5 ms·

I honestly don't understand this. The article talks about revolutionizing the world of education and yet expects the online courses to give out certifications,

I honestly don't understand this. The article talks about revolutionizing the world of education and yet expects the online courses to give out certifications, like classical schools do. The free online courses exist so that you have free access to education, not that you have a piece of something that you can show to people. That might be an added benefit, and I see nothing wrong with strict requirements and charging money for it, but the primary purpose is the education, not the certificate.

wolfgke 11y ago
> That might be an added benefit, and I see nothing wrong with strict requirements and charging money for it, but the primary purpose is the education, not the certificate. This seems to be a very US-centric mentality. In Germany's mentality it's rather different: Universities are (mostly) free, but about anybody will want to see a certificate for about anything that you claim to have accomplished. So if you can't show some kind of certificate, then you won't believed to have any knowledge in it. Some (older) Germans love to joke that some people mostly do further education while in job only to have lots of certificates to show. ;-)
- wyager 11y ago
  That seems like an absolutely terrible attitude. "Oh, you can clearly demonstrate knowledge in this area? Well, that's too bad, because you don't have a certificate reaffirming what we can easily tell by interviewing you."
  - wolfgke 11y ago
    Nearly all personnel managers don't have the knowledge to examine whether the candidate has a solid knowledge in an area or not. So in my opinion it makes a lot of sense to rather trust in institutions (in particular universities) that have.
    - joshuapants 11y ago
      Yes, as long as the institution is reputable this is a pretty good heuristic. Of course, determining how reputable an institution is can be a problem in its own right if there are tons of institutions offering seemingly identical certification.
      - wolfgke 11y ago
        > Of course, determining how reputable an institution is can be a problem in its own right if there are tons of institutions offering seemingly identical certification. First: Compare the time you need to check an institution vs. the time you need for assessing a job candidate (in particular the former only has to be done one time, the latter for each candidate). Second: Nearly all universities in Germany (in terms of quality of education) can be considered as rather equal. On the other hand: If you have a graduation certificate from a university in a country, where this is not the case, you will, indeed, be doubted, if it's not from a internally renowned university. Similar things hold for the German academic scholarship programs (there are only seven or so big ones in Germany and you know which focus they have on the candidates). > Yes, as long as the institution is reputable this is a pretty good heuristic. Third: This is why you preferably get certificates from reputable institutions (for Coursera, the fact that Stanford offered courses there gave some initial credibility; the same holds for edX - MIT). Fourth: The fact that I got certificates on Coursera from not-so-renowned universities, too, doesn't make them worthless. They'd only be doubted to show deep knowledge in the topic of the course. They still show that I'm willing to upgrade my education on my one (something that employers, of course, love to see).
        joshuapants 11y ago
        > in particular the former only has to be done one time It may have to be done with less frequency, but you probably still want to evaluate them periodically to make sure standards haven't slipped. Otherwise I agree with you on all points.
      - riskable 11y ago
        No, it isn't a good heuristic. How many Oxford graduates actually remember everything they were taught? How many cheated their way through the hard parts? The only solution is to evaluate a candidate directly. Where or how they learned what they know is at best a mechanism to filter resumes but that itself is a bit naive since you could get candidates from famous universities that don't know anything useful.
- lukaslalinsky 11y ago
  We have the same mentality here in Slovakia, but that is not the point. I guess there are multiple ways to look at these online courses, but if they are in any way revolutionizing education, it is not reasonable to expect work just like traditional universities. I really don't see the need for them to promote the kind of mentality where people "do" the courses just to get a certificate at the end.
brudgers 11y ago
There are a lot of different models for distance learning. Self-paced study is one of them. A more structured classroom type environment is another. The value for me was that Coursera provided the latter and the support of a cohort of students with their more traditional approach of timelines with fixed milestones on a fixed calendar. When I started, the verified certificate was offered. It didn't really offer value compared to the unverified certificate. Coursera has done the easy thing. Instead of adding value to the verified certificate, Coursera removed value from the alternative. Instead of adding awesomeness, it added suck. That's its prerogative as a business and more or less the trend on the internet and in education. Adding value to the world is hard work.
- ghaff 11y ago
  On the one hand, I agree. On the other... well, an inability to add more value to a verified certificate is pretty much one of the fundamental problems that Coursera (and other MOOCs) has struggled with. A certificate that you've completed a MOOC (together with some weak identity verification) just doesn't have pretty much any value to most people. Maybe if you've got no other credentials, they're better than nothing--especially if they indicate a systematic attempt to educate yourself in a relevant area. Or maybe to satisfy some sort of continuing education requirement. But MOOCs haven't really gone much of anywhere as businesses precisely because their value is correctly largely seen as more akin to self-paced study with books and video than a college class. This isn't only because of the lack of value attached to their credentials, verified or otherwise, but it's one of the reasons.
joepie91_ 11y ago
While that is correct from a purely educational point of view, it's unfortunately not currently true from a social point of view. There are expectations of certification in many industries, and the assumption is often made that without a certificate, you do not have the knowledge. In the IT world, this isn't really a thing, but outside it, it often is. It's therefore completely reasonable to expect a 'replacement for classical schooling' to also provide similar certifications. Because that's what you need from a social point of view.
- runn1ng 11y ago
  Yes, but frankly, does anyone ever accept MOOC certificates? All the employers I have met usually skip the MOOC part of my resume entirely.
  - wolfgke 11y ago
    You might have the impression that they skipped it. I, in opposite, claim that it showed the employer that you are very willing to upgrade your education on your own.
    - runn1ng 11y ago
      But that, again, has nothing to do with the final certificate.
      - wolfgke 11y ago
        No, the certificate certifies that you indeed invested time to upgrade your education on your own to the employer.
        lukaslalinsky 11y ago
        Did an employer ever ask you to show them your university degree after you mentioned that you attended an university on your resume? I'm asking because it never happened to me and I don't think it's a common practice. Just mentioning that you have done some online courses on your resume and being able to talk about them seems enough to me. If the course is relevant to the job you are applying to, I expect the interviewer to be able to verify that you indeed took the course in a quick conversation.

wolfgke 11y ago

> That might be an added benefit, and I see nothing wrong with strict requirements and charging money for it, but the primary purpose is the education, not the certificate. This seems to be a very US-centric mentality. In Germany's mentality it's rather different: Universities are (mostly) free, but about anybody will want to see a certificate for about anything that you claim to have accomplished. So if you can't show some kind of certificate, then you won't believed to have any knowledge in it. Some (older) Germans love to joke that some people mostly do further education while in job only to have lots of certificates to show. ;-)

wyager 11y ago
That seems like an absolutely terrible attitude. "Oh, you can clearly demonstrate knowledge in this area? Well, that's too bad, because you don't have a certificate reaffirming what we can easily tell by interviewing you."
- wolfgke 11y ago
  Nearly all personnel managers don't have the knowledge to examine whether the candidate has a solid knowledge in an area or not. So in my opinion it makes a lot of sense to rather trust in institutions (in particular universities) that have.
  - joshuapants 11y ago
    Yes, as long as the institution is reputable this is a pretty good heuristic. Of course, determining how reputable an institution is can be a problem in its own right if there are tons of institutions offering seemingly identical certification.
    - wolfgke 11y ago
      > Of course, determining how reputable an institution is can be a problem in its own right if there are tons of institutions offering seemingly identical certification. First: Compare the time you need to check an institution vs. the time you need for assessing a job candidate (in particular the former only has to be done one time, the latter for each candidate). Second: Nearly all universities in Germany (in terms of quality of education) can be considered as rather equal. On the other hand: If you have a graduation certificate from a university in a country, where this is not the case, you will, indeed, be doubted, if it's not from a internally renowned university. Similar things hold for the German academic scholarship programs (there are only seven or so big ones in Germany and you know which focus they have on the candidates). > Yes, as long as the institution is reputable this is a pretty good heuristic. Third: This is why you preferably get certificates from reputable institutions (for Coursera, the fact that Stanford offered courses there gave some initial credibility; the same holds for edX - MIT). Fourth: The fact that I got certificates on Coursera from not-so-renowned universities, too, doesn't make them worthless. They'd only be doubted to show deep knowledge in the topic of the course. They still show that I'm willing to upgrade my education on my one (something that employers, of course, love to see).
      - joshuapants 11y ago
        > in particular the former only has to be done one time It may have to be done with less frequency, but you probably still want to evaluate them periodically to make sure standards haven't slipped. Otherwise I agree with you on all points.
    - riskable 11y ago
      No, it isn't a good heuristic. How many Oxford graduates actually remember everything they were taught? How many cheated their way through the hard parts? The only solution is to evaluate a candidate directly. Where or how they learned what they know is at best a mechanism to filter resumes but that itself is a bit naive since you could get candidates from famous universities that don't know anything useful.
lukaslalinsky 11y ago
We have the same mentality here in Slovakia, but that is not the point. I guess there are multiple ways to look at these online courses, but if they are in any way revolutionizing education, it is not reasonable to expect work just like traditional universities. I really don't see the need for them to promote the kind of mentality where people "do" the courses just to get a certificate at the end.

brudgers 11y ago

There are a lot of different models for distance learning. Self-paced study is one of them. A more structured classroom type environment is another. The value for me was that Coursera provided the latter and the support of a cohort of students with their more traditional approach of timelines with fixed milestones on a fixed calendar. When I started, the verified certificate was offered. It didn't really offer value compared to the unverified certificate. Coursera has done the easy thing. Instead of adding value to the verified certificate, Coursera removed value from the alternative. Instead of adding awesomeness, it added suck. That's its prerogative as a business and more or less the trend on the internet and in education. Adding value to the world is hard work.

ghaff 11y ago
On the one hand, I agree. On the other... well, an inability to add more value to a verified certificate is pretty much one of the fundamental problems that Coursera (and other MOOCs) has struggled with. A certificate that you've completed a MOOC (together with some weak identity verification) just doesn't have pretty much any value to most people. Maybe if you've got no other credentials, they're better than nothing--especially if they indicate a systematic attempt to educate yourself in a relevant area. Or maybe to satisfy some sort of continuing education requirement. But MOOCs haven't really gone much of anywhere as businesses precisely because their value is correctly largely seen as more akin to self-paced study with books and video than a college class. This isn't only because of the lack of value attached to their credentials, verified or otherwise, but it's one of the reasons.

joepie91_ 11y ago

While that is correct from a purely educational point of view, it's unfortunately not currently true from a social point of view. There are expectations of certification in many industries, and the assumption is often made that without a certificate, you do not have the knowledge. In the IT world, this isn't really a thing, but outside it, it often is. It's therefore completely reasonable to expect a 'replacement for classical schooling' to also provide similar certifications. Because that's what you need from a social point of view.

runn1ng 11y ago
Yes, but frankly, does anyone ever accept MOOC certificates? All the employers I have met usually skip the MOOC part of my resume entirely.
- wolfgke 11y ago
  You might have the impression that they skipped it. I, in opposite, claim that it showed the employer that you are very willing to upgrade your education on your own.
  - runn1ng 11y ago
    But that, again, has nothing to do with the final certificate.
    - wolfgke 11y ago
      No, the certificate certifies that you indeed invested time to upgrade your education on your own to the employer.
      - lukaslalinsky 11y ago
        Did an employer ever ask you to show them your university degree after you mentioned that you attended an university on your resume? I'm asking because it never happened to me and I don't think it's a common practice. Just mentioning that you have done some online courses on your resume and being able to talk about them seems enough to me. If the course is relevant to the job you are applying to, I expect the interviewer to be able to verify that you indeed took the course in a quick conversation.