大學(xué)學(xué)什么才能不被計(jì)算機(jī)淘汰？

What to Learn in College to Stay One Step Ahead of Computers

大學(xué)學(xué)什么才能不被計(jì)算機(jī)淘汰?

Computers and robots are already replacing many workers. What can young people learn now that won’t be superseded within their lifetimes by these devices and that will secure them good jobs and solid income over the next 20, 30 or 50 years? In the universities, we are struggling to answer that question.

計(jì)算機(jī)和機(jī)器人已經(jīng)在取代許多人類職工。年輕人如今學(xué)些什么才不會(huì)在有生之年被這些設(shè)備所替代，確保自己在未來20年、30年乃至50年都有不錯(cuò)的工作和穩(wěn)定的收入?在大學(xué)里，我們都在苦苦思索這個(gè)問題的答案。

Most people complete the majority of their formal education by their early 20s and expect to draw on it for the better part of a century. But a computer can learn in seconds most of the factual information that people get in high school and college, and there will be a great many generations of new computers and robots, improving at an exponential rate, before one long human lifetime has passed.

多數(shù)人在20歲出頭的年齡就會(huì)完成大部分的正規(guī)教育，并指望在未來50多年里依靠它來謀生。然而，計(jì)算機(jī)可以在幾秒鐘內(nèi)學(xué)會(huì)人們在高中和大學(xué)獲得的全部事實(shí)信息。在一個(gè)人漫長的生命結(jié)束之前，還將涌現(xiàn)出一代代新的計(jì)算機(jī)和機(jī)器人，而且它們會(huì)以指數(shù)增長的速度進(jìn)步。

Two strains of thought seem to dominate the effort to deal with this problem. The first is that we teachers should define and provide to our students a certain kind of general, flexible, insight-bearing human learning that, we hope, cannot be replaced by computers. The second is that we need to make education more business-oriented, teaching about the real world and enabling a creative entrepreneurial process that, presumably, computers cannot duplicate. These two ideas are not necessarily in conflict.

應(yīng)對(duì)這一問題的努力似乎由兩種思路主導(dǎo)。第一種思路是，我們教師必須定義一種廣泛、靈活、有洞見的人類學(xué)習(xí)體驗(yàn)，并把它提供給我們的學(xué)生，同時(shí)希望它不會(huì)被計(jì)算機(jī)取代。第二種思路是，我們需要讓教育更加以商業(yè)為導(dǎo)向，讓學(xué)生認(rèn)識(shí)真實(shí)的世界，實(shí)現(xiàn)一種計(jì)算機(jī)大概無法復(fù)制的創(chuàng)新的創(chuàng)業(yè)過程。這兩種想法并不一定矛盾。

Some scholars are trying to discern what kinds of learning have survived technological replacement better than others. Richard J. Murnane and Frank Levy in their book “The New Division of Labor” (Princeton, 2004) studied occupations that expanded during the information revolution of the recent past. They included jobs like service manager at an auto dealership, as opposed to jobs that have declined, like telephone operator.

一些學(xué)者正在試圖弄清哪些類型的學(xué)習(xí)被技術(shù)進(jìn)步取代的程度更小。理查德·J·莫尼恩(Richard J Murnane)和弗蘭克·利維(Frank Levy)在他們合寫的《新的分工》(The New Division of Labor，由普林斯頓大學(xué)出版社于2004年出版)一書中，研究了近期歷史上在信息革命中出現(xiàn)擴(kuò)張的職業(yè)。這其中包括汽車經(jīng)銷商的服務(wù)經(jīng)理。相比之下，另外一些工作崗位則在減少，比如接線員。

The successful occupations, by this measure, shared certain characteristics: People who practiced them needed complex communication skills and expert knowledge. Such skills included an ability to convey “not just information but a particular interpretation of information.” They said that expert knowledge was broad, deep and practical, allowing the solution of “uncharted problems.”

這種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)下的成功職業(yè)有一些共同特點(diǎn)：從業(yè)者需要復(fù)雜的溝通技巧和專業(yè)學(xué)識(shí)。此類技能傳遞的“不光是信息，還有對(duì)信息的特定解讀。”兩人認(rèn)為，專業(yè)知識(shí)要廣泛、深入、實(shí)用，能夠解決“未知的問題”。

These attributes may not be as beneficial in the future. But the study certainly suggests that a college education needs to be broad and general, and not defined primarily by the traditional structure of separate departments staffed by professors who want, most of all, to be at the forefront of their own narrow disciplines. But this old departmental structure is still fundamental at universities, and it is hard to change.

這些特點(diǎn)未來或許不會(huì)帶來同樣的優(yōu)勢。不過，這項(xiàng)研究無疑告訴我們，大學(xué)教育需要廣博和寬泛，不應(yīng)該主要由院系的傳統(tǒng)結(jié)構(gòu)來框定。這些院系各行其是，里面的教授多數(shù)想要成為各自狹窄學(xué)科的翹楚。但這種舊的院系結(jié)構(gòu)仍然在大學(xué)根深蒂固，很難改變。

Consider the controversy at Harvard College over the Program in General Education, whose antecedents date to 1946. The program requires Harvard undergraduates to take courses devised to prepare them for a broad range of issues in life after college. But critics have said that the program is not succeeding, and that many professors who participate in it teach only their own department’s scholarly material, without attention to wider aims.

來看看哈佛大學(xué)對(duì)通識(shí)教育的爭議吧。這個(gè)項(xiàng)目的前身可以追溯到1946年。它要求哈佛的本科生學(xué)習(xí)一些量身打造的課程，從而為畢業(yè)后人生中碰到的各種問題做好準(zhǔn)備。然而，持批評(píng)態(tài)度的人認(rèn)為，該項(xiàng)目并不成功，許多參與其中的老師僅教授自己院系的學(xué)術(shù)內(nèi)容，忽視了這些更大的目標(biāo)。

Prof. Louis Menand of Harvard, in a May 5 statement, argued that an education focused on narrow academic disciplines was inadequate: “Less than 20 percent of our students go on to get Ph.D.s,” he said. Many students end up in the business world, broadly construed, not in academia.

哈佛大學(xué)教授路易·梅南(Louis Menand)在5月5號(hào)發(fā)表的一篇文章中宣稱，專注于狹隘學(xué)術(shù)領(lǐng)域的教育是不夠的：“我們的學(xué)生中只有不到20%會(huì)去讀博士，”他說。許多學(xué)生最終進(jìn)入廣義上的商業(yè)領(lǐng)域，而不是學(xué)術(shù)界。

In a separate May 5 statement, Prof. Sean D. Kelly, chairman of the General Education Review Committee, said a Harvard education should give students “an art of living in the world.”

在同樣于5月5日發(fā)表的另一篇文章中，通識(shí)教育評(píng)審委員會(huì)(General Education Review Committee)主席、肖恩·D·凱利(Sean D Kelly)教授提出，哈佛的教育應(yīng)該傳授給學(xué)生“當(dāng)下世界的生存之道”。

But how should professors do this? Perhaps we should prepare students for entrepreneurial opportunities suggested by our own disciplines. Even departments entirely divorced from business could do this by suggesting enterprises, nonprofits and activities in which students can later use their specialized knowledge.

不過，教授們應(yīng)該怎樣做到這一點(diǎn)?也許我們應(yīng)該讓學(xué)生為我們自身學(xué)科的創(chuàng)業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)做好準(zhǔn)備。即使有些院系完全與商業(yè)無關(guān)，也可以做到這一點(diǎn)，方法就是推薦一些合適的企業(yè)、非營利組織及活動(dòng)，讓學(xué)生未來可以在這些地方利用自己的專業(yè)知識(shí)。

Many of these issues have arisen in my own academic life. My teaching has changed over the decades. I try to make it more useful in confronting issues of creativity and morality in the work world.

在我本人的學(xué)術(shù)生涯中，遇到過這里的許多問題。我的教學(xué)在幾十年里不斷變化。我希望自己的課程能更加有助于學(xué)生應(yīng)對(duì)職場上有關(guān)創(chuàng)造力和道德原則的各種問題。

When I arrived at Yale in 1982, there were no undergraduate courses in finance. I started one in the fall of 1985, and it continues today. Increasingly, I’ve tried to connect mathematical theory to actual applications in finance.

當(dāng)我1982年來到耶魯?shù)臅r(shí)候，這里并沒有金融學(xué)方面的本科課程。我在1985年創(chuàng)辦了一個(gè)，并讓它延續(xù)至今。隨著時(shí)間的推移，我越來越多地嘗試將數(shù)學(xué)理論融合到金融的實(shí)際應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域。

Since its beginnings, the course has gradually become more robotic: It resembles a real, dynamic, teaching experience, but in execution, much of it is prerecorded, and exercises and examinations are computerized. Students can take it without need of my physical presence. Yale made my course available to the broader public on free online sites: AllLearn in 2002, Open Yale in 2008 and 2011, and now on Coursera.

開設(shè)之后，這門課逐漸變得越來越自動(dòng)化：它與動(dòng)態(tài)的真實(shí)教學(xué)體驗(yàn)一樣，但在執(zhí)行層面上，許多部分是預(yù)先錄制的，而課堂練習(xí)和考試則在電腦上進(jìn)行。無需我本人親自到場，學(xué)生就能學(xué)習(xí)這門課。耶魯還通過免費(fèi)的網(wǎng)站把我的課開放給大眾：2002年放到了AllLearn上，2008年和2011年放到了 Open Yale上，目前則在Coursera上。

The process of tweaking and improving the course to fit better in a digital framework has given me time to reflect about what I am doing for my students. I could just retire now and let them watch my lectures and use the rest of the digitized material. But I find myself thinking that I should be doing something more for them.

為了更好地適應(yīng)電子教學(xué)而對(duì)這門課程進(jìn)行調(diào)整與改進(jìn)的過程，給了我時(shí)間來反思自己為學(xué)生做了些什么。我可以現(xiàn)在就退休，讓他們觀看我的講課錄像，使用其他的數(shù)字資料。但我忍不住想，自己應(yīng)該為他們再多做些事情。

So I continue to update the course, thinking about how I can integrate its lessons into an “art of living in the world.” I have tried to enhance my students’ sense that finance should be the art of financing important human activities, of getting people (and robots someday) working together to accomplish things that we really want done.

因此我在不斷地更新這門課程，思考怎樣才能將其中的教學(xué)內(nèi)容融入“當(dāng)下世界的生存之道”當(dāng)中。我努力強(qiáng)化學(xué)生的概念，讓他們認(rèn)識(shí)到金融應(yīng)當(dāng)是為重要的人類活動(dòng)融資的藝術(shù)，是讓人們(將來還有機(jī)器人)攜手完成我們愿望的藝術(shù)。

Like Harvard and other colleges and universities, Yale has been struggling with the broad issues for a very long time. It once experimented with an undergraduate business program, to prepare students for life beyond college, but shut down that program in 1954. In the 1960s, during the Vietnam War, antipathy to the business establishment increased. According to the former Yale Graduate School dean John Perry Miller, in his book “Creating Academic Settings” (J. Simeon Press, 1991), there was open “hostility” to the idea of business-oriented education at Yale.

與哈佛等院校一樣，耶魯在這個(gè)大問題上掙扎了很長一段時(shí)間。它曾經(jīng)嘗試開設(shè)本科生的商學(xué)專業(yè)，希望讓學(xué)生為畢業(yè)之后的人生做好準(zhǔn)備，但1954年的時(shí)候停止了嘗試。上世紀(jì)60年代的越戰(zhàn)期間，人們對(duì)商業(yè)權(quán)貴階層的厭惡之情有所加劇。曾任耶魯大學(xué)研究生院院長的約翰·佩里·米勒(John Perry Miller)在他的著作《創(chuàng)造學(xué)術(shù)環(huán)境》(Creating Academic Settings，由J·西蒙出版社[J. Simeon Press]于1991年推出)中指出，當(dāng)時(shí)的耶魯存在對(duì)以商學(xué)為導(dǎo)向的教育理念的公開“敵意”。

Nonetheless, Yale produced many fine businesspeople. But because of this hostility, Yale did not start a business school until 1976, and even then denied that it was just a business school: Instead of offering a Master of Business Administration, it initially conferred only the more idealistic-sounding Master of Public and Private Management. Before 1976, the university had a great economics department, imbued with a lofty sense of pure theory and mathematics, but it was not focused on practical business education.

盡管如此，耶魯培養(yǎng)出了許多出色的商人。然而，由于這樣的敵意，耶魯直到1976年才開設(shè)了商學(xué)院，而且就算到了那個(gè)時(shí)候也否認(rèn)它是一所純粹的商學(xué)院：開始的時(shí)候，它并未開設(shè)工商管理碩士課程，而是僅授予聽起來更具理想主義氣息的公共與私人管理碩士學(xué)位。1976年之前，耶魯已經(jīng)擁有了一個(gè)不錯(cuò)的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)系。它沉浸在高遠(yuǎn)的純理論與數(shù)學(xué)的氛圍之中，但并未關(guān)注務(wù)實(shí)的商學(xué)教育。