We can design a better educational institution if we separate assessment from teaching. We can do better than you propose if assessment is fully decoupled from teaching. MIT wouldn’t hand out degrees; some other body would. MIT’s role would be to educate people to be able to pass those assessments to the extent anyone cared about performance on those assessments.
Of course there’s a bunch of ways I expect such a design to fail, but if the goal is education, then this seems like a more efficient way to do it.
As stated in the OP, I expect this to be the end result of the regulations I suggest. The advantage of this approach is that for now MIT can carry on doing it’s thing instead of forcing a hard switch over where you stop it being able to assess is students without yet having an equivalently respected replacement.
We can design a better educational institution if we separate assessment from teaching. We can do better than you propose if assessment is fully decoupled from teaching. MIT wouldn’t hand out degrees; some other body would. MIT’s role would be to educate people to be able to pass those assessments to the extent anyone cared about performance on those assessments.
Of course there’s a bunch of ways I expect such a design to fail, but if the goal is education, then this seems like a more efficient way to do it.
As stated in the OP, I expect this to be the end result of the regulations I suggest. The advantage of this approach is that for now MIT can carry on doing it’s thing instead of forcing a hard switch over where you stop it being able to assess is students without yet having an equivalently respected replacement.