Can’t vouch for all the statistics, but if they’re accurate, they represent some things to consider. I like the point about how we’re preparing students today for jobs they will eventually get but that don’t yet exist. However, the point

The amount of technical information is doubling every two years …

For students starting a 4 year technical degree this means that … half of what they learn in their first year of study will be outdated by their third year of study

is wrong.

First of all, it makes the mistake of equating technical study with simply learning facts, and that’s not accurate. Second, it implies that new information makes old information obsolete. While that may be true in some cases — technology often makes old technology obsolete — it doesn’t really happen that way. Sometimes new information is really new information, i.e. something we didn’t know before, and not “just” a better way of doing something. Relativity, quantum mechanics — these represented completely new areas of physics, but did not make the kinematics equations of a macroscopic object obsolete. Science doesn’t really devour itself that way; more often it expands. Third, it implies that students learn cutting-edge material in their first year, and that just isn’t widely the case, if at all. You start with the basics, and that never becomes outdated unless it was wrong to begin with. The cutting-edge material is more likely learned in advanced study, and at the end.

h/t to the Mom