5 ms·

I've received one of these emails as well. Almost makes you wonder how much would offline university degrees be worth in a few years. Objectively, this is not

I've received one of these emails as well. Almost makes you wonder how much would offline university degrees be worth in a few years. Objectively, this is not a new idea. We have been talking about revolutionizing education for years - and free online education is pretty much the ideal. There is even enough material about most scientific fields and areas of study (some are more open than others, though) to become an expert. So what is the problem? Becoming an expert with enough authority for people to actually listen to you. Easy enough to do it on your own in programming or entrepreneurship you might say. Not so easy in medicine or biochemistry (though I will admit I have no first-hand experience). In that regard, certifications are a significant next step, provided that they get wide enough acknowledgement. That is the next battlefront, I think - convincing industries, governments and academia that online education is the way to go.

cal5k 15y ago
Part of the problem right now is that online education has such a bad rap - for example, The University of Phoenix is widely recognized as a degree mill. It remains to be seen whether companies/institutions (like Udacity) can get the certification part good enough that it will be worth something.
- jeffreymcmanus 15y ago
  UoP's bad rep comes not because they're a degree mill but because they have a high dropout rate (which is sort of the opposite problem -- if they were a degree mill their dropout rate would be low). Their problem is really that they spent many years recruiting unqualified students who used financial aid to attend, telling them things like "it's no problem to take on $100,000 in debt, with a degree you'll easily be able to get a job that pays $100K." Then the student drops out after four semesters and defaults on their loans, leaving the taxpayer holding the bag.
splatterdash 15y ago
I think this will highlight differences among fields of education (?). Programming is a very pragmatic field. Your ability to code is at its core judged by whether you can program something that works. Don't have a formal education? Whip up several interesting programs / websites on your own, and less people will care about your degree. In addition to that, it's becoming increasingly easy to learn the subject on your own. Not many other fields are like that. Medicine for example. Sure, you can learn the names of the bones in your body, understand the use cases of different drugs in the market, but can you diagnose a patient? To learn that, you need access to training in real hospitals which are only given to students enrolled offline. Same thing with biochemistry (needs access to labs and direct mentorship), law (access to courtrooms? or certification from proper boards). Many of these other disciplines are based on initial trust. It takes time for a biochemist or a lawyer until their work results in something. Having an actual (offline) degree places some kind of 'proxy' for the work result, until they actually appear. I'm not that certain that they can be replaced / revolutionized by online classes. I'm all for revolutionizing education, but I don't think this new approach is able to revolutionize all fields of education.
- IvoDankolov 15y ago
  I do agree on that point, but I'm not sure if pragmatic is the right word. Need of a specialized work environment, perhaps. Programming needs one, too, I suppose, but it just happens to be a computer. Approaching other subjects the same way we do math and programming would be quite monumentally stupid. Could you trust a "doctor" to make the right decisions if his/her experience consists of watching lecture videos on YouTube and answering quizzes? However, should we completely give up on those fields that require specialized practice? I see it as more of a challenge than a reason to despair. For one thing, you can combine online education with offline practice (provided willingness of all parties involved to experiment with new approaches, which is certainly not a trivial thing to ask). Also, an approach I'd try is having games that simulate the real-world task as close as possible. At some point, you probably would need specialized equipment and/or test subjects. Reducing that to a minimum, though, is in my opinion a very good thing, as it would drive down the cost of education.
  - RuchitGarg 15y ago
    My thoughts on why a real university will always make sense, but for different reasons http://blog.siliconverse.com/2011/12/29/why-you-need-to-go-to-good-college/ http://blog.siliconverse.com/2011/12/29/why-you-need-to-go-t...
    - johnohara 15y ago
      Read your blog Ruchit. I agree with your thoughts on human interaction. I think in a couple of years we will discover that the key benefit to online education is the ability to consistently deliver high quality instructional content to very large numbers of students. The social component of learning should benefit from this. My hope is that online delivery of instruction will free up time in the classroom for the human dynamic of discussion, problem-solving and shared inquiry.
    - ippisl 15y ago
      It's too early to conclude what are the limits of computer mediated human socialization.It's still a pretty young field.For example, just before something like 6 months , google came out with google+ hangouts, and now some people are cooking together using it, which seems pretty unexpected.
thomaslangston 15y ago
> That is the next battlefront, I think - convincing industries, governments and academia that online education is the way to go. If the program was an accredited degree, I think it would get us a lot closer. I'm sure that there are some online friendly institutions such as WGU and University of Phoenix who would be interested in offering a low cost CS degree program.
- jonknee 15y ago
  The University of Phoenix is not interested in anything low cost.
  - thomaslangston 15y ago
    They might be interested in something high margin. See my other comment.
- jeffreymcmanus 15y ago
  UoP already does quite a bit of online instruction. It's unlikely there's much going on here that they aren't doing already.
  - thomaslangston 15y ago
    The main point is that if they line up credentialing that mirrors Udacity's courses, they can offload the cost of curriculum development and course management and sell the exams and degree, at a substantially higher margin. They can also offer a pure CS degree instead of the IT and MIS degree they currently offer.

cal5k 15y ago

Part of the problem right now is that online education has such a bad rap - for example, The University of Phoenix is widely recognized as a degree mill. It remains to be seen whether companies/institutions (like Udacity) can get the certification part good enough that it will be worth something.

jeffreymcmanus 15y ago
UoP's bad rep comes not because they're a degree mill but because they have a high dropout rate (which is sort of the opposite problem -- if they were a degree mill their dropout rate would be low). Their problem is really that they spent many years recruiting unqualified students who used financial aid to attend, telling them things like "it's no problem to take on $100,000 in debt, with a degree you'll easily be able to get a job that pays $100K." Then the student drops out after four semesters and defaults on their loans, leaving the taxpayer holding the bag.

splatterdash 15y ago

I think this will highlight differences among fields of education (?). Programming is a very pragmatic field. Your ability to code is at its core judged by whether you can program something that works. Don't have a formal education? Whip up several interesting programs / websites on your own, and less people will care about your degree. In addition to that, it's becoming increasingly easy to learn the subject on your own. Not many other fields are like that. Medicine for example. Sure, you can learn the names of the bones in your body, understand the use cases of different drugs in the market, but can you diagnose a patient? To learn that, you need access to training in real hospitals which are only given to students enrolled offline. Same thing with biochemistry (needs access to labs and direct mentorship), law (access to courtrooms? or certification from proper boards). Many of these other disciplines are based on initial trust. It takes time for a biochemist or a lawyer until their work results in something. Having an actual (offline) degree places some kind of 'proxy' for the work result, until they actually appear. I'm not that certain that they can be replaced / revolutionized by online classes. I'm all for revolutionizing education, but I don't think this new approach is able to revolutionize all fields of education.

IvoDankolov 15y ago
I do agree on that point, but I'm not sure if pragmatic is the right word. Need of a specialized work environment, perhaps. Programming needs one, too, I suppose, but it just happens to be a computer. Approaching other subjects the same way we do math and programming would be quite monumentally stupid. Could you trust a "doctor" to make the right decisions if his/her experience consists of watching lecture videos on YouTube and answering quizzes? However, should we completely give up on those fields that require specialized practice? I see it as more of a challenge than a reason to despair. For one thing, you can combine online education with offline practice (provided willingness of all parties involved to experiment with new approaches, which is certainly not a trivial thing to ask). Also, an approach I'd try is having games that simulate the real-world task as close as possible. At some point, you probably would need specialized equipment and/or test subjects. Reducing that to a minimum, though, is in my opinion a very good thing, as it would drive down the cost of education.
- RuchitGarg 15y ago
  My thoughts on why a real university will always make sense, but for different reasons http://blog.siliconverse.com/2011/12/29/why-you-need-to-go-to-good-college/ http://blog.siliconverse.com/2011/12/29/why-you-need-to-go-t...
  - johnohara 15y ago
    Read your blog Ruchit. I agree with your thoughts on human interaction. I think in a couple of years we will discover that the key benefit to online education is the ability to consistently deliver high quality instructional content to very large numbers of students. The social component of learning should benefit from this. My hope is that online delivery of instruction will free up time in the classroom for the human dynamic of discussion, problem-solving and shared inquiry.
  - ippisl 15y ago
    It's too early to conclude what are the limits of computer mediated human socialization.It's still a pretty young field.For example, just before something like 6 months , google came out with google+ hangouts, and now some people are cooking together using it, which seems pretty unexpected.

thomaslangston 15y ago

> That is the next battlefront, I think - convincing industries, governments and academia that online education is the way to go. If the program was an accredited degree, I think it would get us a lot closer. I'm sure that there are some online friendly institutions such as WGU and University of Phoenix who would be interested in offering a low cost CS degree program.

jonknee 15y ago
The University of Phoenix is not interested in anything low cost.
- thomaslangston 15y ago
  They might be interested in something high margin. See my other comment.
jeffreymcmanus 15y ago
UoP already does quite a bit of online instruction. It's unlikely there's much going on here that they aren't doing already.
- thomaslangston 15y ago
  The main point is that if they line up credentialing that mirrors Udacity's courses, they can offload the cost of curriculum development and course management and sell the exams and degree, at a substantially higher margin. They can also offer a pure CS degree instead of the IT and MIS degree they currently offer.