Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Economy

The Institute is a non-profit, educational institution for the public promotion of the ideas and concepts put forth within the context of the Sanctuary Project. This forum is to discuss the structure of the Institute, requirements and the teach/learn and learn/teach systems.
Post Reply
User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Economy

Post by Arcelius » Tue May 08, 2007 3:41 pm

HIGHER EDUCATION, GLOBALISATION AND THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY: http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/pf/v8i18_peter.pdf
From URL wrote:Knowledge is valued for its strict utility rather than as an end in itself or for its emancipatory or enlightenment effects.
From URL wrote:Today this ideal is undergoing radical change: in short, as the knowledge functions have become even more important economically, external pressures and forces have seriously impinged upon its structural protections and traditional freedoms.
Is there a place for an institution like a University in Sanctuary?

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3696
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Econo

Post by LoneBear » Tue May 08, 2007 10:06 pm

aluxon wrote:HIGHER EDUCATION, GLOBALISATION AND THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY: http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/pf/v8i18_peter.pdf
From URL wrote:Knowledge is valued for its strict utility rather than as an end in itself or for its emancipatory or enlightenment effects.
From URL wrote:Today this ideal is undergoing radical change: in short, as the knowledge functions have become even more important economically, external pressures and forces have seriously impinged upon its structural protections and traditional freedoms.
Is there a place for an institution like a University in Sanctuary?
The TPs were discussing the very thing over the last couple of weeks--sort of a "Hogwarts" for Sanctuary. Even working out a curriculum, based on Elder knowledge rather than the "new age" stuff. IMHO, decent education is a critical factor, but without the problems like Gopi has talked about in Indian schools where the profs are tyrannical, or the lack of any practical experience from American instructors.

I don't agree with the formalized education system (being primarily self-taught myself). Education should be a guidepost to help you in your exploration of knowledge, wisdom and enlightenment, not a system confining you to predefined beliefs.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Econo

Post by Arcelius » Wed May 09, 2007 4:10 pm

LoneBear wrote:
aluxon wrote:HIGHER EDUCATION, GLOBALISATION AND THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY: http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/pf/v8i18_peter.pdf
From URL wrote:Knowledge is valued for its strict utility rather than as an end in itself or for its emancipatory or enlightenment effects.
From URL wrote:Today this ideal is undergoing radical change: in short, as the knowledge functions have become even more important economically, external pressures and forces have seriously impinged upon its structural protections and traditional freedoms.
Is there a place for an institution like a University in Sanctuary?
The TPs were discussing the very thing over the last couple of weeks--sort of a "Hogwarts" for Sanctuary. Even working out a curriculum, based on Elder knowledge rather than the "new age" stuff. IMHO, decent education is a critical factor, but without the problems like Gopi has talked about in Indian schools where the profs are tyrannical, or the lack of any practical experience from American instructors.
The discussion sounds interesting! What is a TP (please forgive my ignorance)?
LoneBear wrote:I don't agree with the formalized education system (being primarily self-taught myself). Education should be a guidepost to help you in your exploration of knowledge, wisdom and enlightenment, not a system confining you to predefined beliefs.
In a system based on Elder knowledge, wouldn't the system by definition be somewhat confined to some beliefs generally held in common amongst the Elders? Or are you referring to a continuum? The standard University system is pretty much the same throughout the world without much of an alternative (and it is rigid). The guidepost would provide for opportunities for learning without the same level of rigidity; a minor amount of structure without forcing one to accept everything (or anything).

So the purpose of a University would be to explore knowledge, wisdom, and enlightenment and hopefully add to all three. To me, this sounds like some of the original purposes for which universities were organized. I personally like the enlightenment one and feel that this is largely missing in today universities (there may be a few exceptions). Of course, if you are building something from scratch, emphasis can be placed where desired.

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3696
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Econo

Post by LoneBear » Thu May 10, 2007 12:50 pm

aluxon wrote:The discussion sounds interesting! What is a TP (please forgive my ignorance)?
Tell you what... if you figure out who they are, I'll introduce you! Otherwise, I have to respect their privacy.
aluxon wrote:In a system based on Elder knowledge, wouldn't the system by definition be somewhat confined to some beliefs generally held in common amongst the Elders?
When it comes to knowledge, the Elders value "acquisition" much higher than "possession", which becomes obvious when one starts poking around their Archive, with borderline research at every turn. It is a motif that I happen to like, and have practiced in the past as a teacher and tutor.

Because corporations have taken over every aspect of life, including education, new ideas are not profitable--the cost a LOT of money and produce little return on investment. Hence, education these days values "possession" of knowledge more than acquisition of new knowledge, to keep those profits up.

Elders seek new knowledge, based in natural consequences, which is what Dewey Larson did with is Reciprocal System of theory, and the main reason I was initially attracted to it. And you should see the crap he got when he proposed a new, revolutionary idea regarding space and time! Heck, I'm going through the same thing now with the Larson "fundamentalists" when I challenge one of Larson's ideas, such as using projective geometry instead of a pure, Euclidean perspective. They're about ready to burn me at the stake! These days, it comes down to this: Ignorance is profitable.

Dealing with the Elders can be somewhat troublesome, since they won't force any view on you. They won't TELL you anything. The Elders put forth a concept, such as "here is what I saw, here is how I quantified it... now go look and tell me what you see." They are more than willing to share their understanding of things, which is why they left the Archive, but if you find a better expression, there are still plenty of empty pages in the book for you to document it.
aluxon wrote:Or are you referring to a continuum? The standard University system is pretty much the same throughout the world without much of an alternative (and it is rigid). The guidepost would provide for opportunities for learning without the same level of rigidity; a minor amount of structure without forcing one to accept everything (or anything).
That's the idea. If you ever read Thea Alexander's book, "2150 AD", the concept is similar to that of their supercomputer, "CI" (Central Information). You are introduced to concepts, then go where your curiosity takes you.

Yes, we would have classes, but they aren't to force a view upon someone. They present one view of many. Yes, there would be 'testing', but the tests are to see how clearly you understood the material presented, not to see how well you conform to it.
aluxon wrote:So the purpose of a University would be to explore knowledge, wisdom, and enlightenment and hopefully add to all three. To me, this sounds like some of the original purposes for which universities were organized. I personally like the enlightenment one and feel that this is largely missing in today universities (there may be a few exceptions). Of course, if you are building something from scratch, emphasis can be placed where desired.
Exactly. I don't see any other option to build from scratch, since the "system" is so firmly dug into place. A deceased friend of mine, Frank Meyer, was a professor at the University of Wisconsin. He put forth a very simple proposal to add a couple of lectures on the Reciprocal System to his physics classes, to introduce the concept of space and time being reciprocally related. He was almost drummed out of the University system! And what, over 2, 40-minute lectures? The existing system is so firmly entrenched, you're better off planting seeds in virgin soil.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Econo

Post by Arcelius » Thu May 10, 2007 4:09 pm

LoneBear wrote:
aluxon wrote:The discussion sounds interesting! What is a TP (please forgive my ignorance)?
Tell you what... if you figure out who they are, I'll introduce you! Otherwise, I have to respect their privacy.
Thank-you for answering the somewhat idle question. If I figure something out, I'll let you know.
LoneBear wrote:
aluxon wrote:In a system based on Elder knowledge, wouldn't the system by definition be somewhat confined to some beliefs generally held in common amongst the Elders?
When it comes to knowledge, the Elders value "acquisition" much higher than "possession", which becomes obvious when one starts poking around their Archive, with borderline research at every turn. It is a motif that I happen to like, and have practiced in the past as a teacher and tutor.
Process is more important than the result. Or process is the desired result. I expect that acquisition makes it easier to acquire more rather than possession which is content with what is already there.
LoneBear wrote:Because corporations have taken over every aspect of life, including education, new ideas are not profitable--the cost a LOT of money and produce little return on investment. Hence, education these days values "possession" of knowledge more than acquisition of new knowledge, to keep those profits up.
Yes, I can see that.
LoneBear wrote:Elders seek new knowledge, based in natural consequences, which is what Dewey Larson did with is Reciprocal System of theory, and the main reason I was initially attracted to it. And you should see the crap he got when he proposed a new, revolutionary idea regarding space and time! Heck, I'm going through the same thing now with the Larson "fundamentalists" when I challenge one of Larson's ideas, such as using projective geometry instead of a pure, Euclidean perspective. They're about ready to burn me at the stake! These days, it comes down to this: Ignorance is profitable.
Fundamentalists of all persuasions have closed mind. They think they already "possess" the necessary knowledge and need no more. Alternatively, those with an open mind will have a natural bias to "acquire" new knowledge. Even if the new knowledge acquired is evaluated and found to be of lesser value, this will not dissuade the open mind from continuing to seek.
LoneBear wrote:Dealing with the Elders can be somewhat troublesome, since they won't force any view on you. They won't TELL you anything. The Elders put forth a concept, such as "here is what I saw, here is how I quantified it... now go look and tell me what you see." They are more than willing to share their understanding of things, which is why they left the Archive, but if you find a better expression, there are still plenty of empty pages in the book for you to document it.
This style resonates with me. I expect that all of the understandings will then be available for others to view. This is significantly different from what is presented and researched at Universities today. It is typically a single viewpoint that is offered as the single correct (or most correct) viewpoint. Rather than accepting mulitple viewpoints, there are usually battles fought over the next accepted viewpoint.
LoneBear wrote:
aluxon wrote:Or are you referring to a continuum? The standard University system is pretty much the same throughout the world without much of an alternative (and it is rigid). The guidepost would provide for opportunities for learning without the same level of rigidity; a minor amount of structure without forcing one to accept everything (or anything).
That's the idea. If you ever read Thea Alexander's book, "2150 AD", the concept is similar to that of their supercomputer, "CI" (Central Information). You are introduced to concepts, then go where your curiosity takes you.

Yes, we would have classes, but they aren't to force a view upon someone. They present one view of many. Yes, there would be 'testing', but the tests are to see how clearly you understood the material presented, not to see how well you conform to it.
Or to attempt to force you to conform to it. A University education is getting more and more expensive and the cost of repeating required courses can be a deterent.
LoneBear wrote:
aluxon wrote:So the purpose of a University would be to explore knowledge, wisdom, and enlightenment and hopefully add to all three. To me, this sounds like some of the original purposes for which universities were organized. I personally like the enlightenment one and feel that this is largely missing in today universities (there may be a few exceptions). Of course, if you are building something from scratch, emphasis can be placed where desired.
Exactly. I don't see any other option to build from scratch, since the "system" is so firmly dug into place. A deceased friend of mine, Frank Meyer, was a professor at the University of Wisconsin. He put forth a very simple proposal to add a couple of lectures on the Reciprocal System to his physics classes, to introduce the concept of space and time being reciprocally related. He was almost drummed out of the University system! And what, over 2, 40-minute lectures? The existing system is so firmly entrenched, you're better off planting seeds in virgin soil.
This almost surprises me. Well, not really. I can just imagine the religious ferver. Thank-you for sharing!

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3696
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Econo

Post by LoneBear » Fri May 11, 2007 1:51 pm

aluxon wrote:Process is more important than the result. Or process is the desired result. I expect that acquisition makes it easier to acquire more rather than possession which is content with what is already there.
aluxon wrote:Fundamentalists of all persuasions have closed mind. They think they already "possess" the necessary knowledge and need no more. Alternatively, those with an open mind will have a natural bias to "acquire" new knowledge. Even if the new knowledge acquired is evaluated and found to be of lesser value, this will not dissuade the open mind from continuing to seek.
I think you have defined a quantifiable difference between Tier 1 (possession) and Tier 2 (acquisition) vMemes. It would be easy enough to put to the test... all one would have to do is to form an agree/disagree question with the primary vMemes, such as "Jesus is Lord!" (blue) or "Power is Money" (orange). That would isolate the "possession" values very quickly.
aluxon wrote:This style resonates with me. I expect that all of the understandings will then be available for others to view. This is significantly different from what is presented and researched at Universities today. It is typically a single viewpoint that is offered as the single correct (or most correct) viewpoint. Rather than accepting mulitple viewpoints, there are usually battles fought over the next accepted viewpoint.
One difficulty with the multiple-viewpoint system is that people have no experience with it, and don't know what to do when handed a "blank slate" to add their interpretation. They immediately fall back on the old "this is the only way" system, and go out looking for someone to tell them what to write.

Perhaps there need to be two, prerequisite courses: "Thinking" and "Creating".

From the research done so far, it appears we need a system similar to Hogwarts, with experienced teachers focused on specific disciplines, and the sorting of students into "houses", so classmates would be of similar learning style and experience. Perhaps an astrological approach, or MBTI testing. The 4-house system (like Tarot suits) seems to be a reasonable limit. Small class sizes, also. I can speak from experience in saying that 30 is too many. I'm thinking 10-20 range.

"First Years" would need introductory curriculum, just to initiate the concepts of thinking, feeling and acting outside the system. Need to build a foundation of individuality and expressiveness, but also with acceptance of other viewpoints.

Any suggestions for courses?

Alluvion
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 1125
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:37 pm

Post by Alluvion » Fri May 11, 2007 3:32 pm

its interesting how I have come across the patterns of 'possesion' vs' aquisition' in design eduction - which to my knowledge is one of a very few reflective educations (consider/act/reflect). But that reflection is necessary for any process oriented field.

The older students, grad students and professors have enough experience to see something new and not immediately tear it down, 'price' it - in terms of 'value', ignore it, etc etc - it seems natural to them to particpate with the project for some amount of time to gather what it does well and what it does not well. Its one thing that baffles me, because at my current state, it seems like an endless trudgery with nothing to 'posses' and 'acquisition' seems to hold no immediate value in and of itself. What can I say? I am a product of the times - and fighting hard to change.

Anyways, most of the time spent with younger students is spent teaching them technical skills but another more critical skill - critical 'thinking' - which is more common phrase for what seems to be a reflective process (consider/act/reflect), more participatory and action based. Like me, these students do not have a working cognitive foundation based on aquiring new knowledge, being curious and being reflective - they want to be told what to think, what to do and even what to value so that they can do as little work as possible to go do more immediately satisfying things. I know this is part of my struggle as well.

For me the question is what is it you enjoy? where is the pleasure? Why work so hard for something when there is no guarauntee of usefuless, interest, - honestly, when there is at the end, nothing to posses? You start with nothing and it seems like you end with nothing, so what appetites does the time-wasting in between satiate?

I think my school is comming up against this issue but doesn't see it quite yet, and with this conversation I will probably bring it up to the faculty I am close with. I know that I am, at this point, posessed by an appetite of possesion - not a reflective process of so called 'acquisition' which to me still suggests some kind of ownership/possession.

A reflective process which is all action appears like tedious, soul less and machine like action - whats it get you but doing it over and over again? But being possessed by an appetite for possession seems to be a gross posession of anima, of the soul-ness of an experience - which is perhaps the phenomenal indication of 2nd density mind overwhelming our culture. I know I am having to fight like hell to even care about what appears to me like a dry, stale and worthless life.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Higher Education, Globalisation, and the Knowledge Econo

Post by Arcelius » Fri May 11, 2007 3:43 pm

LoneBear wrote:Perhaps there need to be two, prerequisite courses: "Thinking" and "Creating".

From the research done so far, it appears we need a system similar to Hogwarts, with experienced teachers focused on specific disciplines, and the sorting of students into "houses", so classmates would be of similar learning style and experience. Perhaps an astrological approach, or MBTI testing. The 4-house system (like Tarot suits) seems to be a reasonable limit. Small class sizes, also. I can speak from experience in saying that 30 is too many. I'm thinking 10-20 range.

"First Years" would need introductory curriculum, just to initiate the concepts of thinking, feeling and acting outside the system. Need to build a foundation of individuality and expressiveness, but also with acceptance of other viewpoints.

Any suggestions for courses?
The sorting of students seems like a good idea. The 4-house system has a lot of precedent even within astrology (4 elements) or the MBTI (Jungian Psychology has 4 temperments). No caste systems though :wink:. I was thinking of an even smaller class size of maybe 5-10 students per teacher. Perhaps if there were some tutors or advanced students helping then 10-20 may be manageable. Or perhaps I am underestimating the teachers.

I think I would add a prerequisite course in meditation. This course would not prescribe certain meditation practices but rather guide the student in selecting (or perhaps creating) and consistently practicing at least one method they are comfortable with. This may fit in with the "Creating" course.

One of the "first years" courses could be dedicated to an understanding of the mind and how it works. Again, this would not be to define for the student how the mind works but rather a protected and guided forum for the student to explore his/her own mind and come to an understanding (and acceptance) of it. Everyone's mind will work a little differently and I think it is important to gain a personal understanding of one's own mind. This would be far beyond something like the MBTI.

Alluvion
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 1125
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:37 pm

Post by Alluvion » Fri May 11, 2007 7:46 pm

you can imagine about curriculum and its effectiveness all you want, but really, the only things that will work are the things that pass the test. We can imagine this or that but it pretty much remains just that.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Post by Arcelius » Sat May 12, 2007 8:02 am

Alluvion wrote:For me the question is what is it you enjoy? where is the pleasure? Why work so hard for something when there is no guarauntee of usefuless, interest, - honestly, when there is at the end, nothing to posses? You start with nothing and it seems like you end with nothing, so what appetites does the time-wasting in between satiate?
I enjoy the reflective process. Yes, I do it over and over again and yet it is somewhat different each time. I did not start with nothing and doubt I will end with nothing. Though there may be no guarantees, there certainly have been many useful offshoots for me. Some of these indirect results have been useful enough and visible enough for others to covet. However, the reflective process is not for everyone and I do not believe that everyone MUST engage in it.
Alluvion wrote:you can imagine about curriculum and its effectiveness all you want, but really, the only things that will work are the things that pass the test. We can imagine this or that but it pretty much remains just that.
What is the test? Einstein was quoted as saying that imagination is more important than intelligence. In 4D where thoughts are things, imagination is the tool of choice.

Post Reply