6 ms·
Unlike MOOCs, which mainly expect students to use resources online to complete courses themselves, competency-based programs depend on faculty mentors t
by jloughry 11y ago
Unlike MOOCs, which mainly expect students to use resources online to
complete courses themselves, competency-based programs depend on faculty
mentors to walk learners through the learning process. It’s almost the
opposite of the university lecture. Rather than a professor talking to a
roomful of students, a professor talks to students one-on-one while they
learn information at their own pace.
This sounds almost exactly like the 'tutorial' system used for a thousand years (for undergraduates) at Oxford and Cambridge. Students meet with their tutors weekly and are given suggested reading, and usually an essay to write. Once a term, proctored exams are held.
Edited to add: One difference between university in the U.S. and U.K. is that in the U.K., 'breadth' classes are almost unheard of; the idea of a chemistry major taking an anthropology class, a psychology class, or an art class is strange. That's one of the reasons undergraduates there finish in three years, usually.
- tjr 11y agoWhile I didn't particularly like it as a student, looking back on university ~15 years later, the educational component that I feel like I got the most out of was being forced to take a variety of sundry non-major classes. Most of the major material I probably would have learned on my own anyway; it was the other 'breadth' classes that, well, broadened my thinking in ways I did not expect. Though from a purely vocational standpoint, the elimination of the breadth classes would seemingly allow for not only faster graduation, but also taking more major classes. That may well be a good thing too.
- henrikschroder 11y agoAgree, outside of my comp sci. major, I took courses in cognitive psychology, history of science, and technical writing, and looking back, those were very useful. However, it's frustrating that it's regarded as perfectly fine to require STEM students to take courses in breadth subjects, but completely preposterous to require liberal arts students to take breadth courses in hard science.
- hackuser 11y ago> it's regarded as perfectly fine to require STEM students to take courses in breadth subjects, but completely preposterous to require liberal arts students to take breadth courses in hard science. Hmmm ... at my U. science was required for everyone. Are you sure that wasn't the case at yours? They weren't required to take the most difficult science classes but the same is true for STEM majors taking liberal arts courses. (I'm using "liberal arts" to mean humanities, social sciences, and the arts.)
- ForHackernews 11y agoThe "Liberal arts" also include physical science and mathematics: https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberal-arts https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberal-arts If you mean "humanities and social sciences" then say that.
- henrikschroder 11y agoThanks for the correction, that's what I meant!
- henrikschroder 11y agoInteresting. I went to an institute of technology, so I'm pretty sure they didn't require science classes for humanities and social sciences majors (thanks for the correction!), since they didn't offer those majors. :-) But I know the neighbouring universities offered science classes for non-science majors students, although it was never a requirement, and mentioning that maybe it ought to would make most people upset. It's been twenty years now though, but I don't think the situation has changed, sadly.
- douche 11y agoI think at most colleges, you do have to get at least a couple of science credits. Of course, they are usually along the lines of "Stars for Stoners" (Intro to Astronomy), "Rocks for Jocks" (Intro to Geology), or "DNA for Dumbasses" (Intro to Biology) I'll be honest, I took Stars for Stoners, and it was a very interesting class. But it certainly was not hard, and given the choice to do it again, without having to fill the general reqs, I'd spend the time reading some good hard science fiction and taking another higher-level history or computer science course instead.
- taylorwc 11y agoI have very mixed emotions about this. There were certainly some non-major-specific courses that I had to take that did have a positive effect on my thinking and reasoning ability. The majority, however, were a giant waste of time and money, and I still resent being forced to take them. May be just as much a reflection on my alma mater as on me.
- WalterBright 11y agoThe most useful non-STEM class I took turned out be basic accounting.
- brightball 11y agoI have to agree. Pysch 101 was the best course I took in college outside of my Comp Sci classes. Having classes with group projects in business and english were really helpful from a sheer communication standpoint but there were parts that were overdone. At my college my major had specific classes that we could choose from for the electives and only a few "true" electives. I think it would have been much better to just allocate the rest of the hours to pure electives and just give a category. Choosing what I want to learn about vs being told "learn one of these three things" would have led me to be more interested in the subjects in the first place.
- nickpsecurity 11y agoMy college's critical thinking, diversity, religion, and environmental science classes were outside my major. Yet, they made for fun discussions and learning experiences. Met some good friends, too. I can tell that things I learned in those classes have had a long-term effect.
- Brashman 11y agoI spent a term at Cambridge in Electrical Engineering. Our tutorial sessions were very similar to recitations in America and classes still had traditional lectures. I'm not sure if this is different for other fields.