Age of degree/credits - Why?

Some schools say they won't accept credits from your previous school if the credits (or degree) are more than 5 or 6 years old. Can someone tell me the reasoning behind this?

If I earned my last degree 10 years ago, does it mean that the degree or its credits will not count toward my next degree?

Roscoe

 

Some DL schools claim that the content of coursework completed beyond six-ten years are not on par with current curriculums and trends. However, I don't believe that this is an adequate rationale for not granting credit for these courses towards a degree program.

In fact, such criteria actually discriminates against older students, many of who have degrees that were completed beyond fiteen years.

In effect, DL schools stand to gain a significant amount of money by this standard that necessitates students repeating coursework.

 

Nor do I. However, it should be noted that this is not limited to DL schools; many traditional schools are even worse as they won't accept transfer credits under =any= circumstances.

 

There is a pretense answer and a real answer. The pretense answer proffered by the universities is that course content from five or more years previously is woefully out of date, implying that the knowledge gained is obsolete.

I digress: A while back, I had a humorous experience. My son was completing a micro-economics course. So we compared my text from 1964 to his of 1994, 30 years later. Both were written by different authors and were issued by different publishers. As we turned the pages one by one to compare the texts, the chapters were in identical order and all of the graphs on supply and demand, etc. were likewise in the exact same order and appeared the same, only the style of the graphics differing very slightly. (No wonder they call it "the dismal science"!) Yet, if I wanted to study economics now, which I don't, undoubttedly I'd be forced to retake micro-economics due to my obsolete knowledge.

So now the real reason for the rule: It simply comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$.The more requirements a school can force upon you and the longer you are matriculating and paying tuition, the more revenue and cash for the institution. It may sound cynical to think that institutions of higher learning can be self serving in that way, but alas, it's true.

 

Dr Dave may have the right idea. Not only will other schools at times not be cooperative, but in fact the same schools may not be! A year ago I approached Western about getting the actual mDiv instead of merely having them put on my transcripts "MDiv Equivalencies met." Their response was that as some of my work was old I'd have to do an additional 30 sem units .

 

I was considering going to International College for a masters (that's where I got an undergraduate degree) and I was told that if my undergraduate statistics class was over five years old, then I would have to re-take it.

 

The obvious explanation is that humans are incapable of retaining knowledge for more than 5 years.

 

I did a distance ed degree at the University of Waterloo, Ontario Canada. U of W does not have this policy of disciminating against older degree credits (as far as I know.)
However, some of their taped lectures and notes were more than 10 years old when I was doing their courses.

 

One better. A local brick 'n' mortar (and an Ivy, at that) school suggested to me that one particular Humanities course of mine was old-- ten years, to be exact-- and, thus, not transferrable to their College of General Studies BA program.

In their defense, I bet the teachings of Plato have changed a lot since 1991. Damned outdated Philosophy courses.

 

An admissions person from a RA, brick-and-mortar (but not really great) university told me that my technical credits were expiring, but my humanities credits were "good forever". I told her that calculus, physics and chemistry are actually much easier the second time around.

The school where I earned some of those "expired" technical credits welcomed me back. I guess they didn't know that they were stale. I guess a good consumer should shop around.

Mike Goldberg
almost a B.S.E.E. (Dec. 2002!?)

"The great thing about reading Moby Dick the second time is that Ahab and the whale actually become great friends!"

 

A possibly valid reason for this may come in courses that serve as a prereq for others. Algebra skills earned more than 5 years ago are probably not a good prereq for a calculus course today.

Regards - Andy

 

I wonder if any lawsuits have been filed over this issue. Or maybe it would be a good topic for a "60 Minutes" investigation

Roscoe

 

Because

1. You forget stuff. I took courses back in the late 60's that I can't even remember. No way am I going to be current on the details after 35 years.

2. Things change. I was a biological sciences major back in those days, but I expect that some changes have happened in molecular biology since then.

I think that when a university awards you a degree, they are certifying that you know the stuff now, not that you knew it a generation ago.

Depends.

My experience with the California State University system has been that if I apply to a second bachelors program, I'm not required to redo the general ed. Those credits are good forever. What's happening isn't that the old units are being transferred in, but rather that they are being waived because I already have a BA. But I will still be required to complete an entire new major. If I'd already partially completed these requirements for a new major more than ten years ago, they wouldn't accept them now (though I think they let you petition for an exemption).

If I were doing a second masters instead, I don't believe that they let you re-use any of the units that you already used in a different graduate program. So no matter how old the first graduate degree was, I'd still have to do an entire new program.

But they normally accept a bachelors degree more than ten years old as meeting the graduate entrance requirements.

I don't think that this has anything to do with making money. It applies to on-campus in-state students as well as DL, and these students are state subsidized. The more units they take, the more it costs the university. I think that the motivation is the academic integrity of the programs.

 

Re: Re: Age of degree/credits - Why?

By the same logic, we should all have to earn new degrees every 5-10 years (depending upon the level of academic integrity). At the very least, I'd think that an old bachelor's degree would be unacceptable for entrance into a master's program, or even as a basis for a 2nd bachelor's program. The policies are just too inconsistent for me to consider them rational.

 

Any school policy that restricts the acceptance of course credits over a specific period of time should have a supported basis for its position. Unfortunately, many schools cannot "scientifically" justify their stance on this issue.

The rationale that individuals forget the content of their coursework over a specified period of time is unaccceptable. In fact, one's level of retention of information actually begins to decline within less than one week! Furthermore, upon graduating, many individuals build upon the learning and knowledge acquired at school through a continuous learning process, on the job training or by keeping abreast of the latest trends and changes within the context of their field of expertise.

Therefore, coursework serves as a basic foundation for stimulating futher thought and curiosity as well as potential future acquisition of knowledge. It is not intended to prepare students to repeat the course in the future whether it be six, ten or fifteen years.

However, schools need money and policies that require students to repeat courses can add significantly to their earnings.

 

It's the 'credit' system, folks

I think this has more to do with the 'credits' system than academic integrity.

If you can accumulate 'credits' for previous degree work and use them to put together a new award, then the age that the 'credits' were taken is of relevance. For example, my colleague who was a Professor of Micro-biology until a few years ago states quite openly that 5 years out of touch in his field means in today's terms completely out of touch for teaching and research! In economics, less so.

Where a first degree is required as evidence of reaching a standard, as it is in such things as Matriculation for a Masters degree at Scottish universities, then the age of the Bachelor degree is irrelevant as nothing from it transfers or credits anything in the Masters degree. I know of no 'credit' system of that nature at a UK university. Indeed, at Oxford or Cambridge, previous classes in a subject like Maths are not required to sit the Mathematics Tripos. If you think you can sit and pass at that level you may do so if you are already a student in the University.

But once you start regularising degree programmes and their constituent units, as appears to have been done in North America you create these problems of prior-learning assessments and their dating.

 

I have never heard of a completed degree not being accepted because of age. In other words if a Bachelor degree was required to enter a graduate program, the age of the Bachelor degree shouldn't matter. Course credits is a totally different issue.

 

Dear Dr Dave, about economics ...

The other, and quite valid comment, is that the EXAMS are also the same - actually you can use the same examinations every time ...

... but the answers are always different.

 

Ah yes, the same exams as well as the same lecture notes!

Dave

 

Re: Re: Re: Age of degree/credits - Why?

It depends on what you do with your degree. If you used it as a basis for entry into a profession that has a strict policy on professional development, the age of the initial degree should NOT be a problem. If you have never used it ....!

I did my initial [non degree] accounting qualifications in the 1960's and for the hell of it looked at what my position would be if I applied to do a current undergraduate degree. Out of the 24 subjects required for the current degree, I was given 16 straight off because of my present professional fellowship - that proved the currency of what I did 40 years ago. The reason why I didn't get the other 8 units was mainly due to the fact that some work was going to be required. I also have a masters on the area [90-91] which further vouched for the currency of the 1960's qualification then.

I suggest that those concerned try a little harder and bring in your current experience in the area [if you have it] to verrify the currency of your knowledge and skills. Our RPL policy here has a very strong 'currency' component and this makes a lot of sense. If the knowledge is not current ... ?