"THE HYPE OVER MOOCs peaked in 2012. Salman Khan, an investment
analyst who had begun teaching bite-sized lessons to his cousin in New
Orleans over the internet and turned that activity into a wildly popular
educational resource called the Khan Academy, was splashed on the cover
of Forbes." continues The Economist.
Sebastian Thrun, the founder of another MOOC called Udacity, predicted in an interview in Wired magazine that within 50 years the number of universities would collapse to just ten worldwide. The New York Times declared it the year of the MOOC.
The sheer numbers of people flocking to some of the initial courses
seemed to suggest that an entirely new model of open-access, free
university education was within reach. Now MOOC sceptics are more
numerous than believers. Although lots of people still sign up, drop-out
rates are sky-high.
Nonetheless, the MOOCs are on to something. Education, like health
care, is a complex and fragmented industry, which makes it hard to gain
scale. Despite those drop-out rates, the MOOCs have shown it can be done
quickly and comparatively cheaply. The Khan Academy has 14m-15m users
who conduct at least one learning activity with it each month; Coursera
has 22m registered learners. Those numbers are only going to grow.
FutureLearn, a MOOC owned by Britain’s Open University, has big plans.
Oxford University announced in November that it would be producing its
first MOOC on the edX platform.
In their search for a business model, some platforms are now focusing
much more squarely on employment (though others, like the Khan Academy,
are not for profit). Udacity has launched a series of nanodegrees in
tech-focused courses that range from the basic to the cutting-edge. It
has done so, moreover, in partnership with employers. A course on
Android was developed with Google; a nanodegree in self-driving cars
uses instructors from Mercedes-Benz, Nvidia and others. Students pay
$199-299 a month for as long as it takes them to finish the course
(typically six to nine months) and get a 50% rebate if they complete it
within a year. Udacity also offers a souped-up version of its nanodegree
for an extra $100 a month, along with a money-back guarantee if
graduates do not find a job within six months.
Coursera’s content comes largely from universities, not specialist
instructors; its range is much broader; and it is offering full degrees
(one in computer science, the other an MBA) as well as shorter courses.
But it, too, has shifted its emphasis to employability. Its boss, Rick
Levin, a former president of Yale University, cites research showing
that half of its learners took courses in order to advance their
careers. Although its materials are available without charge, learners
pay for assessment and accreditation at the end of the course ($300-400
for a four-course sequence that Coursera calls a “specialisation”). It
has found that when money is changing hands, completion rates rise from
10% to 60% . It is increasingly working with companies, too. Firms can
now integrate Coursera into their own learning portals, track employees’
participation and provide their desired menu of courses.
These are still early days. Coursera does not give out figures on its
paying learners; Udacity says it has 13,000 people doing its
nanodegrees. Whatever the arithmetic, the reinvented MOOCs matter
because they are solving two problems they share with every provider of
later-life education.
The first of these is the cost of learning, not just in money but
also in time. Formal education rests on the idea of qualifications that
take a set period to complete. In America the entrenched notion of “seat
time”, the amount of time that students spend with school teachers or
university professors, dates back to Andrew Carnegie. It was originally
intended as an eligibility requirement for teachers to draw a pension
from the industrialist’s nascent pension scheme for college faculty.
Students in their early 20s can more easily afford a lengthy time
commitment because they are less likely to have other responsibilities.
Although millions of people do manage part-time or distance learning in
later life—one-third of all working students currently enrolled in
America are 30-54 years old, according to the Georgetown University
Centre on Education and the Workforce—balancing learning, working and
family life can cause enormous pressures.
Read more...
Source: The Economist