On Line Education and the Academy

I have serious questions as to what this on line "stuff" really is. I had taken the first MIT course and had serious problems, and frankly still do. I am trying the others as well. But here are some of the concerns:

1. What is the objective, why are you doing it? Other than just doing it one must be careful about the classic ambiguity of expectations. You may expect A and the student Z. It results in disaffection. Trust me, it always does. Do the students just want to "learn" and if so what do they expect in obtaining the certificate. Then also how does one know who really took the exams. The certificate may go to someone who never read the book. Then why give  certificate. If it is for self learning then let it be to the self alone.

2. Why are you doing it? Why is an institution doing this? Just to follow others? That is a bad idea. It means that you end up justifying it on the fly. Are you being charitable, nice but with costs rising exponentially then you may be shortchanging the students who pay, or their parents, and the alumni who donate.

3. Equity is at play. The students who pay, get vetted, attend class, and pass are clearly better than the "someone" who gets a certificate.

Now in a NY Times piece on the firing of the President of UVA one reads:

What had the board so worried? In late May, as she prepared to remove Sullivan, Dragas e-mailed a board colleague a link to a Wall Street Journal column, beneath the subject line: “Why we can’t afford to wait.” The article described a joint venture that offers free, open online courses. In the last year, Harvard, Stanford, M.I.T. and other elite schools have moved aggressively into this arena, drawing significant global audiences, if no actual revenue. While many veteran professors roll their eyes at predictions that online learning will transform the structure of universities, to certain segments of the donor community — the Wall Street and Aspen Institute types — higher education looks like another hidebound industry awaiting creative destruction. “If you’re not talking about it,” says Jeffrey Walker, a UVA fund-raiser and a former JPMorgan financier, “what’s wrong with you?” 

Perhaps there  is not only nothing wrong with you but you may be smarter than the rest. After all MIT and Harvard plan to spend $30 million apiece out the gate to start this process. That would be a big chunk of change for UVA with there being no clear reason to do it. Afford to wait ... why not if there are so many empty questions.

There is not a single tangible piece of evidence that this will change the universities. In fact as best I can gather from my MIT colleague many of those who got As were my former students back in the late 60s and early 70s taking the course again as I did. There was no vetting of the students, no idea of their backgrounds, and apparently as best I can gather no post course review of the course takers.

I have had this conversation with many who wanted the same fast movement and after a discussion of the type that any reasonable business person would have they changed their views drastically, and fell into the camp of "why are we doing what?".

Perhaps the same momentum do follow the lemmings was similar to what led to the financial collapse. I always remember my father's comment, prior planning prevents poor performance. So just don't follow the lemmings unless you know why and what the consequences may be. The President was apparently quite prudent.