i have found that structured ( classroom ) instruction is valuable WHEN open dialogue is encouraged..the droning on no matter how necessary the information might be .. is lost after my short attention span medication wears off...

Dear Spacecannon, Apparently against my wants, or the ethics of it, what you are saying is true. If you have read my comments about Education you may well remember or note that I am a strong believer in Educational Television.

I do not expect it to be perfect, but do feel very strongly that there is something really wrong with the United Nations for not instituting Educational Televison world wide.

Apparently there are powerful nations that are members of the UN, that do not want free speech, or free education.

It is either that, or the UNTV Department is so inept and lazy as to be virtually non existent.

The only place to get UNTV is by direct feed from Time Warner on the island of Manhattan last I worked on it.

You can get webcasts in French and English, but they are not of much account, and I feel the program really ought to be to cheap and simple.

For instance even I could buy a 25 dollar black and white battery powered 5 inch screened TV capable of receving the State PBS Channel free over the airwaves.

The Stratovision system of DC 6 and apparently B 29s beaming over the Midwest, in the 50s and and Viet Nam in the 60s, when Tvs were expensive and more rare than radios shows that I am not the only one wondering why such stuff isn't commonly utilized to advance our common understandings of things.

Dropping cheap tvs to people in Afghanistan is the sort of thing I would do, if I had the money.

We will spend all the money in the world to put every murder in a coffeeshop, or on the streets on camera, but putting cameras in the great classrooms, is so far out of the question.

Trancendian --I am in agreement with your views on ITV. But I think we've all missed the crux of the problem. It's not the hardware or even the software. You need quality content ready to go in today's electronic technology and the motivation to develop the organizational models to create educational institutions that can win accreditation.

Getting the content is a big up front investment. You need good teachers, and other people to help craft good lecture presentations and put them together into a cohesive course. You need support material for the course and training for teaching assistants that do the brunt of the grading and interaction with hundreds of students. You need management and administrative resources that may not be the kind of stuff your best teachers want to do. Courses will need continuous improvement and updating. A large scale institution will likely want to offer several different course productions all for the same subject either for giving students a choice of teaching style and/or course intensity (and amount of credit hours). Tests need to be constructed and changed periodically. Homework problems and project assignments need constant evolution.

To develop a distinct bounded entity that can set and enforce standards as well as efficiently compete with other institutions of learning for "customers" as well as accreditation requires an enterprise plan. I wonder if anyone has actually done that?

I wonder what institutions may be already on their way in that direction? I suspect there are some private institutions already. University of Phoenix, a business school, seems to be somewhat there judging from the occasional media and advertising ink they get out here in California.

Any public institutions doing this in the world of engineering education or technical education at the level involving serious accreditation?

Is it really practical or are the up front costs as well as the problem of finding quality teachers to participate too overwhelming?

Ed Weldon

The Open University was a major turning point in the UK. Although the bearded presenters on late night TV are a long running joke in Britland, it gave an opportunity for thousands to return to education. In it's early days that was especially true of those from poorer backgrounds, and guys who'd come out of National Service.

I'm not sure why I'm mentioning it, but Educating Rita is a good film/play. All about education/aspirations and so on.

Thank you for that Link on the OU.. When I first started reading the link, I thought that it was an article about an extinct attempt, but its still going and that is awesome! I think it is great to hear about a model like that, and to read how well it works. I wonder why that meme hasn't transferred to North America long ago?

but now that I've seen the comedy link, I guess I know why.... british humour.

GA.

Chris

Yes, the OU fills a space in the education system, and it does a good job. People used to be a bit 'sniffy' about it ("not a proper university" etc), but things are much better now. I'm not sure why the concept hasn't been taken up in America, but perhaps it's a size thing ; To gain credibility, such a place has to be know and used by all the people in a country. Somewhere with a large population, like the USA, might find it hard to get a similar thing off the ground. The OU grew at a time when there was widespread recognition of the need for that method of learning. The number of people interested was enough to make it viable to establish, but not too great to overwhelm it.

If there is no equivalent in the USA, perhaps the way forward would be for a nationally agreed framework, to be implemented at state level. Having a nationally agreed 'blueprint' would enable cross-state recognition. I don't know enough about the American system to suggest further, but if each state had an accredited distance learning university, it might be a step forward.

The comic link was a bit week, but I couldn't find any good archive material. Back then, if you turned on the TV after midnight the only thing you'd find was the OU. Although the styles of the time were hilarious, the programme content was excellent. I was never a student of the OU, but I'd often watch because of the well delivered, and wide ranging, lectures I could sit in on.

very well written!! GA.

and although I am very leery of the globalization movement, for it puts into place mechanisms that can harm an ever increasing amount of people, I know it is all done with the best intentions. Just remember the quote "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".

You would think that in the millenia of recorded history, that someone would have come up with methods of pure and incorruptible government.

I also don't believe we've ever really seen a pure free enterprise system. America has never been without central banking influence, or other monopolizing interests. Its a fantasy that it ever existed, or probably ever will exist. The compulsion of humans to create monopolies is far greater than the enthusiastic enlightened few to create a free society.

Chris

Some things work one way whether you believe in them or not.

Other things work entirely dependent on whether you believe in them or not.

Methods of government that are pure and incorruptible can never really be created, because they are not dependent on facts or science, but dependent on willful belief and commitment to ideals, manners, and ethical structures that really are divorced from natural law.

Man cannot be "good" unless Man wants to be "good".

When I look at nations and see nations where it is legal that women are not treated equally to men in pay, or educational opportunities, that have membership in the United Nations, I am revolted.

true.. still the idealist in me wants it to be incorruptible...

Chris

Hi Transcendian,

I think your point about well fed armies is mostly true, but even our own history offers a counter example. Certainly the red coats were better equipped and fed than Washington's army, but somehow (with much help from the French and an unenthusiastic British Parliament) we won. Something about higher motivation and novel guerrilla tactics I assume.

As for the drift away from meritocracy, I think this is complex and a little depressing. I think we now have two parallel class systems - the old money Rockefeller-Bush-Paris Hilton permanent aristocracy, and the newer meritocratic aristocracy. Smart, motivated people tend to marry other smart motivated people and have smart motivated kids, who grow up in families that support educational achievement. This gives them a tremendous leg up.

Working class people tend to marry working class spouses, start families at a younger age, and raise their kids in cash-and-time strapped working class households. Since in many cases neither parent has any advanced education, and since they may both be working (maybe even two jobs) the time, energy, and knowledge base may be lacking. It is much harder (not impossible - just much harder) for a kid from this background to move up. While there is still an untapped pool of students from the working class with the ability and motivation to go on to a university, they face much higher barriers. So we have two aristocracies, neither of which is as open to the working class as in the past. This is a tragic waste, both for the individual and for society.

no, what I mean is that Britain and France had an interest in the outcome, and it was a garella war, far from either, and effected by bordered interests with long supply lines.

This does not fully obviate the fact that South Vietnam was the ostensible side that the US chose in a Civil War.

I regard the Vietnam war as a Proxy War, and steamvalve of the Cold War between Russia, China, and the US.

Ho Chi Ming apparently did use strategies that George Washington used in his conflict with Great Britain, according to Military Historians, in the conflict.

That is what I meant, primarily.

I see your point but it is still that America had war with the north Vietnamese faction, that these wars were joined not for humanitarian reasons, is mostly always.

I regard the Vietnam war as a Proxy War, and steamvalve of the Cold War between Russia, China, and the US.

i bet the Vietnamese people do not see it that way.

it seems all the major armies seem to forget the "lessons learned" while fighting a guerrilla army

So, how they see it, and how it was, may be different.

How do you see the involvement of the French and Great Britain in the US Civil War?

No, I thought you did fine, and an excellent peek over the fence into someone else's efforts.

We suffered the same attack "feel good" on our grade schools, it has resulted in two "classes" of engineering schools - those willing to go 5 years to cover remedial education and those not.

I'd like to have the Germans or the Skandinavians wade in here somewhere with at least brief descriptions.

as an aside - we only promised to allow the PURSUIT of happiness.

I'm glad to see someone catch that. There has never been a promise of equal outcome. The promise is equal opportunity. That being said, we haven't always done a very good job of keeping the promise of equal opportunity.

I wish that public education was doing a better job of educating our young people and preparing them for the next step. The answer to why is very complex with many causes including family participation. How is the family supposed to participate when Mom and Dad are both working full time plus to try to finance the family? I don't know the answer either.

I must add that federal involvement in public education has not improved the outcome. All they have done is to throw money and requirements at the problem without really helping.

we only promised to allow the PURSUIT of happiness.

Yep, and it's just as well. I've always viewed that bit as meaning some sort of 'do your own thing' type clause. Education is certainly no guaranteed path to anything, and happiness is pretty much self-defined. Now I think about it, that part is superfluous - nobody in their right mind is going to pursue unhappiness ! Maybe it's there as a restraint on politicians !

Actually I think its there to prevent drafting [ie military] ... the old coin in the bottom of the beer trick invented by.... After all, how can one be havin' any fun if they are getting dragged off in cuffs to some stinky old boat, to have some stinky old sea-captain yell at you?

Chris

First off that is totally ludicrous. As The United States of America advances towards the future I see no reason to have the Blacks, Native Americans, women or Mexicans educated beyond high school. Who would do the menial tasks like labor and domestic chores? I don't know where you are from but the white men of America have sweat our butts off trying to keep the lid on the melting pot of American commerce and having to compete with other races for jobs, then that means we would have to elevate our own education to stay on top.

Think about it, what if General Motors, Ford and Chrysler were run by a black, a woman, Mexicans and Native Americans? We would have been on the forefront of the auto industry long before Japan. There would be no payoffs from the oil and gas companies to the auto industry like we have today to keep building gas guzzlers that keep the oil and gas companies and their employees as well as ours employed.

What if the farm industry was run by blacks, women, native Americans and Mexicans? We would be eating organically grown crops and live stock. The ammonia companies, growth hormone companies, chemical fertilizer companies as well as senators and congressmen would loose out on billions in profits and under the table monies that make us rich.

Lets take a look at one more institution: The health care industry. What if all the hospitals were run by those people? what if all the doctors were members of those races? what if all the healthcare providers were minority run companies. Do you think they would give billions to pharmaceutical companies, medical research companies or deny legitimate claims to persons who really are covered by HMO's or PPO's without hiring an attorney so we would all make money at the little mans expense?

Blacks, Mexicans and women don't understand the delicate balance of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours". We have to keep the money circulating amongst ourselves and let them have a few crumbs off the table to keep them coming back or we will have to do all the work ourselves and God forbid I am not going to do physical labor.

ROFLMAO!! gotta love sarcasm! GA.

I don't have the statistics, but I 'feel' that if one could compare all the labour that has gone in to america since its inception, the whiteys would still be in the 10% group.. as in having only contributed 10% of the labour.

Chris

Tell me your kidding here and just jerking our chain, I believe in sticking up for our race (the way every other race does), but if we do, we are called raceist. (Im White), but to keep someone down cause of race is wrong. America needs and always has benefited for the cream of the crop of every race, thats why we are America. And educational OPPORTUNITY is what Chis wants to discuss here.

I read that as completely sarcastic, meaning the opposite of what he/she is saying, and is a very witty social commentary.

Chris

There are problems you have failed to see. 1. Not every person has the requisite intelligence to be educated to a BA level, whatever that means. If you want to dumb down education, as would certainly happen, the BA might be no more demanding than 8th grade is now. 2. "TANSTAAFL" or "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" also applies. Someone has to pay for it. If the money comes from government, then the government has to take it away from the taxpayers. There is no "free" education. 3. In such a system the government would have control of what was taught and I don't trust any politicians to make those decisions. The indoctrination is already bad enough in government-run schools and colleges. The government would put even more pressure on eliminating any private education that was contrary to their views.

Politically there is no practical difference between Fascism and the extreme socialism of the Communists. If diagrammed properly and describing the actual world ---

Total Government G---------D-R---------------------------------F--No Government

D is where the Democrats are and R is where the Republicans are while F is where the Federalists started in 1800. Fascists and Communists are at G along with absolute monarchies, god-kings and the like. The terms Right and Left are due to a chance of fate where one political party sat on one side and the other party sat on the other and have nothing to do with the results of their policies. The diagram above could be reversed [with Total Government at the right] and the positions of the letters would be the same in relation to Total Government and No Government. America and Canada both suffer from creeping government control.

There are ways to fix health care without putting the government in charge. Just require an income dedution to go into a medical savings account and pay for a high deductible policy [costs less], the money belongs to the citizen, but can only be used for medical expenses chosen and controlled by the citizen. The low cost major medical would then cover serious illness. The best part is that all the money in an MSA would belong to the citizen and he would watch the expenses. Pensions depend on Wall Street and corporate profits. Stockholders control pay. Do movie stars, athletes and politicians deserve to get rich or are they just greedy too? Be careful about utopia, unfortunately you may get what you wish for.

Now if you test students and take those who are most intelligent and provide education aid based on that, and on need, while maintaining high educational standards without regard to whether the college is private or government and without regard to the subjects studied, then you might have a viable system. Nearly half of students do not even graduate high school and less than half of those who do are capable of college-level work. Some additional aid for those who are capable would help, but there is little to be done for the rest that would not be called regressive and old-fashioned.

Come on now Taganan, In my judgement if you can make through High School, you can make it through college, so I'd say enough of the citizens are smart enough to do the work, and get the degree, to make the opportunity worthwhile to offer.

As to who is to pay for it, whatever taxes paid into government that actually come back to those that pay them in a beneficial form, are a legitimate use of the money, as opposed to propping up corrupt governments, or local sweetheart land grabs and development corruptions.

As far as University, or College expenditures that run up the price of Education, them Sports Programs where the Coach gets paid more than the Chancellor or Professors, and sometimes in the Millions of dollars a year, could as well be attacked as counter to the real missions of educational institutions.

And then so what if something is called old-fashioned? The old fashioned phonetic method of teaching someone how to read, is considered to be superior to the whatever weird and more difficult way enforced over the past few decades. So I am for some old-fashioned ways of doing things, when they work better than what is supposedly new and improved.

Educating the masses is never a bad thing.

In Holland we have free university, well sort off.

But it is more off who can apply, In America it is more like the wealthy can afford it and the poor can enter on some handouts.

it should be about those who are able not about those who have money.

At least that is the way i see it

Well, after reading through all this (which is still more appealing than starting work) we seem to have a number of issues:

1. Getting the knowledge.

2. Getting the degree.

3. Paying for above

And here is part of the problem

Universities are expensive to run. They fund them more and more through tuition (as state aid dropped of a cliff under Republicans) and all the knowledge (unless you work for yourself) in the world is useless without the paper.

People can train themselves, the Navy technician program is an excellent example. Don't keep training ON YOUR OWN TIME, you don't get promoted.

People can also gut the real good out of almost any program (see the College of the Air Force) with useless degrees on useless subjects. (And I am not actually being engineering centric here, but practically some degrees are never even going to pay for themselves).

Now I have run the web enough to tell you, if you quit hitting youtube and actually want practical knowledge - it is out there. It isn't organized, there isn't a "curriculum", but you can learn the essential - BUT YOU WILL HAVE NO WAY TO PROVE IT.

Except on the job or by working for yourself.

So non-traditional career paths for non-traditional people?

None of this is to say the University system couldn't be improved, or that education isn't in general too expensive, or really to disagree with most of what is posted.

But the web is COVERED with people trying to teach what they know.

So then we have to ask ourselves - what was it we wanted from University?

What is wanted is a certification of a professional level of performance.

excellent breakdown and synopsis. GA

Chris

One could argue that dropping state aid to universities is a good thing in the long run. While so-called price gouging on gas has been a major political issue for long time in the USA, the universities have been price gouging at a far greater rate with very little political fallout. Just compare what us old-timers paid for tuition compared to now - it makes gas seem like a good deal!

I think the reason universities get away with it is because of easy to get student loans. The market is elastic for college tuition, as no matter how fast it increases in price there are still plenty of students to fit the available seats in college. Without the easy to get student loans the universities would be pricing themselves out of the market and would be seeing fewer students - students simply couldn't afford to go. Student loans have become like all other forms of easy credit, a way to buy what you cannot easily afford.

Rather than continually increasing available student loans, a government that really cares about common people would be railing against university price gouging as they do for gas prices. I bet that the universities have had too much of a hold on our politicians to have that happen so far.

Even within engineering this gets splintered after high school

The other thread about organizing engineers to either volunteer or get paid for throwing in on projects has the same problem - they both depend on what kind of engineer.

In software we can throw together to collaborate on almost anything until it has to hit the hardware.

But civil f'rinstance, I don't know how you do remote collaboration.

And civil and others - accreditation I am guessing can be done through standing for the P.E. license, but that requires working experience in the field - and how do you get that without the ticket to get hired? And lots of adverts I have seen recently ask for a degree from an accredited ABET university - even in my field.

In software and some others, we count heavily on the degree (good thing I got in early) as we have no ongoing accreditation.

Then none of this matters later - as your project work stands for you.

A complex pickle. But only if you think there is a shortage of engineers I think.

I respectfully disagree with you. Greed and envy have been with us for a long time and I do not believe they are going away anytime soon. I do agree that education is a powerful tool that can raise the standards of an entire group. There is nothing like the feeling of accomplishment you get from achieving that goal. Education is one of the greatest investments any civilization can make as long as the education is real and the people are taught the truth and the free exchange of ideas can flourish.

The distinction between "How will it affect..." and "How to make it" is singularily perceptive. Responders might keep it in the back of their mind while responding.

I work at a Community College in South West Indiana. I had a chance to attend a presentation given to a group of high schoolers. Ordinarily statistics about the cost of an education do not stick in my head. Because of this thread I paid a little closer attention. It was stated that on average students attending state schools pay around 1/3 of the actual cost of their education. Students attending private schools pay a much greater percentage. The actual amount varies with the individual school.

Chris-

I have not read through all the posts to this thread yet, so maybe this link has already been posted. I thought you might be interested in it:

http://features.csmonitor.com/innovation/2009/05/13/opencourseware-college-education-without-the-student-loans

I personally have been subscribed to MIT's open courseware for some time- not all of the available courses are all they should be, but for someone with preserverence, there is already a free university growing on the web. Now, getting a DEGREE from your studies, that might be a different kettle of fish...

That's a great link... GA.

GA Kris. I watched one of the videos of a lecture. I am struck by the thought that as we go about our lives occasionally dismayed by one or another waste of something worth saving our universities may be throwing away the opportunity to capture the lectures of their greatest teachers on video. This is a true waste and I believe it is largely a bad habit of our cash strapped public institutions.

I don't see the pricey private institutions missing these opportunities. But neither do I see these folks letting go of this material for a price the rest of us can afford.

Public universities are different. This is where lies the great opportunity to provide valuable content for a free university system. I wonder if the regents of the University of California would go for that. I'm not hopeful. But there are others.

Ed Weldon

Dear Ed, Where we may have some disagreements concerning wind power, we are in complete agreement from what you just wrote.

Most every University does have an Audio Visual department, some are more powerful and work with Public Broadcasting.

The competition for "eyeballs" is fierce.

The TV University has long been desired and attempted to varying degrees of success. 200 channels and you can't get a degree, by watching free TV?

I have long felt that this is a mission that the United Nations ought to take up. My failures politically regarding this agenda have been a source of profound sadness, if not depression and despair.

Thank God I've not been humiliated too!

I will tell anybody that I think very very well of Chrisg, and I hope he will accept that the work is as much about doing it, as arranging it, making it flow, as it is about just having a "Library".

Cross thread I know he knows that an organized body of knowledge, is of utility, for his categories on the Rebuilding Reading List, are a display of that.

That is the sort of "editing" required to achieve a Free TV UN, University, since most AV vids are really of low production value, and must be really great to compete with the flash and smash we are prone to drift to.

Some Threads will Never Die!

Threads like this one eventually become part of the CR4 Reference Library.

There is a reason that to be an Editor, is an honorable and respectable position.

I myself do try to edit, or summate threads I have started.

In one case I have said I was not fully competent to do the summation.

In that case c_warner711 did a fine job.

In the case of chrisg288s thread it would appear that on the one hand it is desired, and not in place, and on the other, it is a reality in need of codification, and a "place". For the sake of argument imagine the University of CR4 at Troy.

Imagine the CR4 Admissions Test?

FAA Tests for Certifications, FCC Tests for Certifications, Bar Exams, and some other Educational Systems of Acknowledgement of worked for and achieved competence have a history of supporting the great randomness of how people learn.

Some things you can learn all by your self, and other things really do demand that you hang out with others that have done it.

For instance I might well hire an attorney who has never fought a case, but simply passed the Bar Exam, whereas I would have great reservations about hiring a pilot who simply passed the Written.

There is Practical knowledge, and then theoretical knowledge which is why it makes sense that the highest degrees for practical sciences are the Masters.

(correct me please if there is a doctorate of engineering.)

At the risk of dipping into an area we typically prefer to avoid, I do say that the Concept of God, who is forever, everywhere, and knows everything, offers to us in our finite lives the prospect of knowing what we need to know, when we need to know it.

The struggle is to both know some things, and know how to put them together, which is the aim of great educators to accomplish.

The reason that I asked this question (the thread question) is that I tend to think that Education is a Massive enabler of civilization and it's growth. Subsequently I tend to see Free education as a massive enabler of the growth of civilization, and the only overall solution to conquering the problems of human self-annihilation.

What can a 100 million university graduates do to change the world in the next ten years, before it is too late? I think a lot.

Therefore, I haven't felt the need to edit or condense... I just want the results.

Chris

The problem is that everything has to be short time gain these days

There would be two groups of people going to college. The ones who want to learn and the ones who just want to postpone going to work. I'm not sure if it would solve anything. It might even cause a total meltdown of the education system. Let's leave things as they are, at least for the time being.

In as far as the stated question ("What if virtually ever man and woman 'of age' in North America were educated to at least a BA level?") goes, I'm inclined to agree. However, my take on this is "How do we enable people with desire and potential to get a University education". A more egalitarian system. Circumstance of birth excludes vast numbers of people, and pointing to a few examples of those who manage to claw their way up just doesn't cut it*.

Chris : It's been a while since I read all this. Having seen how the thread has developed, would you (with hindsight) have re-phrased the question ? Everyone having a degree seems like a non-starter (I'm sure we've covered it), but the issue of merit based advancement/level playing field seems (to me) to be the important one. In the UK, equality gets bastardized by giving everybody a bit of paper that says "degree", regardless of talent. The term "fail" is not allowed by Big Brother style Newspeak. Equality of education is about equality of access/opportunity. Merit-based access and advancement is what I'd like to see. The term 'equality' has been hijacked by the politically-correct crazies. To paraphrase a well known book ; Destroying an education system is easy, you just give everyone a Degree and parade those bits of paper as being of equal value.

*That line's a general comment on the subject, Ron, it doesn't read very clear.

I tend to agree with what you are saying. We have given everyone the opportunity for a free education through high school, however there are many who graduate without a good education. Just because the opportunity is presented doesn't maen that people will take advantage of it. The fault and failure in our system falls both with the education system and the people being educated. There other component is the expectations of the parents and how involved they want to be in their child education.

Thanks, Chris

There's a mass of really interesting and good points there. I need to let that mull around in my head for a while, but I'm pretty much in agreement with you on all points. I'd give you a GA for a lot of the individual parts in that post, but I especially like the last paragraph. If anybody visits this thread, that paragraph is worth reading several times. Excellent job of composing an 'I wish I'd said that' post. Just to help highlight it, I'll quote you ;

"..the questions we ask ourselves tend to organize the answers we generate. Like a statistical query, the question becomes the test for compliance. I believe that we humans have a tendency to ask for what we already think we know. I asked this question, not only to receive the answers we have, but also to organize the thinking of others into finding the best solutions, and to assist in changing the status quo. Therefore, I chose to ask the most unlimited question I could. With a fantasy question posed, I knew that I would receive a lot of reality in return. This is of benefit to us all. We have painted a fairly broad landscape of the educational world, and internationally to boot. I don't pretend that it is comprehensive by any means, but it is certainly awareness raising. I don't know what the next question is... but my children might, if I've done my job." - If I could give you more than one vote I would.

Cheers.

thank you Kris.. I was feeling guilty for excessive verbiage...lol

Chris...excellent topic and great discussions. Sorry to have come to this thread so late, but have been quite busy with work and am just now catching up on CR4. So instead of interjecting for and against all the posts where I had an opinion, I'll keep silent.

I would like to correct your very first statement assuming that you are Canadian (not a European, or citizen of another country living in Canada). You are an American. You live in North America. I know what you meant and I know it's generally taken that when someone says they are American or from America, that they mean the USA. I guess it's a pet peeve of mine. I work for a company headquartered in Montreal and my colleagues there continually say "you Americans" meaning those of us from the USA. It drives me nuts.