I read the books too. I can see no reason why it is not acceptable to states to allow the granting of degrees based on verifiable knowledge and experience. I am thinking of enrolling in a French University that will give me credit for the vast knowledge that I possess…..

Please give me you thoughts..

 

That one is really easy.
Start on the MBA from HW. They only require you to turn up for the exam.

 

A college degree isn't life/work experience. Life/work experience isn't a college degree. Anyone who tells you differently is trying to sell you a piece of paper from a diploma mill.

If you have creditable knowledge, and you feel you're wasting your time in class, take exams for credit. That's what I did. If your school doesn't accept all of your testing credits, change schools. That's what I did.

Choose a school that will allow you to challenge its requirements using a variety of methods, one that doesn't place artificial limits on such credit. Consider "The Big 3," Excelsior, TESC, and COSC.

The bottom line: if you want to be recognized for having a degree, go and get one. If not, be proud of your accomplishments without one. But don't expect one to be handed to you.

 

I am not aware of European countries giving outright credit for experience. I would be interested in learning more about this.

 

Re: Re: Degrees for work experience

They dont.

Long answer - It is possible to aquire qualifications or equivalent in Europe for previously acquired knowledge and learning. But there is confusion when people use the term "experience". As this has other connotations. The credit is not for the experience per se but is for the knowledge and skills learned during that experience. For more info check out the relevant professional body in the UK covering your field or have a look at the French VAE system.

The other point is that what is meant in the US by the term credit doesnt translate into the European setting well either. When earning a UK degree I didnt amass a certain number of credits towards a total. I applied for a degree course and had to pass all of the subsidiary courses that were part of that degree. And the courses didnt contain an equal amount of work. Transfer between institutions in the UK is on a case by case basis and usually involves the transfer of an academic year. Not individual courses. This is changing though (its 18 years since I last swapped between UK universities).

 

More than 2,000 regionally-accredited US degree-granting schools give credit for experiential learning, based either on portfolio analysis, examinations, or already-evaluated experiences (corporate, military, etc.) by the American Council on Education.

The problem with the bad guys is in the abuse of this process. They even use lines like, "Just like Thomas Edison State, we give credit for prior learning. You've been selling insurance for five years? That's clearly the equivalent of an MBA." That sort of thing.

 

Re: Re: Re: Degrees for work experience

Hi Dave

Can you give some credible sources of info on the British and French programs you mention? I am not aware of the British system giving advance credit other than letting professionals enroll in Masters programs without a Bachelors in some cases. The French VAE system seems to be very new and not much used. I believe it is valid only at French State schools despite some erroneous info being spread by a U.S. based degree mill. I appreciate your contribution. I am just looking to substaniate these programs. Many thanks!

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Degrees for work experience

One often cited example is the City & guilds route, which is probably closer (IMO) to the vocational tech route in the US.

 

I couldn't agree more. I took 25.5 credits in one semester in a junior college, got all A's and was bored to death. It seemed like the class was simply a forum to review the homework assignments for the students who didn"t do it.

The fact still remains, that in our society people treat you differently if you have a degree. Unfortunately, even if it comes from a degree mill (sad) because most Americans don't know what a degree mill is. With your background, and if you use the tips at www.Bain4weeks.com ; you could finish it up in a matter of weeks/months. Check out any of the Top 3, they are all accreditted and fine schools.

Finish you're degree, and look into a good Master's program. That is the level at which you will probably find learning fun again. Good luck.

 

Right here on DegreeInfo, there are a number of good articles that try to explain how life experience can be turned into college credits while being truly academic rigorous. This is the big hook the degree mills use to try and convince people that they deserve the degree.

http://www.degreeinfo.com/articles.html

 

Experience is a strange creature.

Who deserves more credit for "experience" of these two:

1. Someone who starts and runs a successful business, first try.

2. Someone who starts two businesses that totally crash and burn, then starts a third that does decently, but not as well as the business of person 1.

Who "learned" more? Who has more "experience"?

I learned more about things during the hardest times of my life -- during the times that would hardly fall into the "successful" category. It's the mistakes I've made -- the stuff that I'm least proud to boast of or list -- that taught me the most.

Some of the things I've succeeded at first time around -- taught me nothing. Which is why crashing and burning stung so much.

The other thing that concerns me about work/life experience is the whole issue of repeatability and measurement of outcomes. Life doesn't come with a taxonomy:

The life learner will come out of the first 20 years of his or her life able to X, Y, Z. Given 1 year under proctor's supervision, the life learner will be able to A, B, C.

One life learner's tomAYto is another life learner's tomAhto. If the person looking at the evaluation of such a life wants to make tomato juice -- how to know how it will end up tasting?

It's a cookie cutter world we live in. The cookies are all supposed to be uniformly round, with the same filling in the middle. Experience tends to produce cookies that sort of just happen.

 

It seems to me that the workplace actually does correct the situation to some extent. Usually employers evalute both education and work experience in selecting an employee. The notable exceptions concern certain licensed professions such as law and medicine where the applicant must possess a very specific educational credential to function.

Work experience is a hugely valuable, maybe even the most valuable, credential. But it just doesn't do the same thing for the student as a guided, systematic, theoretical study of an academic subject.

Hidden in the original post, I think, is a complaint that lack of a degree triggers a sort of professional prejudice. I understand this prejudice and could, in some ways, even defend it. What I object to is the SOCIAL prejudice that goes along with it.

 

I agree. All that really matters in most jobs is job performance. Certain positions have certain requirements, which may or may not be waived depending on mandates and the candidate -- but at the end of the day, all other things being equal, even that eventually boils down to performance. (Except maybe in unions or heavily tenure/seniority type places.)

Work experience is not the same as self-guided study. Self-guided study is not the same as guided-study. I don't know if they can be placed on a scale (A is better than B), but they do differ.

I like working with degreed people because they tend to understand what I mean when I say "I don't like intuition and hunches -- prove it." There are undegreed people who understand that -- and I enjoy working with them, too. But someone with a master's in a science has a better idea of what I mean when I say, "Method is king. No hunches, please."

My team tends to produce proofs-of-concept when I ask them, and they don't question why I ask for them, and why I ask them to store the POCs in SourceSafe. They understand without being told why I ask that of them.

If I look at a resume and see signs that someone will understand why I am going to ask that of them -- then they stand a better chance with me. A published paper or two or three, a conference presentation, would be enough. A degree in a science tends to imply this. But it still requires that I attempt during the interview to find out if they really understand why I would ask them to provide a POC.

Degrees are just a hint. It's up to the person doing the interviewing if the hint leads anywhere.

 

This reminds me of what happened to my father. My dad is in his 70's and in his day if you simply graduated High School you were looked up to.

My dad was born in the great depression and almost starved to death. My grandpa was a WW I vet who was wounded and lost part of his leg serving on a submarine chaser. Since back then people with handicaps were pretty much out of luck, and with no military compensation comming he did what he could to make ends meet. He taught my dad to be a hard worker and to shoot for the stars.

My dad worked in a factory after getting out of the military in the fifties. He made 1.35/hr. He took a risk and went on to become a bank teller making a paltry .75 cents an hour. He busted his butt and went from teller to supervisor. Then he became a branch manager. Afterwards, he continued his way up the corporate ladder and became an AVP(assistant vice president) of what used to be Ohio's largest bank. He was also the chief of security at this bank as well. He was given an early retirement "incentive" after 26 years of work. Seems the new leadership wanted more younger educated people to replace the older workers. Well, needless to say, that bank which had grown up to be quite big and was even spreading to other states, choked.

My dad never had any college, but he was so brilliant and intelligent. He was truely a master in his profession. I so respect him and honor him for all his hard honest labor.

My point, is that both education and experience are important. Also, while college teaches knowledge, experience does this and also builds character. It creates good leadership. So both are keys to success and not to be discarded or looked down at.

I'm not saying that he should've been given a degree for his experience, but that he was worthy of respect even without one.

 

The problem is not that you need a bachelor's degree, the problem is that you don't need such a degree but that we live in a society in which degrees have achieved a false valuation. Thus your colleagues give you the fish-eye.

To my astonishment, the Chronicle of Higher Education has accepted an essay in which I argue that society needs fewer degrees, a shift of formal training back into the workplace and a disconnection between degrees and employment. It should be out this fall.

 

My reponse was intended for Michael73, sorry if that was not clear. However, it applies to many situations.

 

The only problem is getting in the door to PROVE your performance. Many companies require a certain level of degree for a position no matter what. A real life example: A large European-American auto manufacturer had many capable people in the Middle Management ranks who had started with the company doing jobs like driving a forklift. Upper Management in Europe decreed that all at or above the level of Supervisor had to have a Bachelors degree. After one got demoted ("So, where's your degree,John?") the others quickly got the message and suddenly had degrees from SRU, Hamilton, etc. And they got to keep the jobs in which they had been performing quite well for years.

 

Forget Excelsior & TESC

I appreciate the guidance to Excelsior and Thomas Edison, but unfortunately they are not very good schools. They only give credit for exams that have been evaluated by the ACE. The problem with this practice is that ACE only evaluates for organizations that will pay them. In my case all of my exams are from the NASD, and they have no interest in paying. While schools like Nova evaluated the NASD exams and give 12 credits for each one (they are very difficult exams) these schools feel that they have nothing of value for a Business finance degree and will give no credit at all. Imagine that. The most important qualification exams in finance, and these schools find them of no value...

 

Re: Forget Excelsior & TESC

An interesting perspective but I feel that you are making a big generalization because of your specific situation and I wanted to point a few things out for the benefit of others on this forum.

It is agreed that Excelsior and others accept ACE-evaluated credit (any ACE-evaluated credit). Perhaps NASD isn't ACE-evaluated because there was never a big demand for it? Have you thought about portfolio assessment (which is then accepted as college credit at COSC, TESC and Excelsior)?

The fact is - you've got an Associates degree, and don't have a bachelor's. Instead of making a big deal of your level of experience and why you should receive a degree without work, etc. why not just sign up, take a bunch of exams and get it done with? Many people in this forum have done exactly that, in timeframes ranging from a few months to a little over a year, no classroom required. If you know all of the core material because of your NASD training this should be a matter of turning up and writing the exam - a definite way to verify your extensive experience.

Or, take a look at COSC and create your own concentration - perhaps in Brokerage and Securities?

All of these options seem to be more cost-effective and less time-consuming than if you either (a) enrolled in a college (like you did) or (b) dealt with an overseas university where you may or may not know exactly what they give for "experience" and fight a foreign bureaucracy for what they're looking for.

In any case, best of luck to you.

Cheers,
Mark

 

you did not pay attention

I never said I was not willing to do work... What I said was that I don't want the work that I HAVE done to be completely ignored. How would you feel if you had done years of work, passed exams and are then told that it does not count so you must start over. As far as portfolio evaluation the schools already told me that they WOULD NOT consider the exams that I have taken no matter what... My point is that schools like Nova Southeastern DO give credit for these exams. As far as not being much demand for approval of the exams, according to the department head at ACE she gets a dozen calls a week from people looking for credit for the NASD exams.... Yes I could start my life over again, but unless these schools tell people who took (for example the microsoft certification exam) that they have to start over, then this is discriminatory. I was considering Excelsior because they were less expensive, having to do everything over would cost far more...