Why don't more schools do this?

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by soupbone, Aug 6, 2009.

Loading...
  1. soupbone

    soupbone Active Member

    I noticed something in my search for a master's program that could be started before I finish my bachelor's and I just realized something. Most Australian programs will allow entry into the master's without a bachelor's but you must document several things.

    Along with a curriculum vitae you must also provide certified documents detailing your training and transcripts from all schools attended. You must be able to prove that you worked at least five years in your current job and it must also be in line with the degree program description. Obviously you wouldn't want someone with a law enforcement allowed entry into a master's in nuclear physics unless that person could document their knowledge in that subject.

    They allow you into the program on a probationary status as you work toward the graduate certificate, graduate diploma, then finally complete the masters. Along the way you can choose to exit with either the certificate or diploma without penalty or continue to finish the masters. All courses taken apply to the master's program. My question is why don't schools within the U.S. allow this or do they? Is it possible no one has asked the question and it simply isn't advertised? If the U.S. educational system would simply study how the Australian system is set up I believe that they could learn a lot. The way it stands currently they are losing money from people like me who are seeking these types of programs.
     
  2. bazonkers

    bazonkers New Member

    Maybe this is a jaded view of US education but I think that most schools want people to get a BS degree first because it makes more money for the schools. Yes, they are losing money from people like you at the moment but it looks like you are enrolled in a BS degree program. After you are done, you'll still probably enroll in a Masters program so they'll still end up getting your money and the system as a whole will get more more money as you would have skipped your BS degree if you could.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 6, 2009
  3. soupbone

    soupbone Active Member

    I am finishing up my bachelor's but I was searching for a program that could be started prior to finishing. I know this thread could turn into a debate about whether or not years of experience should count towards entry but my thinking is more detailed.

    Basically what these programs do is allow you to prove yourself by taking the courses and moving toward the end goal of a masters. If for some reason you decide to stop or simply cannot handle it the school still gets your money and they don't have to admit that they allowed you entry into a masters withouth the undergraduate degree. They can simply say you were taking courses for the graduate certificate, or diploma instead. It's odd because you take the exact same path and same courses. After successful completion of the certificate or diploma you are then allowed full entry into the masters. It's a strange way of handling it but I think this is something the US should look into.
     
  4. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    The American accreditors do allow rules to be bent with special admissions procedures in unsual cases.

    But creating general policies opening up graduate admissions to people who lack undergraduate degrees is kind of an invitation to abuse in my opinion. It just cheapens the already doubtful educational currency. Low-end schools will inevitably compete for students by lowering their standards, then their graduates will insist on their equality with graduates of more demanding schools, and the rot will work its way up the system.

    (That danger might be rather less pronounced in Australia than here in the US, since Australia only has a few dozen universities total, most of them publicly run.)

    I think that it's preferable that people without a bachelors degree but with lots of extra-academic study and work experience be given the chance to turn that informal learning into undergraduate credit on a class-by-class basis, and even into a complete bachelors degree if that's warranted, using portfolios, exams and whatever. (Assuming that the process isn't abused, which it sometimes is. Undergraduate prior-learning assssment needs to be watched very closely by the accreditors.)
     
  5. soupbone

    soupbone Active Member


    Bill, I believe you and I have typed about this a few times before. I agree that those wanting to move on from a bachelor's should consider the options you posted. However I feel that the way the Australians handle higher education might be the future model for US institutions.

    If you have a tiered system like the AU Universities then you can allow those people wishing to test the master's level waters without actually being fully enrolled in a program. It's a win/win situation for all those involved. The university doesn't look foolish by admitting someone into a master's program if they fail out because they were just taking a few courses, and it also gives the student a chance to prove that they can manage upper level graduate courses. If the student can pass the courses then they move into the master's and the university looks good by having another successful master's degree holder.

    Understand though that what I am referring to is not allowing anyone to just sign up for courses. It would need to be someone who has documented experience in a particular field (5-10 years minimum). The degree path must be directly related to that person's job duties and must be backed up by a supervisor's statement. You must provide professional references that are willing to be interviewed about your work ethic and knowledge. You must have documented and provable training which would directly relate to your degree program. You must also prepare a written statement concerning why you would like to be admitted into the program. All of this documentation must be certified and notarized as to not allow people to just make up information.

    All of these items I just listed are ones that I just recently submitted to Macquarie for admission into their program (my experience is almost 14 years). I may be a special case since I do have an associate's and I am enrolled in a bachelor's program as well. I just feel that US universities should consider cases like mine and consider at the very least a probationary entrance into a program. I know that I am biased because of the particular situation I am in but what would be the negatives of attempting to put together a tiered system? Maybe some US universities already have systems like this in place but I am not aware of any.

    I agree with you that since Australia has fewer universities they may be able to monitor their programs so that abuses for entrance don't take place. I can tell you that I have been in constant communication with Macquarie and they have been very strict about every single document I have sent to them. They have also followed through with verifying everything that I claim in my curriculum vitae. This is done even with the documents being certified. I guess US universities would have to dedicate too much time to each applicant which would require the hiring of additional personnel, and in this current economic setting this simply isn't possible.

    My hope though is that US universities may one day at least look into options for special cases and realize that some people just don't fit into a specific mold. My journey so far has been like riding a roller coaster but even though I seem fickle I keep moving forward toward my end goal. Great discussion! :)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2009
  6. ebbwvale

    ebbwvale Member

    As an Australian who completed a Masters Degree and then completed a US Bachelors, I think there is a significant difference between the two countries. Australia started to go down this line at first quite a number of years ago for lawyers who had a professional education, but not a degree in law.

    Some of the professional lawyers, who had undertaken board examinations and had not attended universities, wanted admission to an LLM. It would have been a nonsense to say that they could be elevated to the Bench in the Supreme Court but not admitted to a LLM program. Other professions, such as accountancy, followed suit and it become accepted more generally provided there was experience of substance in the specific industry.

    As previously outlined, this is not a done deal. The regulatory control here is extremely vigorous. The Federal Government now controls the universities and funds most of the loans to domestic students. PHD's are scholarship based for domestic students, while professional Doctorates are able to be obtained by use of government loans.

    There is a whole superstructure of government control over the universities that I suspect would not be accepted in the US. A private university setup really requires a Private Act of Parliament to be passed. No small matter and, again, government control. As a result, there is only a few private universities.

    You could get an AU Masters and then proceed to a Doctorate in Australia and nobody would turn a hair if you did not have an undergraduate degree. Distance Learning Degrees are not considered inferior and there is no difference between a bricks and mortar qualification and the distance learning one. Same graduation ceremony, same degree issued. Nobody ever asks if you did it by distance or attendance in person. Not even on the radar. If anything, distance learning is thought to show greater commitment.

    When I became interested in US qualifications, it took me a long time to understand how a nationally accredited degree could be considered less than a regional accreditation. I assumed that recognition by the federal government was all that was required.

    Different countries, different educational cultures. We are closer to the UK in education, than to the US. One of our differences. Be warned if doing a degree from here, our English is another. Use the UK English spell check. I found that out the other way! Good Luck with Macquarie (named after one of our English Governors)
     
  7. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    I'm unfamiliar with the jargon. What does the phrase "tiered system" mean?

    Many students could probably grope their way through an advanced class without a lot of background, as long as that class wasn't too technical. That doesn't necessarily mean that they have the broad general foundation in their subject that an undergraduate education represents. If there's too much of that and too many students are having trouble staying up to speed, then "advanced" classes won't really be so advanced any more. They will imperceptibly degrade into introductory classes, offered for graduate credit. I think that we've seen that happening a lot already and we are already a long ways down that road.

    I still say, and I will never budge from this belief, that the bachelors degree is probably the most important degree that most people will ever earn. A masters degree is just frosting on that cake. The bachelors degree is an individual's foundation, their solid basis in their subject. It provides the knowledge and technique upon which all of their more advanced classes build and elaborate.

    I don't think that most people's job experience compares one-to-one with an undergraduate syllabus. People often perform a relatively small set of tasks and they get very good at them, very knowledgeable about all the intracacies and in's and out's. But they still don't know all the science, math, engineering and history underlying what they are doing and they might not even have the basic prerequisites to begin learning it.

    Obviously some people do, and I'm all for giving them an opportunity to demonstrate it on a class-by-class basis, by submitting portfolios and challenge examinations. It needs to be done on a class-by-class basis because the actual content of undergraduate classes needs to be examined in detail, and also because individuals' informal education is typically very spotty and incomplete, deep in a few areas of interest and perhaps almost non-existent in other equally important parts of the syllabus.

    I'm less concerned with abuses of entrance than with abuses of graduation. If acceptance of life-experience credit ever starts to replace undergraduate education, then masters degrees will be in danger of turning into little one or two-year introductory degrees. Certificates with attitude. Everything will be dumbed-down. It's already happening.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2009
  8. ebbwvale

    ebbwvale Member

    Bill,
    Because there is entry into a Master's Program in Australia without the need for a Bachelor's degree in some instances, is does not mean that the student would, if found deficient in some area, be required to do some undergraduate courses. It is very much a case by case basis and does not mean an easier passage for all. I might add that not all areas are necessarily open to this process.

    The last year in high school in Australia also really cover the introductory subjects in the first year of College. The general education, I think you have referred too, is supposed to be taught and achieved in high school. The student in the first year at uni may find themselves covering the same area that they did in the last year at high school.

    The last year in high school here is a very difficult year and has a long history of severe stress for students with a high dropout rate. The government has since diverted some students into a Technical and Further Education Colleges for trade qualifications to support those wanting trades rather than higher academic education.

    The undergraduate degree has an interesting history in the UK and Australia. It used to be the professional degree. It still is in many cases. In the UK system which Australia adopted as a colony, there was a history of the MA being the only degree offered. The student went from high school to an MA. This gradually was replaced with the undergraduate degree, but I think that there are still some direct MA's in existence.

    I don't seriously think that anytime soon the US will be adopting our system. Can you seriously see the accrediting structure change in the US? Countries seem to develop their own cultural approaches to education and I think, ultimately,despite the different paths, they mostly arrive at the same point.

    In respect of Macquarie University, the education that Christine Nixon, the Former Commissioner of Police for Victoria, received there was accepted at Harvard University where she completed her Masters Degree.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Nixon
     
  9. Ian Anderson

    Ian Anderson Active Member

    I happened to talk to an engineer from Brazil earlier this week. I asked him if masters degrees were looked down on there (as reported by another poster recently on degreeinfo.com). He said "yes - masters are not considered important at all unless one was looking for a university teaching job."
     
  10. David H

    David H Member

    This topic is interesting and perhaps I am "jaded" as well.

    First, a bachelors degree should not be "easy." It should be a rigorous test that proves you have the knowledge necessary. Hello folks, this is why diploma mills sprung up (people realized they could give those that did not want to work for it the appearance of having worked for it and make some money at it).

    I have always viewed the Masters degree as the next progression beyond the bachelors and frankly most of the people I know do as well. If you say you have a masters, it is assumed (rightly or wrongly) you have a bachelors. Perhaps that's out of ignorance -- or is it? Why do you want a masters before you get a bachelors? Because the masters is morely highly thought of? yep!

    I think we have moved into a "how can I get a degree without a regard to education" mentality. Perhaps it is a cost issue. Are we create a credentionalized, under educated populous?

    It bothers me but maybe I am alone.
     
  11. mattbrent

    mattbrent Well-Known Member

    In one of my undergraduate history courses, the professor brought up the educational system and explained how it (Bachelors, Masters, Doctorate) stemmed from the Apprentice, Journeyman, Master system that craftsmen followed back in the Middle Ages or so. Like you, I always assumed that if one has a masters, he or she had a bachelors as well.

    -Matt
     
  12. -kevin-

    -kevin- Resident Redneck


    I brough this subject up before but many automated hiring/qualification systems use "Do you have a bachelors in XXX?" as a grade out question. I have been a subject of this type of system where a job I applied for required a bachelors in business. I answered "no" and did not have an opportunity to repsond "but I have an MBA." I ended up calling the HR department which was an adventure in itself. We use a similar type system in the federal government.

    While I believe we can become an expert in a field, a bachelors is much broader than a masters with perhaps 30-45 credits out of 120 or so actually the major and the remainder breadth. Broader perspectives are better in my opinion for understanding many things outside of those we choose to become experts in, and while I have no doubt many individuals can progress through a masters in a particular field I believe the lack of a bachelors will manifest itself in ways the masters only individual will not realize.
     
  13. HikaruBr

    HikaruBr Member

    I know this thread is old, but as a brazilian I'd like to point out that this is, indeed, the case in Brazil.

    The bachelors is the most important degree and people think is VERY WEIRD to have a Master in a subject different than your bachelor and a Master is considered a de gree only for academic types.

    (The MBA is not considered a Master in Brazil. It is considered a postgraduate certificate, because there is no thesis)

    I know some cases of people that had earned a Phd from Ivy league universities in the USA and then went back to Brazil only to find out that they couldn't teach there, because their BA was in a different subject (for example, a PHD in History but with a BA in Communications).

    This has to do with the fact that a BA in Brazil is only in one subject - there is no majors.

    It's 4 years of only one subject and with a very tough final project in the final year that is in the same level of a Master thesis in the USA (at least in a serious Federal Brazilian University, like the one where I did my BA in History).

    All the professional degrees (Law, Engineering, Medicine, etc...) are Bachelors degree, not Masters.

    So that's why, even though I'm living in the USA doing a Master, I was so intended to get a second BA - because my Master here in the USA (Motion Pictures & TV) is in a different subject than my master in the USA.

    P.S. I think the USA system is superior, it gives more breath of study to the students. BUT sometimes I think the american system it's ridiculous easy at the undergrad level in comparison to the Brazilian model, that's a mix of Portuguese and French ones.
     

Share This Page