calling one degree better than another is always subjective...
Calling one degree more advanced than another is NOT subjective, this is a direct indicator of the level that one is expected to contribute or bring to the table. A MS is not viewed in the same light as a BS. Nor is a BS viewed in the same context as an AS.
obviously, within the classroom someone with a BS is going to get more education... however, i am looking at it from the entry level job market... a vast majority of entry level positions in biology across this nation are for people who have AS or BS degrees with little value of one over the other...
Of course there are going to be positions in which a lower level of education would suffice, such as those positions where they are looking for "monkey's" to file out paperwork and do basic lab prep, and for these positions an AS would suffice. However, there are ALSO going to be entry level positions for scientists in which a BS is required and your not going to be just filling out paperwork and doing basic lab prep and it is these positions that an AS would NOT be able to obtain without some sort of outside experience. So once again, I disagree, there is value to a BS as opposed to an AS - they are not one in the same.
of course Washington DC is going to have more companies looking for a BS or higher, you have more than 10 universities within a 1 hour drive... DC is by no means representative of the common job market...
If an AS can do what a BS can do for cheaper why would it matter that there are a ton of universities out here? There are also quite a bit of cc's and according to your rationale shouldn't the lower paid AS out compete the BS job seekers? The fact that the NIH, the universities, the tech companies, the pharmaceutical companies, and the governmental organizations all require BS degree's has little to do with how many universities are in the area but more to do with what these entry level positions entail. An AS applicant with an introductory level knowledge of bio and chem 101 does not have the necessary foundation to pick up these positions as fast as the BS applicant whom actually did take bio courses beyond the 101 level. Also while the DC area may have its unique niche - the pharma's, universities, research corporations, tech companies, and hospitals have presence in all metro areas within the US.
face it, a majority of entry level bio positions are not going to have you do anything more than paperwork and some very basic lab prep... nothing someone with an AS cant handle... as far as climbing the ladder, most employers will treat a BS the same way as an AS...
I will have to disagree with you here, my experiences and those of friends in several cities across the US are vastly different from what you describe. If that's the case in your area I would recommend anyone with a BS to pack up and quit because there not really learning anything. Maybe that is why you guys are hiring AS applicants for those entry level positions.
you start simple and work your way up to more advanced techniques... but what you learned at university doesnt apply because the equipment is different, the materials are different, and the goals are different... besides, that 1 week experience on HPLC at university 2 years ago is going to inspire little confidence in lab managers... so whats the difference in teaching an AS monkey over a BS monkey on how to use the familiar, but different toy?
I agree that a fresh out of college BS applicant is still entry level, and your right, the typical BS applicant will not remember how to do this. But there is a difference between an AS applicant and a BS applicant, and that difference goes beyond just the technical setup of the "toy". I am not sure if the community colleges your recruiting your students from are drastically different then the cc's out here, but to obtain an AS in science from a cc out here requires just 1 year of introductory biology with lab and chemistry with lab. Beyond the intro level all that is required is an additional 1 semester sequence of a 200 level biology lecture and that's it! The rest of your coursework are all general education requirements. So the foundation that you build over the next 2 years, beyond the introductory level biology required of AS degree candidates, is undisputable. You cannot seriously tell me that the applicant with just knowledge of introductory biology 101 is just as valuable as the applicant with not only the introductory biology but an additional 28-30 credits of upper level biology under their belt... The BS applicant will no doubt still be entry level, but they have a much stronger foundation and will understand the concepts behind the research and ultimely grasp things much quicker than the applicant without this foundation.
I am speaking from experience on this. I have a Masters in Biology and spent 5 years hiring and training recent biology grads for ConAgra, one of the largest food manufacturers in North America. The practices we employ are standard in the industry and no different than what you would see elsewhere in the common market. Yes, there are exeptions (e.g. good ole boy network), but these are rare compared to the national average
With a masters in biology I would think that you would quickly recognize the difference in your level of knowledge after having taken you first year of intro bio (equivalent to an AS) and after you'd completed your BS. I would assume that upon completion of your MS that same level of difference would be evident.
In addition your experience with the responsibilities of entry level biologists within your company are not going to be the same across companies in different sectors of industry, so I wouldn't assume that just because the technical difficulty evident of the entry level positions within your company, in which you state can easily be handled by AS applicants, is uniform across the field.
