stanford has one of the better models out there (and good tech backing it up) as far as (ugh) MOOCs go.
while MOOCs buck one of the more disturbing trends in contemporary higher education--the idea that it is an essentially transactional endeavor, cash for credentials--in that it is ideally self-motivated students engaging with difficult material with essentially no instructional support, there's no profitable endgame right now. and nothing gets done in higher ed without money getting thrown around somewhere. i work in online higher ed at a smallish liberal arts school and my dean emails me stupid-ass articles about MOOCs every couple weeks, because of academic buzzwordy hysteria and a general absence of critical thinking skills.
right at this second though, there is a ton of instructional material out there for free in like a zillion disciplines and if you are the kind of autodidactic learner that can benefit from that, go fucking buck-wild. it's not going to be as accessible as it is once the VC money runs dry and institutions start charging for it.
my guess is that in a couple years there will be consortial extension schools (and a few big guys like stanford) charging smallish (for higher ed) fees for non-degree, certificate, maybe even associates-level programs taught in a MOOC-like manner. there is a _ton_ of accreditation stuff to figure out first though, and different states/regions have differing requirements. wheels turn slowly and i think a lot of schools will give up once they figure out how much work it will be to turn a profit.
in the meantime, drink deep of free, unfettered knowledge.
― adam, Tuesday, 10 September 2013 14:48 (eight years ago) link
ok that seems about right
just thinking of diving in before i take it on as a module in a course i'm doing anyway, so cant do any harm
― his LIPS !!! (darraghmac), Tuesday, 10 September 2013 15:04 (eight years ago) link