If Education is taliored

I think that if education was tailored to meet everyone’s cultural and personal preferences then potential problems could arise. First of all education is meant to be challenging and as stated in the previous blogs it is there to stretch people so if it is altered to meet ones personal needs then could this just lead to 'lazy' tendencies and making the system too easy. I understand that it helps some, for example online learning in China which has increased the amount of people who attend Uni and graduate however for education to change everywhere completing for everyone’s cultural and personal problems it cause conflict. If their are different 'rules' and ways of teaching for everyone it could provoke feelings of jealousy or anger towards another who might be seen to having it 'more easy' or 'not being taught properly'. Also grading work could become very difficult and many opinions would arise on this and how it is done fairly and equally.
Like i have said online learning worked in China and some other countries but if this was the system for everyone, would this cause problems? Would it be too much to handle?
I think education meeting some peoples cultural and personal preferences is a good idea in some cases, for example disabled and less mobile people who would perhaps not attend education otherwise, and people who live to far away and cants afford to travel. However, to meet everyone’s needs and change for a lot of people would cause conflict and disagreements. Furthermore i think education is there to teach/stretch you in a serious and helpful way, not to accommodate all your comforts and make it really easy to do. There would be no point in education if it was 'easy'.

China - Distance learning

During the 1960's China undertook a new way of learning by introducing television universities (TVU's) which encourage distance learning. As 'weird' or 'different' it may seem 8,000 students graduated in the space of 6years. It was when China entered to the socialist modernisation project in need for more trained people that the TVU's were in demand, especially as the number of trained technicians of accounted for '2.5%' of the countries work-force.
When i first heard of distance learning i didn’t think much to it and wondered how it was really benefited anyone or their country. However after to reading why China had to have the TVU's it makes more sense. Their Higher education rates in enrolment were very low and the country needed for trained people to help the country through a stage and the TVU's did this by increasing the rate of enrolment and graduation in China for higher Ed.
Furthermore its be proposed that it need fewer funds that traditional teaching as well and this can only be a good thing? Furthermore in China they 'can train more people in a shorter period of time' helping everything run better. The Universities developed into radio and tv broadcasting, and PTUV's which could reach the rural areas. I used to think it wasn’t 'proper learning' and not beneficial however if it is reaching and encouraging people who wouldn’t and couldn’t normally attend Higher Education then it is a great thing. This is not just my opinion though it is mentioned in the article that from the radio and television universities '590,941 students have graduated'.
All the way though i have been questioning and wondering about how 'academic' the studies really are, and are they 'real' qualifications. The article goes on to say though that in 1986 students had to pass a national entrance exam. Furthermore 'presenters are chosen from key universities' and textbooks have to be used in order to complete the courses. There are tutors which you can see face to face as well which are responsible for correcting work. Finally during the practical technician course they are required to practical work in factories etc for the credits are awarded.
My only reservations are that the article doesn't mention any figures of cost or comparison to real universities, so i am unsure how much cheaper it would be? However it did mention no tuition fees and only paying for entrance to exams, but once gain i do not know how much?
The downside i can see is that with it all being technology run, you are relying on it not failing and we all no technology doesn’t always run smoothly and it even mentions in the article that there was 'delayed distribution of teaching materials' and 'shortage of staff'. However overall it has increased China's ratio of students from 0.7% in 1975 to 4% in 1987 which can only be a good thing for the country and its developing industry. I just wonder how long it will last?