I signed-up for the crypto class next semester. I'm looking forward to it. I code a bit of crypto and am interested to see what they'll cover. On a separate note, I don't think the full-time Standford students need to be concerned about the free Internet classes. Guys like me (state A&M college degrees) who take online Standford classes won't devalue his Standford degree one bit. Two totally different things as he is enrolled as a degree-seeking Standford student and I (and those like me) are not.
Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
91–100 of 107 posts
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#92There are two goals with learning ML: - Applying known ML algorithms to a real world task - Coming up with new ML algorithms and research It turns out (ahem) that the first goal, applying ML, is not only much, much higher in demand than the second goal, but is also much, much easier to teach than the content required to pursue the second. This dichotomy is the reason the split between CS229a and CS229 in both content…
The secret is: This Is The Internet. There's no reason a class can't have the same material presented two (or three or twelve) different ways for multiple audiences. There's no reason a class needs a "start date" and an "end date." We can grow classes to be about communities, not authorities. None of us are as smart as all of us. We shouldn't copy the Boring Ole' Lecture Format (and especially not "camera up my nose…
You're right, and I hope we'll see more innovation in this area, but I don't think it's reasonable (or a good idea) to expect Stanford professors to try to attack two very hard problems at once at this stage:
- Scale traditional educational techniques (lectures, homeworks, schedule) to a class size of 100,000 people
- Come up with an altogether new way to teach and assess students by taking advantage of the web
It's probably a good idea to figure out the bugs in solving the first problem before tackling the second.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree totally. The first two sins of education are making simple things complicated and making complicated things simple. Ng was clear, and that is commendable. My concern was not based on how difficult he made the material he presented seem . I was concerned that he did not present more difficult material. Vocabulary is very important. But in addition to knowing the meanings of words, its important to know why con…
Vocabulary is very important. But in addition to knowing the meanings of words, its important to know why concepts are carved up the way they are. Why divide the world into supervised and unsupervised --- what does carving at that joint win us? I'm not sure that I get you. Why we have both supervised and unsupervised algorithms was made pretty clear to me in the class. And just what more difficult material would you…
I agree with you that doing proofs isn't the most important thing --- though I might not be so adamant about avoiding it.
My own experience with ML is so narrow, it's hard for me to say what else should have made an appearance --- I made up the example that you rightly called me on. I worked with a research group on a reinforcement-learning system with a silly name, and we used a whole messy pile of linear algebra. I guess I shouldn't have expected to recieve the same kind of grounding in all the ML topics.
I agree that projects would make for a huge improvement. They are difficult, but no more difficult than they need to be, and practical. You're right, grading 20,000 of them would be madness. And maybe that's OK --- what's wrong with assigning work that won't be graded?
(OK, there are lots of things wring with it, starting with motivating the student to do the work, and ending with the lack of quality feedback. But even suggesting projects for self-directed students might be enough to get a blog-ecosystem going.
I don't know much about pedagogy --- I'll talk to some people who do, and maybe they'll dope-slap me into agreeing with you totally.)
But I don't think we disagree particularly -- math should only appear when necessary to understanding. Easy things shouldn't be made difficult just for the sake of some kind of scholastic masochism. But difficult things should be attacked with vigor, and not nerfed for the sake of the audience.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#94There are two goals with learning ML: - Applying known ML algorithms to a real world task - Coming up with new ML algorithms and research It turns out (ahem) that the first goal, applying ML, is not only much, much higher in demand than the second goal, but is also much, much easier to teach than the content required to pursue the second. This dichotomy is the reason the split between CS229a and CS229 in both content…
I'm sorry if I made it confusing, but it really isn't about whether I signed up for 229 or 229a, the point is most of my classes for the coming term are now under this new online format and it would be shame to see them lower their standards to fit the public.
I agree, but would prefer to keep the standards high for the public rather than see the courses separated. I enjoyed the first few ml-class lessons, but I quickly became bored with the difficulty level.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#95There are two goals with learning ML: - Applying known ML algorithms to a real world task - Coming up with new ML algorithms and research It turns out (ahem) that the first goal, applying ML, is not only much, much higher in demand than the second goal, but is also much, much easier to teach than the content required to pursue the second. This dichotomy is the reason the split between CS229a and CS229 in both content…
The secret is: This Is The Internet. There's no reason a class can't have the same material presented two (or three or twelve) different ways for multiple audiences. There's no reason a class needs a "start date" and an "end date." We can grow classes to be about communities, not authorities. None of us are as smart as all of us. We shouldn't copy the Boring Ole' Lecture Format (and especially not "camera up my nose…
Except Nikola Tesla. All of us are still not as smart as Nikola Tesla
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vocabulary is very important. But in addition to knowing the meanings of words, its important to know why concepts are carved up the way they are. Why divide the world into supervised and unsupervised --- what does carving at that joint win us? I'm not sure that I get you. Why we have both supervised and unsupervised algorithms was made pretty clear to me in the class. And just what more difficult material would you…
I agree with you that doing proofs isn't the most important thing --- though I might not be so adamant about avoiding it. My own experience with ML is so narrow, it's hard for me to say what else should have made an appearance --- I made up the example that you rightly called me on. I worked with a research group on a reinforcement-learning system with a silly name, and we used a whole messy pile of linear algebra. I…
Now that I think about it, I do think that I heard somewhere that the free AI class has a final project. IIRC, it's a "challenge" that is the same for every student, and the solutions are ranked by how well they solve the problem according to some metric that can be measured automatically. Kind of like how Netflix set up a challenge like that with a million dollar prize, only in the AI class there was no cash prize. (I hear that they did send out requests for job interviews, though, as rewards.) This actually sounds like a great idea to me. Topcoder for AI. I'm sure something similar could be devised for the Machine Learning class. Now that I think about it, I'd actually be pretty surprised if they don't do something like this for future versions of the class.
I've heard some people complain that the programming assignments in the Machine Learning class were too easy. A specific complaint is that they provided all the equations and explication you needed right in the homework statement rather than having to remember it from the lectures. Personally, I find this approach to be the best way to learn. My favorite approach to learning has always been "workbook" based, where the lessons and problems to solve are in self-contained lessons. Give me material like that and I can learn anything. There are entire classes at MIT that I did extremely well in because they were workbook based. And I took Organic Chemistry and got an A+ in the first half of the class because it was workbook based. They thought I was a genius. Then the second half of the class used the more traditional approach of reading 100 pages a week of terribly boring and dense textbook. I got a D- in that half. Fortunately, it averaged to a C and I passed the class, but if the entire class had been workbook based, maybe I'd be doing something great with Computational Chemistry at the moment.
Back to the actual ML class, I've only completed the first few programming exercises as of yet, as I was also taking the database class, which actually turned out to be a lot of work. I've heard that in the ML class, the programming exercises become progressively spoon-fed, and ultimately not much of a challenge. That's not good, if true. While I do think that all the information you need should be at hand, you should still be given challenges that make you think. All the thinking should not be done for you.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#97There are two goals with learning ML: - Applying known ML algorithms to a real world task - Coming up with new ML algorithms and research It turns out (ahem) that the first goal, applying ML, is not only much, much higher in demand than the second goal, but is also much, much easier to teach than the content required to pursue the second. This dichotomy is the reason the split between CS229a and CS229 in both content…
The secret is: This Is The Internet. There's no reason a class can't have the same material presented two (or three or twelve) different ways for multiple audiences. There's no reason a class needs a "start date" and an "end date." We can grow classes to be about communities, not authorities. None of us are as smart as all of us. We shouldn't copy the Boring Ole' Lecture Format (and especially not "camera up my nose…
I disagree. The start/end date concept facilitates working together with others in a study group setting. Everyone is at the same part of the class, and you can benefit from learning together. Finding a real-world study group for material with no start/end date is significantly more difficult. One of the best ways to learn is to work through material with others in a group.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally agree. I felt a number of the Master's level CS classes were more like hazings than classes. It was like some professors were most interested in making their particular field of interest seem insanely difficult at the expense of students comprehending the material. Or alternately, some profs were primarily concerned with creating material difficult that most of the students would falter, and it would become…
I just don't want my degree devalued by people who aren't as astute as yourself when it comes to the gap between the online courses and those taken by Stanford students. I can certainly understand this worry, but I don't think you really have to worry too much about this. Those who matter will always know the true value of a Stanford education. It's not quite as good as an MIT education ;) but it's right up there. Wh…
The classes were presented as being the same as Stanford classes, and in the AI class one of the professors claimed to be surprised that the online students were doing better than the Stanford students. As if the comparison was valid based on the difficulty of the material.
You can't make those sorts of claims and at the same time try to protect the reputation of the institution by saying that the online class is not as rigorous as the "real" Stanford class.
There's some actual danger in devaluing Stanford's rep here.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#99There are two goals with learning ML: - Applying known ML algorithms to a real world task - Coming up with new ML algorithms and research It turns out (ahem) that the first goal, applying ML, is not only much, much higher in demand than the second goal, but is also much, much easier to teach than the content required to pursue the second. This dichotomy is the reason the split between CS229a and CS229 in both content…
I disagree. This class was very easy compared to other courses in the department. There's no problem with the class not having a theoretical focus. However I do think that it is bad to have assignments/quizzes that require no critical thinking and programming assignments that can be done in 30-40 minutes. There is a lot that can be taught in the area of applied machine learning.. I have to disagree that applied machine learning is inherently an "easy" topic.
I think this course would be great for what it does if they made the programming projects a bit harder and maybe labeled it an intro level course (CS129?). I totally agree with the posters sentiments -- I'd much rather have a harder class where you interact with other students to learn more complex material.
Re: Stanford Free Classes – A review from a Stanford Student
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
The secret is: This Is The Internet. There's no reason a class can't have the same material presented two (or three or twelve) different ways for multiple audiences. There's no reason a class needs a "start date" and an "end date." We can grow classes to be about communities, not authorities. None of us are as smart as all of us. We shouldn't copy the Boring Ole' Lecture Format (and especially not "camera up my nose…
I disagree. The start/end date concept facilitates working together with others in a study group setting. Everyone is at the same part of the class, and you can benefit from learning together. Finding a real-world study group for material with no start/end date is significantly more difficult. One of the best ways to learn is to work through material with others in a group.
If the lectures were coupled with wiki-style video annotation, over time people could curate Q&A. This would be fantastic study material and it would be embedded at the most relevant moments of the lecture. It would get better with each new question and would be available to everyone forever.
So - people still learn together, just not necessarily concurrently.