Presentation Scales In Massive Online Courses; Does Interaction?
lpress writes "Coursera has demonstrated that they can scale presentations in massive, open, online courses — they have reached over 1.3 million students in 195 countries since they were funded in April. But can they scale student interaction? As of this morning, 7,839 Coursera students had formed 1,119 communities on Meetup.com in 1,014 cities — many outside the U.S." On the whole, isn't that a positive outcome?
On the whole, isn't that a positive outcome?
I dunno; are they forums where the blind lead the deaf or are they staffed with people who are able to answer questions correctly and quickly enough that students don't learn the wrong lessons?
Is it real interaction? Class interaction is talking to the professor for authoritative answers to questions, or in the case of the massively large science classes I took (CHEM 101 and PHYS 201-ish), they had a paid TA in the lab. Unless there is a paid TA in each of the 1000+ groups, they are nothing more than study groups, and aren't class interaction. There is no "official" answer to a question. There is no "interaction" with a class authority. That's not class interaction any more than friending a classmate on Facebook makes that classroom interaction (even if they meet in person, the difference is the lack of official representation in the group).
Learn to love Alaska
So 8k students out of 1.3M have formed study groups? While that's good for those students, I'd hardly call it scaling well. That's a rate of 0.6%. Far, far lower than what you get in traditional universities.
Do students really need to resort to a third party site to meet each other? If so, that's probably part of the problem right there. It seems like integrating social networking features right into Coursera would help to tremendously increase the rate at which students interact.
On the whole, "interacting" via message boards is about as productive for education as typing with mittens on is for coding. Online courseware can provide students with reference materials and enlightening prose, the enhancement that comes with direct, rapid-fire human interaction is missing.
This is why medical, law, and engineering schools heavily promote study groups where you appear IN PERSON to interact with your classmates. The nuance of the spoken word, and the nonlinearity of conversation, adds a powerful dimension to the student's internalization of the material in ways you just cannot duplicate with words on a screen or paper.
b.g.
This isn't a positive outcome. The 1960s "tutorial" revolution in tertiary pedagogy indicated the need for small group (6 person max) discussion led by an expert. Coursera currently fails in this area worse than traditional Universities. Most traditional Universities that went through the tutorial revolution in pedagogy maintain some degree of expert led discussion. "Traditional" distance education providers also maintain an element of this function, and have generally proven that the systems required to maintain tertiary pedagogy do not scale towards reduced labour costs.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but for the most part in first world countries, if you don't have a recognised certificate as 'proof' of your knowledge, then your knowledge is worthless.
It's been fine for me. I expect that for some students it wouldn't be perfect however. I'm a guy already in the middle of my career and the video lecture format and mailing list/forum types of interaction works awesomely for me. But even given that this format is not perfect for everyone, there are a lot of really whiny voices among the legitimate complaints. For example, some have said on the first day that they are dropping the stats course because the screen was slanted. Others were annoyed that were no certificates of completion and some were upset that we didn't get credits at the school for the work.
Sorry, I profoundly disagree.
Let's separate topics into "objective" and "subjective".
The "Objective" ones are "easy" - math-engineering-parts of science. There is supposed to be "1.0001" right answers. (The "Right One" and the one in a million shot that the official answer is in fact incorrect.) So no amount of students thrashing around with no closure will help if at the end of the day the instructor-team doesn't produce the right answer. Then there's more thrashing about why 70% didn't get it right, and there is where you learn.
On the subjective stuff, yeah, it heads more into what the Prof wants to hear, but a good Prof might actually have a clue. Look at the Legal Disputes we have going on here. We desperately need an IAAL whose paid specialty (from the EFF?) is to lead the discussions because however much we joke about the topic, law is hard, and 85% of our comments are flawed. The IAAL might make an error, but it's gonna be a much narrower error than most of our 200 comments.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I'll concede I haven't heard of that, but I'll also wager that a few modern online techniques can scale things much better. An online course, assuming a "tight budget" would employ a special second professor whose sole job it was to answer the forum comments. Then the Moderator system automatically puts him at for example +5 so that his remarks show up instantly. A Prof who really knows his stuff can drill out some 15 comments an hour, so say 4 hours of work a week for the class, pretty soon 60 authoriative replies to the best questions would shape the discussion, because the students would begin re-quoting the answer farther down the thread.
In traditional University, I for example was lucky if the class ever got more than five questions combined in the entire hour because all the time was spent in the lecture. So I'd take 60 answers any day, because chances are at least a couple of them are close to the same question I had.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
These are university courses.
If there is no interaction with a professor and fellow students then these are not very good university courses.
There is actually little that is new here, one way presentation of information are centuries old, that is what books are.
Yes there are people that can learn from such presentations. However those individuals are exceptionally rare. That is why Universities evolved, because books alone were not enough.
You don't learn anything useful by having someone tell you the 'right answer' to a made-up problem.
And that *is not* what happens in real university level classes.
The point of the problems is to learn to think about the issues and build the skills needed to find answers.
And that *is* what happens in real university level classes. Sadly however that is not what happens in all university/college classes. Yet it happens far more often than when merely reading or engaging in some other one way presentation. By "real" I was not referring to a class that merely takes place on a university/college campus, some classes are good, some are not, it has a lot to do with the professor and/or TA.
Study groups are places where students can help each other build these skills. Even in face-to-face tutorials, a good TA doesn't just tell students the answers, but helps them find their own ways to the answers.
Absolutely.
Eventually a student needs to talk with and be guided by someone adept in the field. All this online stuff is okay but, I don't think you can become an adept through the online education medium. I am half way through my first Coursera course, I have just short of a million points with Kahn Academy, and I have done 14 Euler Project problems. Online is okay but you'll eventually need more. Good luck to you all. Jim
The 'presentation' part of most education be automated. I really don't see that as controversial at all.
Lab and specific question issues are another beast all together.
How can this be helped?
Maybe fewer profs/lead/expert teachers... and more TA's and other lower-paid people allowing for more one-on-one help with students.
This can even be applied to high school and other areas. You don't really need expert teachers. The material must be presented generally... and can be largely automated presentations. But you can hire more assistants to help with behavior and individual help.
How much interaction does big lecture classes at a traditional university have?? and what if differnt from on line then???
Also why pay the high traditional university price when you can get the same on line with DRV control?
"The Tutorial" is a big issue in tertiary pedagogy, and the increase in tutorial sizes from 6 to 40 or more has been a serious attack on the quality of face to face teaching and learning.
Places that don't run face to face, the traditional distance education providers, work pretty hard on this topic. They've already had forty or more years to explore the potential methods of scaling distance education. Given the deep similarities between online modes of delivery and distance modes of delivery you'd think that a quality online provider would be taking many of their cues from the distance providers. They don't seem to be, particularly in the area of direct interaction between students and experts.
Access to Q&A isn't nearly as important as access to modelling conduct and supervised engagement. Small group course delivery provided a large part of what formative assessment is meant to provide. It is possible to substitute—current University distance providers do so successfully—but not on the scales that the market model of these dodgy online providers are operating at.
'The USA is the new Soviet.'
'Nough said Dan'O. :)
Let's give this, and Only This.
I guess, I repeat what others already mentioned in other forms, but interaction without teacher is more likely to build a shared mythology based on superficial understanding of the course -- someone proposes a plausible "explanation", others will accept it and build upon it, getting farther and farther from the truth.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
So no amount of students thrashing around with no closure will help if at the end of the day the instructor-team doesn't produce the right answer.
That "thrashing around" as you put it is extremely educational. If you are the asker you have to think carefully and logically about the problem in order to phrase exactly what it is that you do not understand and for those answering they have to do the same to be able to make a rational argument as to why they are correct. This has been shown to lead to better understanding for everyone involved. In fact it is a recognised teaching technique called "peer instruction".
You do still need an instructor to provide the correct answers and explanation at the end to ensure that everyone knows what the correct answer is but it is not necessary for them to be involved all the time in the discussion. Essentially it boils down to the fact that you learn a lot more if you can reason out for yourself your own answers. The instructor acts more like training wheels to stop you falling over. Eventually, if you become a scientist, you use the same technique - thrashing it out in journals - but since nobody knows the answer there is no instructor to come it and tell you the answer at the end...which is what makes it so much more fun!
This is a developing concept with the potential of being a paradigm shift. Now days anything you want to do, there is a YouTube video. From baking bread, to understanding excel, to trying to figure out complex math concepts. Somebody charismatic among a multitude on mediocre has made a video or a tutorial.
We are comparing an old method of tuition with a new concept of online learning. There are elements of online learning that cannot duplicate face to face tuition, but the reverse is overwhelmingly on the side of online learning.
Some of the greatest innovators are self taught. Some of the most brilliant mathematicians/scientists are also self taught. How many more self taught brilliant minds will this produce ? How many more of the rest of us will not have access to knowledge there is no way we would have pursued under the "old" system ?
FTFY
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
It's called TV.
WTF is with the nonsensical titles all of a sudden?
"Presentation Scales In Massive Online Courses; Does Interaction?"
The words are English, but it makes absolutely no sense at all.
Sorry, I profoundly disagree.
Let's separate topics into "objective" and "subjective".
The "Objective" ones are "easy" - math-engineering-parts of science. There is supposed to be "1.0001" right answers. (The "Right One" and the one in a million shot that the official answer is in fact incorrect.) So no amount of students thrashing around with no closure will help if at the end of the day the instructor-team doesn't produce the right answer. Then there's more thrashing about why 70% didn't get it right, and there is where you learn.
For engineering, there often isn't a "1.001 right answer;" at least not in how you arrive at a reasonable approximation of how your design will behave in the real world. I learned a number of ways, for the same problem, to get to such an approximation; what was important that you develop an understanding of how things work and where you can safely simplify a problem. Much of it was subjective despite the rigorous and equation laden world of engineering; as one professor put it "if the design looks right it probably is right; the hard part is developing a good sense of what looks right..." Oddly enough, that was when I decided I really didn't want to be an engineer but rather learn how develop a sense of what looks right and solve problems; I really enjoyed my days working for a degree after taht and never really worked as the prototypical engineer even though my engineering education has been valuable no matter what I do.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
How much interaction does big lecture classes at a traditional university have?? and what if differnt from on line then???
Also why pay the high traditional university price when you can get the same on line with DRV control?
Depends on how much of a coward one is to be too afraid to ask questions. Sorry, but having a few degrees at a major US university, nothing beats that interaction. If you don't think it is pertinent to ask your professor to work out the integral that you aren't seeing, then you're short changing yourself. Please spare me the on-line quality vs. University quality. They are night and day. Go get a Mechanical Engineering degree and discover how important it is being immersed in your field with groups of ME students working on projects. On line crap just doesn't cut it.
But can they scale student interaction?
If you mean "scale it from its real world analogue", then no. No, they cannot, because...
If you mean "scale it from smaller online courses", then yes, because online classes essentially have no interaction, at any scale.
what about the filler classes and off major forced classes?
What about the gen edu's? ones
Some of them are the big lecture classes that can be done on line for less and it's not on-line quality vs. University quality. It's that they can be mixed to make learning better.
... and they've never actually met!
Don't be fooled by the raw numbers. Look at how many meetups they've had, and whether any of those Meetups actually occurred. My one lists 3 past meetups, but the location had never been finalized - no one actually got together and met up.
Beetle B.
I'm doing a machine learning course with them right now, and they ask you as one part of the homework to write Matlab code, and include a script that connects to their servers, and checks your code for correctness. This, plus a set of partly randomized multiple-choice questions for each lecture are a great help for me to focus on the content.
That's pretty awesome in my book, way more than any forums (well already at Uni I mostly skipped the lectures and discussion groups, and passed everything by reading the lecture notes, then doing the homework).
All this needs to match everything a real university can give me is the option for those few that can pass that sort of course with flying colors (doing the advanced homework well etc) to get a chance for a follow-up advanced course where after passing the automated code check you'd get a real human to comment on your solutions to the more interesting problems. I'd be more than happy to pay for that sort of course, too, after I'd had a chance to check out the professor and material during the free initial course. I already have a career so couldn't care less about getting a piece of paper out of it, but could always do with learning some bleeding-edge techniques.
Well, I'm taking a Stats course on Coursera right now and to prove that I've learned something, I took the mean of interaction (average number of students interacting via meetups vs. total population). I'm new at this, but I don't think that .6% is statistically significant.