M.I.T. Calls Academia's Bluff
by
Gary North
by Gary North
Recently by Gary North: Wikipedia
and Google Will Bring Down Establishments All Over the World
The Massachusetts
Institute of Technology has begun the most revolutionary experiment
in the history of education, stretching all the way back to the
pharaohs. It now gives away its curriculum to anyone smart enough
to learn it. It
has posted its curriculum on-line for free. These days, this
means a staggering 1900 courses. This number will grow.
This is proof
to the academic world that MIT regards its program as the best,
and dares any other institution to prove otherwise, where everyone
can see and compare. The free site validates the MIT T-shirt: HARVARD:
Because not everyone can get into MIT."
MIT has publicly
stiffed its main rival for the title of the best science university
on earth. That rival is the California Institute of Technology.
CalTech will forever play catch-up to MIT on-line. It will be "We,
Too On-line University."
Students around
the world can see for themselves that MIT has what it takes to be
the best. They can test drive the entire curriculum.
Top students
all over the world still want to attend MIT. They want a diploma
that has MIT's name on it. The free site does not reduce demand
for an MIT diploma. It increases it.
MIT has up-ended
several millennia of higher education. Let me explain.
THE
NATURE OF THIS REVOLUTIONARY EXPERIMENT
For as long
as there have been priesthoods, there has been formal classroom
education.
The Egyptian
priests had classrooms, lectures, and students taking notes.
The Jews had
schools where bright young men came to learn the Hebrew texts and
memorize the oral tradition, which began being written down in the
second century A.D. This oral tradition was written down centuries
later: the Mishnah and the Talmud.
The Classical
Greeks had academies. Plato and Aristotle taught young men the rudiments
of philosophy.
The Greeks
also had medical schools.
These programs
were closed to most outsiders. A student had to be accepted. He
also had to pay.
In most cases,
the information was secret. The student was bound by an oath of
secrecy. Here
are the opening words of the original Hippocratic Oath.
I
swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia
and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I
will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and
this covenant:
To hold
him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live
my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money
to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal
to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art
if they desire to learn it without fee and covenant; to
give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other
learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed
me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an
oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
The training
created a medical guild. The guild functioned as an oligopoly. It
kept prices high by restricting access to the training.
This is what
the college diploma has always done. It has created a guild that
restricts entry by non-certified people. This keeps wages high.
To obtain
the diploma, a person must pay money to the trainers. The trainers
are located at one center or special regional centers. Journeying
to the center adds costs. Quitting a full-time job back home also
adds to the expense. Forcing students to attend pre-requisites adds
to the cost. Everything is done to screen access to the knowledge.
So, the knowledge
does not spread. This is the crucial function of the academic screening
system, especially for practical knowledge: healing people and building
things.
For the first
time in the history of man, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
has opened the gates to all comers. It has said, "You won't get
certified by us, but you can get the classroom knowledge. If you
are smart enough to teach yourself, you will have the knowledge."
MIT has now
removed the most important layers of bureaucracy: the layers associated
with classroom instruction.
1.
The fee to obtain the training
2. The cost of journeying to a training center
3. The pre-requisite system
4. The cost of quitting your job
This has de-mystified
the entire guild procedure. It says this: "If you are smart enough,
you can master the initial content."
This opens
the door for the revival of the local apprenticeship system. Here
is where a student masters the non-textbook basics of a field, which
are at least as important as the textbook content.
Think of a
written account of how to tie a shoelace. Then think of a parent's
training: apprenticeship.
There is one
remaining price barrier: the high cost of textbooks. But Amazon,
eBay, and the many on-line used book sellers let you buy older editions
for $20 instead of $150. A textbook one edition behind is 99% effective
in every undergraduate major.
The gatekeeping
function of the academic guild is now under assault by one of the
supreme gatekeepers: MIT.
REMOVING
BUREAUCRACY
The next step
in the liberation of society is the introduction of certification
by examination without diplomas. There would no requirement to attend
a school. Just pass the exam.
This terrifies
every guild. Smart people could get in just by passing the guild's
entry-level exam.
The ultimate
breakthrough would be a requirement that every certified member
of a guild would be required to pass the guild's entry exam every
five years or else lose his official license to practice. That would
mean the end of exams that screen for wage reasons rather than for
technical reasons. The members would demand easier exams, so that
they could pass. More students would pass. Wages would decline.
Finally, there
would be a removal of state-chartered systems of professional licensing.
It would not be illegal to sell any services at any price.
Combine these,
and the bureaucratization of society would end.
If you think,
"This is utopian," consider this: MIT has removed the crucial initial
layer, which imposes the greatest financial burden.
A student
in India who understands English and who has access to the Web can
get an MIT education.
If other universities
imitate MIT, the world of higher education will be radically changed
for the better.
$120,000
DEGREES FROM PODUNK COLLEGE
Let me tell
you a story I know first-hand. It happened several years ago.
There is a
tiny Christian college then unaccredited that has
pretensions of being a first-rate Christian university for conservatives.
The librarian put a book by a certain historian on its shelves.
This scholar had written some unconventional books regarding certain
controversial aspects of World War II. This book was not one of
them.
Some bonehead
faculty member came to him and told him to remove this book. He
refused. She then told the administration. The librarian was ordered
by the administration to remove the book, because a library-review
committee was scheduled to visit the school. This team could revoke
the library's accreditation if certain kinds of books or authors
with certain views were found on the shelves. The librarian quit,
as he should have. The book was then removed.
The administration
was bluffed by a bonehead faculty member into committing a preposterous
assault on intellectual liberty removing a book from the
library because of the administration's utter terror in the
presence of a committee of librarians.
There was
a day when Christians chose death by lions rather than capitulating
to the State. That day is long gone. This is the confession of Christian
higher education: "Our government-accredited utmost for His highest."
Colleges are staffed by certified bureaucrats who have been trained
by certified bureaucrats. They grew up in the fear of committees,
and this fear never leaves them.
The losers?
The students and their parents, who spend $120,000 to earn a degree
(if the student graduates) from a low-prestige school that provides
a third-rate education. In addition, the school raises another $15,000
a year per student from naïve donors who don't know how third-rate
the place is.
There are accredited
universities around the world that offer distance-learning programs
where a student can earn a liberal arts degree at home in two or
three years for $15,000. A student can pay his own way by working
as an apprentice to a local businessman. This way, he or she learns
a trade. But no. The parents send them off to college for $30,000
a year (after taxes).
Parents who
send their children off to Podunk College are behind the technological
curve.
First, about
half of college freshmen don't graduate, even
after six years. Second, those who do graduate enter a job market
in which only
20% of graduates can find a non-minimum wage job.
The graduates
are four to six years older, minimally educated, have no full-time
work experience, and have forfeited four to six years of income.
I call this "formally certified stupidity." What would you call
it?
A college
could easily provide free on-line guides to passing the Advanced
Placement, CLEP, and DSST exams to quiz out of the first two years.
Total cost: under $2,000 for the exams. That would save parents
at least $60,000. The school would provide conservative guidelines
for free on-line in PDF. It would also provide free YouTube or Blip.tv
video courses.
If the school
were interested in educating people, it would do all this. But Podunk
College is interested in selling accredited degrees at above-market
rates. It is not interested in educating people. This includes all
of the "dedicated to furthering God's kingdom" colleges. They are
dedicated to furthering their little kingdoms at parents' expense.
If they are
really worth the money, they should prove this for free on-line.
MIT has. Why not them?
Simple: because
they are not worth the money. They know it. The parents don't know
it. The illusion must go on.
Could a college
make its money by teaching upper division courses on-line for 25%
of today's tuition $5,000 a year instead of $20,000
with no room and board costs? Yes. Will any of them do this? Of
course not. Why not? Because they are in debt up to their ears for
educationally unnecessary real estate. They adopted a technologically
defunct model before the Web.
There is another
reason. If a school's curriculum were 100% on-line for free, every
parent, donor, and prospective student could judge the academic
quality of the program. There is no interest in doing this. I think
the administrators have a sense that their programs are not up to
the standards of tax-funded universities.
Their problem
is not lack of money and physical plant. Education is about wisdom,
self-discipline, highly motivational teachers, and perspective.
The problem for these schools is a lack of a distinctive Christian
academic worldview.
If parents
could see the classroom presentations, they might conclude that
the academic content is essentially the same, the perspective is
the same, and the cost is far higher than tax-funded education.
A prayer before each class is not worth an extra $80,000.
Someday there
will be a Christian college aimed at home school graduates that
itself is 100% on-line and priced accordingly. In the meantime,
parents and students have on-line alternatives for under $20,000,
total.
There are
several universities that offer this, most notably Excelsior and
Edison State.
Would a college
lose its accreditation if it adopted such a program? Not if it played
things smart. It could enroll on-campus students whose parents are
eager to spend extra money. There are still lots of these parents.
Jennie Sue and Billy Bob want to get away from home at their parents'
expense for four to six years. They wheedle a free education by
pleading a love of classroom education. Peer pressure from other
parents reinforce this. "What? Your kid is still at home?"
Would parents
enroll their children at an unaccredited college? Maybe not. They,
too, grovel at the feet of accreditation committees. But since the
graduates of accredited schools can't get decent jobs these days,
of what economic value is accreditation?
I am not talking
about students who major in a natural science like engineering or
chemistry. But hardly any American students do. I am talking about
the standard, career-unrelated liberal arts degree.
WHAT
DO PARENTS WANT?
The sad fact
is this: most parents don't care about education. They care about
accreditation. The great German social scientist Max Weber commented
on this just after World War I. He
wrote this:
If
we hear from all sides demands for the introduction of a regulated
curricula culminating in specialized examinations, the reason behind
this is, of course, not a suddenly awakened 'thirst for education',
but rather a desire to limit the supply of candidates for these
positions and to monopolize them for the holders of educational
patents [B]ureaucracy strives everywhere for the creation
of a 'right to the office' by the establishment of regular disciplinary
procedures and by elimination of the completely arbitrary disposition
of the superior over the subordinate official. The bureaucracy seeks
to secure the official's position, his orderly advancement, and
his provision for old age.
Parents seek
union cards for their children. But there are so many kids with
union cards today that the advantage has disappeared.
What should
a wise parent do? Keep the child home and away from the bureaucrats.
Get the child apprenticed to a local businessman. Have the child
quiz out of the entire B.A.
Add an incentive.
The child gets $50,000 in cash or half the total cost of
college as a graduation present. The child pays for his/her
college education. The parent saves a bundle, especially considering
how many students drop out. The child gets starting capital. Use
it for grad school. Use it for starting a business. Use it for down
payments on a few repossessed houses.
Meanwhile,
Podunk College gets nothing. This is the way it ought to be until
it offers something educationally unique and worth the extra money,
or else offers its existing run-of-the mill program on-line for
a third of the money that it charges today.
Private, campus-based,
wildly overpriced colleges with undistinguished academic programs
will survive, but only a handful of them will prosper. They function
today as expensive marital matchmaking services. There are cheaper
ways to marry off your children. They can to use one of these on-line
dating services.
To the parent
who says, "I don't want my child being certified by a state university
like Edison State or Louisiana State," I respond: "So, you prefer
to pay $120,000 to a private college that gained its accreditation
only by kissing the hindquarters of a state-licensed accreditation
agency?"
There is stupidity
and then there is financially suicidal stupidity. Parents display
both. The older the child, the more suicidal the stupidity.
Under no circumstances
none should a family or a student go into debt for
college. The average student graduates with $20,000 of debt. This
is suicidal. When graduates marry, they are $40,000 in debt. I
offer lots of horror stories here:
CONCLUSION
The end of
the high-priced university training system is in sight. It may take
a generation. These schools are licensed agencies of the state.
They will not surrender without a fight. But when the best science
university in the world says "Come and get it . . . free!" the other
schools have a major problem for justifying secrecy. This response
"We offer a better program than MIT does" is not likely
to be widely believed.
Any
college that does not have all of its professors' classroom lectures
on-line on YouTube or Vimeo or Blip.tv is saying, loud and clear,
"We don't want people to see how incompetent our faculty really
is."
Any college
that claims to be Christian but which assigns standard secular textbooks
and does not publish on-line refutations of these textbooks is saying,
loud and clear, "We agree with the textbooks. We charge parents
$30,000 a year so their kids can have a prayer before every class
maybe and a morally safe environment maybe."
I call it Darwinism with prayers.
It is fraudulent.
It is corrupt. It is widespread.
Parents, save
your money. Have your college-bound children stay at home and pay
for their own educations by using AP/CLEP/DSST exams at $60 per
course, plus on-line distance education at $100 to $125 per semester
unit, plus local apprenticeship with a salary are the way for your
children to pay for their own college educations. This takes the
risk out of the deal for you. With a 50% drop-out rate, there is
huge risk.
If you say,
"My child is not smart enough or mature enough to learn on his own,"
then do not send him off to college. Let him stay home and watch
Animal
House twice a day until he matures.
August
20, 2009
Gary
North [send him mail] is the
author of Mises
on Money. Visit http://www.garynorth.com.
He is also the author of a free 20-volume series, An
Economic Commentary on the Bible.
Copyright ©
2009 Gary North
The
Best of Gary North
|