To say that people don't learn at their work is complete nonsense.
It depends on the work they do.
Yes if one sell bus tickets in a little boot for 10 years is the same as one who had a job whit professional development, training.

Here is an example, A person who w business analyst at some services company participated in software testing and he never done it before but at work there comes a consulting company KPNG and he is assigned to work with them.
He gets to work on all the test strategy, review test cases, review requirements, participate in Unit testing bug reports resolution, system testing, participating in writing test plans, QA, UAT etc.
Now lets say he is involved in such projects and also deployment of this new technologies at the company and now post production support.
Then another new software arrives, let say this time its work force management software.
The same cycle, requirements definitions, development, testing etc.
Now 10 years passed.

This person not only knows how to test software but he most likely can teach it.
I have no issue what so ever if he gets recognition for on work learning.
As Dr. Bear in his book stated and I think it was ACE statement.
I don't care if you took typing 101 or learned to type at work.
You know the same you can get the same 3 units.
Exam is fine but also portfolio is fine.

Please compare apples with apples.

Employers actually prefer the experience over the degree. How many degreed persons I have seen who are good in taking tests but when it comes to work they suck.

To say that people don't learn at their work is complete nonsense.
It depends on the work they do.
Yes if one sell bus tickets in a little boot for 10 years is the same as one who had a job whit professional development , training.

Here is an example, A person who w business analyst at some services company participated in software testing and he never done it before but at work there comes a consulting company KPNG and he is assigned to work with them.
He gets to work on all the test strategy, review test cases, review requirements, participate in Unit testing bug reports resolution, system testing, participating in writing test plans, QA, UAT etc.
Now lets say he is involved in such projects and also deployment of this new technologies at the company and now post production support.
Then another new software arrives, let say this time its work force management software.
The same cycle, requirements definitions, development, testing etc.
Now 10 years passed.

This person not only knows how to test software but he most likely can teach it.
I have no issue what so ever if he gets recognition for on work learning.
As Dr. Bear in his book stated and I think it was ACE statement.
I don't care if you took typing 101 or learned to type at work.
You know the same you can get the same 3 units.
Exam is fine but also portfolio is fine.

Please compare apples with apples.

Employers actually prefer the experience over the degree and how many degreed persons I have seen who are good in taking tests but when it comes to work they suck.

In my own mind, DL is closely linked with non-traditional learning. DL is in itself non-traditional. I'm somewhat amazed (and more than a little dismayed) when I see vehement total denial of of the value of non-traditional education in a DL forum. DL learning eaned its place in academia when it became verifiable and measurable. Other non-traditional forms of learning should be acceptable if they lead to verifiable and measurable academic achievement.

While I'm on the subject of tolerance and intolerance ....

I object to the patronizing, and sometimes outright insulting, tone of many posts dealing with reputable institutions from outside North America. South Africa is a very good example. Before belittling an entire national university system, some posters would do well to check where their US alma maters rank against the SA schools worldwide. Pay particular attention to University of Cape Town.

DLG

My observation is that students with non US degrees in USA are doing very well. It actually depends on field and discipline.
In general from my observation MBA earned in USA will have a higher rate of success in getting jobs then non US MBA.

With a few exceptions of well known UK Oxford etc it is almost like a club or conspiracy.
In Canada the MBA is some 24 classes wile in UK its 11 so Canadians don't have high appreciation to quick MBA from USA or UK.
In USA I can have Bachelors in one field then go and earn MBA,

In Canada you need Bachelors in Business before you can earn Masters in Business.

The hostility is at times understandable. Some people spent 7 years to earn MBA and took 40 or more classes related to business wile others have 9 classes in Business and they are MBA.

In the world of Engineering this is not going to work.
If your Bachelors degree is in Psychology and you want to earn masters in Engineering you are going to take most of the Bachelors Engineering classes
then move to Masters Engineering including higher math etc.

One more think here in US we have tiers of Universities.
So Harvard folks lough at University of Phoenix.

In General I see high respect to degrees from UK, NZ, Australia, SA, EU and India etc.

That's news to me. A lot of MBAs are/were 20 courses. I think some are now 16 courses. The first 10 courses are what many Americans study in their 10 course MBAs - intro undergrad equivalents. The last 10 courses are the major or support it. Canadian MBAs always had an in-depth major.

On a project with me now working a US consulting firm.
The 2 lead enterprise architects are Canadian.
Fred is one f them and he is working on his MBA from Toronto Univ.

I will ask him again, maybe I misunderstood something.