Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/06/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yes, Frank: If I recall correctly, the original intent of the academy in Plato's time was not higher education for all. It was to prepare society's leadership for the reigns of responsibility to govern democratically. Over the centuries that mission has adjusted with society's change. With the advent of public sponsorship of university finance in America in the early 20th century, the mission was broadened to include access for all. Hence in some states, one encounters the phenomenon of guaranteed right of entry. Stripped of exclusivity by a very influential segment of society that is bent upon socially engineering equality at any cost, the degrees that result DO have less value. When university education for all at taxpayer expense becomes the norm, then only graduate level education will be seen to have value. This is an industry created by well-meaning social engineers, who unfortunately lacked sufficient vision to understand what the end game might look like... What would the camera market be like today if everyone who wanted to make a photograph were guaranteed access to a Leica and the government subsidized the manufacture and distribution of them at taxpayer expense? Ah, well... I hope and pray Ralf is recovering well from his moment last weekend. Len -- -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+ljkapner=cox.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+ljkapner=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Frank Dernie Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 11:40 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] declining quality now why are these illiteratesevenadmitted to college Len, I agree with you. I am in the UK. I believe the education "industry" is the most important industry of all. It prepares the most important resource the country has, its people. I take issue, however, with the view that more and more people should have a University education. Our government seems to have a target of 40% of the population having a University education, in the '50s it was around 5% I believe. Since the average intelligence of the population has not much changed this results in a dumbing down of entry requirements, course content and eventual Graduate capability. The degree has less value. The education requirements of job seekers has changed over the period but not enough to prevent people today, who have a degree, doing exactly the same job that they would have done in the past without a degree and on the same pay. This results in massive financial hardship for young people. I could go on.... Frank On 27 Jun, 2004, at 00:44, Leonard J Kapner wrote: > Sorry for the intrusion, but this whole issue makes me see red. > > When academic administrators are rewarded for managing to a set of > numbers > rather than to the independently inspected quality of their product, > we get > this kind of "felgerkarb" result. > > Higher education is the only industry in America (other than politics > and > used car sales) that flourishes, despite the almost universal > condemnation > of the quality of their contribution to the nation's economy. > > What is wrong with us?? > > Maybe I'm just wearing a red filter today... > > Len _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information