Poll: Do you think an associate degree is a legitimate college degree?

[IndomitableSam]

She's proud she worked hard and has gotten a good education that will lead to a career. Don't ever judge someone poorly for doing that.

Personally, I have 4 years of University and a 2-year College Diploma behind me, but I don't have my Masters like most Librarians (some insist you can't even be called a Librarian until you have your Masters), and I find myself looked down on by some people in the business. It's degrading - and I went to school just as long as they did. HOnestly, I just tell myself to fuck those people, because obviously they aren't nearly as smart as they think they are if they're judging someone based on whether the peice of paper they have is a "degree" or a "diploma". Everyone worked hard for those papers, so why does it matter?

In my mind (having done it myself), the most usless thing anyone can do is go for a Bachelor of Arts. ... Venti vanilla iced frappuchino, please, with soymilk. (Did I order that right? I get Starbucks maybe 2-3 times a year.)

Edit: I should say that where I live in Canada, a Bachelor of Arts means you qualify for a retail job. My sister runs a store on hers. I went back to school after and got myself a "diploma" and now I'm a goverment employee earning a nice chunk of money with $1000/year raises twice a year - cost of living, plus a "step" up the seniority ladder. A BA could never have gotten me this job.

Also: What's her education? Could you do what she does without going to school for it? Most college diplomas are very specific and focused in the type of education you get.

 

[SciMal]

I respect the people who do "hard" Psychology well, but there's a lot of fluff and pseudo-science in the field (I might say it's the majority of the field, but I don't have proper access to the Journals or the time to read them).

The fluff and pseudo-science by definition doesn't have anything to do with legitimate psychology. The problem is, like what has plagued many other fields before it, pop psychology that doesn't have a basis in the psychology community is more exciting and sexier than actual psychology, so guess which one gets more attention from the public?

This is probably a more succinct way to say it.

I'm of the opinion that there's an overabundance of Psychology students because of pop-Psychology, and as such most aren't oriented towards doing rigorous scientific studies. So while there's a large amount of B.S. - Psychology students out there, the noise to value ratio is also skewed until you get into Graduate level studies where all of the true enthusiasts usually advance to.

This is not to say "hard" science fields don't have similar issues (the sheer existence of "Daily Vitamin Supplements" for healthy people in developed nations is a huge signifier of medical educational voids), but I think Psychology is particularly notable since it's usually the least quantifiable.

 

[DarkishFriend]

You spend 2 years learning things that are usable in everyday life and careers; how is that not a real degree? It's better than 4 ears at a pretentious art school and barely any jobs actually have enough to teach you to need 4 years. Also at unvi you take basically maths and languages.
To prove the point my dad makes 60000 a year with a 2 year degree and my mom makes around 40000 without an actual college degree. A combined income of over 100000 with only 2 years of college seems easily enough to consider an ass degree good enough and something to be proud of. Even if you don't make a lot of money graduating from further education anywhere is something to be proud of, you worked to do it.

 

[LetalisK]

I respect the people who do "hard" Psychology well, but there's a lot of fluff and pseudo-science in the field (I might say it's the majority of the field, but I don't have proper access to the Journals or the time to read them).

The fluff and pseudo-science by definition doesn't have anything to do with legitimate psychology. The problem is, like what has plagued many other fields before it, pop psychology that doesn't have a basis in the psychology community is more exciting and sexier than actual psychology, so guess which one gets more attention from the public?

This is probably a more succinct way to say it.

I'm of the opinion that there's an overabundance of Psychology students because of pop-Psychology, and as such most aren't oriented towards doing rigorous scientific studies. So while there's a large amount of B.S. - Psychology students out there, the noise to value ratio is also skewed until you get into Graduate level studies where all of the true enthusiasts usually advance to.

This is not to say "hard" science fields don't have similar issues (the sheer existence of "Daily Vitamin Supplements" for healthy people in developed nations is a huge signifier of medical educational voids), but I think Psychology is particularly notable since it's usually the least quantifiable.

My experience is that people who are attracted to psychology because of pop psychology don't make it past biopsychology or statistics, which are very chemistry/biology and mathematics heavy respectively, not to mention the realization that they can do damn near nothing with just a four-year degree in psychology.* Shit gets real and they bolt. I think a possible reason for an existence of many psychology graduates is because the field itself is still very large with coming up on almost a hundred specific disciplines within it, thus appealing to a larger number of people. But that's my opinion and I could be wrong.

*That said, I do believe psychology makes for a great spring-board into further education.

 

[TWRule]

I'm surprised you're getting the kind of backlash you are here, OP. I wonder how many of the people replying here actually went through college...

As far as the system itself is concerned, an AA degree is "legitimate" in the very basic sense that it is recognizable by other parts of the system, etc.

Will it get you a job in today's economy? Depends on the subject area perhaps, but I would not count on it - two years working in related fields will be infinitely more attractive to any employer than 2 years spent getting an AA, which is just general ed with a loose emphasis in a particular area. Hell, most Bachelors degrees are becoming worthless for employment too.

For purposes of showing one's "educatedness" or other intellectual achievement, ALL degrees (at least in the American system because I can't speak to the rest) are worthless. The kind of thing the average Ph.D. publishes is far worse than what some of my classmates and I can already write, and we only have Philosophy B.A.s (which I'm well aware are worth nothing on their own in general beyond what any B.A. is worth job-wise). If it weren't for a particular professor, our program would have been high school 2.0, and that's fairly common as far as I can tell - at least for public universities.

So no one should feel haughty with their BA, no matter what it's in - I won't even feel that way once I have my Ph.D., but I need that degree to *maybe* get a job these days. The only thing worth celebrating for an A.A., however, would be the end of GE classes, and the first two years of college being over with.

 

[Logiclul]

A degree tells the employer that you will do the work you're asked of. That you will show up. That you won't suddenly disappear. That sounds silly but it's true. A Bachelors degree from a great school shows this much much more than an AA from an instate community college.

Jacco: What school are you attending? I'm curious of 1) What school makes sense to double in history/psychology in and 2) What's the source of your elitism.

Once again: The AA will help you get through to your Bachelors later in life! That's huge if you actually plan on doing that. It was also much cheaper than starting at Uni if that's your path.

 

[Psykoma]

I don't even know what an associate degree is :/
I've never heard the term before.