I'm not going to disagree with the major premise of this article: it is better overall to learn through hands-on engagement and experience than by sitting in a lecture theatre taking notes. But I think that there's an argument to be made that if you're paying a lot of money for something (either directly through tuition or indirectly through taxation) then you should not be paying for things you can do for yourself. For the most part, we don't actually need a university to learn through hands-on engagement and experience. We can do it for ourselves. But what we can't do for ourselves is cut through the opacity around any discipline, especially in the initial stages of learning, and come to a sharp and focused understanding. That's what the university provides. Sure, maybe if the university provided less of it, and left space for exploration and creativity, the overall learning experience would be improved. But that would require changing university economics entirely, and nobody wants to do that.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
