27th June 2011, 01:11 PM
As for the idea that universities teach students how to think or critical thinking or how to be an observer of conditions or what ever the hell you want to call it, I pose this:
With a straight face can you say that every class you took at uni gave you the skills to think? That before going to uni you did not think at all. That uni “taught you how to think about archaeology”.
Lets get real, uni’s could teach practical skills, which by the way proposal writing, making budgets or completing a task on time is more valuable for the 95% who do not go into archaeology then thinking about the Neolithic, or they could teach about theories and your level of critical thinking would stay the same.
The difference is one could put food on your table or help you in another career.
Teaching practical skills and theory is the same. What you want is for someone to understand and to be able to question the reasoning behind it, whatever it is. If it’s theories on Mesolithic migrations or putting your accounts payable in column B some people will accept it as is and some people will understand why it is that way and maybe change because they do not agree with that reasoning.
The content does not matter it is what you do with that content that matters. And right now uni’s teach content and not what to do with that content. So I would put forth teach content that can help a person in their career as unfortunately the world has changed and now that is why you go to uni.
This argument is looking at what the world is not what it should be. I do not think everyone should go to uni to be an archaeologists, lawyer, writer, etc. but that is not the world we live in.
With a straight face can you say that every class you took at uni gave you the skills to think? That before going to uni you did not think at all. That uni “taught you how to think about archaeology”.
Lets get real, uni’s could teach practical skills, which by the way proposal writing, making budgets or completing a task on time is more valuable for the 95% who do not go into archaeology then thinking about the Neolithic, or they could teach about theories and your level of critical thinking would stay the same.
The difference is one could put food on your table or help you in another career.
Teaching practical skills and theory is the same. What you want is for someone to understand and to be able to question the reasoning behind it, whatever it is. If it’s theories on Mesolithic migrations or putting your accounts payable in column B some people will accept it as is and some people will understand why it is that way and maybe change because they do not agree with that reasoning.
The content does not matter it is what you do with that content that matters. And right now uni’s teach content and not what to do with that content. So I would put forth teach content that can help a person in their career as unfortunately the world has changed and now that is why you go to uni.
This argument is looking at what the world is not what it should be. I do not think everyone should go to uni to be an archaeologists, lawyer, writer, etc. but that is not the world we live in.