3 ms·

What's most insane to me with a degree system: Everyone who has the same 'degree' could have had wildly different classes. What's the point? Maybe we need to d

What's most insane to me with a degree system: Everyone who has the same 'degree' could have had wildly different classes. What's the point? Maybe we need to dial it back to more of a 'certificate' based approach? Instead of the letters-beside-your-name, list the completed certificates. And this also gives the opportunity to better upgrade skills in the specific problem area. And maybe it can encourage more interdisciplinary study.

colechristensen 6y ago
I don’t agree with this approach, the biggest value of a university degree is teaching someone how to think and learn in combination with some domain knowledge. Unless you are going for higher degrees, the specialization isn’t of prime importance. i.e. what one engineer/scientist/scholar learns within their field in undergrad compared to another is really not so important for their ability to do things related to that degree. You don’t need to be exclusively prepared for your exact job. We have accreditation boards to determine what is required for a common base.
- interestica 6y ago
  Maybe I wasn't totally clear, but I think we actually agree. To me, a focus on 'credit-based' system is about acknowledging that the boundaries of those domains are growing and changing. Gaining knowledge and expertise in one area can inform your work in another. The idea would be to broaden abilities, not focus on being 'exclusively prepared'. > the biggest value of a university degree is teaching someone how to think and learn in combination with some domain knowledge. I would add also: 'how to work', 'how to learn' and 'who to know'. By 'certs' I didn't just mean tech specializations. Courses can be about broader topics. A course on politics can be absolutely beneficial to an engineer. A more modular approach could also encourage lifelong learning rather than the "checkbox" that a degree satisfies. >We have accreditation boards to determine what is required for a common base. That's the problem. Those boards/requirements vary based on Universities and available instructors and resources. Yet, everyone comes out with the same degree.

colechristensen 6y ago

I don’t agree with this approach, the biggest value of a university degree is teaching someone how to think and learn in combination with some domain knowledge. Unless you are going for higher degrees, the specialization isn’t of prime importance. i.e. what one engineer/scientist/scholar learns within their field in undergrad compared to another is really not so important for their ability to do things related to that degree. You don’t need to be exclusively prepared for your exact job. We have accreditation boards to determine what is required for a common base.

interestica 6y ago
Maybe I wasn't totally clear, but I think we actually agree. To me, a focus on 'credit-based' system is about acknowledging that the boundaries of those domains are growing and changing. Gaining knowledge and expertise in one area can inform your work in another. The idea would be to broaden abilities, not focus on being 'exclusively prepared'. > the biggest value of a university degree is teaching someone how to think and learn in combination with some domain knowledge. I would add also: 'how to work', 'how to learn' and 'who to know'. By 'certs' I didn't just mean tech specializations. Courses can be about broader topics. A course on politics can be absolutely beneficial to an engineer. A more modular approach could also encourage lifelong learning rather than the "checkbox" that a degree satisfies. >We have accreditation boards to determine what is required for a common base. That's the problem. Those boards/requirements vary based on Universities and available instructors and resources. Yet, everyone comes out with the same degree.