Give autodidacts and independent learners a chance

[lightfire22000]

Great post shadron. I'm working as a programmer right now. The truth is that most learning comes from doing. Classes very seldom emphasize doing. It is mostly the fine points of theory, if you're lucky. Tons of CS majors aren't good programmers.

 

[drkitten]

drkitten,

What do you teach?

Students, mostly. In fact, I make something of a professional specialization in picking up the autodidact-wannabees and showing them the great wodges of material that they're missing so that they can actually get a good enough background to work professionally in the fields they've chosen.

Many, many laws specify a "BS/AB/BA/BE" degrees in tons of trades. In Massachusetts, those designations are required for teaching. That's how I can tell the degree won't count. Take law for example. One needs a J.D. from a recognized law school to practice law.

Nope. Again, there are alternative paths; check out the California "Law Office Study Program." (It's not confined to California, either; there are something like ten states that offer this or a substantially similar program.)

If all of the law schools only accept BA/BS undergraduate degrees, such designation is a legal requirement to become a lawyer. A policy of a sanctioned monopoly is a law.

Not really an issue; you can get a BA or BS almost anywhere -- TASC offers something like a hundred different BA/BS programs.

The laws you provide in other states also considerably hamper non-ABET accredited degree earners.

Cry me a river. They should hamper autodidacts; the ABET-accredited feeder programs are set up the way they are for a reason. It's much easier to teach people correctly the first time than it is to let someone flounder around because he or she is unwilling to play the game by the standard rules.

Quacks and degree mills are actually assisted by accreditation and the FDA.

.... and here is where you just crossed the line from inexperienced kid to out and out fruitbat nutcase who wears tinfoil on his head.

Okay.

I think I've proven my point from my initial paragraph on this thread. Despite the fact that you don't actually know much about education, about educational procedures, about available options, or about what educational credentials are really needed, nevertheless you still know so much better than a professional educator who has been advising students on career planning for an uncomfortably long number of decades.

My career advice to you? Suck it up and go back to school. Because you suck as an autodidact. A successful autodidact -- and, yes, I know several of them -- would have been able to find TESC or the LOSP on his own.

 

[drkitten]

Great post shadron. I'm working as a programmer right now. The truth is that most learning comes from doing. Classes very seldom emphasize doing. It is mostly the fine points of theory, if you're lucky. Tons of CS majors aren't good programmers.

There's a reason for that. Programming doesn't require a CS degree, any more than drawing blood at the red cross requires a medical degree.

If you're taking CS to become a programmer, you're in the wrong program. (That's what the various associates in technology cover, and you can pick them up in half the time for a quarter or less of the cost.) CS is about the theory so that you understand what's going on when the technology changes. Indeed, much of CS today is about making the technology change happen.

 

[bpesta22]

I think we should ban the word autodidact. Not for any logical reason, or even it's meaning. It's just an ugly looking and sounding word. It's like Rubric. I can't stand that word.

I'm of the opinion that students are adults, so if they don't want to come to class, fine by me. I don't dock points for that, though I think most students know that missing class isn't the best way to do well in a class.

 

[drkitten]

I think we should ban the word autodidact.

It's a word that screams insecurity. It's a five-dollar concept wearing a thousand-dollar suit in the hopes that the audience won't know it for what it really is.

But autodidacticism [evil grin] is often about that insecurity. Because if you can dress "self-taught" up in a thousand-dollar suit, people might not realize what that likely implies about huge gaping holes in your background that you don't know about.

Maybe a better metaphor would be "a five-dollar concept wearing a thousand-dollar sports jacket and no trousers."

I'm of the opinion that students are adults, so if they don't want to come to class, fine by me.

That's my philosophy as well. I catch hell for it from time to time, generally from the same students who don't have a work ethic unless I hold their feet to the fire. Most of my classes are also strongly back-weighted on a final project or paper, precisely because if you can't apply the material to solve a significant problem, you haven't learned anything in the class. But this means that if you decide to skip a lecture or two, no real harm done.

 

[SezMe]

If you doubt me, I bet I can answer most problems you ask if they are in math or science.

Your OP had me thinking you are fat-headed. This cinches the deal.

"Science" ranges from astronomy to zoology and hits a thousand points along the way. To say nothing about the range of subjects that rightfully belong under the rubric^* of "math".

If you think you can "answer most problems" (obviously English is not your strong suit either), then you're grossly wrong.

^* With apologies to bpesta22.




​

 

[lightfire22000]

drkitten,
You still refuse to answer my simple question. What subject do you teach? Is that better?

bpesta22,
You make a very good point about the word "rubric." It has lost its original meaning of roughly category and has come to mean a set of criteria for grading. In modern usage, a syllabus is the rubric in writing. Do you know why rubric has come to mean that? Teaching guilds! Teachers colleges and courses routinely distort the English language. Do you know what they call teaching material now? They call it teaching "content." Content is a dirty word to them.

SezMe,

Would you like me to search the forum to see how many word choice/grammatical errors that you've made? drkitten alone has made at least four here. The truth is SezMe that most of Mathematics and Sciences have the same underlying recognizable logical principles. For an example, just notice how osmosis in biology is an application of the law of entropy in Physics.

 

[lightfire22000]

If you're taking CS to become a programmer, you're in the wrong program. (That's what the various associates in technology cover, and you can pick them up in half the time for a quarter or less of the cost.) CS is about the theory so that you understand what's going on when the technology changes. Indeed, much of CS today is about making the technology change happen.

I'm a software engineering intern for a market research firm. Very few CS majors ever work in a theory based environment. Mostly, they become programmers.

When did I ever say that I was an autodidact entirely? I go to a university that US News and World Reports hold in high regard.

My career advice to you? Suck it up and go back to school. Because you suck as an autodidact. A successful autodidact -- and, yes, I know several of them -- would have been able to find TESC or the LOSP on his own.

I've been reading about the topic for a week now for market research. It wasn't even the primary topic. I came across Empire State College and I had vaguely heard of Edison State, but I was analyzing the prospects of starting more schools. Your assessment is not exactly fair. I attend a university, but I have always done most of my learning on my own. I have gone even further in this direction due to illness. Oh, btw, a degree in "Engineering Technology" is different from a degree in "Engineering" as far as ABET is concerned. That may not be considered acceptable for PE certification. Also, it's a little presumptuous to say that I live in one of those 10 states with LOSC. I don't. I could move, but that's admittedly more than a little hassle.

 

[lightfire22000]

..

 

[martu]

I'm a software engineering intern for a market research firm. Very few CS majors ever work in a theory based environment. Mostly, they become programmers.

One reason degrees and other qualifications are used is as a shortcut in the application process. I hire programmers for my firm and we get way more applicants then we can interview and so we use qualifications as a means of filtering them. Now this does mean we may miss out on that brilliant programmer who has no qualifications but frankly what are the chances of that?

I agree with drkitten you might as well get the degree and then all these problems go away. If you're half as bright as you think you are it will be a breeze.

 

[lightfire22000]

Martu makes a couple of good and fair points in the post above. However, degrees are expensive and time consuming. There is also a big demand for new, effective schools of higher learning. These appear to be curtailed by anachronisms in the accreditation processes.

Martu, there are so many standardized tests that could demonstrate a prospective employee's ability. There are also so many people with "learning disabilities" who would benefit a lot from periods of self study if more people considered it potentially legitimate. Open testing(tests that anybody can take) could be a great way to evaluate employees.

If drkitten is right and they can't pass the test, then they know what they need to improve.

 

[drkitten]

drkitten,
You still refuse to answer my simple question.

That's right. It's a rude question, the answer to which is none of your business.

 

[drkitten]

When did I ever say that I was an autodidact entirely? I go to a university that US News and World Reports hold in high regard.

And by your own admission, you're a terrible student and not taking advantage of the opportunities the university gives you.

Oh, btw, a degree in "Engineering Technology" is different from a degree in "Engineering" as far as ABET is concerned.

Which would be relevant, even insightful, if anyone other than possibly you had been under the impression that they were the same.

Also, it's a little presumptuous to say that I live in one of those 10 states with LOSC. I don't. I could move, but that's admittedly more than a little hassle.

So what? You'll have to move after you flunk out of your prestigious school, too.

Basically, what you're telling me is that not only are you complaining about the educational opportunities available at your "university that US News and World Reports hold [sic] in high regard," but that you insist that a better opportunity be delivered to your doorstep because you're unwilling to get out of bed to seize that opportunity.

How were you planning on studying for yourself? Are you under the mistaken impression that Google has all the books you need to read?

I stand by my previous statement. You'll never make it as an autodidact.

 

[lightfire22000]

That's right. It's a rude question, the answer to which is none of your business.

Then why did you address it in the first place drkitten? I need that information to get a better understanding of your posts' exposition.

And by your own admission, you're a terrible student and not taking advantage of the opportunities the university gives you.

I never admitted that at all. I've taken advantage. I could have those opportunities anyways without the university. A "terrible student" is a subjective issue, but if you must know I have a GPA of around 3.3.

Which would be relevant, even insightful, if anyone other than possibly you had been under the impression that they were the same.

A degree in Engineering Technology is not necessarily acceptable for PE certification. You seemed to be under that impression.

So what? You'll have to move after you flunk out of your prestigious school, too.

Flunk out? I told you that I'm in no danger of flunking out.

How were you planning on studying for yourself? Are you under the mistaken impression that Google has all the books you need to read?

It sure has a lot of them. If it doesn't have a textbook, it has an almost identical textbook with the same information. However, in classes, it doesn't count because the professors require problems from the class textbook, which is over $100. Textbooks are a racket. Every major work in Economics, Literature, Mathematics, Physics, and much of Chemistry is available online for free. Textbooks copy these major works but change the problems and values of variables.

I stand by my previous statement. You'll never make it as an autodidact.

Based on what? You don't even know me(I assume.) I'm standing on experience, logic, knowledge, and tests. On what are you basing your assessment?

 

[drkitten]

A degree in Engineering Technology is not necessarily acceptable for PE certification. You seemed to be under that impression.

This is, not to put too find a point on it, simply wrong.

Re-read the New York guidelines. A regionally-accredited bachelors degree in technology qualifies you for a PE licence. If you want licensure in another state, get the New York licence and apply for licensure by comity in the state of interest.

Flunk out? I told you that I'm in no danger of flunking out.

Yes, and I didn't believe you THEN, either. You have no measurable problem-solving ability.

 

[lightfire22000]

That's not a bad idea drkitten! However, it still doesn't explain why other states should block a degree in Engineering Technology.

If I "have no measurable problem solving ability," then tests sure are screwy. I tend to test pretty well.

 

[martu]

Martu makes a couple of good and fair points in the post above. However, degrees are expensive and time consuming. There is also a big demand for new, effective schools of higher learning. These appear to be curtailed by anachronisms in the accreditation processes.

Martu, there are so many standardized tests that could demonstrate a prospective employee's ability. There are also so many people with "learning disabilities" who would benefit a lot from periods of self study if more people considered it potentially legitimate. Open testing(tests that anybody can take) could be a great way to evaluate employees.

If drkitten is right and they can't pass the test, then they know what they need to improve.

Who is going to administer these tests? Every minute I am not doing my day job, writing code, I am losing my company money. Hiring is a necessary evil and we want it to be as quick and efficient as possible. There already exists a program to show you are skilled or intelligent in an area while at the same time displaying maturity and self discipline by sticking with something for 3 years or more even if you don't enjoy all of it.

Wake up - unless you are your own boss (even then this is true until you get to be very rich) you'll spend a lot of your adult life doing things you don't enjoy. You might as well start now.

 

[lightfire22000]

Martu again makes good points.

Your company wouldn't have to administer the tests! Other private companies would quickly emerge and administer the tests, or until then, the government could issue competency tests that would be open to everyone. This is the case in China.

Discipline can come from the tedious, but it doesn't always.

Another point that I'd like to address is that many people with college degrees in one field also would like experience in what's considered another field. For instance, I'm studying hoping to be a pharmacist, but I would also like to show that I am a capable engineer.

 

[drkitten]

That's not a bad idea drkitten! However, it still doesn't explain why other states should block a degree in Engineering Technology.

Do you think if you repeat a false statement often enough, it will become true?

Look up licensure by comity some time.

If I "have no measurable problem solving ability," then tests sure are screwy.

They are. That's why I prefer project-based grading, because tests do not measure problem solving ability well. A better measure of problem solving ability is, frankly, your track record of solving problems. Such as your ability to determine (correctly) whether or not a person with a degree in technology can become a professional engineer.

 

[drkitten]

Your company wouldn't have to administer the tests! Other private companies would quickly emerge and administer the tests,

And who would validate the tests?

the government could issue competency tests that would be open to everyone. This is the case in China.

That's a very VERY good example, and it totally damns your point. Cheating is well-known to be rampant on the Chinese tests, which is why almost no one, not even the Chinese, particularly trusts the outcomes.

My department has a blanket policy of not believing standardized test scores from China at admissions time.

We've already seen the effects of this kind of policy in operation DIPSCAM; companies crawl out of the woodwork to offer valueless credentials, and other companies crawl out of the woodwork to offer valueless certifications of the valueless credentials.