3 ms·

Coursera actually converted a course I was enrolled in to paid-quizzes-only, while I was actively enrolled in the course and on the second to last week of eight

by tgokh 10y ago

Coursera actually converted a course I was enrolled in to paid-quizzes-only, while I was actively enrolled in the course and on the second to last week of eight. They finally converted it back after 2 days of many of us contacting support but never gave me a straight answer as to whether it was accidentally or intentional :-/ Definitely lost my faith in Coursera as a platform over these recent changes.

reachtarunhere 10y ago
Agree they have been acting too greedy recently.
sotojuan 10y ago
I never liked Coursera because they offered classes only sometimes... I know a "real classroom" experience is what they were going after but it sucks finding a great looking course that will be offered a year later or worse, no upcoming dates. Sad to see they're going to downhill though.
- zhte415 10y ago
  Indeed. I feel a gamefication theme to some of it. Think of the opposite: Socrates had his teachings and live lectures online, with recorded classroom, and feedback, for all to comment on, with his replies. It may have only been 'live' for 20/40 years of his life/teaching life/sharing life, but it would be amazing today. MOOCs offer this opportunity for humanity, to record teachings in increasingly diverse formats that are free for others to use and experiment with.
  - visarga 10y ago
    What MOOCs need is deep understanding of human learning, as it relates to specific fields. In other words they need to keep track on a per-user-basis of the level of mastery they have on all the relevant concepts. They need to map out how relevant concepts rely on each other, and be able to make recommendations. It often feels like an avalanche of books, courses, materials - we need simple paths through this mess. We need to keep people right in the sweetspot - not giving them too difficult material, but also not too easy, just right enough to maximize learning. And this perfect gradation of difficulty can be reverse engineered through machine learning over student activity logs. Another area they need to invest in is the practical side. Course takers need more examples, tests, problems and projects. Only by applying the concepts in reality will students gain firm confidence in their abilities. I don't think the "short course" format is the best. It might be better to have a graph of concept nodes, each equipped with its own instructional materials, problems and tests. The graph can be expanded gradually to include more concepts and to reduce the gradient of difficulty for the more problematic ones. People who bang their heads against difficult material and don't grock it might feel discouraged and give up. But if they can build confidence that everything is taught gradually and without too violent jumps in difficulty, they might improve the dropout rate.
- veddox 10y ago
  Yeah, it did suck when a course you wanted wasn't available any time soon, but I have to say their model did make sense. I took part in a timed/dated course (however you want to call it) and it did actually give one something approaching a "classroom feeling", as compared to doing a course completely on your own.
  - visarga 10y ago
    Holding people off from enlisting in a course is only useful if you're going to offer the course eventually, and sooner rather than later. Otherwise, it just doesn't make sense to keep it locked.
- acjohnson55 10y ago
  It's really the worst combination of features from the online and offline worlds: the strict synchrony of offline classes combined with the lack of in-person contact.

by tgokh 10y ago

reachtarunhere 10y ago

Agree they have been acting too greedy recently.

sotojuan 10y ago

I never liked Coursera because they offered classes only sometimes... I know a "real classroom" experience is what they were going after but it sucks finding a great looking course that will be offered a year later or worse, no upcoming dates. Sad to see they're going to downhill though.

zhte415 10y ago
Indeed. I feel a gamefication theme to some of it. Think of the opposite: Socrates had his teachings and live lectures online, with recorded classroom, and feedback, for all to comment on, with his replies. It may have only been 'live' for 20/40 years of his life/teaching life/sharing life, but it would be amazing today. MOOCs offer this opportunity for humanity, to record teachings in increasingly diverse formats that are free for others to use and experiment with.
- visarga 10y ago
  What MOOCs need is deep understanding of human learning, as it relates to specific fields. In other words they need to keep track on a per-user-basis of the level of mastery they have on all the relevant concepts. They need to map out how relevant concepts rely on each other, and be able to make recommendations. It often feels like an avalanche of books, courses, materials - we need simple paths through this mess. We need to keep people right in the sweetspot - not giving them too difficult material, but also not too easy, just right enough to maximize learning. And this perfect gradation of difficulty can be reverse engineered through machine learning over student activity logs. Another area they need to invest in is the practical side. Course takers need more examples, tests, problems and projects. Only by applying the concepts in reality will students gain firm confidence in their abilities. I don't think the "short course" format is the best. It might be better to have a graph of concept nodes, each equipped with its own instructional materials, problems and tests. The graph can be expanded gradually to include more concepts and to reduce the gradient of difficulty for the more problematic ones. People who bang their heads against difficult material and don't grock it might feel discouraged and give up. But if they can build confidence that everything is taught gradually and without too violent jumps in difficulty, they might improve the dropout rate.
veddox 10y ago
Yeah, it did suck when a course you wanted wasn't available any time soon, but I have to say their model did make sense. I took part in a timed/dated course (however you want to call it) and it did actually give one something approaching a "classroom feeling", as compared to doing a course completely on your own.
- visarga 10y ago
  Holding people off from enlisting in a course is only useful if you're going to offer the course eventually, and sooner rather than later. Otherwise, it just doesn't make sense to keep it locked.
acjohnson55 10y ago
It's really the worst combination of features from the online and offline worlds: the strict synchrony of offline classes combined with the lack of in-person contact.