4 ms·

I seem to have missed the part of university where we were learning things not yet in published books. If you think that undergraduates are reaching the cutting

by relkor 11y ago

I seem to have missed the part of university where we were learning things not yet in published books. If you think that undergraduates are reaching the cutting edge of research as part of their reguarly scheduled syllabus, I don't know what to say to correct this impression. You seem to forget that not every university is Stanford, where there are true leading experts that students can engage with beyond the context of class. There is no global university level. The trope of students conducting cutting edge research as undergrads is based on a few outliers who are widely publisied. The experience for the vast majority of us down in the trenches however is limited to the simplified model of physics that is safe for undergrads. Basing your expectations for a university education on the behavior of the top %0.001 of students is like expeciting your minivan to handle as well as a Grand-Prix racecar. My question to you is then "Why the hell did society decide to co-opt researches into passing on the information, rather than create a new class of specialists like society has done for every other field of human endevor?"

sklogic 11y ago
> I seem to have missed the part of university where we were learning things not yet in published books. You had an access to the teachers, who are all supposed to be active, well-connected, bleeding-edge researchers. You had a fair amount of their time allocated for you solely and more of that time for your class. Now, it was 100% your responsibility to extort all the bleeding edge knowledge from them, to loiter around their laboratories, to get a summer job as a lab assistant, and all that. This is what universities are for. > like society has done for every other field of human endevor? What? When did it happen, exactly? The master-apprentice model is still alive and kicking in most of the professions. There are no alternatives to it. Dedicated pedagogues can teach you to read, write and count your fingers (on one hand). The rest must be passed on by the real professionals.
- aries1980 11y ago
  > You had a fair amount of their time allocated for you solely and more of that time for your class. Talking (and not teaching) to 200 ppl over 2 hours is not time allocation to "me". That is something I could watch without the presence of the teacher. There is no added value in this case compared to any MOOC class. University courses should follow the possibilities what technology has to offer and focus on really teaching. The rest can be watched at home. > Now, it was 100% your responsibility to extort all the bleeding edge knowledge from them. Yes, 18 yrs old kids have the power and character to chase and force teachers without a backfire. You might be such character, but not everyone is such persuasive as you, yet they can be a great scientist.
  - sklogic 11y ago
    > Talking (and not teaching) to 200 ppl over 2 hours is not time allocation to "me". I'm not talking about the lectures (they're useless unless most of the time is spent on Q&A). There is always a certain amount of time teachers must spend with their students individually, upon request. Smart students use that time, the others may not even know they've got a right to harass their teachers occasionally.
    - aries1980 11y ago
      > There is always a certain amount of time teachers must spend with their students Not at my university, or at any university my friends attended. In many cases, you could just simply piss off the teachers asking tough questions or pointing to errors in their thinking.

by relkor 11y ago

sklogic 11y ago

> I seem to have missed the part of university where we were learning things not yet in published books. You had an access to the teachers, who are all supposed to be active, well-connected, bleeding-edge researchers. You had a fair amount of their time allocated for you solely and more of that time for your class. Now, it was 100% your responsibility to extort all the bleeding edge knowledge from them, to loiter around their laboratories, to get a summer job as a lab assistant, and all that. This is what universities are for. > like society has done for every other field of human endevor? What? When did it happen, exactly? The master-apprentice model is still alive and kicking in most of the professions. There are no alternatives to it. Dedicated pedagogues can teach you to read, write and count your fingers (on one hand). The rest must be passed on by the real professionals.

aries1980 11y ago
> You had a fair amount of their time allocated for you solely and more of that time for your class. Talking (and not teaching) to 200 ppl over 2 hours is not time allocation to "me". That is something I could watch without the presence of the teacher. There is no added value in this case compared to any MOOC class. University courses should follow the possibilities what technology has to offer and focus on really teaching. The rest can be watched at home. > Now, it was 100% your responsibility to extort all the bleeding edge knowledge from them. Yes, 18 yrs old kids have the power and character to chase and force teachers without a backfire. You might be such character, but not everyone is such persuasive as you, yet they can be a great scientist.
- sklogic 11y ago
  > Talking (and not teaching) to 200 ppl over 2 hours is not time allocation to "me". I'm not talking about the lectures (they're useless unless most of the time is spent on Q&A). There is always a certain amount of time teachers must spend with their students individually, upon request. Smart students use that time, the others may not even know they've got a right to harass their teachers occasionally.
  - aries1980 11y ago
    > There is always a certain amount of time teachers must spend with their students Not at my university, or at any university my friends attended. In many cases, you could just simply piss off the teachers asking tough questions or pointing to errors in their thinking.