Hacker News Reader

Comment by AlchemistCamp | Hacker News Reader

I've been an enthusiastic follower of MOOCs since 2013 and it's amazing to me that there still isn't a better option than OCW for a serious, long-term learner.

Coursera and edX each had some great courses at their peak but the vast majority were lower-level, they came from a wide variety of institutions and most were time-restricted. As a result, even for subjects like mathematics or computer science there just wasn't a path for an ambitious learner to piece together the full material from a bachelor's degree. These days, even automated graders are behind the paywall and the promise of an education for all is more distant than ever.

OCW is truly an invaluable resource worth supporting and sharing!

View on HN

The MIT on edX courses for Probability [0], Single Variable Calculus [1], and differential equations [2] are of the absolute highest quality.

In general, I'd if there's a course by MIT on edX for the topic you wish to learn, I'd check it out.

[0] https://www.edx.org/course/probability-the-science-of-uncert...

[1] https://www.edx.org/xseries/mitx-18.01x-single-variable-calc...

[2] https://www.edx.org/xseries/mitx-18.03x-differential-equatio...

Thanks! Looking for a free version of [2], do you know where else one could find it?

Especially if you're willing/able to pay some money there's still a lot on edX etc., both individual courses and the various MicroMasters programs.

But, yes, totally free content is somewhat limited at this point and, generally, MOOCs have to be seen as a disappointment to anyone who saw them as a radical free substitute for a university education.

Perhaps interestingly, when OCW launched, MIT presented it as very much not a substitute for an MIT education but rather as raw materials for educators to assemble their own courses. Which I'm sure was at least in part a matter of internal politics but still. (And, of course, ubiquitous video of lectures wasn't a thing at the time anyway.)

Many if not most MOOCs certainly lack depth, maybe the problem is in M part? Sometimes they feel like an ad

Many of them are fairly faithful representations of the lecture components of courses from "elite" universities. There are certainly many MOOC courses I would struggle with. But, discussion boards are mostly a tire fire (in part, because of the M part as you suggest), problem sets/assignments are limited even if they're not behind a paywall, there are no recitation sessions, etc. So even if someone is motivated, which can be hard in the absence of meaningful certifications, they're just more limited than taking an actual university course.

Is it possible to piece together a full undergrad of coursework, self-study and then pass a subject GRE?

That would be a more recognizable credential than a "micromasters".

No one (except a grad school) cares what you get on a GRE test. GREs aren't that different from SATs.

Even if that were true, which I don't believe, it's still highly useful. E.g. if someone passes a GRE Physics test, they may be able to enter a graduate program with an entirely unrelated undergraduate degree instead of spending 100k getting another.

You may be different, but I'd have increased confidence in someone's general comfort with mathematical problem-solving if they posted good scores on a test covering this: https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/content/physics/

For computer science specifically, that's unfortunately not possible because the GRE for CS was discontinued in April 2013.

That's really a shame for ambitious learners trying to achieve more with less time, wealth or pedigree.

It completely makes sense from the university's perspective, though.

Totally agree, for me online education is a bummer because it has so much potential but most of the offerings instead of being great inherited the WORST of both worlds, old-brick-and-mortar education and web technologies. So to take a course I have to first sign-up for the platform, then sign-up for the specific course, then the material is arbitrarily split in micro-segments where you have to watch the professor droning on like in person education, then you have to answer some inane quizzes. The firs section is the SAME for all the courses, introduce yourself and blah blah. At the end you realize that the actual content was like 50% of a traditional college course. Do you want some credit? You have two options, you may pay 50-100 bucks for a useless certificate or the second option and the most insulting one, you take the course from a BIG NAME UNIVERSITY and you are requested to pay a high fee but the credit given is from a third-rate-municipal college for their "general requirements" course.

In the case of OCW you are presented with THE SAME EXACT course the kids at MIT are taking and many many courses have full lecture notes, quizzes, and so on. You could argue that the experience is not the same but at least the content is, you don't have to sign up for anything, the institution is actually world-class and the cost is 0.

i love how you put it. all of this micro organization and "filing" for ease actually makes it harder to follow. Give me a 2 hour youtube videos with stamps and i'll find what im looking for

Some courses can be of amazing quality, like 6.824

This course (at least the videos) are on YouTube for the latest iteration. I found the YouTube interface a bit more familiar for sampling the course.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrw6a1wE39_tb2fErI4-WkMbs...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com