Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

news.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 202 posts

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#41

Post by nobrains »

wodenokoto wrote: post #33
benrbray wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to use edX for the first time recently to take a "food science" course, but was disappointed to see that they've resorted to the same dark patterns as Coursera and others, such as: * Removing your access to course materials when the class is done, and disallowing access to past versions of the class. * Pressuring you into joining as many courses as possible, due to fear of missing out. When you visit the site…

> Breaking courses into useless 2-minute chunks and constant unhelpful quizzes. I really just want to hear the lecturer speak for 20-30 minutes at a time uninterrupted, especially if I'm listening while doing dishes etc. I disagree. If you’re doing dishes you are not taking a college level course. One of the best things about digital courses is that you don’t have to spend an hour zoning out to a professor talking an…

Well, it depends on the kind of a learner you are. Some learners prefer to listen to long lectures and some short (and some might prefer interactivities, and others might prefer one-way communication). This is where personalized learning comes in, which is something in its infancy and being explored by academicians and especially companies focused on e-learning delivery. (I work in tech at an online / blended learning higher education institution).

Now this comment by OP (benrbray) and you (wodenokoto) gives me an idea that courses can be designed in a way that the learner can mention how much hands-free time they have to spare now, depending on which the platform can hold off any interactivities / quizzes until then (or something like that), to make the learning process more personalized.

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#42

Post by henvic »

tsjq wrote: post #24

MIT and Harvard did this for 800million? Don't these two universities have multi hundred billion dollar endowments ? Squeezing every single drop of money from every single brick of the university : great work, MBAs . Slow clap

It's a shame how academy ends up being unaccessible for many people, even though they receive a lot of endowments... while there are a lot of ways to make them more accessible!

Like: online courses... or... What about the white elephant in the room? The cost of social events and Ivy League athletes/sports.

I don't have anything against those, but if I were in a position of power in one academic entity, I'd definitely make sure sports is not a cost center, as it is today for many.

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#43

Post by the__alchemist »

Anecdote: MitX's science and math classes (QM, molecular bio, general bio, materials, Diffeq etc) are outstanding. I wish they didn't have to move to a paid model for exams etx a few years back. The classes I tried from other universities on EdX seemed to be of lower quality.

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#44

Post by benrbray »

wodenokoto wrote: post #33
benrbray wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to use edX for the first time recently to take a "food science" course, but was disappointed to see that they've resorted to the same dark patterns as Coursera and others, such as: * Removing your access to course materials when the class is done, and disallowing access to past versions of the class. * Pressuring you into joining as many courses as possible, due to fear of missing out. When you visit the site…

> Breaking courses into useless 2-minute chunks and constant unhelpful quizzes. I really just want to hear the lecturer speak for 20-30 minutes at a time uninterrupted, especially if I'm listening while doing dishes etc. I disagree. If you’re doing dishes you are not taking a college level course. One of the best things about digital courses is that you don’t have to spend an hour zoning out to a professor talking an…

> I disagree.

That's something we have in common :). My disagreement spans a few dimensions:

* I've already been through school. An undergraduate and graduate degree already taught me how to learn. I have good habits, and I know how to buckle down and study when needed. For me, I find that having something to do with my hands while listening to a lecture actually helps me stay more focused on the topic. Before and after watching, I like to review the slides, do some reading, and take notes.

* I already have degrees. I'm not looking for extra credential. I'm just looking to learn something new from someone qualified to teach me who can filter out what's important and what's not. It would be nice to have the opportunity to listen without necessarily jumping through all the hoops of a normal college class.

* Sometimes I already have background knowledge that overlaps with the course content. In these cases, it's really frustrating when a course won't let me skip around and focus on the topics that I want to learn. The quickest way to get me to drop an online course is to make me sit through lecture content that I've already learned before somewhere else.

* Different students learn in different ways. You might like that the frequent quiz interruptions hold you accountable. That's great! For me, I don't find it too helpful. Usually the mid-lecture quizzes are simple "are you listening?" questions that don't really test your deep understanding. I'd rather go through a set of exercises all at once after listening to the lecture.

Basically, I see no reason online courses can't be structured to give us more choices about how we want to consume the content!

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#45

Post by dentemple »

rossdavidh wrote: post #39

Hypothesis: MIT and Harvard had enough experience in distance learning by now to realize that it is NOT going to be the wave of the future in education. They don't want to exactly say this out loud and take flak for it, so they're just unloading this (for significant $$) primarily in order to refocus on in-person education, since they've realized that distance learning has been around for decades and nothing about th…

Seems like an overly negative take. I see no reason not to take the article at face-value here, namely, that MIT & Harvard saw the growing gap between for-profit and not-for-profit online education--and decided to take steps ensure that the latter doesn't fall behind.

It's also pointed out in the article that MIT & Harvard will be investing money into a new non-profit to explore the "next generation" of online learning, which is literally the opposite of "[refocusing] on in-person education", as you hypothesize.

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#46

Post by benrbray »

chaosbutters314 wrote: post #40
benrbray wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to use edX for the first time recently to take a "food science" course, but was disappointed to see that they've resorted to the same dark patterns as Coursera and others, such as: * Removing your access to course materials when the class is done, and disallowing access to past versions of the class. * Pressuring you into joining as many courses as possible, due to fear of missing out. When you visit the site…

why is food science in quotes? you wouldnt put physics course in quotes. As someone that works as an engineer in the food industry, our work is just as rigorous as other fields. When working with vendors that support different domains, they always get excited to work with us since we have some of the craziest and most challenging problems that are not straight forward. While the work we do may not be critical to savi…

I didn't mean it that way at all. They were intended more like title-quotes than belittling-quotes. Everything I have read / watched on the topic tells me that food science is a really deep and interesting topic that demands expertise in many different areas of chemistry, physics, and engineering all at once! It's why I was so interested to take a course in the first place!

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#47

Post by GrinningFool »

wodenokoto wrote: post #33
benrbray wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to use edX for the first time recently to take a "food science" course, but was disappointed to see that they've resorted to the same dark patterns as Coursera and others, such as: * Removing your access to course materials when the class is done, and disallowing access to past versions of the class. * Pressuring you into joining as many courses as possible, due to fear of missing out. When you visit the site…

> Breaking courses into useless 2-minute chunks and constant unhelpful quizzes. I really just want to hear the lecturer speak for 20-30 minutes at a time uninterrupted, especially if I'm listening while doing dishes etc. I disagree. If you’re doing dishes you are not taking a college level course. One of the best things about digital courses is that you don’t have to spend an hour zoning out to a professor talking an…

> If you’re doing dishes you are not taking a college level course

Relatively mindless tasks to occupy my hands frees up my brain to focus. If I'm not doing dishes, I'm doodling or playing with a coin or, or...

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#49

Post by nightski »

rossdavidh wrote: post #39

Hypothesis: MIT and Harvard had enough experience in distance learning by now to realize that it is NOT going to be the wave of the future in education. They don't want to exactly say this out loud and take flak for it, so they're just unloading this (for significant $$) primarily in order to refocus on in-person education, since they've realized that distance learning has been around for decades and nothing about th…

The problem with MIT's online courses is that while the content itself was fantastic they refused to treat it like an online course. They wanted to have it run on a schedule, strict no-compromising deadlines, and large fees for full access.

That's fine and all but it's forcing the university model they know into an online format and it doesn't work so great for the audience that wants to take online courses imho.

The value proposition on it's Micro Masters course was that you could use it for credit at full universities. The problem is it was extremely unlikely one would get the opportunity to use it at MIT, and the rest of the partners were universities that I had never even heard of before. Not necessarily places I'd probably want to go to further my studies.

Re: MIT and Harvard agree to transfer edX to ed-tech firm 2U

#50

Post by lisper »

rossdavidh wrote: post #39

Hypothesis: MIT and Harvard had enough experience in distance learning by now to realize that it is NOT going to be the wave of the future in education. They don't want to exactly say this out loud and take flak for it, so they're just unloading this (for significant $$) primarily in order to refocus on in-person education, since they've realized that distance learning has been around for decades and nothing about th…

To paraphrase Tom Lehrer [1]: education is like a sewer; what you get out of it depends on what you put into it. This is true regardless of the medium. Some people will get value out of distance learning, others won't, just as some people will get value out of in-person learning and others won't. The only difference is the cost. Distance learning can be provided for a lot less money, so you can afford to be less selective on who you provide it to, and so your failure rates are likely to be higher. This does not reflect at all on the actual effectiveness of the process.

[EDIT] Reference added, because today's youth are apparently not well-versed in the classics:

[1] https://youtu.be/w8d0GwzY6cA?t=2210

Post reply on HN