2 ms·
>It has been possible for a century to self-study to the equivalent of a bachelor's degree using textbooks That is not the point of a liberal higher education,
by hammock 4y ago
>It has been possible for a century to self-study to the equivalent of a bachelor's degree using textbooks
That is not the point of a liberal higher education, though.
Historically (for much longer than a century) people were tutored k-12 in their own homes, with their families and neighbors, and not in these government-run public schools. You could learn whatever you wanted from books at home, and a governess and key instructors.
Still, you were sent off to college at a certain age, to be finished as either a man or a woman at a place like Harvard or a women’s college. The purpose was not principally to teach you math or anthropology that you couldn’t otherwise learn yourself (though you would learn some math and anthropology). There was another purpose
- MandieD 4y ago"... and a governess and key instructors." If your family was wealthy enough for you to be economically inactive as a youth, and to pay for said governess and instructors. Higher education was for the rich, too. As you said, a different purpose, mostly social (definitely social for the wealthy young women). All those little, often church-supported, colleges and land-grant state universities and teachers' colleges that sprang up all over the US in the late 19th and early 20th centuries? That was a revolution: higher education for the non-rich, and mostly for practical purposes.