New Degree System of Jediism?

Connor L. wrote: I am still waiting for somebody to come along and tell me what they think the PURPOSE of the Degree Scheme is.

The Degree lessons are a peer-reviewed compilation of lessons created by TotJO's Teaching Masters; to study the Degree is to study under each of the Teaching Masters at TotJO. This provides a well-rounded and comprehensive programme to learn from.

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/degreescheme

You've completed one Apprenticeship, feel you've developed yourself? Good. Now here's enough work for two more...

I feel I should point out that Knights do not only use the degree scheme (if they use it at all) to continually develop themselves.

The purpose of the Degree scheme!? I would have thought it would be ones application of effort here, in the topics here. It's not after all meant to be a measure of something like 'Jediiness', but a chance for Jedi to focus in similar topics and support each other as a community, IMO.

Warning; hypothetical follows

To be specific, if you need some structure to conceptualize what a degree might mean then maybe you could it be to associate awards level's as measures of a change in the relative depth explored by the student.

This could work by using a core set of topics (like in the IP) which are defined by the student in the IP, and then as they expand on those topics in other programs like Apprenticeship and say Knights Program, Masters Program etc.

The Core topics would be expanded upon by electives in different ways in different programs, with the Apprenticeship being about the more guided relationship to Knighthood, then being any Knight program being open for the Knight to choose/create electives to expand their understanding of the Core material in their own directions. This could allow the Master's level to really be a larger commitment, perhaps a thesis type of thing.... then the concept of a TOTJO Divinity degree.

We sort of cannot just have a bunch of awards without it being related to each other, but we don't want to redo the same material each time, so its all I could come up with to keep a consistent theme. Luckily IMO the IP has enough breadth of topics to cover exploration in more then one area, and so if we change slightly the way the material is interacted with at each level, to invite expansion of understanding around it, then it seems a legit approach to me. Just one idea though, but might be better then the others I've had since it really knuckles down on building up from a foundation.

I'm not convinced that's a good enough reason. Especially when it could be wrapped into the rank system.

One other thing, where was this when we were discussing the Degree Scheme last year?

The idea of having a big pool of lessons for continuing education is fantastic. I love that and what we have. But why are they degrees?

I do not disagree with the principle... Just that maybe we should be clear on what a degree is and what it does for the person. Benchmarks aren't too useful... People who are Knight rank probably do not need the validation that comes with working for a number of points.

EDIT: My point is that the degree scheme offers more "issues" and confusion than it does pros and positive growth. So, we should reverse that or get rid of it until such a time when it becomes useful.

What does a div. covers, what a rank does not? I feel confused even more now..

Connor L. wrote: IOne other thing, where was this when we were discussing the Degree Scheme last year

Is that to me? AFAIK the Committee was setup to investigate and brainstorm how to build a degree scheme, not why to have one. I'd assume they'd already have a purpose or quickly agree on one at the outset, otherwise why have a committee about it. If it was a committee about 'what is the purpose of the degree scheme' then that would have been my feedback, but I thought you guys were working on the best way to develop a program. But I wasn't on the committee so I wouldn't know.

As to the rest of your post. Milestone's are useful in helping people apply themselves more effectively by giving them something tangible to schedule with their other activities. Validation about achievement is optional, but certainly inherit in effort that equates to progress. I could equally argue it is more of an exercise to undertake it and not feel validation then ignore it not to feel validation.

Aqua wrote: What does a div. covers, what a rank does not? I feel confused even more now..

To answer this, you have to look beyond the Senior Knighthood ranks.

Because, the IP + Apprenticeship = the A Div. Degree (meaning there is NO difference).

The Senior Knight is the B Div. Degree (so, one and the same again).

So. I ask again... ??? What is the point if they are the same thing?

The confusion is calling it a degree scheme at all.

Essentially, there is no degree scheme. There is rank, with an unhelpful additional name.

Adder wrote:

Connor L. wrote: IOne other thing, where was this when we were discussing the Degree Scheme last year

Is that to me? AFAIK the Committee was setup to investigate and brainstorm how to build a degree scheme, not why to have one. I'd assume they'd already have a purpose or quickly agree on one at the outset, otherwise why have a committee about it. If it was a committee about 'what is the purpose of the degree scheme' then that would have been my feedback, but I thought you guys were working on the best way to develop a program. But I wasn't on the committee so I wouldn't know.

As to the rest of your post. Milestone's are useful in helping people apply themselves more effectively by giving them something tangible to schedule with their other activities. Validation about achievement is optional, but certainly inherit in effort that equates to progress. I could equally argue it is more of an exercise to undertake it and not feel validation then ignore it not to feel validation.

Sorry, Adder. That was actually to Akkarin.

I know why the committee was set up (I created and headed it up..). But, I quickly had sort of an existential crisis about the degree scheme and stepped down. The committee was set up to create the degree scheme, yes, but I couldn't find a good enough reason to create one. That was the problem.

The milestones are covered in the rank though.
IP + Apprenticeship = A Div.
Knighthood = B Div. (completing 200 more points making one a Senior Knight)

So, if that's the purpose, then it's superfluous.

Edan wrote: The confusion is calling it a degree scheme at all.

Essentially, there is no degree scheme. There is rank, with an unhelpful additional name.

Right. That is essentially the boiling down of it.