> "My response concerns the 'this is intended to be different' on the first slide, which grates because it's a blanket statement. Had it added 'different from a liberal arts education' or 'different from what most think of college' then I would not react as strongly."

Noted. I can and will adjust the wording, not only in this presentation, but also in my future descriptions of this model.

> "But college also includes religious colleges, culinary college, ..."

Good point. I assumed the term "college" was restricted to liberal arts colleges, some of which are religious. I don't have any proof of that. In fact, these documents suggest that the Department of Labor defines colleges to include technical schools: http://www2.ed.gov/students/prep/college/consumerinfo/index.... http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_definitions_edtrain.pdf

However, this website suggests that the Department of Labor does distinguish between colleges and technical/career education: https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ctes/

> "1) "How many of those are going to something other than a 'traditional' liberal arts college?"

I'm no longer as sure of the answer to that as I was at the beginning of our conversation. I'm going to have to do further research and probably also ask the Department of Labor for clarification of how to interpret the information they have available.

> "why focus on the differences to a liberal arts college, which is the most dissimilar to your proposal, instead of the more similar technical and vocational colleges?"

There's multiple reasons for this:

1.) Because my experience has been that liberal art colleges have far more credibility in the eyes of the general public than tech schools, art institutes, etc.

2.) Up until today, I was confident that liberal art colleges had a majority share of the postsecondary education market.

3.) My model was specifically created to disrupt liberal arts colleges.

> "Why not just call that a 'test', and leave 'standardized test' for its primary association?"

Very well. I will adjust my future wording of this as well.

> "Unless the external people are free to do whatever they want, they are being held to some standard, yes? Which is why they will get some (standardized) training in how to mentor students, yes?
Why do you think a standardized external adviser is more cost effective at providing the education that the student desires than standardized custom tests developed by the teachers for each course?"

Okay, I feel like you just used the term "standard/standardized" with three different meanings.

I would like to reiterate that this model is built on the premise that the information that the student needs in order to obtain mastery is likely already available online in a format that the student can easily digest.

When I say that advisors "advise", it's not a euphemism for instruction or in-depth mentorship. Students are encouraged to learn all they can on their own, to "bootstrap" their education, if you will. Any instruction by someone connected to my institution is only to provided as a last resort.

Are advisors held to a standard? Yes, the standard of student satisfaction. Will that require some management of student expectations? Absolutely.

Are advisors provided standardized training? No. Advising best practices can not be expected to be standard across all industries.

Even the conceptual mastery interviews will not be standardized. They will most likely be structured, but the questions themselves will be unique to the student's project.

--- Starbucks is closing. I'll address your other points as soon as I can.