University of Nothing

The University of Nothing – The Bylaws

I’ve said several times on this blog that the education system is broken and is in desperate need of change. I now think we are finally starting to see the emergence of a new era in education reform. One led by the private sector.

The issue I still struggle with is how to balance the intersection, or lack thereof, between cutting edge methods of education with societal expectations of having to graduate from an accredited university.

Specifically, what is the difference between a Harvard business professor teaching a Harvard class, in Harvard, vs. someone like a Fred Wilson teaching a business class in his firm’s office? What is the difference between a computer science professor teaching JavaScript in a university building vs. a computer science entrepreneur teaching JavaScript in some office space in NYC?

To me, the answer simply boils down to a piece of paper. A degree. Being able to say you graduated from a prestigious program or accredited university which is still very highly regarded within our society. My friend calls this a “luxury good.”

Furthermore, what does it really mean to have “accreditation in the United States?”  According to the US Department of Education:

The goal of accreditation is to ensure that education provided by institutions of higher education meets acceptable levels of quality.

Well I think its clear that the “levels of quality” are definitely not acceptable. Just go watch the movie Waiting for Superman.

And how exactly does a University even achieve this “accreditation?”

Accrediting agencies, which are private educational associations of regional or national scope, develop evaluation criteria and conduct peer evaluations to assess whether or not those criteria are met. Institutions and/or programs that request an agency’s evaluation and that meet an agency’s criteria are then “accredited” by that agency.

So I’ve always wondered, “what if there was a way to leverage the best technologies and platforms for education while still maintaining an element of prestige or recognition outside of the broken, very expensive university systems?”

And now I think I know the solution: New Accreditation Agencies and Guidelines.

Here is how it would work:

  1. There would be new, self governed accreditation agencies, with new guidelines, that are not subject to government oversight.
  2. These agencies would be comprised of successful, influential individuals who have rich domain expertise (e.g. venture capital, finance, online ad tech, biology, etc).
  3. The agency itself would be its own university or academic institution.
  4. These agency individuals would oversee: a) the appointment of other “teachers” b) the fundraising initiatives of the “investment pool” (described later) c) public outreach and communications about the agency itself via personal blogs, op-eds on third party publications, etc.
  5. These agency individuals would teach: a) design curriculums, b) teach and broadcast classes using the latest education platforms (e.g. SkillShare, YouTube), c) make introductions as needed on behalf of their students
  6. These individuals would invest: using the “investment pool,” these individuals would allocate money to students that have demonstrated the ability to succeed as a jobs creator, otherwise known as entrepreneurs via their class projects (described later).
  7. The investment pool would be comprised of capital raised from non-profits, endowments, donations and there would be no contingencies tied to the money.
  8. At the end of the curriculum, the students would be given a degree that is widely recognized by the participating members of the agency (e.g. the influential VCs, financiers, executives, etc). Instead of graduating in hopes of getting a job, these students would be graduating with an extensive network of active working people with a possibility of getting money from the “investment pool” to fund a business.
  9. Student tuition is not required.
  10. Tests are not used to assess students. Projects, prototypes, and inventions are.

Although fairly abstract and not fully vetted, I think the final result would be getting a bunch of smart people together, with money to help fund those smart people’s ideas, while providing the students with an umbrella of recognition, and a network of business contacts that could rival an accredited or prestigious university. All the while the students would be learning in the most efficient ways possible.

The best part is, the only people that would care to be involved in such a program would be those looking to build real businesses which in turn will drive innovation, new jobs, and real growth.

On the future of education

It will be very different in 10 years.  It is very different now.

Pretty soon those backpacks carrying 100 lbs worth of textbooks will be replaced by one, 10.2 oz Amazon Kindle or even your iPod.

From Gizmodo:

iTunes U will be teaming up with universities and other education establishments to offer a free hosting service for educators.

As information continues to become more widespread and readily accessible, the question becomes, what value does a physical university really have?

If I can get the same education for free either on the Internet or through other distributed devices, why do I really need to be in a classroom, or furthermore, why do I even need to be in a University?

Students can take courses online and learn what they need to learn with companies like Phoenix, Kaplan, BigThink, Academic Earth and even YouTube (Dear Ambassadors and Respected Representatives of UW-Madison and Eduction).

The “Degree” is beginning to seem less and less valuable (in many cases, but not all) when you can learn what you want, when you want, where you want , and apply those lessons to real world applications. This to me, is infinitely more valuable than doing homework or taking tests in an insulated environment.

However, being in a physical university does have its advantages. You are surrounded with like-minded individuals and have a very good chance at meeting the right people, and creating some real value for the real world. Then again, can’t we just do that online?

“School Spirit Skit 2” – Kanye West (The College Dropout)

You keep it going man, you keep those books rolling,
You pick up those books your going to read
And not remember and you roll man.
You get that a sociate degree, okay,
Then you get your bachelors, then you get your masters
Then you get your master’s masters,
Then you get your doctron,
You go man, then when everybody says quit
You show them those degree man, when
Everybody says hey, your not working,
Your not making in money,
You say look at my degrees and you look at my life,
Yeah i’m 52, so what, hate all you want,
But i’m smart, i’m so smart, and i’m in school,
And these guys are out here making
Money all these ways, and i’m spended mine to be smart.
You know why?
Because when i die, buddy, you know
What going to keep me warm, that right, those degrees

I’m not suggesting students drop out of school.  Just, reconsider HOW and WHERE you get your education and reconsider HOW and WHEN you apply what you’ve learned to the real world.

A fantastic piece was written yesterday in the NYTimes.com by Mark C. Taylor titled, End The University As We Know It. If you are going to read one thing today, please read this piece.

An excerpt from the piece:

GRADUATE education is the Detroit of higher learning. Most graduate programs in American universities produce a product for which there is no market (candidates for teaching positions that do not exist) and develop skills for which there is diminishing demand (research in subfields within subfields and publication in journals read by no one other than a few like-minded colleagues), all at a rapidly rising cost (sometimes well over $100,000 in student loans).

Widespread hiring freezes and layoffs have brought these problems into sharp relief now. But our graduate system has been in crisis for decades, and the seeds of this crisis go as far back as the formation of modern universities. Kant, in his 1798 work “The Conflict of the Faculties,” wrote that universities should “handle the entire content of learning by mass production, so to speak, by a division of labor, so that for every branch of the sciences there would be a public teacher or professor appointed as its trustee.”

Unfortunately this mass-production university model has led to separation where there ought to be collaboration and to ever-increasing specialization. In my own religion department, for example, we have 10 faculty members, working in eight subfields, with little overlap. And as departments fragment, research and publication become more and more about less and less. Each academic becomes the trustee not of a branch of the sciences, but of limited knowledge that all too often is irrelevant for genuinely important problems. A colleague recently boasted to me that his best student was doing his dissertation on how the medieval theologian Duns Scotus used citations.

worth the entire read..more here…

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dear Ambassadors and Respected Representatives of UW-Madison and Education

In the back of my mind I’m always thinking about education and change. Below is an open letter written to some faculty members of my alma-mater about the importance in recognizing that change.

(Before reading this letter, please note that I will be making this letter publicly available on my blog. Also, kindly take note of the recipients.)
To: Chancellor Carolyn Martin – chancellor@news.wisc.edu
To: Provost Julie Underwood – junderwood@wisc.edu
To: Director of Admissions, Steve Amundson – samundson@uwmad.wisc.edu
To: Dean of Students, Lori Berquam – lberquam@odos.wisc.edu
To: Senior Policy and Planning Analyst, Hazel Wade – symonette@bascom.wisc.edu
To: Associate Dean of Students, Argyle Wade – awade@odos.wisc.edu

3/31/2009
Dear Ambassadors and Respected Representatives of UW-Madison and Education,

I am writing to you out of extreme concern for the future well being of my alma-mater and your home, UW-Madison. The admissions process, curriculum structure, and speed to iterate are overwhelmingly frustrating and alarming. The arguments and issues addressed throughout this letter only reflect my first hand experiences, but I firmly believe these issues are far-reaching and not specific to UW. Nevertheless, these issues exist and must be addressed, or at the very least, must be thoroughly considered. By way of introduction, my name is Dan Reich and I am a recent graduate (May 08’) from UW-Madison’s College of Engineering (Electrical). During my four year tenure at UW, I was able to accomplish some great things, including but not limited to:

Additionally, I have a younger brother Jeremy who is currently enrolled in UW’s school of business where he is double majoring in real estate and risk management. I also have a younger sister, who I would like to say is also a legacy, but was recently rejected by the UW admissions office. A sister who admittedly did not score as high as she could have on her SATs, but did have excellent remarks in school, as well as other critical skill sets and experiences (she also attended UW’s summer program). This is an individual who if assessed in relation to her peers, in my objective estimation, is a stronger candidate for success than most. Nevertheless, I believe the admissions process is critically flawed and this belief is not exclusively dependent upon my sister’s recent rejection.

While I believe the admissions process in general could be significantly improved, (which I’m more than happy and eager to discuss with any admissions officer at UW at any point in time), I will start my focus on the issue of networking in light of recent events.

As an individual who is currently working in a digital media and technology startup company specializing in social networks, emerging trends and technologies, I understand the importance of networks. Networks are literally changing the world. We see it happening everyday as companies like Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Etsy, Twitter and others utilize the power of what Mark Zuckerberg calls “elegant organization.” When a single node is affected on a network, those directly tied to that node, piece of information or person also feel a change. The connections are what is most important. So, how does this have any relevance to the admissions process?

UW-Madison, as well as other schools throughout our society, should know this answer better than anyone else. Since 1848, UW has been building a super network of students and alumni. Every year UW graduates about 10,000 students who go on into the working world thus strengthening the badger universe. These are people who are ambassadors to the UW brand and are lifelong members of the network, and additionally each member has numerous other networks that are additive in value to the primary group: what we call Badgers.

Now you might imagine what I was thinking when I heard that my sister was not admitted into UW. A school that had endured not only my sweat, blood and tears, but also that of my brother. A school in which I had given money, time, but most importantly, a tremendous amount of value through conversation and action. So again, when I heard that my sister did not get into UW, you might think my reaction was “Why didn’t she get in?” but instead, my reactions were:

  • Why is the school degrading the network it has worked so hard to build?
  • How do you review applications? Why do you do it that way?
  • Doesn’t the school consider an applicant’s legacy within the school, and more importantly, their track record (I had a 2.5 GPA first semester and graduated with honors)?
  • Why didn’t I get a phone call from the school saying, “Dan, we just wanted to take the time and let you know that your sister did not get into the school?” or “Dan, if you and your sister are willing, we would be more than happy to go over why she wasn’t accepted?”
  • Why would I want to continue to support an entity that I believe has poor judgment?

In one phone call, you could have showed that you still care about your network in a very personal and meaningful way. Instead of strengthening your network, you weakened it.

How do you expect to compete in a rapidly changing world using obsolete methods and practices? Students are beginning to realize getting a “degree” is less valuable than getting practical, real world work experience. They can take courses online and learn what they need to learn with companies like Phoenix, Kaplan, BigThink, Academic Earth and even YouTube. Why spend $500/semester on books when I can get the same information free online? Why would students want to pay full tuition to an accredited university when at the end of the day they are taught linear algebra by a teacher’s assistant that speaks poor English, makes continual mistakes (which were witnessed by a head of department), and has inconsistent grading (this happened to me junior year. That semester I had a 4.0 GPA until given a C by a TA)? Why implement practices that have students cramming for exams instead of using methods enabling true adoption of the material (I wrote a piece about this on my blog entitled, The University of Nothing. This post received over 60 comments from various communities and sites, and the consensus was that current education systems are in trouble. I’m also willing and eager to discuss this point further with any faculty member. In fact, I had this conversation with one of my engineering professors when he asked my opinion on “why the enrollment in engineering was decreasing.” He was giving a presentation to his peers on this very topic).

In any case, this letter is not intended to bad-mouth or criticize current practices at UW. It is however intended to act as a wake-up call. I only and respectfully ask two things:

  • Please reconsider how you value your network and remember that we among the network are all ambassadors to UW-Madison. We are your most valuable asset.
  • Please reconsider how UW-Madison can take the lead and become the most efficient and attractive educational institution of tomorrow. The world is changing and so should you.

Again, I’m happy to speak to anyone and everyone about these issues. Please feel free to leave comments on my blog or send me an email at reich.ny [at] gmail [dot] com. I most welcome a phone call and conversation.

My Very Best Regards,

Dan Reich

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

University of Nothing – Part II

My previous post titled University of Nothing, generated a ton of meaningful, insightful, and thoughtful response.

J.T O’Donnell of Careerealism.com adds some tremendous value and insight to this subject as she draws some parallels between my post and that of Sir Ken Robinson‘s new book, The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything. In her post:

However, I put my money on those who understand the simple truth to getting on track professionally: a discovery learning approach to finding a career that leverages a person’s own unique intelligence is the best way to find what they’re looking for. When put together, Reich’s and Robinson’s thoughts on learning and intelligence unlock the secret to finding professional success.

While I completely agree with this assessment, I would take this one step further:

When put together, Reich’s and Robinson’s thoughts on learning and intelligence unlock the secret to finding professional and PERSONAL success.

So what would the University of Nothing actually look like? I briefly outlined how the process might look if it were applied in an institutional setting:

Here are a few common themes I’ve noticed and how they could be applied to my University of Nothing (commented in Seth Godin’s Triiibes):

  1. Identify a general area of study (math, electronics, science, English, etc)
  2. Define a project, task, or end goal that is too hard for the students. (ie. prove a math theorem, build a robot, write a simple web application, write an essay using certain allegory or prose, etc)..just make it hard. And if they don’t like it, let them suggest a different end goal. One that intrigues them (within the same subject)
  3. Outline certain checkpoints for the students, and have them work towards each checkpoint (proof, concept, approach, methodology, etc). Build the approach so it forces analytical thinking and independence.
  4. Meet with the students at each checkpoint and discuss how they got there. Offer multiple suggestions for next steps without giving them a definitive answer.
  5. Review final product and discuss the various elements. Once the student has reached this point, you can take a more traditional approach to teaching (what I call cram-sorption), because by this point, the student will know the pain points, and will look to learn what they lacked in the process. They will most likely retain the information at the end of the process, than from the initial onset.

Teachers can help facilitate the learning process, and guide along the way, but at the end of the day, it’s all on that person to know how to get things done.

Bottom line: Education reform is needed and with question marks lingering over the economy, government, or society as a whole, 2009 may be the year that we see some of this reform. Whether or not it comes directly from government and the new Obama administration, private schools, or new and innovative startups, a change will occur because it has too and because people are fed up with this broken system.

Bailout in the financial sector, bailout in the auto sector, next…bailout in the education sector.

A complete revision of how we teach our children is long overdue. Whenever I go to school events I can’t help but notice what an unispiring environment these buildings are. – Bodo Albrecht

For those of you that haven’t seen Sir Ken Robinson speak, I highly recommend watching this:

My primary teaching goal is teaching folks how to think. I don’t care what they’re learning; the process is the real value. – Joel D Canfield

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The University of Nothing

I’m founding a school called the University of Nothing.

This is a school that teaches no subject matter directly. Instead, this university will teach you how to learn, and while learning how to learn, you will indirectly learn something else.

My past 4 years in college, I’ve learned by a process that I will call cram-sorption learning. Information is given to you (for the most part) and it’s up to you to learn it (or cram for it) and spit it back on tests. The reality is, after that test is over, many people forget everything they’ve just learned.

Students and schools today should learn through a process which I will call discovery learning. A process by which no information is given, except for an overall goal or objective. In this model, students will be required to do whatever is necessary to find, learn, and complete the task. Accessible Information has become so huge, widespread, and abundant, that I could learn anything I wanted to if I just knew how to look and if I applied a different way of thinking.

If this is successful, my students of the University of Nothing will be prepared to prepare themselves for any job or new career no matter what the situation.

Applications available soon…

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Scroll to Top