Or a mathematician, director, physicist, screen writer, journalist, accountant, statistician, historian, designer, botanist, cook, mechanic, etc.
Now that I think of it, most professions already have online communities for discussion and group learning of skills which one self-motivated enough to study. What's most blatantly missing is the accreditation: it's not easy to cheat the accreditation system at a University (mostly because the experience of academic culture is what gives the accreditation validity), but it's a lot easier to "cheat" online.
I'm sorry, but believe it or not, not all professional skills can be remotely acquired without a kind of human transference of intangible, personable skills. Education in higher academia is about much more than the acquisition of particular facts--it's a culture, practice, and way of life. Critical ideas are meant to be discussed in person, ruminated on, and debated in real, highly dynamic discussions. Real life work environments, especially in software companies, are ones in which critical, GROUP brainstorming dynamics are particularly important, because oftentimes the answer doesn't lie in the answer key in the back of the book, but rather as a result of a group process of rumination, guess, check, and revision.
It's a completely different way of thinking, no doubt about that. I love the university atmosphere.
My point isn't that a good set of lecture videos will be world-changing (we've had broadcast video for awhile now). My point is that that the learning all of these subjects can have a strong web component to augment the process (and "web" doesn't necessarily mean video). Maybe when I put it that way, it sounds almost obvious. A stronger statement: whatever form web-augmented learning takes in the next century will improve learning so drastically we'll barely recognize it.
Agree with the first part. Hoping you're wrong about the second. Time will tell :)
In terms of formal skills sites like Vectips, Smashing Magazine, et al. Do a good job conveying how to work with tools.
I do agree that the sense of fraternity that grows up in a creative environment is important, but the web is flattening that out. Look at a site like Threadless.com where there is a dedicated critique community. I think film makers coming up sharing videos via YouTube, collaborating remotely, and will replace a lot of the community that is typically found on campus.
More broadly, we may be looking at the end of a historical blip. For hundreds of years, skills were transferred via apprenticeship, on the job training, etc. A number of demographic and political trends changed this from the 1950's til now, but maybe we are seeing a reversion to the mean?
And creating small group face to face dynamics could be achievable using group video chat/telepresence.
and : """ A recent 93-page report on online education, conducted by SRI International for the Department of Education, has a starchy academic title, but a most intriguing conclusion: “On average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.” """ http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/study-finds-that-on...
The reason why you feel comfortable with a self taught software developer is because you can write and run software on your own.
Let's say you got shot. Who would you want to operate on you, someone who went to medical school but probably didn't see too many gunshot wounds, or someone from a field hospital in Iraq who operated on hundreds of cases but does not have a medical degree?
$x = "software developer" $y = "we made him head of this huge project without even evaluating his skills"
I don't think it's so unreasonable for a surgeon to learn the traditional body of knowledge online, learn his way around an operating table IRL, take a test, and then go do his residency like every other doctor.
On the other hand learning iPhone programming, which may be all you need to get a job as a developer, is significant easier than any learning any other profession online, just given by how much information is available on the topic and how well it's presented.
It is a bit like a pharmacist or a chemist who has never mixed two compounds together but knows all about them, yet does not know for example what colour they are, or what do they actually look like, or what the actual reaction from mixing them looks like.
I think another comment here made a good point. It is not just about the learning. It is also about teaching you how to think, and experience of course, practical experience. For example, I might be comfortable talking to a lawyer who got all his knowledge from the internet but only for reference, to ask him lets say what the law is, but I wouldn't hire him to argue a case for me. You can read all the books, or lectures, but without the practical experience of how to apply the law to facts which is then graded to give you an idea of whether you are applying it correctly and how to find things you do not know in the area of law where there often are conflicting points and maybe the law is not settled, and perhaps most importantly how to think like a lawyer, which argument would do, which evidence would do.
Even if all of these things can be replaced through virtual stimulation, why would you want to sit in front of a computer for say three years on your own rather than share the experience with others and make friends and have the opportunity to be part of interesting student groups, and expand yourself in many more areas than just the core subject.
I suppose it might be good for someone who might be thinking of a career change, if all those things can be replaced, but for an 18 year old, it would be very disadvantageous.
In any event, as things currently are Gates is very much dreaming. People have access to textbooks yet they hardly have replaced universities though pretty much they teach what is in the text book in the lectures which are only a small part of undergrad courses.
And obviously , using simulators can offer great results: """ The residents had displayed similar psychomotor skills, but the two groups performed very differently in the O.R. Those who had trained on the simulator completed the operation, on average, twenty-nine per cent faster than those who had not. Moreover, the residents who had received standard surgical training were nine times more likely to hesitate during the operation, five times more likely to injure the gallbladder or burn surrounding tissues, and six times more likely to make other errors. Additional research has shown that simulator training significantly enhances performance of hernia repairs, nasal sinus procedures, and bronchoscopic examinations of the lungs. """ http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/05/02/050502fa_fact?cu...