[KLUG Advocacy] Some impressions on the education system, a discussion rope

[Robert G. Brown]

I think we're talking about something like  5 different topics, all sort 
of intertwined here... yes, braided together threads to make a rope; it's
useful to identify them. A lot of what's been said is based on personal
experience, and is at best anecdotal evidence; looking at these factors
and then be used to see how they combine in each of the experiences we see.

1. Purpose of the academic system. Bruce Smith touched on this a bit
   earlier, and his point has not been acknowledged. There is a purpose
   to education, and that is to make good citizens. Bruce framed it in 
   largely commmercial terms; it is a bit broader than that.

   Education is critical in a democracy; its traditional role is to
   create a workforce that is able to create a prosperous economy, and
   an electorate that is knowledgable enough to understand the issues
   of the day and vote for those who they think will address them best,
   and between elections, pressure their representatives to act in their
   interests as they change? An idealist view? perhaps, but this country
   as founded on such optimism. To the extent we fall short of these high
   goals, we must look to at the systems by which we provide education to
   people (and other things) at different stages of their lives

   A "techincal" education may miss the aspects of education that address
   good citizenship. I become concerned when we are dishonest about which
   is which, and I become even more concerned when I see one suffering 
   at the expense of the other.

2. Technical schools and more conventional educational institutes. These
   are really two different kinds of education; since the end of WW-II, 
   they have come closer together, as more conventional educational in-
   titutions offered more and more technical training to meet the demands
   of the returning troops. The Baby Boomers and generations beyond caused
   that trend to accelerate.

   Bryan Smith seems to hop between these two surroundings, giving us some 
   contrast into how they still Differ. I think Doc Lea support the use 
   of technical schools in some ases; more clasic Universites need not be 
   all thing to all people. He doesn't say it, but drops some nice hints 
   in that direction.

3. Quality of education - here we are discussing the issue of how good the
   curriculum, instructors, and other elements of eduction combine. There 
   is a fair amount of territory to cover here; it is a bit glib to state
   that "It all sucks" or that "they're all useless"; we each have a limited
   perspective, what often happens is a mismatch between candidate and job.

   One serious problem I see with quality is that large educational 
   institutions often take years to deliver curriculum modifications
   that reflect changes in the industry, often when it is too late to
   have the impact needed. For its part, "industry" doesn;t do a good 
   job telling educational institutions what they're going to need...
   not for today, but 2-4 years down the road, where they can actually
   do something about it.

   Not being current has other effects.. how can you select, or hire, or 
   retain good instructors, when there no way to review what "good" means
   each semester?

   Thanks to Randall Perry for his reportfrom the "front lines" on this. He
   has highlighted a number of topics.

4. Course curriculum and Focus....
   Earlier, Doc Rea asked me what I meant by focus. I isolate this aspect of
   things because it is a great case of the general leading the particular.
   For example... I was a physics major and one of the favorite students of
   the chairman of the Mathematics department at my first college. He was a 
   topologist, but via physics. He advised me.. nay, TOLD me, to take HIS
   Linear Algebra class, which I did (of course, a challenge! :). The way he
   taught the class, choice of text books, et. were very worthwhile; it gave
   me insight into a number of areas, and was quite useful, not only for 
   what I learned there, but for the insight it gave me into appproaching
   systems and solving problems, in general.

   A couple of years later, I was tutoring students, and I was assigned to
   help someone with Linear Algebra. No one in the class I took needed help,
   and it caused me to wonder... I sat in on a class, and it was completely
   dfferent! This was Linear Algebra for computer technology folks (and 
   maybe a chemist or two). The same course title and number, but populated
   by physics and mathematics people, really a dfferent course altogether.
   Faculty filled the sessions knowing this, too.

   So this is what I mean by "focus". In larger schools, or nowadays, it may
   be handled by different course numbers. The point is that a course with
   the same name and topic coverage (in general) can easily have a different
   level of depth or sophistication, or simply a different tone, based on
   the goals of the students.

5. Need for theoretical knowledge, practical experience.....
   This has been touched on by a couple of people, notably Bryan and Doc Lea.
   I recognize the importance of internships, and have mentored several in-
   terns in several jobs. It is indeed a critical step that people take. I
   plan to do more of this kind of work in the coming year.

   I think that what Doc Lea spotted as contradictory in two paragraphs that 
   Adam wrote is a good example of this, and I don't think that what Adam 
   said was quite the contradiction Doc Lea thinks it is. Rather I interpret
   what Adam wrote perhaps a bit differently. When I look for evidence of
   someone's matery of theory in some area, what I try to get the person 
   to show me is how knowledge of theory was actually applied. Mastery of
   a body of theory is (almost, usually in this "industry") worthless if it 
   can't  be applied, and NOTHING illustrates mastery better thn a walk-
   through of applications, showing what happens when some aspect of the 
   theory-based model is "tweaked".

   I've done the above (in both roles) on job interviews. Lemmetellya, nothing
   is more eye-catchin, attention-getting, even job-capturing. I've even had
   job interviews that FAILED to get a position just then, and the interviewer
   came back to me long after, with another opportunity in-hand.

Of course, it's impossible to pull these threads apart completely, and in doing 
so we run the real risk of losing some detail, especially important interac-
tions between these "threads". Thus the rope is more than the sum of the 
threads. However, I hope this is useful to others who are reading and/or part-
icipating in this thread; its been useful to me just assembling it.

                                                 Regards and Happy New Year
                                                 to all!
						    ---> RGB <---