Bachelor Degree Plan 100% through Testing out?

For a lot of people, the choices are testing out/competency-based education or not getting a degree at all because they don't want to take on large amounts of debt. If you haven't noticed, college has become very expensive. You can take community college courses cheaply, but from my experience, CCs usually require very little writing. I've taken classes at CCs in Texas, New Mexico, and Washington.

 

There are a lot of difficult choices to make; life is not easy. And my observations are not to diminish the achievements of people who have finished degrees this way.

 

I've been on the sister forum for a long time, so I've read the stories behind the decisions to take this route. We've had several people who were going to lose their jobs in a year because of a new degree requirement. There have been people on a tight budget who didn't qualify for much grant money, and they wanted a degree to get a better job. But, most of the members appear to be adults who are 25+ and already tried more traditional schooling on-campus and/or online. Working adults (I mean people over the age of 23) and people from economically disadvantaged backgrounds have low college graduation rates. It doesn't make sense for people to keep trying the same methods that didn't work for them.

I attended three different schools over a 6-year period and wasn't even halfway done with a bachelor's degree. It was hard for me to juggle working overtime and keeping my grades up, so I would repeatedly drop out. One time, I dropped out because I didn't have regular access to a computer and Internet, and I was going to get an F in two of my courses. I was lucky to have found out about the Big 3, and I tested out of the last half of my degree. It took me almost a total of seven years to finally earn a degree. If I hadn't discovered the Big 3, it would have taken me two to three more years to graduate, if at all. After that, I finished a master's degree at a state university in a little over a year. Many of the members of the sister forum have successfully completed master's degrees.

 

I think it would be important to point out that this debate of "testing-out" versus "take all the courses" is only one of many debates within the world of education. The "take all the courses" philosophy is at least in part based upon the idea that there is value in the basic Liberal Arts approach to higher education. This is not an unusual idea and in fact, the American system of higher education is based on the concept of producing a well-rounded, generally capable individual who has been exposed to a wide range of subjects and ideas. We know, however that there are other philosophies to be found. One that we might be somewhat familiar with is the British system which takes a somewhat more focused approach to university study. This narrowing of focus is such that a person might graduate with a Bachelor degree in Mathematics from a British university without having taken a Literature course or a History course. Their counterpart in the American university is unlikely to have such courses missing from their transcripts. I for one am not prepared to say that as a result of this de-emphasis on the Liberal Arts, the British are less well educated. So, a case could be made and subtracting some measure of the Liberal Arts from a university experience (such as with the "testing-out" model) does not necessarily result in a poor outcome. Difference does not require a hierarchy.

 

I would not describe the "testing-out" model as a university experience if that is the totality of their degree. In that case, they would lack the university experience, but may have earned a degree.

I think there is certainly value in doing some limited amount of testing out, and I would encourage that. To reiterate, it is when a student attempts to satisfy nearly all the requirements of a degree through testing out that they miss out on significant aspects of their education--some of the intangibles that I described, some of which Kizmet alluded to.

 

It's clear that your definition of these sorts of terms is more narrow than most people on these sites. It's also true that there are some whose definitions are even more narrow than yours, essentially insisting that the student's butt must be firmly placed in a classroom or else their learning is somehow inferior. And so we see that there is a continuum of opinion, a spectrum of philosophies, etc. Plus, we all know that these are not static issues. It's all evolving, it's evolving quickly and it's evolving in a trajectory that is taking it away from your way of thinking. There will always be brick and mortar universities and that is a good thing. But there will also be other models. Some will seem to be competitive models, some complementary. The marketplace will demand it, the students will demand it and the universities will either shift gears in order to supply these alternatives or they will suffer the consequences. We have already seen some of these consequences with multiple closings of these little liberal arts schools with their dropping enrollments that have refused to change gears and then essentially go bankrupt. Everyone has come to realize that those English Literature degrees might be interesting, challenging, in their own way but unless you're willing and able to do some career gymnastics the ROI on those degrees is rather limited. Lots of grads with low paying jobs and lots of debt. It's ok if that's what you want, but it's also ok to want something else. It's OK to prioritize ROI. And it's OK to prioritize that on-campus-dormitory-hey-lets-steal some-trays-from-the-dining-hall-and-go-sledding-down-S.Huntington Avenue experience. (Yes, I did that).

 

You may have misunderstood me. A liberal arts education was one example of intangibles that would be missing if a student pursued all 100% testing, which is the topic of the thread. I am no great proponent of liberal arts education by any stretch of the imagination. I just provided that example as it required less to explain. So you propose a student should obtain a degree in IT or science with no labs, no hand's on projects--just 100% testing out, just simply regurgitating knowledge on a test? That borders on the absurd.

I have no special affinity to brick and mortar and believe that online can be just as good and in some cases better; that is not always the case though. Online versus b & m has nothing to do with testing out.

 

I think your opinion, while well articulated, isn't answering the OP - but I'm happy to jump in on that.
No, there are no RA colleges that allow 100% testing out.
There are 3 RA colleges that allow testing out of all but 2 classes (Cornerstone/Capstone) for a bachelor's degree, however, that assumes you can FIND a test to meet a degree requirement. Since CLEP and AP exams account only for 100 and 200 level courses, it is challenging to find exams that = 300 or 400 level credits. So, if you're not picky and are willing to choose from DSST, TECEP, UExcel, and online classes that you can do at home, companies like Studycom have many, many options to do so easily. These classes are not really testing out- but by testing out, I think the assumption is DIY (not-at-a-college) and under that definition, you can do a degree that way.

Beyond those 3, there are about 250 RA colleges that allow you to transfer in / test out of 90 credits of 120(bachelor's) or 45 out of 60 (associate's). This is a good plan if you want to major in something that is more specialized or you want to network with faculty/students in your major, or want graded credits. Transfer credits and tests don't award graded credits, so this is also a good plan when you're trying to meet graduate school prereqs or something else that requires a GPA (scholarships, promotions, etc.) This list is going to include distance learning schools, but ALSO regular brick and mortar colleges/ state college/ community colleges. The community college I taught for / chaired for 18 years takes 45 out of 60 via CLEP, transfer, AP, etc.

Whether or not *I think someone *should do this isn't relevant. Regional accrediting bodies do all the heavy lifting - what a student does within the parameters of the rules, in my opinion, shows their resourcefulness and ingenuity. Some might argue that an outside the box thinker brings more to the table than someone who wrote a few extra papers instead of taking a CLEP test.

EDIT to add: Pierpont Community College (VA) offers an AAS degree that requires 12 credits of classroom (taken from ANY college) and the rest of the 60 can be from CLEP. One of my sons has a degree from there and didn't take a single class with them.

 

You're right. In the end the important thing is that it's inside the lines. We also know that many employers don't really care. So when you start subtracting the variables all you're left with is this mythical "college experience." Clearly there are many people who value this experience and will pay tens of thousands of dollars every year in order to get it (or give it to their children). But what about the people who don't share those values? Fortunately there are legitimate alternatives

 

Science labs are best done in the classroom as opposed to online courses, but ground courses aren't an option for everyone. The Big 3 do not award lab credit for exams. You have to take an ACE or NCCRS-approved lab course or a lab course from a regionally accredited school.

When online programs were still fairly new, the IT industry was the most accepting of online degrees. It makes sense since the Internet is a part of IT. IT and CS are some of the easiest subjects to teach online. The hands-on IT stuff is mostly lower-level coursework, and you can get experience doing that stuff in entry-level technical support, help desk, and PC tech positions. These jobs don't even require a degree because they're basic.

 

True. Testing out is an older form of competency-based education. The philosophy of competency-based education is that you should be able to move on if you already know a subject. The traditional education model makes you stay in a class for a set period of time whether you've mastered the material or not.

 

IT courses can have lab content that can be easily done online through virtualization. You are talking about online coursework but this topic is about testing out, which is the absence of course work.

 

You have to follow the conversation. It has been made clear there are no 100% test out degrees. In the post you quoted, it was also made clear that if there is a lab component it is not available through testing out. As a result, if an IT or any other degree requires a lab, it has to be done through an acceptable method.

 

On another thread, she posts about this as nearly 100% doable via testing:
Sanantone's BSBA in Computer Information Systems - Degree Forum Wiki
That is an outdated link, but it appears there are insufficient safeguards in place at some of these schools, to allow for this abuse of nearly 100% testing.

 

Do you mean the thread from 2014 that she hasn't updated because some of it isn't applicable any longer?

 

The one that she says is now over at the other forum? That would be the one. I tried visiting that site once, and found little of interest, but feel free to check it out.
It may surprise you to learn that a CIS program should have labs as part of the curriculum, so nearly 100% testing out would mean that lab content would be neglected, giving the degree only minimal value. Thanks.

 

There may be a lot that surprises me with a CIS program because I have never looked into them but the requirement of labs doesn't because it has been discussed in this thread. There are no RA colleges neglecting any degree requirements.... if labs are required, they are being completed.

 

It's a business degree with a CIS concentration. It doesn't need labs. It isn't a computer repair or networking degree. It's not an engineering degree.

 

This is 1) hyperbole, 2) unsupported opinion