> It's taught in classrooms from MIT to rural India. The tools I dreamed about making accessible? They are. The barrier to entry I wanted to lower? It's almost gone.
I have an ironic sense that there are classrooms in rural India with better pedagogy and lower barriers to entry than some of our elite engineering programs.
Many elite engineering programs in the United States (I don't know if this is what you mean by "our") are elite solely due to social status (rankings need to publish rankings that feel right, or they're ignored, and they accept bribes to rank specific programs) and research output, with little to do with quality of pedagogy. Instead, pedagogy is generally poor because the elite researchers usually view teaching as a chore and many don't have any real skill in it either.
I thought traditional Indian pedagogy was heavily criticized for being heavily based on rote memorization over conceptual understanding or problem solving. And also being heavily hierarchical and exam-oriented.
This isn't to say engineering programs in the US can't be improved, but there seems to be widespread consensus that they don't suffer from the kinds of serious problems that ones in India commonly do.
India isn't as uniform as you may imagine. Indian states are about as diverse as the EU. So don't assume that the Indian educational system adheres to any one system or paradigm. I for one, wouldn't have graduated in engineering if it was like what you described. I'm an utter failure at rote learning anything.
I didn't imagine anything like that. I'm just taking about on the whole, i.e. the average.
And this isn't some personal opinion of mine -- I've never set foot in an Indian classroom. It's just something I've heard repeatedly from professional educators and from hiring departments, and was under the impression this was common knowledge.