At the risk of resurrecting a 3 year old thread, it rather depends on the reason the question
" I don't have a degree but with the knowledge I have accumulated over the years, I think would be on par with the knowledge gained with a degree.  What do you think? "

Was originally asked.

If it was  should I call myself "degree or equiv?" it all rather depends for what purpose.


I mostly agree with the comments above, especially the bit about engineering degrees not teaching anything very deeply. I see a reverse hierarchy at my place of work, where the more 'lowly' technician staff are far more useful if you are in a tight spot than a number of folk who on paper have more recent and far better qualifications.

But it depends on the individual and their approach to new techniques - 20 years of experience where it is more or less the same year repeated 20 times, is not the same as  5 years of experience in 5 widely diverse situations. Some of us enjoy the fun of being put on the spot for new problems, and read the journal articles on new components, new techniques etc and think about them . Others just watch the clock till mid afternoon and then slip off.

I'm certainly wary of qualifications only based judgements, and systems that are too inflexible to allow someone to take on a role if they lack a piece of of paper, but have the knowledge.  When I did some of my scout leader training refresher quite recently, I was introduced to the mantra " competence essential, qualification optional'  to the situation which often occurs with things like deciding to award someone a camping permit, (allowing one to be the responsible person for a team of youngsters out camping - various levels from making a bivvy to sleep in a  green field to visiting an enclosed official site with bunk houses) . Clearly there is no NVQ for this, and watching a power point presentation and answering 20 questions does not fully guarantee that someone will do the right thing in an emergency.

The method is then that you do run a camp, but someone else, already ticketed, comes along for the ride, and in principle takes over if it all goes off the rails. A sort of proof by demonstrating ability in real life - almost a practical exam.

In things like high voltage pulse power engineering (a personal favourite) almost each case is different, but the 'rules of play' when designing things are similar, and again it is hard to teach in a sterile classroom environment .

The balance between hands on knowledge and intuition (based on  previous problems) and the new and strange (the academic analysis)  needs to be struck each time.


regards Mike

At the risk of resurrecting a 3 year old thread, it rather depends on the reason the question
" I don't have a degree but with the knowledge I have accumulated over the years, I think would be on par with the knowledge gained with a degree.  What do you think? "

Was originally asked.

If it was  should I call myself "degree or equiv?" it all rather depends for what purpose.


I mostly agree with the comments above, especially the bit about engineering degrees not teaching anything very deeply. I see a reverse hierarchy at my place of work, where the more 'lowly' technician staff are far more useful if you are in a tight spot than a number of folk who on paper have more recent and far better qualifications.

But it depends on the individual and their approach to new techniques - 20 years of experience where it is more or less the same year repeated 20 times, is not the same as  5 years of experience in 5 widely diverse situations. Some of us enjoy the fun of being put on the spot for new problems, and read the journal articles on new components, new techniques etc and think about them . Others just watch the clock till mid afternoon and then slip off.

I'm certainly wary of qualifications only based judgements, and systems that are too inflexible to allow someone to take on a role if they lack a piece of of paper, but have the knowledge.  When I did some of my scout leader training refresher quite recently, I was introduced to the mantra " competence essential, qualification optional'  to the situation which often occurs with things like deciding to award someone a camping permit, (allowing one to be the responsible person for a team of youngsters out camping - various levels from making a bivvy to sleep in a  green field to visiting an enclosed official site with bunk houses) . Clearly there is no NVQ for this, and watching a power point presentation and answering 20 questions does not fully guarantee that someone will do the right thing in an emergency.

The method is then that you do run a camp, but someone else, already ticketed, comes along for the ride, and in principle takes over if it all goes off the rails. A sort of proof by demonstrating ability in real life - almost a practical exam.

In things like high voltage pulse power engineering (a personal favourite) almost each case is different, but the 'rules of play' when designing things are similar, and again it is hard to teach in a sterile classroom environment .

The balance between hands on knowledge and intuition (based on  previous problems) and the new and strange (the academic analysis)  needs to be struck each time.


regards Mike