There are other parallels, too. When I was growing up, my dad used to check out VHS tapes of university lectures in physics, astronomy, etc. from the local lib

There are other parallels, too. When I was growing up, my dad used to check out VHS tapes of university lectures in physics, astronomy, etc. from the local library - they had complete recordings of a wide range of courses available to the public. As with a MOOC, the videos were free to check out, although there was no text or problems provided alongside the lectures; but anyone could still check them out and watch them, or not, just as anyone can enroll in a MOOC, or not, at no cost in any case. Which is why the article's point isn't really valid: all of these - MOOCs, video lectures in the library, and "University of the Air" alike - can't be compared to a traditional bricks-and-mortar university. Universities have entrance requirements and tuition charges; the people who attend courses are the ones who want to be there enough to pay high fees for the privilege, and whom the university admissions staff believe have the capacity to succeed in their studies. Quite a selection bias. If MOOCs also end up having only 17% completion rates, it won't be all that surprising, but it won't mean that they're not a successful and valid innovation.