Feel free to rant here. It’s disheartening that investing in education (both K-12 and higher ed) doesn’t seem to be a priority.

I think being observed would not only help professionals continue growing and improve their skills but also add a bit of a check for accountability. I’m guessing a lot of people wouldn’t love this idea because it can be difficult to hear criticism about your work even when it’s constructive.
I know that’s something I struggled with in my first job after college where my supervisor provided feedback in one-on-one meetings on a weekly basis. This was clearly a good source of support and allowed me to correct any mistakes early since meetings were so frequent, but even very minor constructive criticism made me feel a little defensive.

I agree that the environment of in-person lectures is different from online lectures (I prefer in-person too). But online courses have the ability to reach a much wider population. So I guess part of the question is (for the system as a whole): is the goal to educate the masses or to educate only those who are able to physically come sit in a classroom (for example) at 10am on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday?
To answer your question: no, I don’t think people will treat those two the same– at least not any time in the near future– because of the idea of the “famous college” that Godin mentions. I do think that institutions like VT will increasingly offer courses that are 100% online. VT currently offers some online courses (I’ll be teaching one this summer actually), and I think in the future there will be many more.

Hi Yang,
The cost of publishing open access can vary dramatically depending on the publication; some journals have very low costs. I think this article (also from the background materials) gets at some of the questions you’re asking: https://www.nature.com/news/open-access-the-true-cost-of-science-publishing-1.12676

Thanks for sharing this, Anna. I love that you said: “our time is better spent honing our strengths and less time focusing on our weaknesses.” I think we are often preoccupied thinking of how to improve our weaknesses that we don’t think as much about how to best leverage our strengths to meet our goals.

That’s a good point about research being reproduced. Here’s a report about reproducibility that you may be interested in: https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970

The title of your post really resonated with me. I feel like I’m in the same boat as you. Grades can be good motivators for some, but like you said they “can also motivate laziness.” With little expertise on this topic, qualitative assessment seem much better to me– they allow students to receive constructive feedback, suggestions on what skills need improvement, and even how they might go about further developing those skills. There are some institutions that don’t use grades. For example, Evergreen State College in Washington does narrative evaluations. But it’s definitely difficult for the entire educational system to challenge the established norm of grades.
http://www.evergreen.edu/evaluations

Devin, I love what you say here about assessing your students on growth/improvement rather than on some sort of one-size-fits-all scale. Opportunities for partial credit are also helpful. One of my chemistry instructors in the past required that students write out explanations for all multiple choice questions. She (or, more likely, a TA) would then read the explanations for the questions that were incorrect, and award partial points if appropriate. This isn’t perfect, but I thought it was a pretty good approach for that large (200+ students) lecture-style course.

Thanks for sharing your friend’s story. I love the idea of giving students non-traditional assignments. I think hands-on experiences like internships are really what prepare students for life beyond university.