5 ms·

If this attitude prevails I would think the value of degrees will quickly diminish.

by efavdb 1y ago

ebiester 1y ago
This seems to be the general feeling of students right now. Academia put itself as a gateway and barrier to the middle class. Why would we be surprised when people with no interest in anything but the goal are not enthralled by the process?
- bumby 1y ago
  Academia clearly lost their monopoly on information. Since their last moat is a monopoly on credentials, I expect them to defend it intensely. We could make it less meaningful if employers weren’t so keen on using credentials as their own gateway. That may have more of a chance of happening if the OPs perspective becomes more prevalent and the credential becomes an increasingly worse signal for meaningful skills.
  - geysersam 1y ago
    In what way does academia have monopoly on credentials? You can start issuing your own credentials tomorrow.
    - sigmaisaletter 1y ago
      I don't know where you live, but in the "developed" parts of the world this is illegal. There will either be some government agency or some council of credential-giving institutions and they will give you a license to issue degrees, or most likely they will not give it to you.
      - zmgsabst 1y ago
        In the US, you can just make up degrees — but you have to be honest that you’re unaccredited. Accreditation is regulated by NGOs who need government approval and without that you cant received financial aid (or participate in some programs) — but you can hand out pieces of paper for completing your program. https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/higher-education-laws-and-policy/college-accreditation/overview-of-accreditation-united-states https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/higher-education-laws-and...
    - bumby 1y ago
      There are accreditation bodies. So I don’t think your self-proclaimed engineering degree is going to help you get a job or a professional engineering license like one from an ABET accredited school.
  - ebiester 1y ago
    They didn't have a monopoly on information anytime in the 20th century. If you wanted to have all the knowledge, it could be expensive to acquire a personal library, but nothing was stopping you from acquiring the same textbooks. Heck, until the information age it was pretty easy to forge a credential. But it wasn't about credentials even. It was about inculcating a culture. You knew that someone had the knowledge and ability to reach university, and you knew that they had a shared common culture with you. Shared common culture and norms increases trust. Credentials mattered for doctors, but universities, in the end, were selling something far more intangible: culture.
    - bumby 1y ago
      High barriers to entry are a feature of monopolies. Saying I could start my own railroad by simply buying up billions of dollars of land and investing billions more in equipment isn’t a compelling argument against the idea of a monopoly.
- alpinisme 1y ago
  > Academia put itself as a gateway How did academia do that? It doesn’t seem like universities would have the power to do that. More likely, either employers put academia as a gateway. Or even: the culture at large misunderstood what pathways existed to middle class life. Or even: pathways to middle class life became scarcer and more insecure, and the real gatekeepers (hiring managers) had no good ways to select which of the many people at the door to let through.
  - bumby 1y ago
    I agree with you (and upvoted) but consider this: why don’t fancy schools offer the same credentials for MOOCs if the information and assessment is on-par? I believe it is because they recognize the value of the credential and guard it closely.
    - godelski 1y ago
      I think you missed the parent's point. Maybe consider this: Why don't employers recognize the credentials of a MOOC to the same degree that they would a university degree? We could similarly ask why employers value the degrees of some universities more than others. I think it's important to realize that ultimately the decisions come from the employers, not the universities. No one is making the employers do anything. But at least the second question might have a clearer partial answer. In part, there is a selection of a tribe, an implicit "culture fit" that's happening. It isn't uncommon to see employer bias towards specific universities. This is especially true with prestigious universities. But it's not the universities that are making anyone do anything and that's an important distinction.
      - bumby 1y ago
        I brought up that I think the root problem is employers in a different comment, so I’m not missing that point.[1] The distinction is that I don’t think it’s a dichotomous problem. While colleges may not be the root problem, they can still be a contributor to the problem. (Besides, if an employer is to recognize a MOOC, that course completion has to be documented, which means it’s just another version of credential) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43890682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43890682

If this attitude prevails I would think the value of degrees will quickly diminish.

by efavdb 1y ago

If this attitude prevails I would think the value of degrees will quickly diminish.

This seems to be the general feeling of students right now. Academia put itself as a gateway and barrier to the middle class. Why would we be surprised when people with no interest in anything but the goal are not enthralled by the process?

bumby 1y ago
Academia clearly lost their monopoly on information. Since their last moat is a monopoly on credentials, I expect them to defend it intensely. We could make it less meaningful if employers weren’t so keen on using credentials as their own gateway. That may have more of a chance of happening if the OPs perspective becomes more prevalent and the credential becomes an increasingly worse signal for meaningful skills.
- geysersam 1y ago
  In what way does academia have monopoly on credentials? You can start issuing your own credentials tomorrow.
  - sigmaisaletter 1y ago
    I don't know where you live, but in the "developed" parts of the world this is illegal. There will either be some government agency or some council of credential-giving institutions and they will give you a license to issue degrees, or most likely they will not give it to you.
    - zmgsabst 1y ago
      In the US, you can just make up degrees — but you have to be honest that you’re unaccredited. Accreditation is regulated by NGOs who need government approval and without that you cant received financial aid (or participate in some programs) — but you can hand out pieces of paper for completing your program. https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/higher-education-laws-and-policy/college-accreditation/overview-of-accreditation-united-states https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/higher-education-laws-and...
  - bumby 1y ago
    There are accreditation bodies. So I don’t think your self-proclaimed engineering degree is going to help you get a job or a professional engineering license like one from an ABET accredited school.
- ebiester 1y ago
  They didn't have a monopoly on information anytime in the 20th century. If you wanted to have all the knowledge, it could be expensive to acquire a personal library, but nothing was stopping you from acquiring the same textbooks. Heck, until the information age it was pretty easy to forge a credential. But it wasn't about credentials even. It was about inculcating a culture. You knew that someone had the knowledge and ability to reach university, and you knew that they had a shared common culture with you. Shared common culture and norms increases trust. Credentials mattered for doctors, but universities, in the end, were selling something far more intangible: culture.
  - bumby 1y ago
    High barriers to entry are a feature of monopolies. Saying I could start my own railroad by simply buying up billions of dollars of land and investing billions more in equipment isn’t a compelling argument against the idea of a monopoly.
alpinisme 1y ago
> Academia put itself as a gateway How did academia do that? It doesn’t seem like universities would have the power to do that. More likely, either employers put academia as a gateway. Or even: the culture at large misunderstood what pathways existed to middle class life. Or even: pathways to middle class life became scarcer and more insecure, and the real gatekeepers (hiring managers) had no good ways to select which of the many people at the door to let through.
- bumby 1y ago
  I agree with you (and upvoted) but consider this: why don’t fancy schools offer the same credentials for MOOCs if the information and assessment is on-par? I believe it is because they recognize the value of the credential and guard it closely.
  - godelski 1y ago
    I think you missed the parent's point. Maybe consider this: Why don't employers recognize the credentials of a MOOC to the same degree that they would a university degree? We could similarly ask why employers value the degrees of some universities more than others. I think it's important to realize that ultimately the decisions come from the employers, not the universities. No one is making the employers do anything. But at least the second question might have a clearer partial answer. In part, there is a selection of a tribe, an implicit "culture fit" that's happening. It isn't uncommon to see employer bias towards specific universities. This is especially true with prestigious universities. But it's not the universities that are making anyone do anything and that's an important distinction.
    - bumby 1y ago
      I brought up that I think the root problem is employers in a different comment, so I’m not missing that point.[1] The distinction is that I don’t think it’s a dichotomous problem. While colleges may not be the root problem, they can still be a contributor to the problem. (Besides, if an employer is to recognize a MOOC, that course completion has to be documented, which means it’s just another version of credential) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43890682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43890682