Comments (5)

• GSH

  American state schools are awful for the most part...accredation is meaningless... what if ivy league schools chose not to be accredited?

  Published: April 2, 2006 10:59 PM

• C Warren

  Most universities are worthless in terms of education. Almost nothing that I have learned in the past 3 1/2 years has helped me out at my internship at a financial institution. Everything I need to know I learned on the job.

  It seems that the university policy of attendence is drawn from the Prussian model that tries to instill obedience. I had a mono relapse last Fall that caused me to miss several of my Intro to Management classes (elective required for Econ majors for some reason). The teacher gave me an F for the absenses, even though I had scored at least a "C" on all of the exams and did well on all of the projects. This put me one course out of reach of graduating this year, but luckily I'll get that piece of paper telling companies that I'm capable of doing quality work by taking Intro to Sailing for Maymester!

  Published: April 3, 2006 12:15 AM

• Luke Fitzhugh

  The ultimate source of the problem of education, from kindergarten through graduate studies, is government intervention. Most of the worthless research that fills academic journals would not have been done and published without taxpayers footing the bill. The government-like accrediting agencies that haunt educational institutions justify their reason for existence and grow by imposing ever-changing requirements to attain or retain accreditation, which further diverts administrators, faculty, and staff from what they should be doing. I could go on, but suffice it to say that until we get government out of the funding and operation of education at all levels, the waste will continue. Socialism destroys, and education is but one bit of evidence.

  Published: April 3, 2006 11:05 AM

• Graeme Bird

  You know the Mises institute might be able to pick up some loose change just through straight accreditation. Quite seperate from holding a course.

  I've been told that there has been much grade inflation in the last few decades. It might be possible to go the other way. To offer accrediation without the course for a fraction of a full course price. And it may be quite the money-spinner for the institute.

  You want to FAIL most people. Be famous for failing 90% or something. You only let the best pass.

  You know how these days you can virtually buy a degree. So I reckon the only way to make this non-course accreditation mean anything would be to make it NOTORIOUS for its severity. Notorious for failing most applicants.

  The oral exam could be like this really nasty cross-examination by half a dozen guys looking for an excuse to fail you.

  But its done in one day or a single weekend. Perhaps over a video conference and secure computer linkup with a local agent (some really nasty strict piece of work) who makes sure you have no access to materials.

  Trial by ordeal. And you either pass or more likely fail and get a full assesment of where you don't measure up.

  Accrediation without the classes could really mean something and be of great commercial value under such circumstances. And consider the productivity (in terms of man-hours) on both sides of the balance sheet.

  
  Just a thought.

  Published: April 3, 2006 2:07 PM

• GSH

  what's the difference between a diploma and a communist party card again?

  Published: April 3, 2006 7:47 PM