Is University Degree Important?

[Steve Levicoff]

Sheila Danzig <shei...@aol.com> wrote:

> >> Also, when it comes to distance learning, I strongly suggest all
> >> young people who have not yet enter the workforce MUST attend
> >> traditional school. You come to the class and make connections
> >> with classmates and professors, learn how to work in a team
> >> environment, let the professors to have chances to evaluate you
> >> not only in terms of mark and thus they will give you a better
> >> referenc<<
>
> I strongly agree.
>
> I think that the only time a dl degree should be considered in
> someone other than an older adult, is in a case where on campus
> learning is truly impossible.
>
> -Sheila

Looks like I should speak up for my fellow ADD'ers here . . . As anyone
who has grown up with attention deficit disorder (before it became
popular as "the disorder of the 90's") can tell you, ADD'ers who have
done poorly in traditional classroom environments can excel in a D/L
environment. Moreover, their right to pursue a D/L degree could be
construed as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA).

I must have taken at least a dozen traditional courses without
completing one of them. Notwithstanding that most of them were taught
by boring numbnuts who, despite their subject knowledge, sucked eggs
when it came to pedagogical skills, I doubt that I would have been able
to sit still long enough to listen to them even if they did teach well.

Yet, despite my own tendency toward being rambunctious, I was able to
use D/L to complete my B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. in under six years for the
whole ball of wax. (Lest anyone wonder, they're all from regionally
accredited colleges and universities - B.A. from Thomas Edison, M.A.
from Vermont College of Norwich University, and Ph.D. from The Union
Institute.) I'd love to credit it to my natural brilliance (yes, my
tongue is in my cheek), but as clinical professionals know, ADD'ers have
an uncanny ability to "hyperfocus" *when* the subjects and/or learning
methodologies pique their interest.

Distance Learning comes under various headings that include, inter alia,
"alternative education," "campus-free learning," "university without
walls," ad infinitum. Most students who have undergone one or more D/L
experiences will tell you that they're far superior to the traditional
classroom because the student is placed in the active role of "doer"
rather than merely the passive role of a "listener" who is merely forced
to regurgitate facts on a final examination.

ADD notwithstanding, if properly motivated, a student who is allowed to
take his or her own ball and run with it will do far better than the
Harvard or Yale graduate who spent his or her four years sitting through
traditional classes. Not only will their subject knowledge be, at the
very least, equal to the traditional graduate, their critical thinking,
reasoning, and research skills will most likely be superior.

I am on record in "Name It & Frame It" (my absolutely wonderful book on
nontraditional education which, because of my good taste, I wouldn't
dare advertise in a newsgroup, but would be happy to send information to
anyone who requests it via e-mail . . . but I digress) as supporting
residency experiences within the context of nontraditional education,
but to make a person's entire educational experience consist of
traditional classroom work reminds me of a T-shirt I saw last week on a
schizophrenia patient with a sense of humor - "Normal is boring."

For anyone who believes that only adults who physically can't attend
traditional classes should pursue a D/L environment, I would suggest the
reading of A.S. Neill's classic, "Summerhill: A Radical Approach to
Child Rearing," to this day the "bible" of nontraditional education for
*all* ages.