71–80 of 146 posts
If that wasn't made clear prior to enrolment I would be surprised if it wasn't fraud.
Howso? I think it might be hard to prove.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that the discussed lecture was delivered remotely, I don't think is offers much of a social experience too...
In person lectures delivered one way can be pretty non-social and non-interactive as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Teaching isn't bi directional. Understanding before application are two different steps. The issues you're outlining can be solved by arranging technology to go through a process to satisfy the above. Still, instruction, and instructors aren't really needing to be replaced, it's the silent elephant in the room that is rarely talked about that hopefully considers evolving.
> Teaching isn't bi directional. ... said no decent teacher, ever. The flows aren't symmetrical, but they are bidirectional.
There are some bad teachers where it is not bidirectional for sure. But to claim it isn't (or at least is not supposed to be)... is wild
Outrageous at the least. These universities already became so commercial that they show photos of some Victorian era buildings as their campus, but most students never set foot in those buildings, as all classrooms are held in rented building outside of campus, and the main buildings are kept only as ornamental pieces. Also, there are hardly any good teachers left. Most are hired on sharing basis, who shuttle between…
Check out the "Who Wants to be a Teacher?" episodes of the Educate Podcast. I remember listening to these and shaking my head. Worse, if you go back further in the same groups older podcast, you'll hear the tragedy of students being taught to read using provenly bad methodology and teachers defending it saying they don't care that studies show that it's the wrong path. It made me genuinely very angry on behalf of kids. They're being robbed of their future.
Unpopular opinion, but I dislike how universities embraced vocational programs. These students were not there for academics, they were there for job and career training. The irony is that they complain about the high costs of tuition when they're just there to get more money. These professors have much better things to work on. I apologize if my opinion upsets you.
I get it that some professors don't like teaching and just want to do research, but teaching is what pays their bills, and if they can't be bothered to do their job well...
AI will continue to stratify education. The typical student will get AI generated course content by the cheapest models. Other children will spend $1000s/month on multimodal AI tutors spinning up Python code to check their math homework. Those students will easily surpass others without individualized support.
I kind of wonder whether we are past the point where waiting to be trained is feasible.
AI will continue to stratify education. The typical student will get AI generated course content by the cheapest models. Other children will spend $1000s/month on multimodal AI tutors spinning up Python code to check their math homework. Those students will easily surpass others without individualized support.
AI will continue to stratify education. The typical student will get AI generated course content by the cheapest models. Other children will spend $1000s/month on multimodal AI tutors spinning up Python code to check their math homework. Those students will easily surpass others without individualized support.
> The typical student will get AI generated course content by the cheapest models.
> Other children will spend $1000s/month on multimodal AI tutors spinning up Python code to check their math homework. Those students will easily surpass others without individualized support.
The better-off children whose parents are "spend[ing] $1000s/month" will get real teachers who are people, not fancier AIs.
I mean look at food: The lower classes are eating industrially-processed McDonald's food, the upper classes are not eating more expensive but still industrially-processed stuff from McDonald's, they're eating organic, locally grown stuff from the farmer's market (which used to be the standard for food for everyone).
I just had a pretty amazing 4 hour session with gpt 5.1 going over my son's rare disease. Chat broke it all down for me in a really deep and clear way in the back and forth. Insights I've never gotten to from talking to docs, reading papers, reading bio textbooks etc. I guess some small percentage of it was hallucinated, but if you want to call it a teacher/student relationship, it was pretty amazing.
Curious why do you think you not have gotten these insights that too even from textbooks no less?
> I guess some small percentage of it was hallucinated
You guess it is a small percentage? How much do you guess this small percentage was the most important part about this disease?
Because it seems like you were taken in by the empathic answers by gpt and think it got things mostly right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which universities aren't commercial and about cashflow?
Allegedly most of them, since they have non-profit mandates and are often tax-exempt. The University of Staffordshire is a public university and is funded by the government to provide education to British people. Its mandate isn't "about cashflow". In reality, that particular school created a private commercial subsidiary called "Staffordshire University Services". All new employees are hired by that subsidiary, whic…