Education 2.0 | The Internet makes us the computer wearing tennis shoes

I’ve got a confession. I love the ‘95 remake of The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes, the one with Kirk Cameron —not Kurt Russell. Having access to all that information just seemed really cool.

For those unfamiliar, here’s a quick summary: This average guy, Dexter Reilly, zaps himself working on a state-of-the-art computer and suddenly he’s able to recall everything on the computer’s hard drive. 

Pretty cool, huh?

The best part about Dexter’s adventure is we’re already at that point. With the Internet, social media, mobile Internet, collaboration, etc., we’ve got the ability to find and recall all of the information in existence. It’s like Cultural Anthropology Professor (and all around YouTube badass) Michael Wesch says: the machine is us/ing us. 

Education used to mean going to college and getting a degree after spending hundreds of hours on coursework designed to make you a well-rounded human being with some form of valuable skill. That isn’t the case anymore.

[T]his term I am taking Physics 201 for my Environmental Sciences major. Unfortunately, most of the information covered in the course I already learned in my junior year of high school IB Physics. More than any other course I’ve taken, this one is just for the grade.

Daniel Bachhuber’s situation isn’t uncommon. I’m taking an American national government class on top of a U.S. History 1600-1877 class this semester. My derision at these classes is obvious when you know the missing piece of information — I’ve taken these classes before, in high school and at my community college.

Now I’d be lying if I’d say I’m not learning anything, but it’s mostly from the textbooks — not the lectures or assignments.

What does this say about university education? Is it dead? Dying, like the newspaper industry? 

I’d argue there’s always a need for the classroom, whether it’s for j-school or a general university education. The approach must change though.

Turn the classroom into a coffee shop

Learning doesn’t need the caffeine or overpriced baked goods common at the coffee shop. Rather, the discussions are the greatest part of the coffee shop. We’ve got to encourage discussions and free exchange of ideas among the students in the classroom with the professors and TAs acting as moderators and guides, not a fountain to fill up our heads with knowledge.

I know, this is an ideological point, but I feel I’ve learned more from talking to students than listening to a professor go through a lecture about something I’ve already read. Yes, there’s some emphasis and interpretation, but I feel it’s lost in the regurgitation part of the lecture.

Cliff Notes version: We’ve got to discuss among ourselves more, that’s the only way to learn.

It’s not what you know, but how you get there

Hear me out with this one. I’d argue there’s a need for certain amounts of stuff we “need” to know. How to think critically, how to think creatively, how to perform skilled tasks (whether it’s cooking, shooting a photograph, reporting a story, visualizing a design or whatever) — that’s all essential knowledge.

What I don’t need to know is the finer points of social contract theories and the intricacies of Rousseau’s “noble savage” theory. I should know the themes, of course, but the specific information can now be retrieved from my iPhone, laptop, desktop … whatever. 

I need to know how to categorize and collect the specifics while having an idea of how to get it back, and how to store it. That’s an incredible power because we can start to teach ourselves and each other.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got to zap myself with a computer connected to the Internet.