Slashdot Mirror


The MOOC Revolution That Wasn't

An anonymous reader writes: Dan Friedman at TechCrunch is ready to call Massive Open Online Courses a failure. Originally hailed as a revolution in learning, MOOCs have seen disappointing course completion numbers. Coursera and Udacity, two of the most prominent online learning hubs, have seen about 8 million enrollments in the past few years. Unfortunately, half of those students didn't even watch a single lecture, and only a few hundred thousand completed the course they signed up for.

Friedman says, "[N]ew technologies enable methods of "learn by doing" that just weren't possible before we could deliver immersive experiences to people's laptops and phones. In the 1960's, Jerome Bruner expanded an educational theory known as constructivism with the idea that students should learn through inquiry under the guidance of a teacher to grasp complex ideas intuitively. That process of trial, failure, and then being shown the correct path has been proven to drive student motivation and retention of learning. What we don't yet know is if that process of trial and failure can become 10x more engaging when delivered through a new medium such as Minecraft or Oculus. ... These new immersive worlds promise to hold the attention of students in ways textbooks never could."

11 of 182 comments (clear)

  1. Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:

    Having the full attention of an instructor accelerates an individual’s learning by focusing them on the right problems at the right times, and having a real relationship with one person provides students with accountability. At Thinkful, we see a spike in learning the day before students have sessions with their mentors. Students want to achieve more because of their relationship, and that motivation translates to more efficient learning. We’re now working to apply that same social pressure throughout the week to bring up overall learning time further.

    In other words, our competitors in the online space have been doing it wrong. But we've come up with something so New and Improved, we don't call it MOOC. Whether you're an angel investor or just want to learn some new stuff, you owe it to yourself to check us out today.

    1. Re:Slashvertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly. This poorly-written "article" was written by none other than the founder of Thinkful, an online school/startup funded by "institutional investors" Peter Thiel's FF Angel, RRE Ventures, and Quotidian Ventures.

      John Oliver has more on the blessed industry of for-profit schools.

  2. Good intentions vs free time by olsmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have signed up for 3 of these from Coursera. I've completed two and dumped one. They do involve a fair amount to time to get through, depending on how familiar you are with the subject matter to start with. I'm guessing most of the people who do this are people who sometimes think about going back to college but aren't quite willing to dump an existing career that pays the bills but perhaps leaves them not completely satisfied. I guess the question I would have is how important is it to these places that people finish their courses? Given that the price right now is $0, maybe they could charge a nominal free (like $20) to sign up, refundable if the course is completed.

    1. Re: Good intentions vs free time by ranton · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have signed up for dozens of Coursera classes, but have not taken the complete course even once. The fact that they are free allows me to sign up for a class without even thinking if I have the time to watch a single video. If I watch a single video, and learn a single fact, then it was probably worth it to me. And if 100,000 people sign up and only half watch a single video and only half of them getting anything useful from the video, that was probably worth the time for a professor to create the class.

      I have learned to write a parser for a personal SQL engine optimization project. I have learned a great deal of machine learning from a few different classes that I have used in my profession. I have learned interesting material about Economics, Sociology, etc. I could have learned all of this from books, but while I am an avid reader I still feel those lectures helped me learn quicker and probably even gave a more complete level of understanding.

      That is worth something to me, and I hope that the professors would feel that it was worth their effort to teach people like me even though I never completed their courses. I hope that as this catches on there will be a big enough market for these professors to get paid well for their effort. I would pay $100 to even $500 for some of these classes, even if I never complete them or get a certificate.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  3. What did they expect? by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When it's free, and there's no penalty for failing to participate, and it makes the news as a fad, then this is the expected result, not some outlier.

    If anything they should be happy that a few hundred-thousand of the eight million actually completed it; assuming they're around 5% completion that's pretty good for something that there was no obligation to participate in, that required a fairly large amount of time committed that might not have been considered in advance, etc.

    It's like an extreme version of the affluenza-type kid that's had everything handed to him going off to college because it's automatic; he does poorly and skips a lot because he has no stake in what happens. His parents pay for everything and he has none of his own cost on the line.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:What did they expect? by CODiNE · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only that, they are using completion to rate success. I disagree.

      I took the massively parallel computation course online somewhere... It was great, I got a basic understanding of CUDA, compute units, transferring data, running carefully designed and constrained code on it, I learned about memory access issues and ordering data so it can be easily streamed. Etc

      To me that was extremely valuable information. I did not complete, stopped about halfway because I didn't need to learn it in depth and I don't plan to specialize in that.

      However now I know what kind of data the GPU can process, the basic workflow for doing that and approximately how much time it would take me to get up to speed and make something using that if I needed to.

      I feel the course was a success to me, but to them I'm a failure statistic. Perhaps a large percentage of their students are joining classes without the intention of completing them and they need to reevaluate where their value lies to different users.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  4. Re: hahaaa.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The same thing that happened to the 1950's and 1960's era dream of delivering education by television, so that schools would be nothing more than broadcast studios and children could learn comfortably nestled in their suburban homes. People (cue indignant dissent here) like interacting with people, and classrooms, whether university or grammar school, are inherently more suited to most people's personalities and social desires than 1960's television lectures or today's failing MOOCs. Technology can cut corners and increase efficiency ("one prof for 100K students" chant the university accountants), but it can't provide the subtle reinforcements of being in a room with people.

  5. On the other hand ... by jamesl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't Sesame Street the original, and most successful, MOOC?

    For another point of view ...

    This week, Russ Roberts chatted with former Stanford professor and Coursera co-founder Daphne Koller about the present and future of online education.
    http://www.econtalk.org/archiv...

  6. Silicon Valley Rebrands Correspondence Courses by BorisSkratchunkov · · Score: 4, Informative
    Attitudes towards correspondence courses don't change. News at 5.

    For the record, correspondence courses have been around since 1892. But somehow MOOCs are "disruptive" (have classrooms and disruption ever gone well together?). Here's a quotation from Wikipedia to add context:

    In the United States William Rainey Harper, first president of the University of Chicago, developed the concept of extended education, whereby the research university had satellite colleges of education in the wider community. In 1892 he also encouraged the concept of correspondence school courses to further promote education, an idea that was put into practice by Columbia University.[12][13] Enrollment in the largest private for-profit school based in Scranton, Pennsylvania, the International Correspondence Schools grew explosively in the 1890s. Originally founded in 1888 to provide training for immigrant coal miners aiming to become state mine inspectors or foremen, it enrolled 2500 new students in 1894 and matriculated 72,000 new students in 1895. By 1906 total enrollments reached 900,000. The growth was due to sending out complete textbooks instead of single lessons, and the use of 1200 aggressive in-person salesmen.[14][15] There was a stark contrast in pedagogy:

    The regular technical school or college aims to educate a man broadly; our aim, on the contrary, is to educate him only along some particular line. The college demands that a student shall have certain educational qualifications to enter it, and that all students study for approximately the same length of time, and when they have finished their courses they are supposed to be qualified to enter any one of a number of branches in some particular profession. We, on the contrary, are aiming to make our courses fit the particular needs of the student who takes them

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

  7. Re: hahaaa.... by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not just that. They would rather watch football or Game of Thrones than the current iteration of The Day the Universe Changed. It doesn't matter how much you impress random billionaires or the Ivory Tower education crowd.

    You can provide the materials, but there's no gaurantee that anyone will want to use them.

    On the other hand, The Great Courses see plenty of Torrent traffic. There's certainly demand for the stuff. Just less than for Expendables 3.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  8. Re:I WAS a regular on Coursera by Zarhan · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have this problem as well with not just online courses but several video "tutorials". It's been numerous times recently that I've googled for for "how do I ...." and the top results have been videos. I typically have some idea on how to do what I'm looking for, and I just need to verify some details. So now, Instead of quickly skimming a text (or even a slideset) to find the exact bits I'm looking for, I have to try to fast-forward a video to a point where it gets interesting.

    This is especially problematic when you are just looking at a talking head droning on, or just a video of someone doing stuff with an application. One exception has been when I wanted to cut down a tree in my back yard. There was no danger to surroundings since the house wasn't anywhere close by, so I figured I could just cut it down myself. In this case, the videos on how to use a chainsaw helped a lot, since it showed actually *stuff happening*, not just a talking head.

    If these video lectures would even have transcripts, that would increase their usability tremendously. Considering that youtube is now offering closed captions created with voice recognition, such transcripts could perhaps be generated automatically soon...