OP-ED COLUMN
By Coco
A college student is facing expulsion for organizing a chemistry study group on Facebook. His University claims the study group urged the sharing of answers.
I seem to recall Ernie from My Three Sons having study groups from time to time. Or, remember when Marcia Brady decided she really loved bugs and started entymologizing with the geek in nerd glasses?
Now, because Ernie and Marcia’s efforts toward higher education were “offline” (okay, Marcia’s motivations were love, not knowledge, but still) their study groups could not be regulated by the powers that be–and therefore were not a threat to the Institution. But since when are study groups “cheating”? Jesse Hirsh, social web site pundit offers this in regards to the Facebook group: “The online culture is outpacing the curriculum and education system. These students are being smart and using the Internet the way that it should be used. This is the future of education.”
Meanwhile, silly discussion #23,084 is festering about “those kids today” …In this context, it’s about their purported lack of enthusiasm in the classroom. Now, ignore for a moment the shortsightedness of anyone saying that all kids in all classrooms today are disengaged. But, IF it is even partially the case, do we really have to wonder why? Remember those history text books about the American Revolution? Paul Revere and his tweaky horse ride; George Washington and his chopping down the cherry tree only to disclose his sins to his father? They were placed before us on our desks with biblical significance and righteousness. There was NO alternative point of view offered. It simply WAS what happened. Ink on a page; end of story.
“Those kids today” are used to highly interactive sources of information and entertainment, and may find dead text books, well, dead. Today, history is being catalogued and written by thousands of perspectives and is replete with images, audio and video to back it up. In 2020 when a student decides to write a paper about the historic 2008 Presidential Election, do you really think they will go find two books from the library, written by academics, to compose their paper? Or, will they scour their version of the 2020 Internet (which, by this point, will likely be a chip planted in our heads and rather than clicking your way through Web pages on a desktop, you will only have to close your eyes and “think” your way through browsing all that data). In 2020, college essayists will be able to discover multiple points of view that ultimately write a more accurate capturing of history. I mean, wouldn’t it have been cool to watch little George chop down the cherry tree on YouTube? And, wouldn’t a native American Indian Facebook group in year 1655 perhaps shed a little more veritas on what our glorified American pioneers were up to as they “tamed the wild, wild West?”
The student proactively engaged himself in the learning environment most familiar and useful to him. He could have, I suppose, scheduled a meeting with the professor during one of his three office hours during that week; he could have holed himself up with his textbook; or, he could harness the collective knowledge of others that share his passion and learned considerably from the experience.
Corporations, smart ones at least, are doing precisely this. Sites like Innocentive.com are meeting places for chemists, engineers and other scientists to meet and solve problems collectively–and they make money doing it. The concept is simple, 20,000 people are smarter than two. “Increase your R&D capacity with Open Innovation” is their mantra. Scientists from all over the world have collectively solved major challenges for fortune 100 companies across the globe. Like what? Here are a few examples from the hundreds available:
- Synthesis of fluorinated ethers
- Enhancing Water Solubility of a Chemical Compound
- Containment and Pickup of Submerged Oil
- Pin Pulverizer Redesign
- Sulfur Encapsulation
- Novel technology for incorporating particulates
Heady stuff, to be sure. And, today’s college students will fit right in with such a productive and collaborative, technology-driven environment. Final case in point, and then I’ll stop bludgeoning the pony here: my fourth-grade daughter was asked to write about an African American of her choosing for Black History Month this February. She chose jazz musician Charles Mingus and, of course, independently went online to gather data for her paper. Among the many things she learned, from many sources, is that Mingus had a temper; that once, even, he slammed the keyboard cover down on his pianist’s hands out of rage. As any ten year old girl would, my daughter found this quite newsworthy, and put the information in her paper.
Her teacher forbade the inclusion of this information on the grounds that it was “disrespectful of Charles Mingus.” My question, isn’t this censorship more disrespectful to the poor pianist than to Mingus (of whom she had never heard)? The shame. But, not a surprise, I suppose, because this same teacher told my daughter that Jimi Hendrix was not African American.
And you wonder why our “kids today” are disengaged in school.