Ah yes, Scott Adams, the great expert on education.
Last I checked, he was somebody who made a semi-funny cartoon. Why are we listening to him for education advice?
Last I checked, he was somebody who made a semi-funny cartoon. Why are we listening to him for education advice?
I have a general rule not to heed advice unless the advisor can back it up with some kind of personal experience. This excludes maybe 99% of financial advice, which I think is a good thing.
Your criticism might be relevant if he was putting forward a comprehensive plan to reform the education system, but he is just trying to give another perspective on what the goals of education should be.
The only reason this got any traction is that he happens to make Dilbert. His is not a particularly rare and/or valuable insight, and nothing in there makes it different from millions of other armchair education reformers.
I expect more from HN links. My mistake for making a snarky comment instead of spelling it out properly.
Disagree with what he says, not who he is.
When you have a complicated system, and a non-expert comes in with a plan, then it's appropriate to dismiss it without overwhelming support. The burden of proof is on the non-expert. Expert time is too valuable to waste debunking every hobbyist solution.
You see this on a small scale in mathematics, with professors getting incorrect (and frequently laughable) 'proofs' or outstanding unsolved problems or problems that have been proven not to have solutions.