Considering the fact that a recent Nobel was given to somebody for
doing absolutely nothing, I'm not sure the glitter of such an award
has as much weight as it once did.
It isn't often that Moose launches out against somebody other than me
AND we happen to agree on something. I'll put a very slight spin on
the topic, however...
In my experience I've encountered degreed people that studied to pass
tests, not to actually "learn". I'd rather deal with somebody who had
horrid scores but actually knew the subject than somebody who aced the
classes but doesn't know squat. I used to train people in computer
systems and accounting, and my worst students had Master degrees who
took copious notes but didn't have a clue how to apply what they were
writing down.
The thesis is a means of proving the leaning. But the problem then
comes down to who is reviewing the thesis. If the committee is made up
of individuals with the "form, not function" mentality, then I would
agree with John that you essentially have a degree mill. But if the
reviewers (probably more common in the physics, bio-med and
electrical-engineering fields) are looking more at the content than
the form, then you are more likely to get a better class of degreed
individual.
My opinion only--as a college dropout who made it OK as an engineer
learning on-the-job. YMMV.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|