The future of college is online, and it’s cheaper(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
The future of college is online, and it’s cheaper
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/25/opinion/online-college-coronavirus.html
74 comments
I agree — it’s not that online-learning has to be intrinsically, objectively of lower quality than traditional college education (indeed, some online-first courses I took for fun now offered on Coursera were better than I remember some of my in-person courses), but to think that college is only courses misses the point: it’s the opportunity to grow not just academically, but, just as important, socially and independently — at most schools, you’re meeting with peers from all over the world (or at least from outside your hometown), have direct interactions with professors renowned in their field who are (in my experience) eager to personally introduce you to opportunities you wouldn’t know about from searching the internet, and access to a vast collection of resources much more restricted to the public. To say college is just getting a degree is to miss out on all of the non-purely academic opportunities colleges offer.
But aside from all of that — it’s also where many (not all) young adults go after high school to figure out who they are, who they want their friends to be, and what they want to do, as for most of them it’s their first taste of living as their own fully independent person. Something has to fill that vacuum.
But aside from all of that — it’s also where many (not all) young adults go after high school to figure out who they are, who they want their friends to be, and what they want to do, as for most of them it’s their first taste of living as their own fully independent person. Something has to fill that vacuum.
I completely agree. I'm not even sure what that would look like. The article implies moving to a completely online experience, but how does that actually work? A student graduates high school and then what? Stays home for another 4 years, except now they are at home the entire day attending lecture and doing home work at night? How and where do you meet friends or dates? Even as an introvert that complete lack of socializing would be difficult. It's basically what people who worked from home pre-COVID would talk about. Needing to put extra effort to not be isolated, and have breaks from being in the same spot the whole day.
And I think there would be many types of classes that would suffer from being delivered online. I think most of us here are thinking in STEM terms, but what about others? The article mentions remote acting classes. Seriously? It's one thing to 'get by' with workarounds, but I'd imagine being in the same place as other people is an important part of acting. There's no way you can replace in-person teaching for instruments. And discussion heavy classes, would be a drag. Even a 10 person meeting at work is awkward with all the network glitches and delays etc.
Sure it might and does work for some, but I think a totally online experience would be a definite downgrade for most.
And I think there would be many types of classes that would suffer from being delivered online. I think most of us here are thinking in STEM terms, but what about others? The article mentions remote acting classes. Seriously? It's one thing to 'get by' with workarounds, but I'd imagine being in the same place as other people is an important part of acting. There's no way you can replace in-person teaching for instruments. And discussion heavy classes, would be a drag. Even a 10 person meeting at work is awkward with all the network glitches and delays etc.
Sure it might and does work for some, but I think a totally online experience would be a definite downgrade for most.
Met my wife and most of my best friends in college. I can’t even fathom the hole that a purely online experience would have left in my life.
I've been to college and by far, the most valuable thing i got a little piece of paper that says I'm cool: the bachelors degree in computer science, and roughly 10% of what I learned is useful. nothing else mattered, at all.
> Something has to fill that vacuum.
There’s always the military or a peacetime national service program.
There’s always the military or a peacetime national service program.
Both of those would seem to imply the virtual exclusion of anyone who is not a US-citizen
Non-citizens are free to join the military for the record. It’s one of the more accessible ways of becoming a citizen on an accelerated timeframe.
I was a top student. I have taken online college classes.
I didn't find them inferior to in-person classes in terms of teaching the material. In some ways, they can be better (though they are also gameable -- on the other hand, kids have been gaming the system since time immemorial).
From what I have read, elite colleges are a place where personal connections are made. Co-founders are often people you met at college and bonded with at college.
This never did anything for me, personally. Maybe I went to the wrong schools. Maybe I'm the wrong gender. Maybe there's some other factor I'm missing.
From what I have read, the strongest argument for attending college in person at an elite school is because of the personal connections that can result. Off the top of my head, I don't know of data explicitly stating this mostly applies to male students, but I would not be shocked if that was the conclusion of some study.
There is, after all, the old tradition of saying a woman is going to college to "get her MRS." In other words, to get married and then to supposedly "do nothing" with her degree while she raises kids and supports her husband's career.
I didn't find them inferior to in-person classes in terms of teaching the material. In some ways, they can be better (though they are also gameable -- on the other hand, kids have been gaming the system since time immemorial).
From what I have read, elite colleges are a place where personal connections are made. Co-founders are often people you met at college and bonded with at college.
This never did anything for me, personally. Maybe I went to the wrong schools. Maybe I'm the wrong gender. Maybe there's some other factor I'm missing.
From what I have read, the strongest argument for attending college in person at an elite school is because of the personal connections that can result. Off the top of my head, I don't know of data explicitly stating this mostly applies to male students, but I would not be shocked if that was the conclusion of some study.
There is, after all, the old tradition of saying a woman is going to college to "get her MRS." In other words, to get married and then to supposedly "do nothing" with her degree while she raises kids and supports her husband's career.
> From what I have read, elite colleges are a place where personal connections are made. Co-founders are often people you met at college and bonded with at college.
I took a business law class (intellectual property law) during my (nearly complete) engineering PhD. I found the culture in business school to be really odd. The class was a mixture of law students, MBA students, and STEM students. You were required to bring a name plate, which I found really weird as a STEM person. To me a class is about learning the subject, not the specific personalities of each student.
Later it all clicked to me: A MBA is partly about making personal connections and the name plates help with that.
I had a similar experience in the business school startup class I took until the drop date. The basic lesson of the class seemed to be to not spend a lot of money until you're confident your product will be profitable. (Or at least that's the main thing I remember.) The class had name plates, and was fairly heavy on social gatherings to talk with others. Learning seemed secondary to me. The class had a few days where people pitched different business ideas they had, and I realized that I had little in common with everyone there from the pitches, so the chance of making a genuine connection seemed low. I had no problem dropping the class.
Personally, I think I'd network better in other contexts.
I took a business law class (intellectual property law) during my (nearly complete) engineering PhD. I found the culture in business school to be really odd. The class was a mixture of law students, MBA students, and STEM students. You were required to bring a name plate, which I found really weird as a STEM person. To me a class is about learning the subject, not the specific personalities of each student.
Later it all clicked to me: A MBA is partly about making personal connections and the name plates help with that.
I had a similar experience in the business school startup class I took until the drop date. The basic lesson of the class seemed to be to not spend a lot of money until you're confident your product will be profitable. (Or at least that's the main thing I remember.) The class had name plates, and was fairly heavy on social gatherings to talk with others. Learning seemed secondary to me. The class had a few days where people pitched different business ideas they had, and I realized that I had little in common with everyone there from the pitches, so the chance of making a genuine connection seemed low. I had no problem dropping the class.
Personally, I think I'd network better in other contexts.
If it makes you feel any better, I'm male, and this was pretty much my experience, too.
Hmm, I think classes were probably last on my list of what I gained out of college?
Most of what I found important:
- Perspective. In high school you're the best by a longshot, but then once you get to college you end up just average or below average. Then, you get to constantly interact with all these people all the time, learn from them, and expand how you view and approach things. This also means this is the easiest time to meet the smartest and most capable people, right at the ground level, before they become founders and VPs. Maintain the relationships through the years, and they'll be the people that you tap or that tap you.
- Hyper-social interaction. Never again will you be surrounded by so many people in close proximity in the same phase of life trying to achieve the same goals. You can try to recreate this by living in a city, but you'll never have everyone within walking distance, just spending 110% of your time with everyone. Just walk to class and have 3 meaningful interactions along the way. This is also why so many people marry someone they metin college. It's just way easier when you meet 100 new people to date every day.
- Independence. You don't need college for it, but it is a key part of the college experience. You learn how to live on your own, how to live with roommates, how to do all your own chores, how to feed yourself. You set your own schedule for how you want to use your time, how much time you want to spend on classes (or not), how to juggle all your responsibilities, any clubs you want, and of course all your social time.
- Career prep. This is a bit more college specific, because the culture on campus will differ, but you learn by talking with people in your class and years above what is needed for each phase. So, find out what other people needed to do to get their choice of job offers before graduating, and start prepping on those things. See what internships your peers are getting and what it takes to get the name brand ones. The college itself is also a powerful brand name and can make your future job searches easier, if people recognize the college and form a favorable first impression because of it.
- Classes. Probably the two main things I learned are 1) how to modulate the amount of work i put in to get the grades i wanted. You don't always need perfect grades, and you don't always need to study every single night to get them, so figure out how to put in exactly the amout of effort you need to get the exact GPA that you want. 2) what things are there in the world. So, I basically don't remember anything that i learned in college, but I remember all the princicples and the ideas and the fact that such things exist. I still have my textbooks that I can look things up in, but now with google, it's even easier. I just need to know that there is some principle or idea or some way to solve this problem, and i just look it up. Without taking the classes, I wouldn't even know where to begin. But now i just need to keep all the pointers to the knowledge, not the actual knowledge itself.
Most of what I found important:
- Perspective. In high school you're the best by a longshot, but then once you get to college you end up just average or below average. Then, you get to constantly interact with all these people all the time, learn from them, and expand how you view and approach things. This also means this is the easiest time to meet the smartest and most capable people, right at the ground level, before they become founders and VPs. Maintain the relationships through the years, and they'll be the people that you tap or that tap you.
- Hyper-social interaction. Never again will you be surrounded by so many people in close proximity in the same phase of life trying to achieve the same goals. You can try to recreate this by living in a city, but you'll never have everyone within walking distance, just spending 110% of your time with everyone. Just walk to class and have 3 meaningful interactions along the way. This is also why so many people marry someone they metin college. It's just way easier when you meet 100 new people to date every day.
- Independence. You don't need college for it, but it is a key part of the college experience. You learn how to live on your own, how to live with roommates, how to do all your own chores, how to feed yourself. You set your own schedule for how you want to use your time, how much time you want to spend on classes (or not), how to juggle all your responsibilities, any clubs you want, and of course all your social time.
- Career prep. This is a bit more college specific, because the culture on campus will differ, but you learn by talking with people in your class and years above what is needed for each phase. So, find out what other people needed to do to get their choice of job offers before graduating, and start prepping on those things. See what internships your peers are getting and what it takes to get the name brand ones. The college itself is also a powerful brand name and can make your future job searches easier, if people recognize the college and form a favorable first impression because of it.
- Classes. Probably the two main things I learned are 1) how to modulate the amount of work i put in to get the grades i wanted. You don't always need perfect grades, and you don't always need to study every single night to get them, so figure out how to put in exactly the amout of effort you need to get the exact GPA that you want. 2) what things are there in the world. So, I basically don't remember anything that i learned in college, but I remember all the princicples and the ideas and the fact that such things exist. I still have my textbooks that I can look things up in, but now with google, it's even easier. I just need to know that there is some principle or idea or some way to solve this problem, and i just look it up. Without taking the classes, I wouldn't even know where to begin. But now i just need to keep all the pointers to the knowledge, not the actual knowledge itself.
I'm going into college next year and while I've always loved online learning, I would be devastated to have college fully remotely. I'm not sure how badly it would effect me in terms of academics; I didn't really do much 2nd sem anyways, but I need to move out and learn to live on my own.
Online is just a delivery mechanism, an implementation detail.
There is still the rigor of getting accepted into a program, proctoring exams, quality of teaching staff, guiding projects, grading, feedback, and curriculum progression.
If we get hung up over the fact that physical lectures are not happening, and is now being delivered via digital tools, then that says a lot about the value of that program, that it loses it’s power soon as we modify one simple parameter.
We can adjust that one parameter for probably over half of all degree programs, and keep the requirements for necessary physical things like lab work.
There is still the rigor of getting accepted into a program, proctoring exams, quality of teaching staff, guiding projects, grading, feedback, and curriculum progression.
If we get hung up over the fact that physical lectures are not happening, and is now being delivered via digital tools, then that says a lot about the value of that program, that it loses it’s power soon as we modify one simple parameter.
We can adjust that one parameter for probably over half of all degree programs, and keep the requirements for necessary physical things like lab work.
> If we get hung up over the fact that physical lectures are not happening, and is now being delivered via digital tools, then that says a lot about the value of that program, that it loses it’s power soon as we modify one simple parameter.
> We can adjust that one parameter for probably over half of all degree programs, and keep the requirements for necessary physical things like lab work.
That's not the only parameter you're cutting out, though. You're also removing the "hallway track" to use conference parlance. It's definitely possible to make friends online, but it's much easier to make friends with people you spend a lot of time in person with.
> We can adjust that one parameter for probably over half of all degree programs, and keep the requirements for necessary physical things like lab work.
That's not the only parameter you're cutting out, though. You're also removing the "hallway track" to use conference parlance. It's definitely possible to make friends online, but it's much easier to make friends with people you spend a lot of time in person with.
Correct. There’s also a value in getting away from where you’re from and meeting entirely new people. The prices are too high, but I can’t be convinced that it’s possible to replace that kind of immersive experience with the internet.
Besides, after two months of running virtually all communication over Zoom, does anyone still think video for everything is good enough?
Besides, after two months of running virtually all communication over Zoom, does anyone still think video for everything is good enough?
You didn't say what you do think the point of college is. Just that unnamed people other than you misunderstand it.
Granted, college is not just about gaining certification by authorities. But that's only your claim if I am very charitable. Your claim instead is about learning. Even spending money, meeting new people, and drinking irresponsibly can be learning experiences so I also have no idea what your claim actually is. Or why people seem to agree with you.
Granted, college is not just about gaining certification by authorities. But that's only your claim if I am very charitable. Your claim instead is about learning. Even spending money, meeting new people, and drinking irresponsibly can be learning experiences so I also have no idea what your claim actually is. Or why people seem to agree with you.
Not only that but I'm surprised the article doesn't mention, in light of companies adjusting pay for people who "work from anywhere", that the validity of a degree itself may end up playing a part. What if online degrees end up being valued less over all?
It won't surprise me if NYT changes it's tone some years from now and reflects back on "what could have been". Not the first time, not the last time.
It won't surprise me if NYT changes it's tone some years from now and reflects back on "what could have been". Not the first time, not the last time.
Sounds like snake oil when you put it that way.
[deleted]
Honestly a lot of the newer and "innovative" online programs I've seen, even from legitimate institutions, sound very suspicious when I read about them
[deleted]
>online education is something you want other parents' children to do
This is true of a lot of college alternatives, from online classes to state schools to vocational training. Everyone insists that we should view these as viable, even superior options. But it's hard not to think that when push comes to shove most parents still want their own kids to go to Harvard (and are willing to go to some lengths to make that happen).
This is true of a lot of college alternatives, from online classes to state schools to vocational training. Everyone insists that we should view these as viable, even superior options. But it's hard not to think that when push comes to shove most parents still want their own kids to go to Harvard (and are willing to go to some lengths to make that happen).
I agree, not sure why this was downvoted. Peter Thiel (not someone I admire) had a good point about this - when Michelle Obama (someone I do admire) says that community college or your state school are fine places to get an education, it isn’t advice meant for Sasha or Malia.
But part of that is because they are part of the elite with the resource stockpile that comes with that status. If you are starting with zero or -30k then the math for community college ain’t so bad
> "online education is something you want other parents' children to do"
Perhaps a degree is a proxy for measuring parental investment
Perhaps a degree is a proxy for measuring parental investment
I’ve sat through so many lectures where it’s just one dude talking, with a sprinkle of a question here and there.
Higher education just has this weird power, they are held in such reverence that they are actually able to say ‘no, this magical monologue can only be heard in person’.
Make it mostly remote, bring the kids in for proctored exams, enable insane flexibility with respect to people’s time. Enable all types of schedules and accommodations, which believe it or not is also a barrier, not just money.
My college simply did not offer any of it’s science classes after work hours, definitely no chance to catch one on a weekend. We had to be there for the magical in person monologue.
Higher education just has this weird power, they are held in such reverence that they are actually able to say ‘no, this magical monologue can only be heard in person’.
Make it mostly remote, bring the kids in for proctored exams, enable insane flexibility with respect to people’s time. Enable all types of schedules and accommodations, which believe it or not is also a barrier, not just money.
My college simply did not offer any of it’s science classes after work hours, definitely no chance to catch one on a weekend. We had to be there for the magical in person monologue.
To be fair, lectures are cheap (and entirely worthless) but labs and recitations are somewhat expensive and tailored (to varying degrees) to each student.
Not saying college shouldn't die - it's a racket. However, I can't imagine performing any of my magnetism or optics labs remotely.
Not saying college shouldn't die - it's a racket. However, I can't imagine performing any of my magnetism or optics labs remotely.
How about all lectures go online and you come in for a couple of days a week for labs? Lets cut the price in half and stop the insanity.
There was a time a kid could get a summer job and put himself through medical or law school.
There was a time a kid could get a summer job and put himself through medical or law school.
Yeah, definitely can’t substitute lab work, or proctoring exams since that’s one of the better ways to curb cheating (which would only get worse online).
There’s a way to do this, but it starts with first destroying some of our gods - the almighty lecture.
There’s a way to do this, but it starts with first destroying some of our gods - the almighty lecture.
This is basically how the Open University currently works. They send you the materials for the module, you submit a bunch of assignments that are marked by tutors throughout the year, then sit an externally invigilated and marked exam at the end.
It seems to work well apart from people losing motivation, but there could be unexploited network effects in large numbers of people supporting each other more informally if it became the norm.
It seems to work well apart from people losing motivation, but there could be unexploited network effects in large numbers of people supporting each other more informally if it became the norm.
There is a lot of dropout in the introductory classes (I remember one person didn't make it to the end of the first tutorial). Once you get past that it becomes more stable.
There were forums where you could get peer support and I think some people even got together for regular in-person sessions.
There were forums where you could get peer support and I think some people even got together for regular in-person sessions.
I teach at a university. We aren't (completely) evil sith lords who have somehow tricked everyone with our big conspiracy. And students aren't irrational fools who love to waste their money. We'd love to do more online programs. Everyone has been trying to get them or two going, including us. The problem is most students can't handle them. It's like buying a home exercise device. They usually just gather dust if you aren't surrounded by peers and trainers pushing you to use them.
Over the years I'd say student self-motivation has gone down not up for a variety of reasons, requiring a lot more hand-holding. More people go to college than before, plus in STEM most of our students come from countries where school consists of watching lectures passively then cramming the night before exams.
Over the years I'd say student self-motivation has gone down not up for a variety of reasons, requiring a lot more hand-holding. More people go to college than before, plus in STEM most of our students come from countries where school consists of watching lectures passively then cramming the night before exams.
I know that I needed hand-holding to get through college. Oddly enough, there were some subjects that I was able to learn easily on my own, including programming and electronics. Other subjects, such as math and physics, I just didn't have the self discipline to keep up on my own, even though I was sincerely interested in them. I majored in those subjects, but continue to use programming and electronics in my work.
I don't know anybody who has brought themselves up to a useful level of competence in math or physics, through self-study.
I don't know anybody who has brought themselves up to a useful level of competence in math or physics, through self-study.
I'm not convinced. The response I've seen from traditional students has been overwhelming negative. Added to that is the negative legacy of online education (which is of course a whole story itself)
Education is just one part of attending a college. Credentialling is another really big one, and beyond that theres a ton of various social components that add to the value of attending a school. With online schools, you either lose out or get a degraded version of those.
I've seen a lot of arguments from people in non-software fields doubt online degrees, including engineers say they'd be wary of an online degree regardless of its accreditation and physics graduates raise question about not having access to extremely expensive equipment for labs.
And yes, a legitimate online degree wont indicate its online (although it can be deduced in some circumstances), so ideally the credentialling remains valid at least.
Education is just one part of attending a college. Credentialling is another really big one, and beyond that theres a ton of various social components that add to the value of attending a school. With online schools, you either lose out or get a degraded version of those.
I've seen a lot of arguments from people in non-software fields doubt online degrees, including engineers say they'd be wary of an online degree regardless of its accreditation and physics graduates raise question about not having access to extremely expensive equipment for labs.
And yes, a legitimate online degree wont indicate its online (although it can be deduced in some circumstances), so ideally the credentialling remains valid at least.
I am not sure why professors still think college is about education (as the author in this article who is a professor is assuming). And that students learn in the class. No - that is not what it is about. Most students in top tier universities are smart enough to learn themselves. There are already tons of online education courses for them to get this done. The goal of college is more about networking, having a good time and credentialism. And that is what they pay for. You are not going to Harvard MBA to get their education - it is all about the people you will get to know and credential you will get once you graduate. That is worth $200k. Not a Zoom class sitting in front of a computer in a far off corner of the world with nothing else to do.
Not even that it’s about signaling. A Harvard education is no better than the other top 50 schools but it signals elite status to future employers and clients.
I worked for CTLT at WSU for two years - 2003[0] - 2005. Distance learning is hard, and I feel like people are not appreciating how difficult assessment is. There is a book on this[1] which covers a bunch of finicky stuff; we used a much earlier version for our designs.
CTLT is no more; I'm sure WSU is still working[2] on distance learning.
[0]: https://blog.ryjones.org/2003/09/18/For-want-of-a-nail
[1]: https://www.powells.com/book/-9781118456149
[2]: https://online.wsu.edu
CTLT is no more; I'm sure WSU is still working[2] on distance learning.
[0]: https://blog.ryjones.org/2003/09/18/For-want-of-a-nail
[1]: https://www.powells.com/book/-9781118456149
[2]: https://online.wsu.edu
I definitely believe that there is a need to transition college programs into an online format, or at least present the option to college students. It is, however, tricky for various fields of study. While for computer science it's definitely easy to offer an online curriculum, I would say the value for a lot of the physical sciences comes from the hands on experience. This is the case for business students as well, where most of the value of in person classes is derived from the network that one builds. It's much harder to build those kinds of relationships without engaging with other students face to face.
That being said, in my experience regarding the computer science perspective, having mandatory in person lectures added little to no value in terms of actual knowledge gained. In fact, I would argue that not being able to participate online was a detriment to my personal college experience. In order to avoid taking on massive amounts of debt, I had to work full-time while doing my undergrad. I was lucky enough to land a full time development gig my sophomore year, but it required being in the office 80% of the week. Between work, commuting, and sitting in a lecture hall, I had very few hours left in the day to actually work on my assignments and this caused me to make sacrifices in order to manage my time.
There was nothing communicated in our lectures that could not have been communicated in a pre-recorded video or via a class forum. The option to participate online will open up doors for many individuals who might not have been able to pursue higher education before, such as those who have to work or take care of their families.
The article mentions the OMSCS program at Georgia Tech [1], and I can't recommend this program enough. I'm currently about half way through the curriculum, and the format of the program alone addresses almost every issue I've had with my undergrad. I am able to watch lectures and do projects at my own pace which makes managing my time significantly easier. It also comes at 10% of the cost of my undergrad and that's a price that's hard to beat.
[1] https://omscs.gatech.edu/
That being said, in my experience regarding the computer science perspective, having mandatory in person lectures added little to no value in terms of actual knowledge gained. In fact, I would argue that not being able to participate online was a detriment to my personal college experience. In order to avoid taking on massive amounts of debt, I had to work full-time while doing my undergrad. I was lucky enough to land a full time development gig my sophomore year, but it required being in the office 80% of the week. Between work, commuting, and sitting in a lecture hall, I had very few hours left in the day to actually work on my assignments and this caused me to make sacrifices in order to manage my time.
There was nothing communicated in our lectures that could not have been communicated in a pre-recorded video or via a class forum. The option to participate online will open up doors for many individuals who might not have been able to pursue higher education before, such as those who have to work or take care of their families.
The article mentions the OMSCS program at Georgia Tech [1], and I can't recommend this program enough. I'm currently about half way through the curriculum, and the format of the program alone addresses almost every issue I've had with my undergrad. I am able to watch lectures and do projects at my own pace which makes managing my time significantly easier. It also comes at 10% of the cost of my undergrad and that's a price that's hard to beat.
[1] https://omscs.gatech.edu/
Teaching second semester CS students atm I unfortunately see that many students just can't handle it remotely.
Although I admit that I'm skeptical if students unable to do some work independently are... a good fit.
I live in a European country where things are different of course. With university being basically free, this piece is a non-issue. Also people trust public institutions much more - for a reason. The university where I studied had no problem kicking out 70% of the students. I teach at a private institution and every year I have to dumb down things because they pay and controlling and management and blah. We're now sooo far away from the material taught at the comparable university course. And with this remote semester even much worse.
Furthermore, traditionally out university studies were already organized in a very "free" way - no specifically enforced order or lots of mandatory presence. Do your exams and in the end show all your certificates. Most lab courses were a meeting once and then everyone working on their own at home anyway. It was mostly the first 2 years with the math whiteboard sessions with mandatory presence. The rest I did mostly from home anyway and skipped most lectures.
Lastly, many companies are still reluctant to hire graduates with "only a bachelor" as it's still often seen as a dropout degree (we made the switch from out classic 5 years diploma studies just a decade ago or so). So go figure what the opinion on some MOOC certificate.
So to to sum up I don't see much chance here because: - many can:t handle it - university cheaper than udacity nanodegrees - good job compatibility anyway (at least for studies like CS anyway but if not you can't do a MOOC either) - no trust by companies in private edu providers
I live in a European country where things are different of course. With university being basically free, this piece is a non-issue. Also people trust public institutions much more - for a reason. The university where I studied had no problem kicking out 70% of the students. I teach at a private institution and every year I have to dumb down things because they pay and controlling and management and blah. We're now sooo far away from the material taught at the comparable university course. And with this remote semester even much worse.
Furthermore, traditionally out university studies were already organized in a very "free" way - no specifically enforced order or lots of mandatory presence. Do your exams and in the end show all your certificates. Most lab courses were a meeting once and then everyone working on their own at home anyway. It was mostly the first 2 years with the math whiteboard sessions with mandatory presence. The rest I did mostly from home anyway and skipped most lectures.
Lastly, many companies are still reluctant to hire graduates with "only a bachelor" as it's still often seen as a dropout degree (we made the switch from out classic 5 years diploma studies just a decade ago or so). So go figure what the opinion on some MOOC certificate.
So to to sum up I don't see much chance here because: - many can:t handle it - university cheaper than udacity nanodegrees - good job compatibility anyway (at least for studies like CS anyway but if not you can't do a MOOC either) - no trust by companies in private edu providers
Two interesting examples of viable, accredited, online schools:
Western Governors University: https://www.wgu.edu/ (also mentioned in wikipedia): state aid available from multiple states it seems (per wkp).
BYU Pathway Worldwide and associated programs. It requires a Church affiliation but not necessarily membership (I think). I think there is good personal support, interaction, tuition is much lower, bachelors programs (like IT, business, others) are available, programs excellent, and is also suitable for those who need to first become qualified for entering a university (edit: i.e., learning English which is used in curriculum, and other basic skills), then provides that university. More info is in Wikipedia and I have gathered a bit of info including linking to a news article that explains it well I think, here: http://lukecall.net/e-9223372036854578440.html .
Western Governors University: https://www.wgu.edu/ (also mentioned in wikipedia): state aid available from multiple states it seems (per wkp).
BYU Pathway Worldwide and associated programs. It requires a Church affiliation but not necessarily membership (I think). I think there is good personal support, interaction, tuition is much lower, bachelors programs (like IT, business, others) are available, programs excellent, and is also suitable for those who need to first become qualified for entering a university (edit: i.e., learning English which is used in curriculum, and other basic skills), then provides that university. More info is in Wikipedia and I have gathered a bit of info including linking to a news article that explains it well I think, here: http://lukecall.net/e-9223372036854578440.html .
The two degrees in the articles are examples of "MOOC-based degrees". These are launched by MOOC providers like Coursera, edX, and FutureLearn.
In all 50+ such degrees have been announced [1]. ~30 of these were announced in 2018, but there was a slow down in 2019 with only 11 announced [2].
A majority of degrees tend to be Master's, but there are few bachelors. Most recently Coursera announced that their Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from University of London had 2,000+ students enrolled. It was announced last year and costs 10,088 – 15,132 GBP.
Disclaimer: I am the founder of Class Central, a Tripadvisor for Online Education. But we also write about the MOOC industry in depth.
[1] https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-based-masters-degre...
[2] https://www.classcentral.com/report/moocs-stats-and-trends-2...
In all 50+ such degrees have been announced [1]. ~30 of these were announced in 2018, but there was a slow down in 2019 with only 11 announced [2].
A majority of degrees tend to be Master's, but there are few bachelors. Most recently Coursera announced that their Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from University of London had 2,000+ students enrolled. It was announced last year and costs 10,088 – 15,132 GBP.
Disclaimer: I am the founder of Class Central, a Tripadvisor for Online Education. But we also write about the MOOC industry in depth.
[1] https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-based-masters-degre...
[2] https://www.classcentral.com/report/moocs-stats-and-trends-2...
One interesting thing I've noticed in a handful of the MOOC degrees (only a few of them at the moment offer this) is alternative pathways. I've seen masters degrees offer pathways for literally anyone, even with no prior education to be admitted into them and acquire a masters degree.
On one hand, I'm all for democratizing education, and have taken some courses from said programs individually (typically the offer a "preview") and from what I've seenb hey aren't something anyone without prior subjects knowledge can just fake themselves through.
On the other hand, a lot of the advertising from the schools themselves read like something from a for-profit and I wonder whether programs like these will weaken the reputation of the degrees or even that of the schools themselves. Paraphrasing something I've read on here before, sometimes, the degree is more about signalling than education.
On one hand, I'm all for democratizing education, and have taken some courses from said programs individually (typically the offer a "preview") and from what I've seenb hey aren't something anyone without prior subjects knowledge can just fake themselves through.
On the other hand, a lot of the advertising from the schools themselves read like something from a for-profit and I wonder whether programs like these will weaken the reputation of the degrees or even that of the schools themselves. Paraphrasing something I've read on here before, sometimes, the degree is more about signalling than education.
It seems like if college study is going to move online there will still need to be opportunities for young people to come together and network in a way that will be functionally similar to a college campus. I could see some sort of cooperative college town without the college emerging...
Youth hostels. It is a becoming a trend to put work spaces and decent chairs in the hostel for remote workers and students.
It's not in-class interactions (party? Networking? Labs?) versus being alone in a room watching lecture videos.
If students don't have to live on campus to get the credits and the degree, it opens a world of possibilities. They can work part-time/intern in a real company and network while completing their online courses. Receive salary at 18, network with other interns and older employees at the company, participate in industrial grade lab experiments if that happens at the company.
Say Google would open "3y part time internships" allowing students to enroll in a credentialing University and complete courses and get a degree online while working at the company. The in-campus experience doesn't sound very compelling now.
If students don't have to live on campus to get the credits and the degree, it opens a world of possibilities. They can work part-time/intern in a real company and network while completing their online courses. Receive salary at 18, network with other interns and older employees at the company, participate in industrial grade lab experiments if that happens at the company.
Say Google would open "3y part time internships" allowing students to enroll in a credentialing University and complete courses and get a degree online while working at the company. The in-campus experience doesn't sound very compelling now.
Shopify actually has a program like this: https://devdegree.ca
Probably the single best course I took in college was an advanced course on Metaphysics (my degree is in philosophy.) It was during the summer, so the class was about 3 hours long, and there were only 3 other students and the professor. The level of discussion and feedback was incredible - there was very little lecturing and essentially just discussion and Socratic-style investigation into the paper of the day.
I’m not sure how this experience can be replicated by an online lecture. Even group video chat is a poor replacement for a small in-person discussion group. I can see online videos replacing the lecture format for larger or general education classes, but to me personally, the real value was in the small discussion groups.
I’m not sure how this experience can be replicated by an online lecture. Even group video chat is a poor replacement for a small in-person discussion group. I can see online videos replacing the lecture format for larger or general education classes, but to me personally, the real value was in the small discussion groups.
What did you read?
Pretty much just a different paper on metaphysics every week. It’s been a decade and I don’t remember exactly, but most of the names listed here sound familiar (Quine, Carnap, Ayer, etc.):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophy#Analytic_m...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_philosophy#Analytic_m...
What folly! Would you hire a chemist, physicist, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer or aeronautical engineer who didn't have any lab experience? Never mind doctors, nurses, dentists, dental hygienists - and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on. The biggest thing separating college from high school is hands-on experience. The degrees that can be learned entirely online are the ones most-likely destined for the trash bin as it's going to be expected that everyone has that knowledge since it's so readily available and accessible.
It's about doing, not just learning.
It's about doing, not just learning.
It is indeed very cheap and convenient for colleges. For students, it will just mean the loss of a community, of a network and even more isolation in an already deeply solitary society.
There are other way that can make education cheaper, ways that do not involve the commoditization of classes and the destruction of the student experience.
There are other way that can make education cheaper, ways that do not involve the commoditization of classes and the destruction of the student experience.
If higher education is all about networking then why they've not been disrupted by cheaper ways to network?
Why there exists nothing other than higher education institute charging arm and leg for people to network?
Can't we have simple institute where people simply go to brainstorm on random stuff and with no focus on grades or anything at all.
Why there exists nothing other than higher education institute charging arm and leg for people to network?
Can't we have simple institute where people simply go to brainstorm on random stuff and with no focus on grades or anything at all.
Higher education doesn't have to be expensive.
Because signaling is hard to distrupt. It’s like asking why coach hand bags haven’t been distrusted.
A lot of people are thinking of starting the university education as the primary means to make some money off of your work. They don't make that as a side effect of the cost of the college degree.
A lot of the "higher education", and the "college", are just "people who get to keep that kind of money" as we see in the article (I know there is a lot of money in universities around the world). I wish I'd see the financial returns for such programs as the ones with the most money, but it doesn't make sense to me to go to one without being very rich. Sure we have a good business model and we can afford a college degree, but there's no guarantee that the people with the least money are the ones spending the most money.
A lot of the "higher education", and the "college", are just "people who get to keep that kind of money" as we see in the article (I know there is a lot of money in universities around the world). I wish I'd see the financial returns for such programs as the ones with the most money, but it doesn't make sense to me to go to one without being very rich. Sure we have a good business model and we can afford a college degree, but there's no guarantee that the people with the least money are the ones spending the most money.
Parallel online degrees programs as mentioned in the article already exist. However, they are not necessarily cheaper. Harvard Extension School costs $2,840 per course even when taking it online
I have a friend whose daughter had a baby while in high school, was allowed to graduate early (i.e., got kicked out), and enrolled in online college. It was an online program from a state university.
According to my friend, her daughter's biggest challenge was the boredom: Sitting all day long in front of a computer in a small rural town.
She graduated with a major in some meaty subject like biology, and has made a decent life for herself. But I can see how there's a lot of attrition.
According to my friend, her daughter's biggest challenge was the boredom: Sitting all day long in front of a computer in a small rural town.
She graduated with a major in some meaty subject like biology, and has made a decent life for herself. But I can see how there's a lot of attrition.
The most valuable aspect of university for me wasn't going to lectures and learning things, but learning how to get myself to important classes on time and other "adult" stuff.
When you get to uni you've spent 13 years in the education system, but you're probably only just starting to be responsible for yourself. Learning that in a slightly more forgiving environment is useful and missed by online classes.
When you get to uni you've spent 13 years in the education system, but you're probably only just starting to be responsible for yourself. Learning that in a slightly more forgiving environment is useful and missed by online classes.
The reason why you want to go in person to college is to meet your peers in ability and get to know them up front.
Otherwise, you can just pick up a book and start reading.
Otherwise, you can just pick up a book and start reading.
There is something about immersion. Not everyone has the discipline to study independently for hours a day.
Getting away from one's home life has to have value for a lot of kids, either escaping a bad situation or getting free of an overbearing parent. I think the nytimes had an earlier article about the inequalities that are suddenly on display when students are on camera in their homes.
Also, I just finished "Educated", and can't imagine the story working online.
Also, I just finished "Educated", and can't imagine the story working online.
I don't understand why there are so many 4-year and Masters programs that are so expensive. Who has $60,000 for a degree? They are priced with the expectation that you will take on debt and slave away for 30 years at the profession for which you're now trained, to pay it off. Community colleges look like a huge advantage.
Is there any need not to have, online, in person discussions and learn for yourself, mixed to suit you and the institution? I think not.
Neither a one size fits all online lecture nor a physical lecture with a lot of students, is tailored to the individual student very much, or interactive. I'd prefer to see education that is personalised.
Neither a one size fits all online lecture nor a physical lecture with a lot of students, is tailored to the individual student very much, or interactive. I'd prefer to see education that is personalised.
Nobody seems to be acknowledging how schedules and in person classes are motivating. For instance I would not understand calculus to the degree I do if I didn't have some kind of irl accountability. And there have been many times when a good instructor has galvanized intense interest in something new.
Online learning removes two major barriers, accessibility and classroom limitations.
Harvard has no limit on how many students it accepts in its online program. Once they realize that and offer it, why would I go to the local state school if I can go to Harvard instead?
Harvard has no limit on how many students it accepts in its online program. Once they realize that and offer it, why would I go to the local state school if I can go to Harvard instead?
Because Harvard doesn’t want that. The value of that degree is 90% signaling and 10% networking. If anyone could go that would remove most of the value.
Don't get me wrong, campus enrollment will still be limited. Online certifications have no limits. All Harvard has to do is internally stratify their degrees, online vs on-campus, and have it say so right on the diploma. They could serve 100x the current enrollment count and still remain exclusive.
It may get cheaper for the organizations that control the resource to distribute it, but it will not get especially cheaper for the people who want the resource, the difference will of course be pocketed by the organization.
although I could conceive of some sort of tiered service based on your ability to pay, so you can buy the Harvard-lite package. But I think that is going to need a few years of them figuring out how to package and sell it.
My suggestion: wait twenty or thirty years and look at the resumes of the 30-somethings at the New York Times. I suspect their colleges will be much what you'd find now.
The University of Texas System tried to do this in the late 90s/early 00s. They concluded Web-based distance education is not appropriate for every student. [0] (There also exists a long form narrative about the origins of this, but I can't seem to find it again)
The opinion columnist misses crucially what college is. It's not really about lectures. Rather, it's an incubator for young people to intellectually grow. Online courses don't give you the ability to drop in on a hundred different clubs, go to the library, party, date, drop in the office of some very smart people.
A college campus drops some thousands of young people in the same proximity, and gives them a collective experience. It situates them amongst a litany of highly intellectual adults and gives them a way to try news things. I just graduated from university, and I was leaving the core curriculum had become under conflict. I attended a Jesuit university, so there was a large philosophical/religious portion of curriculum. Opponents say this leads to no meaning job skills, and it's hard to disagree.
College isn't just about getting a job, at least it shouldn't be. We have culturally deemed the degree necessary for employment, and that's the bigger issue. I grew philosophically and theoretically in the classroom, but it was everything outside of the classroom that made me readily employable. Frankly, it was a privilege that I had four years to figure out who I was and what I enjoyed.
I recognize that not everyone is this fortunate. Some go to college just because they need to find jobs. That is where I think online learning has potential. We must acknowledge it will lead to a bifurcation in higher education. Online degrees are already less respected than degrees from high-ranking private universities or good public systems (UC/UT/UM). This bifurcation is not necessarily a bad thing. Those who want job skill training should be able to opt for online programs and be able to land jobs (Think like what Lambda aims to achieve).
The wealthy and high-achieving will still go to expensive private universities in person. For everyone else, there should be an accessible means for gainful employment at a fraction of the cost.
I see the fundamental issue in higher education being that colleges have become more expensive as they become more comprehensive experiences, but the market forces bachelors degree attainment for even basic employment. The result is that those who don't need, or don't want, all the luxuries have to subsidize the cost.
[0] http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/53/110
The opinion columnist misses crucially what college is. It's not really about lectures. Rather, it's an incubator for young people to intellectually grow. Online courses don't give you the ability to drop in on a hundred different clubs, go to the library, party, date, drop in the office of some very smart people.
A college campus drops some thousands of young people in the same proximity, and gives them a collective experience. It situates them amongst a litany of highly intellectual adults and gives them a way to try news things. I just graduated from university, and I was leaving the core curriculum had become under conflict. I attended a Jesuit university, so there was a large philosophical/religious portion of curriculum. Opponents say this leads to no meaning job skills, and it's hard to disagree.
College isn't just about getting a job, at least it shouldn't be. We have culturally deemed the degree necessary for employment, and that's the bigger issue. I grew philosophically and theoretically in the classroom, but it was everything outside of the classroom that made me readily employable. Frankly, it was a privilege that I had four years to figure out who I was and what I enjoyed.
I recognize that not everyone is this fortunate. Some go to college just because they need to find jobs. That is where I think online learning has potential. We must acknowledge it will lead to a bifurcation in higher education. Online degrees are already less respected than degrees from high-ranking private universities or good public systems (UC/UT/UM). This bifurcation is not necessarily a bad thing. Those who want job skill training should be able to opt for online programs and be able to land jobs (Think like what Lambda aims to achieve).
The wealthy and high-achieving will still go to expensive private universities in person. For everyone else, there should be an accessible means for gainful employment at a fraction of the cost.
I see the fundamental issue in higher education being that colleges have become more expensive as they become more comprehensive experiences, but the market forces bachelors degree attainment for even basic employment. The result is that those who don't need, or don't want, all the luxuries have to subsidize the cost.
[0] http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/53/110
I can see it happening for computer science, law and business, but anything that involves dealing with real physical matter (think rocket propulsion labs, molecular biology labs or even just welding/machining shops), we will need physical spaces. The signalling value might just move there: "We have the most sophisticated lab equipment for you to learn with world-class researchers to assist you"
Still, the great unbundling of education has begun. We at learnawesome.org are contributing to that as we recently launched a project-based learning program with a peer group and practitioners as mentors. The mentors will curate a "syllabus" using online resources, but the goal is for you to learn by accomplishing meaning projects: https://learnawesome.org/project-based-learning.html
Still, the great unbundling of education has begun. We at learnawesome.org are contributing to that as we recently launched a project-based learning program with a peer group and practitioners as mentors. The mentors will curate a "syllabus" using online resources, but the goal is for you to learn by accomplishing meaning projects: https://learnawesome.org/project-based-learning.html
People who think college is just about, or honestly even primarily about, learning various subjects show a deep misunderstanding of what college is in my opinion. Online learning will of course have a place, but in a world where there are both in-person and exclusively online options it's not hard to imagine which experience top students (not to mention the rich and connected) will prefer, and this will only lead to more inequality in higher education.