Re: Speed, Technology, Progress LO92

Emily Myers (
Mon, 13 Feb 1995 08:06:42 -0500 (EST)

Replying to LO59

Stever Robbins and Peter Bishop's comments on the irony of academic
institutions immune to learning brings to mind two questions.

How much would you learn in a room with 25 other people your own age doing
the same thing for 40 or so hours a week?

Why does the already outrageous price of tuition keep going up when doubts
about the value university learning are becoming so prevalent?

Emily R. Myers
Mobius Project
Voice (610) 388 1274 FX (610) 388 0555

On Fri, 10 Feb 1995, PETER C. BISHOP (713/283-3323) wrote:

> Stever Robbins hazarded an explanation to the lack of learning in academia
> (i.e., avowed learning organizations). He tried pop-psychology; let me
> try pop-sociology. Universities and their faculty consider themselves the
> repositories of truth. If they were to place the customer ahead of their
> discipline, they fear that the "standards" of the discipline would be
> watered down and eventually disappear with consequent loss to
> civilization. While this sounds absurd to some, I believe deep-down
> faculty feel that theya re the last defenders of truth, culture, and
> standards against the onslaught of modernity. This tradition goes back a
> long way. One professor I heard said the last time the university was the
> source of new ideas was when they introduced Aristotle to the Middle Ages.
> We do ourselves and the concept of the learning organization a disservice,
> however, when we consider these faculty simply a bunch of benighted souls
> who are covering their behinds. Rather unless we address their mental
> models, their deepest held beliefs and assumptions, we will never make
> progress on engaging in a real dialogue about the purpose of the
> university in the 20th as opposed to the 12th century. "First strive to
> understand."
> Thanks for the comment Stever...
> From: "PETER C. BISHOP (713/283-3323)" <>