The Atlantic considers whether free Massive Open Online Courses can replace a college education:
Ever since MOOCs debuted, they’ve been an object of concern for many college professors. In a letter published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, the philosophy faculty of San José State University described the MOOC as a “serious compromise of quality of education.” They feared that MOOCs would come to be seen as replacements for flesh-and-blood teachers. Soon, they warned, there would be no classrooms, only technological simulacra managed by teaching assistants, with all the rewards flowing to a handful of private corporations.
2 comments:
They may, but they shouldn't unless they improve significantly.
I've taken several of these sorts of courses. I'm doing one now with my wife on the French Revolution. But on the level at which most people will engage with the material they bear the same resemblance to a good lecture class that reading a popular book bears to sitting down with the author in a lively back-and-forth.
It's possible to get more out, but that means that the student--usually unguided--has to be willing and smart enough to add the needed depth.
Still, I have enjoyed the Rev course. My wife is not a history fan, and last night when we watched an episode of British three-part The Scarlet Pimpernel aeries on Netflix, she was able to follow the story without bombarding me with back-story questions. She was actually disappointed there weren't more episodes to follow. I consider that, at least, a MOOC triumph.
Larry,
Nothing beats being in the same room with a great instructor so you can ask questions on the spot.
Book recommendation: "Paris in the Terror" by Stanley Loomis. It's excellent.
Michael
Post a Comment