Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) were going to transform learning. At least that’s what we were told, but perhaps we were thinking about learning the wrong way. The New York Times compared the promise and the reality of MOOCs in “After Setbacks, Online Courses Are Rethought.”
“Two years after a Stanford professor drew 160,000 students from around the globe to a free online course on artificial intelligence, starting what was widely viewed as a revolution in higher education, early results for such large-scale courses are disappointing, forcing a rethinking of how college instruction can best use the Internet.”
That’s looking at the issue from the college side. But, as Harold Jarche noted:
“The real value of the MOOC (massively open online course/content) could be its potential to remove the barrier between learners, designers, and instructors. Its workplace learning potential may be greater than its academic value. But if one thinks of the MOOC as a course, designed by one party for another party, then it really is nothing new.”
If you think about things from the learner’s side, it’s less about courses and certificates and “going to college” than it is access to information when you need it. It’s more like MIT Open Courseware (“Unlocking Knowledge, Empowering Minds. Free lecture notes, exams, and videos from MIT. No registration required”) and less like finding a way for children in developing countries to get a degree from Stanford. It’s more like the Khan Academy and less like college.
Great talent development in this century will be less about degrees and certificates, less institutionally focused, and more like browsing in the library or asking your brother for help fixing your gutters.
thanks..this is informative and clarifying.