That online degrees have less merit than degrees earned offline

Bifurcations

In this round I will explain what online degrees are and explain by what metric the "merit" of a degree should be decided upon,  this undermines the case already presented by my opponent.

1. They are classified by distance learning and are offered by both accredited institutions and simply websites. If the institution offereing the course is not accreditted the degree cannot be accredited either therefore falls outwith this debate. The people most likely to use these degrees are people how are currently in work or have such barries like finances or disabilities making physically attending a university close to impossible.

2. Merit in this debate should be judged on the degree's usefulness. Harvard has been ranked best for online degrees so if University name is important then it is still possible with online degrees. For the people that I spoke about above, they would be locked out of getting a degree if online degrees were not available. Tthis allows them to get a qualification and a job so it it useful and the degree has merit. The "lack of substance" is not true as the courses are still run via lectures and lecture notes, you still get a tutor and a point of contact that way. University degrees are earned by indivdual study and most degrees are using online resources more anyway. The only thing you might not get is lab experience but most people who do an online degree are not looking to be research scientists. Many also promote the use of skype for students to connect.

The best point my opponent makes is that there is room for cheating. Firstly, cheating happens in ordinary courses to so that is not mutually exclusive. Online degrees have many ways of preventing cheating like proctored exams. Obviously it can be imporved and given the demand for these degrees and the fact the proceedure itself is still young, they will be imporved.

Pro misunderstands university learning, oppose.

True Capitalist Acolyte

My opponent made several provocative and erroneous statements in this debate. Most of which is based off her opinion exclusively. I have a limited response, therefore I will address my opponent's dismissive attitude towards cheating.

My opponent goes on to say:

"The best point my opponent makes is that there is room for cheating. Firstly, cheating happens in ordinary courses to so that is not mutually exclusive. Online degrees have many ways of preventing cheating like proctored exams..."

My opponent is very dismissive of cheating when we know for a fact that it is far easier to cheat online. If the degree is obtained online we have no way of knowing who is doing the work other than by a confirmation of audio or video which can easily be manufactured(I will elaborate more on this later). For example, what makes any person reading this debate know who either of the debaters are? We are anonymous and hidden. What is there to prevent my opponent or I from replacing ourselves with someone else in this debate?

How does the reader of this debate know for a fact that the person writing arguments for Pro in Round 1 is the same person as the person finishing arguments in Round 3? There is no definitive way of knowing. We can say "I recognize that person's hand writing." Can you actually say that? There is a thing called mimicry where a person imitates the way a person walks, talks, eats, and writes. Those who are skilled in mimicry, it is easy to cheat.

We can't simply dismiss cheating because it happens in real life as well. The magnitude of cheating online as opposed to offline is great. Even a proctored exam would not address this in many cases. If I normally go to a class every day and when exam time comes a different guy shows up to take the test and write my name then we will be caught cheating with ease. Versus online, there is nothing preventing a different person from taking an exam. Even if it is a proctored exam, who would know me? No one.