NYU using Codeacademy to Teach CS: Who got fired? « Computing Education Blog.
I agree with the concerns raised by Mark here.
I would add a few additional concerns to this as well. See, I’m not as thrilled by the MOOC idea as some others are.
Forgive my cynicism, but, why bother to teach a course at all? Why not just charge people money to take a test?
I can see us coming to this.
I always thought the value-added at a university was supposed to be the personal part. In other words, the one-on-one. I know this is hard to do in large classes, but jeez, don’t the students deserve your best efforts?
I also know that a great many of the so-called “good” schools have courses “taught” (i.e. leactured) by famous people who never interact with their students. If all you ever get to do is watch, then what’s the point of doing it in person?
Fifty undergraduates will participate in the pilot program, which includes a weekly class and monthly lectures from technology-industry leaders. If all goes well, the course may be incorporated into the department’s curriculum.
So, basically, the students are being asked to teach themselves with what they find online, and then come to a few talks. For this I bet they pay full price.
If all that’s left of the “value” of paying tuition and taking courses from a recognized university is the test at the end and the name on the parchment, why not cut to the chase and just start charging for tests? Clearly, if someone can pass your test, they know all they need to, right?
RIGHT?
Maybe, just maybe, rather than succumbing to greed and the unending pursuit of more, and bigger, and faster, we might consider getting smaller, more personal.
Learning a discipline is only partly about learning the content.
A big part of becoming a professional has to do with learning to BE. MOOCs aren’t going to be able to help with that.
