feddit.org

2 points

24 days ago

Would they though? Wouldn’t they be thrilled to teach things in an open ended, no pressure type environment. It wouldn’t have to be structured like it is today. People could learn what ever they are interested in, focus solely on that, and teachers could offer different levels of difficulty based solely on each person’s ability.

report

[ - ]

Aatube@kbin.melroy.org

3 points

24 days ago

With free housing, I’m expecting quite a bit of people to be there without interest in learning anything. There is also a lot of pain if the learners aren’t filtered into skill levels because you’re going to have to “conserve” teacher power so that everyone gets at least one teacher for their subject. A “bright-line” solution to this would be dropping those who don’t pass a test after a few weeks, but then you also risk filtering out those who only want to learn a specific subtopic.

report

[ - ]

1 point

24 days ago

That’s not the point. The point isn’t to force people to learn. The point is eduction is readily available. Sure there might be a person there that doesn’t want to do anything but live in their dorm or what ever. Except, there is no obligation for them to learn anything either because school doesn’t end.

They could be stuck into a class all about socializing while playing video games. A class about stacking blocks. Whatever.

Then you say, well then how does society work if everyone is dicking around in school. It’s not a complete answer but imagine you have all these people who have learned all this very specific stuff according to their interest. What do you think they are going to want to do with it? They will want to apply it.

report

HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club

[ - ]

5 points

24 days ago

You’re focusing on the education being the value, where the combination of low responsibility plus free room and board may end up being more valuable to some people.

You wouldn’t be forcing people to learn, but going to college is a lot more preferable working in fast food or as a janitor.

report

[ - ]

1 point

24 days ago

Am I crazy, people have interests, right? Even the most useless person, given the chance, would be more than willing to explore those interests. History of Marijuana? Cheeto manufacturing?

Those types of classes would probably overfill.

report

[ - ]

Aatube@kbin.melroy.org

1 point

24 days ago

This system could work, but there needs to be an incentive to actually learn instead of hogging resources. To create value and not just be a huge budget hole of consumption like OLPC, the incentives should be passing tests for a skill that people can be paid for. Until we institute anarchy, such a project would be doomed to close if there wasn’t such an incentive.

(That is, assuming people allow the government to allow people to get free housing by simply learning about the history of weed, which is still banned in many states. Such “interesting” topics also have way more hold within only the neurodivergent community than the masses.)

report

[ - ]

2 points

24 days ago

I’m more just world building here then actually plotting a path to this utopia. Societal needs will always push their way forward but I think there is a level of misappropriation of resources and around education.

The world kind of builds itself, honestly, though.

If society made education our ultimate pursuit answering unanswered questions would be what it’s all about. Who would teach them? The people who never leave the system, of course. What if they aren’t good teachers? Not every teacher is suited for every student. Structuring classes can be based on learning competencies. Teacher involvement can be based on learning competencies. Ok, but someone needs to run society. Well, we have a population of highly educated individuals.

I think, the more we break down this thought experiment we find that this is actually the natural order. No, not in the form of academia but in the form, what is it called, anthropology? Think to your friend group. Friend groups succeed when they have a unified task. Because each contributor has their own set of experiences each provides new information for the rest.

I don’t know. Thanks for humoring me.

report

HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club

Show more comments

[ - ]

2 points

24 days ago

Even the most useless person, given the chance, would be more than willing to explore those interests.

Maybe to a certain extent, but probably not to extent necessary to succeed in college.

A major difference between high school and college is that people choose to be in college; they don’t choose to be in high school. Make someone’s economic life dependent on college and it switches back to being high school.

And something that you haven’t addressed is when people leave. I’m imagining people being more than happy getting stuck in thesis hell for their Masters or Doctorate because it means they still have a roof over their head and food on the table and being a student would be a far better job than a lot of other work out there. There is a reason why all degree programs have a point to try push students out, either via graduation or flunking out.

report

[ - ]

1 point

24 days ago

Masters or doctorate implys they don’t need to leave the system. They are contributing. In this world, there is not need for honors or degrees in the same way it is now. Degrees, the way you imply, mean you indend to stop educating yourself and join the workforce. That’s not the point. You don’t have to stop. That’s the point.

report