Just a tad pissed off

It's all a matter of perspective. I believe that older learners that have an already established career are frequently more interested in getting the "credential". They perceive a specifc hurdle/requirement and need the credential to satisfy it in order to move their career in the direction they want. They're generally already convinced that they could already do the job, if given the opportunity. For example, I was passed over for that management job again, if I get an MBA it won't happen next time.

I'm not trying to say that this is good or bad or usually the case. You just questioned why people would think like that and I was just trying to give one explanation.

 

There are those who pursue learning and they want the highest quality experience possible... the credential is the "award" at the end of the journey.
There are other who would simply "buy" a degree if they could but credentials from the mills lack utility... so they look for the quickest, easiest and cheesiest RA school available.

 

Ken, you must keep missing my messages to you, so I'll ask again. When will you post your evidence that the US has the majority of the world's worst schools? Several of us are very interested in seeing this.

I guess the law of averages guarantees that if I keep asking this question, you'll eventually see it and respond.

Bruce

 

Ken, what you said is literally true. I'm addressing the subtext of it. If quality of experience is the measure then some will find it in the Peace Corps where NOTHING can compare (not I). Some will find it in a classroom chair drinking from a residential firehose and would find your/our DL aspirations completely laughable whether done in four weeks or four decades; get over it. Others (like me) would rather sit in a monastery-like room studying as distantly and quietly as possible.

Some would go to http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/org/a/acs/www/acaduses2.html and borrow their lecture notes, curricula, quizzes and other resources with thanks for the sake of the (free) knowledge alone...no credential needed or desired. (I have a forty-volume set of "Great Books" and a 20+ set of Nobel literature that, if I were but to read them, I'd feel I'd accomplished something Great...if only.)

Some would find a True Master and study thereunder, smiling inwardly at your random use of rent-a-profs at universities, whether Oxford or Oxnard.

In other words, it seems somewhat stiff-necked to pontificate about the One Path to enlightenment. Afterall, the greatness of the scholarship is up to the student, not the institution or educational model used. Institutions merely set certain expectations; NONE of them limit the scholarship, not even the most vile degree mill.

 

I was just about to provide a bunch of evidence and then I saw this vision of Ben Kenobi saying "remember the Force, Lewchuk.... beware the dark side". So instead I will offer this,

I have always said that people should research these matters on their own and since you have such a passion for international academic issues, here is a study plan for you...

1) Obtain academic experience in 3 countries. This should include, at a minimum, studying in/from two and teaching at a University level in/from 2. While you are at this, seek out others with international experience and learn from them, gain from their experience.
2) Study the academic environments of the 3 countries... structure, etc.
3) Take several courses in Economics from different perspectives. Once you understand the advantages/disadvantages of different forms of regulation you will be in a better position to identify how this impacts the academic structure of different countries.

Once you have finished this you will have experience similar to mine and I anxiously await what your view is once you have completed your studies.

Best wishes in your future endeavors,

Lewchuk

 

A couple of observations;

1) A really pathetic excuse, you'd save a lot more face if you simply admitted that you were slinging the old BS (and I don't mean Bachelor of Science).

2) Assuming I buy that load of crap (which I don't), why should we all proceed through these tedious steps if you already have this evidence available? Surely you wouldn't deny this to the DL community?

In any event Ken, I'm satisfied that you've ducked, dodged, ignored, and evaded the question enough times that it should be painfully obvious to even a casual bystander that no such evidence exists, and any future comments from you regarding the supposed inferiority of US schools have no credibility. And that's enough for me.

Bruce

 

So you really have no interest in international academic standards... you just want the opportunity to diss my evidence... such as I feared, how unfortunate.

Perhaps someone else will take up the challenge and investigate this issue... I would welcome the discussion with a knowledgable individual.

 

How can I possibly "diss" something that, because you refuse to reveal it, effectively doesn't exist? I ask you again, post it for all to see.

Bruce

 

Unfortunately I seem to have missed the posts where you presented any evidence.

 

I'm starting to think that the evidence is stored on the campus of American World University, since that location has never been revealed either.

Bruce

 

That doesn't make any sense. How would you be compromising yourself by strengthening your position?

That doesn't make any sense either. The burden of proof always lies with the person making an assertion, at least if he or she wants to convince anyone else. It's ridiculous to suggest that people must believe everything that they are told until they disprove it themselves.

Since you possess this valuable experience, then it should be simple for you to answer Bruce's question, right? So why are you unwilling to even try?

 

Bill, there are basically two types of questions on this forum honest and dishonest (you know exactly what I mean).

Example of an honest question:
1) Q) So how do you know about the Force.
A) I met Yoda, the Jedi Grand Master, who showed me the ways of the Force.
Q) Interesting, does anyone else agree with Yoda?
etc.

Example of a dishonest question:
1) Q) So how do you know about the Force.
A) I met Yoda, the Jedi Grand Master, who showed me the ways of the Force.
Q) Ah ha. According to Google there is a Herbert H Yoda in Topeka Kansas who has a degree from a non-RA school. Do you have any other evidence of the Force?

If someone has experience contrary to mine I would be most interested in hearing it and seeing how it differs from mine (always willing to learn) however I have no interested in "validating" my learning and experience for someone who obviously has very little real interest in the subject.

 

So what evidence do you have that US schools are not inferior???

future comments from you regarding the supposed inferiority of US schools have no credibility. And that's enough for me.

Bruce

[/B][/QUOTE]

 

From the U.S. Network of Education Information:

"Education in the USA

The education system in the United States is the product of some 350 years of development, incorporating ideas, methods, and practices from America and around the world. U.S. education is well-known for its diversity, openness, quality, broad array of opportunities, and attitude of concern for the student."

Full information at:

http://www.ed.gov/NLE/USNEI/us/


Karlos Alberto Lacaye
[email protected]

 

From the British Council... read carefully or you will miss is.

Higher
Associate degree - may be considered to satisfy the general entrance requirements of British higher education institutions. Courses of a more vocational nature (Associate of Applied Arts or Science) may be considered comparable to the BTEC National Diploma/N/SVQ level three/Advanced GNVQ/GSVQ standard.

Bachelor degree - diversity is the key to American higher education with more than 3,000 institutions offering post-secondary education. This means a uniform standard of Bachelor degree is impossible. Students who have attended a regionally accredited institution, have gained good grade-point averages (GPA - normally at least 3.0), both overall and in individual courses, have taken advanced-level courses in appropriate subjects, have accumulated sufficient credits in major courses (typically between thirty and fifty-four), and have good academic references, may be considered for admission to postgraduate study. For further information enquirers should contact the National Academic Recognition Information Centre (NARIC). NARIC does not comment on institutions which are not regionally accredited.

Master's degree - in terms of specialisation, the American Master's degree from prestigious colleges and universities is considered comparable to the British Bachelor (Honours) degree. Candidates who have followed academically rigorous programmes have reached a standard comparable to that of a British taught Master's degree.

 

Did you read it? Some comments:
1) How can you imagine that this helps your arguement? You've completely missed the issue and are using your hypothesis to prove itself. You are alleging that the American education system is inferior to the U.K. system and are using the U.K. system's self-analysis as a filter...this assumes the hypothesis. All that your undocumented snippet ACTUALLY shows is that when the U.K. compares their own more highly specialized programs against the U.S. diverse programs, then it goes without saying that the U.S. programs are less specialized. That says nothing about which is superior. If you make the opposite comparison, assuming the U.S. system is superior, the U.K. system will be less diverse and therefore inferior. You've shown nothing that helps your argument.

b) Let me help you a little bit because you're lost at the moment. Your best hope would be to argue that the U.K. students get some diverse training in secondary school and therefore the specialized tertiary training at least brings them up to par with the advanced diverse training in the U.S. After that argument, you have to actually show which system is better, specialized or diverse training at the post-secondary level alone and in combination with postgraduate study, which changes the landscape altogether. Such a proof would have show how these combinations actually serve students in career and life. This would take a great deal of real research and a lot less pontification to make any meaningful claim.

b) Since you've been nailed in the PLAR thread for using old policy information and ignoring information in those references that hurt your argument, I must ask you to give a link to the quote that you gave.

 

Keep in mind that the British Council is a marketing and promotional organization. "The British Council's purpose is to enhance the reputation of the United Kingdom"
http://www.britcoun.org/who/index.htm

So if you take differential equations or your introductory chemistry sequence at a community college, you will have to take them over again if you apply to a British university? That's a very good argument against transferring from community colleges to British universities.

I think that the core of this problem is that British universities have difficulty in dealing effectively with transferring individual courses. That puts them at a disadvantage when it comes to distance education, where adult students often take courses from a variety of providers.

But this British remark on associate degrees doesn't present any evidence that community college courses are not operating at a university standard. Evidence that they are is provided by the fact that their credits are accepted for transfer credit almost universally in the United States. That includes the prestige institutions like University of California at Berkeley.

That sounds similar to the entrance requirements at most American graduate schools. So it doesn't sound like British universities are discriminating against American bachelors degrees. In particular, there isn't any suggestion that degrees from smaller or less prominent universities are dismissed.

Many Britons like to argue that their "honours" bachelors degrees are equivalent to American masters degrees, but I remain skeptical.

But the issue really isn't relevant to me, since I live in the United States and in this country British bachelors degrees are not considered graduate degrees.

I also wonder what the relevance of this little bit of British self-promotion is to the ridiculous claim that the majority of the world's worst universities are in the United States.

 

You periodically see British educators saying things like that themselves.

Imagine a British undergraduate going on to earn a master's and doctorate "by research". Then imagine that same Ph.D. being hired to teach the broad range of undergraduate courses in the discipline.

The problem is that having devoted all of his or her attention to a specialized dissertation topic, the new professor has actually had no graduate education at all in the subjects he or she is being asked to teach. You had better hope that their honours BA is the equivalent of a masters degree, because its all they've got.

 

Predictably, you are in such a passionate rage to win the war over communism you missed the key salient point.

One would think that there should generally be a 1-1 relationship between a standard RA US program and a standard UK program. Now what exactly that relationship is (i.e Bach(Hons), MA, etc.) is a discussion for another day.

What the British Council is saying is that, upon review, the diversity of education in the US precludes a 1-1 and results in a 1-many. They do refer to structural differences (i.e. amount of specialization in the undergrad) but they also refer to the quality of the program (note the adjectives "prestigious", "rigourous"). In other words they are saying that there is a diversity of quality in the US which precludes a 1-1... the UK equivalent depends upon the quality of the school in the US you attended.

Incidently, the British Council does provide information regarding equivalencies in other countries and such qualifiers are absent... a 1-1 relationship exists.

Once you accept this, then you can ask the question... what differences in the two systems may contribute to a more diverse level of quality in one system and how does this level of quality compare with the other... but children, that is a less for another day.

Incidently, I find the "controversy" regarding this a little surprise considering the importance of "attending a good school" in the US vs. the relative lack of such importance in, say, Canada.... of course, you probably don't know that.




Master's degree - in terms of specialisation, the American Master's degree from prestigious colleges and universities is considered comparable to the British Bachelor (Honours) degree. Candidates who have followed academically rigorous programmes have reached a standard comparable to that of a British taught Master's degree.

 

I find the flood (yes, I think that slightly under 700,000 students in the year 2000 consitutes a "flood") of foreign students entering the U.S. to study here every year to be pretty persuasive.

Only a small number are from third-world countries. Most are from Europe. Over 200,000 are from Canada or the U.K. Surely something makes the cost of living abroad, and attending at international student tuition rates, worthwhile to these folks. I doubt that it's the low quality of U.S. schools.

Any explanations?