Posted by Kenneth Sloan on May 05, 2003 at 23:23:22:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: too many ? posted by js on May 05, 2003 at 21:15:44:
I teach "outmoded techniques" everyday.
Why? Because they are useful to the students. They are necessary stepping-stones on the path to the bleeding edge.
I regularly teach a mid-level undergraduate course. In that course, I teach "outmoded techniques" that are a bit more up-to-date than the "outmoded techniques" they learned in the earlier courses...and less up-to-date than the "outmoded techniques" they will learn in higher-level courses.
Joe-if an apprentice walks into your shop and you agree to train them, didn't you once say that you would allow them to hang about and do scut work for awhile, and if they proved useful at that might eventually deign to show them some of your "tricks of the trade"? Think about it.
Rick's professors (and I, on occasion) are trying to teach students the skills needed to go out into the real world and *continue to acquire* new ideas as they come along.
When I was an Engineering undergraduate student, our department was *proud* of the fact that they had gotten rid of the "how to design a propeller" courses in the Aeronautical Engineering program. It wasn't because they didn't know how do design propellers; it wasn't even because designing propellers was no longer an important industrial skill (recall...this was a long time ago). It was because they recognized that more hours of basic Physics and generic design techniques were more valuable to someone planning on being an Engineer for the next 50 years. Did this mean that graduating students were at a disadvantage when applying for a job at Acme Propeller Corp. Yes. Did the faculty care? No. Did they replace these outmoded courses by "more modern and relevant courses"? Also no. They (belatedly) had realized that the propeller design courses had been a mistake. They had taught salable skills - but the details that made the skills salable stole hours away from the study of skills with more staying power.
I choose techniques to teach to undergraduates based on my judgement of what is most *instructive* and what is most likely to build a foundation of general principles. They see their fair share of "bleeding edge" stuff - but only after (or in addition to) the "instructional" stuff.
We don't graduate any Microsoft-Certified Network Engineers. We have a Continuing Studies program that does that sort of thing; there are also several local institutions that do that sort of thing much better, and much faster, than we do. Their ads on TV say "my buddy is still sweating out 4 years of college, and after 6 months I already have the job he was dreaming of". True enough.
You see - we understand the old joke: "In ten years, you will discover that 90% of what we teach you is crap - the problem is that we don't know which 90%". I teach "outmoded techniques" that (in my opinion) are worth understanding even when they are *not* directly applicable in a "real job".
Now...are there people in academia who "can't cut it" in the RealWorld? Undoubtedly. My point in the previous message was that I don't think an undergraduate can spot them.
Read *all* of Rick's posting, and you may find that he agrees with me.
Tell me...when a high school student buys a tuba from you and wants a lesson to learn "how this thing works", do you start by teaching circular breathing and throat singing? Do you advise him to purchase a tuba with an easily accessible first valve slide so that he can play every note in tune? Do you steer him away from the "student line" and insist that he purchase a $15000 custom made instrument? Do you hand him the Moses Fantasy to work up as his first recital piece?
Neither do I.
I like to start with the 48 scales. You know - outmoded ideas like "Joy to the World". Definitely not "bleeding edge". I pity (as do you, I think) the tuba student who tries to play modern music before mastering those 48 scales.
Of course, when they "grow up", these players will look back and say "poor Joe - he spent all that time playing boring scales; obviously he didn't have the chops to play really interesting music"