
Will edX Put Harvard and MIT Out of Business? - iProject
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2012/05/06/will-edx-put-harvard-and-mit-out-of-business/
======
1053r
The reason to attend MIT or Harvard (as an undergraduate) is not to take MIT
or Harvard classes. It is to hang out with MIT or Harvard students, have
discussions after class with MIT or Harvard undergraduates, grad students, and
professors, be challenged by having those people as peers. It is to have an
entire network of well connected people all over the globe in the highest
reaches of every organization on Earth for free upon graduation. Lastly, (and
perhaps least), it is to have a piece of paper that certifies that you are
smart and work hard.

Fundamentally, the elite schools are in no danger from these online education
initiatives. It is the state schools, community colleges, and for profit
schools that are in danger. If a school can't figure out a value add beyond
simple education (which the elite schools have had for centuries), that school
is in trouble.

~~~
astrofinch
$200,000 is an awful lot to pay for this networking possibility. There's no
reason why putting high leverage individuals together should cost so much
money. What would a competitor with universities on the networking front look
like?

Keep in mind that $200,000 will pay for a lot of plane tickets, so the
competing service could involve lots of world travel and still be much cheaper
than elite schools.

~~~
objclxt
This is a little OT, but it hits home so I want to correct this misconception:
Harvard (and MIT) are very affordable, and the majority of students attending
do not pay full tuition. Indeed, at Harvard families with incomes under
$65,000 pay _nothing at all_ , and those with incomes between $65-150k are
heavily subsidised and asked to pay between 0-10% of their income for tuition.
I wouldn't have been able to attend without such help.

~~~
droithomme
These sorts of rebuttals about costs from colleges (not just Harvard) are
often rather misleading when they claim costs only include things not covered
by a "financial aid package", which is almost entirely comprised of fairly
high interest loans (fairly high interest given they are close to zero risk as
both there is no way to get out of them and most are federally guaranteed).

Harvard gives these numbers:

Tuition and fees for 2010-2011: $36,142

Room and board for 2010-2011: $12,308

Average financial aid package for 2010-2011: $41,300

This is presented to look like the average student pays $7150 a year to attend
Harvard. (Not including incidental expenses, books etc.)

This is misleading because not mentioned is that the financial aid package
typically includes a Pell grant of a maximum of $5500 (average $3,593),
leaving the remaining $35,800 covered by loans at 8-10% interest. Other than
the Pell available to low family total income US citizens, the financial
package is not scholarship style grants that come free and clear. The student
ends up over $140,000 in debt upon graduation and Harvard gets their entire
$48,450 each year.

The term "financial aid" is intentionally misleading and used against naive
parents and students in articles and personal exhortations to convince them
that college is affordable to them. We don't talk about "financial aid" when
discussing loans for houses or cars, that would be considered misleading by
nearly everyone. Saying college is affordable because you get "financial aid"
consisting mostly of interest loans makes no more sense than saying that
mansions and Hummers are affordable because "financial aid" consisting of
deferred loans is available so that you won't have to pay hardly anything
during the first four years. Actually the mansion/Hummer case makes more sense
since their loans are not ones you can not get rid of no matter what (not even
bankruptcy) and that if you don't pay will cause serious legal problems like
revocation of needed professional licensing.

------
peter_l_downs
No [0].

[0] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridges_Law_of_Headlines>

~~~
peter_l_downs
Also, from the article:

    
    
      As long as students who take edX are blocked from the branding and professional networks 
      that their parents pay so dearly to obtain, such top schools have nothing to fear from giving 
      away what the teachers are getting paid modestly to deliver.
    

University teaches a lot more than the course material.

------
neovive
With online education really gaining traction, the major university brands
need to be out in front of this trend. With Harvard and MIT throwing their
names and money into the mix they buy themselves a chance to steer the
direction of the trend and become major players. Sitting on the sidelines and
watching things change around them, completely outside of their control, was
not a good strategy. This parallels many other industries in which large
established brands face obsolescence or major competition in the face of
recent technological advancement. I'm sure someone at Harvard or MIT modeled
out quite a few scenarios to justify the cost.

------
cdrxndr
edX does more to nudge out no-name schools than prestigious universities - and
if anything will likely be a strong revenue generator for top universities
going forward.

A few scenarios:

* Would you pay tuition to be taught by [well-meaning] no-name professor Dave at no-name Community U?

* Would you be willing to pay a nominal fee to receive a certificate for edX achievement?

* Would you be more willing to pay for a certificate from Harvard/MIT, or UVA?

The online education trend will act as a channel for the most prestigious
schools to capitalize on their brand without diluting their stature. And we'll
see them making hand-over-fist money by outcompeting community colleges and
other online programs that don't have the weighty reputations.

------
jmvidal
I love all these free online classes.

But, what's going to happen is that profs like me are going to continue using
them in our classes in the same way we have been using textbooks, which will
liberate a little time for us to provide more one-on-one help. At least, that
is my prediction. But, you know, predictions are hard, especially about the
future.

[1] [http://www.jose-vidal.com/2012/05/online-classes-are-just-
ne...](http://www.jose-vidal.com/2012/05/online-classes-are-just-new-
textbook.html)

------
LyleK
Most people are not going to be able to follow the classes from MIT and
Harvard. (Certainly, there are a lot of people who can't get into the schools
who could follow the material just fine.) Remember, this material is already
available in books, but that didn't put the universities out of business. But
if you look at how many people are struggling with math classes and having to
hire tutors, I don't think it is fair to assume that by watching videos from
MIT lecturers would suddenly make it all make sense.

------
LyleK
So much for all the professors on food stamps. Now they have to compete with
free classes from Harvard.

<http://chronicle.com/article/From-Graduate-School-to/131795/>

------
diminish
the first nobel prize winner graduate of edX will change everything. i
sometimes think, should online universities also be strictly selective?

~~~
grayed_comments
Isn't most of the "prestige" of a nobel prize winner normally directed at the
university at which they were conducting research (assuming it is an academic
heavy field) at the time?

~~~
Turing_Machine
In my experience, every institution that has any connection whatsoever to the
Nobel Laureate claims him or her. Undergrad, graduate school, research
location, even high school (one local high school claims multiple Nobel
Laureates -- unusual, but I don't know if it's unique).

------
dgabriel
In the worst possible scenario, edX may nibble at the edges of the Harvard
Extension school enrollment.

------
mrbill
Forbes is just outdoing themselves with the headline bait lately.

~~~
LyleK
Agreed. If they thought it would put them out of business, would they do it?
It makes more sense to ask if it will put community colleges out of business.

~~~
RedwoodCity
Online education has existed for at least 10 years, and in recent years
community colleges have been unable to keep up with enrollment. California
community colleges are so over enrolled they wanted to start charging more
money for popular classes. If college were entirely about static material such
as readings and lectures libraries with video tapes and textbooks would have
put them out of business decades ago. Most people need help understanding the
material and apparently benefit from personal interaction. Finally many
physical sciences and engineering labs are impossible to conduct outside of
the setting of university of college.

Would you like the next surgeon you visit to have a certificate on his wall
from YouTube Medical School.

------
xxiao
possibly, in fact, why do kids need go to college at all in the near future?

