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

261–270 of 281 posts

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

#261

Post by gohrt »

dhimes wrote: post #110
ucsdrake wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That used to be the case, but now corporations require you to pass their own exam before they hire you. You mean an ... interview?! Ok, that was purposely obtuse, but I don't see how an extension of a company's interview process (ensuring, through their own testing, that candidates meet the proper qualifications without school bias) is a bad thing. Or how it signals an 'inevitable disruption of modern higher ed'. W…

Your conclusion is right. To me, that helps keep schools honest and continuously adapting their curriculum's (except for the misplaced apostrophe). In other words: Sure, you have a 4.0 in engineering from Stanford. But now let's see if you can actually compute a Fourier transform. Or even if you know when to use a FT. To my generation, that's damning. In other words, (quoting you here) ensuring, through their own tes…

It just means that employers are now hiring for competency in job function, and not just plucking the upper class elite to get access to their rolodex.

IOW, it's not that schools are getting worse at teaching, it's that they are getting better at teaching, and less about filtering elites.

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

#262

Post by gohrt »

kelseydh wrote: post #259
verst wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we are still quite a long way away from removing the school bias. In my experience, the large tech companies actively recruit from select few universities (and prefer applicants from those universities). The resume screeners / sourcers are biased to look for top schools also. They often don't want to risk spending time on a candidate from a school with which they are not familiar. Most qualified applicants ne…

There's a good story in Ben Horowitz book the "Hard Thing About Hard Things" that angered me about how blatant good school vs weak school bias appears to exist within the startup world. But it has good advice on the need to overlook people's "flaws" (if you can call them that): ----- "Hire a worldclass team" is about as helpful as telling someone to "Try their hardest." Anyone building a company likely already is, an…

That's a very awkwardly written story, but "know what league you are in" is solid advice. It's Moneyball in another domain.

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

#263

Post by gohrt »

david927 wrote: post #54
dhimes wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"guarantee" that students "know" what they are "taught" That used to be the case, but now corporations require you to pass their own exam before they hire you. Let that sink in a moment. No longer are the universities taken at their word about their product. For some of you it has never been any different, but this change came about more or less when I was teaching at university/college. Some of us saw this as a quit…

It's surprising that it's taking so long. The wealthiest have always found ways to preserve their wealth and Ivy League institutions have played a role in that. Take some smart people, a lot of people that are good at fitting the mold that looks best, mix your rich kids in there and call the paint one color. Remember, George W. Bush (all politics aside, just looking at him in terms of intellectual prowess) graduated…

The word "meritocracy" was originally invented as satirical word to describing "signalling by people who pretended they weren't signalling"

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

#264

Post by marincounty »

msellout wrote: post #252
baudehlo wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At 18 most kids have extremely strong passion about what they want to do. I know I did. I was wrong (maths vs computer science). But persuading them to take a break from that is going to be hard.

> most My experience says the opposite.

That's been my observation too. I don't remember one kid out of high school, or college who knew exactly what they wanted to do for the rest of their lives. (Actually one wanted to be a cop, and another wanted to be Maverick.)

As you age, you will find your interests, and passion will ebb, and flow. When I was in college, I was all about learning anything, and everything about medicine. Now, I don't even like disgusting lipid levels with family members.

In college I hated computing, and pretty much everything related to technology. I just didn't find much invented by man interesting. I felt like Programming was a waste of a life. I couldn't begin to comprehend how someone could stare into a screen for more than a few minutes. Now--I can't put this stuff down.

And to be completely honest, I still don't know how I want to spend my remaining days.

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

#265

Post by realitygrill »

gravypod wrote: post #183
mietek wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He was truly very dull, something he himself admitted You may wish to rethink this.

What do you mean by this?

Dull people don't usually call themselves dull. "Reasonably intelligent" or "average" are more common.

Think, was there perhaps a strategic reason to paint himself so?

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

#266

Post by EGreg »

I think degrees and accreditation are fine, but the classroom should be inverted. Universities should be a place for labs, socializing, and individual tutoring and exploration. Not lecturing. Unless it is just to give a talk that will later be put online.

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

#267

Post by danieltillett »

CardenB wrote: post #227
danieltillett wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you are right. This sort of teaching is very effective, but very expensive. The reason we have the current system we do is because it is the cheapest solution that somewhat works.

Except our current solution has become very expensive. Perhaps we need to move out of our local maxima of education if people are willing to pay so much.

You can basically do this now if you really want. There are heaps of adjunct lecturers who will provide one-on-one or small group tutorials for cash. Wave a few thousand dollars a term in front of some starving adjunct and you will get exactly the education you desire.

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

#268

Post by ludamad »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #36
ludamad wrote: post #13

Now project based learning is fine, but CS for example has lots of wonderful theory, where does that fit in?

How much of that theory do you have to understand in order to be a competent professional programmer? Some, sure. The more the better, sure. But much of it can be learned independent from much of the rest of it - you don't need one mammoth 4-year curriculum to "master" CS.

I learn a lot faster from the people who teach it well at university, and from focusing on the subject. But yes if you're goal is to become a competent programmer it is not strictly necessary.

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

#269

Post by cyphar »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #180
fao_ wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have also had the experience with infomally teaching ( read with a bias towards 'mentor' ) programming to people, along with the second hand experience of knowing numerous teachers, including my father. Along with this I was unschooled from the age of eleven, and I have seen the effects of this upon the children -- most notably with a child ( Eleven years of age ) teaching themselves to read to an adult level in ro…

My anecdotal experience brought me to similar conclusions. Structure is required in schools because of the way children are taught in schools. And I'm not sure I'd do any different given the same requirements. Even though it doesn't have the best results for every child it scales well enough that most people at least do okay. Take your average child away from that after several years of being part of it and any short…

> My anecdotal experience brought me to similar conclusions. Structure is required in schools because of the way children are taught in schools.

First off, that's a circular argument. But also note that research into education is riddled with issues (such as the researchers having moral issues with blind control groups, which results in basically useless data). Our education system is based on the gut instinct of certain administrators. People who clearly would prefer a structured system where one-size-fits-all. Not that I'm saying everyone learns differently (learning styles are also mostly bullshit), I'm saying that the current system could be much better and people who do well in the current system are very motivated to do well and will gladly push with all of their force through the bullshit so they can get on with their lives.

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

#270

Post by bsder »

melted wrote: post #258
bsder wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A failure of many youngsters is that they think everything annoying or boring is "bullshit". For example, I have to practically threaten employees in their 20's to actually fscking pick up the phone and actually TALK to a customer rep. Yes, it can be annoying--they're going to try to sell you something as that's their job. But some of them also know what they're selling better than anybody on the planet. The only way…

Don't threaten. Get them engaged, get them to set their own team goals (with your guidance) and get them to agree to the goals. Divide pleasant and unpleasant tasks visibly and fairly. Get rid of people with poisonous attitudes who sabotage this white glove treatment. Threatening only works in the short term, right up until your best people pick up their shit and leave. In the long term it does not yield the kind of…

> Get them engaged, get them to set their own team goals (with your guidance) and get them to agree to the goals.

And how many times am I supposed to let them order the wrong thing (at company expense) because they won't PICK UP THE DAMN PHONE AND CALL SOMEBODY? I've been mentoring interns and co-ops in engineering for almost 25 years and this set of 20-somethings is just like any other--except with respect to their absolute avoidance of using the bloody phone.

Making a genuine mistake is acceptable. Talk to the rep, order some stuff and see if it works. If it doesn't, no big deal. With the rep in the loop, it'll take one or two iterations, and you'll get what you need. After the third time I asked: "Did you call the rep?" "No." "Do it." After the fourth time: "Call the rep.". "Okay." "No, NOW. While I'm standing here. On conference." After 10 minutes of talking to the rep, he's got an order for the right stuff, the rep comped it, and sent it overnight.

The worst part--even after examples like this--THEY STILL WON'T PICK UP THE PHONE. It's absolutely infuriating. This isn't just one person getting old and complaining. It also isn't just my observation--I have heard the same complaint from different people from ages 35 to 55.

I've reached a point where I almost don't want to hire anybody in their 20's.

Post reply on HN