While everyone agrees that Higher Education needs new thinking, there is one sacred cow: Degrees! All the private capital flooding into the field with the battle cry to change the world meekly surrender themselves to the alter of the Degrees. To follow the rhetoric, the search is for a better way, not a better credential. The degrees, an early modern invention, look safe and sound, despite the world being claimed to be turned upside down.
Or, is it?
The recent Udacity Nanodegree Plus, which is an employer-backed credential that comes with a job guarantee (which, in effect, is a guarantee of full refund of fees if the learner does not get a job after graduating), opens up an interesting possibility. After a somewhat faltering start, Udacity, among the various MOOC providers, is now finding its mojo through nanodegrees, which, despite the allusion, are not degrees. In a plain vanilla world, this would be called a Certificate. But this, and other similar credentials like Micro-degrees, is more ambitious than mere certificates, and it is worth looking at it closely.
But, before that, the question: What's wrong with Degrees? It is simply that degrees do what they are meant to do, but we have come to expect too much of it. Designed to reflect scholarly excellence, which is needed to advance knowledge and was used in the service of pre-modern, patriarchal state, degrees reflect a high level of rhetorical abilities and persistence and commitment in pursuit of complex idea. But they were not, given the context, designed to represent a high level of practical awareness or abilities, or how to build and sustain collaborative enterprises, particularly with a diverse, socially, economically and ethnically, group of people. But, over time, we have come to demand precisely these abilities from the degree-holder, because we thought of the latter as 'lower' abilities which can be easily achieved by a highly educated person. Degrees, with economic and social change, became a proxy - we sought credential rather than its content! Whether we acknowledge or not - as such acknowledgement may offend our democratic instincts - degrees became different depending on who granted them.
That degree is the way to unlock the middle class life was a powerful myth, particularly in the newly industrialised countries, which sought to emulate the path taken by the developed nations, as if living in a time-wrap. Universities and enrolments multiplied there, and the myth of the new middle class, who pursued an American dream, drove private investment in proliferation of the degrees. But it was - past tense - as we encountered a shape-shifting event, the global recession of 2008, which is now getting into its second act by spreading the malaise to the emerging economies and crushing those middle class illusions. While the cost of the degrees climbed, the opportunities that the degrees brought, by proxy, shrank precipitously.
So, it may have been the best of the times - because there was an expansion of global demand for degrees on the back of the emerging economies - and worst of the times - because its impact dwindled - for the degree education in the last decade, now it is decisively becoming the latter. Even in India, the young country where everyone wanted to be a government servant and hence wanted a degree, the illusion is now giving away. The degree as proxy is coming up short in a world where the demand for real things, practical knowledge and human abilities, wrongly labelled 'soft skills' (because, there is nothing 'soft' about it - it can be both empirically observed and has very tangible impact on performance), is altogether real.
The latest great challenge to degrees came in the 1990s, with the unprecedented expansion of the demand for IT skills, particularly in terms of infrastructure and networking skills. A new model of education arose, which proudly calls itself the Certification industry. Backed by technology providers of various kinds, these were gold standards of practical abilities. But the ambition of the Certification providers was not to transform Higher Education, but to sell their software. Closely tied to respective platforms, the fortunes of certification training waxed and waned with that of the platforms, spawning a sizeable industry of tests, content and training, but stopping short of the ambitions to create the complete employee. It was, and remained, a supply-side enterprise, just like the rest of the Higher Education.
Udacity Nano-degree goes a step further. It actively seeks to replace Higher Education. It is not platform-independent, but multiplatform, and being a third party provider, it can set the agenda for education without being subservient to the commercial objectives of selling software. But it goes further in Employer Engagement, involving real and big name employers, and contextualising the skills within real work. Being 12-months long, these are neither 'nano' nor degrees, but tied to high demand technology areas, these intensive, long immersions (as opposed to short bootcamps), are targetting people who would traditionally go for a degree (or, yet another degree) rather than pursuing a certification by burning midnight oil. It may be challenging the Postgraduate rather than the Undergraduate degree, but it has finally made the leap on the other side.
Contrast this with the attempts by some MOOCs to offer College Credits, or, for that matter, my own earlier attempts to create globally delivered pathway qualifications. The problem with those innovations is the umbilical cord that tie them to the regulatory structures and more importantly, values that a degree represent. At the frontier of innovation, that all degrees are not the same are perhaps a clear and present fact, more apparent than the more traditional world of admission tests and offers. Often, the mere presence of a degree, as an outcome or even as an option, obscure the innovator's intent, attracting learners who are looking for a degree (and, hence, sensitive to what sort of a degree or pathway is on offer) and constricting pedagogy with mistaken imperatives of course sequence, unnecessary essays and assessments, and irrelevant pursuit of theoretical skills.
Udacity nano-degrees is only a nascent experiment, and not the final word in education innovation. It may focus on the practical skills, and take a bold position of challenging the degrees, but may fall short of addressing the human abilities imperative. But this shows both the opportunities and dangers of alternative credentials. For these, as no one would treat them as a proxy of broader abilities except those explicitly covered, they must deliver what they promise. But, the opportunity is the ability to create models focused on practical work and human abilities, rather than being constricted by bureaucratic dictats that come bundled in degrees. In summary, the business of Alternative Credentials is not for the faint-hearted, but they represent the best chance to bring Higher Ed in sync with real world.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
There is no other city like Kolkata for me: It is Home. The only city where I don't have to find a reason to go to, or to love. It is one city hardwired into my identity, and despite being away for a decade, that refuses to go away. People stay away from their homeland for a variety of reasons. But, as I have come to feel, no one can be completely happy to be away. One may find fame or fortune, love and learning, in another land, but they always live an incomplete life. They bring home broken bits of their homeland into their awkward daily existence, a cushion somewhere, a broken conversation in mother tongue some other time, always rediscovering the land they left behind for that brief moment of wanting to be themselves. The cruelest punishment, therefore, for a man who lives abroad is when his love for his land is denied. It is indeed often denied, because the pursuit of work, knowledge or love seemed to have gotten priority over the attraction of the land. This is particularly
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.