Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bill Gates Proclaims US High Schools Obsolete

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the i-coulda-told-you-that dept.

bryan sent us a story about Bill Gates' take on US High Schools. He says 'America's high schools are obsolete. By obsolete, I don't just mean that they're broken, flawed or underfunded, though a case could be made for every one of those points. By obsolete, I mean our high schools even when they're working as designed cannot teach all our students what they need to know today.'"

4 of 971 comments (clear)

  1. This isn't Bill Gates by pHatidic · · Score: 5, Informative
    Bill Gates may be repeating it, but these are the ideas of the Aspen Group, a coalition of business leaders and billionaires. Their opinion is that schools were designed to make kids good factory workers, and they are obsolete because kids no longer grow up to work in factories. This is true, schools are obsolete. However, be use a skeptic's eye when these people tell you what the replacement should be.

    This is largely a group of Fabians out to preserve the social hierarchy. It's members include everyone from Steve Case to Jack Valenti. Anyway, I just thought you should know who that even if it is Bill advocating the ideas this time, he is really just the spokeman for a larger group.

    1. Re:This isn't Bill Gates by pHatidic · · Score: 4, Informative
      Oh, and here is the link to the Aspen Institute homepage.


      You can read more about them here.

  2. Re:I agree! by haluness · · Score: 5, Informative

    This more than anything else is the reason the third world (esp. India and China) will eat us alive

    having had my high school and college education in India, I can tell you that before entering college we study 2 languages along with the core sciences - and thats the last 2 years of high school.

    Before that, we do geography, history, civics, languages plus math , science (chemistry, biology, physics)

    True, college is more focussed - I did chemistry (major) for 3 years and had to take math and physics for 2 years. Thats one aspect I appreciate about college in the US - the fact that you *can* take/study subjects outside your area of specialization.

    I certainly learnt chemistry well in India, but I also didn't have the opportunities to broaden my mind.

  3. Re:I agree! by Beetle+B. · · Score: 3, Informative

    But to require every student to get a full liberal arts degree in order to get a job in a specialized area is not simply inefficient, it's idiotic.

    A full liberal arts degree? Oh please! Where I went, we had to take six courses in such areas for engineering - that's at most a little over a semester's worth. Not even 15% of your time.

    As one of the posters said: It's your money. If you don't like it, the universities don't have to change - you have to find one that suits your desires. There are dedicated colleges in the US - often quite expensive. Or you could move to one of those countries you envy and do your college there.

    This more than anything else is the reason the third world (esp. India and China) will eat us alive

    Nonsense. I used to hear this during my undergrad: "Once you go to grad school, the folks from China and India will just blow you out - you can't compete with them." I ended up going to a university ranked 3rd in my field (electrical engineering), and 5th in engineering overall. Yes, the folks from abroad often had taken my introductory grad courses in their undergrad, but it made very little difference. It takes at most a year to catch up with them. And then I knew as much as they did with regards to engineering, and much more with regards to everything else. I didn't get the tail end of the curve as everyone suggested.

    The only difference is that they may get their PhD a year earlier. Good for them - I'm not in a hurry.

    --
    Beetle B.