And the next generation will be able to do the same thing at a whim even in poverty with a little device in their pocket, and not even have to pay for the classes.
I'm not talking about watching videos on the internet. I'm talking about libgen, scihub, MITs entire curriculum for free on the internet, forums and chatrooms to discuss topics with others, and some videos on the internet. And that's just the free ones.
That's still not anywhere near the same though, a tutor is able to figure out what the student is missing through observation and also teach in a way that the student will learn fastest. Whereas any internet resource relies on the student being able to figure out what they themselves don't know and isn't tailor-made for them.
Having a person sit down with you and walk you through everything one on one is great. Having swathes of useful information available to everyone that's interested and determined is a sure way to create a much more highly educated society at a low cost. And as a bonus, geniuses are more able to hone their gifts so you get more of them.
The argument is that 1:1 instruction, or tutoring, is a superior way to acquire knowledge. Having lots of information available is great, but not a substitute.
The discussion here is about an argument that says basically without tutoring you can't create Einsteins. My only point is that we can now make them easier and cheaper than ever because they can make themselves.
On this specific topic, I must admit I do believe 1:1 tutoring is overrated. I've taught myself most of what I know, and the rest I learned in a classroom. I have never had one on one tutoring. I may not be representative of the population, but I bet most people don't need near as much tutoring as a tutor would have you believe, they just need access to accurate and well organized information.
Having a tutor is superior to simply having access to all of the information in the world. The tutor acts as a guide to that information, they structure the presentation of that information to you based on your individual needs which means you can quickly speed through parts that you pick up easily while spending enough time and having a ready source of answers and guidance on problems that you have difficulty with allowing you to master them faster. Sure, someone could reach the same level of understanding with nothing but the internet and motivation but they will arrive there much, much later than someone who is actively tutored from a young age. Think of it as like acceleration to some maximum speed, the one that reaches that speed earlier will be able to go much further during the time allotted. You could see that allotted time as the lifespan of the person but age also affects performance and could result in a drop off in ability over time.
An intelligent person who is privately tutored can be performing at a college level or above when they are in their early teens. They can be at a doctoral level when they hit their twenties and then spend the entirety of their most productive years making use of their education. Compare that to our current educational track which has most people achieving their doctorate in their 30s. Performance for the average autodidact would likely be much worse.
The article isn't about high performers. It is about world-changing genius. If you had a competent tutor, you would progress much faster and much further than you have by yourself.
developments in education technology is actually driving to to do exactly that, personalized learning curriculum designed to expose the user at their own pace and using heuristics to create learning schedules
Yeah 90% of them will. It's still exceptional, just not limited to those with connections. That still leaves an order of magnitude more people motivated to learn that didn't have the option to before.
