5 ms·
I think it's still disruptive if you can access all of the course materials just as you could before.
by psbp 13y ago
I think it's still disruptive if you can access all of the course materials just as you could before.
- ghaff 13y agoI'd argue though that MOOCs haven't really been disruptive. If you look at the demographics of a typical course, it's primarily people who already have degrees--and multiple degrees in many cases. So they're adult ed to a large degree. Nothing wrong with that at all. I certainly appreciate them in that vein. But it's not a disrupter of education.
- thatthatis 13y agoDo you lump Kahn Academy in with MOOCs when you say they aren't disrupting education?
- ghaff 13y agothatthatis: I don't think Khan Academy is typically considered a MOOC--in part because it never really AFAIK considered certification as a goal as Udacity, etc. have. I'm also not sure that simply having a bunch of videos available on programming and related topics qualifies as disruptive. It's not a bad thing certainly! But what is it fundamentally changing? "Disruption" is a high bar.
- darkxanthos 13y agoI agree. So far this and others looks more like its disruptive solely within our echo chamber. What will be disruptive though is if Udacity or one of the others can become a credible source for teaching. All of this means nothing on a larger scale unless it gives you skills and abilities others trust.