Listen to the podcast:
Traditional universities — including Ivy League schools — fail to deliver the kind of learning that ensures employability. That perspective inspired Ben Nelson, founder and CEO of the six-year-old Minerva Schools in San Francisco. His goal is to reinvent higher education and to provide students with high-quality learning opportunities at a fraction of the cost of an undergraduate degree at an elite school. While tuition at top-tier universities in the U.S. can run more than $40,000 a year, Minerva charges $12,950 a year, according to its website. In a recent test, its students showed superior results compared to traditional universities while also attracting a large number of applicants.
Minerva is a disruptor and the traditional university establishment needs to adapt to its model and perhaps improve on it, according to Jerry (Yoram) Wind, emeritus marketing professor at Wharton. Nelson, who was previously president of Snapfish, an online photo hosting and printing service, and Wind spoke to Knowledge@Wharton about why the higher education model needs to change, and how the Minerva model could help.
An edited transcript of the conversation follows.
Knowledge@Wharton: Jerry, where is the future of education headed?
Jerry Wind: The future is now. It has been here for a while, and with Minerva, Ben has recreated the university of the future. Ben, describe briefly the Minerva concept, and then go into the recent findings of the CLA report (Minerva’s Collegiate Learning Assessment test).
Ben Nelson: We refer to Minerva as having been built as an “intentional university.” Everything about the design of the institution, what we teach, how we teach and where we teach it is based on what we know, and through empirical evidence, is effective.
In what we teach, we are classical in our approach, even though we’re [also] modern and progressive in the way we teach. For example, if you think about the purpose of a liberal arts education, or what the great American universities purport to teach, they will say ‘We teach you how to think critically, how to problem-solve, how to think about the way the world works and to be global, and how to communicate effectively.
“Universities … basically teach you academic subject matter and they hope you pick up all of the other stuff by accident.” –Ben Nelson
When you actually look at how universities attempt to do it, they basically teach you academic subject matter and they hope you pick up all of the other stuff by accident.
We decided to have a curriculum that teaches these things, that breaks down critical thinking, creative thinking, effective interactions, and effective communications into component parts. [We wanted to make] sure that we don’t just teach them conceptually, and don’t just teach them in a context, but actually explain the concept and then have our students apply them actively from context to context to context.
Knowledge@Wharton: Could you share an example of how you do that?
Nelson: One aspect of critical thinking, for example, is evaluating claims. There are various ways of evaluating claims. Sometimes you use logic, sometimes you use reasoning, which is different than logic, sometimes you do statistical analysis which is different than the other two, and sometimes you just think of a counter example.
Now there are different [types] of critical thinking. One example: making a decision tradeoff. Should we go down Path A or Path B? The technique for making a decision tradeoff is perhaps thinking through the cost-benefit analysis, which is a type of critical thinking.
If you say ‘I’m going to teach you critical thinking’ and you just try to teach it as a thing you will never succeed. [It is important to] go through it systemically and do the component parts – that’s the first aspect.
The second aspect is if you teach a person an idea, say evaluation of claims, the mind gets trained in a particular context. When somebody makes a claim, let’s say on an investment opportunity, or a political claim, the mind doesn’t really transfer those skills from one field to another. This is one of the fundamental problems of transferrable education. The way that you teach that is to provide exercise and applications in multiple fields.
How we teach is also radically different. The science of learning shows that the dissemination of information [through] lectures and test-based methodology simply doesn’t work. Six months after the end of a traditional lecture and test-based class, 90% of the material you were supposed to have learned is gone from your mind. In an active learning environment you struggle through information, and two years after the end of the class you retain 70%.
All of our classes, despite [being] small seminars with 15 to 19 students at a time, are done via live video online where there’s a camera pointed at every student’s face. The students are actively engaged with the materials, [and it is] not the professor lecturing — professors are not allowed to talk for more than four minutes at a time. The students get feedback on how they apply what they [learn].
“Six months after the end of a traditional lecture and test-based class, 90% of the material you were supposed to have learned is gone from your mind.” –Ben Nelson
Lastly [it is about] where we teach. We have created a university that takes advantage of the best the world has to offer. Being a Penn graduate, I always gravitated towards the idea of the urban campus. Our students live in the heart of cities in residence halls together, and have a very strong community. They spend their first year in the heart of San Francisco, but over the next three years across six semesters, as a cohort, as a group, they will travel and live in six different countries. So in their second year they go to Seoul and Hyderabad, and then to Berlin and Buenos Aires, then London and Taipei, and come back to San Francisco for a month to manifest their education and graduate.
Wind: While the concept is appealing, does it work? Describe the CLA test, and then talk about the implications of [your approach].
Nelson: The Collegiate Learning Assessment is provided by a third party nonprofit that has been testing and assessing students’ progress on critical thinking, problem-solving, scientific reasoning and effective communication skills for many years. It’s been administered to hundreds of thousands of students across hundreds of universities. It is administered to students at the beginning of their first year and at the end of their fourth year, and so you can measure [the] progress of students.
We provided [our students] the first-year test just before they started the first class at the beginning of the year. But rather than waiting four years, we gave our students the fourth-year test at the end of their first year, Eight months later, the results shocked us. Not only did our students after eight months have the highest composite score in the country compared to any other university that was assessing their students, the delta improvement they accomplished was higher than what the CLA has seen any university accomplish over four years.
Knowledge@Wharton: What drove those results?
Nelson: The silly answer would be to say, ‘Oh we’re brilliant and we’re great, and look at how amazing what we do is.’ The fact of the matter is we’ve got a lot of room to grow and improve. These results in many ways are much more damning of the existing system than they are generating praise for our brilliance.
We have taken publicly available scientifically published data on how the mind works. We’ve broken down the things that every university says that they teach or that they want to teach, and merely spent time putting together a curriculum that does that, and we’ve offered it to students. We’ve just done what anybody who would rationally approach trying to create a solution to a problem do.
I would bet you that if you had 100 institutions or 100 groups of people that were to do the same thing we would have done from scratch, we would have probably been better than some of them, maybe most of them, but not all of them. There would be some that on their first try would be even better than [us].
Wind: This is the value of idealized design. As opposed to trying to fix the current educational system by adding another course or trying to create a cross-disciplinary course, [Minerva] reexamines the whole purpose of education.
They didn’t go far enough, which is they are still within an academic context, and probably they will relax the academic context that is [with] semesters and the like, and get even better results. But even within this academic context and constraints, what they have done is amazing – the curriculum, the concept, and the way it’s developed for the benefit of the learner, and not the benefit of the faculty.
The [first] implication is, if you had a choice and you wanted to go to a university now, where would you go? If you want really great education, go to Minerva; [but if] you want to network, go to one of the top five schools — Penn, Harvard, Princeton, Yale and MIT. Minerva offers probably a different network than the traditional ones because it is a network of people who are willing to do it.
Nelson: Last year, for our third class ever, we received 20,400 applications. That is more applicants than MIT or Dartmouth got. The network you get in a Wharton or Harvard or Yale or what-have-you is [of] a certain kind. It is overwhelmingly American, [with] 80% or 90% from the U.S., and usually from particular socioeconomic backgrounds. Even though there is some diversity, it’s heavily weighted [in favor of that profile].
The Minerva network is radically different because 80% of our students are not from the U.S. — they come from 61 countries. We received these 20,000 applications from 179 countries. The experience and the network you build as you travel and live as a resident in these seven countries is unparalleled. If you want a global footprint, that’s what we provide.
Wind: The current educational system does not work. Implication two is that [universities] have to realize that they are being disrupted. At this stage [it is on a] small scale, but if other universities start adopting it, it can [become] large scale. [Minerva is] the disruptor here, and the signal to the legacy universities is, our model does not work. Stop trying to fix it by adding another Band-Aid, but try to rethink the educational system. And here you have a wonderful blueprint that works.
Nelson: We just wrote a book called Building the Intentional University, which is a blueprint for how other universities can create their own Minervas or reform in that sense. We are a residential university that grants undergraduate degrees with 120 credit hours, with majors and minors and electives and a general education curriculum. We are plug-and-play for universities. We offer potential salvation from disruption.
“The future is now. It has been here for a while, and with Minerva, Ben has recreated the university of the future.” –Jerry (Yoram) Wind
What I have worried about is the other kind of disruptive force that can attack universities [and be] destructive, in the sense that in six months you get a high school degree, go to a boot camp and then get a six-figure job being a software programmer. We have put together an educational experience that enables university graduates to be better prepared than [with that] six-month boot camp. Because they are able to do higher level problem solving, they are going to be [software] architects as opposed to the programmers. They’re going to the ones that in a world of Watson and artificial intelligence and outsourcing are going to be much more future-proof.
Wind: An increasing number of people view employability as being critical, and a traditional university degree does not guarantee employability, [but] the new non-degree programs guarantee you a [job] position.
Knowledge@Wharton: Three or four years ago, a big potential disruptor was the so-called MOOC, or the Massive Open Online Course. A number of platforms came up [such as] Coursera, Udacity and EdX. It seemed like they were going to be disruptive, but that doesn’t seem to have happened. What happened with that so-called disruption and why did it fail?
Nelson: The jury is still somewhat out on that, and let me give you an example of what I think is happening on the surface. MIT had a master’s program in supply chain logistics, and it cost $60,000 for a two-semester program. As an experiment, [they put the] first semester on MOOCs, and rather than charging $30,000 for it, [gave] it away for free. If you want to get credit for it pay $250, [write] an exam, and then if you score well you [go] to campus, do a one-semester supplement, pay $30,000 and get a master’s degree.
This [halves] the cost of higher education for a master’s degree. Imagine if the Ivy League – or any university – [extended that to] all the courses they give academic credit for. Of the $250,000 that they are used to collecting and are reliant on [for each degree course, they] can only collect $100,000 because $150,000 is effectively given away for free. So far no university has an incentive to rock the boat too much on this. [However,] just because the disruption does not happen immediately doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
Wind: The concern is that especially for the leading universities, it’s an excuse not to innovate. They are saying, ‘Look how innovative we are; we have MOOCs, or we offer classes on Coursera,’ and basically the rest of the education stays exactly the same way as it was before. Some of the findings suggest that less than 5% of the people who start ever finish the courses on Coursera or EdX. But there are some encouraging signs that if you add to the traditional Coursera course or EdX interaction, and if you provide some more gamification principles in terms of getting involved, you can increase the numbers significantly.
The advantage of this — with MIT, Stanford, Penn and other universities putting all of these courses online — is that the role of the faculty becomes easier as a curator. This is the fundamental change that we have to see in education.
Knowledge@Wharton: [In addition to] a network, one other factor that the Ivy League universities offer is the brand. When you have this innovative model like Minerva, how do you establish a brand that is acceptable to students as well as employers?
Nelson: Minerva was built as a positive brand. When you meet somebody at Minerva you know that they have … been given systematic frameworks of analysis that they can apply effectively to the rest of the world. Our challenge is to propagate that brand, to get people aware of it. The good news is that the internet is a very good way of disseminating information. Brand building in today’s world doesn’t take centuries; it doesn’t even take decades.
Wind: The final word on branding is always [from] the consumer. One, the best carrier of the brand, and especially on the positive side, would be the alumni. So the value of the degree, the value of the Minerva experience is a function of how good the alumni are. Two, a lot [depends] of the employability and demand for the Minerva students.
Nelson: It’s too early to tell.
Mastering Innovation: From Idea to Value Creation
Become the catalyst for company-wide change when you learn how to construct the architecture that drives innovation in an organization.
Learn more.
Join The Discussion
4 Comments So Far
Steven Brady
I’m tired of looking at private colleges and universities understating cost. You do it in this article. “While tuition at top-tier universities in the U.S. can run more than $40,000 a year,…” Wharton’s website states tuition and fees (not including Housing, dining, books and supplies, Transportation, and personal expenses) are $53,534 for this year. It’s about $70,000 when living on campus. You guys just want to drive the middle class away don’t you. Or, leave students burdened with debt (punished for because of their parents income) RIDICULOUS!!!!!!!
Mukul Pandya
Mr. Brady, thanks for your comment. I share your concern about the high cost of education at private colleges in the U.S. I would like to clarify that we neither intend nor desire to understate the costs of education. According to TopUniversities.com, average fees at private, four-year colleges in the U.S. are about $47,000 a year. (https://www.topuniversities.com/student-info/student-finance/how-much-does-it-cost-study-us). That is all we meant by our statement that tuition runs north of $40,000 a year. It was a description of an unpleasant reality and not a justification. I agree entirely that this is an enormous burden for the middle class.
Michele Cresmen
I’d be interested to hear what your 1) graduates are doing now that you’ve had some graduating classes; and 2) thoughts are on disrupting high school education to prepare people to go to a place like Minerva.
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
Excellent.
The Minerva Schools at KGI is a university program that was founded in partnership between the Minerva Project and Keck Graduate Institute (KGI), a member of the Claremont University Consortium. It offers both a four-year undergraduate program as well as two master’s programs. The Minerva Project is a for-profit corporation that owns the technology platform the school runs on. Minerva Schools at KGI is a non-profit institution that relies on the Minerva Project for services.
The traditional university model should be shaken up because it does not effectively train students to apply their knowledge and skills across contexts, said the founder of an American school that has reinvented college experience.
The model should be replaced by one that truly develops critical and creative thinking, said Mr Ben Nelson, CEO of Minerva project.
“The way in which universities teach is proven scientifically to be broken,” he said. “When you have an individual who learns certain habits within a context… no matter how good of a critical thinker they are in their field, they are not able to transfer that knowledge to anything else.
“The nature of work and society… is to be able to translate what we learn from various aspects of our lives into new contexts,” said Mr Nelson.
(Higher education has to be overhauled: entrepreneur Ben Nelson at ST-SIM forum,THE STRAIGHTSTIMES).
Though not a Undercrduatestdy but with practical trainining and vocational training based on the principle,”Voluntary Learning is more effective than Forced Learnining,the Folkschools in Denmark and elsewhere are a shining example. I lived in Denmark.
Folk high Schools (Danish: Folkehøjskole; few) Heimvolkshochschule are institutions for adult education that generally do not grant academic degrees, though certain courses might exist leading to that goal. They are most commonly found in Nordic countries and in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The concept originally came from the Danish writer, poet, philosopher, and pastor N. F. S. Grundtvig (1783–1872). Grundtvig was inspired by the Marquis de Condorcet’sReport on the General Organization of Public Instruction which was written in 1792 during the French Revolution. The revolution had a direct influence on popular education in France. In the United States, a Danish folk school called Danebod was founded in Tyler, Minnesota.
Despite similar names and somewhat similar goals, the institutions in Germany and Sweden are quite different from those in Denmark and Norway. Folk high schools in Germany and Sweden are in fact much closer to the institutions known as folkeuniversitet in Norway and Denmark, which provide adult education. However, unlike the folkuniversitet, folk high schools in Sweden are not connected with a regular university. The Finnish adult education centers called työväenopisto and kansalaisopisto (Swedish: arbetarinstitut, literally workers’ institute) are also part of the adult education tradition.
Other countries have also been inspired by Grundtvig’s concept of popular education. In Nigeria, the United States, and India, a few schools have been built upon Grundtvig’s principles for education.
Grundtvig, regarded as the founder of the folk high school, received inspiration for the concept from the English boarding schools, but Grundtvig’s focus was not on formal education but on popular education and enlightenment. The idea was to give the peasantry and other people from the lower echelons of society a higher educational level through personal development; what Grundtvig called “the living word”. The language and history of the fatherland, its constitution and main industries (farming) along with folk songs should be the guiding principles for an education based on a Christian framework.[1]
The first folk high school was established in 1844 in Rødding, Denmark. The school in Rødding, however, was somewhat aristocratic as chiefly civil servants and rich farmers were enrolled.
Another pioneer for the folk high school was the teacher Christen Kold. His, for that time, highly unorthodox way of teaching gave the folk high schools a broader democratic basis in comparison to the initial religious focus. The teaching took place from November to March because students did farm work the rest of the year. Kold’s goal was for students to return to the school regularly in the winter to continue their education. In the beginning only young men could attend the courses, but in 1861 young women also gained access to folk high schools when teaching began being offered from May to July. The men still only attended during winter.
The breakthrough for the idea was the Second War of Schleswig in 1864 when Denmark had to surrender a large part of its territory. This incident allowed the growth of a new Danish consciousness and nationalism based on enlightenment of the people. Denmark’s loss of territory to Prussia hit the Danish national consciousness hard, but there was a group of young men determined to benefit from the disastrous war, which became a catalyst for a new Danish identity. They established folk high schools all around the country and by 1867 twenty-one folk high schools had opened. Almost everyone working at the folk high schools had been an apprentice of Grundtvig. In 1918 the number of folk high schools in Denmark had reached 68.
The modern folk high schools vary significantly. Some still have a religious focus but most of them are secular. The schools are still “Grundtvigian” folk high schools which means that their focus is on enlightenment, ethics, morality and democracy although they are not taught explicitly. The Grundtvigian philosophy is embedded in the teaching of various subjects, e.g. the arts, gymnastics, and journalism. Most of the schools have an area of expertise, for example sports, music, art or writing. Since no degree or diploma is awarded the teaching is freer and more informal than at ordinary educational institutions. Most Scandinavian folk high schools are boarding schools where the students live for 2–6 months., and some schools offer programs for an entire year.
The school and lifelong learning
Grundtvig fought for a school with popular education as the primary focus. The folk high school movement was an act against a conservative ideal of both education and culture. An act against an ideal of literacy and book-learning, a use of language unknown to common people and a learning ideal where the primary relation was between the individual and the book alone.
The movement therefore started as a row with the old school. Grundtvig fought for a public education as an alternative to the university elite. The folk high schools should be for those wanting to learn in general and to help people form part of human relations and society.
The folk high schools have changed naturally – some also radically – through time, but many of Grundtvig’s core ideas about the folk high school are still to be found in the way they are run today. The folk high school of today is engaged in a complex modern reality and influenced both by national, international and global questions.
One of the main concepts still to be found at the folk high schools today is “lifelong learning”. The schools should educate for life. They should shed light on basic questions surrounding life of people both as individuals and as members of society.
To Grundtvig the ideal was to give the students a sense of a common best and focusing on life as it really is. Therefore, Grundtvig never set down guidelines for the future schools or a detailed description of how they should be run. He declared that the folk high schools should be arranged and developed according to life as it is and the schools should not hold exams because the education and enlightenment was a sufficient reward.
The essential element was and is the life at the schools. A folk high school becomes what it is because of the individuals of which it is made. Learning happens across social positions and differences – the teacher learns from the student and vice versa in a living exchange and mutual teaching. For Grundtvig dialogue across differences was essential – the ideal was that people must learn to bear with the differences of each other before enlightenment can be realized.
Features
The character of folk high schools differ from country to country, but usually institutions have the following common features:
• Large variety of subjects
• No final exams
• A focus on self-development
• Pedagogical freedom
• Courses last between a few months and one year, with per-course fees
• No numerus clausus (entrance exams)
Especially in non-German speaking countries, the folk high schools may be boarding schools or may mainly offer courses for adults age 18–30.
Germany, Switzerland and Austria
Folk high schools in Germany, Switzerland and Austria are called Adult education centres (ger. Volkshochschule). They usually funded on a local level and provide non-credit courses for adults in:
• general education
• vocational education
• political education
• German as a second language (especially for immigrants)
• various foreign languages
• various forms of art
• information technology
• health education
• preparatory classes for school exams (especially for the Abitur or Matura)
This type of folk high school is currently most widespread in Germany. Because they offer preparatory classes for school exams, the German Adult education centres also function as the equivalent of adult high schools in other countries. Germany also has Adult education centres that are boarding schools, called Heimvolkshochschulen.
In these days of growing unemployment of Engineering,Science and Arts Undergraduates especially in Developing countries,Folk Schools and Minerva Schools at KGI are role models for alround development of Students in Schools, Colleges and Universities.
Dr.A.Jagadeesh Nellore(AP),India