mitchell@community-chest.uucp (George Mitchell) (12/06/89)
In article <489@cherry5.UUCP> murphyn@cell.mot.COM (Neal P. Murphy) wrote:
`Education involves much more than training. The purpose of college or
`university is not to train students to perform a specific task. Its
`purpose is to enable students to learn as much as they can about as many
`different topics as they can, so that by the time they graduate and enter
`the industrial/business world, they will know how *and* where to find
`answers to questions, solutions to problems, without having to pass the
`problem on to someone else. A technician, who has been trained, passes an
`unknown problem to an appropriate engineer, who has been educated, who
`solves it and instructs the technician how to fix it.
`
`A college/university education enables one to communicate effectively with
`anyone: co-workers, management, fellow countrymen, foreigners in his land,
`or natives in their own land. An education teaches him that the needs of
`other people aren't necessarily the same as his needs, that these
`differences are part of what make up the dynamics of this planet.
` .... The purpose of college is to give
`the student as broad a background as possible, so that that student will be
`able to lead as productive, good and independent a life as possible.
What has happened to our concept of public schooling? I thought that
grades K through 12 were supposed to prepare us to be citizens of our
state, country, and the world. This is the arena in which we are
supposed to have our exposure to "as many different topics" as possible.
If the public schools are not succeeding, the remedy should NOT be to
accept the situation and help the fortunate in college.
In the college/university we are expected to specialize. Most students
have major/minor fields of study and learn as much as they can about
those fields. However, within this narrower scope, the tendency IS
towards education (providing knowledge) rather than training (providing
practice in performance). It is for these reasons that many schools
have developed extensive cooperative programs to supplement knowledge
with experience and professions have provided apprenticeships (MD
interns).
I suggest that the followup to this thread move to sci.edu. The
discussion has moved from what background is necessary to prepare the
computer science/software engineering student for life after college to
what is the purpose of education after high school. In a country with
extensive adult education programs, colleges no longer need to consider
themselves the last chance an individual has to become enlightened.
Given the rapidly decreasing employment opportunities for inexperienced
people without highly specialized knowledge, perhaps the role of the
college and the curricula it offers needs revamping.
--
/s/ George vmail: 703/883-6029
email: mitchell@community-chest.mitre.org [alt: gmitchel@mitre.arpa]
snail: GB Mitchell, MITRE, MS Z676, 7525 Colshire Dr, McLean, VA 22102elm@sprite.berkeley.edu (ethan miller) (12/18/89)
In article <1989Dec18.042005.19231@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu> bralick@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Will Bralick) writes: %In article <7474@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: %| From snidely@nosun.UUCP (David Schneider): %| > Most students consider themselves incarcerated, and aren't %| > willing to make it easy for teachers to teach. %| %| And leading to low efficiency in the educational system; by making % ~~~~~~~~~~ %I guess we just aren't cranking out those degrees fast enough. We %want more degrees for lower effort. No, what billwolf is saying is that education is inefficient; it takes longer to teach anything than it should take. In several of my undergrad classes, I don't feel that I got a semester's worth of material during the semester. *That* is inefficiency. %| (limited only by the need to satisfy %| an absolutely minimal set of prerequisites), % %Ah, yes, we don't want any of those foolish _breadth_ requirements, %now do we? But, wait, there's more! Why bother with those silly %prerequisites? Heck, people should be able to take anything %they want. How can you justify having some teacher decide %what previous work is to be required before taking a class? %You will probably want the job of ensuring that only _really_ %necessary courses are prescribed; we don't want those poor %oppressed students to actually learn anything that isn't absolutely %necessary for their exact job that they will get upon graduation. Anyone who can do well in a class should be allowed to take it. I'm glad that Brown was lenient on prerequisites; it meant that I got to take some classes I might not have otherwise. If I can handle the material, and I have the necessary background (or I'm willing to get it on my own), why shouldn't I be allowed to take an advanced class. Besides, many "advanced" classes in the liberal arts, such as history, merely delve deeply into one subject; a broad view of history (covering hundreds of years) may not be necessary for studying the Russian revolution. The Mayan civilization (and the Greeks for that matter) have little to do with it, yet History 1 is often considered a prerequisite for all other history classes. %| But surely (heavy sarcasm) this could not compare with the thrill %| of force-feeding irrelevant material to a captive audience which %| really doesn't give a damn, right??? % %Students (based on their limited life experiences) cannot see the %relevance of the material. What a surprise! The surprise is that we %should put the "inmates in charge of the asylum" and have the admittedly %ignorant students decide what the relevant material _is_. By putting the students in charge of their curriculum, you give them the choices, so they're interested in what they learn. You won't learn if you're force-fed. If you really are concerned with providing help on the curriculum, advise the students; don't order them around. The faculty only has more experience, not more intelligence. %| How could we reasonably %| believe that by totally disregarding their interests and forcing them %| to study wars of the 17th century, we could be seeing to it that they %| seek out drugs as an escape mechanism??? % %If a student "seeks out drugs as an escape mechanism" because they %are forced to (gasp!) actually read (that's right -- read) an actual %book that they wouldn't actually _buy_ because it doesn't fit within %the narrow confines of their "interests" then such a person should %seek professional help. But why should I be forced to read a book on something that doesn't interest me? Instead of forcing me to read the book, why not get me interested? %| No, our educational system %| is doing a FINE job of producing pregnant teenage dropouts who give %| birth to heroin-addicted babies -- why should we change a thing??? % %Our educational system has its problems, but I think that the culture %students _live in_ bears far more blame for the above than the school %where they spend only 30 hours/week. They're the same thing. Why is it that teachers get paid so little and have so little respect? Imagine the looks when a scientist earning $60K decides to teach high school and earn $25K. Why must such a person be "under too much pressure?" Why isn't teaching held in higher regard? It seems that the older generation is to blame; the schools often get the dregs of a discipline, not its stars. "Those who can, do; those who can't teach" seems to determine who teachs in schools, so is it any wonder that a student is fortunate to get one or two good teachers per year? The schools are to blame, but it is society that runs the schools. ethan ================================= ethan miller--cs grad student elm@sprite.berkeley.edu #include <std/disclaimer.h> {...}!ucbvax!sprite!elm Witty signature line condemned due to major quake damage.
bralick@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Will Bralick) (12/19/89)
In article <33278@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> elm@sprite.berkeley.edu (ethan miller) writes: | In article <1989Dec18.042005.19231@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu> bralick@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Will Bralick) writes: | % In article <7474@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: | % | | % | And leading to low efficiency in the educational system; by making | % ~~~~~~~~~~ | % I guess we just aren't cranking out those degrees fast enough. We | % want more degrees for lower effort. | | No, what billwolf is saying is that education is inefficient; it takes | longer to teach anything than it should take. In several of my | undergrad classes, I don't feel that I got a semester's worth of material | during the semester. *That* is inefficiency. What he is saying is that you have interests that you wish to pursue, and that taking courses that you perceive to be inconsequential is a waste of your time. You seem to be saying that in at least some (one?) of your courses you didn't get a "semester's worth of material" implying that you had time to pursue your interests, I suppose. | Anyone who can do well in a class should be allowed to take it. And how can one hope to predict that the student has the necessary background to be successful in a course? By self-affirmation, I suppose. Now, if a student thinks a course might look good on a resume' and the student takes the course without adequate preparation, then the student should fail (or drop) to course, right? Perhaps the student will struggle along visiting the professor and/or asking questions in class that were covered in the prerequisite courses. | % | But surely (heavy sarcasm) this could not compare with the thrill | % | of force-feeding irrelevant material to a captive audience which | % | really doesn't give a damn, right??? | % | % Students (based on their limited life experiences) cannot see the | % relevance of the material. What a surprise! The surprise is that we | % should put the "inmates in charge of the asylum" and have the admittedly | % ignorant students decide what the relevant material _is_. | | By putting the students in charge of their curriculum, you give them | the choices, so they're interested in what they learn. The students don't learn because they don't choose to become interested in the subject matter. They are -- spoiled. They only want to do what they want to do. At least education can disabuse them of the notion that they will be able to live like that :-). | You won't | learn if you're force-fed. If one is sufficiently mature one needn't be "force-fed." Students who are wise enough to design their own curriculum are certainly wise enough to carefully select a school which will satisfy their objectives while keeping their "irrelevant" courses to a minimum. Students who make an informed decision about the school they will attend and then whine about having to take "irrelevant" courses need to grow up. | % | How could we reasonably | % | believe that by totally disregarding their interests and forcing them | % | to study wars of the 17th century, we could be seeing to it that they | % | seek out drugs as an escape mechanism??? | % | % If a student "seeks out drugs as an escape mechanism" because they | % are forced to (gasp!) actually read (that's right -- read) an actual | % book that they wouldn't actually _buy_ because it doesn't fit within | % the narrow confines of their "interests" then such a person should | % seek professional help. | | But why should I be forced to read a book on something that doesn't | interest me? Instead of forcing me to read the book, why not | get me interested? One might get oneself interested. One might be in a situation where one is faced with doing something that one regards as distasteful, but which will be beneficial in the long term. Instead of hunkering down and attempting to make the best of it, some people prefer to complain about how unfair life is. | % | No, our educational system | % | is doing a FINE job of producing pregnant teenage dropouts who give | % | birth to heroin-addicted babies -- why should we change a thing??? | % | % Our educational system has its problems, but I think that the culture | % students _live in_ bears far more blame for the above than the school | % where they spend only 30 hours/week. | | They're the same thing. I disagree. One's educational system is not the sum total of one's culture. | Why is it that teachers get paid so little and I recommend this be pursued in sci.econ. | have so little respect? Some teachers deserve little respect. Most certainly deserve our respect and the respect of their students, but then again, we have been talking about students who are spoiled; who only respect their own desires. | Imagine the looks when a scientist earning | $60K decides to teach high school and earn $25K. Why should they care what anybody _else_ thinks? Some people are motivated by other things than money. Some people enjoy teaching. Regards, -- Will Bralick | ... when princes think more of bralick@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu | luxury than of arms, they lose bralick@gondor.cs.psu.edu | their state. with disclaimer; use disclaimer; | - Niccolo Machiavelli