|
| ▲ | mbernstein 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| The argument for universities to be a place to learn to think critically and not learn specific skills is an even stronger value prop in an era where useful skills likely change rapidly. |
| |
| ▲ | bsenftner 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | There needs to be a realization of how important communication skills are to develop and possess. The act of disagreement has skill levels that do not trigger emotional responses, and cause cross understanding to occur. Learning how to convey understanding and gain understanding from others becomes more and more important in a landscape of rapid change. Which we are collectively terrible at, with most companies being miscommunication circuses, with all the stress that generates, needlessly. | |
| ▲ | btilly 9 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | The problem is that professors say "learn to think critically", then actually just want the students to learn to sound like them, and agree with them. Actual critical thought has been on the decline for some time. This is especially true in the humanities and the social sciences. Where truth is hard to ascertain, and therefore it is easier to substitute political correctness for critical thought. |
|
|
| ▲ | b3kart 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| so universities become trade schools? one concern is where does one get theoretical knowledge required for e.g. going to graduate school and then doing research to push the state of the art. that's one of the reasons universities emphasize theory: it's seen as the first step on the academic ladder, not as a trade school |
|
| ▲ | iugtmkbdfil834 14 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Agreed, but I can immediately see how painful it will be to monitor whether the work is actually done by the student. |
