Comments by "looseycanon" (@looseycanon) on "Why the US Has the World’s Best Universities" video.

  1. I'm sorry, US universities understood, that teaching job related stuff is necessary? That more engineers are needed, while fewer philosophers and artists are necessary? Dude two words: Women studies. The problem is NOT the universities, the problem is the students and the pressure these students are under! When deciding our majors, very few people actually care, what they're going to study. They chose based on course's perceived difficulty and, thanks to basolutely attrocious approach to teaching math in middleschools, very few people voluntarily chose math heavy fields, which are all STEM fields. Science? Think of a field, that doesn't need advacned math. Technology? Again, math squared. Engineering? Can you design and build an aircraft carrier without math? Mathematics? Have you ever tried mathematics without math (in which case, I want the stuff you're on)? Thanks to antiquated and, frankly, forceful approach in middleschool, mathematics heavy fields are viewed as hard ones and not chosen by the students, hence there are fewer and fewer actually net contributing workers in Europe, which in turn is the first factor, why there are so few high end businesses around here. Basically everyone with good brains in their heads goes to the US to get STEM education and stays there, or move to other countries, that have lower costs of living thanks to idiocy of enrgiewende and the rest of green BS (make no mistake, this was not the war. If the war didn't come, it would have been other reason, like a Central Europe wide blackout caused by too much or too little Wind in North Germany. The war merely accelerated the problem), that is sweeping through Europe. Because of this our energy costs have skyrocketed to the point, you can't have energy intense activities in Europe, be it steel mills, IT parks or FABs, or even start a family, because you can't afford basic necessities of housing, utilities and Internet opn one income! This is the second factor, that's killing legacy industries like steel, which have their equipment written off already and are therefore financially competitive with new stuff (which is why historically we've never replaced old energy sources in their entirety, rather, we added more modern ones into the mix), and preventing new high yeild fields from taking off, like server farms. instead, we're focusing on how to lower our footprint on the planet, ignoring the fact, that the necessary reduction of said footprint requires Europe to be driven into absolute poverty. Third factor is the fact, that if your business venture dies around here, you're on the hook for the debts taht you've picked up to get the business going, making European population far less entrepreneureal (well, that and the fact, you effectively can't have a side husstle because of how contracts are done around here), which reduces the number of businesses, that could have a part of them on cutting edge of their respective fields, hence have no real motivation to cooperate with universities on high yeild projects. As to the graph that you've shown, that is not sufficient granularity. Law falls under humanities and you could argue, that lawyers are the actual engine of US ecnonomy, given how it is them who craft license agreements and find ways, how to brick what you bought without breaking said agreement, thus creating recurring revenue streams for companies. Copyright is the same tale. Make no mistake, Europe has it's problems with beraucracy, but it is not in the academic field. We have picked up policies, that don't encourage studying more challanging fields like engineering and science, because one, these fields have certain impacts and needs, that are either shunned or can't be provided for anymore in Europe, making student far less likely to chose them, even in the rare cases when the student actually choses based on field perspective. It makes no sense for a student to chose a field, when its major employers will not maintain their operations in Europe. High costs of living and too high risks and devastating effects of running a business in Europe force people, who could create businesses, that would benefit from and to business-university cooperation, out to the US and Asia, which in turn limits universities ability to partake in cutting edge research, which in turn drops them in the rankings. We need to start from the students, change how mathemathics are taught in middle school and abandon implementation of the green transition in favour of returning of energy demanding, but actually productive industries and lowering of costs of living, maximizing real take home pay in the economy without touching taxes (to ensure predictability of tax law). The one thing I kind of agree with in the video, is rigidity of our majors. There is certainly something to be said about not being able to chose subjects that interest you and have them applied to your credit requirements to graduate, on the other hand, giving the students too much choice could also result in a problem. We can't permit an economist to evade all math in his field, tendency to which is precisely what I observed in my colleagues in my study days. What I'd like to see, would be a change in the structure of credits needed to attain. Currently, most places have class A credits, which are mandatory, class B, which are mandatorily chosen (basically subjects from a shortlist), class C credits, which tend to be chosen general studies subjects and class D, which don't earn you credit to current field, but should you chose to study at that uni another field for which the subject is relevant, can be applied there. The further into the alphabet you go in credit classes, the further you can substitute them (A can substitute both B and C, B can substitute class C). What I'd like to see, would be intoduction for four class applicable credit system, where substitutions would only be possible for the last class of credit and specifically have one of the higher credit classes be interdisciplinary thing or specific effect of studied field on other fields and I'd reduce the mandatory credits to absolutely essential knowledge necessary for the more specialised courses. (as economics major, I only learned the mathematical application of micro and macro economics on business in master's degree course, while the subject matter was taught in bachelor's course. The connection or where that subject knowledge was actively applied was never mentioned in that course, which I belive, to be a massive mistake). To illustrate, what I'd like to see, would be a business major student having to study specific field of business, like agri business or horti business. A agronomist would have to study some specific aspect of forestry (for instance, presence of forest has effect on soil, certain methods of raising cattle require knowledge from both fields). Multidisciplinarity is the dealbreaker for the future in my opinion.
    2