If we want to discuss the problems of the race, we should think about what career we want. Within this debate, we might think about what college we want. And for that, we would have to tell us a bit, not to talk crap.
To this end, I recommend reading of this educational and interesting Article magazine produced by the Faculty of Sciences of the UBA which I share below. You can generate controversy and result in zero comments, who knows. I would listen to ideas. -----
"professional or scientific?
Argentines knew conceive many discussions about what college we want. Free or secular, free or fee, elite or mass, with unrestricted entry or oil filter. However, the main crossroads was never raised: do we want a university professional or scientific university? This discussion we still us, everything else is nuance.
Nothing is as it is because. And the university less. All universities in the world adopt models that are useful to their countries and respond to different interests and objectives. The adopted in Argentina was the professionalism, a model based
in creating professional, many good, and preferably at low cost and quickly. The reasons for this decision were many, including: the existence of major schools and professional tuition, and the rise and the need
of the professions. Ultimately, all converged in the creation of universities and professional schools merger (now the Faculty) who have the basic task of producing professionals and follows a particular pattern called professional model.
another model already existed
much older than the professionals, there was a very different university model, which we call science. Was based on the essence of the oldest universities in the world, which can be summarized this way: the university is the place that humanity attempted to reflect on the truth and for knowledge creation
. We find the model in ancient Greece, Plato's Academy and Aristotle's Lyceum, Alexandria, Paris, Bologna, Leiden, Salamanca, Geneva, and many more. This model of university survives in full health scattered around the world. In reality, the first world. In that ancient cauldron cooked a fruitful symbiosis between teaching and scientific research. Since then can not exist without the other, without impairment of efficiency and quality.
Both models were arranged more or less the same time, close to the French Revolution and to a certain neighborhood. The professionalism is established in Paris under the aegis of the emperor, and so called scholars of science education: Napoleonic universities. The scientific model does in Germany, mostly with the ideas of Wilhelm von Humboldt founded the University of Berlin (Now Humboldt University) and specialists have been called scientific model or Humboldt. In a superficial and mistaken reading, some people think that scientists are scientific universities, and professional, professional.
But it is not my idea to make a statement, not least of historical review, which would badly. My intention is to do in this note a characterization of simple, practical, or why not?, A field guide. One, in dichotomous key that allows us to recognize each model and think in practical terms what is the meaning, utility, suitability of each. With easy features to assess for any mortal who specializes in science education or education policy. Here goes.
How college catalog
The first item is cost. The professionalism is cheap. The scientist is expensive. Creating knowledge is an expensive, scientific research very difficult. Instead, buy ready-made knowledge is very cheap, most can be obtained from books. Professionalism, then, is ideal for heavily indebted poor countries like ours, in fact the most common in third world countries, while the scientific model is common in first world countries. It suffices to look at budgets and compare to draw conclusions.
Students are also characteristic. Scientific university students are typically full time. Theoretical problems, seminars and laboratories make the student remains practically the whole day in college. The typical student is a part time professional universities. Usually has a job which supports their studies, and studies at night. In the professional world, the student centers get mad if the School does not offer night shifts. By day, are moors, and at night, crowds.
The curriculum is the mark in the selvage. Scientific universities are characterized by basic cycles common (not to be confused with the CBC, not in principle at least) with intensive training in basic sciences: mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology. For all students, with the same depth and quality. The professionals, however, start the classes with courses in their respective specialties. Hostage to professional content. If doctors have to give them physical, that is, at least, biophysics, or something that has more to do with them and not so intense level. "And what I kinematics if not I need to listen to my patients?" Often ask medical students if they are to teach physics. Teachers also do not know what to say, and often invent absurd scenarios and unconvincing or themselves. Both fell into the trap of content. In the scientific paradigm, the question makes no sense, we all live like the most natural, is not conceived a doctor who can not or do use derived statistics.
These basic courses are usually conducted by the respective departments. For example, courses in mathematics (through which pass all mixed, future mathematicians, physicists, psychologists, accountants, philosophers, etc.) Are given by teachers in the department of mathematics at the university. Thus, universities scientists often have a departmental organization. In contrast, the professionals are organized into academic structures. The first teachers are "generalists" that are rotated among different subjects, the latter, teaching specialists, in them, usually the top specialist takes over a chair and form a kind of academic feud, often impenetrable.
Another feature of qualified candidates is that they are rigid. In science, there are often many electives and common among different races (beyond the basics). The studies are flexible and hard to find two identical graduates training.
A good time to stall a university, if still in doubt, it is noon. A dining hall is ideal for characterization. It's simple: the Humboldt university lunches are fun and exciting, if not, erotic. It's easy to find tables where they eat a future engineer, a future veterinarian, a philosopher and an economist. It is easy to imagine a pep talk, digestive.
Another place where you can clearly see the difference in academic libraries. The scientists are full of students, books, magazines!, Computer terminals with Internet and online catalogs. The professional world, however, is the largest subsidiary of the target industry.
Substances scientific universities have an important interdisciplinary content and have to be done in English. Some people can get excited with this and another can generate urticaria. But so, science is a global company and communicate in a lingua franca.
Let me insert a quote from one of our champions for science, Marcelino Cereijido: "The experts can generate professional universities, or at most scholars, but only in a scientific university leave the wise."
scientific universities are small. The iconic MIT and Harvard not exceed 18,000 students. The last census in the UBA throws a whopping amount of 320,000. Of these, the majority noted in traditional courses without academic or strategic sense. The laws governing market trends enrollment in professional universe. "It became fashionable for journalism?, Macanudo: morning bought a new building and then enter the 40,000 students in communication sciences that will handle the taxis of the future. The universities plan scientific visionary.
With full time teachers with full time students, living together in college, teachers and students are trapped in the tradition of student-teacher training. On the other hand, the student is sentenced to the massive and anonymity.
We can make a crucial question: What is the ultimate academic goal of these types of college? For the Professional: EFFICIENCY. For science: EXCELLENCE.
And I do
Now, suppose you remember the differences between both types of university. What could make a scientific university would prefer to to a professional? I have two important reasons. The first is the science itself. Science is a conception of the universe, a way of dealing with the universe, based on reason, observation, experimentation, irrespective of dogmas, beliefs and the principle of authority is a knowledge system with enormous implications for philosophy, ethics, morality and life. Being a scientist is a personal challenge
each anxious to be free in the minority.
The second is strategic. Base the higher education system in universities professionalism is the best way to chain himself to a model dependent country, dependent on inputs, recipes and knowledge developed in the developed world, consumer and slave imported technologies and knowledge. On the contrary, to have scientific universities is a necessary condition to generate a national project independent. You can not be a sovereign country, and even less rich without science.
Well, I stop here. There should be a guide to more serious and more complete. This is a summary for the public.
From now on
The outlook is not promising. Our teachers' unions are engaged in getting job security, contrary to the principle reformist academic schedule, which will turn the university into a bureaucratic entity and mediocre like a Kafkaesque ministry. Student centers, now dominated by leftist political parties (a new and reactionary left) claim, in their majority, trasnochada idea de que la ciencia es una herramienta de dominación
capitalista y no pueden distinguir entre científica y cientificista. La opinión pública y los medios de comunicación masivos soportan el bombardeo mentecato de los discursos posmodernistas que relativizan el conocimiento científico equiparándolo a creencias religiosas y modas culturales. La cosa está peluda.
Pero aunque parezca una meta inalcanzable, generar universidades científicas no es imposible. La época de oro de la UBA, del 56 al 66, demuestra que en muy poco tiempo se puede patear el tablero y dar un golpe de timón que nos encamine hacia un rumbo de excelencia. Algo tenemos los argentinos, yo no se qué, pero somos el único Latin American country with three Nobel Prizes in science, and thirty other scientific luminaries who did not receive the Nobel Prize, three hundred in top positions throughout the world, and some 60,000 scientists trained yirando here and there. Something needs. Maybe that something will allow us to give us time to reflect on this dilemma and, who knows, one day, take the direction indicated.
is impossible to change the Argentine university system to adopt the scientific model. But there is no valid reason to avoid certain academic groups that are able to adopt it should give up this goal. The time is ripe for a rational partition allows UBA generation one (maybe two) scientific university that our country needs and deserves.
ever knew to be the star of the Faculty of Social Sciences University of Buenos Aires (UBA). However, fewer young people are registered to the career of communication sciences: in the last five years, the number of students admitted to the CBC for Communications dropped 40 percent, according to the university. Since the UBA clear that there was a decline in all faculties, about 22.4 percent on average, and explained on the economic rebound and the emergence of similar courses at other universities. Anyway, the race director of Communication Sciences, Postolski Glenn admits that also influences the extent of the completed. 