TED Conversations

Master Student in Innovation,

This conversation is closed.

Why don't universities use their knowledge in practice?

Shouldn't universities be the place where private companies enviously look, amazed at how effective they are at communicating complexities? How well structured they are? How smooth everything seams to flow?

Why isn't the lecture on communication the best communicated one? Or the lecture on pedagogy the one which involves the most?


http://www.ted.com/conversations/6965/the_gap_between_knowledge_and.html


Feel free to join the debate and share your thoughts.

Share:
  • Nov 11 2011: We don't have a danish site that does that, but maybe we should create one.

    Our student organizations are already working on numerous topics.
    • thumb
      Nov 13 2011: If you worked on creating such a site with some friends from the computer science department you would be taking some control of your situation and you might even have a real money making opportunity!
      Good luck, Caper! I wish you happiness in your studies- find something you absolutely love and find out every last detail about it whether or not the profs are great.
      • Nov 16 2011: Thank you Debra.

        I've already found my passion. It's in creating stuff that can make a difference for others. Created a new concept on a 6 hour bus trip yesterday with three other people, as a part of the global entrepreneur week. So I'ill continue on this round for a while. :)
  • Nov 13 2011: Because schools are about making more slaves to consumerism, not educational initiatives. These are institutions funded by corporations and the rich- not by the people and their needs. It is not profitable to let knowledge run it's course but the channel it to feed the economy. That is why education should never be allowed to be a political issue but be for the education of the young people.
    • Nov 16 2011: Hey David. Thanks for our input.

      You might be right, but then I'd think that it being a political issue is exactly whats needed. So people can debate these different perspectives in a public forum.
      • Nov 16 2011: "Political" and "debate" are mutually exclusive terms. Politicians get elected by platitudes and then govern to repay those who got them there- which isn't us. Pick any one of the GOP debates this year and tell me any one of those people could govern better than you or I. Napoleon said that to attain political office one needs to display absolute pettiness and to govern properly one needs to display absolute greatness- and the two traits are rarely found in one individual. We're great at the former but lousy at the latter- because truly great individuals want no part of the circus of politics. These people could care less about our children b/c they can afford whatever education they choose, as opposed to the rest of us.

        Perfect example, a serious contender for the GOP nomination can't remember his own proposals (Perry)- because they are not real- they are "tested" to be what people want to hear and taught to him, but he can't speak on his own- like GW Bush, remember where that got us as a nation? Last night he proposed an 18% spending reduction b/c he said it was the average of a GDP history of spending- except that it isn't- 18% is the average tax collection revenue, not the GDP, and it would kill the economy. Yet, it sounded good so everybody clapped like trained seals. The education we need comes from the homes of INTERESTED parents, not elected officials. It's too important to be part of the circus.

        That's just my opinion, and I may be wrong. Peace, Casper.
  • thumb
    Nov 11 2011: What an interesting question, Casper. Your words could be interpretted as though you have had a demoralizing experience.

    My answer would be that I think it all goes back to Henry Ford. The idea that all work should be reduced to a small portion of the big picture or of the whole. I concur with what I am guessing is your bewilderment that all that knowledge is stored within all those computer data sets and heads and yet no one is plugging it in within their own institutions. I think in the end that it comes down to their narrow job descriptions. Everyone is responsible for exactly so much and no more and the concept of the common good sometimes gets lost in the cracks. You would think that someone would find it a matter of personal pride to ensure that their research findings were plugged into the immediate surroundings but perhaps the skills that make someone a phenominal researcher or lecturer are not the same skills needed for practical implementation.
    • Nov 11 2011: That's my point. There's a gap between what they know and what they do. My question is therefore in regards to filling this gap. How do we do it? What does it take?

      This question comes from being a university student for a few years now and not a specific experience. I've noticed this in many occasions and have talked to friends who study at different universities, who seam to be experiencing the same thing.

      Where's Ken Robinson we you need him to talk up a learning revolution? :) Just saw his TEDtalk again. It really makes sense when I look upon they way things are structured in our educational institutions.
      • thumb
        Nov 11 2011: Hey Casper!
        The one weapon that I think students have for changing things is to visit the internet sites which rate their profs in each course. I think these ratings will become more and more influential as good profs start using these ratings to get promotions and pay raises.

        Another route is to become part of student government or attend meetings on campus to push forward your very solid and reasonable expectations.