[MD] 42

[ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR]

[John]
I really like those animated talk things.  They seem to capture our attention in a broad way.

[Arlo]
They are very well done, for sure. Here's another one I see come up now and again: EPIC 2020 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gU3FjxY2uQ)

Its a recast of an older video (EPIC 2014, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUHBPuHS-7s), which was primarily about the shifting information 'mediascape', using the same 'future voice' to describe educational changes that occur between now and 2020. However, if you watch them both back-to-back, you'll see that the original one (2014) wasn't presenting a utopic future per se, but asked critical questions about where these changes took (take) us, and what unintentional consequences may be. The education one (2020) is nearly entirely utopic, condemning the present state of education and presenting an future-perfect scenario where online, open, automated (AI), degree-less, tuition-less, 'education' functions so well that only 'misguided' and 'misinformed' people do not turn to intelligent online programs for all their informational, educational needs.

"Phædrus remembered a line from Thoreau: "You never gain something but that you lose something."" (ZMM)

[John]
And I think that's a good thing because you always value the teaching most that you seek out rather than have shoved down your throat whether you're in a receptive mood or not.

[Arlo]
If I'm understanding, this is mostly a comment on public/compulsory (K-12) education? Post-secondary education, whether technical, academic, vocational or otherwise is voluntary, so the act of self-registering is a form of seeking out 'information/learning'. Is this, then, a call for eliminating compulsory education all together? Or is it more a call for reform to the way curricula are adhered to (the factory model of ken robinson's video)? 

[John]
Also I realize that this style isn't appropriate for every subject but it seems to me that for the art of programming - and the culture of programmers- it's uniquely appropriate.

[Arlo]
How do you mean? I see this simplified to something like "programmers should not be forced to learn things (about programming?) they don't value"? Would you say that one of the goals for the instructor is to demonstrate 'why' something is valuable that not all students may initially understand? Or is this, too, some form of educational-violence? 

[John]
Again, programming is different.  If you're good at it you can get a good job.  It doesn't matter if you have a degree or are self taught. 

[Arlo]
How would a prospective employer know you're good at it? Believe me, I do not think 'degrees' in and of themselves prove a person can do anything (one of the more recent 'techno' reforms is digital badging, an idea built off of older competency-based models of education), but if we eliminate degrees/grades, how do you suggest our skill(s) be packaged so that an employer can see what we can do? Portfolios try to address this, do you think these are better? What about certifications? I see computer jobs all the time that advertised for people with so-and-so certification. Would that go out with degrees?