More attempts to add more misfortune to bad fortune

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, one way would be to go to the closest university, find the class that teaches what you want to learn, then go to the bookstore and see what books are being used for that class.

And you feel that just reading the text book(s) would be sufficient? Most of my colleagues go way beyond the text book in terms of content and challenging the students.

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

 

[beero1000]

Well, one way would be to go to the closest university, find the class that teaches what you want to learn, then go to the bookstore and see what books are being used for that class.

And you feel that just reading the text book(s) would be sufficient? Most of my colleagues go way beyond the text book in terms of content and challenging the students.

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

Speaking from experience in math (the epitome of the 'you can just learn everything from the book' subject), the vast majority of students who try to teach themselves the core undergrad major material on schedule will leave sizable gaps in their understanding. In theory, a book is nearly as good as a class, but in practice? No way. You might eventually manage it, but it'll take at least twice as long and you'll have to keep going back to ideas that you missed or didn't fully understand the first time. Without the interactive feedback component of a guide who can point out connections between ideas and answer questions in the moment, only the talented and diligent have any chance at matching a curated degree sequence by themselves. Saying that you learned more from the books than from the classes misses the point entirely. Books and classes are used for different purposes in teaching and this is one case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

 

[laughing dog]

Well, one way would be to go to the closest university, find the class that teaches what you want to learn, then go to the bookstore and see what books are being used for that class.

And you feel that just reading the text book(s) would be sufficient? Most of my colleagues go way beyond the text book in terms of content and challenging the students.

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

First, most people and most degrees are not in "STEM", so your observation (if valid) has little empirical value. Second, as as beer01000 points out in his insightful post (and beero1000 is in STEM), your observation misses the point even in mathematics. Third, in my experience, it is a rare student who learns more from the texts alone than from the class.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, one way would be to go to the closest university, find the class that teaches what you want to learn, then go to the bookstore and see what books are being used for that class.

And you feel that just reading the text book(s) would be sufficient? Most of my colleagues go way beyond the text book in terms of content and challenging the students.

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

So we should go LP Education model. Whatever works for Loren is the way to go? Seriously, you need to accept that the world does not revolve around you.

Also, engineering and the teacher are important. Often there is no textbook, at least where I went.

 

[LordKiran]

And you feel that just reading the text book(s) would be sufficient? Most of my colleagues go way beyond the text book in terms of content and challenging the students.

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

First, most people and most degrees are not in "STEM", so your observation (if valid) has little empirical value. Second, as as beer01000 points out in his insightful post (and beero1000 is in STEM), your observation misses the point even in mathematics. Third, in my experience, it is a rare student who learns more from the texts alone than from the class.

Its almost as if humans are social creatures and typically learn best from each other or something.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And you feel that just reading the text book(s) would be sufficient? Most of my colleagues go way beyond the text book in terms of content and challenging the students.

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

Speaking from experience in math (the epitome of the 'you can just learn everything from the book' subject), the vast majority of students who try to teach themselves the core undergrad major material on schedule will leave sizable gaps in their understanding. In theory, a book is nearly as good as a class, but in practice? No way. You might eventually manage it, but it'll take at least twice as long and you'll have to keep going back to ideas that you missed or didn't fully understand the first time. Without the interactive feedback component of a guide who can point out connections between ideas and answer questions in the moment, only the talented and diligent have any chance at matching a curated degree sequence by themselves. Saying that you learned more from the books than from the classes misses the point entirely. Books and classes are used for different purposes in teaching and this is one case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

 

[Trausti]

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

Speaking from experience in math (the epitome of the 'you can just learn everything from the book' subject), the vast majority of students who try to teach themselves the core undergrad major material on schedule will leave sizable gaps in their understanding. In theory, a book is nearly as good as a class, but in practice? No way. You might eventually manage it, but it'll take at least twice as long and you'll have to keep going back to ideas that you missed or didn't fully understand the first time. Without the interactive feedback component of a guide who can point out connections between ideas and answer questions in the moment, only the talented and diligent have any chance at matching a curated degree sequence by themselves. Saying that you learned more from the books than from the classes misses the point entirely. Books and classes are used for different purposes in teaching and this is one case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

Yup, while we may be found of this or that professor, it's up to the student to learn. And you don't need to pay $$$ for that.

 

[gmbteach]

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

Speaking from experience in math (the epitome of the 'you can just learn everything from the book' subject), the vast majority of students who try to teach themselves the core undergrad major material on schedule will leave sizable gaps in their understanding. In theory, a book is nearly as good as a class, but in practice? No way. You might eventually manage it, but it'll take at least twice as long and you'll have to keep going back to ideas that you missed or didn't fully understand the first time. Without the interactive feedback component of a guide who can point out connections between ideas and answer questions in the moment, only the talented and diligent have any chance at matching a curated degree sequence by themselves. Saying that you learned more from the books than from the classes misses the point entirely. Books and classes are used for different purposes in teaching and this is one case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

Which, if they are worth their merit, should be the teacher!

 

[beero1000]

Depends on the field. Remember, I'm STEM. I learned far more from the books than I learned from the classes.

Speaking from experience in math (the epitome of the 'you can just learn everything from the book' subject), the vast majority of students who try to teach themselves the core undergrad major material on schedule will leave sizable gaps in their understanding. In theory, a book is nearly as good as a class, but in practice? No way. You might eventually manage it, but it'll take at least twice as long and you'll have to keep going back to ideas that you missed or didn't fully understand the first time. Without the interactive feedback component of a guide who can point out connections between ideas and answer questions in the moment, only the talented and diligent have any chance at matching a curated degree sequence by themselves. Saying that you learned more from the books than from the classes misses the point entirely. Books and classes are used for different purposes in teaching and this is one case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

 

[Trausti]

Speaking from experience in math (the epitome of the 'you can just learn everything from the book' subject), the vast majority of students who try to teach themselves the core undergrad major material on schedule will leave sizable gaps in their understanding. In theory, a book is nearly as good as a class, but in practice? No way. You might eventually manage it, but it'll take at least twice as long and you'll have to keep going back to ideas that you missed or didn't fully understand the first time. Without the interactive feedback component of a guide who can point out connections between ideas and answer questions in the moment, only the talented and diligent have any chance at matching a curated degree sequence by themselves. Saying that you learned more from the books than from the classes misses the point entirely. Books and classes are used for different purposes in teaching and this is one case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

There are plenty of successful people and professionals to teach themselves. Of course, not everyone has the ability for self study. But teachers/professors seem to over estimate their impact.

 

[Trausti]

In current dollars, the average cost for tuition, fees, room, and board at a public university in 1980 was $7,014. In 2016 it costs $19,189. Do you get more education today than in 1980? Certainly, public universities can trim the fat and administrative bloat so students are not taken advantage.

 

[beero1000]

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

There are plenty of successful people and professionals to teach themselves. Of course, not everyone has the ability for self study. But teachers/professors seem to over estimate their impact.

and ignorant people seem to underestimate it.

In current dollars, the average cost for tuition, fees, room, and board at a public university in 1980 was $7,014. In 2016 it costs $19,189. Do you get more education today than in 1980? Certainly, public universities can trim the fat and administrative bloat so students are not taken advantage.

Lol at 'trim the fat'. In 1980, a public university got $24k per student in public funding, adjusted for inflation. In 2014 it was $11k.

Maybe you should take a class? You don't seem to be doing too well with teaching yourself.

 

[Harry Bosch]

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

There are plenty of successful people and professionals to teach themselves. Of course, not everyone has the ability for self study. But teachers/professors seem to over estimate their impact.

and ignorant people seem to underestimate it.

In current dollars, the average cost for tuition, fees, room, and board at a public university in 1980 was $7,014. In 2016 it costs $19,189. Do you get more education today than in 1980? Certainly, public universities can trim the fat and administrative bloat so students are not taken advantage.

Lol at 'trim the fat'. In 1980, a public university got $24k per student in public funding, adjusted for inflation. In 2014 it was $11k.

Maybe you should take a class? You don't seem to be doing too well with teaching yourself.

Wow, that's pretty telling. More than a 50% drop in government support.

 

[laughing dog]

Yup, while we may be found of this or that professor, it's up to the student to learn. And you don't need to pay $$$ for that.

Theoretically that is true. There are people who are self-motivated and who can learn on their own. No doubt about that. But for some reason, throughout history, people have paid others to teach them. Why do you think that is?

- - - Updated - - -

There are plenty of successful people and professionals to teach themselves. Of course, not everyone has the ability for self study. But teachers/professors seem to over estimate their impact.

Do you have any actual evidence to support your claim?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

Which topics are important? How does a textbook not do this?

Which order to cover them? How does a textbook not do this?

Which exercises? Again, a textbook.

Do you understand? This varies depending on the field. In most cases in STEM field at least if you can arrive at the right answer by a process you understand you understand the material.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There are plenty of successful people and professionals to teach themselves. Of course, not everyone has the ability for self study. But teachers/professors seem to over estimate their impact.

As far as I'm concerned, in most fields once a student learns to read there's no longer any need of a teacher. What is needed is more akin to a tutor. Let the computer take over the role of teacher, the teacher spends all their effort on helping the students who are stuck.

In a large class there will be very little interactive time, anything non-interactive might as well be canned. There's no point in paying a human to be a glorified VCR. Use the humans for things which are interactive.

- - - Updated - - -

In current dollars, the average cost for tuition, fees, room, and board at a public university in 1980 was $7,014. In 2016 it costs $19,189. Do you get more education today than in 1980? Certainly, public universities can trim the fat and administrative bloat so students are not taken advantage.

How much of this is due to cutbacks in government funding??

- - - Updated - - -

In current dollars, the average cost for tuition, fees, room, and board at a public university in 1980 was $7,014. In 2016 it costs $19,189. Do you get more education today than in 1980? Certainly, public universities can trim the fat and administrative bloat so students are not taken advantage.

Lol at 'trim the fat'. In 1980, a public university got $24k per student in public funding, adjusted for inflation. In 2014 it was $11k.

Maybe you should take a class? You don't seem to be doing too well with teaching yourself.

Guess I was right.

$7,014 + $24,000 = $31,014
$19,189 + $11,000 = $30,189

 

[laughing dog]

As far as I'm concerned, in most fields once a student learns to read there's no longer any need of a teacher.

Obviously you believe that worked for you. I am pretty sure many readers of your posts disagree.

 

[beero1000]

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

Which topics are important? How does a textbook not do this?

Which order to cover them? How does a textbook not do this?

Which exercises? Again, a textbook.

Do you understand? This varies depending on the field. In most cases in STEM field at least if you can arrive at the right answer by a process you understand you understand the material.

Textbooks are usually designed to be used in varying courses at different institutions, so they generally cover multiple classes' worth of material, and often have sidetracks and optional chapters that may or may not be covered depending on the focus of the class. They present the chapters in one static order that may not be the best choice for the particular class in which they're used. They generally have a huge number of exercises, where no one would be reasonably expected to complete all of them in a semester.

Do you understand? I am confident that I have much, much more experience in STEM education than you do and I'm telling you from actual experience, that the 'teach yourself from the book' technique will likely take a significantly longer time investment to reach the same level of understanding as students taking an actual course. The students who try it often think as you do, but their actual placement scores usually show that they are wrong.

There's a reason why there are workshops and mini-courses at academic conferences for professors trying to expand into nearby subfields. Expert PhDs definitely have the ability to teach themselves any topic related to their field, but in practice, they often pay to take a course to learn it. It's faster and more efficient than fumbling around by yourself, and that is value added. There's a reason why schools aren't collections of cubicles where students are given a textbook and told 'see you in a month for the exam'. There's a reason why you only really see successful autodidacts when they are brilliant and hardworking and didn't have many options for a formal education in that field in the first place.

 

[gmbteach]

Yeah, the real value I see in school is not the teacher, but having someone to ask questions of when you're stuck.

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

There are plenty of successful people and professionals to teach themselves. Of course, not everyone has the ability for self study. But teachers/professors seem to over estimate their impact.

A good teacher/professor doesn’t just impart knowledge and skills, but also how to study etc! Are you implying that teachers are unimportant?

 

[gmbteach]

and having someone to decide which topics are the important ones so you can focus on them
and having someone to decide the order in which to cover the topics
and having someone to show you which exercises get to the heart of the important ideas
and having someone to evaluate whether or not you really understand the material

... y'know, a teacher.

I've been in departmental meetings where we've discussed students who wanted to teach themselves an important class that they couldn't fit into their regular schedule. It rarely works, we tell them it rarely works, and sometimes they insist on doing it anyway. The proof is in the pudding though, and exam scores don't lie.

Which topics are important? How does a textbook not do this?

Which order to cover them? How does a textbook not do this?

Which exercises? Again, a textbook.

Do you understand? This varies depending on the field. In most cases in STEM field at least if you can arrive at the right answer by a process you understand you understand the material.

Good teachers use the textbook as a source, not the be all and end all! Students who use only textbooks to learn are shortchanging themselves as they are not given further examples of the content in use. Teachers can also provide other points of view not given in a textbook and encourage students to critique what they have been presented with. Can a textbook do that?