Reading all these comments, I feel like US universities are a joke.
I had to do all the exams in person. 100% of the grade was decided at the exam. Millions of people graduated this way and they are fine. No students were harmed in the process.
I had to do all the exams in person. 100% of the grade was decided at the exam. Millions of people graduated this way and they are fine. No students were harmed in the process.
You still do all the same things, and they are graded, but this doesn't affect your final grade. Instead, you need to pass a threshold to enter the exam, which is then graded.
The US isn't so amazing at this, it simply can be done better. Recognizing where you can improve and from whom you can learn is a great first step to ACTUAL improvement.
What a narrow set of skills to send into your economy.
What is the "it" that AI does for you?
This is assuming you know how to get good work out of AI in the first place. But even that is turning out to be a skill in and of itself.
Context helps immensely, for example. Think of what you can do that someone outside tech can't.
For example, take “X” to be “walking”. Do we have the technology that allows us to pretty much never have to walk? Sure. As far as I am aware, though, we do not generally favour a lifestyle of being bound to a mobility aid by choice, and in fact we have found that not walking when able in the long run creates substantial well-being issues for a human. (Now, we have found ways to alleviate some of those issues for those who aren’t able, but clearly it is not sufficient because we still walk.)
The problem is exacerbated immensely as the value of X approaches something as fundamental to one’s humanity as “thinking”.
When running water replaced the need to pump water out of the ground yourself, were people urged to "learn faucets"? You kind of just need to twist a knob and water comes out, right?
Maybe there was an intermediary stage where running water was slightly more complicated and there were more steps to learn, but devoting time to learning those steps would have been a waste of time, since the end goal of the system was for it to function without much input.
At Oxbridge, for CS we still had lab work. We still had problem sets assigned for CS and for math which were graded. We had one large CS group project in, I want to say, our second year. Humanities students were still assigned essays. It's just that none of this stuff contributed to your final degree classification which was based entirely on your exams (although if you didn't do your CS practicals you wouldn't be allowed to pass).
Obviously Oxbridge isn't exactly representative but certainly my experience showed me that the American style is not the only way of making education work.
joking, of course everyone does 'projects, labs, teamwork and papers'. It's just not the main focus of the grading process.