Hey Rob, I work for Kaplan University, a fully online and accredited school of higher ed. Let me know if you ever want to chat about my experience w/ them.
robchogo
· 3 months ago
Thanks Tammy! Great to hear from you. Would love to hear about your experience sometime. Email me at robert dot go at sparkcapital dot com
Kevin Vogelsang
· 3 months ago
Rob, I'm glad to see you pushing conversation on this topic. It's very important. With regard to your poll, I'd say I use 0% of the material I learned in college. I'd say I learned 2% of the skills I use from school. Everything came from outside of school: athletics, fraternities, jobs, etc. College did indirectly provide an avenue for this (can't play college football without a college), but there simply is a better way to use the time and money.
To me, you're advocating 3 things: 1) greater diversity in learning institutions 2) established pre-college opportunities that accomplish the "life skills" portion of education and 3) better use of technology to enhance delivery/accessibility.
With regard to 1), the brain is diverse; our education system needs to offer diverse opportunities for academic learning. In light of concept, the need for diversity is undeniable. Previously, this was not doable as greater specialization requires resources (more teachers, students from a larger geographic area, etc.). As you've pointed out, technology allows delivery and customization.
As for 2) (post-high school opportunities), currently college is key for learning life skills and learning what motivates/excites you and what doesn't. Given that education is largely homogeneous, the best way to learn about oneself is through a greater variety experiences that can only be had outside of classrooms. To me, this seems more of a cultural shift you're proposing, "don't be in a hurry to 'get school done', go get some life experience first." If you go to college able to take care of yourself, and know what you're trying to get out of school, school is much more effective.
As for #3, it allows and enhances the previous 2. It offers many opportunities that I won't discuss completely here.
I think in order to fully understand the role of technology, I think we need a better understanding of what the goals of college really are.
Said another way, I think it's worth discussing, "What fundamental capabilities should a college graduate possess?" . Answering this guides and clarifies the necessary changes you've proposed.
So what should a college graduate be capable of? I think it's possible to create a set of flexible criteria.
robchogo
· 3 months ago
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I actually have a hard time thinking about what fundamental capabilities a college grad should have. It really depends on the area of study and the goals of the person. I would say that the general idea is that the college graduate is better prepared to enter into a profession with a set of specialized skills that they don't get in a general K-12 education.
The list of fundamental capabilities I think is what we should expect of from our K12 education. Stuff like analytical problem solving, the ability to write and research effectively, decent math and verbal standards, etc. It's shocking to me when I see the stats of how ill-equipped many high school graduates are. I think the bar should be much higher there, and it's totally doable.
Kevin Vogelsang
· 3 months ago
There should definitely be higher standards for the outcome of K12 education (I've got some ideas for that). When it comes to fundamental capabilities, I believe timing is important. The sooner they can be learned the better. But, at the very least, they should be accomplished upon graduating college (although some should be accomplished earlier). There are some basics such as learning to do research, effective communication, analytical skills, etc.
But there are some fundamentals, that can't be accomplished before "college." These boil down to a certain level of self-awareness and life skills. I'd say the main thing most people learn in college is just learning to take care of themselves, as college is often the first time an individual is away from home for a prolonged period. Most students learn a lot of lessons about dealing with simple stuff like finances and cooking. Hopefully college students learn to deal with alcohol, relationships, and other life skills.
As you've pointed out, using college as an avenue to learn these life skills is not the most cost effective. It's also distracting from the academic learning process.
And then there's self-awareness. A basic goal of college is to train a productive member of society. This is a good objective. But this is difficult when a student has no concept of what motivates them, what they really enjoy, and what types of work they want to do. Most people end up working in a field unrelated to their major. This is fine and inevitable. But, what education can do better at is helping students get to an understanding of what types of work they want to do. There are distinct attributes and propensities that people possess that make them very fit or unfit for certain work environments.
Better self-awareness helps a student understand what they want to get out of their time in school. Better motivation in and understanding of education vastly increases the value of education.
Ed Chang
· 3 months ago
Hi Rob, I see a parallel between the growth of average U.S. house sizes and the growth in costs (and amenities) provided by U.S. colleges. In both cases, they were fueled by easier access to loans. And in both cases, they provide much more than is strictly needed. A part of American culture is to borrow as much as you can and spend it on the best possible. So answering the question of "how do we get people into more cost-effective, less luxurious schools" is similar to "how do we get people into smaller and cheaper houses." I agree with your proposed solutions, but I don't know how to stimulate the demand side of the equation.
robchogo
· 3 months ago
Interesting perspective. I think it comes down to the quality of the product. I think you can deliver a better education and more rich life experience at a much lower cost by completely changing the product. The demand side can be satisfied because they would have higher utility. In the housing example, it's tougher to get folks into smaller homes that are cheaper with greater utility.
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry
· 3 months ago
This is all very interesting, and by and large I'd agree. I would have two things to add:
1- be careful about early vocational training. One of the great benefits of US style 4 year college is that it doesn't lock you down in one particular discipline. Here in France and in many other countries (particularly in Europe and Asia), you choose the occupation that you will have more or less for the rest of your life at 18 or even earlier. This is really bad. Your late teens and early twenties should be for self discovery, trying at and failing things. The US college is very good at making that happen and vocational models are really bad. Having people start law school or medical school after college is only "wasting time" in hindsight, because these people have figured out that they want to be lawyers or doctors. But asking people to decide they want to become lawyers right out of high school in my view makes no sense.
This isn't to mean I don't support vocational training. I'm sure you've read the article (now book) "Shop Class as Soulcraft". There definitely needs to be more done to support vocational training in the trades, and more generally to remove the stigma associated with having education other than a four-year degree.
BUT there is that element of determinism associated with vocational training that we need to keep in mind and be wary of.
2- This is somewhat linked to what I've said above, there should also be a definite emphasis on education throughout life. The US is probably the best country in the world for this, but it's still way behind where it could be. People should be able to make bizarre turns in careers and have the training that is associated to that available, and have it in spades in whatever way is best for them at that point (going back to school full time, night classes, online classes), and all those variations need to be better recognized by employers as valuable. Again, this already is true to an extent, but not nearly enough.
robchogo
· 3 months ago
Thanks Pascal. Actually, I completely agree with you. Learning is a lifelong thing, and there isn't necessarily a strict schedule that should be prescribed to everyone. In the model I'm describing, I think it should be totally fine to switch between concentrations, take time off between the community service component, work and study simultaneously using online instruction, etc. The key is to make it modular enough to do this. My emphasis in timing above isn't to say that everyone should speed through as fast as possible, but that we should have a cost and time effective path for those who are sensitive to this. Great points though!
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry
· 3 months ago
Thanks.
deanregrut
· 3 months ago
Hi Rob,
Most academically inclined students treat college as an automatic extension of high-school. It’s often something that they do because it is the next step in life, not because they truly want to study and learn. How many undergraduates really enjoy learning for the sake of learning? So, students are on a forced march to get a degree that may or may not be relevant for their careers. No wonder X-Box, parties, and other distractions hinder academic performance for so many students. Imagine if every student was passionate about learning and truly appreciated the value of their education. How can we make that happen?
Kevin Vogelsang's comments about self-awareness are spot on. Students make large investments in time, effort, and money pursuing career paths that may or may not suit them. Students may specialize in a course of study that prepares them for a specific field (pre-med, engineering, architecture, etc), and hope that they guessed right. Or, students may choose a more general approach (liberal arts), and face the prospect of entering the job market without distinguishable skills.
So, what’s the solution? I think that students need a variety of real-world work experiences before entering a traditional 4-year program and select a course of study. Whether these experiences come from community/military service, internships, or some other arrangements, these experiences would help students understand their own preferences and attributes, and the value of their education. More importantly, I think that both the break from school and the awareness of and experience with the "real" world will help students crave and appreciate the education that college provides.
Does anyone know whether student performance and satisfaction has been compared for those that followed the traditional path against those that had 1-2 years of work/life experience prior to entering a traditional 4-year program? I’d love to see some data on this.
robchogo
· 3 months ago
Great comments and excellent final question. I would like to see way more outcome data for students that pursue different sorts of higher education. There may also be studies on studies coming from different countries where time off between school is more prevalent or the time it takes to get a professional degree is shorter (both of these characteristics are true for Australia). Has anyone seen anything along these lines?
leehower
· 3 months ago
Community or military service is a pretty interesting adjunct to broader higher ed innovation. In addition to Singapore and Taiwan, Israel has compulsory service for nearly all high school grads. I recall the Israelis I went to undergrad with... in addition to being incredibly sharp, they obviously entered college with a couple more years life experience & maturity.
Darcy Murphy
· 3 months ago
Quite honestly, I think the first thing we ought to do is kill high school. In a sort of throwback to the days of apprenticeships, we should allow and encourage our kids to start specializing their education far earlier in life. They'll learn more, and learn it faster, because they *want* to learn it.
All Comments
I'm glad to see you pushing conversation on this topic. It's very important. With regard to your poll, I'd say I use 0% of the material I learned in college. I'd say I learned 2% of the skills I use from school. Everything came from outside of school: athletics, fraternities, jobs, etc. College did indirectly provide an avenue for this (can't play college football without a college), but there simply is a better way to use the time and money.
To me, you're advocating 3 things: 1) greater diversity in learning institutions 2) established pre-college opportunities that accomplish the "life skills" portion of education and 3) better use of technology to enhance delivery/accessibility.
With regard to 1), the brain is diverse; our education system needs to offer diverse opportunities for academic learning. In light of concept, the need for diversity is undeniable. Previously, this was not doable as greater specialization requires resources (more teachers, students from a larger geographic area, etc.). As you've pointed out, technology allows delivery and customization.
As for 2) (post-high school opportunities), currently college is key for learning life skills and learning what motivates/excites you and what doesn't. Given that education is largely homogeneous, the best way to learn about oneself is through a greater variety experiences that can only be had outside of classrooms. To me, this seems more of a cultural shift you're proposing, "don't be in a hurry to 'get school done', go get some life experience first." If you go to college able to take care of yourself, and know what you're trying to get out of school, school is much more effective.
As for #3, it allows and enhances the previous 2. It offers many opportunities that I won't discuss completely here.
I think in order to fully understand the role of technology, I think we need a better understanding of what the goals of college really are.
Said another way, I think it's worth discussing, "What fundamental capabilities should a college graduate possess?" . Answering this guides and clarifies the necessary changes you've proposed.
So what should a college graduate be capable of? I think it's possible to create a set of flexible criteria.
The list of fundamental capabilities I think is what we should expect of from our K12 education. Stuff like analytical problem solving, the ability to write and research effectively, decent math and verbal standards, etc. It's shocking to me when I see the stats of how ill-equipped many high school graduates are. I think the bar should be much higher there, and it's totally doable.
When it comes to fundamental capabilities, I believe timing is important. The sooner they can be learned the better. But, at the very least, they should be accomplished upon graduating college (although some should be accomplished earlier). There are some basics such as learning to do research, effective communication, analytical skills, etc.
But there are some fundamentals, that can't be accomplished before "college." These boil down to a certain level of self-awareness and life skills. I'd say the main thing most people learn in college is just learning to take care of themselves, as college is often the first time an individual is away from home for a prolonged period. Most students learn a lot of lessons about dealing with simple stuff like finances and cooking. Hopefully college students learn to deal with alcohol, relationships, and other life skills.
As you've pointed out, using college as an avenue to learn these life skills is not the most cost effective. It's also distracting from the academic learning process.
And then there's self-awareness. A basic goal of college is to train a productive member of society. This is a good objective. But this is difficult when a student has no concept of what motivates them, what they really enjoy, and what types of work they want to do. Most people end up working in a field unrelated to their major. This is fine and inevitable. But, what education can do better at is helping students get to an understanding of what types of work they want to do. There are distinct attributes and propensities that people possess that make them very fit or unfit for certain work environments.
Better self-awareness helps a student understand what they want to get out of their time in school. Better motivation in and understanding of education vastly increases the value of education.
1- be careful about early vocational training. One of the great benefits of US style 4 year college is that it doesn't lock you down in one particular discipline. Here in France and in many other countries (particularly in Europe and Asia), you choose the occupation that you will have more or less for the rest of your life at 18 or even earlier. This is really bad. Your late teens and early twenties should be for self discovery, trying at and failing things. The US college is very good at making that happen and vocational models are really bad. Having people start law school or medical school after college is only "wasting time" in hindsight, because these people have figured out that they want to be lawyers or doctors. But asking people to decide they want to become lawyers right out of high school in my view makes no sense.
This isn't to mean I don't support vocational training. I'm sure you've read the article (now book) "Shop Class as Soulcraft". There definitely needs to be more done to support vocational training in the trades, and more generally to remove the stigma associated with having education other than a four-year degree.
BUT there is that element of determinism associated with vocational training that we need to keep in mind and be wary of.
2- This is somewhat linked to what I've said above, there should also be a definite emphasis on education throughout life. The US is probably the best country in the world for this, but it's still way behind where it could be. People should be able to make bizarre turns in careers and have the training that is associated to that available, and have it in spades in whatever way is best for them at that point (going back to school full time, night classes, online classes), and all those variations need to be better recognized by employers as valuable. Again, this already is true to an extent, but not nearly enough.
Most academically inclined students treat college as an automatic extension of high-school. It’s often something that they do because it is the next step in life, not because they truly want to study and learn. How many undergraduates really enjoy learning for the sake of learning? So, students are on a forced march to get a degree that may or may not be relevant for their careers. No wonder X-Box, parties, and other distractions hinder academic performance for so many students. Imagine if every student was passionate about learning and truly appreciated the value of their education. How can we make that happen?
Kevin Vogelsang's comments about self-awareness are spot on. Students make large investments in time, effort, and money pursuing career paths that may or may not suit them. Students may specialize in a course of study that prepares them for a specific field (pre-med, engineering, architecture, etc), and hope that they guessed right. Or, students may choose a more general approach (liberal arts), and face the prospect of entering the job market without distinguishable skills.
So, what’s the solution? I think that students need a variety of real-world work experiences before entering a traditional 4-year program and select a course of study. Whether these experiences come from community/military service, internships, or some other arrangements, these experiences would help students understand their own preferences and attributes, and the value of their education. More importantly, I think that both the break from school and the awareness of and experience with the "real" world will help students crave and appreciate the education that college provides.
Does anyone know whether student performance and satisfaction has been compared for those that followed the traditional path against those that had 1-2 years of work/life experience prior to entering a traditional 4-year program? I’d love to see some data on this.
I think this xkcd strip sums it up nicely: http://xkcd.com/519/