Live data from Hacker News

Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

class-central.com

81–90 of 92 posts

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#81
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've taken two of those courses. I often typed the example code from the lectures in or took notes as I would in a brick and mortar class. This meant slowing the lectures down or pausing them or rewinding them. That's great for me...but I'm on Norvig's ten year plan.

Wouldn't reading the source material (and copying from there) be even better for Norvig's ten year plan? Note that the pace of brick and mortar classes drove me mad back in my student days :) Also, the deadlines from Coursera and most MOOCs conspire against watching videos at normal speed. Most of us have day jobs and the only time we can read the lectures and do the exercises is a few hours a day, late at night. In…

The deadlines in a MOOC are no different than any other deadline. Cut scope, cut quality, or deathmarch are the options for meeting them. Death march is the only option for full credit. Cutting quality will let a person play the "points game" for a certificate. Cutting scope means learning whatever you learn in the frame of the class.

One of Grossman's observations is that the length of the class correlates with completion rate. The longer the class, the more likely something will come up and throw everything off schedule. Knowing that fact means the longer the course, the more likely cutting quality will be necessary to earn a certificate.

The underlying premise for skipping around to just the interesting parts is that the entirety of the subject does not interest the student. There's nothing wrong with that. But that's not really a good target audience for the design of a class. That student is already committed to partial disengagement.

My take on programming has become that watching a programming video is like watching Jimi Hendrix play the guitar. A beginner learns almost nothing applicable because they don't have the mechanical technique as a basis for informing their seeing. A virtuoso will see new techniques and ways they could do them better.

Watching Grossman type text into a box or Ullman do a proof is less informative until I had the mechanical experience of following along. We all tune out video because it is so ubiquitous. The courses on Coursera are real courses. The results of not taking notes during lectures are pretty much the same as not taking notes during a brick and mortar lecture: some geniuses will ace the test anyway and everyone else will do average, mediocre or poorly according to their nature.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#82
post #31

I don't get why MOOCs are so focused on video. I think many people enjoy the relaxed experience of watching a video more than reading, but why ignore people who rather jump right into a text? A text is easier to skim search and reference than a video, and easier to keep up-to-date for the creators. However, I think the best option is a combination of text with visual and interactive content, such as graphical represe…

A text is easier to skim search and reference than a video That's great when you're refreshing or referencing, but when you're learning something from scratch, text presents an easier opportunity to "skim" and miss things than video which sorta decides the speed of the treadmill for you. I'm the author of a book and the amount of queries I get that were answered on the previous page.. I think many people just don't r…

Right, you need to learn by doing and cannot just passively watch a video or read a text. To learn a topic like programming, you need to practice it. So a good format is to combine a text with small questions and coding challenges. If the user is unsure of how to solve something, it's easier to look it up in the text they read than in a video they watched. And hopefully they'll recognize that the question is asking something they can answer on their own without emailing the author. (Though once the text is online, there should be some kind of forum there to ask questions anyways.)

(PS - I'm actually looking for programming authors or bloggers who would be interested in publishing online with questions and programming challenges.)

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#83
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't reading the source material (and copying from there) be even better for Norvig's ten year plan? Note that the pace of brick and mortar classes drove me mad back in my student days :) Also, the deadlines from Coursera and most MOOCs conspire against watching videos at normal speed. Most of us have day jobs and the only time we can read the lectures and do the exercises is a few hours a day, late at night. In…

The deadlines in a MOOC are no different than any other deadline. Cut scope, cut quality, or deathmarch are the options for meeting them. Death march is the only option for full credit. Cutting quality will let a person play the "points game" for a certificate. Cutting scope means learning whatever you learn in the frame of the class. One of Grossman's observations is that the length of the class correlates with comp…

Disclaimer: the following comes with a big "in my opinion" preceding it.

Um, I think no-one finds every part of any given subject interesting to the same degree. That's human nature. But also, maybe you already understand some parts and want to skip ahead to the more difficult parts. Sadly, in the excessively constrained format of video, sometimes the teacher will choose to focus on the topics you already understand, and neglects others. Such are the limitations of video format -- and indeed, of brick and mortar classes! Only the full, unabridged text gives you a (relatively) unconstrained explanation of all relevant topics. Of course, it also comes with some disadvantages: it can overwhelm the student, or present topics in the wrong order, or -- even -- focus on the "wrong" things, because after all written notes are also space-constrained. But I find it a way less constrained format anyway.

I find taking notes to be an uninteresting artifact of "live" classes. What truly matters is that you do the exercises and understand them.

If I gave the impression that I favored the "lazy" approach, I apologize. To be honest, I think watching the videos is both the lazy approach (only reading the notes seems like the serious approach to me) AND a time-waster. You are both more efficient AND gain a better understanding of the source material if you read the written notes/book and also do the exercises.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#84
post #8

In my experience, both with self-study and at university, the best way to gain and retain knowledge is by working problems. To do this you need: demonstrations of the concepts, problems, hints and solutions. Hints and solutions can be time consuming to obtain at university (office hours) and might be impossible if you can't find instructor manuals for self-study. Khan Academy makes the most sense to me. You work the…

>In my experience, both with self-study and at university, the best way to gain and retain knowledge is by working problems.

I'm this way too, but I don't think everyone is. I think a successful program should include problem solving, reading, and audio/visual.

Because people learn differently.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#85
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deadlines in a MOOC are no different than any other deadline. Cut scope, cut quality, or deathmarch are the options for meeting them. Death march is the only option for full credit. Cutting quality will let a person play the "points game" for a certificate. Cutting scope means learning whatever you learn in the frame of the class. One of Grossman's observations is that the length of the class correlates with comp…

Disclaimer: the following comes with a big "in my opinion" preceding it. Um, I think no-one finds every part of any given subject interesting to the same degree. That's human nature. But also, maybe you already understand some parts and want to skip ahead to the more difficult parts. Sadly, in the excessively constrained format of video, sometimes the teacher will choose to focus on the topics you already understand,…

[deleted]

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#86
post #73
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agree with this. What makes me really scratch my head is that I talk to people regularly who prefer this! If I have to watch a video to answer my question, I'll just figure it out some other way.

It depends on context. First-order: * At a computer ==> Text * Commuting ==> Audio/video Second-order depends on things like type of content, cognitive load, etc.

Agreed that commuting (for some forms of commuting) text is suboptimal. I ride on a subway so it doesn't really matter to me but I can't read blogs while driving for instance.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#87
post #39
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a little surprised at the strong support this comment has driven. Haha, I usually use this account for opinions that I would think controversial.

I see this opinion voted to the top of Hacker News all the time. People seem to forget that watching something in video format is just so damn convenient, and requires little effort.

It also takes longer and is harder to skim/skip around to exactly what I want to see. I usually kind of have an idea of what I want when I'm looking something up so I'll just scroll an article to get to the good stuff, and then go back if I realize I need more context. That's a lot harder to do with video.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#88
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deadlines in a MOOC are no different than any other deadline. Cut scope, cut quality, or deathmarch are the options for meeting them. Death march is the only option for full credit. Cutting quality will let a person play the "points game" for a certificate. Cutting scope means learning whatever you learn in the frame of the class. One of Grossman's observations is that the length of the class correlates with comp…

Disclaimer: the following comes with a big "in my opinion" preceding it. Um, I think no-one finds every part of any given subject interesting to the same degree. That's human nature. But also, maybe you already understand some parts and want to skip ahead to the more difficult parts. Sadly, in the excessively constrained format of video, sometimes the teacher will choose to focus on the topics you already understand,…

I took Odersky's class because I wanted to learn Scala and functional programming from Odersky. I trusted his judgement as to what was important and what wasn't. I could find programming exercises and Scala tutorials using Google. There are even free Scala ebooks and I own a hard copy of SICP. What I can't get on my own is Odersky.

BTW, I found the format of the exercises for that class tedious and overly dependent on SBT. I walked away knowing some Scala and more functional programming but configuring the IDE to start a new very simple Scala project wasn't covered, unfortunately.

I will also add that Odersky's videos were a bit confusing because they were disconnected from the bricks and mortar class where they are also used, apparently. Curtailing the subject matter for the MOOC may make sense, but the those videos show how tempting it is to avoid the effort that editing video entails.

I think Grossman's class was much better designed. The slide based format without human body parts allows more flexibility with regard to editing. Taking body parts off the screen allows more flexible combination.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#89
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: the following comes with a big "in my opinion" preceding it. Um, I think no-one finds every part of any given subject interesting to the same degree. That's human nature. But also, maybe you already understand some parts and want to skip ahead to the more difficult parts. Sadly, in the excessively constrained format of video, sometimes the teacher will choose to focus on the topics you already understand,…

I took Odersky's class because I wanted to learn Scala and functional programming from Odersky. I trusted his judgement as to what was important and what wasn't. I could find programming exercises and Scala tutorials using Google. There are even free Scala ebooks and I own a hard copy of SICP . What I can't get on my own is Odersky. BTW, I found the format of the exercises for that class tedious and overly dependent…

I agree Grossman's class was much better designed. I think he is a great teacher. But in my opinion it was mostly because the course's notes were very comprehensive in the case of Programming Languages and somewhat poor in Odersky's courses (again: no disrespect meant for Odersky; just my opinion on the design of these online courses). With Grossman's course you can skip the videos entirely and miss nothing, whereas you cannot do that with Odersky's.

In both cases, I found the exercises very engaging and for me they were the main "thrill" of taking the course, but I understand that other people found them very frustrating -- they were very vocal on the forums -- often for the reasons you mentioned: the tools were hard to configure or confusing.

Re: Why My MOOC Is Not Built on Video

#90
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took Odersky's class because I wanted to learn Scala and functional programming from Odersky. I trusted his judgement as to what was important and what wasn't. I could find programming exercises and Scala tutorials using Google. There are even free Scala ebooks and I own a hard copy of SICP . What I can't get on my own is Odersky. BTW, I found the format of the exercises for that class tedious and overly dependent…

I agree Grossman's class was much better designed. I think he is a great teacher. But in my opinion it was mostly because the course's notes were very comprehensive in the case of Programming Languages and somewhat poor in Odersky's courses (again: no disrespect meant for Odersky; just my opinion on the design of these online courses). With Grossman's course you can skip the videos entirely and miss nothing, whereas…

For Odersky's class, SICP is available for free on line and in dead-tree form so there was plenty of background material to support the lectures [not to mention the SICP video lectures].

I just found the exercises for Functional Programming in Scala to be drudgery. That wasn't the case in Grossman's class. Odersky's class was full of klunky complexity - SBT, IDE's, and Scala's compiler performance and the warts of working on top of the JVM. Formatting the exercises partially completed code just added to the mess [though the partially completed code idea is a useful pedagogical approach].

On the other hand, Grossman's use of Emacs was one of the reasons I took the course. I still use Emacs. I don't still use Eclipse or ScalaIDE.

Post reply on HN