

Coursera Jumps the Shark - kmfrk
http://higheredstrategy.com/coursera-jumps-the-shark/

======
bzalasky
If they keep sharing great content via courses, and make traditional education
better (by replacing Blackboard), more power to them. I would have loved to
have a tool like this when I was in school. My grades would have been better
if I had access to old lectures to prepare for exams (though, I'm not sure how
quickly instructors would be willing to post lectures). When I last used it 5+
years ago, Blackboard sucked... I'm assuming that hasn't changed. Anyone have
more recent thoughts on that front?

~~~
hkmurakami
My school used Blackboard as well (and as you know it's pretty bad), but what
was funny was that the CS department used something called Whiteboard which
seemed to be much better designed (I wonder if it was made by a former student
or something along those lines)

------
alok-g
This rather feels to be the right step to me as explained below.

Before MOOCs, knowledge went from the creators (original researchers) to the
students via a chain of steps -- academic papers, advanced topic-specific
books, curriculum books, local university professors, finally to the students.
MOOCs have shown a way where most of these steps can be bypassed, with top-
notch creators directly delivering education to the students. It's like
Feynman delivering the lectures to a much wider audience than he actually did.

One problem remains partly unsolved - how to ensure students actually grasp
all the concepts, stay motivated to complete the courses, get personalized
career guidance, and also are unable to cheat in the exams. This requires a
local system of teachers and teaching assistants, which already exists.

Why not combine both systems, even though now it is just blended learning per
the OP. Cannot say about others, I have certainly encountered teachers who
were not up to the mark. Future will being students lectures directly from the
Feynmans of today with the local system just aiding the delivery. This is no
different than cutting the middle men out [1] that can both improve education
and make it cheaper in the long term.

Coursera and others has started by making the courses free which, while not
sustainable by itself [2], has enabled countless poor students to take the
courses. The future just holds the prices of this education tailored to the
local markets (differential pricing) which can still be better than education
today on the quality/price figure-of-merit.

[1] This allows the professors to spend more time on their research work.

[2] OK, I am not in the favor of advertising within the course content.

------
prostoalex
Feisty little guy. Apparently a company can either work on courses or on
course management software, but not both.

~~~
monkmartinez
I had the same impression... was like "wow, dude is hacked off and taking
names!"

------
jared314
> And so the revolution ends with a whimper, not with a roar.

Is he criticizing Coursera for changing strategies in a changing market? It
seems premature to declare it all over.

------
neuroguy
Any reason to think they are not going to do both? Before coursera exploded I
had thought of doing something similar, and the eventual plan had been to
provide the software to universities (for pay), but that was mainly to support
the idea of great education for all.

------
jbackus
Over-hauling higher ed is a long term goal that may pitch well in board rooms
but is too slow for VC money in the long run. Seeing as they are fairly
restricted by VC influence now I think Blackboard is a soft target they could
K.O. Fairly easily and start seeing some real money. Blackboard has only
survived until this point because it buys up the rest of the market.

------
jmartens
Author seems to be drinking the higher-ed koolaide. He clearly doesn't
understand Coursera or their mission.

------
molecule
> University of West Virginia

West Virginia University

(Go Mountaineers!)

------
Chris2048
(ノ ゜Д゜)ノ ︵ ┻━┻

