Is credential creep the result of
a) that the same jobs now require more knowledge and skills than before, or
b) that there’re just too many difficult-to-distinguish candidates with bachelor degrees and their degrees can’t guarantee minimum competency for the jobs, or
c) both?
I can only speak to the credential creep in Ontario as I did undergrad there.
Pharmacy is yet another area that has succumbed.
I got into pharmacy school (4 year undergrad) right out of high school with 2 12th grade science courses, 2 maths and 1 English course and a PCAT score in the 90s.
Dear reader, I didn’t go!
30 years hence, it’s now a pharmD. From Reddit fora, I see that wages have declined in present value terms, while COL has surged.
Or none of the above. Credential creep could be caused by too many in a particular field and some agency wanting to vet individuals so they use education rather than testing/experience as a criteria.
I’ve seen it in many fields where knowledge is key. Some jobs have associations. Joining can be a requirement to remain competitive as well.
Yes but the whole point of this thread is whether or not parents suggested that their kids should pursue degrees that would lead to better paying jobs. Some people said that for undergrad degrees that traditionally don’t see high salaries (e.g. bio/chem/humanities/arts etc.) they can be the gateway to higher paying careers via graduate degrees. My point is that while getting a graduate degree may lead to higher incomes, they don’t always, and even if they are fully funded, there are opportunity costs associated with them. For those who are concerned that their students pursue degrees that will lead to careers with high incomes, a graduate degree won’t necessarily overcome the limitations of their undergrad choices, so it’s best they steer their students away from those degrees if that’s what they value.
For S19 it’s not clear that he will earn more money with a Master’s degree vs just an undergrad. What a Master’s degree will allow for is greater employment opportunities relative to his field of study rather than one that is degree agnostic. That’s a price he’s willing to pay to have the type of career he wants. Parents who value the ROI of a degree would no doubt have steered their student away from Physics in favour of Engineering because getting a graduate degree is probably not going to get employers to suddenly value his degree more.
I don’t know but I’ve seen too many kids here who were not considered academic superstars at all in high, more like average in high school and they are both getting PhDs. One didn’t get into any UC out of high school, he went to a Cal State and now he’s in a PhD program for English. The other one was much lower strength in academic in high school and now she’s striving to get a PhD in Latin, she barely had any interesting in the Latin language in high school. So that makes many years of schooling to achieve the language proficiency, working minimum wage to support her academic goal, last I’ve heard she’s secretary at somewhere. It really baffles me.
The only angle I can see is they both will want to teach at the local community college and the more education you have the better salary grade you get. All of my teachers at the local community college have/trying to have a PhDs for that reason. Some of them did remote learning while working, make sense to me, but the two young kids don’t have a job at the community college yet.
I thought years ago, people who are into academia are usually super smart, not in this case.
This is likely the most commonly stated reason, but it is also likely that an unstated reason is that existing practitioners want to raise barriers to entry (i.e. higher cost in time and money for the entry level degree for the profession) to reduce the number of new entrants competing against them in the labor market.
It seems to be only in the US that such credential creep occurs-the allied health jobs are usually 3 year undergrad certifications in the UK. Compare that to the 6 or even 7 years in the US
Yes it’s very sad. One of dh’s direct reports’ son just graduated from Engineering at Waterloo and got hired by Apple in California for a very generous salary. I don’t want my kids to have to leave the country for better employment prospects, but that’s a whole other discussion.
As someone who has recently had extensive physical therapy, I must say I had no idea PT required a doctorate. 
Only here…
The existing practitioners may but their boss wouldn’t, right? Their boss would prefer more qualified new entrants to lower the personnel cost of her/his business, wouldn’t s/he?
In the 1990s, bachelor’s degrees in physical therapy were common. As the entry level degree for physical therapy, they were displaced by master’s degrees, which have since been displaced by doctoral degrees.
Obviously I don’t know much about PT, but I had been aware of the master’s level . In fact I once knew an engineer who left to pursue PT. The doctorate is definitely news to me. Yikes.
Physical Therapy programs transitioned from a 4 year undergraduate program to generally a Master’s Degree about 25-30 years ago and to a Doctorate Level within the last 15 years. The scope of practice for a PT has evolved immensely over the past 50 years. Our profession started in this country with the focus on exercises for patients recovering from polio and other orthopedic issues. Today, Physical Therapists see patients from the neonatal ICU to in home care with the elderly, we set up complex wheelchair seating systems, treat mobility issues with all types of patients from those with severe burns, degenerative neurological diseases, traumatic injuries (orthopedic as well as neurological) and so on. In my opinion the degree level upgrade each time was necessary to expand the scope of practice. PTs now also have autonomy with direct referral, thus not requiring a MD order for services and reimbursement.
We are paid well.
Not to prolong the somewhat off topic discussion, but curious if the previously credentialed were grandfathered in?
I am also in the allied health professions (same field as Thumper) and I am not permitted to work without a masters. I do not feel underpaid at all. I know it used to be done, but there is really no way to learn everything and finish all the clinical hours that are required now with just a BS. The field has expanded tremendously and includes information and subject matter that likely was not a part of the profession 50 years ago.
When I do early intervention with the birth-3 age group, not only do I need a masters, but I had to prove that I had a certain amount of clinical hours with that age group. I also have to present a letter to any employer stating that I have the required experience.
We work with babies and adults with feeding disorders and various neurological problems. Again, one needs to be competent in this area. Not enough time during the undergraduate years.
I was part of a craniofacial team. There is no way I could have done that with a BS.
Dyslexia, spelling, learning disabilities, autism, sensory, etc are all part of what we do. A graduate degree is most certainly necessary. That is where we receive our training, and the learning never ends.
Yes, previously credentialed were grandfathered in.
In speech pathology…yes. But the requirement for a masters began in the 1970’s. Anyone who already was certified was allowed to continue. States began licensure after that…and IIRC, there was no grandfathering for licensure. You had to meet the requirements set forth on your state.
Typically, school based speech pathologists continued….but others needed licenses.
Same thing happened for classroom teachers in CT. A masters was required BUT if someone already had a professional certification with a bachelors prior to a certain date, they were able to continue.
Most, if not all, of those folks are now retired.
Well, ya learn something every day. Interesting to hear what is involved in these allied health professions.
Anyway, I certainly needed the multitude of PTs that helped me recover from a badly broken leg (in hospital, rehab facility, and home). Guessing at their ages, they probably fell into all three credential levels.
Pharmacy moved to requiring grad degree and opened new schools so it wasn’t a matter of trying to keep people out. Increased complexity requiring an additional 4 years of school? Doubtful. Result is glut of pharmacists which often creates reverse auction situations: we already have someone willing to work crazy hours for $x, will you do it for less?
Wife is former pharmacist. As a lot, I am not sure I have met a group of more miserable people. Work events with her were no fun at all. Only happy ones are retired ones.
Pharmacists who got degrees before grad school was required were grandfathered in but often times jobs require the advanced degree.