Discursive thoughts that began as a comment to Monday's post, but quickly morphed into something else...
This is what I find difficult to understand: If the U.K. system is so well-respected and the U.S. system is looking for ways to improve itself, then why doesn't the latter get ideas from the model of the former?
I don't think I've ever read a U.S. consideration of the U.K. system of higher education (although I'm sure there's probably a lot out there).
I also find it ironic that my experience with the tutorial system is in direct opposition to the dictum of most U.S. universities (or at least grad schools). That is, you have to prove you're "conversant" in everyone else's theories/ideas before you can propound your own. I can see how this makes sense--but to make every single student do this in every thesis? It becomes gratuitous hoop-jumping after a while...doesn't it?
Any thoughts would be appreciated--I'm obviously a little biased.