That dream was joined this week by a dozen vaunted academic institutions including Duke University, the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Switzerland and the University of Edinburgh in Scotland.
The schools will add online versions of classes to Coursera.org, a website launched by Stanford University professors Koller and Ng early this year with debut offerings from Princeton, Stanford and two other US universities.
"We have a vision where students everywhere around the world, regardless of country, family circumstances or financial circle have access to top quality education whether to expand their minds or learn valuable skills," Koller said.
"Where education becomes a right, not a privilege."
I hear that universities have these things called libraries, which contain these things called books, and that just anyone can go and read these books and learn lots from doing this, often completely for free, especially at public universities. I also hear that this has been going on for some time now.
ReplyDeleteIn "Steal This Book," Abbie Hoffmann told how to get free college: just show up in the classes at your local university. He pointed out that in large classes, you might never be noticed.
Now you know my sentiments toward online instruction. How exactly is online instruction different from teaching machines or programmed instruction, except that it's done more expensively, with a computer? I can't wait until it becomes obvious that online instruction is not the magic bullet that so many politicians want and ed-school denizens claim. It'll be even better than disproving string theory.
As far as I can tell, coursera classes are the equivalent of eavesdropping on a large lecture class (with the opportunity to get a copy of the syllabus and do the reading if you choose), then going out for coffee with some other eavesdroppers and discussing the material, with maybe even the prospect that the proffie (or a TA) might drop by now and then and join the discussion. You could even go by the professor's office hours, and if (s)he has time, (s)he might spend a few minutes with you (answer your email).
DeleteIt's all good stuff, and I strongly support it, but it's outreach work by universities, targeted at people who don't have access to their resources, not a substitute for their regular (expensive, genuinely interactive) program.
As I think I've mentioned before, both of my grandfathers, born in the very late 19th century, had two-year technical degrees (plus professional certifications gained through an apprenticeship and a qualifying exam). They also did a lot of reading on their own in the humanities, one of them using Harvard's 5-foot shelf of classics (which, if I'm remembering correctly, had introductions, and perhaps some notes, by professors). I'm pretty sure that used copies of the 5-foot shelf also eventually migrated around the world. That, to my mind, is what Coursera is like -- admirable, and very useful in the right (disciplined and determined) hands, but supplemental.
And yes, a good free library (or, these days, smart use of the web, perhaps with some help from curators knowledgeable about a particular subject) could serve much of the same purpose.
Oh, and Frod, to answer this:
DeleteHow exactly is online instruction different from teaching machines or programmed instruction, except that it's done more expensively, with a computer?
It's not, unless it's built on a(n extremely expensive) model where the professor (not a machine) interacts regularly with the students (and, in addition to providing feedback on existing assignments and activities, adjusts the class activities each semester, and sometimes even in the middle of the semester, based on what (s)he learns through those interactions). At this point, you can do pretty much anything online (with the exception, I think, of most lab/clinical activities) that you can do face to face, but it's generally a bit more expensive and time-consuming online. That trade-off may be worthwhile if students, teachers, and/or the school as a whole are facing other barriers (e.g. inadequate classroom and/or parking space at the times when students are actually available to learn, heavy traffic that makes commuting time a major barrier/consumer of resources), but good online education is *not* going to make college cheap, or even cheaper, because it requires as much or, usually, more labor by highly-skilled humans (teachers and tech support) than face to face education.
These free online courses provide two crucial components that reading or sitting in on lectures on the sly do not - structure and assessment.
DeleteHow about working the homework problems in the book?
DeleteIt'll eventually fizz. There was a similar fever in the 50s-60s about classes via TV, and earlier, though ham radio. Presence and access to library resources can hardly be replaced.
ReplyDeleteNot that online teaching is impossible. Some business schools have created real online classrooms, where every student can be seen by the teach in a screen, and can see the professor and everyone else in his computer. The cost is hideous, affordable only to high-level corporate drones, and normally paid by their own company. But this is not the direction Coursera is taking, it is more like the "Great courses" series: an intelligent book read aloud.
I think the issue here is not the manner of presentation -- as others have commented, various means of access to information have long existed -- but the all too common edu-fad mentality claiming that this format will revolutionize education.
ReplyDeleteNothing a student did caused me as much despair as being forced to sit through the latest "staff development" seminar where some hyper-caffeinated cheerleader tried to sell a program that would, wait for it, revolutionize education.
I have long embraced the "toolbox" method of teaching. Good teachers do not have only one "tool" in their toolbox. For example, PowerPoint and SmartBoards didn't make or break my teaching; they simply were new tools that could help or hurt depending upon how they were used.
This is simply another tool for the toolbox.
The money to be made is not in the education; it's in the credentialing. It's all well and good to say you're going to sit in on a MOC, but who's going to hire you based on that statement alone? I predict some form of credentialing, probably by an outside agency administering a standardized test in exchange for credits, is going to follow all this "free education." Those credits may not even be at the university that offered the education. I can easily see someplace like Western Governors U swooping in on this opportunity. Right now the only thing standing between students and legitimate degrees given entirely for experiences outside the confines of a structured class is accrediting agencies. Given the push for more college-educated adults, I think it's just a matter of time before that barrier is gone. It may not be a bad thing for those who are self-directed enough to absorb the information, but I don't think we all need to be signing up for unemployment just yet. The vast majority of students can't navigate material without a professor.
ReplyDeleteQuite a few of those can't navigate the material with a professor.
DeleteToday's post in Confessions of a Community College Dean has some interesting things to say about MOCCs.
ReplyDelete" the prospect that the proffie (or a TA) might drop by now and then and join the discussion."
ReplyDeleteThat'll be a cold day in hell, unless it's compensated. Sorry, I don't give away my labor for free except in situations I choose. I've taught free courses for community-run organizations and so on, but I have no interest in doing overtime so my university can profit.
Indeed. So far, the people who are volunteering to do this stuff seem to be already very well compensated (and secure in their jobs), and thus in a position to volunteer, but what one volunteers to do, and when, should still be each proffie's individual choice, with neither direct nor indirect pressure to do a bit more work, free, for the sake of the university's reputation.
DeleteMy guess is that many of those who are happy to participate actively in their own coursera classes for a semester or two are eventually going to tire of the enterprise, or at least want to go on to create new coursera courses, at which point the older ones will presumably become orphans.
Really, the fact that answering the same questions, correcting the same misconceptions, etc., etc., over and over again, semester after semester, isn't all that much fun is one of the reasons they have to pay us in the first place.
I have a longtime mentor who says the same thing about all of these alternative delivery methods - "Without full time face to face, it's all just watered down bullshit."
ReplyDeleteEven though I've done some "distance education," I tend to agree with her.
There have been self-educated types throughout history. Some of these have been dropouts who put together computers in their garages, or sons of coalminers who built rockets at Cape Coalwood, or a couple of bicycle mechanics who cobbled together the first functioning combination of motor and wing. Open-source education will benefit these, and by this, benefit society.
ReplyDeleteThe rest of society will need the piece of paper that said they showed up on time often enough and turned in enough pieces of scrawled-on paper to not fail. For this vast majority, free information is a waste.
I'm still for free information. Society is not advanced by the burger-flippers, even though we must bring them with us, or we fail. Society is advanced by the Jobs' and Hickam's and Wright's and Cochran's of the world.
Don't forget that self-taught lawyer with a reputation for honesty, Abraham Lincoln. He's often used as an ideal for American self-reliance: he just found a bunch of law books in an old barrel and started reading them, his total formal education coming to less than a year. Lincoln himself bitterly resented that he never had the opportunity to get more formal education.
DeleteWe remember the standouts, but for every Jobs, Lincoln or Wright brother, there are a multitude of Joe Schmoes, who peruse a smattering of books or online postings, randomly connect a few 'facts' and call themselves 'self taught'. The more fortunate go serenely through life in blissful ignorance of their own ignorance, and are mostly harmless. The less fortunate will make a thorough balls up of something they were sure they knew all about, with real (if less than historic) consequences for themselves and the people around them.
DeleteHi, Neat post. There's a problem together with your site in web explorer, would check this?
ReplyDeleteIE still is the marketplace leader and a huge portion of
other people will miss your great writing because of this problem.
Also visit my website :: Mahony Patrick ()