I have a thought. Whenever we watch or read the news we often see interviews or banter among established experts in various fields. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but entertain this though. Often times, circumstances and conditions are happening in the world that experts might be on or less than that of the level of understanding as current students. For example, the creation of a new state, a regime or foreign policy change change, or some new scientific or technological advancement. Perhaps the experts have become too dug-in to their respective disciplines. For example, an expert trained during the Cold War is likely a realist who wouldnt place emphasis on UN action or domestic politics for international relations or American foreign policy concerns when commentating on the Israel-Palestine conflict or Russia in Ukraine. Furthermore, they may be unaware of how other areas of study outside of their areas of expertise has major implications of the topic at hand. In their research, students devote a great deal of time to studying a multitude of current world events. This covers a breadth of disciplines from the humanities (philosophy, arts, history, sociology, political science) to the hard sciences (environmental science, human health, botany, physics, chemistry) relatively simutaneously. Would something like a YouTube channel or podcast centered around the observations and analysis of students in various disciplines be beneficial to the current national conversation and conveyance of the most up to date information? By not being experts yet, but certainly more trained and competent than the average person, to me, serves multiple goods. It bridges the gap between the elitists and the average person. Student are more relatable to the public than an Ivy League educated elitist. Students are seeking knowledge as the ends while the experts ends may be career advancement or book deals. It als gives a sort of real-time peer-review. The pursuit of knowledge can be imposing and agoraphobic because of the sheer amount of literature one goes through in research. The more we learn the more we realize how much we didnt know. Theres a good chance that people in the same fields of study have seen different literature on a particular matter. This serves as a platform for advancing students in their respective fields. I was inspired with this idea because my Government and Politics of Western Europe instructor assigned us each a country to report on. She essentially assigned the sections on: Poland, Spain, Sweden, Greece, and Hungary to the students to teach. Without any real prior understanding of the government, politics, history, or culture of Spain, I made an excellent presentation and wrote a great paper that would essentially be a chapter on Spain in a modern textbook. My research presented information that the instructor wasnt aware of. This isnt because shes incompetent or Im an excellent researcher; its because some of the things I reported only occurred a few weeks ago. As students, we may not have the depth of knowledge as experts, but our information is very current and we are experienced enough to think critically and academically to provide quality analysis. Would students discussing the most current information on the state of the world be beneficial to the public, the students, and the national conversation? I think so.
Posted on: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 20:06:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015