[nostatic]

Instead of a cut and paste job, I'd like to actually get a discussion and perspective on what is wrong (and also what is right) with post secondary education in the US today. I'll preface this by saying that I know this arena well: as undergrad, grad student, postdoc, faculty, administrator, and now research fellow (on soft money). I have argued with and to colleagues that the system is pretty broken and we are at a tipping point wrt higher ed: digital technologies and the network have forever changed the way that we consume and produce content (and by extension, knowledge from information). Unfortunately most of education and associated industries (most notably publishing) either are in denial or don't fully comprehend the implications.

What's right? I still believe in a liberal arts education. I think that the most important thing we can teach students is to learn how to learn. With the ferocious rate of change in fields these days, there is no way that a college can teach all of the "facts" and have them be relevant...in other words, a college can't be a trade school. Instead, it needs to teach critical thinking skills and analysis. This is often found *outside* of the major however. I was a chemistry major in undergrad, but found that some of the most important classes were symbolic logic (a philosophy course), catholic theology (religious studies), and intro to anthropology. Each got me to think differently about me and my surroundings, and showed me how to question accepted reality. Had I opted for nothing but "meat", I surely would not have progressed as far and wide as I have.

What's wrong? Glacial reaction time wrt change of curriculum and delivery. Intellectual property concerns in academia are based on very old models, and stymie innovation such as remixing content. Projects like open content are making small dents, but uptake is hampered by academic departments that refuse to change. Digital disseratations still number in the single digits, in part due to the archive repositories that refuse to accept them (due in part to technical and content issues). Tenure has created an atmosphere in some institutions that can best be described as "comfortable" and at worst, lazy. Pay disparities between academia and the "real world" still hamper getting the best and brightest, especially in technical fields where the skill set is much better paid in the private sector.

What to do? Abolish tenure. This has to be done carefully though, as one of the driving forces for tenure in the first place still is an issue: having faculty and their research interests potentially at the whim of senior administration. I would prefer rolling contracts (5 year?) with a modified peer/administrative review process.

Revamp IP. Some university has to take the bull by the horns, and either partner with Hollywood or take them on. Students need to be able to quote in the vernacular (video, image, audio). Fair use needs to extend to rich media, with an accepted "quotation" system in place.

Overthrow traditional publishers. Text books are ridiculously expensive. And it isn't the authors getting rich here. It costs $500K to bring a new book to market. That is insane. Digital publications can be cheaper/faster/better, and more important, remixable and viral. The system used to judge faculty, based almost soley on peer reviewed publications, needs to change to recognize blogging, wiki contributions, and other "new" forms of publication.

Oh, and we need to fire all the liberals. That'll solve all the *real* problems...