Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

tech.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 281 posts

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#21

Post by gravypod »

paulojreis wrote: post #9
gravypod wrote: post #4

The only point of a modern day university is that they are (a) exclusive, and (b) "guarantee" that students "know" what they are "taught". That's at least what people who hire think. I remember someone saying "It wouldn't matter if MIT only taught basket weaving as long as they still had such a thorough selection process". This holds true here. People only care about the pedigree of your degree, it's substance comes…

I wouldn't say that the substance of e.g. a M.D. degree comes "second". Maybe you're focusing too much on IT?

If there were two medical schools, one a state funded community medical school and the other a big name like John Hopkins, what school would you want your doctor to have attended? Even if you were assured that they both teach the same material, you would want the Coca-Cola over the Pepsi.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#22

Post by pragone »

Taek wrote: post #14
legutierr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this reasoning, you should put a list of the universities you were admitted to on your resume, not the university that you actually attended. Under these terms, what's the difference between going to Harvard for a couple of semesters and dropping out, and getting admitted to Harvard but deciding to attend Dartmouth instead?

For me, being at MIT has been much more valuable than my time at RPI (my alma mater). And that's because lots of cool, innovative, and intelligent people flock to MIT. When hosting an event, MIT is able to get the best speakers in the world to show up, because the speakers are excited to be at MIT. I've had conversations with people who would never have come all the way out to RPI because RPI just isn't as interestin…

To be fair, RPI is in Troy, NY, and MIT is in Cambridge/Boston, MA.

Nonetheless, I agree with you. Location probably is a deciding factor in a minority of people who would rather go to MIT to talk than RPI.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#23

Post by gravypod »

ttcbj wrote: post #20
gravypod wrote: post #4

The only point of a modern day university is that they are (a) exclusive, and (b) "guarantee" that students "know" what they are "taught". That's at least what people who hire think. I remember someone saying "It wouldn't matter if MIT only taught basket weaving as long as they still had such a thorough selection process". This holds true here. People only care about the pedigree of your degree, it's substance comes…

This econtalk provides some nuance for your point: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/04/bryan_caplan_on.htm... There are many reasons to believe that college is more about signaling than knowledge. While admission is an important part of the signal (certainly at the high-end), completing college is probably an important signal in the mid-range and below. Completing college is probably associated with work-ethic,…

I've not seen this before, I'll give it a look.

Also, I do admit, my point is made bluntly.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#24

Post by edtechdev »

legutierr wrote: post #5
gravypod wrote: post #4

The only point of a modern day university is that they are (a) exclusive, and (b) "guarantee" that students "know" what they are "taught". That's at least what people who hire think. I remember someone saying "It wouldn't matter if MIT only taught basket weaving as long as they still had such a thorough selection process". This holds true here. People only care about the pedigree of your degree, it's substance comes…

By this reasoning, you should put a list of the universities you were admitted to on your resume, not the university that you actually attended. Under these terms, what's the difference between going to Harvard for a couple of semesters and dropping out, and getting admitted to Harvard but deciding to attend Dartmouth instead?

Getting admitted isn't as valuable a signal as getting a degree. Both are a signal or proxy for intelligence (IQ), but getting a degree is also a signal of persistence and conformity to get through the grind of college courses.

Bryan Caplan has written much about 'signaling theory' and education in posts like this one: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2006/02/mixed_signals.ht...

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#25

Post by supster »

noonespecial wrote: post #16
legutierr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this reasoning, you should put a list of the universities you were admitted to on your resume, not the university that you actually attended. Under these terms, what's the difference between going to Harvard for a couple of semesters and dropping out, and getting admitted to Harvard but deciding to attend Dartmouth instead?

This advice exactly was given to me by my HS guidance counselor. He told me to apply everywhere I think I might be accepted and then use the list on my resume. Edit: Excepted to accepted. Read what your damn phone types for you...

accepted = past tense of accept (to receive or admit formally)

excepted = not included in the category or group specified

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#26

Post by mywittyname »

This kind of hippiesque, free-spirit approach sounds fine for MIT-level students, but I have my doubts that this model can be effective beyond those highly driven individuals.

Also, while I agree that you don't need a college degree to be a successful programmer or business person, most other science professions require some sort of structured learning environment and equipment to effectively teach students.

Maybe I'm dumb and this professor is onto something. She has a degree in material sciences, so perhaps she knows first-hand that all the knowledge you need to learn advanced chemistry can be gained by someone with a garage and aspirations.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#27

Post by Pharaoh2 »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #19

We don't need a "new" university system. We need to update our expectation about higher education and the work force. Let's start but dropping our mantra that everyone should go to college. Here's another: Maybe not everyone should even go to high school.

But everyone should go to high school. Hell, if you aren't going to college I do hope there is an extended high school. I don't care if its taxpayer sponsored but even high school is not enough to foster a critical thinking process.

I picked that up somewhere between high school and end of college. Some people may be faster than me but that skill is really important.

Either that, or you don't get to vote.

Edit: The last statement was more about the ability to think critically and less about if you finished high school/college.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#28

Post by paulojreis »

gravypod wrote: post #11
legutierr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this reasoning, you should put a list of the universities you were admitted to on your resume, not the university that you actually attended. Under these terms, what's the difference between going to Harvard for a couple of semesters and dropping out, and getting admitted to Harvard but deciding to attend Dartmouth instead?

If you have not joined the university you are not part of the "in" group. There is a perception among people that if you attend a "prestigious" university that you are smarter than someone who attends a community college. I find that crazy. Both teach basically the same thing. If they are both accredited, then it is almost indistinguishable. Who would you think is smarter off the cuff, a Harvard graduate, or someone…

I'm not U.S. based, so I don't have a total understanding of the whole "prestigious" university vs. community college debate. However, I find it hard to believe that they teach basically the same thing.

I'd believe that their curricula are essentially the same, but that's what's "on paper", so to speak. Even if they're both accredited, wouldn't better faculty lead to better teaching? Or better research programs and partnerships with industry? Even stricter requirements and evaluation criteria. If at least some of these aspects are true when talking about "prestigious" universities, then the bias you describe isn't that bad of a heuristic.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#29

Post by yuncun »

paulojreis wrote: post #9
gravypod wrote: post #4

The only point of a modern day university is that they are (a) exclusive, and (b) "guarantee" that students "know" what they are "taught". That's at least what people who hire think. I remember someone saying "It wouldn't matter if MIT only taught basket weaving as long as they still had such a thorough selection process". This holds true here. People only care about the pedigree of your degree, it's substance comes…

I wouldn't say that the substance of e.g. a M.D. degree comes "second". Maybe you're focusing too much on IT?

There's no doubt the substance is actually more important, but the question is what folks end up caring about.

As an interesting anecdote, I found that when I'm around my Chinese friends or family, I'd hear the question "where did you go to school?", but when I had conversations with White or Black folks we'd talk about "what did you study?". I think that's a pretty interesting cultural nuance. For me, the second question is more wholesome.

Re: MIT dean to start new university: “No majors, no lectures, no classrooms”

#30

Post by Alex3917 »

mywittyname wrote: post #26

This kind of hippiesque, free-spirit approach sounds fine for MIT-level students, but I have my doubts that this model can be effective beyond those highly driven individuals. Also, while I agree that you don't need a college degree to be a successful programmer or business person, most other science professions require some sort of structured learning environment and equipment to effectively teach students. Maybe I'…

> I have my doubts that this model can be effective beyond those highly driven individuals.

C.f. Punished By Rewards.

Post reply on HN