5 ms·

No, it mustn't be transmitted for pay. In Argentina, for example, public college is good and free. More importantly to your question, teaching a hard curriculu

by Fargren 14y ago

No, it mustn't be transmitted for pay. In Argentina, for example, public college is good and free. More importantly to your question, teaching a hard curriculum to a lot of students at the same time is a hard problem, and exercises with deadlines and relatively tight syllabus are a method that has been shown, for many years, to work for a large number of people. It certainly doesn't work for everyone, it certainly isn't the best way to learn, but it's an effective tool for the problem at hand.

rumblestrut 14y ago
In America, most people get a degree and leave school with unbelievable debt that can't be bankrupted, should hardship ever occur. I would have taken apprenticeship over college any day.
- Fargren 14y ago
  I wont argue that private college in the US isn't brokenly expensive for most mayors. I'm not even saying that college is a good idea for most of the population anywhere. What I am saying is that for some important fields of knowledge that it would be good to teach to some not small fraction of the population, college is a good solution; maybe the best that has been actually tested. Of course not going to college would be a great choice for a lot of people who are going there. But it is also the right choice for a large number of people.
  - icelancer 14y ago
    >I wont argue that private college in the US isn't brokenly expensive for most mayors. The University of Washington is $13,000 per year for residents, who are preferentially screened and rejected because tuition for in-state residents is too cheap. UW costs $30,000/year for out-of-state residents who are more likely to be admitted since it's more than twice the cost. By the way, the University of Washington is a public school. Private schools in the area start at $45,000/year. There is literally nothing you can study in undergraduate school that would be worth that price. Not even close.
    - kyllo 14y ago
      UW is overwhelmed with demand. They've set up satellite campuses in Tacoma and Bothell to handle the overflow, especially for business courses. When I went there in 2003-2007 it was still a deal for the quality of education, and my degree was definitely worth what I paid for it (about $5,000-6,000/year) but the price has more than doubled since then. If I had to choose a university at current prices I'd probably go to Western or WSU instead.
      - icelancer 14y ago
        I think $13,000/year is absolutely reasonable at UW. However, you have to be exceedingly intelligent to get in there - which most are obviously not. They screen in-state residents because they don't get enough tuition from them, so the standards are very high if you live in WA state. So I question whether or not the University of Washington is really a public institute in that regard. Let's not even talk about what it costs to go to Seattle University or Gonzaga.
invalidOrTaken 14y ago
I'd argue that it has not been shown to be effective. We're reaping the fruits of that today: grade inflation, disinterested professors, and new graduates without the jobs that served as the carrots to get them into school in the first place.

by Fargren 14y ago

rumblestrut 14y ago

In America, most people get a degree and leave school with unbelievable debt that can't be bankrupted, should hardship ever occur. I would have taken apprenticeship over college any day.

Fargren 14y ago
I wont argue that private college in the US isn't brokenly expensive for most mayors. I'm not even saying that college is a good idea for most of the population anywhere. What I am saying is that for some important fields of knowledge that it would be good to teach to some not small fraction of the population, college is a good solution; maybe the best that has been actually tested. Of course not going to college would be a great choice for a lot of people who are going there. But it is also the right choice for a large number of people.
- icelancer 14y ago
  >I wont argue that private college in the US isn't brokenly expensive for most mayors. The University of Washington is $13,000 per year for residents, who are preferentially screened and rejected because tuition for in-state residents is too cheap. UW costs $30,000/year for out-of-state residents who are more likely to be admitted since it's more than twice the cost. By the way, the University of Washington is a public school. Private schools in the area start at $45,000/year. There is literally nothing you can study in undergraduate school that would be worth that price. Not even close.
  - kyllo 14y ago
    UW is overwhelmed with demand. They've set up satellite campuses in Tacoma and Bothell to handle the overflow, especially for business courses. When I went there in 2003-2007 it was still a deal for the quality of education, and my degree was definitely worth what I paid for it (about $5,000-6,000/year) but the price has more than doubled since then. If I had to choose a university at current prices I'd probably go to Western or WSU instead.
    - icelancer 14y ago
      I think $13,000/year is absolutely reasonable at UW. However, you have to be exceedingly intelligent to get in there - which most are obviously not. They screen in-state residents because they don't get enough tuition from them, so the standards are very high if you live in WA state. So I question whether or not the University of Washington is really a public institute in that regard. Let's not even talk about what it costs to go to Seattle University or Gonzaga.

invalidOrTaken 14y ago

I'd argue that it has not been shown to be effective. We're reaping the fruits of that today: grade inflation, disinterested professors, and new graduates without the jobs that served as the carrots to get them into school in the first place.