Internet DL Integration and Education Obsolescence

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Neil Nelson, Dec 31, 2005.

Loading...
  1. Neil Nelson

    Neil Nelson New Member

    Thank you for the opportunity to present the following views. I have no useful degree in the following areas. These ideas derive from long experience in computer information methods and personal study in the foundations of mathematics. The prior area of study may also be called mathematical philosophy and has no recognized body of learning in contrast to that seen in the philosophy of language or logic.

    Assumptions: A primary goal of education is that it may be applied to a sufficiently large number of cases that justify an education investment. Education is a capital in the traditional sense. Degrees and certifications are assurances to employers of education capital that some widely known class of goals can be addressed by the holders of those assurances.

    Hypothesis: The current state of education (DL included) is exceedingly inefficient.

    Argument : If university A and university B can supply degree holders to company C for resolving the same class of goals/problems, then either program of university A or B can be used for obtaining the satisfying degree holders for company C and only one program is required. Where Internet (DL) learning can support an arbitrary number of students, the prior education capacity requirements of physical universities is of little use and more than one Internet program per degree is wasteful. My very cursory Internet review this morning of DL seems to suggest that DL is being presented as a variation on the physical university as if no capacity efficiencies were applicable. Very little if any course integration across the many education resources was evident. It may be that a detailed discussion of how this can be done is needed, but a very direct model can be seen in the open-source development of the Linux operation system.

    Hypothesis: The utility of education in the learning of specific volumes of detail is declining with respect to Internet and automated methods where solutions can be quickly identified and applied.

    Assumptions: Computability theory and methods can be applied to a very large portion if not a majority of the knowledge processes addressed by the universities. In general, arbitrary goal conditions or their state description have a significantly smaller understanding requirement than seen in their solution paths. An example of this is that we can utilize the specialization of others and off-the-shelf equipment and software without needing to know much about that used specialization or how a piece of equipment or software was assembled.

    There exist general solutions methods for arbitrary problems. These methods do not guarantee a solution for an arbitrary problem, but where the problem may be solved a solution will be found given enough time. General solutions methods will typically take longer than specialized methods and in many times take longer than the time available for obtaining a solution. Where partial solutions are available, solutions are more easily obtained by combining several partial solutions such that the primary solution build requirement is in identifying partial solutions and their assembly to the final solution.

    There are frequently, if not commonly, a number of ways to obtain a solution.

    Argument: Given that we prefer solutions requiring less effort we will prefer solutions where the effort of education can be minimized. This will be facilitated when the problem or goal identification (goal satisfaction requirements) is obtained using a language focused for that purpose. It is likely that most cases will require some language specialization education but where such an education occurs at a fraction of that required for use in the corresponding solution path. This distinction between the goal satisfaction language and the solution path language with the second commonly having a larger education requirement is not commonly understood. An extreme example of this would be a comparison of the statement of Fermat's Last Theorem, accessible by common algebra students, and its proof that very few mathematicians would have the capacity to follow. This point goes to increasing the efficiency of solution identification.

    The abundance of partial solutions made available on the Internet can be used to assemble short solution paths in the manner of combining off-the-shelf components. Short solution paths are enabled by general solution methods and by rapid trials of a variety of possible solution paths.

    Automated methods (software) for direct solutions, particularly in study areas of significant mathematical (algorithmic) content, should be made commonly available on the Internet.

    Integration of these and related directions then changes the focus of education toward learning general procedures and language specialized for goal descriptions in the variety of study areas.

    Hypothesis: The idea that a person can make a long and expensive investment in a fixed set of solutions that become quickly obsolete is not tenable and an alternative is required.

    Assumptions: Knowledge requirements are constantly changing and perhaps changing at an increasing pace.

    Argument: That fixed solutions of the detailed variety commonly promoted by universities collides with a constantly changing solution requirement context should be directly understood. The idea of constant retraining in the traditional detailed sense though of obvious benefit to traditional education promoters only forestalls the point at which such an approach will fail. This occurs when the expense of that adaptation method is not recovered by the benefits of the required adaptation. The faster the solution environment changes the less useful fixed solutions beyond a certain detail become. This occurs because of the length of time required to learn a given volume of detail. At a certain point the only solution is to figure out how to learn less while solving more and that requires a better understanding of how knowledge is utilized and how we can make use of increasingly better knowledge tools.

    Neil Nelson
     
  2. AdAstra

    AdAstra Member

    Well, I was always under the impression that a university course is not one that offers techniques in providing fixed solutions, but an opportunity to learn and find one's way in a continually changing knowledge space and to use that training of finding information and applying it to new problems.

    At least that is the approach of the universities that I have attended.

    As a result, or maybe that was already an inherent characteristic of mine, I became good at using the internet as a resource to become quite proficient as a software engineer/developer. In the context of software development, a course in computer science is all well and good and should be pursued, but in the end the tools and methods are changing constantly and the best way of dealing with the flux is by daily learning.

    The same is applicable to my law degree. I am provided with the tools to work within a jelly like environment to solve problems for which more than one solutions is possible. No fixed solutions provided in my course of study.

    It should not be the aim of a higher learning institute to provide fixed solutions. If they do so, then they fail the student badly.
     

Share This Page