I think if you try hard enough you can get a degree from a "real", heck even "established" college with stunningly little math.
And indeed personal interaction with a professor is essential to get to a certain level,But if you can not afford that, then the much worse alternative, is still INFINITELY better then no college.
And not a single one of my professors at my real and established university used the Socratic method of teaching, not even once.
Then again I didn't take any polysci courses, just cs, math, stat, etc.
And the ability to pay a lot of money just to get the opportunity to discuss Elizabethan poetry with someone else comes from wealth. Not form talent, or hard work, but the wealth of your family.
Apologies if you actually come from a poor family and made it to college on scholarships and tips from waiting tables.
But the vast majority of the time, people who discuss Elizabethan poetry in college don't really need college as an essential economic opportunity opener.
In short, you are not the target demographic of that $99 college.
Every time an article shows up on the (fascinating) topic someone pops up and starts swinging. "Personal growth. Face to face interaction with brilliant professors. Discuss with like minded talented youths. Completely misses the point of college... and on"
The reality is that no one would even consider paying private universtity equivalent fees to achieve those things in any other case. They are peripheral. Like air conditioning in a car they are inseparable from a good university.
You can't ignore the fact that "They’re also in the information business in a time when technology is
driving down the cost of selling information to record, destabilising lows."
In any case, assume andreyf is correct and the peripherals make all the difference. That is still a big deal. Universities may need to compete explicitly on that advantage, without the pretence of a better education. That world would look very different. Perhaps as this article and discussion on HN suggest, online is more suitable for basic courses while advanced courses still need a building. Maybe this is on to a decent idea: $99 per month online study of all basic courses, 1-2 year. 1-2 years in a building for advanced courses.
Universities may need to compete explicitly on that advantage, without the pretence of a better education.
But that is what makes a better education - a well-rounded view of the world and a deep understanding of the material. That's the distinction between "University education" and "community college education". At least in high-level math classes, the "read the book and solve the exercises" is only the first part of a lesson. Understanding the meaning of the concepts, the epistemological implications, and discussing how it related to other areas of math is the true value-add.
a well-rounded view of the world and a deep understanding of the material
The deepest level of understanding may only be achievable through peer and superior face to face interaction. But a deep understanding could be within the reach of an extraordinary autodidact. Especially if the tuition fees are out of his or her reach.
A well-rounded view of the world on the other hand, is more social stratification then education. Or it's education only as much as certain knowledge is essential to truly belong in certain strata of society.
You don't have to be wealthy to attend college and study poetry or other liberal arts. I went to my state university with no financial help from my parents, just federal loans. I ate plain rice many days and pay $300 bucks a month on the loans, but I did it and I wouldn't trade it for the world.
Maybe 3/4 of it is from just liberal arts. My degree is in philosophy with concentrations in peace studies and religious studies. As much as I loved the experience, it was certainly not easily monetizable. The remaining 1/4 is from taking computer science classes after struggling to find interesting work with a philosophy degree. I love the structured nature of coding, but the world isn't always so black and white. Liberal arts teaches you to explore and analyze the fuzzy, murky, gray areas.
Comments
I think if you try hard enough you can get a degree from a "real", heck even "established" college with stunningly little math.
And indeed personal interaction with a professor is essential to get to a certain level,But if you can not afford that, then the much worse alternative, is still INFINITELY better then no college.
And not a single one of my professors at my real and established university used the Socratic method of teaching, not even once.
Then again I didn't take any polysci courses, just cs, math, stat, etc.
And the ability to pay a lot of money just to get the opportunity to discuss Elizabethan poetry with someone else comes from wealth. Not form talent, or hard work, but the wealth of your family.
Apologies if you actually come from a poor family and made it to college on scholarships and tips from waiting tables.
But the vast majority of the time, people who discuss Elizabethan poetry in college don't really need college as an essential economic opportunity opener.
In short, you are not the target demographic of that $99 college.
Every time an article shows up on the (fascinating) topic someone pops up and starts swinging. "Personal growth. Face to face interaction with brilliant professors. Discuss with like minded talented youths. Completely misses the point of college... and on"
The reality is that no one would even consider paying private universtity equivalent fees to achieve those things in any other case. They are peripheral. Like air conditioning in a car they are inseparable from a good university.
You can't ignore the fact that "They’re also in the information business in a time when technology is driving down the cost of selling information to record, destabilising lows."
In any case, assume andreyf is correct and the peripherals make all the difference. That is still a big deal. Universities may need to compete explicitly on that advantage, without the pretence of a better education. That world would look very different. Perhaps as this article and discussion on HN suggest, online is more suitable for basic courses while advanced courses still need a building. Maybe this is on to a decent idea: $99 per month online study of all basic courses, 1-2 year. 1-2 years in a building for advanced courses.
Universities may need to compete explicitly on that advantage, without the pretence of a better education.
But that is what makes a better education - a well-rounded view of the world and a deep understanding of the material. That's the distinction between "University education" and "community college education". At least in high-level math classes, the "read the book and solve the exercises" is only the first part of a lesson. Understanding the meaning of the concepts, the epistemological implications, and discussing how it related to other areas of math is the true value-add.
a well-rounded view of the world and a deep understanding of the material
The deepest level of understanding may only be achievable through peer and superior face to face interaction. But a deep understanding could be within the reach of an extraordinary autodidact. Especially if the tuition fees are out of his or her reach.
A well-rounded view of the world on the other hand, is more social stratification then education. Or it's education only as much as certain knowledge is essential to truly belong in certain strata of society.
You don't have to be wealthy to attend college and study poetry or other liberal arts. I went to my state university with no financial help from my parents, just federal loans. I ate plain rice many days and pay $300 bucks a month on the loans, but I did it and I wouldn't trade it for the world.
But did you really go into significant dept to study liberal arts? Just liberal arts, nothing more... easily monetizable?
Maybe 3/4 of it is from just liberal arts. My degree is in philosophy with concentrations in peace studies and religious studies. As much as I loved the experience, it was certainly not easily monetizable. The remaining 1/4 is from taking computer science classes after struggling to find interesting work with a philosophy degree. I love the structured nature of coding, but the world isn't always so black and white. Liberal arts teaches you to explore and analyze the fuzzy, murky, gray areas.