3 ms·

Taking something that exists, and making it hugely popular or more accessible (think ride sharing or house sharing ala AirBnb) can be disruptive. I'm not talkin

Taking something that exists, and making it hugely popular or more accessible (think ride sharing or house sharing ala AirBnb) can be disruptive. I'm not talking about who invented it. I'm talking about how disruptive it is. Seems like others disagree which is fine, but for me personally, online education has been a game changer that I've greatly benefitted from.

Retric 7y ago
More accessible seems seems like an good argument, but I disagree that more popular is a disruption as the option already existed. Anyway, I was looking to get an online masters in 2000 and there where several to choose from. On the other hand Coursera was founded in 2012 so I fail to see the disruption. Better marketing?
- tchaffee 7y ago
  I don't want to get into a debate about whether Coursera themselves are disruptive. My original question was intended to be more about online education as a whole, even if I didn't make that clear. I do think popularity and marketing both matter. Amazon was not the first online store. Linux wasn't the first or only OS. Neither was Microsoft the first windowing OS, not even close. Does popularity / marketing matter for education? It might. When someone says they took a course on Coursera, or at Oxford that means something to almost everyone. Very often education serves a dual purpose: 1. Actually learning the thing. 2. Being able to put a signal on your resume that gets you past certain barriers.
ChrisSD 7y ago
The Open University was started in 1969 and is the largest academic institution in the UK. Undergrads used to receive course materials by mail and broadcast TV shows but since the web took off, much more is done via the internet. It's free if you don't have a degree and you meet the means test. In 2000 they had virtual courses on Second Life. Since 2006 they joined the Open educational resources movement and begun offering courses that are free for everyone via the inernet.

Retric 7y ago

More accessible seems seems like an good argument, but I disagree that more popular is a disruption as the option already existed. Anyway, I was looking to get an online masters in 2000 and there where several to choose from. On the other hand Coursera was founded in 2012 so I fail to see the disruption. Better marketing?

tchaffee 7y ago
I don't want to get into a debate about whether Coursera themselves are disruptive. My original question was intended to be more about online education as a whole, even if I didn't make that clear. I do think popularity and marketing both matter. Amazon was not the first online store. Linux wasn't the first or only OS. Neither was Microsoft the first windowing OS, not even close. Does popularity / marketing matter for education? It might. When someone says they took a course on Coursera, or at Oxford that means something to almost everyone. Very often education serves a dual purpose: 1. Actually learning the thing. 2. Being able to put a signal on your resume that gets you past certain barriers.

ChrisSD 7y ago

The Open University was started in 1969 and is the largest academic institution in the UK. Undergrads used to receive course materials by mail and broadcast TV shows but since the web took off, much more is done via the internet. It's free if you don't have a degree and you meet the means test. In 2000 they had virtual courses on Second Life. Since 2006 they joined the Open educational resources movement and begun offering courses that are free for everyone via the inernet.