
Sal Khan responds to critic  - danso
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/sal-khan-responds-to-critic/2012/07/25/gJQA83rW9W_blog.html
======
kamens
Disclaimer: I'm part of Khan Academy. Not going to chime in w/ my deeper
disagreement w/ the original critic and the other article on the frontpage.

I would like to correct a persistent misconception or two.

Persistent misconception: "...we suggest that Khan Academy desperately needs
voices of teaching experience. Khan could tap into any number of existing
networks..."

Truth: We have four ex-teachers as full-time employees. We have two high
school math teachers as consultants. One Harvard Doctoral candidate in
Education and one post-doc in neuroscience at Stanford are in residence. One
UPenn Professor is also likely to begin a sabbatical with us. We have a 3
person team dedicated to working with and getting feedback from our 50 pilot
classrooms and the 15,000 teachers actively using KA in classrooms.

Persistent misconception: "...it certainly requires more than just “two
minutes of research on Google,” which is how Khan describes his own pre-lesson
routine."

Truth: Go read Sal's AMA response (includes the sentence "When I did organic
chemistry, I spent 2 weeks immersing myself in the subject before making the
first video") before taking one of these "two minute" snipped quotes at face
value:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ntsco/i_am_salman_khan...](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ntsco/i_am_salman_khan_founder_of_khan_academyama/c3bv5hv).
I've seen Sal's face light up when he gets an unwieldy new shipment of
textbooks to start studying in preparation for his videos. Does he dive right
into some videos? Absolutely. Is claiming that his "pre-lesson routine" can
always be dismissed as two minutes of Googling disingenuous and patently
false? Absolutely.

~~~
archgoon
> "When I did organic chemistry, I spent 2 weeks immersing myself in the
> subject before making the first video"

I'm sorry, but 2 weeks is not that much time. Most TA's for ochem classes have
at least taken 2 quarters (and yes, I can assure you, they also are
'immersed') of the subject, and they aren't in charge of the lecture.

~~~
jlgreco
Can it be said that his organic chemistry lessons have suffered for this?

Honest question. I have not seen them and I am not in a position to evaluate
them even if I had.

~~~
jardiamj
Organic Chemistry is not rocket science. I haven't seen those videos, but if
they are introductory subjects, 2 immersed weeks sound about enough to me.
I'll take a look at the videos today and see.

~~~
kragen
Actually, as documented in _Ignition!_ , a great deal of rocket science is, in
fact, chemistry — and although the oxidizers are not usually organic, the
fuels are.

~~~
jlgreco
I would suggest that the chemistry parts of rocket science are some of the
easier parts (how complicated can burning kerosene and LO2 be?), but I suspect
I would piss off a few rocket scientists. ;)

~~~
microtherion
Read _Ignition!_. It is, in fact, fairly difficult to find a combination of
fuels that ignite exactly in the manner one wants them to, in a reasonable
range of temperatures, and can be stored without decomposing or eating the
storage container.

~~~
kragen
Of course, _today_ , in large part thanks to a large number of people who died
horrible deaths investigating this during the time period documented in
_Ignition!_ , it's not hard at all. But it was sure hard until the 1960s.

------
jgrahamc
Having the debate framed as 'Sal Khan is the future of education' and 'No, he
isn't, teachers are' is bogus. It's a ridiculous dichotomy. It does a
disservice to both Khan and teachers to debate this in that way.

There will be many teachers who will use Khan's videos in their teaching (or
to augment it), and I imagine that over time Khan will change the way he does
things based on his own education about education.

It's self evident that the 'sitting in front of a machine watching videos'
isn't the solution to the education. If it were the multimedia revolution
wouldn't have petered out as it did. Children (and adults) need a variety of
approaches. Khan's is just one.

~~~
randomdata
As a child of the multimedia revolution, it was strongly ingrained in us that
going to college was the _only_ route to getting a job that wasn't flipping
burgers. To even consider learning in non-traditional ways would make you the
laughing stock of not only your peers, but the older generations too. I'm not
sure learning through multi-media ever stood a chance.

I do feel that those times have changed dramatically. Now all we hear about is
the college dropouts who went on make billion dollar companies. It has almost
become cool to not go to school. I think the time is finally right for these
non-traditional educational services and it just helps that the internet is
now widely available to act as the conduit for it.

~~~
adestefan
There has to be something regional/cultural about this that I'm missing since
I hear this complaint a lot, but don't know anyone personally that experienced
it until very recently.

When I went to high school in Pennsylvania the 90s people were still
encouraged to into the trades. I have some friends from high school that have
gone on to be very successful electricians and welders. Even when my brother
went to the same school and graduated in 2007 he was never pushed to go to
college. He ended up getting his AA at a local university and is now a
paramedic/fire fighter for the same city.

~~~
Reebz
Is that not the same principal? Person X chooses career Y and must obtain a
certification through path Z.

~~~
adestefan
The complaint is that teenagers are being told the only way you'll be a member
of the middle class is that you must go to a four year university. People were
saying that going into a trade or getting "just" an Associates degree would
leave you in the dust of everyone else.

------
jere
>An effective math teacher will point out that “rise over run” isn’t the
definition of slope at all but merely a way to calculate it. In fact, slope is
a rate that describes how two variables change in relation to one another:

What a dumb thing to argue about. I'm not a historian (or a mathematician),
but the term "slope" seems pretty obviously adopted from a physical
slope/incline/hill. Why? Because it's the easiest visual analogy for us apes
to grok. It doesn't come from an earlier term meaning strictly "a rate that
describes how two variables change in relation to one another."

If you're trying to teach someone a complex concept, are you going to use a
phrasing that has zero significance to them? Rate? Variable? What? The people
learning about slope aren't programmers or engineers. Give me a break.

Why not use a visual analogy that makes perfect sense and is still a valid
definition: rise over run on a section of a hill, road, roller coaster, etc. I
hope whoever is teaching this is relating it to a real world object. Just
talking about a line on paper isn't going to help much, but neither is an
overly complex definition.

~~~
chris_wot
Wait till they start learning Calculus - by this point it would be extremely
useful to have understood that slope is a rate that describes how two
variables change in relation to one another!

------
bicknergseng
From the article that sparked Khan's response:

>Take Khan’s explanation of slope, which he defines as “rise over run.” An
effective math teacher will point out that “rise over run” isn’t the
definition of slope at all but merely a way to calculate it. In fact, slope is
a rate that describes how two variables change in relation to one another: how
a car’s distance changes over time (miles per additional hour); how the price
of an iPod changes as you buy more memory (dollars per additional gigabyte).

Followed by this in her response to his letter:

>As math was not my subject in school, I don't know who is right but would
love to hear from mathematicians out there.

I had to reread all 3 articles multiple times. Then I lamented the sad state
of journalism as well as the complete willingness of our society to tolerate
the "I'm just not good at math so I won't bother to understand it because I
don't think it's worthy"-attitude. What angers me about the first article is
not that it went by some editor without the editor saying, hey, this seems
suspect, but rather the fact that the journalist decided to write about
something she had little knowledge about with a tone that suggests that she
thinks she knows knows more than Sal or someone else educated on the subject.
An unapologetic combination of ignorance and condescension.

~~~
eurleif
The original article criticizing Khan wasn't written by the person who wrote
this response.

~~~
bicknergseng
"A guest post I published Monday critiquing the Khan Academy..."

~~~
eurleif
Right. She published it as a guest post, but it wasn't written by her. She
didn't "write about something she had little knowledge about"

~~~
bicknergseng
Oh my mistake.... you're right. I suppose this is why I'm not a journalist.

On a related subject; note to WP: do not have guest posts published under an
editor's byline. Instead of

"By [editor]

[italicized paragraph explaining that this is a guest post published by an
editor]

By [actual author]"

Have 1 byline... the person who wrote the article.

------
droithomme
From the article:

> Below is Khan’s e-mail to me, which I shared with the author of Monday’s
> post, Karim Kai Ani, a former middle school teacher and math coach who is
> the founder of a company called Mathalicious. He said Khan is wrong.

So, to summarize, "Khan is wrong, but I won't bother to explain why, he just
is, and I have a self-proclaimed expert that says so."

~~~
ghshephard
Not to suggest that credentials are everything, but, lacking any other
information, they do provide useful signaling indicators, from
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Academy>

"After earning three degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (a
BS in mathematics, a BS in electrical engineering and computer science, and an
MS in electrical engineering and computer science), he pursued an MBA from
Harvard Business School"

One would hope that his education background might have given him some insight
into what "slope" was, and how to best explain it to someone in the 8th/9th
grade.

I can _recall_ when it was introduced to me, and I didn't really grok it until
a few years later - "rise over run = slope" was complex enough for my brain
back then - I can just imagine if people started yacking about "Ratios of
variables" - my head would have exploded.

~~~
Gormo
How often do you _need_ signaling indicators, though? If someone has
sufficient competence at a given field, they should be able to demonstrate
that competence by delivering satisfactory work.

The proof should be in the level of understanding of the concept of slope
acquired by students using various methods; it doesn't matter at all who is
"right" with respect to some formal definition.

~~~
ghshephard
Totally agree with you that what matters is whether the students eventually
grasp the material. What I like about Khan, is he is fundamentally interested
in teaching students so they _understand_ the material. He doesn't get caught
up in theories of pedagogy or mathematical models or precise correctness - he
sees his job is to communicate a concept in a way that the student says, "Oh,
I get it."

Now, with that said - there _is_ a danger in that model of teaching, in which
the student gets lured into a zone of comfort. So there _absolutely_ is a
place in teaching for instructors who are going to challenge, upset, and
disturb the student - resulting in a form of stress that pushes to the student
to new heights. This can be a very uncomfortable (and, indeed,
upsetting/stressful) learning environment - but it does give students deeper,
and sometimes much more meaningful insight into topics.

But that's not what Khan's about. He is the guy you go to when you just want
to get over some hurdle about a topic that has frustrated you.

------
mikemarotti
"As math was not my subject in school, I don't know who is right but would
love to hear from mathematicians out there."

Go find a professor, you sorry excuse for a "journalist".

~~~
saraid216
You mean the two who are sitting there disagreeing?

~~~
dinkumthinkum
Which ones are the "professors?" I'm not trying to be flip but I don't think
it's unreasonable to ask for the blogger or whatever it is to go find an
expert. It's not like this debate is occurring between Einstein and Feynman.

------
Cushman
The way I've understood it, Khan isn't trying to disrupt the idea of teachers
or schools _per se_ , only alter it.

Basically, the traditional schooling model consists of "lectures" in class,
where the teacher presents you with information for an hour, and homework,
where you work on problems relating to that content alone in your own time.

Khan says, that's cocked up-- we should let students consume the raw
informational content on their own time, where they can pause, rewind, and go
over it as many times as they need to in order to understand it without
disrupting anyone else, and then do "homework" in the classroom, where there's
a focused environment that encourages exploration and somebody who can help
each student with their individual difficulties.

Which has always struck me as a pretty straightforward, good-common-sense
approach to at least _try_. Why is this concept so opaque to so many people?

~~~
Strallus
That approach (students working at their own pace) isn't very novel when you
consider the fact that home-schooling has been around for a while.

~~~
saraid216
Except that the notion of homeschooling is hugely co-opted by cultists who
brainwash their kids. It's hard to get a serious dialogue on homeschooling
going when most people equate it to a stand-in for Bible study and avoiding
science education.

~~~
billswift
I've heard this said often enough, but most of the homeschoolers I actually
know or know of indirectly are pretty lefty or libertarian. Most Christian
extremists go to little private schools which are scattered all over the
place.

~~~
jasonrr
There is actual data to look at here:
<http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009030.pdf>

Desire to provide religious or moral instruction is at the TOP of the list of
reasons people homeschool.

~~~
Gormo
...among those who answered the survey.

~~~
r00fus
This is a survey by the NHES, a government organization - do you think there
is some reason for selection bias?

Here is the survey's remark on their estimation methodology:

"When applied to survey data, weights allow for the generation of national
estimates from a sample of respondents. They also adjust for characteristics
of the survey design, nonresponse, and noncoverage. However, biases may exist
in the data if weighting procedures have not adequately adjusted for these
issues. A large-scale bias study was conducted in conjunction with the 2007
data collection. Readers interested in the findings of the bias study, as well
as detailed information on NHES survey methods, weighting, and response rates,
can refer to the Data File User’s Manuals published online at
<http://nces.ed.gov/nhes> ."

~~~
Gormo
I think that the fact that the survey was conducted by a government
organization and that the targets of the survey were families who had decided
not to participate in government-run education, for one reason or another,
makes a certain selection bias seem likely.

I'd expect a measure of homeschooling families to want nothing to do with the
federal department of education.

------
mikeleeorg
What Khan is doing is great. For some students, it is very effective. For
other students, not effective whatsoever. Thankfully, dozens of similar
offerings have appeared (40 by one count), as well as tools to help teachers
create their own video lessons (ie. Educreations). And that's not even
mentioning all the other students for whom video is not the best way to learn
these topics.

The real problem is the media. And by that overarching term, I mean the
rhetoric that various journalists, bloggers, and others have let themselves
use for whatever purpose (ie. sensationalism, pageviews, linkbait, etc).

It's understandable that there's been a backlash to Khan. He got overhyped.
The pendulum swung too much one way. Now it's naturally swinging the other
way.

In the end, this is going to turn out better for students. As critics lash out
in both directions (supporters and detractors both have gotten pretty vicious
in this debate), there are a bunch of for-profit and non-profit efforts that
are creating alternatives. Khan has a smart team too. I'm sure they're
steadily improving their offerings.

------
zeteo
Frankly the response only addresses a small part of the criticism (the
definition of slope) and then launches an attack on the critic's motivation.
The main point in the original article [1] was that Khan's preparation for his
lectures is deficient ("I don’t know what I’m going to say half the time") and
often resumes to "two minutes of research on Google".

[1] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-
sheet/post/khan-a...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-
sheet/post/khan-academy-the-hype-and-the-
reality/2012/07/22/gJQAuw4J3W_blog.html)

~~~
gorbachev
I found Mr. Khan's response really odd for the same reason.

He's addressing an EXAMPLE the critics used to illustrate their actual point,
and fails to completely address the bigger issue.

I thought the critics' points were completely valid, and raise pretty serious
issues about the quality and usefulness of the Khan Academy material.

~~~
ghshephard
How many of Khan's videos have you watched? I've gone through about 100+ of
them, and the material has been universally excellent, and certainly met, (and
in most cases exceeded) the lecture material that was presented to me at High
School/Simon Fraser University.

"Quality and Usefulness of Khan Academy Material?" - you must have gone to an
incredible school if you find his material lacking.

~~~
gorbachev
You didn't read the criticism, did you?

I didn't say anything about how I view Khan Academy content.

I don't use Khan Academy, because I have no use for it. That doesn't, however,
preclude me from assessing critique made by others about it.

~~~
ghshephard
Absolutely I read the original criticism - carefully. It was (in my opinion)
complete nonsense by somebody who clearly has an axe to grind.

I have seen over 100 of Khan's videos. On many occasions he was able to
clearly communicate a topic that I had been gated on. Doing so in a clear,
concise manner. I have colleagues at work that use Khan to help their children
through Math. If Khan had existed when I was in university, it would have
eliminated 90% of the tutors costs associated with things like linear algebra.
So, as I read his criticism, I was asking myself, WTF - this feels like it has
_nothing_ to do with the content that I've viewed, which has been _excellent_
in explaining topics that very few (if any ) of the lecturers I had in High
School/University were capable of doing.

What it actually reminded me, was of Encyclopedia Britanica's FUD against
Wikipedia when it was coming out. The criticism _sounds_ accurate, unless
you've actually looked at the content being attacked.

My point is - you can't read the criticism, and make a judgement, until you've
spent some time looking at the material to see if the criticisms are sound.

------
delinka
My son has been watching Sal give lessons for the last year. Sal makes
mistakes sometimes. My son usually notices and asks for clarification. We end
up with a nice discussion about the topic at hand and arrive at a correct
answer. If it's math related, I've got it covered. If it's not, we do some
research.

Classroom teachers make mistakes. Textbooks make mistakes. But the system is
set up to disallow question of these two authorities. Example: Math class is
the first class of the day; teacher follows textbook and textbook is wrong;
child questions and is waved off; is that kid gonna remember at the end of the
day that she needed to ask mom about this problem? No.

I much prefer when Sal makes a mistake because it makes for a learning
experience. What's nice is when my son comes back some time later and tells me
that Sal's video has been corrected.

~~~
dinkumthinkum
No, I think that's great. Is it really like that though. I always feel like
this is kind of a caricature: "The teacher would not dare let me question the
authority of the textbook." That doesn't seem very serious. I'm sure, and this
may sound mean, that this goes on some very bad rural or inner city schools
but it's just such a ridiculous thing to say that I find it hard to believe it
occurs in more reasonable scholastic settings. But people always bring it up
...

~~~
delinka
It seems to be a matter of convenience. It shouldn't be, but that what it
looks like. It disrupts the flow of the teacher's classroom. It's viewed as
yet another disruption, but the worst kind of disruption: the legitimate kind
that gives the rest of the class an opening to continue disrupting the class.
And that could affect perceptions about how this teacher handles a class. No,
can't have that so just sit down and shut up.

A good teacher can handle the book being wrong. A good teacher will tell the
students that the book has a mistakes on this problem well before they have
the chance to discover it themselves. A good teacher will have gone over the
material in advance and know what's correct. Instead, we have teachers thrust
into roles that aren't near their specialty; teachers that can get a degree
and qualify for a paycheck because they can work the system, not because they
know how to teach students. And interfering with that teacher's conveniences
is not a good thing for a student to attempt.

------
frankphilips
Looks to me like a feeble attempt by Karim Kai Ani of Mathalicious to generate
some PR for his for-profit website. What better way to drive traffic then to
"build up some controversy" by hating on Khan? Sal's noble efforts have
allowed countless people obtain a first-class education at virtually no cost.
Shame on The Washington Post for promoting this hidden agenda. Seems like they
also have an agenda of their own.

1) Post a controversial guest article bashing a guy whose actually trying to
do something good in the world.

2) Act like the neutral party so they don't have to take any blame. Allow
Karim to be the scapegoat.

3) Sit back and enjoy while traffic explodes to their site.

I see you Washington Post. You ain't fooling me!

~~~
mrobataille
Wow, nailed it. I totally missed the Washington Post incentive angle.

------
spinchange
Can anyone weigh in on their differing arguments regarding the definition of
slope? I am not a maths expert by any means, but am genuinely curious who is
correct here. Or is this a matter of one being technically correct versus the
other being correct in practice?

(Cross posted from the original thread because I genuinely would like an
opinion more informed than my own and the totally unhelpful "conclusion"
provided by Valerie Strauss.)

*Edit, I missed that he (Khan) posted a video defending his definition <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNaQJjLAhkI>

~~~
nessus42
I'm not a math expert either, but rise over run sounds like a perfectly good
definition of slope to me, at least for the purposes of an introduction to
high school algebra. It is certainly how _I_ was taught about slope, and I
went on to graduate from MIT, so whatever nuance this definition allegedly
didn't catch did me no harm.

Once you get to calculus, things get a little more complicated, as the slope
at a given point is defined using derivatives, but I'm pretty sure that ends
up being the same as the rise over the run of a tangent line.

In any case, anyone who would make such a lame criticism, should just STFU. If
that's the best criticism they can come up with, they surely can't have much
of value to say. Also, when teaching something like algebra, it's more
important to make the material approachable and comprehensible, rather than
define everything to a level of rigor that would make Russell and Whitehead
happy.

~~~
pflats
>It is certainly how I was taught about slope, and I went on to graduate from
MIT, so whatever nuance this definition allegedly didn't catch did me no harm.

In that case, this debate really isn't about you. You were probably an
exceptional student, who saw the connections between mathematical concepts
easily, regardless of instruction. You probably found yourself predicting the
next concept a teacher would introduce, because it just "makes sense." Not all
students are that way. Most are not.

The two people involved here are fighting over two different ideas. Sal is
being pedantic, but is right, _slope_ is defined as ∆x/∆y. What the other guy
was saying is that slope represents _rate of change_ , which is a much more
important concept to early algebra, and the underpinning of why you actually
care about slope in physics and calculus. You probably made the connection
effortlessly. I assure you, many students do not.

I teach high school mathematics to both honors and special needs students, and
it's important to keep in mind that the instruction is very different between
the two populations.

~~~
rm999
"slope is defined as ∆x/∆y"

Do you mean ∆y/∆x?

~~~
pflats
Yup. Caught the typo when I wrote the post, even, but I apparently retyped it
the same way.

------
nadu
Thats the old response to this critique
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-
sheet/post/khan-a...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-
sheet/post/khan-academy-the-hype-and-the-
reality/2012/07/22/gJQAuw4J3W_blog.html)

------
bherms
The original critical piece was written by someone with a vested interest in
defaming Khan, as he runs a company that is (in a way) a direct competitor.
That alone should be enough to dismiss his critique.

~~~
brockhand
I disagree that critiques from those with vested interests should be dismissed
out of hand. I do believe that their points should be reviewed more carefully,
though.

~~~
bherms
My comment was a bit sensationalist... I agree with you 100%, I just stated it
a little more black and white than I should have.

------
saraid216
I wasn't aware that KA was a non-profit. Where do they get their money?
Entirely donation-driven?

~~~
smashing
Just ask KA for a current IRS Form 990. It will show you just about
everything. Here's an example from 2010 -
[http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/261/26154496...](http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/261/261544963/261544963_201012_990.pdf)

------
tomkin
What's missing from this argument is that traditional education dogma has the
same plight. Is anyone ready to state, on record, that any educational
platform is perfect and free from error? Khan deserves/requires criticism, but
let's not forget that these criticisms apply across the board.

------
justin_vanw
Either the people who watch Khan's video's find them useful, and can do things
they couldn't do, or understand things better than they did, or not.

Most public school teachers are awful. They have degrees in education, and
most university programs in the teacher pipeline are intentionally easier and
less demanding than the equivalent 'real' degree in a given subject. 'Math-ed'
is a very undemanding degree compared to 'Mathematics'. If high-school
teachers were placed under this kind of scrutiny we would be forced to
completely re-evaluate how teachers are credentialed and licensed. They aren't
put under this or really any scrutiny at all, and probably they never will be.
Teacher unions fight as hard as they possibly can to prevent any measurement
or evaluation of teacher performance.

Students will continue to try to fill in the gaps in their understanding of
these topics, and if there are free resources available to them to do so, even
better!

~~~
dinkumthinkum
The problem is partly economic. Most people very advanced in mathematics, I
don't think would choose low salaries teaching kids Algebra or "AP Calc" in
the inner city. Sure, there are the "heroes" out there but it's a reality.

------
coolpin5
I never understood why Sal Khan does all the videos himself. Shouldn't they
get the best Linear Algebra teacher that they can find for the Linear Algebra
series, the best Calculus teacher for the Calculus series, the best Marine
Biology teacher for Marine Biology, and so on? Maybe even get two sets of
teacher with different lecture styles for each subject?

I've had dozens of amazing teachers throughout my education, all of which were
excellent at gripping my attention, having a passion for their subject, and a
knack for explaining it extremely well. If I thought my teachers were this
good, can you imagine how good the best in the country would be? And what it
could do for education to makes those lessons available for the entire world?

It's a shame he does it entirely himself. It's not for lack of funding, that's
for sure. Maybe it's an ego thing?

------
cs702
This article is emblematic of the hardest challenge Khan Academy faces, IMO,
as it tries to change the educational system from the current 'lecture at
school, practice at home' approach used by virtually all schools today, to the
'learn at home, tinker and interact at school' championed by Khan Academy.

The hardest challenge is this: disrupting the educational experience _requires
buy-in_ from teachers, administrators, regulators, academics, and existing
service providers, but all these parties are nearly always resistant to change
and well-entrenched in their positions, making large-scale change very, very,
very slow and difficult.

The optimist in me wishes Sal Khan and his team only success as they take on,
and attempt to co-opt, the educational establishment. The realist in me thinks
they face a long, tough battle.

~~~
dpatru
The educational establishment won't "buy in" it Khan, just like the
traditional encyclopedia establishment didn't "buy in" to Wikipedia. But
change will happen regardless because the users of education, the parents and
students, will ask themselves the same question that the users of
encyclopedias asked themselves: "Why are we continuing to pay for the same old
product when a much better product is available for free?"

------
theoretick
I found quite a bit in the original article that seemed to point to a
misunderstanding of the site for someone who hasn't used it. Karim doesn't
even mention one of the most valuable areas: the practice area. It isn't just
about watching videos, and maybe I'm alone, but I use the practice first and
the videos as supplements. Furthermore, the actual videos seem to often
feature explanations in a clear way that does not merely point to following a
series of steps (see "why division by zero is undefined")

------
robomartin
Frankly, I don't know why he even bothered to respond. What KA is doing might
not be perfect but it is one serious attempt to move education forward in some
form. They deserve nothing less than admiration and support. I am sure that
they welcome and encourage constructive criticism.

Aside from that, the only way the "(highly unionized) teachers do it better"
argument can hold water is if the (highly unionized) teachers start producing
students that actually place in a reasonable range in international
comparisons.

------
reso
The author of the criticism is the founder of a for-profit start-up competing
with Khan Academy. Khan Academy itself is a non-profit.

These incentives should frame everything we hear about this exchange.

------
caycep
this also is reminiscent of this nytimes op ed:
[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/opinion/the-trouble-
with-o...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/opinion/the-trouble-with-online-
education.html/?_r=1)

that conveniently forgets to mention all the collaborative/interactive
components built into coursera - the community TA's, the forums, chatrooms,
etc etc etc.

moral: don't criticize unless you've actually read the book/seen the
movie/etc. or maybe beware of hidden agendas.

------
themonk
Mathalicious is doing this just to get popular, I never knew they exists
before this debate. Google might improve page rank of mathalicious.com as well
due to back links.

------
thirsteh
The critique was written by a competitor. Isn't the motive obvious?

------
infinitex
This is a storm in a tea cup.

------
andyl
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you
win.

~~~
derleth
Then you get to shove mind-control worms into their ears.

