Good article, except Khan Academy is misspelled twice. There is a sound in a
number of languages transliterated as kh. It is absent from English and takes
some work for English speakers to learn.
A considerable numbers of "if" statements seems to pervade the model- a
big part of what one pays for at an Ivy League school is the alumni and the
network they provide- as we all all know the best idea or thinker in the room is
rarely the one that wins the day- I wish the world was about what you know- we
would all be better off- but the more pragmatic side tells us it is about who
you know and often who you know is not all that bright but they have the money
and other resources- sorry but that is why they fly first class and you drive a
7 yr old car but know deep in your heart you are smarter than they are- and that
got you what?
I like the idea of getting teachers who can teach. Many universities that
require extensive research by their faculty tend to have teachers who can't
teach. At the same time, from the sounds of this article, these students will
not have access to a world class library--or at least not for the duration of
their education. The article mentions that they will fill in the gaps with
open-source information. That's all well and great, but from my experience
as a graduate student, some of the most insightful educational experiences I had
came from my research in libraries which provided a great deal of information
that cannot be found online. Until they can get a library like Harvard, there
will continue to be a number of important areas where they can't even hope
to compete with Ivy League schools.
I always admire people who try to improve the system. Post secondary education
is a failing system. It is better than not having an education but it is not
practical for most people. It takes a lot of money and a maze of arrogant
professors to tolerate. Then, there is no guarantee of a career.I
don't know for sure but I really doubt a Harvard/Yale education is far
superior to Snow College. However, XelaDave is correct. It is about the
networking. Most people don't go to Harvard because they believe it is a
better education necessarily. It is because it will say "Harvard" on the
diploma. MIT is a different story. Students go there because they want to
be mentored by some of the smartest people in the world. I believe students
actually go there to learn.So, after my rambling, I guess what I am trying
to say is I think this is a good deal. I wish them luck. The have hundreds of
years of tradition to battle. It sounds like the kind of environment I would
I hate to be cynical but this sounds like another for-profit college marketed
differently to avoid the stigma of current for-profit colleges. If it were as
affordable as SLCC/Weber State then maybe they'd have something.
The best thing that Harvard researchers ever did was get other universities to
stop competing with them.