2020 Vision

[PonoBill]

Lynda is extremely good for tech ed. The "Learn to Learn" course can take over your life. It heads twenty different ways every week. If it were ML-driven the different ways would be curated for you learning differences, but as it is, it's pretty wild, very good, and overwhelming.

[Ichabod Spoonbill]

I've talked about education with teachers, and they invariably bring up the points Ichabod does. Then I ask how many kids get that experience and what percentage of the teachers they know of actually deliver that, and the defense falters. Certainly nothing like the "part learning coach, part therapist, part parent, part cheerleader, and part information transfer." gets delivered to even a majority of kids by the majority of teachers. And that absolutely does not happen in college.

That's our job now. I don't know where you're referring to. I would never deny there are crappy teachers, but most are at least fairly good at it. I think most teachers are pretty dedicated to their craft. I mean, why choose the field of you're not? It's not financially rewarding.

I think if you spent time seeing modern education, you might be surprised. We don't just hurl facts. We do all those things I mentioned. Someone who's a highly-motivated learner like yourself might not have much use for the touchy-feely part of the job. Its also less. Nevertheless, those moments are some of the most rewarding.

[RideTheGlide]

I've talked about education with teachers, and they invariably bring up the points Ichabod does. Then I ask how many kids get that experience and what percentage of the teachers they know of actually deliver that, and the defense falters. Certainly nothing like the "part learning coach, part therapist, part parent, part cheerleader, and part information transfer." gets delivered to even a majority of kids by the majority of teachers. And that absolutely does not happen in college.

That's our job now. I don't know where you're referring to. I would never deny there are crappy teachers, but most are at least fairly good at it. I think most teachers are pretty dedicated to their craft. I mean, why choose the field of you're not? It's not financially rewarding.

I think if you spent time seeing modern education, you might be surprised. We don't just hurl facts. We do all those things I mentioned. Someone who's a highly-motivated learner like yourself might not have much use for the touchy-feely part of the job. Its also less. Nevertheless, those moments are some of the most rewarding.

A lot of what teachers can do in a classroom setting is limited by time and the student/teacher ratio. Then there is the matter of pace; it's set by the full amount of material to cover in a quarter or semester. It overwhelms some students and holds back others. And after presenting material to the whole class to keep pace, there often isn't a lot of time left to do one on one. I do believe most teachers are in because they want to help kids learn, but most public school systems don't make it easy to do the best job.

[Ichabod Spoonbill]

You're right about that, Glide. Sometimes it feels like we're working in opposition to administration.

[Admin]

Admin, I'm inclined to agree with you some on higher learning. Still, I think we get a little too enthralled with our machines. All those electronic delivery systems have their place with instruction, but if teaching were only that, what a cold, cold world we would live in. Of course, with the sub-par instruction you get in many colleges, maybe electronic teaching could be better> I don't know. I will say in K–12 it's best done on a limited basis.

Ich,

I value value what you guys do.  My mom was a teacher and I have seen what that commitment and caring looks like up close.  I would suggest that this would begin as a free mode of higher education.  Non Linear Education is a huge potential benefit of this system.  In my self-directed learning online I have revealed to myself how important a variety of approaches are to the same subject.  What is mottled and complex from one teacher can be simply digested from another.  How many students reject subjects because they can't follow early on and never truly regain the pace of the class.  In this linear environment we lose kids to "I'm bad at math" that could be routed to an approach that worked for them.  This is no failing of the teacher.  It is not possible to present 100 different approaches as a single educator.  In a Non Linear environment this can be accomplished. 

There is nothing about this type of system that would limit itself to an age group, a geography, a timeline for completion.  No application process would be required. 

We currently have 47 percent of our students at community colleges.  When we think of free college for all, Princeton may be the image in our mind but in reality what we would be providing and paying for is not that.  When you think of the massive efficiencies, environmental impact and of of course the quality of education, it seems like something we need to pursue.

[Ichabod Spoonbill]

Admin, I'm inclined to agree with you some on higher learning. Still, I think we get a little too enthralled with our machines. All those electronic delivery systems have their place with instruction, but if teaching were only that, what a cold, cold world we would live in. Of course, with the sub-par instruction you get in many colleges, maybe electronic teaching could be better> I don't know. I will say in K–12 it's best done on a limited basis.

Ich,

I value value what you guys do.  My mom was a teacher and I have seen what that commitment and caring looks like up close.  I would suggest that this would begin as a free mode of higher education.  Non Linear Education is a huge potential benefit of this system.  In my self-directed learning online I have revealed to myself how important a variety of approaches are to the same subject.  What is mottled and complex from one teacher can be simply digested from another.  How many students reject subjects because they can't follow early on and never truly regain the pace of the class.  In this linear environment we lose kids to "I'm bad at math" that could be routed to an approach that worked for them.  This is no failing of the teacher.  It is not possible to present 100 different approaches as a single educator.  In a Non Linear environment this can be accomplished. 

There is nothing about this type of system that would limit itself to an age group, a geography, a timeline for completion.  No application process would be required. 

We currently have 47 percent of our students at community colleges.  When we think of free college for all, Princeton may be the image in our mind but in reality what we would be providing and paying for is not that.  When you think of the massive efficiencies, environmental impact and of of course the quality of education, it seems like something we need to pursue.

Admin, I don't think there's a teacher out there who wouldn't want more individualized education for their children. I agree -- it's a serious issue. All we need is an increase in education spending to pay for the extra teachers and facilities, and it can happen.

[Area 10]

Please remember that what is required of education for children and adults is quite different. Education for children is probably in reality more about socialisation than skills training, and for adults it’s more about skills training than socialisation. I think you might be looking at the education process from the perspective of an adult, not what a child needs to become an integrated member of society, with the soft skills and self-awareness (and discipline, perhaps) to succeed. You as adults don’t need those things because hopefully you’ve already got them.

[PonoBill]

The sweet spot for online education is post-secondary, both because of the nature of college and other post-secondary education, and because that's where the money is. The USA spends more than any other country on education per student, but post-secondary is almost three times higher than grammar/HS. The average expenditure per student for college is about 30K including all grants, loans, and subsidies.

Still, when the US ranks fifth in spending on primary/secondary education and ranks 30th in standardized achievement testing it's a tough go to say that more money is the solution. Regardless of what you think about testing as a valid assessment of progress, it's a hard argument to buck politically. And it doesn't make much difference who is in office. Spending has been stagnant for five years and actually declined when President Obama was in office, even in the years when he had a democratic majority in the house and senate.

[eastbound]

30k/yr vs 10k/yr--ima process that for a minute over here

very interesting data point

[surfinJ]

More money isn’t the problem.  It is just in the wrong places.
My daughters last three years of her aerospace master at one of the top engineering schools in the country, $1800 in total tuition.

[Bean]

30k/yr vs 10k/yr--ima process that for a minute over here

very interesting data point

Eastie, to bring it closer to home (at least closer to one of your home-breaks), if you look at some of the individual schools statistics you will find anomolies like Asbury Park, where the average cost per student was over $35,000.  Clearly, the Asbury Park studens did not get $35,000 in educational value.

In the stats that PB shared, there are likely thousands of data points that mirror this anomoly.  A huge chunk of the $35k per student go to non-educational programs.  So, in instances where schools are "overfunded" to cover other non-educational programs, the total dollars are included in the overall statistics skewing the results.

[digger71]

More money isn’t the problem.  It is just in the wrong places.
My daughters last three years of her aerospace master at one of the top engineering schools in the country, $1800 in total tuition.

J - I have to assume you understand that $1,800 per student doesn't pay the bills for the school and that the money is coming from somewhere/someone else. 

[digger71]

The sweet spot for online education is post-secondary, both because of the nature of college and other post-secondary education, and because that's where the money is. The USA spends more than any other country on education per student, but post-secondary is almost three times higher than grammar/HS. The average expenditure per student for college is about 30K including all grants, loans, and subsidies.

As the owner of an online, post-secondary school I will agree that it is a sweet spot for those two exact reasons.  And I will be the first to say that some bad actors in the space have hurt our reputation and ability to operate quite a bit over the past few years.  However, the single largest driver of costs for us is regulation.  Even my small school is beholden to the Dept of Education, Dept of Defense, Dept of Veterans Affairs, Dept of Labor, our national Accrediting agency, and each state where we have a single student (for me that is 48!).  I get that the first three want to be able to look under the hood because they are putting up $ for student tuition, but NONE of them have consistent reporting requirements or regulatory language.  And the worst part is that even with all this ridiculously expensive "oversight", bad actors continue to exist in the space.
 

[Ichabod Spoonbill]

The USA does spend a large amount on student education as compared to other countries. We also have the highest poverty rate, which means that we have higher ratios of kids in our public schools with very high needs.

The USA does not score well on international tests, until you factor in its poverty rate. When you compensate for that, our international scores as defined by the NAEP test are fine. We don't have a failing educational system. Yes, kids in need need extra services, and that costs more. What of it? Until the poverty rate goes down in the USA, this is going to be a constant.

I guess what frustrates me about this conversation is that it seems like everyone is so willing to dump on the system itself for not working or for costing too much. There are many, many people working inside the system to make things better. There are many many teachers out there -- most of them -- doing their best. They are not a corrupt class. The larger system around American education is what's mostly creating the problems, not educators.

If you want better schools, please be part of the solution. Bashing them solves nothing, and after experiencing a couple of decades of teacher bashing and public education bashing and school bashing, it really sucks. There's a reason teachers are leaving the field with shortages happening all over. Between the low pay, long hours, and lack of respect, this is very demoralizing.

[RideTheGlide]

The sweet spot for online education is post-secondary, both because of the nature of college and other post-secondary education, and because that's where the money is. The USA spends more than any other country on education per student, but post-secondary is almost three times higher than grammar/HS. The average expenditure per student for college is about 30K including all grants, loans, and subsidies.

Still, when the US ranks fifth in spending on primary/secondary education and ranks 30th in standardized achievement testing it's a tough go to say that more money is the solution. Regardless of what you think about testing as a valid assessment of progress, it's a hard argument to buck politically. And it doesn't make much difference who is in office. Spending has been stagnant for five years and actually declined when President Obama was in office, even in the years when he had a democratic majority in the house and senate.

Is that average including 2 year degrees at community colleges? If it is completed 4 years programs, I think it is really low. My oldest, the only one who has completed a degree program, had a total expenditure of over $100k. If you are just talking tuition, the published tuition price would have been over $80k. We didn't actually pay that; they provided a partial scholarship.