This fuckin guy
I can't line-by-line it, but here's a few musings:
-I am a math major, so I get that it is logic, and I agree. I always tell people it is like untying knots and that's fun - puzzles are fun - until the numbers go away and it's mostly symbols and logic. But the point is that those numbers and the high-level stuff aren't really that useful. They aren't often applied, and I envision a future where coding, the internet, and robotics are everywhere, and to make proper use of those tools, it has to start early. Really, really early.
I have a masters degree in mathematics and physics with a focus on the "theoretical" and not the applied.
These are two, completely different, schools of thought within academia and I would be pulled between both throughout my education. But simply put, you cannot have one without the other. Applied science without the prerequisite theory has nothing to engineer, and theoretical science without application has no purpose other than it's own intellectual pursuit.
With respect to robotics; the field is actually mostly dependent on theoretical sciences to advance it. We need new advances in material science, including surfaces materials and fibers, advances in battery technology, silicon wafer size and heat management, power consumption for electronic devices, etc; that are very dependent upon new technologies.
You can't simply half the science department and say, you guys get funding and you other guys don't. You need both, and you're best left with the students deciding which suits them best.
-College is expensive because we have messed with the natural course of supply/demand via student loans. That's how I see it. The cost will gradually reverse course, unless the government interferes.
This simply is not true, yet it keeps getting repeated. As many others have already stated, it is a myth to attribute college expense to government subsidization; especially when you compare costs across borders.
-With very few exceptions, I hear "I don't use my degree in what I am doing" and phrases about "the real world," and I agree. I think there's something critical in here, and I think it will sweep the world. As an aside, I just had my cousin and his son over for dinner, I told the son I would negotiate for him. So cousin said that he will pay for all of college in full. Awesome. These are private colleges, smart kid, smart cousin. So I told his son to figure out how long college acceptance offer is good for (or now that I think about it, he should apply for a year in the future). Figure out which courses can be taken online, through which places, and knock out a bunch of General Education requirements. Use the $ saved to travel the entire world for 1 year on your dad's dime. It's functionally the same thing: he gets 1 year of college classes paid for and he gets one year closer to completing his degree. My cousin (kid's dad) agreed. Thought it was a smart idea.
As a guy who taught students, I see no way to make this work across the board. Many students, perhaps most, need more structure in academia; not less. I think it's dangerous and counterproductive to take students out of classrooms and plant them in front of computer screens.
Academics should be the sole focus of students seeking 4-year degrees for the entirety of those 4-years. There's just no reason, other than exorbitant costs, that we would consider taking students out of the classroom.
-I don't think there's any significant difference in knocking out Gen Ed courses online versus in the classroom. Need extra help? Hire a virtual tutor while you are on the beach in some random country, seeing the world, gaining experiences, and catalyzing your growth. Still saving $. Don't like online classes? Go to community college classes.
Eh.. I understand how this could be a personal recipe for many students to save money. I think my argument is that college tuition should be paid for by society, thus removing the financial burden from the student; therefore, removing the need to make these kinds of decisions or requiring students to take online courses or courses at community colleges.
-But it comes down to this: why are you going to classes? What's the point? To prepare you for a career or to prepare you to market yourself to start a career? What else? Because career preparation for most people is some sort of 3 month to 1 year training period or studying for licenses to be able to do their job. So I think ultimately the utility of college and the dollars spent on it will have to change.
I think we need more college educated people, more engineers, more people who can think for themselves - critically - and are equipped to learn new skills.
I think that means we need to revamp our education system from the ground up, and take it a bit more seriously.
That means, IMHO, that we empower the Department of Education, remove the State "right" to education and create a single, federally enforceable curriculum that is internationally competitive in math, the sciences, and yes, in the arts as well.
I think it's of the utmost importance to start with K-12 education first, and then address higher education by removing the financial barriers to entry that citizens of other nations aren't burdened with. We can address costs in a different way without necessarily gutting some great college institutions.
