Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Free Universities.

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 7:44 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes. Unhappily that 10% are mostly idiots. Political advertising tends not to work on the people who can reason for themselves.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 7:44 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
stui magpie wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
^^^^ The power to think critically and question the value of everything, as an end in itself. Our vision about the society we want and our critical evaluation of what we have and what we want comes from that, not from science (although at its best, science contributes significantly to the enquiry and our understanding) and certainly not from people who worry about whether the market is strong, weak, happy or sad.


Legitimate question, do you think that is still a benefit from courses offered today?

My observation is that very few people go to a university now as an end in itself, other than those delaying entering paid employment. (the ones who have to work part time while studying obviously don't fall into this category). The majority of people who study are doing it purely because the qualification they are studying is a requirement for the career they want. In many cases what people actually learn is bugger all except how to google information, copy and paste and reword it to pass assignments.

Well, yes, of course. But one needs to distinguish between the glorified trade certificates (eg, the core parts of law, medicine, computer science, commerce etc degree curricula) and the activities that enable and encourage critical thinking.

The question of why people go is, I think, irrelevant - the issue is whether you encourage them to think intelligently, carefully and critically about the world while they're there. One of the truly tragic consequences of making people pay for their tertiary education is that they become consumers of it and only want to be given the bits that they think will enable them to maximise their incomes. Law students, for example, have always tended to be lukewarm, on the whole, about being taught ethics and jurisprudence (that is, reflective, critical legal theory, rather than the positivistic skills required to defeat an opponent in a contract dispute) but I think society is improved by producing people who think about what they do and why they do it - and what they should do - rather than people who are merely technocratic functionaries.

I make my living as a technocratic functionary. That doesn't mean that my particular function should be all that I know about or understand - and I'm reasonably confident it isn't.

I should, perhaps unhelpfully, add that I could give you a vast array of day to day examples about why that is critically important for the proper performance of the work I do - but I can't because the professional obligations of confidentiality that bind me preclude me from doing so. Hence, I am compelled to speak at a level of generality that doesn't really aid the argument.


Interesting, thanks for that.

I was listening to something on the radio this arvo which lead me to the hypothesis that Uni students these days are more diligent and conscientious nowadays because they have to pay for their education. They take it more seriously compared to those who got it for free.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 7:47 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

They take the part about getting the outcome that they think they pay for more seriously. I don't think, on the whole, they take the part about learning critical evaluation skills more seriously. To the contrary, I think they see it as an impediment to the instrumental outcome.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 8:02 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Fair point. I'd agree with that, the reason they go to uni is to get the qual to get the job. It's all about getting the score, not the learning.

Probably been that way for a while TBH though, since more and more jobs started requiring a qual to get in when you used to be able to get taught on the job.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 8:34 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
They take the part about getting the outcome that they think they pay for more seriously. I don't think, on the whole, they take the part about learning critical evaluation skills more seriously. To the contrary, I think they see it as an impediment to the instrumental outcome.

This is the primary topic in Asian secondary education as we speak. Anything not geared towards score enhancement gets quickly tossed out, giving you children with a major in test taking.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Morrigu Capricorn



Joined: 11 Aug 2001


PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 8:46 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
PETA types


Out of curiosity what exactly is a PETA type?

_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:07 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
David wrote:
Mugwump wrote:
^ Good post Stui - I agree. I didn't vote for Abbott, but I'm uncomfortable with the idea that everyone who did simply lacked the education in economics to think properly about the economic promises the Libs made.


Oh, I don't think that for a moment. As I wrote (and perhaps could have made even more explicit:

David wrote:
I'm not saying that such people contributed the total Liberal vote at the last election. But there were certainly quite a few of them, and we know that because it's how those issues were pitched: three-word slogans; alarmist language; complete lack of any meaningful policy agenda. And it worked, spectacularly.


I don't actually think the average Liberal voter is necessarily less educated than the average Labor voter. Even the Greens probably have to count on a sizable proportion of young PETA types to succeed electorally. The point is that there are enough uneducated voters for tactics like those used in the last election to succeed, and that's a problem.


Only in the last election? You're contradicting yourself, again.On one hand you say it wasn't the dummies who got the Libs up, and then you say it was. That comes across as stereotypical left winger sour grapes, playing the intellectual superiority card

If that's not what you meant, consider this part of your education in writing for comprehension. (A trick I've used a number of times when coaching someone in how to write a paper for an audience unfamiliar with the topic is, realise your audience isn't psychic-they can't read your mind, they haven't lived in your skin, they don't know what you know. You need to explain it to them like you were explaining it to your drunk uncle at a family BBQ. Minimise jargon and acronyms and assume no prior knowledge at all. Never over estimate the intelligence of your audience)

In practice, when you look at the votes and actual swings, governments change hands on less than 10% of the populations opinion.


No, I've been pretty consistent all along: I believe that there was sufficient lack of knowledge in the community about economics, climate science and refugee flow to deliver the Coalition victory in the last election with the tactics they used. If you want to phrase that as "the dummies got them up" then fine (though I don't agree with your terminology—being uneducated doesn't necessarily make someone 'dumb'. Intelligence isn't the issue here).

That doesn't mean that I think all or necessarily even most of the people who voted for the coalition in the last election were economically illiterate, or that dumb people vote Liberals and smart people don't. Completely irrelevant. All it means is that there was enough lack of knowledge in the community a) for the Liberals to run a dumb campaign and b) for it to work spectacularly.

As P4S noted, the problem isn't merely that there aren't enough people with PhDs in economics in the community. Even in my idealistic world where 100% have a tertiary qualification, you're still only going to get so many economics students. The problem is that we have a gap in critical thinking, and that's a quality fostered by nearly all tertiary subjects.

(You can have the ability to think critically without going to university, of course, but I think it's fair to say that there's some kind of a correlation between university attendance and level of critical thinking in the community.)

The News Limited tabloids wouldn't get away with half the stuff they do if their average readership had more of an ability to think critically about what they are reading. Hardly anyone would take them seriously. But we don't live in that world; we live in a world where "kick this mob out" on the front page of The Daily Telegraph does have an impact on readers' psyches, and that's never going to change unless our governments get a little more serious about education.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:40 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Morrigu wrote:
David wrote:
PETA types


Out of curiosity what exactly is a PETA type?


I think that's is because we are not mean to animals Wink

And yes I caught the slightly derogatory tone!

Which is cool, we can still bash men Laughing

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:41 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I think [quoteMorrigu][quoteDavid] PETA types [quote] Out of curiosity what is more than that.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ "You can have the ability to think critically without going to university, of course, but I think it's fair to say that there's some kind of a correlation between university attendance and level of critical thinking in the community.)

I think the correlation might run in both directions - in other words, those who enjoy critical thinking tend to choose to go university. Whether uni makes critical thinking capability is more debatable. Education to age 18, plus life experience (including workplace learning) should be enough to teach critical thinking skills to those who have a propensity for it. I suppose we are all struggling for real evidence on this point, but I've met a lot of university grads who could not think their way out of an open window.

None of that disagrees with your point that any glance at the Herald Sun doesn't make you optimistic for the level of citizenship in Australia. But free university education didn't make it much better in 1972.

And i do understand better your point re education and Liberal voters, thanks for the explanation. I agree with it. The Abbott campaign was Barnum and Bailey politics.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:45 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
stui magpie wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
^^^^ The power to think critically and question the value of everything, as an end in itself. Our vision about the society we want and our critical evaluation of what we have and what we want comes from that, not from science (although at its best, science contributes significantly to the enquiry and our understanding) and certainly not from people who worry about whether the market is strong, weak, happy or sad.


Legitimate question, do you think that is still a benefit from courses offered today?

My observation is that very few people go to a university now as an end in itself, other than those delaying entering paid employment. (the ones who have to work part time while studying obviously don't fall into this category). The majority of people who study are doing it purely because the qualification they are studying is a requirement for the career they want. In many cases what people actually learn is bugger all except how to google information, copy and paste and reword it to pass assignments.

Well, yes, of course. But one needs to distinguish between the glorified trade certificates (eg, the core parts of law, medicine, computer science, commerce etc degree curricula) and the activities that enable and encourage critical thinking.

The question of why people go is, I think, irrelevant - the issue is whether you encourage them to think intelligently, carefully and critically about the world while they're there. One of the truly tragic consequences of making people pay for their tertiary education is that they become consumers of it and only want to be given the bits that they think will enable them to maximise their incomes. Law students, for example, have always tended to be lukewarm, on the whole, about being taught ethics and jurisprudence (that is, reflective, critical legal theory, rather than the positivistic skills required to defeat an opponent in a contract dispute) but I think society is improved by producing people who think about what they do and why they do it - and what they should do - rather than people who are merely technocratic functionaries.

I make my living as a technocratic functionary. That doesn't mean that my particular function should be all that I know about or understand - and I'm reasonably confident it isn't.

I should, perhaps unhelpfully, add that I could give you a vast array of day to day examples about why that is critically important for the proper performance of the work I do - but I can't because the professional obligations of confidentiality that bind me preclude me from doing so. Hence, I am compelled to speak at a level of generality that doesn't really aid the argument.


Interesting, thanks for that.

I was listening to something on the radio this arvo which lead me to the hypothesis that Uni students these days are more diligent and conscientious nowadays because they have to pay for their education. They take it more seriously compared to those who got it for free.


Yep human nature, just like when they start buying their own clothes etc! What's the big deal anyway? It's not a huge sum, it's subsidised, and can lead to huge income. Just how much do those UNi professors cost? And the fancy buildings? Power, etc etc? Someone has to pay for it!


And then You earn 50,000 they take $2,000 and it's still an interest free loan. If you never earn that much free education, yipee you've ripped off the government, or should I say the tax payers.

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 10:12 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

think positive wrote:
Morrigu wrote:
David wrote:
PETA types


Out of curiosity what exactly is a PETA type?


I think that's is because we are not mean to animals Wink

And yes I caught the slightly derogatory tone!

Which is cool, we can still bash men Laughing


A PETA type is probably someone who thinks that the organisation PETA shows a lack of critical thinking skills. eg, among others :

- Its leader writing to Yasser Arafat asking him to keep animals away from suicide bombing
- Suggesting, in your advertising, equivalence betwen the Jewish holocaust and live animal transporation and slaughter.
- Running ads of named prostate cancer victims (without their consent) with white "milk" moustaches and the caption "got prostate cancer?" because you believe that milk causes it.

You can be pro-animal rights to various extents without showing the kind of uncritical thinking that characterises PETA.

edit : and none of the above means that PETA does not sometimes hit the mark and do good work exposing intolerable situations....

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 10:23 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Mugwump wrote:
^ "You can have the ability to think critically without going to university, of course, but I think it's fair to say that there's some kind of a correlation between university attendance and level of critical thinking in the community.)

I think the correlation might run in both directions - in other words, those who enjoy critical thinking tend to choose to go university. Whether uni makes critical thinking capability is more debatable. Education to age 18, plus life experience (including workplace learning) should be enough to teach critical thinking skills to those who have a propensity for it.


A voice of reason. thank you.

The number of people who have critical thinking skills who never went to a university would be far higher than those who did.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:35 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Morrigu wrote:
David wrote:
PETA types


Out of curiosity what exactly is a PETA type?


I was just trying to think of something derogatory that wouldn't offend anyone. Embarassed

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Sat Oct 04, 2014 12:14 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

If I could add some science to this discussion, "critical thinking skills" (a very dated and imprecise pop term), are only one aspect of the issue.

You could have all the innate "critical thinking skills" in the world, but:

(a) There is endless data showing that intensive and guided exercise develops cognitive abilities substantially (and why the hell would we expect otherwise; as I always say, our brain is a physical entity like any other part of the body, not a phantom floating about in the ether of one of the Moons of Jupiter).

(b) Focus on "critical thinking skills" is technically deceiving; not only do computation-type skills improve with practice, but connectionist-type skills (and the physical neuronal networks and "memories" and "automated routines" they create) cannot be developed without exposure to diverse content and activities. Intensive study is one of the best ways of simulating exposure by a mile because it uses the brain's natural scenario simulation module to "experience" the world indirectly.

Things like world travel or sheer life exposure are obviously fantastic in this regard, while working in the same office in the same place dealing with the same people and the same problems everyday would be less effective at developing new neuronal connections. Very stimulating jobs made up of many divergent components—products, people, places and problems—would in contrast be a great way to develop one's connectionist brain. (And, of course, nothing beats a rich and diverse childhood!).

(c) Most of the high-value, or highly-productive fields have a very high entry knowledge threshold, from finance and accounting, health and medicine, marketing and public relations, and science and engineering, to even solid-level IT and technology support jobs. This is quite aside from computational ability.

The base volume of the threshold information in such fields means the threshold knowledge generally cannot be learned "on the job", particularly as no one wants to take the risk of training people four years out from serious productivity.

(d) One of the primary yet hidden functions of education is taxonomy and pre-consensus in aid of coordinating high-level problem solving. All the critical skills under the sun do not expose you to the conceptual nomenclature needed to quickly identify the right problem, describe it with meaningful precision and cross-discipline compatibility, and integrate it with diverse other fields in order to develop a comprehensive solution.

People generally underestimate the connectionist brain because work on it is newer in the cognitive sciences. But if you do the maths, it's pretty obvious that X computation skills can generate far more solutions more when applied to 3Y neuronal connections than 2Y neuronal connections, and so on.

Depending on the field you're in and the quality of the institution, learning is fundamentally about putting both of those processes on steroids. This is why very few people enter complex, integrative work fields at high levels, or take up serious positions at multinational companies, without undergraduate study at the very least.

So, if people are claiming that returns to education and the associated wage gap are generally spurious or fundamentally rooted in discriminatory practices, they're talking utter nonsense—unless they're referring to a discrimination which costs people out of a serious, intensive learning process such as a decent university degree.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group