Aaron Clarey brings his customary wit and sharpness to bear on colleges and universities, and their contribution to (alleged) global warming.
The internet has made colleges obsolete.
Of course, colleges don't know that yet. They and their administrative bloat staff need physical college campuses to continue on otherwise they would have to get real jobs in the real world.
. . .
Nearly every participant in today's physical colleges - professors, administrators and the students themselves - have a financial and/or psychological interest in keeping this obsolete horse-and-buggy industry around inspite of the "car of the internet" being developed 20 years ago.
I will delve into why colleges need to be eliminated (and the trillions of dollars in benefits that would confer upon the US and the world in general) in a later article. But for now I want to use the obsolescence of American colleges to highlight a hypocrisy which should make even the most leftist leftists call into question their integrity, veracity, and practicality.
I personally do not believe in global warming. My IQ is simply too high, plus I have street smarts and know a scam when I see one. But let's say I did. And not only that I did, but I was a adamant environmentalist.
. . .
I'm no environmentalist, but there are roughly 21 million college students in the US today. Some of these college campuses have over 50,000 students and are veritable large cities. If the cost of attending an accredited online college is a fraction of what it costs to attend a physical one, and we could eliminate SIGNIFICANT greenhouse gas emissions by eliminating physical college campuses, why on god's green Earth (pun intended) would any global-warming believing student, AND CERTAINLY ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES DEPARTMENTS, insist on attending a physical college?
Of course, the answer isn't because they haven't thought of it. Professors, college administrators, and students are FULLY aware it would be cheaper and much better for the environment to replace physical colleges with digital ones. It's once again a glaring exposure of the environmentalist and academic left's true ulterior motivation. They don't give a damn about the environment. They only give a damn about their cushy, worthless jobs. They know that one GOOD professor can teach millions of students for pennies on the dollar online compared to the thousands of professors and the tens of thousands of college admin staff that is needed to run these now-pointless, unnecessary physical institutions. And if online colleges were ever to establish a beachhead, they would be forced to do what use real world, real adult, hard working Americans do every day - work a real job.
. . .
It would be one thing if these academics, professors, and admins actually provided something of value in exchange for 4 years of childrens' youth and $100,000 in tuition. But most of the products they are offering are completely worthless.
If only there were accredited online colleges that offered worthwhile degrees for a fraction of the cost and greenhouse gas emissions...
There's more at the link. Recommended reading.
I can confirm the value of "distance education" - whether the old-fashioned way, by mail, or using the Internet - from personal experience. Two of my four university qualifications were obtained by distance education, receiving tuition materials by mail, submitting assignments the same way, and studying in my own home on my own time. That allowed me to study at much cheaper rates than a full-time university, and I doubt very much whether my tertiary education was any less challenging and rigorous than the latter's offerings. I continue to recommend such study as not only an economic solution to those who are financially challenged, but also a highly valuable exercise in self-discipline.
With so many courses now available online, I think that unless your field of study requires lab work or practical, hands-on exercises under supervision, there's no longer much point in doing undergraduate studies at a full-time university. Post-graduate may be an exception, but even that's questionable in many fields. Given that online interaction, particularly with video and voice, is often more consistent and less distracted than being in the same classroom, I think Aaron makes a good case.