The conventional way of getting a degree is going to school for a certain number of years after which the degree is awarded on completion of the units of study required. Life experience degrees however disqualify this, as it is not necessary for one to attend classes and sit exams for a number of years to be in possession of such a degree. In order to get one, all that is needed is enough years of experience in the relevant field.
Is such a degree equal in value to one gotten through endless number of classes and exams? This is a question whose answer is relative. For some it is a big yes and for others a big no. Proponents of this concept as well as the opponents back up their stand with reasonable arguments.
For example, for one to be awarded a bachelors degree, he or she would require having four years of expertise working in the relevant field of work to the degree that he or she wants. For courses that take longer than four years, the number of years of know how required is also more. This would therefore mean that in order to get a masters degree, one would require six years of expertise and for a doctorate degree eight years.
Critics of this kind of degree awards are quick to point out that their criticism should not be taken to be an implication that know how is not important. They accept that experience is as important as the academic qualification. They do not accept however, that the know how in itself can be regarded as an academic qualification.
For example, they argue that employees in the work place usually do the same thing repeatedly every day. Their job description spells out what is expected of them and they usually do not go beyond that. They therefore do not think that it is okay for someone who has been doing the same thing for four years to claim that he or she has the same academic qualification as one who has gone through different classes on different aspects of the job for the four years.
When in school for whichever degree program, there are some general courses, which everyone has to take despite what their specialization is. These include algebra, communications, and even world history among others. Critics argue that it is not possible for someone to have experience in all the fields covered by the general courses. This means that anyone who earns a life experience degree has not fulfilled the requirements spelt out by the curriculum for the award of the degree.
Those in support of this concept have one major argument. They are quick to assert that what people do when schooling is simply getting knowledge that will help them in carrying out the duties involved in their line of work, once they finish their studies. If a person has been working for four years, it means that the person has acquired the knowledge needed for that job otherwise he or she would not have done it for so long.
Both proponents and critics have strong arguments with regards to life experience degrees. Whichever side one is on, the fact is that these degrees are here with us and they are here to stay. What with the increasing number of institutions that offer them.
Is such a degree equal in value to one gotten through endless number of classes and exams? This is a question whose answer is relative. For some it is a big yes and for others a big no. Proponents of this concept as well as the opponents back up their stand with reasonable arguments.
For example, for one to be awarded a bachelors degree, he or she would require having four years of expertise working in the relevant field of work to the degree that he or she wants. For courses that take longer than four years, the number of years of know how required is also more. This would therefore mean that in order to get a masters degree, one would require six years of expertise and for a doctorate degree eight years.
Critics of this kind of degree awards are quick to point out that their criticism should not be taken to be an implication that know how is not important. They accept that experience is as important as the academic qualification. They do not accept however, that the know how in itself can be regarded as an academic qualification.
For example, they argue that employees in the work place usually do the same thing repeatedly every day. Their job description spells out what is expected of them and they usually do not go beyond that. They therefore do not think that it is okay for someone who has been doing the same thing for four years to claim that he or she has the same academic qualification as one who has gone through different classes on different aspects of the job for the four years.
When in school for whichever degree program, there are some general courses, which everyone has to take despite what their specialization is. These include algebra, communications, and even world history among others. Critics argue that it is not possible for someone to have experience in all the fields covered by the general courses. This means that anyone who earns a life experience degree has not fulfilled the requirements spelt out by the curriculum for the award of the degree.
Those in support of this concept have one major argument. They are quick to assert that what people do when schooling is simply getting knowledge that will help them in carrying out the duties involved in their line of work, once they finish their studies. If a person has been working for four years, it means that the person has acquired the knowledge needed for that job otherwise he or she would not have done it for so long.
Both proponents and critics have strong arguments with regards to life experience degrees. Whichever side one is on, the fact is that these degrees are here with us and they are here to stay. What with the increasing number of institutions that offer them.
About the Author:
Explanations about how life experience degrees work can be found by visiting www.survivinglifeuniversity.com today. Learn more regarding the topic by clicking on the links at http://www.survivinglifeuniversity.com now.
No comments:
Post a Comment