Hi Billy, On Apr 19, 2012, at 11:46 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> "...the author's concept of higher education is a little narrow, as for me, > my university degree has enriched my whole life in general, and > not just opened doors in my career." > > This is the crux of the matter ; the article seems to assume that there is > only > one possible way to value education , economic payoff. I agree it is a narrow definition; then again, the whole economic subsidy for education is predicated on that assumption. I had a fascinating lunch yesterday with the guy behind UnCollege: http://www.uncollege.org/ The key goal is not so much destroying college as pushing students to take responsibility to for their own development. The most likely outcome is that the different facets of the university: - research - teaching undergraduates - giving space for young people to find themselves - fielding a professional sports team will likely get dis--aggregated into different entities. For example, basic learning could well get folded into high school, with vocational skills acquired at specialized schools. In the middle, there might be something like a nine-month "Discover Yourself" seminar where students travelled the world and visited different industries to more rapidly understand who they wanted to be while making lifelong friends. True, by breaking things up you lose the various cross-subsidied that make the system work today. But each individual piece can become VASTLY more efficient and cost-effective. -- Ernie P. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
