MOOCs — massive open online courses — work only for the well-educated, many believe. However, MOOC participants learned as much or more than traditional students in a MIT physics class, a new study concludes. Less-capable students did as well as similar students in the traditional class.
Only 5 percent of MOOC enrollees complete the course, but that says little about MOOCs’ educational value, argue Brandon Alcorn, Gayle Christensen, and Ezekiel J. Emanuel in The Atlantic.
With no cost to enroll, no penalty for dropping out, and little reward for actually earning a certificate, MOOCs are fundamentally different from traditional classes— and students use them in fundamentally different ways.
Data from more than 1.8 million students enrolled in 36 MOOCs offered by the University of Pennsylvania show that students treat MOOCs like a buffet, sampling the material according to their interests and goals. Some are curious about the subject matter and just watch one or two video lectures; others use the discussion forums to connect with their intellectual peers around the world. Of all enrolled students, nearly 60 percent watch at least one video, complete at least one assignment, or post at least once in a forum.
The Rule of Thirds applies, they write. Roughly one-third of students who sign up for a course watch the first lecture, one-third of those students watch the Week Four lecture, and of those, another third watch the Week Eight lecture and, finally, one-third of the remainder go on to complete enough of the assignments, quizzes, and exams to pass the course and receive a certificate.
What’s more important is the 60 percent engagement rate, they argue.
To qualify for federal aid, students must enroll in accredited, degree-granting programs. Utah Sen. Mike Lee proposes letting states accredit alternative postsecondary programs, such as job training, apprenticeships and distance-learning options. People seeking skills — but not necessarily a degree — could assemble the education they need, a la carte, using federal grants and loans to pay their costs.
These days, more tests ask students to write short essays, not just answer multiple-choice questions. But it’s slow and expensive to hire humans do the grading. Essay-grading ‘bots are cheap and fast, but are they any good?
It’s easy to fool a robot grader, Les Perelman, a former writing director at MIT, tells the Chronicle of Higher Education.
His Basic Automatic B.S. Essay Language Generator, or Babel, can crank out robot-fooling essays using one to three keywords. Each sentence is grammatically correct, structurally sound and meaningless. Robots can’t tell the difference, says Perelman.
He fed in “privacy.” Babel wrote:
“Privateness has not been and undoubtedly never will be lauded, precarious, and decent. Humankind will always subjugate privateness.”
MY Access!, an online writing-instruction product, graded the essay immediately: 5.4 points out of 6, with “advanced” ratings for “focus and meaning” and “language use and style.”
Robots and human graders awarded similar scores to 22,000 essays by high school and middle school students, concluded at study by Mark D. Shermis, a former dean of the College of Education at the University of Akron, in 2012.
Computer scientists at edX, the nonprofit online-course provider co-founded by MIT, are working on the Enhanced AI Scoring Engine, or EASE. The software can learn and imitate the grading styles of particular professors,” reports the Chronicle.
Some of edX’s university partners have used EASE to provide feedback to students in massive open online courses (MOOCs).
“Coding academies,” which offer intensive, short-term training in programming skills, don’t rely on state or federal financial aid. Job placement rates are sky-high. But California’s Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education is threatening to shut down coding schools unless they apply for licenses.
BPPE regulations require schools to get curriculum changes by the agency, which may take up to six months. “We change our curriculum every three weeks, and we can’t teach technology that’s six months old,” Shereef Bishay, founder of Dev BootCamp, said.
Will online learning deMOOCratize higher education? Poorly prepared students need face-to-face support to succeed.
Dhawal Shah signed up for one of the first MOOCs from Stanford in November, 2011 and started Class Central to track new courses on offer. MOOCs are growing rapidly, he writes on EdSurge. There are about 100 MOOCs in 2012 and almost 700 starting in 2013. More than 1200 courses have been announced so far for 2014. He estimates there will be 10 million MOOC registrants.
Completion rates are low, Shah concedes. “It’s still not clear whether they have a sustainable business model.” But students keep signing up.
Coursera offers nearly half of all MOOCs, but competition is growing.
Class Central lists a number of education and teaching MOOCs. California’s High Tech High has two starting in January: New School Creation and Deeper Learning 101. MATCH Teacher Residency offers Surviving Your Rookie Year of Teaching.
“Speeding up college and making it cheaper risks dumbing it down,” according to some professors, reports Timothy Pratt in The Atlantic.
Under pressure to turn out more students, more quickly and for less money, and to tie graduates’ skills to workforce needs, higher-education institutions and policy makers have been busy reducing the number of required credits, giving credit for life experience, and cutting some courses, while putting others online.
Now critics are raising the alarm that speeding up college and making it cheaper risks dumbing it down.
. . . “We are creating Walmarts of higher education—convenient, cheap, and second-rate,” says Karen Arnold, associate professor at the Educational Leadership and Higher Education Department at Boston College.
The Campaign for the Future of Higher Education — mostly university professors — will meet in January to discuss the rise of online courses and performance-based funding.
If states fund universities based on measures such as graduation rates, rather than enrollment, faculty will face a “subtle pressure” to pass more students, says Rudy Fichtenbaum, president of the American Association of University Professors.
Only 56.1 percent of college students earn a degree within six years. President Obama has called for increasing the number of college graduates to make the U.S. first in the world in educated workers.
In a few years, MOOCs went from fad to destroyer of higher ed to flop, but MOOCs have a future, writes Rachelle DeJong on Minding the Campus. It lies “somewhere between adapting to a niche clientele and rebounding to capture” hundreds of thousands of students.
She envisions three possibilites.
First, MOOCs could become “advanced technical schools and outsourced employee training,” as predicted by Walter Russell Mead.
Udacity founder Sebastian Thrun is is moving in this direction after giving up on competing with brick-and-mortar BA programs.
The new MOOC-ish master’s degree program at Georgia Tech is an example: AT&T is a major funder of the Georgia Tech initiative, planning to send its employees through the program and to hire additional high-performing program graduates. Forbes reports that a growing number of businesses are authorizing MOOC versions of their training courses.
MOOCs could be “usefully middlebrow,” a sort of Readers Digest version of college courses, suggests University of Michigan professor Jonathan Freedman. It might be college lite, “but it’s not comic books, either,” writes DeJong.
It’s also possible no-cost MOOCs will “encourage renewed interest in the humanities,” DeJong writes. When college costs are high, students are drawn to what they see as practical STEM courses.