I think there is too much emphasis on teaching facts and insufficient training in how to learn. I believe that higher education should be largely self-directed learning with professors being just another useful resource available to students. In the UK it used to be referred to as “reading for a degree” and lectures were optional.
Now it is growing into an industry just like it is in the US, where I don’t think students get value for money.

Higher education should not be a mere extension of high school, unfortunately it is and as a consequence an alarming number of graduate students asking “will this be on the test?” This is partly the failure of pre-university education to prepare students for adult learning and partly due to the nanny culture of modern
societies. By 16 yrs a person can and should be able to think critically and study somewhat independently, but sadly few are encouraged to do so.

I don’t believe professors should teach in the same way as school teachers do, or that they are responsible for making their students study and learn. Professors should be there to lecture to and open to discuss the course material with students, but they should not be chasing students down or taking a register.

Essays, presentations, and open ended exam questions are the only way to test for critical thinking and ensure students are processing information rather than mindlessly memorising stuff. Multiple choice exams really have no place in higher education, and I would rather see grades being based on just one essay/report or final exam than quizzes given throughout the semester. However, when education is an industry it is not about developing critical thinking or learning skills, but about providing certificates. In a world that values certificates over true
knowledge and understanding, a university education is increasingly becoming a necessity. This is a shame I think, because for me higher education was about the simple joy of studying a subject in depth.

As an aside, and I only mention this because it's near to becomming a pet peeve of mine... Most higher education is at institutions that are teaching-oriented.

As far as the main thrust of the article- I would actually agree that college educations that require significant student loans ARE a scam for people whose goal is making a living as a journalist (or for artists, orbartenders, or many other things). Just putting that out there. I'll be eager to see how Darren Zhu faces starting up a biotech without college.

As far as your point... would you say critical thinkers are better standardized test takers? Do they do their homework more diligently? Are they easier to have in class? I'm not sure K-12 education has any incentives to encourage high levels of critical thinking.

Formal schooling tends to omit critical thinking for the simple reason that if you apply critical thinking to educational institutions, you come to the inescapable conclusions that many of the things they do are not evidenced based, and that different people have distinct goals for education, many of which are at cross purposes.

"I think there is too much emphasis on teaching facts and insufficient training in how to learn. I believe that higher education should be largely self-directed learning with professors being just another useful resource available to students. In the UK it used to be referred to as “reading for a degree” and lectures were optional."

I agree with this, as far as it goes, except I think it's so much more broadly applicable than you seem to think. I'm not sure "training people how to learn" is necessary- small children love to learn and they are pretty much preprogrammed for it. There may be specific types of things you need to be trained to learn efficiently, but then there is also much to be said for inefficient wandering processes when it comes to education. I believe that *all* education should be largely self-directed learning. From preschool on.

As an aside, and I only mention this because it's near to becomming a pet peeve of mine... Most higher education is at institutions that are teaching-oriented.

Well, I know I didn't present any evidence to support my comment (it was purely anecdotal), but I would still disagree with you. Do you have any numbers?  Also, when you look at the number of students at each set of institutions (research vs. teaching), I would bet that more students go to research-oriented institutions.

As far as your point... would you say critical thinkers are better standardized test takers? Do they do their homework more diligently? Are they easier to have in class? I'm not sure K-12 education has any incentives to encourage high levels of critical thinking.

I would not say that critical thinking skills would automatically translate into being better able to answer standardized tests. I do not think that they would be more apt to do their homework either. To a degree, they may even be more difficult to have in class since they may be less likely to accept having things stuffed down their throats.

I agree that K-12 educators (and the system) has no incentive to encourage high level thinking. It would make their life more difficult, it would make things harder to track, which in turn makes getting money more difficult as well. I'd go so far as to contend that critical thinking threatens the current K-12 educational status quo.

I believe that if society is to not just survive, but thrive, we need a paradigm shift in just about every aspect of society. Such a shift cannot occur successfully IMO, unless the populace is truly educated and informed.

Great post lots to think over. I agree critical thinking is not encouraged. I have had straight A college students in my lab/class that when asked to apply the knowledge they learned in lecture to lab could not do it. Not saying that there aren't students that couldn't but majority of good regurge students fail in critical thinking. Its not stressed. I almost quite college a few times because of this mentality then again i just never did well in classroom settings. Thanks for posting