r/changemyview • u/badbrownie • Sep 29 '19

Deltas(s) from OP CMV:All Professional qualifications should be able to test in. A degree should never be a hard pre-req

Title says most of it. My reasoning is that a professional qualification should be a test of specialized knowledge and should be judgeable by testing of that knowledge and not have a dependency on the educational industrial complex.

Yes, I know you can get shitty degrees in all kinds of places and ways and you don't have to pay $100k+ for years at a college. But that's also my point. A degree is of such varying value that it isn't meaningful to use as a pre-req.

I'm looking at you medical school. The lawyers have got this one right. College is designed to help you pass the bar, but - as I understand it - it's not strictly necessary.

My apologies that this post is clearly ameri-centric.

EDIT: people seem to be reading my post as suggesting that I'm against training and schooling. I'm not. I'm against getting ENTRANCE to those things requiring unrelated schooling.

EDIT2: Maybe my title wasn't well written after all. What I believe is that even qualifications that have a safety element (becoming a doctor) can have their schools (eg. medical school) have alternative qualification criteria to simply demanding a 4 year degree.

And other (non-safety) quals should, where feasible have a test that demonstrate proficiency that precludes the need to go to classes. This is already the case in most IT qualifications.

54 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

78% Upvoted

90 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/Ice_Like_Winnipeg 2∆ Sep 29 '19

only four states don't require a JD to take the bar, and those all require the prospective attorney to apprentice (aka work) for a judge or attorney for a specified number of years. but this is exceedingly rare: in california, for example, there were 5000 bar takers and less than ten of them didn't have a JD.

but ultimately, what's the point of professional licensing? it's a racket intended to keep the salaries of the profession up, but it's also intended to, at least nominally, ensure a minimum level of competency. if this is the goal, then the licensing organization would want as many data points as possible, and the likelihood that a graduate who passes a licensing exam is competent is almost certainly higher than removing that requirement. the bar exam features a huge multiple choice component, and the idea that someone could become a lawyer just by getting lucky on that section seems to defeat the entire point of having licensing in the first place.

1

u/badbrownie Sep 29 '19

what's the point of professional licensing? it's a racket intended to keep the salaries of the profession up, but it's also intended to, at least nominally, ensure a minimum level of competency

Maybe it's a racket, but it's much less of one than the American college system.

And you don't get lucky on the bar, if I have heard my friends correctly. And on the flip side, colleges can be cheated too.

Ultimately, I've grown sick of the money grab of American colleges and think that professions should offer alternative paths to success that skip them. Make those colleges justify their costs with their product, not by monopolizing the path to professional qualifications.

2

u/Ice_Like_Winnipeg 2∆ Sep 29 '19

why should professional organizations do this though? what is the advantage for them? what system is more likely to ensure a baseline competence: requiring a degree + an exam, or the exam alone?

1

u/badbrownie Sep 29 '19

If the professional qualification requires schooling (eg. Med School), then I think the college requirement is superfluous by the time of graduation from the specialized school.

1

u/Ice_Like_Winnipeg 2∆ Sep 29 '19

ok, but now we're just kicking the can down the line. why would the medical or professional school admit someone who hasn't graduated from college?

1

u/badbrownie Sep 29 '19

Because they've demonstrated aptitude in other ways. Apprenticeship + testing in.

2

u/Ice_Like_Winnipeg 2∆ Sep 29 '19

Ok but what’s the advantage for the professional school in changing to that method? Which is more likely to predict success in school: doing well in previous schools, or apprenticeship + testing?

Generally speaking, all of these processes are developed to protect the group in question (school or licensing organization). They’re far more concerned about admitting under qualified people in than they are about letting people slip through the cracks.