Posted on 06/20/2011 9:40:15 AM PDT by RobRoy
As futurists observe the usage and functionality of the internet, more and more of us have predicted an end to the relevance of Public schools. Well, the Khan Academy site may be the first clear indicator that public schools really are a dead institution walking.
Imagine a future world where, via a home computer, laptop, tablet or even smart phone you can access your own personal curriculum of k-12 level class work complete with lectures, follow up questions and help? Imagine it also covers subjects that public school seldom covers, like the intricacies of how banking works?
Well, a friend of mine sent me a link today to just such a site. My jaw dropped when I saw it. I felt like I had been projected into a future where children can be effectively educated at their own pace, by their own parents, completely separate from the indoctrination of public schools, teachers unions, and other leaders with an “agenda”. In this future, all education curriculums are chosen by the parents and child. It can be worked at any time; it can be augmented by external sources on the internet, public libraries, or even field trips. And the parents control the teaching and “indoctrination” of their own children.
And anyone with a thirst for knowledge will find this a huge opportunity to not only learn about many diverse subjects them self, but also as a springboard to much deeper investigation of whatever subject catches their fancy.
This future has arrived. And I know what you are thinking: this will be shut down by “them” in short order. Well, “they” have already tried and failed. This site has significant backing and anything that happens in this vein will be exposed to the light of day – and the press. And you cannot patent Algebra. Teachers unions teamed with book publishers in some states to get the state legislatures to limit what methods can even be used in classrooms funded with public dollars. But this is privately funded and is a non-profit academy. The NEA and Luddite book publishers are facing their looming obsolescence with great apprehension.
This needs to go VIRAL. It could literally change the future of the US and the world as we know it – and for the good!
The Federal government is already doing this, this is nothing new.
That makes me happy!
>>If you are in the top 1% across the nation, how MUCH more better can you do? lol<<
I’m thinking of the five nines concept here.
Perhaps you are not aware that the Federal government ALREADY does this. The OPM (office of personel management) already sets the standards for recognition of degress for hiring purposes.
Please read the sentance again. I am NOT saying that the Feds would set standards for anyone other than the Feds and how they hire.
http://www.youtube.com/user/khanacademy
This outfit has well over 2,000 youtube videos and they are linked up with youtube advertising (making some serious bucks)
Neat concept.
Yes, I knew. So what? It's illegal. There is no Constitutional authority for such an enterprise. None. It constitutes Federal mind control: a counterproductive usurpation of power and an abomination to liberty.
Sounds like he wasn’t challenged to live up to his potential.
This guy leans left
Check out his video on ‘Estate Tax’
http://www.youtube.com/user/khanacademy#p/u/61/eElHlE4j-vw
While he gave both pro and con viewpoints of the estate tax he leaned heavily ‘pro-estate-tax’ and topped it off with a Churchill quote to verify his stance.
Hmm, wonder if he has one on global warming *snicker*
Nice resource for the basics though - I bookmarked it.
>>What about the little matter of all the killing of enemies of the state, the wall around E. Berlin and the enslavement of eastern Europe.<<
That is not about the concept of communism, which the video is referring to. It is using three nations as examples to clarify what is meant by “communism”. The detail you are looking for would be in the history of the particular nation that did the things you refer to.
We need to pay for the education majors to go back to school (or get online training) to learn a new skill. Sort of a post-educational GI bill.
We? Whom would be this royal "we"??? You want to reach into my pocket to fund the re-education of what is likely a unionized Marxist Democrat goon? To what end?
OK, I'll put in my $0.02 and you can fund the rest.
Why doesn't the government have the right to say as part of our hiring process, we will only count degrees that come from regionally accredited universities? The intent of such rules by the OPM is to prevent someone who has a mail order degree from representing themselves for a position that they are not qualified.
Secondly, how is the Federal government's establishment of hiring criteria set out in Code of Federal Regulations (5 CFR) illegal? Please read Article II section 2 with particular attention to “...and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers...” Further, Article I vests the legislature with the power to make laws and the OPM was established by law in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.
So I am not getting where you say that the OPM is illegal nor where you say that there is not a constitutional authority to do so.
Meh, make it tax deductible. It will take something drastic to move these people out of the educational gravy train. I think a carrot would be better than a stick, and we need to dismantle the education monolith whatever way we can. The savings we get from disbanding the schools would more than pay for the retraining.
$195 total....free shipping....this, from the Website...
CA....
Seems like a good thread to ask where good & free curriculum guides are located (k-12 and beyond). Thanks RobRoy for the posting.
Sure they do, but changing the point is not going to save you.
The Federal government has no power to decide what constitutes a degree.
Hence your list of rhetorical questions is bogus in this case.
Why doesn't the government have the right to say as part of our hiring process, we will only count degrees that come from regionally accredited universities?
First of all, the Federal government does not have rights, people do. The Federal government only has those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Specifying the content of educational standards is not among them. Second, as your example of MIT proves, do they need an accreditation from anybody? Everybody to whom the question matters at all understands that distinction.
Secondly, how is the Federal government's establishment of hiring criteria set out in Code of Federal Regulations (5 CFR) illegal?
Appointing officers has NOTHING to do with specifying what constitutes an acceptable education. That does not mean that the Feds cannot assess the education of a particular candidate. The Federal government has no power to interfere in the education marketplace. Hence, it must accept State standards and assess the educational capability of the individual as a matter of equal treatment under the law. I promise you, Albert Einstein did not need the blessing of a university, and in fact, would have met many of the criteria you prefer to impose. The strength of his ideas backed by experimental validation was all that was necessary. Thus, if that particular State specifies that private credentials are acceptable as long as specific standards of accountability are met, then the Federal government must accept them as valid. If an individual can prove that he or she possesses the skills to perform a task, it is not the business of the Federal government to assure that said applicant had paid off a claque of overpaid Marxists and useless bureaucrats to bless his ticket.
Once upon a time, hiring managers were held accountable for assessing the capability of their employees. As technology became more specialized, it became impossible for hiring managers to assess those individual capabilities. Enter Credentialing. The problem is that the lawyers of this world hold that credentials are equivalent to competence or even expertise. Nothing could be further from the truth. As a result, one MUST hold that MIT engineer as superior to an individual from Montreal International Technical College, even if he is incompetent in practical terms while the latter is in fact more competent (and don't get me started on examples of exactly such).
An example of private credentialing is board certification, which in fact is PREFERRED by many employers in the private marketplace compared to university degrees. Another example of the antithesis to your thinking is home education. Care to argue that the credentialed public product is inherently superior?
Thus, technology has progressed to the point where one can acquire expert knowledge without "benefit" of this 19th Century hierarchical institutional structure with which you are so infatuated. Moreover, that structure has become so ossified in protecting its internal interests that it has become a barrier to learning. There is no longer any justification for people to save hundreds of thousands of post-tax dollars to pay a bunch of Marxists to decide if your child is properly brainwashed. The key is testing, because testing really can separate the competent from the credentialed. That's why the left hates it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.