Degrees VS Self Education

Post Reply New Topic

To generalize like that is a bit offensive. I'm not disagreeing that there are many professors that aren't qualified to teach. At the same time, there are professors here that are not only qualified, and well qualified, they are also interested in encouraging and contributing to the learning process of those attending their classes.

I have a hard time believing that all professors in European institutions are of the quality that you seem to be suggesting.

Even with a less than competent (be it in teaching style or in knowledge) professor instructing the class, there are still resources available to you in a college setting that you would not necessarily have outside of one.

It wasn't quality I was suggesting. It was the credentials to profess. A degree is not needed to profess. Nor can they be fired by some board of directors, only their peers can do it. She wasn't speaking of quality, but she was speaking of degrees. My suggestion was that degrees don't equal knowledge nor do they have to hold you back if you don't have one.

And yes you have valid points. As I have stated, I do not do well in schools. Others do just fine. My way won't be others and others won't be mine. I figured out another way to do it is all and I do regret I couldn't do the school thing. Just wasn't in my cards. I don't loose any sleep over it.

I didn't intend to come off as offensive. It seems anytime I tell or suggest someone to look something up here, they take it as an insult. I'll knock it off, lesson learned. I just find if I do my research, I learn more then someone telling me an answer.

Last edited by postpaleo on 25 Sep 2007, 1:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I do not believe I took a single college-level class that wasn't taught by either a PhD, or a graduate student TA under their supervision. The only classes I took with a teacher's assistant as the instructor were in psychology, or they were laboratories that were ultimately supervised by a professor.

And I'm willing to admit that I misinterpreted your meaning.

...but I don't think I misinterpreted that.

Not knowing where you attended school I can't comment nor could if I even knew. I don't know if you studied in Europe and I don't know if that's the way it still works there. But the history of the words I used are well documented and easy to find. Open for debate which is what I was asking her for, a response. I did not insult her, but apparently I insulted you.

You seem to be into some kind of fight mode, so be it. The last statement was about as innocent as I get. I've been blasted at least 3 times lately if not more, for suggesting folks look into something deeper. My statement was, it seemed to be a dead end street for me to do it anymore, that the end result boiled down to people feeling insulted. That I would stop doing it. It was not a "you" directed statement but a statement at large.

I am rude crude and tattooed. I've had one hell of a ride in life and I don't mess around with slanted bite them from behind you statements. Now you can roll your eyes, that was a you statement.

I studied in the United States.

If you have a point to make, you've done the research. I don't feel like checking up on it to verify your claims, nor do I think it should be placed upon me (or others) to do so. If you know where the information is readily available, you could simply post a link to it, or comment on where it could be found.

Far from it.

What I said first addresses this. Telling people to go research something gives the impression (gave me the impression) that you are speaking down to them.
"Go learn more, go become better educated on this subject, then we can talk. "
While I'm happy to consider additional information that you claim you have accessed, why do I have to take the time to either confirm or deny your claims, if you are the one making them?

You claim that I am in some sort of fight mode, and yet you go on the offensive.

I stand by my first response that was directed at you.

If you would care to look at my response to Triangular_Trees, I do think you would or possibly could see it as polite now. Actually my intent was to bolster her. That it's the common conseious that one must have the degree/s. Sometimes you can make your own niche and make it in what you want and not what others require you to be. I did it (and certainly not all the time) and there are more then a few here at WP that are saying the same thing. If she would have said I don't want to look it up I would have replied with what I already did to you. But looking for it, I never know what others might see. That they come back with the response and teach me in the process, ever the student. I just found it ironic that some of the best at teaching, don't have the big degree's, yet that's what she was in essence speaking of.

As to fight mode: "...but I don't think I misinterpreted that. " Perhaps I took it wrong? Perhaps we both are being Aspie about the whole thing? Hey, I hear it happens here. You appear to be very good with words, I would say you got your moneys worth no matter what school you went to. And I do think that's what the discussion was about.

The term university was poorly translated when it finally arrived in the Sates, they didn't get it.

...then I've completely misinterpreted most of what you have said.


I do agree that many "qualified" professors in this country have no business teaching anyone. Too much of it is about tenure. I do not know of many people without higher-level degrees that would be as knowledgeable about the material, not to say that they do not exist, but I don't doubt for a second that there are people in such a group that would be better at teaching.

I think it may have initially been understood, but for many the real purpose has been lost over the years. Some are more concerned with furthering their research, funded by the government or corporations. Others, it is just a job. The few that are there because they love to teach, those are the only ones that should be there in the first place.

I have four degrees (Associate's, Bachelor's and Master's in English, plus an Associate of Occupational Science in Legal Office Systems), but I've also done a great deal of reading and studying on my own about subjects I was never taught, or not adequately taught, at school.

School of life very important to make you well rounded, however, employers look for someone with tenacity. Tenacity to FINISH school. Ability to stick to something no matter how smart you are. Why would they pay you money to make them even more money if you can’t stick to and complete a project? I know dummies with PhDs and whizzes who dropped out of high school. What’s the point of being smart if you can’t finish what you start, unless you are surrounded by tenacious people who share your vision and complete your work. Which takes social skill/leading by vision…

...that definitely includes the tenacity to get through courses you might otherwise consider meaningless, or courses where the professor is so bad that you practically have to teach yourself the material.

"I'll never use this once I graduate..."
"Too bad! I had to take it to get where I'm at...so you do too! "

I came across a quote carved into a statue on campus today, 'NEVER STOP LEARNING, NEVER STOP LEARNING....WHETHER IT BE SELF-LEARNING OR SCHOOL TAUGHT."

This thread just prompted me to register - thanks!

Two things from a small college professor / dad of an Aspie / likely undiagnosed Aspie himself:

1. A PhD does show that a person has the basic knowledge to teach in a subject, but Shadexii is absolutely right that there are many "qualified" people who have no business teaching. Our higher "education" system bases tenure, hiring, and promotion almost entirely on publication record and success in getting grants. So getting tenure at a prestigious institiution generally means putting as little time as possible into class prep and interacting with student so one can focus on the more important task of cranking out publications and grant proposals. If you want to find the good teachers, look for small colleges and "second-tier" state schools that prioritize teaching in hiring, tenure & promotion. I think this is especially important for Aspies. I have my undergrad degree from one of the most prestigious research universities in the world, but retrospectively I wish I had gone to a small college that paid more attention to its undergrads.

2. A college degree and self-educaton aren't contradictory. A college education should (and I think does) prepare grads to teach themselves once they're out in the real world. In 20 years you'll remember almost nothing just because you were taught it in college; what you'll know is what you've learned and used in the meantime. My students seem to think that my classes are about memorizing information whereas what I really want is for them to be able to explain what they've learned precisely and accurately, write clearly, read critically, etc. A lifetime of self-education is bound to give someone more factual information than four years of college, but in my experience what the self-edcuated often really need is a critic to pick apart their reasoning. Hence the large number of self-educated "experts" who are really just quacks (pick your favorite pseudoscience).

College introduces you to different ways of thinking. If you are entirely self-educated, you're missing out on different ways of looking at things that others give. I believe all my years of college has made me more open minded.