Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MIT Begins Offering For-Pay MOOC In Big Data

Posted by samzenpus on from the price-of-a-good-education dept.

An anonymous reader writes "MIT announced today that it will begin offering for-profit courses on the edX platform, beginning with a course in Big Data. This is the first for-pay course offered on any of the major MOOC platforms. It is run through MIT Professional Education, the arm of MIT that provides professional education and training for science, engineering and technology professionals worldwide. MIT announced that it will be the first of a new line of professional programs called Online X Programs, to be delivered globally using the MIT and Harvard founded open-sourced online education platform, edX."

30 of 51 comments (clear)

  1. Blockbuster 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For the tidy sum of $495, you can rent their videos for 4 weeks.

    1. Re:Blockbuster 2.0 by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      For the tidy sum of $495, you can rent their videos for 4 weeks.

      How long before they end up on BitTorrent?

    2. Re:Blockbuster 2.0 by mysidia · · Score: 2

      For the tidy sum of $495, you can rent their videos for 4 weeks.

      Yeah... how generous of them 30 day access to the archived course (includes videos, discussion boards, content, and Wiki)

      Many of the free Moocs only allow you access to archived course material, like.... practically forever :)

  2. Well Then by TemperedAlchemist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have wanted to go to MIT for a long time. They made their content open and seemed quite progressive in actually caring about education.

    After all is said is done they've learned nothing from Aaron Swartz? This is a disgrace. I now want nothing to do with him.

    Education is not a business.

    1. Re:Well Then by BringsApples · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Education is a business, it's actually big business. Why do you think it's so damn expensive?

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    2. Re:Well Then by TemperedAlchemist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Prestige, mostly. I don't deny it. It's the only reason to go there, really. That and research opportunities. A degree from MIT is worth more than the same degree from my state university. I could know the exact same things, have done the exact same research, and published the exact same papers. All things being equal it still comes out that way.

      Cost has nothing to do with it (although going to school for free is a sweet deal). If I truly wish to accomplish something I'll find a way, regardless of cost.

    3. Re:Well Then by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      After all is said is done they've learned nothing from Aaron Swartz?

      I realized now that I had completely forgotten about Aaron Swartz already.

    4. Re:Well Then by TemperedAlchemist · · Score: 1

      $495 for a certificate of accomplishment?

      Come now... I'm not going to pay $500 to read a textbook and get a piece of paper that means nothing.

    5. Re:Well Then by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why do you think it's so damn expensive?

      Artificial Scarcity of Information. Over valuation of accreditation certificates: You still have final exams instead of entrance exams for jobs -- So your brightest self-learning minds are disadvantaged, and your boss is a dummy from a degree mill who doesn't know what your job actually entails.

      The dawning of your Information Age has come. Information markets are post-scarcity economics now. This is the first generation to grow up in such a society, of course there will be growing pains as your markets adjust. You had better learn this lesson now from your economic mistakes in the artificial information scarcity bogosity, because physical things will become post-scarcity as well. Market what's scarce -- labor -- not infinitely reproducible copies. This is how mechanics, builders, and the FLOSS model operate. Most human homes have information duplication devices, soon they'll have object copiers too. Same as all the other sentient species.

      You would laugh at a business plan to sell ice to Eskimos, but imagine what that would entail: Look at your copyright and patent law. You teach art with books that have blank boxes -- a URL placeholder, to leverage more artificial scarcity and forced obsolescence. You have infinite monopoly over your work before you create it, you don't need one afterward. Why are you still charging so much for that which is cheapest to (re)produce? Your professors could do so much more if they were not tied up giving the same lectures over and over, like a looped magnetic film.

      Why do you humans even watch television if you refuse to learn the messages embedded therein for you? How can any advanced race visit your planet with your world's economy in such a ridiculous state? The others have "prior art" for everything you will invent for the foreseeable future. Those among you granted access to such advancements would hinder the progress of others, not share.

      Your knowledge is so expensive because you are a pathetic primitive race -- A case study in how not to advance as an interstellar species. Quarantine is the only option.

    6. Re:Well Then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What a whiner...

      Education should be open to all!!
      Well, you can pay to take the course, which is still a fraction of what it costs to attend as any other student.
      Money is not an object, I'll go to any lengths, but I want to be associated with the exclusive name of MIT!
      Well, sign up here then, registration is open!
      Ah, fuck, who would want to do that?
      (facepalm)

      I can see why you haven't made it into MIT.

    7. Re:Well Then by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Who? :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    8. Re:Well Then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Prestige, mostly. I don't deny it. It's the only reason to go there, really.

      As someone who went to MIT as an undergrad, I don't mean any offense -- but I'm not sure you know what you're talking about if you haven't been there. I don't know what it's like these days, but I can tell you about my experience about 15 years ago.

      I came from a crappy semi-rural public high school and made it into MIT. I had no idea what I was getting into, and I just accepted the tasks that were given to me when I arrived. It was only really when I came home for summer break after freshman year and started talking to my old high-school friends that I realized how insane MIT was compared to many schools, including very well-ranked state schools.

      When comparing the curriculum to other schools, I've frequently found that we covered material at roughly 1.5x to 2.5x the "normal" pace. At other times, the pace was similar, but the expectations in terms of difficulty of problems was significantly harder.

      By the time I reached upper level undergrad courses in my engineering major, most classes had "open book, open notes, open anything you could carry into the exam with you, open just about anything" exams, because you'd come in and have an hour to solve 2 or 3 insane problems unlike anything you'd ever seen before.

      I'm not saying there aren't great students at lots of schools. And lots of schools offer opportunities for very bright students. I teach at the university level now, and I can say that I do still encounter students who could do well at MIT (even at a "lesser" school). But they are far from the norm.

      All of the curriculum differences are largely made possible because of the elite caliber of the undergraduates. It's the reason many high schools offer an "honors chemistry" class or whatever -- because if the brightest students are put together, they can actually cover a lot more material and go more in-depth.

      I'm not saying that MIT is vastly superior or anything -- but it doesn't have some qualities that make the experience there different, and it presents a kind of challenge to most undergraduates that you'd have to seek out if you were elsewhere.

      That and research opportunities.

      Grad school is a little different. I think I agree that there are more options that can give basically something equivalent to MIT in many fields for graduate school, though you're right that MIT does pull in a lot of research money.

      A degree from MIT is worth more than the same degree from my state university. I could know the exact same things, have done the exact same research, and published the exact same papers. All things being equal it still comes out that way.

      Meh. Anyone who judges stuff that way is just being stupid. Sure, if you just got out of school, I'm going to look at your degree and use it to judge you a bit -- mostly because of the differences in difficulty I referenced above. But if you're 5 years out of school, it's barely relevant to me -- I'm more interested in what you did since. After 10 years or more out of school, have your own career and your own research, I don't give a crap about where you went to school. I only care if your work is good.

    9. Re:Well Then by BringsApples · · Score: 2

      I agree. That's why I quit my job working for this ridiculous system, and started my own business.
      My business model: Make enough to pay my bills.

      I call this my "cash crop job", and don't take it very seriously. What I do take very seriously is the personal education that I give my children, which consists of my own carefully lived life experiences, (which has very little to do with today's economics), and growing my own food. Perhaps it's simply teaching my kids how to be happy. But the foremost concept that I teach my kids, and any other kids that'll listen, is that today the adults have it mostly wrong, and that just because people are older (aka adults) doesn't mean that they know how to be happy. To know the difference between having a lot of things, and securing the ability to be happy, despite what's going on outside yourself, in my opinion, is the only real education possible. And when that education is available, it's always free.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    10. Re:Well Then by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Judging by your reasoning, I'd say you graduated from... what, Yale?

      It doesn't matter that you're only paying a "fraction of what it costs to attend as any other student" -- which is also false, unless current MIT students aren't allowed to take the course. Otherwise it costs exactly the same. -- since current students get things like... well, course credit is the big one. GP was looking at the return for the cost which, honestly, I agree is a bit steep for a 1-off.

    11. Re:Well Then by TemperedAlchemist · · Score: 1

      Let me be clear on my position.

      Open courses which require a tuition to cover costs is acceptable. Professors and faculty have to be paid and so do we have to pay for the server hosting and etc.

      Open courses which are created for profit is unacceptable. This is doubly true when all you receive from the course is a piece of paper that's worthless (oh and knowledge that you learned mostly on your own from reading a book!). It's a dirty scheme.

      People who think hospitals, schools, etc. should be run like a business should be slapped silly. They're not businesses, they're basic humanitarian services. Cover costs, yes, by all means; but you have got to be kidding me if you honestly support some guy is getting a big fat check from it. Once you put some CEO at the top with a mantra of, "cut costs and increase profits", everything is going to fall to shit. Yes; ugly, terrible shit.

      That's why you see things like people being kicked off of healthcare for pre-existing conditions. Could you imagine if schools were run that way? Sorry your kid requires too much extra help, so we're kicking him out of the whole system. And even if they can't get away with that the business is going to find some other way to screw it over for quick buck.

    12. Re:Well Then by ranton · · Score: 1

      Judging by your reasoning, I'd say you graduated from... what, Yale?

      It doesn't matter that you're only paying a "fraction of what it costs to attend as any other student" -- which is also false, unless current MIT students aren't allowed to take the course. Otherwise it costs exactly the same. -- since current students get things like... well, course credit is the big one. GP was looking at the return for the cost which, honestly, I agree is a bit steep for a 1-off.

      $499 for a class that ends in a certification backed by a reputable organization is definitely not steep. Many certifications cost about that much for just the exam itself, while training material is usually in the thousands even for online classes.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  3. After I read this article... by BringsApples · · Score: 2

    ...I felt like I just got done talking to a loud, drunken aristocrat. A course on 'big data' and its growing importance in business, to anyone in the world, all for $495.00. wtf just happened?

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  4. Re:For-Pay? by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    The English is strong in this one.

    i got all excited when I first read it, I misread it as "MIT Begins Offering Fore-Play MOOC"!

  5. Before and after by namgge · · Score: 2

    So roughly speaking they're moving from a 'free' model with an enrolment of say 300,000 a pass rate of 0.1%, and cost of $100K to a fee-paying model that will have an enrolment 300 a pass rate 100% and a profit of $1M.

  6. Books by StripedCow · · Score: 1

    Any suggestions for books on Big Data?
    Especially on topics like machine learning.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  7. $500 buys a lot of Dover books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just saying you could buy a lot of Dover books on statistics, stochastic analysis, linear programming, and so on for $500 and learn a LOT about Big Data. You'd have enough money left over to get O'Reilly's Hadoop book.

    1. Re:$500 buys a lot of Dover books by ranton · · Score: 1

      Just saying you could buy a lot of Dover books on statistics, stochastic analysis, linear programming, and so on for $500 and learn a LOT about Big Data. You'd have enough money left over to get O'Reilly's Hadoop book.

      Then you can spend $1000 and have all of the books plus some more guided instruction. I learned far more from reading books than I did from either my bachelors or masters degrees, but that doesn't make them a waste of money. I still know more today because I did all three (well, the bachelors was pretty much a waste, but it allowed me to go to graduate school).

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  8. ROW MOOC vs US:twice the education, 1/3 the price by An+dochasac · · Score: 1

    US brick and mortar universities such as MIT have a captive consumer-base. They form a powerful oligopoly in a land where fewer than 50% of the citizens have passports and even fewer are aware that they are paying 2 to 3 times as much for their community college or technical institute than British students pay for Oxford medical school. While it is true that US brick and mortar universities do provide services that can't be found online. For example, the country-club gymnasiums and dormitories, sports, entertainment, party lifestyle and physical networking with the wealthy. But for those who value other university products (e.g. education), MOOC schools can work. The interesting thing with MOOC schools is that US for profit universities are on a level playing field with well-established distance learning universities in the UK, South Africa and elsewhere.

  9. Not the first by KFW · · Score: 2

    Udacity announced in November for-pay MOOC classes: http://blog.udacity.com/2013/11/udacity-innovation-is-in-our-dna.html /K

  10. But wait, there's more... by az1324 · · Score: 1

    After you finish the course, you'll be able to purchase the big data generated by THE COURSE!!

    Big data, giving snake oil a run for its money.

  11. Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

    MOOC = Massive Open Online Course

    Is it really too much to ask for people to define their acronyms? I'm a little tired of having to Google an acronym in every story. This one *only* appears in the summary.

    --
    The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    1. Re:Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) by neurovish · · Score: 2

      MOOC = Massive Open Online Course

      Is it really too much to ask for people to define their acronyms? I'm a little tired of having to Google an acronym in every story. This one *only* appears in the summary.

      I'm sure an editor will be on that ASAP (As Soon As Possible).

  12. Coursera as well by tommeke100 · · Score: 1

    Coursera has been offering this for some months as well. For about 50$ per course they offer you a "validated certificate", meaning they check if it's really you taking the course. I don't know if this can be used as credit for at certain colleges. I know some courses actually had the college students taking the online course as well. https://www.coursera.org/signature/

  13. Correction: thousands of courses by Immerial · · Score: 1

    MIT OpenCourseWare is up to around 2200 courses... let alone the 20+ they've done through MITx. MIT has spent tens of millions of dollars giving free education material to the world.

    Disclaimer: I work for MIT OpenCourseWare and still get annoyed that we have a ton of people who don't know about us cranking away at free course materials for the world for more than a decade! (MIT OpenCourseWare was announced in 2001.)

  14. Information/Resources != Education by matbury · · Score: 1

    We've had (free) public libraries for decades and very useful they've been. However, they've only ever been a substitute for education for a small minority of "autodidacts." The rest of us need teachers and organised curricula.

    What's missing from MOOCs is effective mediation: The majority of learners need guidance, support, and a sense of belonging to a community in order to learn effectively. MOOCs don't provide any of this effectively. That could partly explain the high rates of learner attrition, but AFAIK, none of the MOOCs are collecting qualitative data from case studies or measuring learning gains with pre-, post-, and delayed post-assessments. Anyone would think they didn't care about the learning outcomes ;)