Live data from Hacker News

The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

wired.com

11–20 of 32 posts

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#11

I think this is great and having such high quality level instructors is very good. However, I'd caution the typical view nowadays, especially around here, that this signals the end of traditional college and that we should just throw it out.

Thrun seems to be getting into this mode as well with this line: "He’s thinking big now. He imagines that in 10 years, job applicants will tout their Udacity degrees. In 50 years, he says, there will be only 10 institutions in the world delivering higher education and Udacity has a shot at being one of them. Thrun just has to plot the right course."

Why is it that people (even apparently faculty like Thrun) seem to forget that universities deliver more than just undergraduate education? "Delivering higher education" also means research labs and centers for scholars, graduate education, professional education, executive education, etc. While undergraduate education may be ripe for disruption, there is a serious leap needed to go from there to the complete disappearance of thousands of institutions.

Just look at the numbers: dederal research grants and endowments will sustain at least several hundred universities for the long-term, and other universities that are currently teaching-focused will move more of their efforts to research as students take online classes and stop being paid customers.

The institutions that should be worried are technical colleges (depending on major), community colleges and perhaps state college systems. They are the most likely to be disrupted, particularly if Udacity could offer a more comprehensive curriculum. But Stanford? Or even schools like the University of Florida or UC-Santa Barbara? They have plenty of other income sources, and still have a lot of life in them.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#12
post #2

Coursera vs. MITx. Any views?

Coursera, I'm doing the NLP class but it is just a guy writing equations on a chalkboard. The class would be much better if he used plain english to explain his equations instead of reading off the slide.

MITx, I gave up on the electronics course because I can't read the guys handwriting and I didn't like the labs. The book is also in the worst format I've ever seen but at least it's free.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#13
I think education at a great University provides primarily four benefits:

1. Great instructor-driven education 2. Great student peer-group-- folks that are truly smarter than you and teach you to think in ways you hadn't imagined (and those you pay attention to, because they might someday change the world) 3. Great networks/connections and maybe even a brand 4. An opportunity to immerse in great research.

I think online education courses do a great job of approximating 1. They sort of try to do 2. And they fail at 3.

I don't point this out to say "yes, online ed. could change higher learning forevermore" or "no, this is a flash in the pan", but to highlight that traditional Universities do have a role-- they may simply be a place where people watch online videos and build stuff together, but they add value beyond a guy in his den watching a video (to be poetic predictions of the death of traditional learning are greatly exaggerated).

e.g. As a Stanford student, (1) above is certainly lowest on my list of great-things-Stanford-provides. (2) is high, and so is infrastructure. On (4), I think the Gates building has a astoundingly high great-ideas/sq-m. None of these can be replicated online easily.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#14
As a replacement for the university, I think this is actually moving in exactly the wrong direction. We've already tried more centralized education (e.g. standardized testing), and it doesn't work. The quality of education any given student receives is proportional to the level to which that education can be personalized to match their interests, abilities, learning styles, etc. Decreasing faculty-student ratios means decreasing personalization. It's just a losing proposition all around.

This sort of system seems more like a replacement for the textbook to me. Traditional textbooks serve the purpose of giving both the instructor and students in a class access to the knowledge of the experts on a subject. This is simply a more interactive way of getting that expert information. Then the personalized part of the education can kick in and not have to worry about helping students memorize basic facts.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#15
'Only 10 institutions in the world delivering higher education'?

Not unless universities abandon the teaching of history, literature, philosophy, politics, economics, whatever etc., or perhaps Thrun is thinking they'll be a gigantic leap forward in developing machine intelligence able for instance to assess students' essays in these subjects. If anyone's seen the slightest evidence that this might happen I'd be more than interested to see it.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#16
post #14

As a replacement for the university, I think this is actually moving in exactly the wrong direction. We've already tried more centralized education (e.g. standardized testing), and it doesn't work. The quality of education any given student receives is proportional to the level to which that education can be personalized to match their interests, abilities, learning styles, etc. Decreasing faculty-student ratios mean…

But online courses actually give you more options as far as personalizing education. At most universities, unless they're very large or very specialized, you're likely to have one professor from a specific subject in a field. With online lectures, even from a reasonably small number of sources you can mix and match. Two personal examples I can think of is supplementing my algorithms class with MIT's algorithms class on OCW, and watching Tom Mitchell's lecture on kernel functions to add depth to the topic as covered in Ng's Ml-class.

Even at great universities there are professors who are better researchers than teaches that still may be a students only option. If you took the top 10, or even 5 teachers on a given subject you could give students the freedom to mix and match as suited their learning style.

Personally I actually find the lectures a poor substitute for a text. I find the Probabilistic Graphical Models textbook a great addition to the pgm class on coursera. Even though the lectures for pgm-class are long and detail, there's still only so much information you can get into a few hours. The information density of a textbook is hard to beat.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#17
post #11

I think this is great and having such high quality level instructors is very good. However, I'd caution the typical view nowadays, especially around here, that this signals the end of traditional college and that we should just throw it out.

Thrun seems to be getting into this mode as well with this line: "He’s thinking big now. He imagines that in 10 years, job applicants will tout their Udacity degrees. In 50 years, he says, there will be only 10 institutions in the world delivering higher education and Udacity has a shot at being one of them. Thrun just has to plot the right course." Why is it that people (even apparently faculty like Thrun) seem to f…

In your world view, places of higher education and places of advanced research are strongly coupled. This does not need to be the case. Historically some great research labs had nothing to do with education (Bell Labs). I think Thrun's prediction is that there were be great institutions of higher education that have nothing to do with research. I certainly agree with that point.

Of course, all disruptive innovation starts at the bottom of the market. I am sure the first big wins will be giving educational access to talented and bright but poor kids in the developing world. For them, even something like access to a first world university is far from affordable, and the fledgling online classes are much better than the alternative, even if they aren't yet competitive with traditional university education.

I took the online ml-class last semester, and I am now taking the pgm-class this semester. I have or am taking graduate versions of the same classes at a traditional university.

The big discovery (thanks to Sal Khan) is that teaching fundamentally scales. It's a big waste that all over the world, there are hundreds of smart researchers each teaching 10s to hundreds of students basically the same subject. What would be best is to get one great teacher for each of the subjects of those 100s researchers, make him focus really hard (10x the effort he would have put in, but 1/10 the total effort of all of the previous combined effort) to make a ridiculously good online class. Then you have freed up a bunch of time for the researchers, and most of the almost thousands to 10s of thousands of students are actually experiencing a better class.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#18

I think education at a great University provides primarily four benefits: 1. Great instructor-driven education 2. Great student peer-group-- folks that are truly smarter than you and teach you to think in ways you hadn't imagined (and those you pay attention to, because they might someday change the world) 3. Great networks/connections and maybe even a brand 4. An opportunity to immerse in great research. I think onl…

But not all colleges and universities are at the same level as Stanford. The idea is to provide higher quality education to a larger group of people who might not otherwise not be able to receive it.

As you state, this cannot replace the benefit of putting a whole bunch of smart and motivated people in close physical proximity, but can complement other programs or help other students achieve a better education then would otherwise be possible.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#19
post #12
post #2

Coursera vs. MITx. Any views?

Coursera, I'm doing the NLP class but it is just a guy writing equations on a chalkboard. The class would be much better if he used plain english to explain his equations instead of reading off the slide. MITx, I gave up on the electronics course because I can't read the guys handwriting and I didn't like the labs. The book is also in the worst format I've ever seen but at least it's free.

> Coursera, I'm doing the NLP class but it is just a guy writing equations on a chalkboard

I'm doing the NLP class too. The professors go through the material pretty rapidly and sometimes you have to fill in some gaps yourself, but "just a guy writing equations on a chalkboard" isn't an accurate description.

Re: The Stanford Education Experiment Could Change Higher Learning Forever

#20
post #4

For me to get a Statement of Accomplishment, will I have to go along with the course or can I start later and still get it. I'm interested in CS101 but the course is already in its fifth week.

You can still join. The exam will count for 100%, instead of 50%.
Post reply on HN