Jump to content

Partial Degrees To Be Offered By The Iom College


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Clearly, you don't know very much at all.   Lecturers are also more often than not researchers, and their duties in the lecture hall are but one aspect of the job. In fact, many if not most view th

Not that I know of. Back when the DEC was proposing the £5,000 contribution to fourth and subsequent years of a degree, it took a question in Tynwald for any figures on student numbers and subjects t

Not that I want to continue aiding in such a low rent derail much longer, but...     They're completely different jobs, and no, they're not necessarily the same people. The much celebrated tutori

It's a great idea.........if you want a shit degree from a worthless university, with sub-standard teaching quality.

 

I thought we were talking about education in the Isle of Man and not the USA thumbsup.gif

 

I don't know what you mean by that. The US has some of the finest universities in the world -- e.g. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, Caltech, UCLA, Pennsylvania. The UK doesn't have many universities which can compete with the US Ivy Leagues. If the IOM College could get these degrees accredited by a university in the Russell Group, and could also get some of their tutors to be involved in the courses, then maybe we'd be in business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This type of link up has been happening in many UK colleges for a few years and with full educational fees being standard may be the only way for some people to get reasonably priced higher education.

 

Is it? I know plenty of colleges run full degrees, provide foundation courses on behalf of specific universities, and might offer one or two years worth of study for a vocational degree via an HND, but I'm not sure many are doing the latter for courses like English and Geography.

 

It just seems like the College is trying to institute something akin to a U.S. style Junior/Community college scheme, only without the existence of associate degrees and an established culture of 'transferring up' to back it up.

 

If the IOM College could get these degrees accredited by a university in the Russell Group, and could also get some of their tutors to be involved in the courses, then maybe we'd be in business.

 

Lecturers, not tutors. And the whole point of accrediting someone else's degrees is that your university gets paid without you having to do much at all except keep an eye on quality, so 'involvement' by staff from the accrediting university generally isn't in the offering. .

 

The UK doesn't have many universities which can compete with the US Ivy Leagues.

 

Apart from the rather obvious points that the US is roughly five times the size of the UK and they also have an awful lot of dreadful institutions, you're comparing chalk and cheese.

 

The US provides four year liberal arts degrees with majors, backed up by a very strong postgrad system. The UK, meanwhile, emphasises specialization from the very start and usually to the exclusion of all else. When push comes to shove, the US probably has a better system than does the UK, but to try a straight comparison between the Ivy League and British Universities is almost as silly as your comments about Chester.

 

Also. UCLA isn't even a private university, never mind an Ivy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lecturers, not tutors. And the whole point of accrediting someone else's degrees is that your university gets paid without you having to do much at all except keep an eye on quality, so 'involvement' by staff from the accrediting university generally isn't in the offering.

 

Lecturers and tutors are the same people. Perhaps if King William's College did some sort of degree options, and linked up with St. Andrew's or something.....

 

We're supposed to be a sovereign nation-state, yet the best our national "college" can apparently do is get some mickey mouse degrees ("motorsport"????) accredited by a backwater university? I think we are lacking in ambition. We want high-quality teaching, and we're not going to get that at the IOM College and you won't get it at Chester University either.

 

You really think someone could study their first two years at the IOM College (accredited by Chester University) and then somehow be able to get into a 3rd year at Oxford or Cambridge or Harvard? The fact is, the only universities which are going to let them join in the 3rd year are shit universities like Chester. The student would have to be a total genius -- and successful IN SPITE of the shit teaching -- to be able to pull that off. A person of slightly above average intelligence would not be able to pull that off. What is more likely is that they would become so bored, disinterested and confused due to the poor teaching, that they'd drop out.

Edited by Thomas Jefferson
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pleased you decided to retract this statement as it just isn't true 'Harvard is usually considered the No 1 university in the world'

 

MIT, then Cambridge... which can be proven by the number of people who aspire to move from Harvard to Cambridge, but of course shit Universities like Manchester do produce rather good scientists and engineering folk

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pleased you decided to retract this statement as it just isn't true 'Harvard is usually considered the No 1 university in the world'

 

MIT, then Cambridge... which can be proven by the number of people who aspire to move from Harvard to Cambridge, but of course shit Universities like Manchester do produce rather good scientists and engineering folk

 

MIT gets massive Pentagon funding. That explains why they have the sort of resources we could never hope to compete with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I want to continue aiding in such a low rent derail much longer, but...

 

Lecturers and tutors are the same people.

 

They're completely different jobs, and no, they're not necessarily the same people. The much celebrated tutorial system at Oxbridge, for instance, can and does involve people on short term contracts with no lecturing responsibilities whatsoever.

 

Just to clarify, a lecturer is someone with responsibility for the actual content, delivery, administrative duties and assessment of a module. More often than not, they're full time staff, a member of the faculty, and have two or more years of postdoctoral work and a decent research record behind them.

 

A tutor, on the other hand, is an auxilliary role assisting with the delivery of a course or a degree by providing pastoral care, marking, seminar duties, and so on. They might be lecturers, but they might also be postgrads, short term contract staff employed purely for that job, postdocs or other junior research fellows at the beginning of their careers.

 

Certainly, most lecturers would not consider themselves tutors and wouldn't be described as such professionally, even if part of their duties involves running tutorials or leading a seminar. Hell, I don't think I've ever heard anyone in academia, students or staff, being referred to as 'a tutor' in the sense you used the term. Lecturers, professors, academics, course leaders and so on, yes... but tutor?

 

We're supposed to be a sovereign nation-state,

 

No we're not, we have a certain degree of autonomy, but we're by no means not a sovereign state. Besides which, sovereignty has little to do with any of this. It boils down to money, resources, and the best way to provide access to higher education given our means.

 

You really think someone could study their first two years at the IOM College (accredited by Chester University) and then somehow be able to get into a 3rd year at Oxford or Cambridge or Harvard?

 

No, I don't, and said as much in my initial post.

 

the only universities which are going to let them join in the 3rd year are shit universities like Chester. The student would have to be a total genius -- and successful IN SPITE of the shit teaching

 

Given that it's pretty clear you don't know much about this subject and that what you have contributed so far is little more than the usual banal received wisdom, perhaps you'd be so good as to refrain from insulting the education of god knows how many people unless you actually have a definite and justified criticism to level at Chester...

 

No, they're not Oxbridge, but that's not the point. They're a teaching institution first and foremost, rather than a research intensive one, and they seem to have a respectable graduate employment rate judging by the stats. That being the case, I'm not sure what more can be asked of them. Certainly, I don't see why anyone should pay any heed to your obnoxious dismissal of the entire university as 'shit'.

 

Also, it's probably worth pointing out that 'quality' is far more dispersed across academia than blithering and hackneyed generalizations about Ivy Leagues and Oxbridge would suggest. John Moores, for instance, more than holds its own in engineering and has some excellent Astrophysics/Astronomy people, despite being one of the much (and often unfairly) maligned post-92's. Similarly, Hertfordshire, Portsmouth, Oxford Brookes, Nottingham Trent, UCLAN, and a number of other institutions have all in recent years started to compete effectively with longer established universities in both teaching and the quality of the research coming out of them.

Edited by VinnieK
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be noted that the IOM College has been offering degrees for a number of years now. The BSc in Health Science originally allowed students to study the first two years on island with the final year at Chester. This degree has now evolved into the BSc in Public Health which is studied wholly on island over three years.

I believe that from September this degree will be offered as a foundation degree over two years followed by a final year to gain the BSc for successful students.

I can personally vouch for the quality of these graduates as I employed two of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They're completely different jobs, and no, they're not necessarily the same people. The much celebrated tutorial system at Oxbridge, for instance, can and does involve people on short term contracts with no lecturing responsibilities whatsoever.

 

Just to clarify, a lecturer is someone with responsibility for the actual content, delivery, administrative duties and assessment of a module. More often than not, they're full time staff, a member of the faculty, and have two or more years of postdoctoral work and a decent research record behind them.

 

A tutor, on the other hand, is an auxilliary role assisting with the delivery of a course or a degree by providing pastoral care, marking, seminar duties, and so on. They might be lecturers, but they might also be postgrads, short term contract staff employed purely for that job, postdocs or other junior research fellows at the beginning of their careers.

 

Certainly, most lecturers would not consider themselves tutors and wouldn't be described as such professionally, even if part of their duties involves running tutorials or leading a seminar. Hell, I don't think I've ever heard anyone in academia, students or staff, being referred to as 'a tutor' in the sense you used the term. Lecturers, professors, academics, course leaders and so on, yes... but tutor?

 

*YAWN* I know what a professor and a tutor are. They are both glorified ways of saying a TEACHER.

 

No we're not, we have a certain degree of autonomy, but we're by no means not a sovereign state. Besides which, sovereignty has little to do with any of this. It boils down to money, resources, and the best way to provide access to higher education given our means.

 

We the people are sovereign. This is the 21st century, not the 16th century.

 

We have the money and resources to send students to Oxford and Cambridge and other leading universities without having to send them to the IOM College to do receive a mediocre degree-level education. Even with GCSE's and A Levels, the IOM College is mediocre.

 

Given that it's pretty clear you don't know much about this subject and that what you have contributed so far is little more than the usual banal received wisdom, perhaps you'd be so good as to refrain from insulting the education of god knows how many people unless you actually have a definite and justified criticism to level at Chester...

 

No, they're not Oxbridge, but that's not the point. They're a teaching institution first and foremost, rather than a research intensive one, and they seem to have a respectable graduate employment rate judging by the stats. That being the case, I'm not sure what more can be asked of them. Certainly, I don't see why anyone should pay any heed to your obnoxious dismissal of the entire university as 'shit'.

 

Also, it's probably worth pointing out that 'quality' is far more dispersed across academia than blithering and hackneyed generalizations about Ivy Leagues and Oxbridge would suggest. John Moores, for instance, more than holds its own in engineering and has some excellent Astrophysics/Astronomy people, despite being one of the much (and often unfairly) maligned post-92's. Similarly, Hertfordshire, Portsmouth, Oxford Brookes, Nottingham Trent, UCLAN, and a number of other institutions have all in recent years started to compete effectively with longer established universities in both teaching and the quality of the research coming out of them.

 

Nonsense. I am not saying anything about the STUDENTS at Chester University, or even the individual teachers. As an institution, it has low quality teaching. Doesn't matter how you sugar coat it; their teaching standard is lower than somewhere like Oxford or Cambridge. That is not snobbery, that is a plain and simple fact of life.

Edited by Thomas Jefferson
Link to post
Share on other sites

TJ - Clint Eastwood, in one of his roles, said "A man's got to know his limitations". Arguing with VinnieK about higher education shows that you don't follow that maxim. Basically, everything that VinnieK says is right, and everything you say to counter him is rubbish. Stick to pointless philosophising.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...