Curriculum revision places no new demands on individual professors and does not change the essential organization of the school year. Curriculum reform is insubstantial, superficial, and safe because it perpetuates rather than overthrows the most deeply rooted assumption in American higher education, namely that education consists primarily of providing young people with knowledge. Students need to know how to interrogate the world around them, discover patterns of meaning, and communicate their discoveries to others. Further, there is a discrepancy between what teachers expect of students in intellectual performance and the way they force students to spend their time in supposed preparation. Instead of superficial curriculum reform, a fundamentally different view of the learning process must be adopted. Attempts to reinvigorate the mind in higher education must emphasize not the rearranging of subject matter offerings but rather the development of the craft skills of the intellectual in each student. The author calls for elimination of the lecture approach and the existing examination system. He suggests that progress in education should be measured primarily in terms of what individuals accomplish in relation to their own needs, not in terms of how they stack up against others.