When you go to a process critique rather than argue results that's the sign of a weak criticism. The article is more concerned about how he does what he does rather than what he accomplishes. Khan has a system of which the videos are just one part. Teachers are a key part of his program, they are just freed to tackle more salient aspects of teaching, like helping kids get over problems. It's an open source business model. The source is free, use it if you wish, but for service, there could be a fee. Teachers could actually be paid to teach and mentor instead of lecturing and giving tests. It's a successful model elsewhere and worth trying in education. Teachers and others can produce the content and then anyone else can charge a fee for teaching using the infrastructure. There's no reason the lectures can't improve over time, but you have to start somewhere, and he did. And the other parts of the system are still very valid. Inversion of lecture and help time, a test until success testing model, go at your pace, short modules that build on each other, a dashboard helping teachers track progress and proactively solve problems. Why is that a bad approach?