Good read and talking points to riff off Erik.
From discussions I’ve had with colleagues in the sector, digital’s influence has been profound in ways educators are, perhaps, still grappling with, but the other impact is the cost of education. Digital indeed flattens many processes, yet I often wonder what it must have been like in the 1960s when education became commoditised with module structures and swathes of subjects entering Uni curriculum e.g. film studies?
If anything, something Einstein said seems more prescient now, “Education is not the learning of facts, but training of the mind to think”. One could addd to that, ‘digitally’ — a word open to great interpretation. But yes, the value-added? If knowledge is in abundance, what part/process makes it an invaluable commodity? You’ll get a thousand responses for that. A few that come to mind:
- Entrepreneurship, you mention, tick! This year we’ve teamed up our MA students with city entrepreneurs for real life practical experiences (lifting an idea from the 1800 impressionists).
- Lab processing. Allowing for a workflow in different thinking modes e.g. Critical thinking ( good read here) that support creativity, experimentation and remove the fear of failure when trying.
- Diversity. Digital brings different people together in ways analogue couldn’t. It exposes conventionally established hierarchies, and yields re-evaluations in explanations. I teach something called Cinema Journalism — a new practice that challenges many precepts of how we shape information through the conventions of news. Digital may have flattened the world, but cultures, often overlooked as homogenous, are impacting digital in ways that are fascinating.
Thanks for the morning read.