The cheap version of learning is dead, and AI killed it.
Not that we were learning all that much to begin with. I mean, walk into any sorority and ask to see the test bank. The students and Profs were phoning it in for a while, by and large. Not all of them were though, and good on yah.
But now that the fig leaf is torn away, we're left with the Oxbridge model and not much else - small classes, under 10, likely under 5, with a grad level tutor, social pressure making sure you've done the work. The great thing about this though is that you'll have an AI listening in all the time and helping out, streamlining the busywork and allowing the group to get down to business.
But that version is very expensive. You're looking at ~$50k / student year [0] at a baseline Oxbridge model in secondary school on up - ~$400k / student from 9th to university graduation.
Assume a 6% loan rate for 30 years (a mortgage, essentially), and you've got ~$2,300 monthly payments for all your working life, ~$46k/year down the drain. How in the hell are you going to manage student loans like that and then try to live a life without a really good job? How the hell is a nation going to be expected to pay for that per kid if you make school free for them?
Cheap learning wasn't good, but it sufficed. The new models of education must answer to the fundamental question of education: How much does it cost?
[0] 2 hours 3x a week per class; 4 classes per tutor per week. Assume $100k/tutor and 5 students/tutor. So $5k / student / tutor. 4 classes / student. So $20k / student in just raw tutors. At least double that for overhead if not triple.