The irony is that all one time the government sort of tried to do that,
though at the time the universities required less of a reset. The
Robarts/Davis changes in the 60s were an attempt to provide paths which
were not "academic" in nature.
I have a long-time friend/acquaintance who was a senior administrator at
Seneca College in the 1970s and 80s. He groused for years, fighting a
rearguard battle, about the way in which the staff (who were mainly M.A.s
with the exception of the minority of "practitioner-taught" courses) kept
pushing for the colleges to become more academic (because they were largely
frustrated academics). And they won; Ryerson is no longer a polytechnic and
Seneca is no longer a "community college".
And tool-and-die makers have a shortage of new blood... (I had a
great-uncle who was a tool-and-die makers, who kept being offered more work
every time he started to retire.)
There is a good argument that in general practical credentials and
more abstract ones should be treated as oil and water; and that
apprenticeship is frequently better than coursework. (Occasionally there
are people who are good at both. My father in retirement has developed a
second career as a bookbinder while retaining his first career as an
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy. But it's probably not the way to bet;
I'll never be as good with my hands as he is.)
I'm not sure what would be required for a reset, though; changing the
credentials model would upset a lot of apple-carts and (even though it
would be good for universities in the long run) would be hard on them in
the short run.
no subject
Entirely agreed.
The irony is that all one time the government sort of tried to do that, though at the time the universities required less of a reset. The Robarts/Davis changes in the 60s were an attempt to provide paths which were not "academic" in nature.
I have a long-time friend/acquaintance who was a senior administrator at Seneca College in the 1970s and 80s. He groused for years, fighting a rearguard battle, about the way in which the staff (who were mainly M.A.s with the exception of the minority of "practitioner-taught" courses) kept pushing for the colleges to become more academic (because they were largely frustrated academics). And they won; Ryerson is no longer a polytechnic and Seneca is no longer a "community college".
And tool-and-die makers have a shortage of new blood... (I had a great-uncle who was a tool-and-die makers, who kept being offered more work every time he started to retire.)
There is a good argument that in general practical credentials and more abstract ones should be treated as oil and water; and that apprenticeship is frequently better than coursework. (Occasionally there are people who are good at both. My father in retirement has developed a second career as a bookbinder while retaining his first career as an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy. But it's probably not the way to bet; I'll never be as good with my hands as he is.)
I'm not sure what would be required for a reset, though; changing the credentials model would upset a lot of apple-carts and (even though it would be good for universities in the long run) would be hard on them in the short run.