Are too many of us stuck in a rut?

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by telfax, Aug 21, 2002.

Loading...
  1. telfax

    telfax New Member

    I have always argued that professional/life-long learning experience should count, including awarding credit towards an academic degree. However, at the end of the day a degree is about 'academic' study and understanding. It is not, per se, about having been, for example, a human resource director in a large (or even small) organization. Someone can be very successful in such a role without remotely understanding the 'theoretical/research' side of what HRM directors and departments actually do to the people in organizations - that's the job of the academic.

    What has prompted this thread is a recent article I read about Trevor Bayliss - the man who invented the clockwork radio over ten years ago. He has suggested that British universities should introduce the degree of Bachelor of Invention (BInv)! If people can introduce/come up with a new idea and market it then they should be able to claim a degree. I find this less than convincing! Coming up with a new idea does not, as a matter of course, mean that an individual understands the overall subject area in which s/he is working in. Bayliss does think that many students at university do have some original ideas and these should count towards a degree and they (the students) should have intellectual property rights on their ideas. Bayliss has no earned degree as I understand things, he left school at 15 and has 4 honorary doctorates, 3 MSc (MS in US speak) degrees and a fellowship or visiting professorship at 4 British universities! I find his invention impressive but the degrees and fellowships less so. Universities, these days, will 'cash in' on anyone who is generally seen as entrepreneurial (especially programmes teaching entrepreneurship!) and have them as an associated faculty member.

    Perhaps I'm being too harsh! Where is the 'academic' rigour?!?

    'telfax'
     
  2. Dave Wagner

    Dave Wagner Active Member

    Hi. Interesting thoughts...

    I've never thought that lifelong learning measured by years of experience or hours should count for academic credit. (And it seems to be a commonly exploited loophole by some of the less reputable unaccredited schools.) The problems are measurement and that everyone has lifelong learning experiences. How can we really tell if the learner has 10 years of experience with a subject or one year of experience 10 times? Besides, if one pursues academic study in a cognate discipline, that lifelong experience will be recognized through the quality of the academic work submitted.

    However, I do believe in credit by examination at the bachelors level -- if knowledge can be measured at the functional level and it fits within an identifiable body of knowledge, then fine and dandy.

    As for the Bachelor of Invention degree, I agree that academic institutions don't need to get into the business of awarding non-honorary degrees to recognize inventions. Having the Patent office grant a patent seems to suffice nicely, in my view.

    Cheers,

    Dave
     
  3. Re: Re: Are too many of us stuck in a rut?

    How can we tell? Through assessment of learning, not mere totting up of experience or taking someone's word for what they think they know. Credit by exam, as you mention, or assessing a portfolio to see whether it demonstrates knowledge equivalent to that which would have been gained in a specific college course.

    It does seem likely that there would be many more opportunities to do this at an undergraduate level.

    Undergraduates' intellectual property rights should certainly be respected, and a variety of projects, including inventions, might be parts of courses. But a degree in Invention for inventing and marketing one thing? Nah. For that, patent and profits seem the appropriate reward.
     
  4. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Great thread, Telfax. I think that the issues you raise are interesting and important.

    I agree that there is an issue over how much credit, and what kind, should be granted by portfolio for practical and applied experience. If earning a particular degree implies that a graduate understands a body of theory, that mastery has to be demonstrated at some point.

    But I don't want to place too much emphasis on the theory/application distinction, nor would I want to suggest that applied study has no place in universities.

    I agree, but perhaps for a different reason. My feeling is that there is far too much emphasis on degrees. There's a suggestion that a degree makes the man, and that a person can't have any professional or intellectual validity without the proper degree. A person which a shiny degree who never accomplishes a thing still outranks an individual with a lifetime of accomplishment but no degree.

    Personally, I'd like less emphasis on degrees. But if that's too much to ask, then granting degrees for accomplishments may be a way to go.

    True, but that's already how things work at the doctoral level, right? Dissertations. Particularly in a no-coursework "research" doctoral program, mastery of an arcane dissertation problem doesn't ensure that a graduate has mastery of the breadth of his or her field. What counts is the "intellectual contribution" that the dissertation ideally represents.

    So why not have the applied equivalent of a dissertation?

    I'll agree that this kind of thing might have less credibility on the bachelors level. There is a breadth component to a bachelors degree that the B.Inv. wouldn't capture. On the other hand, there is no reason why a B.Inv. needs to replicate a B.S. They can be two different degrees, one emphasizing breadth of theoretical preparation, the other the ability to put ideas into action. Both are necessary skills. And one could still insist on some theoretical background for your B.Inv., just as you would expect some application component to a B.S. They needn't be "either-or", but matters of emphasis.

    Of course, one could argue that a B.S. demonstrating theoretical preparation *plus* a resume showing subsequent practical accomplishment would be ideal. Certainly better than either the theory or the accomplishment taken by themselves.

    I have no problem with it. The degrees are honorary, aren't they? No academic toes are being stepped on. And I like the idea of universities cracking open the ivory tower a little bit and bringing in people who have succeeded out there in the world of applications. I wouldn't refuse Bill Gates or Steve Jobs fellowships either. Or tenured teaching jobs, for that matter.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2002
  5. Dave Wagner

    Dave Wagner Active Member

    Re: Re: Are too many of us stuck in a rut?

    You've made some interesting points...

    While I agree that those who have achievements (or even unaccredited doctoral degrees as a part of their background -- oh, boy... -- yes, really) but not RA degrees could serve as lecturers or even professors in some instances, my view is that the main purpose of higher education is to educate students and not necessarily to recognize prior education of students.

    By way of analogy, past learning may be extremely valuable for the student in the context of the degree program, but as in the earning of doctoral degrees, the dissertation starts AFTER candidacy begins, generally. Of course, you have to decide whether character, composition and process are important in undergraduate education. The implication being that the university's matriculation process is a foundational and important part of the degree granting process.

    My opinion,

    Dave
     
  6. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Upon thinking about this subject a little more, isn't this the function that honorary degrees were supposed to perform? At least before they degenerated into a way of sucking up to celebrities and wealthy financial donors?

    So why not forget the B.Inv., and simply reform the honorary degree?

    Go back to granting honorary degrees for real significant achievements in a field. That way an honorary degree would once again be an honor, and they would regain some intellectual and professional credibility.

    I guess that I'm suggesting that honorary degrees should be *earned* degrees, except that they are earned by prior accomplishment.
     

Share This Page