2 ms·
I also have a small education related project I am working on (currently in stealth mode) that is more focused on the online/self-study type of learning. Even t
by anonymous5133 8y ago
I also have a small education related project I am working on (currently in stealth mode) that is more focused on the online/self-study type of learning. Even though there is a lot of headbutting in terms of "most effective" education pedagogy. I think the education space is ripe for disruption and companies like Lambda are definitely innovating in this space. I see the future of education mostly consisting of a hybrid of focused seminars/hands-on training like what Lambda is offering and the online self-study MOOCs/courses for more theoretical learning or life-long learning. The hands-on training will be very intense and focused with a price while the self-study MOOCs will be free or very low cost. They both will play an equally important role in the future of education.
Companies like Lambda clearly show that the education market is being disrupted and it is clear to see why. Our current university education system is completely dysfunctional and it is probably most dysfunctional for CS education. The pace of learning is too slow, the topics you learn are not relevant to the student and often the topics you learn are outdated. The universities don't innovate because they are completely disconnected with what students need to succeed. Half of the courses an undergrad takes are completely irrelevant topics which the "educational experts" call general education. When I was in college, I took courses like history of rock music, art history, greek mythology, and asian-american studies. I only took these courses because I was required to take them. In the grand scheme, they are completely pointless and are basically a waste of time...yet we have students taking half their course load in these types of courses. Why? The reason it is like this is because these so called education experts are trying to mold some sort of "model citizen" in their view point. For the student, it just wastes their time and money. If the student wants to learn these topics, they could do it on their own....but to require it as mandatory to get a CS degree or equivalent...is a shining example of how disconnected our university system is from reality of what students need to be successful in a career.
That's why schools like Lambda are brilliant in the grand scheme of disrupting education. They cut out all the crap and only focus on the core skills that employers want in their employees and students need to be successful in a career. Lambda isn't free but they certainly are doing a significant better job than some of these other schools I see like University of Phoenix, Devry and so on which appear to be complete scams. There was also that WozU school that was promoted on here...which also now appears to be a scam based on student reports of the program.
I think as a society, we need to encourage the creation of effective schools, even if they are private schools like Lambda. If that means diverting people away from government colleges/universities then so be it.
Also another topic that is often brought up is in regards to credentials. From what I see, the base for traditional university degrees is slowly being eroded away. Many people say to go to a traditional university because of networking and connections...which is true but only in the present day. For employers, they need to hire people who are effective at the position and provide maximum value. If the MIT CS degree potential employee doesn't know how to code effectively or only knows obsolete CS topics...how effective will this person be at the company? Not very much. The employer will want to hire the person who knows how to code and has relevant knowledge, even if that person doesn't have a degree from a traditional university. This concept is obvious in a fast growing market like CS. Employers will eventually gravitate towards candidates who have the skills to be successful and avoid hiring people just because they were able to network or get a connection to the company's hiring manager.