|
0 members (),
241
guests, and
17
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
I doubt that many of our children will forego residential college for online courses, but the question may be which courses are best taken online and which in person. Large introductory classes where you don't interact with the professor anyway may be the ones you take through online classes before college. Online courses may free students to follow their intellectual interests in college, knowing that they can take "practical" courses later or concurrently. For example, Harvard Business School has created HBX CORe, an 11-week online course on the basics of business. It grew out of a pre-MBA curriculum they had for MBA students who had not majored in business. The impending surge for the University of EverywhereBy George Leef Pope Center March 25, 2015 ...
No—it’s real and the U.S. (make that the world) is on the brink of the greatest educational change since Gutenberg invented printing. That is the argument Kevin Carey presents in his new book The End of College. Rapid improvements in information technology are already giving students far better learning opportunities than they’d get in the vast majority of “real” courses, and at almost no cost.
Carey calls this fast-emerging educational landscape the University of Everywhere. Once people discover that the high cost college degree—which doesn’t necessarily betoken any level of knowledge or skill—is no longer obligatory, many colleges will find their enrollments plunging. Those that survive will offer solid education at reasonable cost. Higher education as we’ve known it, organized mainly for the benefit of the purveyors of education, will give way to new modes of teaching and assessment based on the needs of learners.
Carey sums up the weakness of the typical American college this way, “Students are left to the whims of professors who haven’t been trained to teach and aren’t accountable for helping students learn….Colleges give 19-year-olds too many reasons to have fun and not enough reasons to study consistently and thoughtfully.”
Quite so, but why does Carey believe that online courses are such a great improvement? Because he took one. Not just any course, but MIT’s introductory biology course, The Secret of Life, taught by Professor Eric Lander, who can put at the head of his list of accomplishments having led the Human Genome Project. To take this course, all Carey had to do was to sign-up online, then start watching the videos. (He could also read Professor Lander’s text, which he largely did.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,245 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,245 Likes: 1 |
Interesting article, thanks for sharing.
While I'm glad to see the diversity of learning experiences being offered, I'd not want to see all education converted to an online format.
I understand that "hybrid" or "blended" courses also exist, combining online independent work with in-person meetings, scheduled on a less frequent basis than traditional in-person courses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 471
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 471 |
I think online courses are worthwhile for exploring subjects, dabbling with higher education, or a particular segment of the population. I actually think many students would be better off not going away to college immediately after high school but spending time really deciding what their interests are. So I personally think MOOCs are a good way to experiment with interests and not go into debt.
I think Carey's points about the weaknesses of the typical American college experience are valid. Too many colleges are spending money on everything but what goes on in a classroom or with instruction. Instead the money is being spent on dorms, recreation departments, landscaping, etc. And far too many 19-year-olds attend college because everyone else is doing so or for social reasons rather than for academic reasons. Why so many parents are willing to fork over oodles of money or let their children accumulate so much debt without really any concrete goals or objectives in mind in attending college is beyond me.
The education sector is currently in the midst of a technological revolution. One only has to subscribe to EdSurge (an education technology site) to see the amount of changes and the amount of money involved. More and more is going online and that's for all segments of education (elementary, high school, and higher education).
Also - if you look at some of the stats with MOOCs, graduates, career changers, and retirees comprise a significant segment of the population taking them. You've got to be somewhat motivated to follow through and finish a MOOC too, which eliminates some.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,498
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,498 |
Learning happens best when students receive individual feedback from expert teachers.
It has already long been the case that different learning environments offer this feedback appropriately or inappropriately, well or poorly or not at all.
The grave concern now, evident across the academic world, is that "cost-cutting" measures" (or: shifting resources away from instruction and toward administrative bloat) will once again make this feedback available only to the elite, leaving everyone else to struggle under circumstances that do not provide appropriate learning experiences.
The problems with online learning and MOOCs are well known: they are typically suited for highly motivated learners who already have excellent skills in assessing information and monitoring their own learning, but poorly suited for everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,453
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,453 |
The problems with online learning and MOOCs are well known: they are typically suited for highly motivated learners who already have excellent skills in assessing information and monitoring their own learning, but poorly suited for everyone else. The irony being that these ought be the only people attending college in the first place.
Become what you are
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 269
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 269 |
Not sure I agree, madeinuk. Highly motivated, yes, but few enter college with fully developed skills in assessing information or monitoring their own learning. These are usually learned in college, even by the best students.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,498
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,498 |
Not sure I agree, madeinuk. Highly motivated, yes, but few enter college with fully developed skills in assessing information or monitoring their own learning. These are usually learned in college, even by the best students. Agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
The point is one well-made, however, that the online-only, massive enrollment MOOC style offerings are least suitable (by far) for those that they are most likely to be enrolling, given how things are going in higher ed.
There have been plenty of studies about that. The bottom line is that the students who have the worst preparation are least likely to benefit from online coursework.
I also agree wholeheartedly with DeeDee and Ljoy-- and really, this has become much more pointedly so, in my estimation. Secondary education does very little to instill those skills in most students. DD has noted that her skill set there is much more highly developed (but then again-- we have encouraged-- nay, INSISTED-- upon that ) than that of many of her freshman peers.
They all struggle that first year, and some of them into the second one, too. IME, I mean.
Like cdfox, though, I also agree with Carey's assessment of the structural problems that are driving students to the lower cost (and probably lower quality, realistically) offerings in MOOC's and other online platforms that are even less finely crafted.
Using MOOC's to explore career and educational interests, though-- now that is an excellent use of those resources.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 149
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 149 |
The problems with online learning and MOOCs are well known: they are typically suited for highly motivated learners who already have excellent skills in assessing information and monitoring their own learning, but poorly suited for everyone else. The irony being that these ought be the only people attending college in the first place. I thought college was where you were supposed to go party away from mom and dad??? No? No really, I really enjoy taking Stanford Online courses when I can although it has been a while since my last class. Being too busy to really take college courses anymore, these free online courses are a fun way to learn. I have always been an autodidact, and online learning is perfect for me. I wish I had had these when I was younger.
Last edited by it_is_2day; 03/28/15 10:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 471
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 471 |
Yes, if you're an autodidact, then MOOCs may be ideal. I couldn't agree more. Another point - Already, MOOCs are being increasingly used as a recruitment tool to attract those highly motivated students (the diamond in the rough so to speak), many of them international students. They're partly aimed at finding the next Einstein. Think what you like about MOOCs, but MIT and other universities are using them to find those in far-flung places of the globe ( http://www.slate.com/articles/techn...n_edx_mooc_then_gave_lessons_to_mit.html). We've got a global educational arms race and MOOCs are just a part of it. It no longer matters if you're can't physically attend MIT because you can learn virtually with MOOCs in Mongolia, Nepal, China, India, Brazil or anywhere else. HG/PG population is not restricted to the US.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,453
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,453 |
I will agree with that, CDFox.
The MOOCS are not a substitute for IRL university ( I read about that guy from Mongolia and posted here about him a while ago) but they are a very fine resource. Further, they have spread the reach of knowledge out. The WWW really has revolutionized the potential for education. Just laying in bed at 3am on my ipad I can access information that even 25 years ago I would have had to go to a university research library to get. MOOCS are here to stay.
To the OP"s point they might as well be done in place of the large intake introductory classes where there is no meaningful interaction with a lecturer/professor AND ideally could be taken ahead of actual attendance.
I can see them useful to for kids (and nominal adults like myself) who are dabblers, tinkerers and delvers into knowledge. For a kid that 'thinks' a subject is interesting this approach allows them try things out before committing, too. This more of an issue outside the US where late adolescents are encouraged to specialise from undergraduate studies onwards.
Become what you are
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
Non-residential higher education and short non-degree programs would get a big boost if students could use Federal financial aid to pay for them. Some legislators are thinking about this. There is the risk that Federal money attracts unscrupulous providers and encourages schools to raise prices. What about Federal and state scholarships for online courses for students who can show that they have exhausted the offerings at their high school? Emerging Path to Federal AidInside Higher Education April 9, 2015 By Paul Fain A scenario in which a student can use a Pell Grant to help pay for a bundle of edX courses no longer seems so far-fetched.
Political support is building for a system to encourage and oversee higher education upstarts that don't look or act like colleges, such as online course providers and coding boot camps. And these emerging players soon may have a pathway to accreditation and even federal financial aid eligibility, albeit in limited or experimental form.
There are many differences among this group, which includes Udacity, General Assembly, StraighterLine and other noninstitutional providers. But none of these companies offers degrees or operates within the heavily regulated confines of traditional colleges.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 121
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 121 |
I am a professor at a fairly large college campus at a state school, so I have watched these educational changes happen up close. Honestly, I loved my college experience. Having meaningful discussions with other like minded students are some of my fondest memories. However, school has moved to a business model as opposed to a strong liberal arts model that is focused on helping an individual to become more educated. While this business model better serves the masses, online education being a part of it, it takes away what is important and meaningful about the college experience. The truth is that about 60% percent of the students at college really don't belong here and it has watered down the entire experience.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
Thank you so much for saying that, Sallymom.
I'd go even further and state that with that additional 60% on the campus, "education" in lower-division coursework has often been reduced to buzzword bingo and busy-work that those 60% can manage...
and with workflow that the erstwhile faculty in charge of monsters like introductory writing or comm courses can also manage... (meaning scantron exams, etc.)
and the result is quite predictable for the kids on this board. We've seen some of this first hand. It's been maddening to have a kid who can learn at a (true) university level, but who is trapped in coursework that expects scarf-and-barf feats of rote memorization instead of critical thinking and deep understanding.
Someone up-thread noted that the MOOC/online experience could be used in introductory coursework. I know of several campuses where this is being done already-- well, sort of, anyway.
The gist of it is that students enrolled in a large intro course at an institution (let's call it UCLA for argument) which has historically had a huge failure rate in that course [i]has now created a "flipped" system where students use the MOOC as a sort of preparatory/review feature PRIOR to attending their first (large) lecture in that course.
It's still pretty experimental, but results have been somewhat promising-- students who do complete the MOOC tend to not fail the course, so that part works. At least, maybe it does. Maybe it's that the MOOC is helping, and then again, maybe it's that the students who are self-motivated enough to complete the MOOC are those more likely to succeed in the course to begin with, and this just helps them out some.
Hm.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 314
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 314 |
University of Florida apparently just admitted 3000 freshmen to the Uni but into an online course only for the first year. Interesting points, according to the article, the students didn't apply for that and were not aware it was online only.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 266
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 266 |
I thought of this thread when I came across this NPR piece about the slower than expected growth of MOOCs. Interesting study observations were that a large segment of users are existing teachers (particularly doing continuing ed -- those already considered well-educated), and students from other countries than the U.S., and that growth and acceptance seems to be limited by assessment and assessment security. New Research Shows Free Online Courses Didn't Grow As Expected(Actual study link in text of link above) HarvardX and MITx: Two Years of Open Online Courses (Study)(*Edited to fix html)
Last edited by longcut; 04/13/15 06:11 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
Large introductory classes where you don't interact with the professor anyway may be the ones you take through online classes before college. Soon you may be able to through Arizona State: MOOCs for (a Year's) CreditInside Higher Education April 22, 2015 By Carl Straumsheim Arizona State University, in partnership with edX, this fall will begin to offer credit-bearing massive open online courses at a fraction of the cost of either in-person or traditional online education.
ASU’s faculty members will create about a dozen general-education MOOCs, the first of which -- an introductory astronomy course -- will launch this August. Anyone can register for and take the MOOCs for free, but those who pay a $45 fee to verify their identity can at the end of each course decide if they want to pay the university a separate, larger fee to earn academic credit for their work.
By fall 2016, ASU anticipates it will offer enough MOOCs so that students can complete their entire freshman year online through what edX and the university are calling the Global Freshman Academy.
After completing the courses, students can receive a transcript from ASU showing that they have earned enough credits at the university to transfer to a different program or institution as sophomores. Since the university stresses the MOOCs are just a new form of delivering courses it already offers, the transcripts won’t specify which type of course -- in-person, online or massive online -- students enrolled in to earn the credit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 471
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 471 |
I received a message on Global Freshman Academy today - that's the edX and ASU partnership - https://www.edx.org/gfaPersonally, I am giving it serious thought for my ds. It's going to be a snip compared to the tuition and fees for a private school someone suggested. We're homeschooling anyway and it looks better, and cheaper, every day!
|
|
|
|
|
