Slashdot Mirror
San Jose State Suspends Collaboration With Udacity
New submitter ulatekh writes "San Jose State University is suspending a highly touted collaboration with online provider Udacity to offer low-cost, for-credit online courses after finding that more than half of the students failed to pass the classes. 'Preliminary results from a spring pilot project found student pass rates of 20% to 44% in remedial math, college-level algebra and elementary statistics courses. In a somewhat more promising outcome, 83% of students completed the classes.'"
You can lead a student to learning, but you can't make them think.... or do the homework.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
In a somewhat more promising outcome, 83% of students completed the classes.
And 100% of students successfully signed up for the program.
Home treadmills and exercise bikes. In theory, they should be great.
I went back and finished my associates, graduating this past December. If there's one thing I observed, it's that a lot of people passed classes who really shouldn't have. Thanks to treating professors' pass rates as a measure of success, following a syllabus is all you really have to do to pass these days. If online students weren't even putting in that kind of effort, there's nothing an instructor can do for them.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Well duh, but seeing as how in many areas an 83% completion rate for a high school grade would be considered excellent, I can see why they consider it a positive sign.
The 20-44% pass rates though, are pretty bad. For any cost-benefit analysis I'd want to know:
1. How much the courses cost per course per student
2. Where the students started knowledge wise, and where they ended, on average. Were they barely falling short?
3. How much time the students had to invest in the course(another expense).
Still I like the article, it mentions that their trial, while not particularly successful, did give them many areas to investigate for improvement.
I don't read AC A human right
It means the classes were actually properly graded and mean something. If you are passing 80% of folks you are likely teaching no one anything.
In any online effort, you are going to get a ton of people who sign up, some that follow along the first few weeks, and then a significant dropoff as people move on to other things.
You cannot apply in-person success rates to online efforts.
Perhaps what they need to do is organize the classes around micro-classes no longer than two weeks. That way they wouldn't get people just dropping off the grid and actually finishing classes... you could string together a series of such classes to make a whole course. It would also let people jump in at the level they felt comfortable at and not bored.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Woah, your user numbers have all the same numbers.
From TFS
remedial math, college-level algebra and elementary statistics courses
No. It's not on topic; these are all math courses.
MS-specific courses wouldn't even be barely on topic for an IT education.
Also; if anybody with an open-source-inspired name starts first-posting with links to MS sites; check their posting history and see if they've ever posted anything non-MS-related, often you'll find they won't. Lately every first post on slashdot seems to somehow relate whatever TFA is about to some random MS link.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Is this a shill train? Can I get on too? To whom do I send my contact information to collect my pay?
Who modded this post offtopic? It's perfectly on topic, the discussion is about online learning courses.
Because there's no "-1, Shill" mod option?
It looks like ad copy, and Slashdot has a very anti-Microsoft mindset. So... you basically created the perfect storm for yourself there.
There seems to be an assumption that just because they didn't pass the class, they failed to anything at all. I'm sure the people who didn't pass knew long before the end that they weren't doing well. The fact most of them stuck with it anyways suggests they still found value in the experience.
I completed a course through Coursera from the University of Toronto. It was a good course, and I enjoyed it. Learned a lot from the course. In the final week of the course (it wasn't a free-for-all - I had to register for the course and complete it, with tests every week, during and eight week period set but the U of Toronoto), there was an exam that would make up 50 percent of my total grade. Coursera completely fell over that final week, and I wasn't able to gain access to the test until two days after the course deadline. So there went an otherwise good grade. They wouldn't allow any tests to be taken after the deadline, regardless of technical issues.
I had spent a total of around 40-45 hours with the course, 20 of those hours were video lectures that needed to be watched, the rest was study time. Even though all I would get from the course was a certificate of completion, I felt cheated and like I'd wasted a lot of my time for what was otherwise a good course.
Would I take another course? Maybe, but I know that if I were studying for transferable college credit, I would have been seriously pissed.
I wonder how much of the non-pass rate was due to issues other than actual class material in Udacity's case.
Reading between the lines, my guess is that many students thought an online course "inferior" to regular classes, and therefore okay to slack off when doing. Time, however, or time management, may be more the enemy than actual course matter.
I know a high school student who takes online school courses, and one of the ongoing problems for the parents is getting the student to understand that there are X modules to do and only Y days to do them in. Dividing X by Y means that every two or three days something must be completed and sent in for marking. If this requirement is difficult for a high school student to follow without parental hectoring, then it is entirely understandable that kids only a couple years older, who no longer have their parents to help keep them on track, are going to run into problems.
The main reason SJSU (and other schools) are looking at Udacity and its like, is to be able to spend less time and resources on remedial courses for incoming students (the California State Univ system is basically the entry-level university for the state). If Udacity could ensure that a majority of these students pass those courses, then SJSU can focus its efforts on "real" university material.
They seem to have fallen down on that deliverable, so SJSU really has no option but to toss them, and go back to teaching those remedial courses in person.
Really, this is quite an undesirable outcome for all sides (students, the university, and Udacity). Most of the students involved in remedial courses are those who have already failed at learning (enough) in a hands-on setting (school). Udacity's job was cut out for them - to do better than hands-on teaching, with students that are significantly harder to teach. So not too surprising in this context..
hairyfoot, United States
Over 80% completed the course but only 40% passed.
What do they really mean by "completed" though? I take it to mean 40% of people were too lazy to drop out of the class, or simply didn't want to do homework. Some people just want to learn without needing a yardstick they can show to other people.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The comment ID numbers are transpositions of each other, too. WTF?
They should be happy about 20%+ pass rate, after all the cost of providing the teaching vehicle asymptotically approaches zero.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Real "online-learning" education programs are the computer-age equivalent to the old correspondence courses. They are both self-discipline dependent. For the need for self-discipline fewer complete and fewer complete successfully. It is normal.
Instead of dropping the program they should offer re-take at drastic discount rate, so students may learn from their failures. This is, after all, what the Bar does with its exams, which produce lawyers -- most of them after two or three goes at mastering the material.
I taught computer programming at a public university for over a decade. In second semester programming ( C++ or Java depending on the year ) about 20% of them never attended again after they found out I actually assigned and graded homework, another 20% of the students vanish before the mid-term, and yet another 20% by the time finals roll around. I had the reputation of being tough, but students that actually took the final had a class average around 86-87%, while the other 60% vanished ( dropped or failed, I didn't keep track ).
I realize that programming is a tougher topic than "college algebra" ( don't get me started on that ), but if 60% don't succeed in a normal environment, why would greater numbers do so in an online one? The only semester I had a substantial number of online students, the vanish rates were around 75%.
You can lead a student to learning, but you can't make them think.... or do the homework.
It's not that simple... the story is that getting students into class, etc... i.e. the more traditional educational approaches, leads to more students doing the work required to learn something.
I often see people bashing about how universities are expensive, and we should all drop out and just follow online courses... i.e. Learn it on our own...
But this clearly shows that showing up for class, discussion with others and having supervisors expecting things from you is very important.
Obviously, it should come as no surprise that educating your self, versus showing up for class, that ladder options is easiest and, thus, most likely to succeed.
Luckily, I'm from a country where education is free... In fact, my living expenses were more or less covered, during the 5 years I just spend taking an MSc in CS.
40 years ago or so, I taught those same remedial classes to freshmen students at a large Midwestern land-grant 4-year university. The only reason my pass rate was higher than 44% was because I felt sorry for the kids. I was then, and am now still considered a good instructor. Most of those students had no business being in college in the first place, and I could tell that few if any would finish regardless of how I graded them. Remember, these are students who were unable to pass the basic requirements coming out of high school. Not representative of the population as a whole. I suspect the "online-edness" of these classes has very little to do with it.
.nosig
Also; if anybody with an open-source-inspired name starts first-posting with links to MS sites; check their posting history and see if they've ever posted anything non-MS-related, often you'll find they won't. Lately every first post on slashdot seems to somehow relate whatever TFA is about to some random MS link.
It's too much work to check the background of every random poster, which is exactly what they're betting on. Maybe we should have a /. version of "spot the Fed".
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I wonder; what's the probability that the class was just very poorly structured/taught?
I'm guessing it's non-zero; that might help explain the dismal pass rate.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Who modded this post offtopic? It's perfectly on topic, the discussion is about online learning courses.
Because there's no "-1, Shill" mod option?
Now, now... I used to think that myself when I was young and stupid like you are. But eventually I wondered to myself, why would MS hire out shills to infest Slashdot of all places? I mean, even they should know nobody ever comes here any more, and that Slashdot's glory days are well behind it.
Well... okay, no, maybe MS wouldn't be aware of that, but the point is, I eventually came to the conclusion it's just a troll. Not all that good of one, mind, and a bit repetitive if you ask me, but just a troll nonetheless.
Who modded this post offtopic? It's perfectly on topic, the discussion is about online learning courses.
Apparently not unless they have a course on Microsoft Algebra and Microsoft Statistics.
Ezekiel 23:20
In my experience, success of online classes really depends on the students
- It's great for very smart, driven and organized students, for them it's a way to study more effectively, and save some money on old-fashioned classes and credits.
- But, average or below-average students need personal attention and guidance. Online will NOT help them. If you don't even know what questions to ask in a forum, or have so little background that you're embarrassed to ask, then you need to sit in a classroom and not alone in front of a computer.
most of the population really gives a flying fuck about factions and percentages when most of their income goes to living expenses. I learnt to rebuild outboard and lawn mower motors in high school, like I'm going to remember how to do it 20 years later when I haven't done that since skool.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I signed up for one of these classes to get some free college credit. About a week and a half in I was notified that I would need to pass a California standardized test or provide my high school transcripts in order to receive college credit for the class. This is a little hard to do considering I am 1200 miles from California and don't have a copy of my high school transcripts from 13 years ago. I never looked at the class again. I believe I was counted as one of those students who "failed" however this was due to skill level but lost interest since I wouldn't be getting credit for it anyways.
That's disappointing news. I'm a happy user of the College Algebra course and have benefited from the curriculum and the excellent teaching of the professors. In fact, having access to courses of this calibre has made me angry as it has shown how piss-poor the state high-school education I recieved; I'm in my 5th decade and it's taken me this long to have things like rational numbers explained to me. Because no-one pointed out that they are ratios, I was left wondering what made one number rational (envisaging some Spock-like digit) over an irrational number!
I may have to speed run through the rest of the course if work permits...
I hope the course doesn't stay offline for too long.
I'm a SJSU student who took the Harvard-run edX course for basic electrical engineering, and it was also terrible. Some highlights:
- Online homework and labs were an order of magnitude more difficult than the content in the lecture. EVERYBODY collaborated on these to get the answers, and we found a website where last semester's class did the same thing. They had the same complaints of having no idea how to proceed or what to do and we literally punching in random numbers until the question was answered correctly.
- Lots of bugs with the video lectures; missing annotations, videos stopped at the wrong time, etc. Dr. Agarwal is a great lecturer, but good lectures alone didn't make this program workable.
- edX website was hard to navigate, feedback on homework and quizzes was broken. For something that cost millions of dollars it felt like they designed it in a month.
- Anand Agarwal's EE book was our literature for the class. It is literally the worst book you can imagine. Many examples are based off earlier examples so you can' t jump into anything and have to keep referring to prior problems. They are all extremely difficult compared to the problems in the lecture. The writing is a stream of consciousness style with no structure so actual content is buried. It's surprising because his lecturing style is clear, but his writing most definitely is not.
Our instructor relied heavily on the online material and did very little teaching, which sucked because the online material was so poor. It in no way was adequate or paced in a way that would facilitate learning. We ended up looking at EE material from other colleges to fill in all the gaps.
I was under the impression he was getting a check from Harvard about promoting this, because he pushed edX hard despite it being terrible for the students. All he could talk about was international recognition, fame, and money, over and over.
Quite honestly, it sounds to me like they dramatically lowered the barriers to entry. So far so good.
However you have to expect that in so doing, you're going to get a lot of people who aren't serious or aren't equipped to pass. Even people who, in the on-campus tradition, really only want to audit the course.
I'd expect pass rates to be lower. It's not necessarily a sign of failure. It might be a failure for other reasons. It might even be the case that the pass rates are simply too low to continue. Perhaps San Jose State University feels their reputation is being damaged. Perhaps they don't like the lower income stream. I just hope they didn't expect the same pass rates as in-person classes.
I sign up for Coursera courses willy nilly. Then I let my schedule at the time the course starts dictate my participation; that along with the apparent quality of the course. So my completion/pass rate is abysmal. Most of the courses I withdraw from look awesome but through no fault of the course it is bye bye for me. Then there is the annoying situation where two awesome but time consuming courses start at the same time. So again through no fault of the course designers it is bye bye.
Now if I had paid good money and was going to attend a bricks and mortar school course with a very fixed schedule I would make sure to schedule around that.
So my guess is that this school was spooked by numbers that didn't match up with their existing medium of bums in seats. I also wonder if there are "metrics" that would then make this online course look like a complete dud. I could see a university looking at completion and withdrawal numbers to compare one professor to another. I suspect that the crappy professors just stand out statistically when compared to other professors. So this course may have statistically looked like a professor who would pee on the front row and throw feces at the student out of splashing distance all the while screaming that they can all pick up their F's at the end of class.
Why they wouldn't look at this as an experiment and let it ride for a while? Basically try it, tweak it, try it, tweak it.
The other thing that probably killed this course was how much it freaked out the non-researching teaching-only professors.
My experience with university is that many of the courses are glorified highschool courses with glorified highschool teachers. But then hidden here and there are researchers on the prowl for students who have a future at the graduate levels. More online courses will make the distinction that much clearer when the glorified highschool teachers are basically demoted to online TAs while the real researchers are given the recognition that they are something different; mentors and researchers.
I was amused when a medical school professor made a gushing presentation about MOOCs. Then a U of Phoenix professor from the audience, one of those for-profit school, said we've known about issues X,Y,Z for a LONG time. And this is how we solved them. You may have gripes about the business model of for-profit schools. But many of these MOOC startups. But they are arrogantly re-inventing the wheel.
The good news is however, when done correcting online/MOOCs can been useful.
The primary touted benefit of online classes are increased access to education. Why would anyone think that the rate of passing grades would be comparable? Your selection bias comes from a sample primed with the requirement of plugging in an email address to a form, vs a traditional environment requiring the investment of moving to the campus, high tuition costs, and full-time attendance.
The important thing is that as the unskilled workforce continues to be displaced by technology, they have access to the knowledge required to keep their heads above water. Specifically, without indebting themselves in to permanent indentured servitude.
The alternative is continued high unemployment and economic stagnation until the cost of basic commodities have inspired an Egypt style revolution, an authoritarian dystopia, or some combination thereof.