William Baumol studied the labor market for the performing arts and made the observation that the productivity for many of them never increases. A Beethoven-playing orchestra, for example, uses the same number of people now as it did in the time of Beethoven, while other sectors of the economy show constant increases in productivity. Wages tend to reflect productivity increases. But a conductor would obviously not be able to pay 1820's wages to his musicians. Musician's wages, in contrast to the productive sectors of the economy, are a reflection of the opportunity cost: the wages in the wider labor market. If the conductor did not raise his musicians' wages, the talent of the musicians would suffer and the music would suffer. Over time, the cost of a ticket to an orchestra will rise compared to other, productive parts of the economy. (It is expensive to go to a Broadway play today, but it was mass entertainment in Shakespeare's time.) Education (and health care) suffers from cost disease: a teacher handles about one hundred to one hundred fifty students. That number has not changed and probably will not change over time. Education will become relatively more costly, just like the theater. And teacher's wages must increase for the same reason that musician's wages must increase. Many of the enthusiasts of education technology believe that it could solve Baumol's cost disease by enabling teachers to handle more students. (In other words, by requiring fewer teachers) While there has been plenty of technological breakthroughs over the past hundred years, teachers have maintained the same level of productivity. Much of the new technology, as well as the focus on data, will have the unintended effect of exacerbating Baumol's cost disease: teachers will have to add technology and data manipulation to their required skills. Are we prepared to pay them for it?
1 Comment
"If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly." - G.K. Chesterton. The New York Times has an article describing the disappointing results that massive open online courses have posted recently. Some selections from the article: "Only about half of those who registered for a course ever viewed a lecture, and only about 4 percent completed the courses." "80 percent of those taking the university’s MOOCs had already earned a degree," meaning that they were not reaching the disadvantaged audiences they claimed they hoped to reach. "The online students last spring — including many from a charter high school in Oakland — did worse than those who took the classes on campus." The article focused heavily on Sebastian Thrun, an artificial intelligence professor, founder of a MOOC (Udacity), and wearer of Google Glass, who retorted, “Few ideas work on the first try. Iteration is key to innovation." The problem, Sebastian, is that this is not the first try. People have been recording lectures since Thomas Edison invented the phonograph. If technology could replace teachers, it would have already begun replacing teachers. If anything, the student/teacher ratio has gotten smaller over the past century. Many of the MOOCs have provided "access" to mentors. This model has been a flop as well, as these mentors are merely cheerleaders. More skilled, more involved mentors (aka teachers) would certainly help, but would not be popular with venture capital, as the model would not be "scalable." To that end, the successes the article cites are when the teachers and professors themselves use some of the MOOC videos to supplement their instruction. The only technology that helps students has been technology that helps teachers: photocopy machines, for example, or free videos. Technologies that try to replace teachers are doomed to failure. The article ends with this delusional quote: “The next challenge will be scaling creativity, and finding a way that even in a class of 100,000, adaptive learning can give each student a personal experience.” Archimedes, the famous Greek scholar who lived in Syracuse, was frustrated by a problem the king had given him. The king suspected his goldsmith was cheating him; the king had given him gold to fashion a crown, and he thought the goldsmith was mixing in cheap metals. Archimedes knew that he had to measure the volume of the crown to solve this problem, but it was an irregular shape. He went to relax and take a bath and think. When he sat down in his bathtub, he noticed that the water level rose. The volume of water displaced, which could easily be measured, was exactly equal to the volume of his irregularly shaped body. “Eureka!” He shouted, hopping out of his bath and running through the streets of Syracuse jubilant and naked. We are all familiar with this feeling, and call it many different things: “moment of clarity,” “aha feeling,” “light bulb moment,” or “epiphany.” Paul Lockhart, in his fantastic A Mathematician’s Lament, talks about how math is actually a creative, artistic discipline; mathematicians do math because it is a pleasure. But the way we teach math kills that pleasure for the vast majority of students. Most people who “love” math love that “aha!” they get when they solve a difficult problem. This feeling goes way beyond math and science. People will remember forever the moments they make deep insights about themselves or about people in their lives. Most entrepreneurs can describe a moment of clarity when they conceived their business idea. There is no general agreement among psychologists as to what is going on in the brain during these moments. There seems to be a common process: a person is frustrated by a problem, tries several different solutions and fails and then takes a break. Eventually, in an unpredictable way, he is hit with the answer. Two aspects of this process are important to education: one, it is pleasurable. Finding problems pleasurable will encourage students to be independent. Two, students remember the insight far longer when they discover it themselves. It is the unpredictability of the process that makes it difficult for the classroom. The attached lesson plan tries to cultivate the “eureka” feeling. Let me know how you like it.
"Five years down there at least. I'm leaving the world of technology and entering the world of Epictetus." - Admiral James Stockdale, 1965, while being shot down over Vietnam. He would spend the next seven and a half years as the highest ranking American officer in a Vietnamese prison. He was tortured fifteen times; he spend four years in solitary confinement - two of those in leg irons. Upon returning home, he had a successful career as a college president and a researcher with the Hoover Institute. He was Ross Perot's vice presidential candidate; his debate appearance, unpolished and honest, was mocked by the rapidly expanding American idiocracy. Before the war, Stockdale had been floundering through a graduate program at Stanford University when he took up philosophy and loved it. Right after finishing a class, the professor handed him the Enchiridion, telling him that Fredrick the Great never went into battle without a copy on him. The Enchiridion is a short notebook of the most famous sayings of Epictetus, the famous Stoic philosopher and tutor to Emperor Nero. He was attracted immediately to the philosophy. As Epictetus says, it was not about "revenues or income, or peace or war, but about happiness and unhappiness, success and failure, slavery and freedom." Epictetus advises, "Some things are in our control and others not," and to only focus on what was in your control: your thoughts and emotions. Stockdale found that focusing on controlling his emotions, even in the face of horrible torture, to be incredibly empowering. The main weapons of torture evoked fear and guilt; Stockdale talks about avoiding all types of guilt - even collective guilt. In Stockdale's words, "the thing that brings men down is not pain but shame." "Remember, you are an actor in a drama," as Epictetus put it. You do not choose your part, but "how well to act it." Stockdale experienced how little control he had over his station in life. He went from commanding over a thousand men to being a prisoner, beaten and mocked, within minutes. But he was determined to act his part well. His fellow American prisoners looked to him for guidance in prison, and he gave them courage. Often, the men under his command would mock their tormentors. One gave the name "Lieutenant Clark Kent" when asked to give the names of American soldiers who protested the war. The Vietnamese press published it and was the laughingstock of the world. Many adults find Stoicism, especially Epictetus's take on Stoicism, to be "harsh." (They would do well to read Seneca) But kids find his teachings interesting, relevant, and empowering. Students - remarkable students - have found his teachings relevant and empowering for two thousand years. Why is Stoicism so obscure today? It is International Stoicism Week. Many of the exercises in From Rebel to Ruler are inspired by Roman Stoicism; many people today are unfamiliar with this influential philosophical school. Here are a few frequently asked questions to clear things up: Q: Doesn't "stoic" mean to hide your feelings? A: No, that is the popularization of the word. Q: Why should anyone care? A: Almost every great leader and thinker of one of the greatest empires that ever existed (Rome) were schooled in, or in heavy contact with, this philosophy. In addition, many influential and remarkable people throughout the past 2000 years were fans of Stoicism. Many parts of George Washington's farewell address are extensive (unquoted) quotes from Epictetus. Q: Ok, ok, what is it in a nutshell? A: First, realize that Stoicism was education and education was Stoicism. There were other philosophical schools, like the Epicureans, but when the leadership classes went to school, they were learning Stoicism. Later, they would obtain a mentor and stay in contact with that mentor throughout their lives. Some of the most famous Stoic writings are the letters that Seneca sent to his protégé, Lucilius. Q: Didn't the Roman Empire fall? A: Yes. But the Pax Romana - Rome's golden age - had several emperors who were strong adherents of Stoicism. The diary of Marcus Aurelius, called the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, at the bitter end of this period, are some of the most famous Stoic writings. Q: Is there a summary? A: Different writers give it different flavors, but there are a few themes that recur. Stoics emphasize courage, friendship, and tranquility. In talking about the "brotherhood of man" they criticize slavery, which is thousands of years ahead of its time. They urge frequent self-reflection and encourage people to confront problems head on. They want students to divide the world into the things that they can control (not very much) and the things that they cannot control; no one should waste a second of worry on things they cannot control. Q: What is a good place to start? A: It depends on you. Three philosophers stand out, and they come from three very different perspectives. Epictetus was a slave who rose to become the tutor of Emperor Nero. Seneca was a businessman, playwright and tutored Caligula and Nero. Marcus Aurelius was emperor at the height of Rome's power, but was renowned for his kindness (absolute power did not corrupt). Q: Is it appropriate for students? A: Absolutely. It was designed for students, and many of the influential people who studied it in the past 2000 years studied it when they were students. It is also easy to read just a little bit or a lot, and involve a lot of "active literacies" - writing and public speaking. And its goals are very relevant to students today: leadership, friendship, and tranquility. "The minute you get away from fundamentals – whether its proper technique, work ethic or mental preparation – the bottom can fall out of your game, your schoolwork, your job, whatever you’re doing.” ― Michael Jordan Jordan was famously the first person to the gym to practice and the last one to leave. It would always surprise rookie journalists when they would go in and see the great Michael Jordan working on basic drills, even at the end of his career. Jiro Ono, regarded as the greatest sushi chef in the world, has a similar dedication to fundamentals. His apprentices, which have included his sons, spend years mastering basic elements of sushi preparation, like cooking the rice or making a level omelette layer. Giotto, and the rest of the renaissance artists, would spend their first years in an apprenticeship simply mixing paint. Once that was mastered, they were then allowed to start creating art; at first, they were limited to painting draped cloth. Only after a few more years could they begin painting more complex subjects. Academic fundamentals often get short shrift in this country. In English class, we rarely teach grammar; we often look at mastering math fundamentals as "rote" learning. (There are ways to make working on basic skills fun and engaging.) Often, the complaint is that "rote learning" will kill creativity. But that is clearly false in other domains. Why is this myth so widespread? One of the central tenets of positive psychology - the somewhat new branch of psychology that focuses on happiness, resilience, and success - is that gratitude is a good thing. There are scores of studies showing that gratitude, giving thanks, and counting your blessings has a wide range of positive effects, from better mood to better grades to better health. Indeed, a few exercises in From Rebel to Ruler focus on gratitude. Many long-standing philosophies and religions have gratitude at their cores. In fact, my favorite "happiness hack" is to just stop and list ten things for which I am grateful. In the book NurtureShock, author Po Bronson describes an exception: middle school kids. Kids ranging from 6th grade to 10th grade showed no reaction to gratitude journals. Diving deeper into the data reveals that happy middle school kids are actually made unhappy by gratitude exercises. Kids at this age have a drive to feel independent and self-reliant. Gratitude makes you feel connected to other people. For students later in high school and college, who are making decisions about their lives and facing high stakes tests, connection is good. But for energetic, rebellious teens, gratitude makes them feel dependent and limited. This interesting paradox cuts to the heart of teaching. Adults (non-teachers) will stand on their soapboxes and want to reinvent education around what they find valuable to their lives right now. In the best case scenario, kids will find these lessons boring. In the worst case, it could actually do harm. “People focus on role models; it is more effective to find antimodels - people you don't want to resemble when you grow up” ― Nassim Nicholas Taleb It is an often-heard complaint that "kids today" or "these kids" grow up without proper role models. Nassim Taleb, author, philosopher, and successful financial trader developed the concept of "antifragility." In his book of that name, he challenges readers to come up with the antonym of "fragile." Most people respond with "strong" or "robust" - things that can withstand stress. Taleb asserts that this does not go far enough; the opposite of fragile must be something that gets stronger under duress. One fantastic way get students to be "anti-fragile" is to focus on cautionary tales. What have you learned NOT to do from the people around you? What behaviors could you learn to avoid? What choices do you know not to take? In this way, they will learn no matter who they are focused on. They won't need to wait for positive role models. One potential problem with a lot of negative role models is that they are cool: they may be attractive and powerful and thus seductive. Who are some useful inverse heroes? Dale Carnegie, in his introduction to How to Win Friends and Influence People, quotes John D. Rockefeller. “The ability to deal with people is as purchaseable a commodity as sugar or coffee, and I will pay more for that ability than for any other under the sun.” Carnegie was a colorful character from the turn of the 20th century. He punched cattle and sold soap, bacon, and lard in the Badlands of South Dakota. He learned business in “pioneer hotels” and gambling with “squaw men.” In college, he finally “distinguished himself,” after many embarrassing failures, by learning to speak convincingly in public. He went to New York and offered to teach a public speaking course at the YMCA. They refused to pay him his requested $2 a day, so he negotiated a commission. Soon he was making $30 a night (a small fortune at the time). Many of the people he worked with wanted a course not only in public speaking, but also in dealing with people. A survey at the time revealed that, after health, adults were most concerned with “how to understand and get along with people, how to make people like you, and how to win others to your way of thinking.” Carnegie searched in vain for a course that would teach those things. He researched the lives of famous people and read the advice of philosophers and psychologists. He then asked the businesspeople attending his courses to use the advice and give him feedback. In that way, the course grew “like a child.” As the introduction says, it is a course that is “as real as the measles and twice as fun.” Its fans are many and distinguished. Warren Buffett, the multibillionaire investor and philanthropist, calls it the most important book he ever read. Carnegie’s criticisms of the education system are not harsh, but they are familiar. He says that the things that are taught in school are not very practical, and that people search for more as soon as they are out in the real world. These people include some of the best-educated in the world, several of whom took his courses. Carnegie claims that the content of his courses – public speaking, coping with worry, and dealing with people - were “incidental” to what he was really teaching: how to confront your fears and develop courage. Can courage ever be included in a school curriculum? Seneca, the famous Roman stoic philosopher, tutor of two Roman emperors, successful businessman, regent, playwright, and inspiration for many of the exercises in From Rebel to Ruler, describes an interesting visit he had to Scipio Africanus's villa. Scipio had lived about one hundred years before Seneca (who lived 2000 years ago). He was the general who finally defeated Hannibal. Scipio was a hero to Romans. Seneca pays close attention to Scipio's bathhouse; it was small, cramped, and dark. The bathhouses of his time were luxuriously appointed with fine marble, precious stones, elaborate fountains, and huge windows. He says that many visitors found Scipio's bathhouse shockingly "primitive" and were appalled that he used cloudy rainwater to bathe. Seneca mocks the modern Roman as too luxurious. People went to bathhouses several times a day, were overly concerned with their personal hygiene, and "stunk of perfumed oils." Seneca contrasts that life with Scipio's simplicity. Scipio would work the land on his farm all the way into his old age. Seneca praises the fact that Scipio would wash only his arms and legs daily, leaving the rest untouched. Responding to criticism that Scipio must have smelled bad, he snorted, "What do you think he stank of? Hard soldiering, hard work, and manliness." We seem to always look at the world of our grandparents as more pure and governed by stronger values. It is jarring to realize that they did the same thing. Is "the old school" - a simpler time of quality and courage - an illusion? |
AuthorI'm an entrepreneur and I teach math, history, economics, and fitness. I'm looking for arguments. Archives
November 2019
|