Experinced based learning degrees

I do believe that most of the schools online offering experience based degrees are downright scams. This does not mean that earning a degree or degrees via experience evaluation is not valid.

The main thing is the process used to represent that degree. My personal position is that verification is the main aspect since thats how schools determine if you graduate anyway.

Can anyone name a school or schools that have a good and well respected process?

 

Sure, for starters see "The Big Three."

1) Excellsior College
2) Charter Oak State College
3) Thomas Edison State College

For others, just do a search. This site has a plethora of information in the archives.

What kind of degree are you looking for?

 

I am aware of those schools but they seem to be exam based. I am not specifically looking myself. I guess my focus is on discussing the subject in a way that moves from focusing on diploma mills.

I would like to know one that uses experience as a basis for credits and maybe some exams to make up

 

Those 3 offer portfolio assessment, which is what I was thinking when I posted. Other than portfolio assessment and exams I know of no other way to verify experience.

 

I agree with those two methods, but how much can someone get from portfolio assessment only. Can they get a degree totally from this method?

 

The Western Governors University www.wgu.edu seem to have a very good approach..

St. Regis is good but people seem to hate them too.

 

It's not that people "seem to hate them" but that many believe it to be a degree mill selling worthless degrees.

 

Work Based Degrees

City and Guilds is a legit way to obtain a work based degree.
The City and Guilds of London Institute has a Royal Charter.
The diploma maybe difficult to use in the USA. However, I would be interested if one of the big three would consider transferring the credit into the USA education system in a portfolio analysis.

 

It seems like in the UK and Australia there is a better system to recognize experience via professional bodies, the US does not have such a system. People are normally recognized by simply having a degree. This lacking creates the vacuum that breeds degree mills.

If the mainstream were to accept the concept and develop the approach then the degree mills would have no excuse to offer worthless degrees.

While I think St. Regis is not the answer, people seem to accuse them of offering worthless degrees without any real rationale. To me it seem they just do not like the concept of a degree based on previous knowledge.

 

I still cannot see why someone with 12 years or more experience cannot get an equivalent degree in their field. Of course you would need to assess them to ensure they posses certain basic foundational skills.

A person can come to the US on a H-1B with 12 years experience. This is given with the assumption that 12 years is equivalent to a US RA degree. An agency would normally evaluate to ensure the standards are met in this case.

I do not believe the experience based approach should apply to PhD but at least MS and BS level. The other thing is that this should be seen as a professional degree and not necessarily academic focused.

 

Read the two articles on degreeInfo titled "Prove What You Know: XXXXXX"
http://www.degreeinfo.com/articles.html

Besides those ways, there are equivalence studies done for many formal training programs, see ACE.

There's no such thing as writing a resume and getting a degree, except at degree mills. The reason that real schools don't do that is because that method does not verify that all of the particular requirements for a specific degree have in fact been meet.

 

Western Illinois University has a well-regarded B.A. program where 1/4 of the degree could be obtained via portfolio evaluation and the rest could be done via testing and other DL methods

http://www.wiu.edu/users/mibogd/

Tony Piña
Faculty, CSU San Bernardino

 

Hi Bill:

A person from overseas can write a resume and get a degreed job in the US. So obviously maybe we need stop and rethink how people are considered qualified. The main word I will stress is verification of learning.

A lot of jobs would say have a degree and equivalent experience. If the person has the knowledge to do the job then why no give them a designation to fit.

It does not have to be a traditional degree and I thats why people keep using the word diploma mill to go with this concept. I honestly do not think someone should get a degree based on a resume primarily, but the resume does capture what you have covered in your life including college.

The reason I keep bringing up this topic is that no one seem have a good reason why it cannot be done. They just dismiss as if its diploma mill if its based on that.

 

*What kind of experience constitutes a degree? If I flip and serve burgers at Joe's Burger Shop for 15 years (10 as shift superviser), is that enough experience for a degree in Customer Service, Restaurant Management, etc?

Should we make new degrees up for every job out there where someone puts in 12 years or more? A BS in Plumb Technology for the plumbers?

Where do you draw the line? Why does Bill get to have a degree in business just because he worked in business for 12 years?

Apprenticeships could be worth 1-2 years of college credit, perhaps after being a journeyman one could be awarded the degree?



*note: written with a healthy dose of sarcasm, but I believe it to be germane.

 

My position has more to do with the contents of the experience which means its not for everyone or some kind of degree for all. I am hoping we can have a balance and constructive discussion.

Very few people are lucky enough to have the experience in the first place. In that case it should be seen as an achievement. This is where we draw the line between a genuine school that evaluates experience and a degree mill that is just try to make money of the concept.

We need to look away from course contents to overall competence in a profession. I honestly do not see how taking a bunch of exams make a person more qualified than actual work experience, so the big three may not be solving the problem anyway. The main thing is professional cohesion in a specific field not just getting credits.

So lets take to a different level and look at practical solutions here.

Its not the resume or the experience thats important it is the demonstrated learning..

 

This is why I ask, "What experience?" See my post again.

This is why I ask, "What profession?" See my post again.

I am not aware of anyone who believes "taking a bunch of exams" makes one qualified for anything. How do people confuse "testing" and "learning" so easily? All the "bunch of tests" accomplish is to verify the "bunch of learning" the person claims to have.

What do you think the point of the credits are? Why is it that universities seem to want a large number of credits in one particular field? "Credits" and "demonstrating knowledge in a particular field" are not mutually exclusive ideas.

How do you suppose we test this learning?

 

Well, I will say more later but I am speaking generally. In other words whatever is required to be qualified in a profession. Do not get me wrong, I am not saying a person will not need to learn anything but may focus on how to put all their experience into the correct context using a mentor. This may involve testing as well. But a test could be the completion of a specific project at work that can be verified by a supervisor or manager. We need to be open here.

My point is that learning already happen by whatever means, we just need to understand how a body knowledge fits a ceratin field.

Some person seem to be sayng that taking an exam is the only way to prove that you learn but why can't verifiable on the job learning and projects not used to very that learning too?

 

I thought this is what portfolio assesment was? I really don't know if it is or not though...?

I don't think your idea of having on the job assesment count towards a degree is a bad one. However, what checks and balances are there? Having your boss, supervisor, or anyone affiliated with your company for that matter is not third party and should not be allowed to verify anything towards an objective degree. They certainly should be allowed to aid in the process, but I know exactly what would happen if my boss was told to grade my project for credit towards a degree. I would have an "A" on every thing I did. "Hey Boss, I'm going out for lunch. You want something? It's on me. "

The intra-company competition for which dept. had the most degrees would be rampant. In fact, I could even see where bonuses would be given.

 

It seems that a little clarification on the nature of an academic bachelor's degree would be helpful. An academic bachelor's degree is not some sort of technical certification stating that a person is technically qualified in a certain profession.

In fact, it is a broad-based multi-discipline degree. In a typical bachelor's degree, 3/4 of the credits are from an area outside the individual's major. How are you going to verify that learning from a resume? Do you really think that my boss at my computer programming job is qualified to evaluate my knowledge in the field of art history, for example?

The way it is currently done is through exam or portfolio. If you can show me another assesment tool that is equitable, comprehensive, and independently verifiable, then I would probably be for it. Otherwise, you might as well just print up your own degree. It will probably have about as much value as one from "life experience school."[/B][/QUOTE]

 

Hi CMT:

you seem to be oversimplifying the whole thing. I am not presenting the exact solution, I am just throwing out ideas. There are so many ways to put checks and balances in anything you do. A good looking gilr could get the same thing in college too.

Are you saying there is no way to verify someones knowledge except to take a bunch of exams?