Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Udacity - free online education for real

<< < (2/4) > >>

zridling:
@TaoPhoenix:
You simply have to differentiate between education and schooling. I have all of both I'll ever need, but use little of it in my work (mostly the research and some math skills). If the person knows the subject, I'd take them over anyone highly "schooled." Universities had their millennium, but I hope they're coming to an end as we know them. At my age today, if you offered me a bachelor's degree with significant debt against my own self-motivated ability to learn online without a dime of debt, I would not go to college.

TaoPhoenix:
@TaoPhoenix:
You simply have to differentiate between education and schooling. I have all of both I'll ever need, but use little of it in my work (mostly the research and some math skills). If the person knows the subject, I'd take them over anyone highly "schooled." Universities had their millennium, but I hope they're coming to an end as we know them. At my age today, if you offered me a bachelor's degree with significant debt against my own self-motivated ability to learn online without a dime of debt, I would not go to college.
-zridling (June 19, 2012, 11:49 PM)
--- End quote ---

Hmm. This sounds a bit like throwing out babies with bathwater. I'd like to do some separating myself.

First, let's separate "complete path of education" with "Some Classes". Very roughly, a uni degree does provide *some* organized learning of a subject. Sure, when you get out you find that it has to be tweaked, but it was modestly efficient for me. But I believe a big part of this is also the Elective process, where if 5 people do Business degrees, one goes for marketing, one goes for industrial design, one goes for HR, one goes for sales, and one goes into accounting.

So Mr. Thrun's initiative is certainly a nice start, but it must *not* end with "3 classes per level comprising only one path". There have been a few other open-ed initiatives recently, one of which MIT was involved, but they looked a lot like loss leader sales - juicy low level courses were available, then like that McDonald's promo, the ones you needed to complete the degree were back under full price.

To 40hz's snarky but underrated remark, a full degree in itself is not a hobby - education is education. It's no fault of the student who did his part. That's where these points intersect.

If the student could prove the same education but earned cheaply through one of these initiatives, and we got past the fraud problems, then that's part of the education of the future. In all our wars on copyright it's kinda amazing that no one is really mentioning education.

Finally to the "learn on your own vs schooling" bit, that just means that we need more modular education. "Everything is teachable" but those particular details never seem to make into standard course offerings. If anything, run it like "Go to Khan Academy. Choose your own 538 modules."

40hz:
To 40hz's snarky but underrated remark, a full degree in itself is not a hobby - education is education. It's no fault of the student who did his part.
-TaoPhoenix (June 20, 2012, 06:32 AM)
--- End quote ---

Hardly snarky. Just a simple observation. And I rather think you missed my point.

The point was me wondering how is "what jobs a "Udacity Graduate" can get" any different from asking what jobs my friend's daughter may get as a 'traditional' graduate. Because, as many graduates are discovering, having a very expensive degree becomes a questionable endeavor when there's no assurance of earning the high wages needed to pay for it. Especially now that so many jobs have been shopped overseas -and management positions (the traditional "upwardly mobile" or "good jobs") are being aggressively eliminated by businesses wherever possible.

Here's some interesting questions:


* Why has the cost of a college education risen by approximately 10-15% per year regardless of economic conditions or the rate of inflation?
* If many top universities are now sitting on endowment funds with holdings in the billions - and in some cases (Yale) have frankly admitted they really don't need to charge tuition in order to operate since they are sufficiently endowed - why do they continue to do so?
* Precisely why is it accepted as given that quality education must be extremely expensive?
* Why, when confronted about the issue of education costs do so many universities, public school administrators, and academic text publishers offer no rationale beyond the repeated assertion that education is, by its very nature, expensive?
To my way of thinking, there are a lot of unchallenged assumptions and agendas driving up the cost of a higher education. And few if any are based on anything other than the lame excuse that fundamentally says: Well...that's what we have decided to charge.

So anything that questions and can help break the largely pointless and arbitrary practice of ratcheting up education costs is fine by me. And even if it doesn't - at least it's a start in the right direction.

---------------------

Note: I also don't judge education primarily in terms of what employment it will get you slotted into. I have to agree with Zaine that there's a difference between schooling (or training as I would prefer to characterize it) and education. :)

barney:
... a full degree in itself is not a hobby - education is education. It's no fault of the student who did his part.
-TaoPhoenix (June 20, 2012, 06:32 AM)
--- End quote ---

Well, in point of fact, education is not always education.  And ofttimes, a [higher] degree does become a hobby for those with the wherewithal.  Several unwarranted assumptions there.  And are you talking about the student who learned, but did not pass [questionable] tests?  Did not pass university muster?  Or are you talking about the student who knew how to pass tests even though that student couldn't put a round peg in a round (and bigger) hole?  Which did not do their part?  And which did?  There are dichotomies in that concept.

Bottom line - if there is one - is who can best perform in the real world.  Experience tells me that most university graduates are not nearly so successful as trade school alumni, on average.  Knowledge, despite the old adage, is not always power.

TaoPhoenix:
... a full degree in itself is not a hobby - education is education. It's no fault of the student who did his part.
-TaoPhoenix (June 20, 2012, 06:32 AM)
--- End quote ---

Well, in point of fact, education is not always education.  And ofttimes, a [higher] degree does become a hobby for those with the wherewithal.  Several unwarranted assumptions there.  And are you talking about the student who learned, but did not pass [questionable] tests?  Did not pass university muster?  Or are you talking about the student who knew how to pass tests even though that student couldn't put a round peg in a round (and bigger) hole?  Which did not do their part?  And which did?  There are dichotomies in that concept.

Bottom line - if there is one - is who can best perform in the real world.  Experience tells me that most university graduates are not nearly so successful as trade school alumni, on average.  Knowledge, despite the old adage, is not always power.
-barney (September 26, 2012, 12:33 AM)
--- End quote ---

Okay, some fair points there. I tried to make a distinction between the "full degree" passing all the tests (including all the related "un-realistic" silliness, etc.) as a formal step in the educational process with the intent to begin a career. I completely agree that we have dismal prospects out there, but then I think the applicable word becomes "tragedy", not "hobby". To me "hobby" is something done with at least subconscious intent that there results aren't ever planned on being part of a significant professional result. The learning required in a a hobby still to me counts as education, just perhaps not formalized enough to put down on a piece of paper for job contexts.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page