|
| quote: | Originally posted by Igneous01
this.
I have mixed feeling about education, with there being two main problems with it:
1. Its too specialized, when times change, certain skills that were so rigorously trained become obsolete, hence the person needs to either go back to school again to learn something new, or end up in the gutter.
|
I've noticed this trend in some of the academics I've worked with / had contact with. The worst thing to deal with are the egos. One Ph.D. I was talking with tried to dismis me because I hadn't read some book in her feild. I almost pointed out that it was because I was busy learning how to make computers but decided that it would probably be lost on her.
I think that part of the obsession with specialists comes from the rabid adoption of capitalisim based loosely on Smith's (passing) comments on how specialization improved production. The fact is that a number of specialists I know are only specialists because they can't do anything else, not because they are good at what they do.
Specialization, particularily in academics, also makes the specialists more ardent when defending thier bred winning brains. It's odd to think that if a student in an undergraduate course proves a prof. to be wrong the rest of the class can justifiably begin asking why it is the prof. and not the student standing behind the podium.
| quote: |
so while it might lead to drastic consequences in government funding education down the road, i cant help but feel there is some responsibility to be held onto these establishments of education that the quality is slowly going down the drain. Opting for the more "earn your diploma in six months" kind of thing, and miss out on some major aspects of the subject.
|
Another difficulty I have with graduate level experiences that I've had is that being responsible and studying things that might be useful is basically dismised as pandering (or something like that). This isn't a topic I've run in to as much but it's almost as if 'research for research's sake' has been adopted to imply that all research in publicly funded universities MUST be disconected with the general society. ... it could also be a problem that I've run into more people in the humanities graduate society than those in science who have tangible "look what I did" moments of finding new materials, chemicals, etc.
| quote: |
also, i think a school on mental health and civilized discussion is necessary. I cant tell you how many times ive read through physics and science forums only to find people calling names and acting like little children when someone presents or challenges an idea. Then as a final resort wave their phd's around claiming they are an authoritative figure on the subject and know whats right and wrong (without having to test the idea first). Kind of funny to read, but also kind of sad knowing that these supposed great minds are leading us into the future - and they cant properly discuss ideas with each other (let alone actually test them and scrutinize them) |
Here here.
One of the things that the internet is really doing is bringing traditional academic structures to question. When confronted with direct opposition quality academics should be able to state thier point in a robust manner and bow out if it isn't thier specialty.
I was talking about economics with one of my friends a while back and he pointed out that many at his place of work were Ph.D's in things financial. But, as mentioned earlier, specialization doesn't mean good in the whole subject. Ph.D's can be earned by scrutinizing a single data set. It might be long and there may be all kinds of elements to it but the fact is that if it is a data set about colour preferences in the revenue generation model of the fashion industry that doesn't grant huge insight into the bond markets.
|