Consequences of accessible education

Does anyone ever think to themselves, now that we have easy access to (institutions of) education, do we not necessarily lower the standard? By opening the gates to all do we not in turn hinder the progress of those who really are exceptional?

I'm studying mathematics and I do find the course material challenging. What bothers me is that I know there are others who do not, perhaps it comes more naturally to them. In that case, the difficulty of the course has to be lowered so that any given student, such as myself, should be comfortable enough to do well.

Surely this significantly slows the progress of those more 'talented' students which then slows the progress of our civilization?

I very much enjoy my course and would be unhappy if I was unable to study - I have accessible education to thank for that - but when I think about society as a whole and not just the individual this notion still bugs me. I wonder how much more (if any) progress would be made if (possibly only particular) Universities were strictly for the more talented students (affluence playing no part).

If anyone has any of their own thoughts on the matter I would be interested to hear them.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 1

nulli tertius

21

Original post by mchairmaster

Does anyone ever think to themselves, now that we have easy access to (institutions of) education, do we not necessarily lower the standard? By opening the gates to all do we not in turn hinder the progress of those who really are exceptional?

I'm studying mathematics and I do find the course material challenging. What bothers me is that I know there are others who do not, perhaps it comes more naturally to them. In that case, the difficulty of the course has to be lowered so that any given student, such as myself, should be comfortable enough to do well.

Surely this significantly slows the progress of those more 'talented' students which then slows the progress of our civilization?

I very much enjoy my course and would be unhappy if I was unable to study - I have accessible education to thank for that - but when I think about society as a whole and not just the individual this notion still bugs me. I wonder how much more (if any) progress would be made if (possibly only particular) Universities were strictly for the more talented students (affluence playing no part).

If anyone has any of their own thoughts on the matter I would be interested to hear them.

Ultimately society has a whole has benefited more from many people having skills than a few.

In the 17th century there were only two men in the world who could do differential calculus. If, for the last 300 years, there had only ever been two men at the same time who could do such work, it would now still take 4 days for a horse to take you from London to Edinburgh, 6 weeks to sail to America and no-one would live in a block of flats more than 7 stories high. That would be the case even if one of those men had devised the General Theory of Relativity and another had split the atom.

Reply 2

SillyEddy

18

Well according to a thousand or more threads on TSR, Oxbridge offer the hardest courses, so surely the students excelling the most at college have an appropriate place to study.

To be honest, I wasn't even sure they were making courses easier - Plenty of universities are raising their grade requirements, so surely they're expecting a more academic type of individual. Besides, there are paths after undergraduate study, such as postgraduate masters and also the doctorate. These are advanced levels of education and research, and the smartest may even receive funding for this too. I think there are still opportunities for people to excel and go beyond the norm.

Consequences of accessible education

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you