First off let me acknowledge that I am willfully participating in a bubble. I am knowingly spending too much money for the product I am buying. The product used to be a degree and a durable set of skills. When obtaining a college degree was affordable for the middle class and meant the promise of a job, alright, the product was properly valued. And college graduates still have higher employment rates than those without a degree (only about an eight percent difference though). But now, the college system in America is becoming extremely over-valued and people are beginning to realize it. Research has shown that tuition increases have outpaced family income increase and inflation by nearly double, yet enrollment is expected to increase this year. Another study found that undergraduates aren’t learning much over the longterm. I want to examine the biggest issues with higher education as I’ve seen them up and close, and then relay some of the many possible solutions I have read about or thought of. Some of the problems are small and relate to student or professor habits and other routine aspects of colleges, but some are epidemics. The blame is universal. Many students I know are uninterested in first principles or even understanding material, but rather only wish to pass. We are teaching student’s what they need to know instead of how they can know things. Professors are preoccupied with research, rely on the mountain of material accumulated throughout their many years of teaching, and rarely seem joyous. Education has become more akin to following a manual’s steps than to creating unique insights and novel thinking habits.
The point of this post is for both students and our culture as a whole to realize that the learning process is not one thing. There is no single method to exploring curiosity or teaching mastery. Specialization is becoming less valuable, and imagining new and creative ways to learn will make our work force and our well being more durable. Automation, cutbacks, losing jobs oversees; a student who becomes a durable generalist will easily pivot to a new area of curiosity whenever necessary. This is the duty of students and educators, to become durable generalists.
I have broken the key issues into categories: 1) Training, 2) Curriculum Structure, 3) Classroom Culture, and 4) Big/Societal
Training and Knowledge Acquisition (or students and teachers suck at problems)
The first thing I have noticed is that student’s knowledge is becoming conditional. What I mean by this is a developing reliance on words and contexts to trigger knowledge, outside of a narrowly defined problem students flounder. The further a problem is outside of its usual context, the harder it is to identify and solve. This issue is related to science, engineering, mathematics, and other problem based degrees. Here are a few examples of higher education’s problem with problems:
1.) Problems Assumed to Have Answers: This is perhaps the most obvious misalignment between what the world is like and what our schools say the world is like. In life we routinely encounter problems or questions that don’t have answers. We certainly encounter thousands that don’t have one answer. In our higher education classrooms, a problem is given, and then students take it for granted that it has an answer. Well, perhaps the question doesn’t have an answer or perhaps it has several. Problems should be massive winking question marks that students tango with, child-like and frustrated before arriving at a unique method for deducing an answer.
2.) Knowns and Unknowns Explicitly Given: In nearly every problem a student will encounter, student’s are told what they know and what they need to know to solve it. The answer is almost never “we can’t solve what we are asked to solve given what we were given.” Student’s are almost never tasked to “identify the information you need to solve this problem, and then solve it.” In life, you often don’t know what you want to know and often you don’t know what you want know. These sound the same but they aren’t. Sometimes you want to know X, but you don’t know it (i.e I want to know how fast the car is going but the speedometer is broken). And sometimes you don’t know that you want to know X. You don’t even realize X is worth wanting! (i.e I need to know how long it will take me to get to Tampa but I am not sure how to find out…speed is crucial but you haven’t realized it yet) First you have to decide, “what matters for this problem?” “Do I need to know the temperature of the system?” “Do I need to know the thermal conductivity of my material?” “Do I need to know what day it is?” Eventually, through arduous trial and error, you say “eureka! Once we find heat loss, the problem becomes trivial!” Instead student’s are told “here’s what you need to find and here’s what you need to find it” and even “here’s how you should find it!”
3.) Solution Betrayed by Context: This is a pervasive case. A problem almost always hints to the reader which one out of maybe four processes taught is needed to solve it. This cues the familiar phrase “Oh! It’s this type of problem!” In reality, we often see a problem we’ve encountered before, but in a whole new context that is unfamiliar to us. Or we can use a tool we’ve mastered before for a different problem to solve an entirely new type of problem. This is a joyful experience. When I was in high school calculus, imagine my joy when I discovered that the familiar process of taking an integral could be used to find the area of a circle!
4.) Language and Story of the Problem: The sentences used to describe many problems that are supposed to be “real world problems” are often jargon-filled and pedantic. A problem that is actually asking “how hot is the room getting” instead says “Solve for the delta Temp of the volume over the given time period given the heat loss Q.” The way normal humans discuss problems is dressed up in some silly or verbose story.
5.) Discovery and Investigation: It should be obvious to everyone. The most fulfilling way to learn something is to discover it yourself. Instead of having students catapult tennis balls and measure the distance traveled to discover the physics of projectile motion, most teachers/professors write y = y0 + v0*t + 1/2 * g * t^2 . Instead of having students try to derive a method of finding the area of a triangle, we are all told to memorize some weird Greek man’s theorem. Failure makes a great teacher, but we save failure for exams these days.
Curriculum Structure (or most kids don’t even know what they’re studying)
Now that we’ve seen a few of the common problems with problems in higher education, let’s examine broader issues within most curriculums.
The first is that NYU and most universities over emphasize theoretical information and under emphasize the fulfilling and internalizing process of hands-on learning. Instead of exclusively studying the refrigeration cycle in a stale, over air conditioned, shrine to the projector classroom, have the student’s take apart a window mounted air conditioner. There they will find the abstract compressor finally made real by metal and the scaling demands of reality, they will find the obscure condenser and evaporator coils, they will hold the simple fan and see where the water must be pooled. This makes the theories real and the lessons memorable. Trust me, this summer I did exactly what I just described and learned more about Thermodynamics than an NYU class was able to teach me. I had a lot more fun too. Most third year engineering students have never held a heat exchanger. By introducing more hands-on projects, universities not only help their student’s retain more information, but also provide hard skills. Hard skills are those like operating a table saw, building a circuit or learning to solder. Just imagine if in Physics II, when most students are taught about electromagnetism, students were required to create a tool utilizing the principles of motors and generators. This would have the double-effect of helping students build skills and a portfolio for future employers, who are starting to value measurable skill sets and self-starters over degrees and good students. Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk now require applicants to Blue Origin and Tesla to discuss specific projects and problems they have worked on and solved. Google, Basecamp, and hundreds more are doing the same.
Related to the lack of hands-on learning, another issue with universities like NYU is the lack of customization. A curious student can’t be inspired by a specific aspect of the topic they are studying, and proceed to do a deep dive to explore their interest. For instance, once while sitting in a lecture on dew points and boiling points, I was curious about what it would take to create a cooling device that brought water moisture in the air down to its dew point, or pulled water from the air. If I had the chance to go out on a side path, I would have had the joy of building a little atmospheric water generator (endless fun videos on Youtube) before venturing back to the main trail with the class. Instead I had to essentially create an entire club and manage my studies with this “side project.” Of course it makes sense why the current model doesn’t allow for these side expeditions of curiosity. Schools are beholden to jamming the textbook’s twenty course meal down the throats of student’s who may only be hungry for three. If student’s could build their own degrees (some schools are indeed starting to have Ad-Hoc majors), they would come out the other side more interesting having been allowed to be more interested! Currently, most students encounter a few classes in their major that hit the bullseye of their curiosity, and then endure dozens that are miles away from the target. Majors are completely inflexible, brittle, and must be handled the same. Universities try to throw in a lab course or two where “classroom concepts are reinforced with hands-on experiments” but these come with lab manuals that essentially detail the process of avoiding experimentation altogether! The point of an experiment is to tinker and devise a method for testing a hypothesis, instead students follow a method and confirm the expected outcome. The process of discovery and invention is dead on arrival. In fact, several of my classmates forge the data…
Classroom Culture (or “will this be on the exam?”)
The next series of issues pertain to the classroom. The first thing I have noticed after four years inside lecture halls is how terribly frightened most of my peers are to ask questions or raise a serious opinion. Maybe they are scared of sounding ignorant on a topic already covered, maybe they think their question is too random or off topic, maybe they are frightened their opinion will be shamed, maybe they figure Youtube will answer their question better and quicker than their old professor who has the lecture memorized down to the slow swallow following slide seventeen ever could. When my classmates do muster the courage to ask a question, most sound oddly formal and over explanatory. Informal everyday tones are hardly heard with the refreshing exception of a small few. With the learning process being so idiosyncratic, people must be allowed or rather feel allowed to speak and investigate in their own voice using their own little methods. If before I can ask about a confusing topic I must first translate my clear question into a muddled language the professor understands but I do not, I will never reach clarity. Plain language results from clear thinking, and explaining complicated things simply is a final step to mastery. I was once decisively told in a philosophy class that “although context matters in other classes, I think the professor is saying in this one it shouldn’t.” We had been discussing the interpretation of language and I confess that in this instance I was speechless. Students often try to anticipate what the professor wants to hear and then cater their opinion to that language and tone, whether they are expressing their opinion or their confusion. In classes requiring long form essays, it is common practice and often advised on sites like Rate My Professor, to dilute your own disagreements to suit the sensitive stomach of your professor.
Finally, the lectures and examinations are reduced, reused and recycled. Past exams essentially show students exactly what they should cram into their heads the night before and are casually passed around by an inner cadre. Once a year PowerPoint slides or crumpled notes are reopened and sink professors into ten year rhythms, limiting spontaneity and discovery, draining dry any joy they once had for a subject. How else would students respond but to fall asleep or skip class altogether? And lastly, the blinds are drawn on all awareness of outside reality. Current research, current events, usual tones, and practical problems are often ignored wholly.
To be transparent and fair, I have had a few amazing professors and high school teachers who actively combatted the traditional short comings I have outlined. They were often times quirky and improvisational polymaths who would weave in and out of different subjects seamlessly. They enjoyed odd questions nudged by a novice that could spark an expert’s curiosity. They had no fear saying, “Hmm, I am not sure but I will let you know next class.” They would call out questions to specific students that directly got to the heart of the matter. These professors and teachers were usually complained about by students for teaching outside of the Syllabus and Textbook. There are thousands of amazing educators making the best of a mediocre system. I don’t want to insult those hidden needles amongst the tenured hay.
Big Societal Problems (or c’mon y’all…we can do better than this)
According to a study by New America, the main reasons students are going to universities are largely driven by paranoia: 1) raise employment opportunities, 2) get paid more money, and 3) get a good job. Now I don’t want to dismiss these reasons for getting a degree, of course they aren’t always driven by paranoia. In fact they are frequently driven by economic burdens. But what does it say about our culture’s appetite for curiosity and discovery that our main reasons for attending giant institutions with millions in funding to supposedly bestow knowledge unto a new generation are all based on job placement and career success? Surely there is something in between career cogs and hippy philosophers. We need desperately to change the incentives of our education system, the students and the academics are severely confused.
We happen to be alive at a moment of intersecting change (listen to Tim Urban go through his “book” metaphor at 41:22). Technology is complex and common, more people have secured comfort in Maslow’s hierarchy than ever, there is incredible inequality of resources and wealth, we are more scientifically advanced and incredibly illiterate about the basics, AI and automation are on the way or have already displaced workers, dropout rates and student debt are increasing, and we have immense numbers of American workers uninspired and aware of the minuscule impact they have on the world. We need to recategorize education, away from specialists and towards generalists who explore their own curiosities. The industrial revolution is over, we don’t need factory workers. We need thinking, adaptive, curious, and diverse generalists. If you master a singular skill you are prone to disruption by technology, a more skilled worker, an oversees worker, etc. If you become a lifelong learner curious about dozens of topics, you become a unique combination of durable information, and easily update your skills and pivot when needed. We need students and workers who are comfortable with failure, not fearful of it. We need them to seek out new problems and enjoy being confused. We need them to develop their own methods for reasoning through novelty and complexity.
So here are some of the many possible ideas on fixing higher education and self-actualization. I have either thought these up or read about them. All would come with their own issues, but the point is to realize that our current system is just one system. And moreover it is new and fragile, riddled with bugs. We need to start experimenting.
1.) Make Education a Protected Status: employers can no longer discriminate based on applicant’s education levels. A PhD and a high school dropout are on the same level a priori. This would force colleges to focus on developing skills and making their school more valuable for useful knowledge, help young adults who are ahead of the curve skip college, fix social perceptions for students who don’t want college, increase the reliance on internships and real world practice for learning new skills, lower tuition, diminish bias against lower income individuals, and who knows what else…
2.) Get Rid of College Acceptances: colleges can no longer reject applicants. Whoever can pay for the school can go to the school. This will probably increase dropout rates in the sort term but decrease them longterm. People who don’t jive with college will learn they don’t need it and after high school, students will experiment more. Most significantly, this will lower barriers to entry and shift us away from “legacy.” One study found nearly 50% of Harvard undergraduates were legacy students, meaning they had a parent or grandparent attend. It will remove the prestige and desire for high schoolers to get admitted to elite universities and leave the prestige and desire for high schoolers to seek out unique educations.
3.) Make the First year of Every Degree Free: this encourages students to try college without the fear of losing all their money by dropping out or choosing the wrong major. It also encourages students to experiment with many majors until they find the right fit, all the while picking up knowledge across fields and becoming generalists. Let students decide how much time they’d like to spend at a university. You could even change this to be the first few courses of every degree free, so students could sprinkle in free exploratory courses into their whole college experience.
4.) Two Degrees per Tuition: Allow students their first degree as normal. When they complete that degree, they can come back to the university whenever they want within a certain time limit (ten years maybe). It can be immediately after the first degree, or much later. This makes schools inherently more valuable, students no longer need to compromise when choosing a major, students are multi-talented not just specialists, students feel more comfortable entering the job market before jumping right back to school (i.e graduate school immediately) and can make some money back. Imagine how many Poet/Engineers we could have, and boy do we need them!
5.) Abandon Four-Year Degrees: Whatever a school decides as its test of knowledge, any student should be allowed to take it and prove they know enough to move on. If my friend can graduate in two years and I take six, so be it. This should combine with online courses available to anyone. If I want to binge watch an entire semester in two weeks and test for a pass, let me. Some courses work like this, but most outside of the core don’t.
6.) Five Internships Equals One Degree: Create whatever accreditation system you need to create legitimacy, but five internships in one area (i.e graphic design, engineering, political science) equals an undergraduate degree in that area. Choose the minimum time at each internship, the minimum number of internships, etc. If I intern with Google, Facebook, WordPress, Mom&Pop Coders, and Twitter I now have a computer science undergraduate degree. Imagine that, making money while in school instead of acquiring debt. We can still have colleges sponsor this as a “degree” and pay them a reasonable tuition.
7.) Abandon Prerequisites: This is a similar idea to number five. By removing prerequisites, students would have greater flexibility when creating their schedules. Students who learn faster would be able to take “higher level” courses and do just fine. And if they don’t, let them fail. By allowing students to judge for themselves which courses are too advanced, they can graduate quicker if possible and gauge for themselves their strengths and weaknesses. Simply have course descriptions that suggest what information is typically required for success, i.e Students typically do better in this class having completed Calculus I and Physics I and II. The average grade for those who have neither of those courses is a C-.
8.) Verbal Examination: Rely less on the standard written silent exam. Switch to a one-on-one verbal exam where a professor and student converse about various topics related to the test material and end with a demonstration on the black board or via some object. For example, on a Electrical Engineering exam:
Start by having the student explain voltage, current, resistance, how they’re related. What is a charge really? What is electricity? What do we mean by parallel circuit? What is a transistor? What is an alternating current? How do we generate electricity for the city?
Then have the student configure the board on the desk to turn the little light bulb on, or repair the broken radio, or draw a circuit on the black board that would supply 12 volts, etc…
9.) Abandon Examination: Why do we give our students exams? To confirm they acquired the required knowledge. Why though? What do we care if they know it or not? If they aren’t actually learning what you say they ought to know, so be it. They are the ones choosing to spend their money. If a company interviews them or asks about their experience or asks to see a portfolio; if they truly haven’t learned enough then they won’t be hired. Well, don’t we want to rank our students by grade point average? Why? That one seems dumb. But, don’t students like to see how they are progressing? Fine, now we are talking about benefiting the students. Create a new gauge of progress. Perhaps have a student actually do the thing they should be able to do after the course…or see number eight above. But don’t colleges want to be known for creating talent? Of course, they should be incentivized to actually bestow useful skills and information. Without exams though, how do we avoid “passing” students who don’t actually know a damn thing, and thereby developing a reputation as a bad college? Maybe talk with the students and ask if they are enjoying the curriculum and feel they are acquiring useful skills and info and if they say no try to fix the issue and if they still say no politely ask them to transfer into your Students Who Say They Aren’t Learning Anything But Chose To Stay school. Employers will know they just like being around learners, or have a hard time learning, or have extremely high expectations of themselves.
10.) Can Someone Please Do Online Education Already?? Start using the internet more, allow distributed classrooms and students. Why limit yourself to the talent of your region or the expense to physically relocate people? The accreditation can be worked out. Most students will still choose to physically go to a campus, but some will choose the flexibility and self-pacing of the internet.
Lastly
We need to start trying new systems. Start with small groups of willing students and then build from there. I know reality is a hard person to please, but we can drastically improve our system and create fulfilled students who actually have skills and enjoy learning. If you’re thinking of going to college, demand more of your program. If you’re in college and agree with some of what I’ve written, demand more of your program. If you’re a professor or teacher thinking “Teachers are trying! We already know this but change is hard.” start tiny rebellions in your classrooms. Maybe do one lecture a week totally unplanned. Maybe give students the option to opt out of one exam and do a project instead. Maybe create a day where all you do is ask questions and try to find answers together. If you’re a student, seek to experiment with your education. How can you study material to increase longterm retention? What weird questions or obvious questions are you avoiding asking? You have experts around you every week. Try to really understand the subjects and relate them to one another, create art with them or a new project, don’t worry about your exams so much, try not studying for one and solve a problem on the spot! We are all rallying for change, but in the meanwhile let’s follow Gandhi’s advice…
If you like this topic I can recommend a few reading materials that helped inspire this post:
- A Mathematician’s Lament: Paul Lockhart
- Surely You’re Joking Mr. Feynman: Richard Feynman
- The Element: Ken Robinson
- Operating Manual For Spaceship Earth: Buckminster Fuller
- The Tim Ferriss Show Episode 90: Tim Ferriss
- This and This: Chase Jarvis and Whitney Ricketts
- Teaching Advice: Paul Bloom
Also…no hate to NYU. You do pretty good and also don’t kick me out please.
Image from Jeff Stahler
polymathematics 
Leave a comment