One of my four concrete life goals is to start a university.
It seems at first glance a strange kind of desire, perhaps self-absorbed in some kind of narcissistic desire for eternal preservation. But seriously, it wouldn't be named "Weekly University" or anything. What kind of self-respecting student would attend "Weekly University"?
So why start a university? Aren't there enough? Wasn't I happy enough at Stanford?
Well, I was very happy at Stanford. I can say honestly I'm sure I wouldn't have been happier at any other university. The reason why I want to start a university is because I believe I could have learned even more than I learned at Stanford, but in order to do so would have required a whole new kind of institution.
Most modern learning is focused around the classroom, where an educated professor, generally actively engaged in research, spares part of his time a few times a week to go and lecture a large group of bright students. The students are assigned work by the professor, which they complete by themselves or in small groups.
I think it's a very reasonable and time-tested way of educating people. It's clearly not done a bad job in the USA; we arguably have the best universities in the world.
But my problem with this system is that it does not work for all students. I think that there are people that don't learn well from lectures, but instead thrive on intense periods of one-on-one tutelage. I am one of these weird people myself. There are a few even rather mainstream institutions that are willing to make a tip of the hat to alternatives to lecture-based learning. Take the Harvard Business School. Nearly all education is done by way of case studies - basically classwide discussion groups.
Personal Experience: Harvard Physics Labs
For example, when I went to work for the Harvard Physics Labs one summer in high school, I entered having never taken a single class in physics. Not only were there not any other high school students; there weren't any other undergraduates. I was surrounded by PhD candidates, post-docs, and professors. And my professor, Dr. Gerald Gabrielse, spent a few hours a day for the first two weeks walking me through Newtonian mechanics and electromagnetism. I went from zero to calculating the force dynamics on anti-particles trapped in an open-ended Penning trap with anti-Helmholtz loops; taking in more in those two weeks than I did in four quarters of instruction from a Nobel laureate at Stanford. Reflecting on the experience, it was clear to me exactly how much more effective the hands-on method was than classroom lectures.
It's also commonly recognized that teaching helps one learn. That's tacitly acknowledged in graduate programs, where graduate students can usually receive full or partial tuition refunds for becoming teaching assistants. After all, if they end up as professors, they will be expected to teach. But more than that, the process of explaining an idea to someone else helps you understand it best. Some believe you can't even claim to have understood an idea until you've made someone else understand it. I think this is reasonable. After all, what's the point of learning things or being able to discover things if you cannot communicate your findings to others?
The Vision
So here is my vision, beginning to take form now, but hopefully much more concrete by the time I want to actually implement these ideas, when I'm rich and 50: I want a school for independent thinkers. The first two semesters would be focused on learning how to teach material. Classes would contain only have a few lectures a semester; this gives the professor the time and content to prepare a truly compelling lecture. Members of the community would be free to attend such lectures, since the incremental expense of allowing people to observe a lecture is very low, and the benefit to the community is high. (This hearkens back to the original role of a university: to disseminate learning.)
Most of the time spent on a class would be in independent research, one-on-one or one-on-three mentorship from a mix of professors and students who have previously taken the class, and group projects. You'd get two grades in every class; one for how well you learned the material and the other for how well you taught it, which would be a mix of your average rating as a teacher by students who you helped and how well they were judged to understand the material.
Curriculum Requirements
All students, regardless of major, would be required to perform basic activities required for a truly broad and modern education. Besides the standard English reading and writing, modern history, and science, requisites would include:
- ✈️ Visiting at least one other continent
- 🏥 Witnessing a few basic surgical techniques in action
- ⚖️ Attending (and giving presentations on) at least one federal court case
- 🗣️ Public speaking
- ⏰ Time management
- 📈 Managing a (fake) stock portfolio
- 💻 Learning how to write a basic computer program and website
- 🤝 Active social participation in the community (extra credit)
The goal would be for all graduates to have a solid grasp on the principles and functioning of modern society and how they could contribute to it.
Scalability
Given the peered-learning approach, this university would likely be more scalable than others. As the number of students grew, so would the number of teachers. Obviously, some number of professors and seed knowledge would be required, but another way to help with this is to have as one clause of admission that a student be able to teach something interesting. Perhaps the entrance examination would consist of a small group of applicants teaching each other interesting subjects and then getting quizzed on them.
Impact and Growth
I think that this style of university would be appropriate for a sizeable enough percentage of high school graduating students that we'd not only not have a hard time finding students interested in "beta testing", but that other universities modeled on our style might also spring up around the world, encouraging their students to be notes in history instead of just taking them.
Historical Context
This vision, written in 2003, anticipated many modern educational innovations including peer-to-peer learning, project-based curricula, and practical life skills integration. Elements of this philosophy can be seen in later educational experiments like Minerva Schools, Lambda School, and various alternative learning communities.
The emphasis on teaching as learning, community engagement, and real-world experience reflects a growing recognition that traditional lecture-based education may not serve all learning styles effectively.
An Evolving Idea
"Last updated 17 november 2003: as the idea evolves, it will be updated here"
This vision document represents a snapshot of educational thinking from the early 2000s, preserved as David originally wrote it. While the specific implementation details may have evolved over the decades, the core philosophy of personalized, peer-driven learning remains compelling.