Hacker News Reader

Comment by rossdavidh | Hacker News Reader

Hypothesis: MIT and Harvard had enough experience in distance learning by now to realize that it is NOT going to be the wave of the future in education. They don't want to exactly say this out loud and take flak for it, so they're just unloading this (for significant $$) primarily in order to refocus on in-person education, since they've realized that distance learning has been around for decades and nothing about the Internet has really made much difference in how well it works. For a few people, it could be significant, especially if they are in a remote location and don't have the option of attending in person, and have an iron will to remain motivated when not in a school environment. It is not what most students need, does not give the networking bonus that is a big part of MIT and Harvard's value, and is not going to be the future of education.

View on HN

Seems like an overly negative take. I see no reason not to take the article at face-value here, namely, that MIT & Harvard saw the growing gap between for-profit and not-for-profit online education--and decided to take steps ensure that the latter doesn't fall behind.

It's also pointed out in the article that MIT & Harvard will be investing money into a new non-profit to explore the "next generation" of online learning, which is literally the opposite of "[refocusing] on in-person education", as you hypothesize.

The problem with MIT's online courses is that while the content itself was fantastic they refused to treat it like an online course. They wanted to have it run on a schedule, strict no-compromising deadlines, and large fees for full access.

That's fine and all but it's forcing the university model they know into an online format and it doesn't work so great for the audience that wants to take online courses imho.

The value proposition on it's Micro Masters course was that you could use it for credit at full universities. The problem is it was extremely unlikely one would get the opportunity to use it at MIT, and the rest of the partners were universities that I had never even heard of before. Not necessarily places I'd probably want to go to further my studies.

The facts are a little different.

For the math & physics classes, the deadlines are 3 weeks after being assigned, whereas when you take the class in person, there's a strict 1 week deadline.

Part of the advantage of taking an online class, as opposed to self study, is the motivating factor of deadlines. I have a lot of textbooks I've started reading, then said "I'll get back to this" and never have.

Another advantage of class over just textbook is discussions with classmates and TAs. Having a schedule helps with that too, since there are others working on the same material at the same time.

I do agree, but fortunately having the course online means one should be able to choose how they learn best. Want to sign up for a scheduled online class with available TAs? Neat, now you can pay for that separately. Want to just consume the material at your leisure and not require any outside assistance other than maybe a forum? Pay a smaller fee or even get it for free depending on the needs of the content creator and get access at any time without deadlines.

Personally I have a study friend and we motivate each other. But we don't necessarily move as fast as MIT's deadlines because we are professionals with deadlines that take priority. So it's completely lost on me which is frustrating because the material is great!

To paraphrase Tom Lehrer [1]: education is like a sewer; what you get out of it depends on what you put into it. This is true regardless of the medium. Some people will get value out of distance learning, others won't, just as some people will get value out of in-person learning and others won't. The only difference is the cost. Distance learning can be provided for a lot less money, so you can afford to be less selective on who you provide it to, and so your failure rates are likely to be higher. This does not reflect at all on the actual effectiveness of the process.

[EDIT] Reference added, because today's youth are apparently not well-versed in the classics:

[1] https://youtu.be/w8d0GwzY6cA?t=2210

Education is like a sewer? No matter what I put into a sewer, my guess is that it's going to come out covered in shit.

Maybe the point is that what you get out of it depends a great deal on what everybody around you puts into it, a depressing fact that online learning can hopefully mitigate at least a little bit for people who have access to it.

It is an allusion to an old joke. Here is the original source: https://youtu.be/w8d0GwzY6cA?t=2210

Up vote for user name

It's not the future for the elite institutions, why would you try and saturate the market with degree holders who can claim they graduated from Harvard/MIT? But it is the future in terms of replacing third rate degrees that charge too much and return too little ROI. Maybe they've decided they don't want to compete in this space anymore given that reality as colleges shut down, and it's no longer seen as an altruistic endeavor, but merely a market share war.

I don't agree that the Internet hasn't made much difference in how well distance learning works, but I agree with a weaker version of your hypothesis applied to educating young people. An indispensable feature of their university experience is building personal and professional connections that will last a lifetime, and that can't be built through distance learning.

On the other hand, distance learning makes a huge impact on mature learners. Whether they need to "reskill" to improve their job prospects, or simply cannot attend a university in person because they juggle many adult responsibilities, innovations and improvements in distance learning is extremely important to them and is beneficial to society. I also think this group is often ignored/pushed to the side in these debates.

I work at Harvard and take classes at the "Extension School" (Classes are good, and as en employee discounted). A lot of the classes are "Remote" or "Hybrid", (even before the pandemic). There have been classes with 40 people with just a handful showing up physically. Oddly they didn't use EdX as the online platform for these. It was "Canvas".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com