4 ms·
Say a couple dozen credible schools start to do this. What would be the differentiating factor? Their classroom reputation, which shouldn't apply much to this
by waterlesscloud 14y ago
Say a couple dozen credible schools start to do this. What would be the differentiating factor? Their classroom reputation, which shouldn't apply much to this path at all?
- sliverstorm 14y agoThe rigor of their testing, of course. Possibly to a lesser degree, fees, accessibility, that sort of thing.
- bilbo0s 14y agoYep. I would expect MIT's exams to be outright impossible for a mortal to pass. University of Wisconsin's will be nearly impossible to pass even with concerted study. Northern Illinois will be possible to pass with study. and then there will be institutions whose certifications don't mean a whole lot. There's no question about that. But MOST people will try to pass the impossible ones... because the payoff will be so much bigger. Only a few will pass though. I'm thinking the tests will be designed that way. I strongly suspect getting a degree from UMichigan, UWisconsin, UTexas, Berkeley, etc. will be MUCH easier if you just attend. But this is a good option for those who, for whatever reason, don't wish to do so.
- phaus 14y agoWell, you can easily test your theory in some cases. Many of MIT's open courseware classes include the exams. Are they impossible for someone without any knowledge on the subjects? Pretty much, but if you follow the course content, they are passable.
- carbocation 14y agoWould you say that the differentiating factor of, say, a Yale certification is its classroom reputation?
- jmaygarden 14y agoI'm not sure the Yale degree is as valuable if one misses out on the networking opportunities.
- jlgreco 14y agoWhat I want to know is if, in the future, I will be able to differentiate between "Is college educated in this subject matter" and "Knows as much about this subject matter as someone who was college educated in it". There is a keen difference between the two I think.
- pbhjpbhj 14y agoI'm guessing the later is the preferred candidate?
- jlgreco 14y agoSince they both know as much about the relevant subject matter, no. The former. I know HN has a thing against college education, but I sincerely believe that neither major relevant information nor a piece of paper certifying that were the most valuable things I got from my time in college. Peer interaction and exposure, exposure to ideas and studies outside of my apparent interests, practice with long-term commitment and responsibility, etc. These are all things that you can certainly, perhaps even easily, have without going to college... but a college education serves as a certification of these things as well. The "relevant coursework" part of a college degree is not of particular interest to me (I saw complete idiots get the same degree as I did, and I know many people without relevant degrees that know as much as I). Given two candidates of equal knowledge, one with no degree and one with a degree in art history, I would hire the art history guy with little hesitation.
- randomdata 14y agoI've always found HN to be pro-college, so I'm not sure why you think people have something against it. However, someone who has a demonstrated college-level education without direction shows extreme motivation, and ability to adapt to adversity. Going to college is the easy way out, so to speak. Of course the attributes you list are valuable too. I don't think you can say one is better than other. You will find great and not so great people in both groups. As always, you need to evaluate the individual, not the piece of paper.