5 ms·

Anyone can teach. Just look at the Khan Academy -- Sal started by just posting YouTube videos of his voice over Microsoft Paint. The thing that is held behind

by cbhl 9y ago

Anyone can teach. Just look at the Khan Academy -- Sal started by just posting YouTube videos of his voice over Microsoft Paint. The thing that is held behind a barrier is issuing a credential. And it seems reasonable that someone generating diplomas (or claims they can teach you enough to get you a job) should itself be held to accreditation or a standards body. But we (software developers in industry) could be making that standards body, rather than sitting on our butts and waiting for the government to do it.

wallace_f 9y ago
I agree. I don't think government is useless, but private industry is much better at innovation and meeting consumer demand. A story everyone speaking of education reform should be cognizant of is that of Jaime Escalante. Another issue aside from innovating to meet demand: Personally, if I want to sit down tomorrow and earn a degree in a subject, I don't know why I can't just self study and take exams to do this. To me, anyone in the world being able to earn the equivalent of a Harvard degree appears to be the ultimate policy in dismantling inequality and advancing opportunity. Why should Harvard degrees be limited to a small number of people? They really shouldn't.
- cat199 9y ago
  > take exams to do this and who manufactures these magical exams you speak of, and on what authority?
  - wallace_f 9y ago
    They're not magical. If I want to be a doctor, there are two primary sets of exams I need to take: 1-the MCAT, and 2-the USMLE. Both sets are managed by non profits. There should be no reason why a poor minority, boy or girl, struggling to make ends meet in a rough neighborhood cannot get online, self study, and one day go and take a seat for these exams. In fact, this should be subsidized by government more than university classes--it is far more efficient and more fair, just better overall. So these are the primary tests, both in a literal and figurative sense, which establish ability and competency to practice medicine. After this point, getting the residency requirements and practical lab skills is just a formality. If what it comes down to is basically some exams, we should be able to give more people access to that. Especially in STEM fields.
    - KekDemaga 9y ago
      An objective test removes the power of picking winners and losers from the academics, they will never allow that to happen.
    - KGIII 9y ago
      Wait... You think someone should be allowed to self-study, take a test, and be a medical doctor? You can do this with some professions, but I'd like to think my medical doctor has had actual experience with living people and cadavers.
      - wallace_f 9y ago
        Read my post again. Someone should be able to circumvent the academic complex's monopoly on credentials, as long as they can demonstrate the same aptitude and proficiency. At that point, as I said, the hospital training is just a formality with some exceptions. Surgeons obviously need to demonstrate dexterity and composure. Candidates need to show up to work on time, etc.
        KGIII 9y ago
        That's marginally better. I'm still not sure I want a self trained physician. A lawyer who didn't go to school and still passed the bar is more acceptable. We standardized for a reason. Could those standards be changed? Absolutely. I still don't think some poor person should be allowed online study and then to pass an exam and be a medical doctor.
        wallace_f 9y ago
        What's wrong with 'some poor person'studying and passing an exam to be a doctor? Fwiw, I'm still saying we should have residencies.
        KGIII 9y ago
        The same things wrong with a wealthy person doing so. There is much more than is on exams. Exams are easy to pass, experience is hard to fake. Much, much more is covered than exams cover. That stuff is also important.
- csa 9y ago
  > To me, anyone in the world being able to earn the equivalent of a Harvard degree appears to be the ultimate policy in dismantling inequality and advancing opportunity. What happens in the classroom is largely not what defines a Harvard degree/graduate -- quite the contrary, actually. While some classes are very well taught, many of them round to something like "hey, you're smart, I'm going to pretend to teach, give you some reading lists, and you can figure it out for yourself." There are little learning hacks like office hours (maybe) or talking with TAs (maybe), but again these are not the defining features of a Harvard grad (high quality or otherwise).
xapata 9y ago
Not everyone can teach well. I've also found that folks who have never had a good teacher in a particular topic don't realize how much disparity there can be.

by cbhl 9y ago

wallace_f 9y ago

I agree. I don't think government is useless, but private industry is much better at innovation and meeting consumer demand. A story everyone speaking of education reform should be cognizant of is that of Jaime Escalante. Another issue aside from innovating to meet demand: Personally, if I want to sit down tomorrow and earn a degree in a subject, I don't know why I can't just self study and take exams to do this. To me, anyone in the world being able to earn the equivalent of a Harvard degree appears to be the ultimate policy in dismantling inequality and advancing opportunity. Why should Harvard degrees be limited to a small number of people? They really shouldn't.

cat199 9y ago
> take exams to do this and who manufactures these magical exams you speak of, and on what authority?
- wallace_f 9y ago
  They're not magical. If I want to be a doctor, there are two primary sets of exams I need to take: 1-the MCAT, and 2-the USMLE. Both sets are managed by non profits. There should be no reason why a poor minority, boy or girl, struggling to make ends meet in a rough neighborhood cannot get online, self study, and one day go and take a seat for these exams. In fact, this should be subsidized by government more than university classes--it is far more efficient and more fair, just better overall. So these are the primary tests, both in a literal and figurative sense, which establish ability and competency to practice medicine. After this point, getting the residency requirements and practical lab skills is just a formality. If what it comes down to is basically some exams, we should be able to give more people access to that. Especially in STEM fields.
  - KekDemaga 9y ago
    An objective test removes the power of picking winners and losers from the academics, they will never allow that to happen.
  - KGIII 9y ago
    Wait... You think someone should be allowed to self-study, take a test, and be a medical doctor? You can do this with some professions, but I'd like to think my medical doctor has had actual experience with living people and cadavers.
    - wallace_f 9y ago
      Read my post again. Someone should be able to circumvent the academic complex's monopoly on credentials, as long as they can demonstrate the same aptitude and proficiency. At that point, as I said, the hospital training is just a formality with some exceptions. Surgeons obviously need to demonstrate dexterity and composure. Candidates need to show up to work on time, etc.
      - KGIII 9y ago
        That's marginally better. I'm still not sure I want a self trained physician. A lawyer who didn't go to school and still passed the bar is more acceptable. We standardized for a reason. Could those standards be changed? Absolutely. I still don't think some poor person should be allowed online study and then to pass an exam and be a medical doctor.
        wallace_f 9y ago
        What's wrong with 'some poor person'studying and passing an exam to be a doctor? Fwiw, I'm still saying we should have residencies.
        KGIII 9y ago
        The same things wrong with a wealthy person doing so. There is much more than is on exams. Exams are easy to pass, experience is hard to fake. Much, much more is covered than exams cover. That stuff is also important.
csa 9y ago
> To me, anyone in the world being able to earn the equivalent of a Harvard degree appears to be the ultimate policy in dismantling inequality and advancing opportunity. What happens in the classroom is largely not what defines a Harvard degree/graduate -- quite the contrary, actually. While some classes are very well taught, many of them round to something like "hey, you're smart, I'm going to pretend to teach, give you some reading lists, and you can figure it out for yourself." There are little learning hacks like office hours (maybe) or talking with TAs (maybe), but again these are not the defining features of a Harvard grad (high quality or otherwise).

xapata 9y ago

Not everyone can teach well. I've also found that folks who have never had a good teacher in a particular topic don't realize how much disparity there can be.