Egalitarianism in Education

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by russ, Mar 17, 2005.

Loading...
  1. russ

    russ New Member

    As someone has brought up in another post, our present system of post secondary education allows for tiers of acceptance and different perceptions of quality. This is often driven by demand where the "better schools" are sought after more by prospective students because of their utility and scarcity. The Ivy League schools are an example of one of the top tiers in the system.

    Since America is enamored with the concept of "equal opportunity for all" and against any kind of aristocracy or priviledged class, we now have an opportunity to make education egalitarian. With the advent of the internet we have the ability to provide everyone with an Ivy League post secondary education. No longer would deserving individuals who did not have the connections or money be prevented from obtaining a Harvard, Yale or Princeton undergraduate degree. No longer would individuals who could not afford a "good" school not be able to obtain an education from some of the best educators in the country.

    Through distance learning with internet access and streaming video, a student from anywhere in the country can be studying at Harvard and learning from (debatably) some of the best professors in the country. Why should they have to learn from their local community college professor if they could have access to a Yale or Stanford professor?

    It seems, in my humble opinion, the internet offers a chance to break down some of the barriers for access to some of the best educators in the country and the ability for many more people to obtain an Ivy League education if that is their desire. Would the cachet of an Ivy League degree go down? Yes, but what is wrong with that if the education was truly exceptional?
     
  2. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    In a traditional sense the "opportunity" spoken of in America is not at all egalitarian. Egalitarianism speaks to outcomes.
     
  3. Jack Tracey

    Jack Tracey New Member

    1) Most people don't want to do their college work online.
    2) Most people can not handle Harvard/Stanford level work.
    3) You can not have one instructor teaching a course (let's say Psych 101) to tens of thousands of students.
    4) Utopian philosophy didn't work the first time around either.
    Jack
     
  4. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    russ,

    Not only will the Internet be a great way of improving access to higher education to all, but it will ALSO be the freest of the free press.

    My personal hobby horse is that the Internet will remake our relationship to our government in ways not yet dreamed of.

    No government will be able to bamboozle its citizens for very long unless that government suppresses access to the Internet, not such an easy thing to do as Red China is finding out.

    And for these reasons, the Internet MUST be free of censorship. As a practical matter, it WILL remain free because of its diffuse architecture and, happily, the great skill of so many unknown "hackers".

    I do not mean free of regulation, BTW...identity theft, for instance, is a crime whether computer assisted or not. But I DO mean that the Internet is becoming the new "public marketplace" where commerce takes place and ideas of all sorts are exchanged.

    The meteoric rise of Howard Dean is a good example.
     
  5. russ

    russ New Member

    Re: Re: Egalitarianism in Education

    decimon, would you like to expand on this?
     
  6. russ

    russ New Member

    Nosborne, hopefully the government keeps their hands off the internet.

    You are absolutely right about the internet's power to disseminate information. In the not too distant past, the major media controlled what the public knew and when they knew it. They also distilled information made public. For example, the White House releases some information about foreign policy in a statement and the major media would read it, analyze it, and then tell the public what they believe is important about it. These actions could be totally innocent or could drive a particular agenda.

    The internet gives every citizen the ability to bring up the same release of information by the White House and read it for themselves without the filter of a news agency. That is power.

    We are still at the beginning of the internet age. It will be fascinating to watch how it affects our lives.
     
  7. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: Re: Egalitarianism in Education

    Equal opportunity means not being denied the opportunity to have a chicken in your pot. Egalitarianism means being guaranteed a chicken in your pot.
     
  8. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Brilliant idea! I, The Wizard of Id, in the interests of having the most educated nation on Earth, do hereby decree that every one of my people shall have the Ivy League of their choice. Have you so forgotten Econ 101 with all its examples that emphasize supply and demand? Can you not see that the only way for Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, UPenn, and Princeton to keep their demand (student applicants) high is to keep their supply (acceptance rating) low? In other words, can't you tell that the only way for Harvard, et al, to maintain a situation in which every prospective graduate student and his dog say, "I wonder if I'd be prestigious enough for Harvard," is to see to it that a very large percentage of applicants are told that they are "riff-raff" to be kept out, if you will. Besides, Harvard, et al, would never be coaxed into doing something that would result in the cachet of their degrees going down.

    Besides, Americans are not averse to any and all aristocracies, just to unearned aristocracies. In other words, a meritocracy (aristocracy of merit) is pefectly acceptable, I believe, to most Americans. In short, if someone told you that they should be a member of the elites because they are descended from Charlemagne or some other figure from the Middle Ages who called himself a king because he sat his arse upon pimpled cushions, you would probably say, "So what?" On the other hand, if that same individual applied him/herself and got some higher education, you might agree that, in some sense, they are members of an intellectual elite. If they apply their intelligence in such a way as to figure out some useful product/service to manufacture/sell/render in such a way that it benefits a very large number of people, you might then acknowledge them as one of the economic elites.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2005
  9. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Ted,

    Good reply but I can't tell who or what you're replying to as I think we all, in this thread, favor meritocracy.
     
  10. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    I'm not sure why you posted this to the board rather than using email or private messaging, but paragraph 1 of my post responds to sentence 2 of paragraph 2 of Russ' thread-starting post and paragraph 2 of my post responds to sentence 1 of paragraph 2 of Russ' thread-starting post.
     
  11. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    This is an open forum so I disfavor the "backroom." IMO, nearly all of what can and should be said should be said in open forum.
     
  12. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Decimon,

    Re what was said in the backroom, I am sorry if I misinterpreted your intentions in the previous post. But I'm glad you were willing to settle it in the backroom. Indeed, a guy, like myself, that likes to make arrogant comments needs to learn to be less thin-skinned himself.
     
  13. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Just some misunderstanding. Forum blood pressures have been a bit high lately. :)
     
  14. russ

    russ New Member

    I'm glad you agree that it is a brilliant idea (or were you being sarcastic?) I have not forgotten about economics but I was not talking about the marketing of a degree but rather the quality of the education the degree is supposed to represent. I have already acknowledged that the cachet would be diluted but, again, so what? There are always those who never believe a new idea will ever get off the ground.

    As to the aristocracies, it is not just the meritorious who get into Harvard and the Ivy Leagues but children of alumni and those, of course, who can afford the $200,000 in tuition for four years. I have no problem with merit alone as a standard. Still, even merit will not allow the kind of numbers I believe could make it through Harvard and benefit from the education if only given the chance.
     
  15. russ

    russ New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Egalitarianism in Education

    Encarta defines it this way:

    maintaining, relating to, or based on a belief that all people are, in principle, equal and should enjoy equal social, political, and economic rights and opportunities

    and I would add - educational opportunities

    If you feel another word would be more appropriate, feel free to comment. Thanks, decimon.
     
  16. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Egalitarianism in Education

    It's the "rights" part that matters.

    Would you add, educational rights?

    I would stick to opportunity and flush the egalitarianism.

    This isn't to engage some pedantic nitpicking. Not my thing. Egalitarianism is where everyone has the right to wait in line all day for a loaf of bread.
     
  17. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Good. It is a great idea, but it will still be Harvard, et al, that decide whether to "lower their cachet" by allowing their degrees to be more readily available. In other wiords, for those who have Ivy League degrees to be considered "prestigious persons," there must be some "riff-raff" (like myself) who are barred at the door. On the other hand, social attitudes might change. Not so long ago, when I was just a kid out of college, it was common to say things like, "A prestigious school would never offer night-school degrees." Lo and behold, number fifteen in the nation University of Chicago commenced offering a night school MBA, from the which my older brother graduated in 1987. With the responsibilities of supporting himself and a wife in grad school, I doubt that my brother could have quit his engineering job to do the full-time day program. So, things can and do change. How long it will take for the Ivies to see some economic incentives to offer all their programs via DL is not known to me.
     
  18. jouster

    jouster New Member

    Do you really think this is still the case? Many who have neither graduate from these schools.

    You mean like this?

    http://www.alllearn.org/


    [/B][/QUOTE]Would the cachet of an Ivy League degree go down? Yes, but what is wrong with that if the education was truly exceptional? [/B][/QUOTE]

    Well, if everyone had access to it, it could not, by definition, be exceptional.
     
  19. jouster

    jouster New Member

    Do you really think this is still the case? Many who have neither graduate from these schools.

    You mean like this?

    http://www.alllearn.org/


    [/B][/QUOTE]Would the cachet of an Ivy League degree go down? Yes, but what is wrong with that if the education was truly exceptional? [/B][/QUOTE]

    Well, if everyone had access to it, it could not, by definition, be exceptional.
     
  20. russ

    russ New Member

    Re: Re: Egalitarianism in Education

    This is an illogical statement. It does not follow that if everyone had access to an exceptional education the education would no longer be exceptional. It would still be exceptional but available to many more people and that is my point.

    I guess, due to the objections to this idea, that the prevailing consensus is that there should be only a few "elites" that should be able to attend the Ivy Leagues. We should make no attempt at trying to raise the level of education for all members of our society (the premise being that an Ivy League education is truly exceptional).

    Where is the rising up of the proletariat educated against the aristocratic educated? Marx would be so disappointed.
     

Share This Page