Theater of Education

Instead of an introduction

For most of my adult life, I have been teaching all sorts of subjects related to computers in middle and high schools. Well, you know: algorithmization, programming, databases, information systems, information technologies, that’s all. I do this firstly because I like programming things on computers, and secondly because I like to teach people things. The feeling that appears at the moment when you told a person something and before your eyes he was able to do something that he could not do before is very motivating.

Not everything is so good, of course. There is also the need to fill out logs to keep track of the completion of logs, and constant changes in regulatory documents and in general many other things that (from my point of view, at least) have little to do with the process of knowledge transfer. But this is possible just accept it learn to work. However, from a long distance, I see a problem that, on the one hand, they don’t really try to talk about, but on the other hand, it is more dangerous than any bureaucratization.

That's what I mean. What I mean is that education, and the word “school” itself, appeared a long time ago, somewhere in ancient Greece. That is, people were taught something before, and in other places, but these were all applied skills: how to plow the land, how to sow crops. But the time and desire to sit down and talk about abstract things like “When is courage born?” or “How can we organize tax collection?” reliably appeared precisely among the Greeks (perhaps they will correct me in the comments). Then people appeared of their own accord who knew more and could speak better. People started coming to them and asking questions. And this activity was at first entirely voluntary: if you want, go to Plato’s agora to listen, if you don’t want, go to the hetaerae.

Later, however, it turned out that those who learned something and won elections more often and are generally more successful in life. Sophists appeared, teaching people to speak more beautifully and off we go. Medieval universities (yes, I understand what a chronological leap I made), the emergence of the concept of an assistant professor (it turned out that it was somehow stupid to let everyone teach) and other things. One thing did not change: in general, education remained a circle of interests, where people came who really enjoyed rhetoric or architecture. It is clear that there were people who wanted to get an education to solve some applied problems, but the essence did not change much: they wanted to learn, and for their own pleasure or benefit there was not much difference. And the education was prestigious! Why, the ability to read and write for a long time was not a weak achievement. But centuries passed, wars were fought, revolutions were made, and it appeared.

Mass education

Somewhere it’s even free!

And this is certainly correct and wonderful (it was at first). People began to read textbooks, and just books, more complex concepts became available to them; they became more aware, with the increase in the number of at least more or less educated people, there were more people who could move further in their education. And, on the one hand, people themselves wanted to get an education (all these stories about twenty kilometers one way, yes), and on the other hand, the transition to an industrial economy required qualified specialists. For effective agriculture, it is no longer enough to plow the soil; you also need to sprinkle fertilizer, and for this you at least read the instructions and labels on the bag. But there must still be people who will come up with these fertilizers. For the industrial production of some nails, it is no longer enough to recruit two hundred blacksmiths – the machines must be set up and maintained by people who understand something in mathematics and mechanics. And so on.

In short, there is an established opinion that education is important, necessary and useful for everyone. What education is the most important, necessary and useful? Higher education, of course! It's not called that for nothing. And if so, then it is a must for everyone who wants to achieve something in life.

Do you see this transition? At some point, education turned from a means of achieving practical results or just a specific hobby into, let's call it, a quasi-title. A person does not actually need knowledge, he needs confirmation that he has this knowledge. Which, as you understand, is far from the same thing.

And since knowledge is not directly needed, people will probably look for ways to get results in a roundabout way. Buy. Write off. Lie. And this is all right, obviously, this has always been the case and the methods of struggle are more or less obvious. But things got worse when

Modern education

(yes, like that same video)

Let's all do it together: distance education, digitalization, neural networks.

Disturbed… Distobr is cool. How did she think about it? So that any person, anywhere in the world, even in Ottawa, even in a ditch, can gain knowledge on a topic that interests him. There will be no more illiterate and deprived of the light of truth. But how did it turn out? So, only about five percent actually study remotely, and the rest complete the cycle “Get assignment N → give to a friend/pay money for the solution → pass → receive assignment N + 1.” Why is this possible? For many reasons, but also because when checking an abstract task you cannot be sure who did it. And how he did it. Of course, you can ask clarifying questions, but in most cases this is not online communication (in which scam options are also possible), but boxing correspondence questions. And reading the answers to them you cannot be sure… You get the gist.

Digitalization is cool. This is a simplification of various operations. What we drew on a drawing board is now done ten times faster in CAD. Films are not edited using scissors and such-and-such mother, it is enough to move the tracks in the editor. Well, even simple calculations now take a ridiculous amount of time, you just need to learn the numbers and operation signs. But what is simplification? Along with what is being simplified, it also simplifies the simplifier. In the fifth grade you used a calculator instead of reducing the fractions yourself, and in the seventh you look in confusion at some expressions with letters that you also need to do something with.

Neural networks everyone is already tired of – it's cool. Because… However, you already know everything. Now you can get rid of a lot of routine tasks, work not twelve hours, but use your head and freed up a lot of free time to do something really useful. You don’t have to read a lot of sources, but ask for a brief retelling of them, from which you can extract what you need. A lot of things are possible. Is everything possible? It turns out that no (at least not yet). But does it all work for the time being? Works.

And this leads to what I call

Theater of Education

Let's summarize everything said above.

Education becomes a formality. Often not only for students, but also for teachers. It is very difficult to teach something to an audience that has come simply to sit through their diploma. And in general, it’s difficult to work if you realize that you’re working in vain. If you don’t believe me, try peeling a bucket of potatoes and then throwing them away.

And if you can give up on the audience (ultimately they are the architects of their own destiny), then teachers lose motivation and the profession itself turns into a bullshit job. Who wants to work in such a job? No one, which leads to the washing out of good personnel and the filling of vacant positions by those who simply have nowhere to turn. “You have no mind – go to hell.”

Distance education should either be left for free listeners or wrapped in ten layers of proctoring to confirm acquired competencies. Otherwise, it turns into a theater of the absurd, when the teacher generates tests using neural networks (after all, why try if no one on the other side will evaluate them), and students solve them using neural networks. As a result we're both full electricity sellers receive some real benefits.

Methods for automated problem solving have become too accessible. And this is good, but for those who already know how to solve these problems, understand their specifics and understand how to use the results of simple problems to solve difficult ones. Otherwise, we have a situation in which a forgotten civilization of the ancients came up with complex and powerful magic, we learned rituals for its use, but how it works and what to do with the results is known only to the Omnissiah.

And even more broadly: information has become too accessible. Tasks like “write an essay” have long become synonymous with “download an essay and rewrite it.” There is no need to sit in the library, write notes, or even think; in fact, there is no need to think. Is there a result in the form of work? Of course I have. But there is no result in the form of research experience (at least a literature review), one’s own opinion, or knowledge of arguments. There is neither the need nor attempts to analyze and synthesize different points of view, or any polemics. We have a magic box that gives answers to all questions; does this mean that knowledge is available? us?

The didactic principle “From simple to complex” has mutated into “From the results obtained magically to, well, we’ll figure it out somehow.” In the extreme of this situation, we will get a caste of tech-priests who at least understand what is happening and a billion servitors who know how to write a simple prompt according to the instructions or put on a kettle (perhaps also according to the instructions).

What to do with all this?

Honestly, I don't know.

It may be worth recognizing that the higher education that everyone has turns into a certificate of adequacy. And make it not so affordable, but of high quality. And give it to people who are truly talented in science and related fields. And to those who are not given it by nature – well, there’s just no smell of idleness.

Is it worth it take away and divide take and ban all those methods of solving problems that I wrote about above? Of course not. But they should be allowed to be used only from the moment when a person can solve the corresponding problems no worse.

Or maybe there is no need to do anything at all and the current situation does not need correction. In a word, subscribe to my telegram channel If you have an opinion, check out the polls and express it in the comments.