The Nearly-Free University model would revolutionize higher education
by Charles Hugh-Smith
The key to understanding higher education in the U.S. is to grasp that
it is at heart just another debt-dependent neofeudal cartel. In
other words, it is just like sickcare and the national defense complex.
Each cartel shares
these features:
1. Compelling PR
"cover" for cartel extraction of wealth. "Healthcare"
(i.e. sickcare that profits from illness, not health) is a "right."
The defense industry is the bulwark of democracy, and "educating our
children" is the key to future prosperity. Each portrays itself as sacrosanct.
These "Mom and
apple pie" cover stories enable monopolistic exploitation: $300 million a
piece fighter aircraft (replacing $54 million aircraft), $150,000 college
diplomas, and "healthcare" spending that is two times more per capita
than competing advanced democracies.
2. Government
(monopoly) protection and funding. The largest monopoly is of course the
Central State, which holds a monopoly on taxation, coercion and distribution of
swag. All these cartels have gained control of Federal (monopoly) funding.
3. Illusory
competition. Each cartel is protected by wide, deep
regulatory moats and complexity fortresses that protect the Status Quo income
streams from any real competition or innovation. Within each cartel,
meaningless variations in price are offered as "proof of competition,"
but everyone knows the price of each cartel's "product" ratchets
higher, regardless of conditions in the real economy.
That's the way cartels
and monopolies work. The most
implacable enemy of innovation is monopoly. If you're protected from real
competition, then you have no incentive or need to innovate. That is the
essence of cartel-capitalism and the neofeudal model.
In the case of the
higher education cartel, the Federal funding is both cash grants and loans
issued to newly minted debt-serfs. Student loans cannot be discharged in
bankruptcy like other debt; these loans have ballooned to about $1 trillion.
This is the essence of
the neofeudal model: a protected Elite parasitically extracts
wealth from the debt-serfs below. Should the debt-serfs resist, the State steps
in to coerce compliance.
The problem with
protected cartels (neofeudal fiefdoms) is that they are unsustainable. Freed
of any competitive pressure or need to innovate, cartels inevitably follow an
S-Curve of diminishing returns: it takes more and more money just to sustain
the bloated Status Quo, even as the value created by the cartel declines.
For a taste of
diminishing returns in the higher education cartel, please read Bureaucrats Paid $250,000 Feed
Outcry Over College Costs (via Maoxian). Yes, top research
universities have to manage grants and research projects; but only a relative
handful of universities need enormous administrative staffing, and even fewer
can justify paying managers $250K+ each.
All Federally
protected cartels are living off debt. One
in every three Federal dollars is borrowed, and this doesn't even count the $1
trillion in student debt which is nominally private-sector debt.
Debt that skyrockets
higher while the real economy that supports it stagnates is unsustainable.
As I note in my new
book Why Things Are Falling Apart and
What We Can Do About It, complex systems based on diminishing returns collapse under their own
weight and are replaced by systems that are simpler, faster and affordable.
This can be a conscious process or it can be a default process, where the
system becomes increasingly fragile and then suddenly undergoes a phase-shift
that is widely viewed as "impossible," i.e. the system freezes up or
collapses.
The Internet has already
opened up an alternative to the neofeudal higher-education cartel. I call it
The Nearly-Free University, a development I anticipate will take
shape within the next decade. Once the model has been proven, it will rapidly
spread, as it is a very advantageous adaptation that is faster, better and
cheaper than the present bloated cartel.
The entire education
industry on the U.S. is based on an inflexible, increasingly marginal-return
"factory model," something I have written about since 2005. Is Our Education System Based on a Factory Metaphor? (November
15, 2005)
We are
"training" millions of people in an assembly-line based on the
assumption that academia is a limitless growth industry, when in fact it has
reached the zenith of diminishing-return complexity and cost.
The Nearly-Free
University may or may not have a physical plant. If it does, it will be a cheap
re-use facility such as an abandoned office park or factory. It may not have a
physical headquarters at all; "classes" may meet in cafes when the
need arises. This is the new distributed model of global corporations, some of
which have no headquarters at all. Physical plant is now unnecessary for pretty
much everything but lab work.
In the current
high-cost model, the physical plant only available at certain times and in a
specific locale. The Nearly-Free University would be available anywhere there
is an Internet connection and other people willing to self-organize and
collaborate. In many cases, if space is required, it could be shared. Vast
campuses are no longer needed.
The coursework will
largely consist of free lectures and tutorials from non-profits like the Kahn
Institute or classes already distributed for free online by institutions such
as Stanford and M.I.T.
In place of costly
professors and overworked, underpaid non-tenured teachers, the instruction will
be overseen by part-time mentors from the real world who act as guides,
occasionally lecturing but more often encouraging peer-to-peer tutoring and
collaborative projects that are not "study groups" but actual work
projects that produce something of value in the real world.
The mentor is a
working professional who "works" at the Nearly-Free University on a
flex-time basis. Their "job" is to suggest a practical foundation of
basic courses in the student's chosen field; these courses are taken while the
student is engaged in the core curriculum, which are the work projects.
These mentors choose
to devote time to Nearly-Free University because they enjoy it; their fee will
be modest. Most will work part-time while they pursue their primary career.
Students will move
seamlessly from online coursework to projects undertaken in real-world
enterprises and communities, learning by doing and from collaboration with
others in self-organizing groups.
Mentors would have
access (as in the Kahn Institute's classroom software) to a visual display of
the student's coursework and work-project progress.
Student would be
encouraged to earn money via the work projects undertaken. Instead of owing
$120,000 after four years of passive study, students might complete their University
experience with earnings in the bank.
Very few people
continue on to research or scholarship within academia, corporations or the
national laboratories. A relative handful of large research universities would
be enough to train those who needed PhDs for scholarship or high-level
research. The Nearly Free University model would educate the 95% who do not
need PhDs.
Instead of an
essentially opaque diploma—what exactly does a diploma communicate about the
student's mastery, interests, coursework or accomplishments? —students will be
issued a C.V./resume listing all their completed courses and their work
projects.
Prospective employers
would be able to scan this C.V. and get a real sense of the person's
coursework, mastery and work results in the real world.
A decentralized
non-profit network of organizations would arise to accredit the coursework
shared by the Nearly-Free Universities. There would be no centralized
“gatekeeper” that could demand a premium for its accrediting or testing
services. Verification of coursework, work history and skillsets would be
provided by multiple-sourced, voluntary transparent networks on the Web.
Credentialing is
another system that has reached the top of the S-Curve and is slipping into
stagnation and decline. What you can accomplish in the real world will rapidly
become more valuable than a credential such as a conventional college degree.
The credentialing gatekeepers are protecting an "asset"--the college
diploma--that is largely a phantom asset for the vast majority of students.
The total cost of the
Nearly-Free University might be $3,000 tuition and fees for 3-4 years compared
to $60,000+ today. (This does not include room and board, of course.) The
credential issued upon “graduation” (an arbitrary concept in an economy that
rewards perpetual learning and improved skills) would be secondary to what the
student has learned to create, accomplish, fix and innovate in the real world.
This is how innovation
works: costs don't decline by 5%, they decline by an order of magnitude.
There would be no
student loans. The low costs of the Nearly-Free University would be paid in
cash or hours of labor that the University could “cash” for goods or services
it needed to operate in a cash-free labor exchange.
Like many of the
concepts discussed in this blog, this model is considered
"impossible" within the confines of the Status Quo even though it is
the only truly sustainable model of universal education.
The value of higher
education for many is the network they establish during their university years.
The Nearly-Free University model actually enables far more robust networks to
self-assemble than the static, high-cost classroom model. "Lifelong learning"
would not be a cliche in the Nearly-Free University, it would be an affordable,
dynamic, exciting reality.
The Nearly-Free
University is just one "faster, better, cheaper" alternative I
discuss in Why Things Are Falling Apart and
What We Can Do About It, currently offered at 20% to 30%
discounts this week only.
No comments:
Post a Comment