The Value of a Degree from Western Governors University

I am close to completing my Bachelor of Science degree in IT, with an emphasis in security.  I am grateful for this opportunity, in part to complete something I started nearly twenty years ago.  Due to the type of degree program, prior work experience, support from my wife, and lots of help from above, I have been able to work through the degree program relatively quickly.


I am also learning a great deal.


However, as a student and a potential employer, I see some problems in the degree program and philosophy of the school.


Many of the classes come down to a single objective assessment, or (generally) industry standard certification exam.  These occur as a single test, are multiple choice and are pass/fail, etc.  This means your students are more likely to be able to cram the knowledge (through the test-prep software you provide) in just enough to pass the test.  This also means that in the end your students will likely graduate with 1) less long-term knowledge and 2) less deep, practical understanding of the subject matter, thus decreasing the value of a WGU education.  Furthermore, there is a real difference in the quality of the education in the student between a 71% student versus a 95% student; pass/fail does not show the difference.  C students are elevated beyond their earning; A students are held down beyond a level of excellence that they have achieved.  It's the "participant trophy syndrome", where everyone gets equal results for unequal effort, skills and performance (how very socialistic).


Selfishly, I like this, because I can leverage my career knowledge and test-taking aptitude to get my degree quickly.  But, objectively, I know that this is not the best thing for the students, and thus, not for the university.  Do we really want people graduating solely by "cram-master" test-prep?  That seems to be the modern equivalent of a school-endorsed "Cliff's Notes"-based degree program.


Each tech course that includes an objective assessment should have at least one performance assessment (a task, lab, or report), preferably two or three.  The performance assessments would be best spent on tasks such as "install, configure, and document a Windows Active Directory domain service that meets requirements X, Y, and Z", or "install, configure and document a simulated network environment that meets requirements X, Y, and Z", or "install, configure and document a Microsoft deployment solution that accomplishes these objectives, and show successful deployment."  These practical tasks, over a somewhat longer period of time, will ensure better understanding of the material (beyond that necessary to achieve a PASS on a single multiple choice exam).


Note that I am not arguing that the performance assessment should necessarily be of immense complexity and duration; only that it ought to be there, should be required, and should figure into the grade.  When the student has a sufficient *practical* grasp on the material, the task will take less than 8 hours.


The students will be stronger, the subject matter will be more tangible to the students (rather than only book-learned), and the value of the degree will increase in industry.

The Free Domain, Stefan Molyneux, or "That ye be not deceived"

There deserves to be written much more on the subject, but I have a job and an employer that expects me to get stuff done.  So, here's what I have:

There is something very appealing, but insidious, about Stefan Molyneux's message.  Stefan is a leader of the free market anarchist movement (at least that is what I will call it).

I have listened to perhaps 5-10 hours of his messages (that ought to be enough to form an informed opinion), and I think that anybody who listens to him must understand clearly: He is an anarchist, a Godless ally for the forces of Chaos, chasing an ideal as pernicious, subversively attractive, and impossible as the Communists themselves. (Perhaps this is why the anarchists and communists are allied now with the globalists, nazis and radical islamists -- all united to destroy the last bastion of freedom.)  Only, if you remove the association that was  established by the people to preserve the liberties of the people, then what will replace it?  Violence, crime, enslavement and force love a vacuum.

1. If people without government create prosperity,
2. If the people had abolished their government in favor of anarchy because the government (by the people) was too corrupt to protect the interests of the people and used force to enslave the people,
3. Then, when there is prosperity, and *all of * the people in the world have not ceased to do wickedly and exercise force,
4. Who will now protect the prosperity and liberty.  The people themselves?  Well, true. But they must organize themselves to stand against standing armies and organized thieves.  And what do we call such an organization, but a governance by the people -- an establishment of government for the common good, which would necessarily be a representative form, must have some continuity and consistency, and rules for its own existence.

I do not believe that God desires anarchy for his children.

True, our national government is rotten.  But to destroy it is dangerous folly.  Reform it.  True, we have an uphill battle to reform it.  First, we must reform our people.

'Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.' - John Adams

If the problem is that our elected officials are corrupt, then the fundamental problem is that we the people are corrupt.  If the people are corrupt, then no form of government (or absence of it) will cure the corruption.

We the people MUST REPENT of our PERSONAL moral failures.  We the people must THEN become engaged in our communities and with the political process.

In short: I have found, and I want my friends and family to know, that if you seek truth and light, Stefan has only philosophies of men to offer. There are better sources to make the arguments that need to be made.