Todd Walton said:
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:22:54 -0800 (PST), Neil Schneider
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Get me a skill, so I can get a job, so I can make a lot of
>> money, so I can retire and play golf all day.
>
> I don't see anything wrong with that. My biggest beef is that it's
> not confined to vocational schools. I think it's because government
> has a history of supporting "higher education", but not so much
> vocational schools. But vocational training is what a lot of people
> want. So, naturally, those people gravitate to the state-funded
> option, it being cheaper out of pocket, and being that they're already
> paying for it anyway. So the institutions of "higher learning" have
> more people interested in vocational skills, and have to evolve to
> meet the demand.
If you want vocational training go to a vocational school. If you want
and education go to a University.
> The problem being that schools have spent hundreds of years, at least,
> fine tuning their processes to support knowledge based education. Now
> they're being asked to support skills based education and they're
> having trouble integrating the two.
Universities are not in the business of giving skills based education,
they are in the business of teaching undergraduates how to learn, and
post graduates how to do research. If you want vocational training, go
to a vocational school.
> Eliminating the state's role in post-secondary education would go a
> long way towards fixing the situation. Not every one needs a college
> education. Not every one can benefit from what universities provide.
> Some people, I think, would be better off going straight from high
> school to a job. Some people would do well at a vocational school.
> Not every role in life requires the same education format. Computer
> jobs have done well with the certification format. Auto mechanics do
> well with a set number of weeks of general purpose training. I got an
> *excellent* education in a two year program that taught me how to run
> a nuclear reactor, with periodic training updates after that. And it
> didn't require philosophy, or math beyond basic calculus.
Well tell companies to stop judging the ability to do a job upon
whether or not the applicant has a four year degree. You underestimate
the requirements of a modern auto-mechanic. Running a reactor doesn't
require the same skill set as designing one. I don't think I want a
two year student designing nuclear power plants.
> I'd like to see more options available (which requires eliminating the
> bias the government produces) and I'd like to see less emphasis on
> full-on four year "education" degrees.
The bias isn't produced by government so much as it is by business.
Business drives the curriculumn at Universities, not Government. State
run Universities are one of the things that have made this country
great and universalised education. Before the advent of state run
Universities, only the wealthy got a college education.
--
Neil Schneider pacneil_at_linuxgeek_dot_net
http://www.paccomp.com
Key fingerprint = 67F0 E493 FCC0 0A8C 769B 8209 32D7 1DB1 8460 C47D
"All political parties die at last of swallowing their own lies."
-- Dr. John Arbuthnot (1667-1735)
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
