3 ms·
That looks pretty great. I guess your approach only has a few downsides: * you can only teach (I'm guessing) 300 or fewer students per year, so you can't real
by blake8086 15y ago
That looks pretty great. I guess your approach only has a few downsides:
* you can only teach (I'm guessing) 300 or fewer students per year, so you can't really have the same reach as Khan
* your method costs orders of magnitude more (someone is paying your salary, and for facilities)
* you can only reach students who are physically near you
* students can only access this education on a very rigid schedule
I don't think your approach is bad, but I don't think you're really solving the same problem. How could you scale your method to teach the entire world for a few dollars per year per student?
- fnoschese 15y agoI think you have to look at the trade-offs of scale. McDonald's serves 58 million people EACH DAY (http://understandingbignumbers.com/how-many-people-does-mcdonalds-serve-daily http://understandingbignumbers.com/how-many-people-does-mcdo...) at extremely low cost. How does that affect the quality of the food and the experience? If Khan's method scaled (at lower cost) without sacrificing other features of high quality face-to-face instruction, then I would expect people who pay private school tuition (K-12) to push their schools to implement such an approach in order to lower tuition. But there's a reason why the elite pay $30K/year for K-12 private schools: Small classes, strong student-faculty relationships, high-quality facilities, and the exceptional educational experience that comes along with those features that cannot be replicated on a large scale.