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.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2019-12-31 01:06 am (UTC)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.