TED Education — Video Lessons For Students 88
New submitter EuNao writes "TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design), the organization based on 'ideas worth sharing,' launched a new initiative this past week. It is called TED-Ed, and it aims to engage students with unforgettable lessons. There are many places in the world where a wonderful teacher or mentor is teaching something mind-blowing, but as it stands now not many people have access to that powerful experience. Ted-Ed aims to bring that engaging experience to everyone who has an internet connection. Here are summaries and links to the nine videos that were initially released."
the best lesson... (Score:2, Insightful)
...is the lesson that you are naturally entitled to nothing, from property to welfare, and that most human constructs are constricting rather than liberating.
So ignore how you're told to live, and work in the way that you think seems right.
America has only produced a handful of scientists. (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, America has only ever produced a very, very small handful of scientists. The "one last generation of scientists" that you speak of is the only generation of scientists that American has produced!
Up until about 1970, essentially every significant "American" scientific discovery of accomplishment was the work of European-born and European-trained scientists and engineers. Working backward from 1970, the space program was mainly the work of Europeans. The atomic age was brought about by Europeans. Much of the digital age, including critical work involving the creation of transistors and semiconductors, was the work of Europeans. Most automotive and aviation technology was pioneered by Europeans. The techniques for building modern urban infrastructure were the work of Europeans. Railways and locomotives were invented by Europeans. The technology of the industrial revolution was the work of Europeans.
I hope you see the trend there. Europeans are responsible for virtually all of the technology available and widely used today.
American scientists only came into their own in the late 1960s and 1970s. Americans like Dennis Ritchie and Donald Knuth, for example, did perform some groundbreaking research. But then the whole Reagan Mistake of the 1980s took place, followed by "free trade", both of which essentially trashed the American economy, and also the funding for scientific discovery and education.
These days, illiteracy runs rampant throughout many parts of the United States. Without having basic reading abilities, it's impossible to learn even the most basic mathematics, and it's impossible to make any kind of a scientific contribution. Indeed, when you hear about American-based scientists today, many of them are from Japan, South Korea, India or China. It's the same situation as it was before the 1970s, except now it's Asian-born and Asian-trained scientists making the real discoveries and performing the real science.
Re:3 edu-sites already. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it depends a lot on the area. We're closer to replacing programming classes with online courses than we are to replacing, say, civil-engineering degrees; at least for the near-term future, nobody is going to license you to work on a bridge if you don't have a college degree, no matter how many online videos you've watched. Part of the reason imo is that it's easier to demonstrate competence in programming, e.g. by having a "Github resume" of non-trivial projects you've worked on in your spare time.
Re:3 edu-sites already. (Score:4, Insightful)
Many fields require dealing with hardware you don't have access to unless you go to college. Also, the ability to learn from smart people is a huge untapped potential, once online learning becomes mainstream universities will realise that they have to offer more than just giving students books /notes to memorise.
Re:3 edu-sites already. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would people even go to college once this becomes mainstream?
Simply put, passively watching a video is better than nothing and even better than tuning out in the middle of class. However, there is simply no replacement for hands-on experience. That's why you see all those cutting edge new charter schools that are opening up moving away from textbook-based learning to project-based learning. As a math teacher, I am 100% behind sites like this providing opportunities for people to engage in life-long learning. That being said, I simply don't believe you can become an expert anything simply by watching. The cognitive psychology research says you need something like 10,000 hours of practice to develop the automaticity of an expert. That is to say, do you want the surgeon who has to check the anatomy book before he cuts into you or the surgeon who practiced on cadavers so much he can find the place to cut with his eyes closed? THAT, my friend, is what the value of college is. The other key feature of college is that gives you a chance to see where the holes are in understanding/technology/methodology. Universities, especially at the graduate level, are really about preparing people to engage in innovation. Do some people have good ideas without college? Surely. Are even half of those ideas feasible or attainable without some serious training? I doubt it.
Watch Mr. Wizard (Score:4, Insightful)
The videos I watched remind me of that old TV show "Watch Me Wizard". Short and focused on a single facet of one topic, the video can hold your attention for a few minutes. They would be a good supplement in a traditional educational setting, kind of like a reading assignment.
They don't seem especially revolutionary though; and keep in mind that TED talks often subtly (or not so subtly) push their organization's political agenda.
Re:America has only produced a handful of scientis (Score:5, Insightful)
A more accurate statement might be "by European-born Americans". The atomic age was not brought about in Europe, but only once Europeans from several nations emigrated to the United States, where they worked in a team of diverse ethnic origins (Germans, Hungarians, Americans, Poles, etc.), something that would've been unthinkable in Europe itself.
You, Sir, Are Unfairly Modded As Flamebait (Score:4, Insightful)
Your analysis of the TED talks by age and gender may be a bit whimsical, but you're in essence dead on.
The smug and tedious pretentiousness of the majority of TED presentations has been one of those Geek Truths That Dare Not Speak It's Name for years now. It's about two, maybe three years away from complete Burning Man Status (i.e., everyone knows it's time has come and gone, but there's still plenty of money to be made from the n00bs, so hush up...)
Re:3 edu-sites already. (Score:2, Insightful)
College is not just about job training, it is learning to think more broadly, becoming a responsible adult, etc. In high school, you get a little sense of history from dates and places, but the grand narrative and the lingering long term effects are not really emphasized whereas in college you get a better sense that one ware grew out of the lingering distrust/resentment of the last. Similarly, a lot of mathematics in (average track) high school is "here's a technique, practice it 20-30 times and show that you can effectively use this technique" while leaving Calculus as a height to aspire to and making no mention of what lies beyond. In college, starting with calculus, you begin to get more of here are a collection of techniques, how can they be combined to solve problems and/or what new techniques/properties can be derived from these? You also see the more tree-like structure rather than the linear structure of concepts seen in primary school. Virtual group work is generally not as effective as in person group work, which is the norm in a job setting, which is a weakness to the online learning setting. Transitioning from living with your parents directly into the real world is more jarring than the gradual progression from dorm to campus/off-campus apartment to real world apartment.
The online learning setting does have one huge edge from what I can see - the ability to more easily allow self-paced learning. Most courses are offered at one pace or perhaps two if there is an honors version. For many of my weaker calculus students, spreading out the standard 3 semester sequence over 4 semesters or extending the semesters into the summer would allow them to learn better. A 20 week slower paced course would be better than taking a 14 week course twice to really learn it for instance. This self pacing could be a vast improvement in learning (though there is a risk of students to letting classes drag out if it lacks firm deadlines). One issue that still requires work to catch back up to traditional instruction is assessment - I like that online homework enables immediate feedback on answers, but at the cost of receiving feedback on technique - it is easy to get sloppy with parentheses on early homework and such habits catch up to you later on. Similarly, long response answers are more difficult to use in these settings. With things like Wolfram Alpha or IBM's Watson, there is hope that in the future we may be able to have computers actually understand written passages enough to provide feedback though.
Re:3 edu-sites already. (Score:2, Insightful)
How many years would it have taken him to get certified to design the next generation of high-efficiency diesel engines?
Tell you what, spend a couple of decades being treated by physicians that have had only 2-3 years of practice tell me if you feel the same way.
Post-secondary education isn't needed for everyone; I'll be the first to say that. However, those who dismiss the value of a degree really fail to understand where it would put them.