Announcing Online MS in Computer Science in Collaboration with Georgia Tech
blog.udacity.com
blog.udacity.com
> How much does the degree program cost? We’re not yet ready to announce a specific program cost, but the plan is to offer the Georgia Tech OMS CS for a total cost of under $7,000—a fraction of the cost of Georgia Tech’s on-campus program and even less than that of comparable private universities.
> The total workload is the same as the residential program; the weekly or hourly workload depends on how quickly students wish to complete the program.
This is revolutionary.
Not only is it much cheaper, the incentives are now back in alignment. I know plenty of people that could graduate much faster and get on with their lives - The schools on the other hand, want them to stay longer (and thus pay more).
This removes the nickel and dime element and all kinds of backwards tedium.
I think there will be quite a few companies willing to pay $7000 in tuition assistance so their employees can get a MS.
> Georgia Tech said it does not plan to lower admission standards to find 6,000 or so students for this track -- a number than is 20 times larger than its current computer science master’s degree program. Instead, Georgia Tech hopes to attract more qualified applicants from across the world, including inside the military and at companies – places that harbor nontraditional students who could not previously come to a traditional campus or find the money for a full degree, on campus or online.
I don't think they said that. In the faqs they say you don't need to take the GMAT.... which every graduate student has to take.
And the materials themselves will be free, like a regular Udacity class.
There is nothing in CS that requires your physical presence in a lecture hall to learn.
Also, there is an element of selection bias. Those who are likely to apply to an MS in Computer Science self-select according to their perception of the requirements of those programs. This enables programs to capture those without a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science but who still have the level of motivation, acumen, and interest necessary to succeed in an MS program in Computer Science.
So long as they know the fundamentals of programming (through, say, the equivalent a Data Structures class) I think a mathematician could take a go at it without much issue. An EE probably wouldn't have too much trouble either.
In my search thus far, I've found zero schools that offer a traditional undergrad CS program online. And please, before we get into the 'you can learn most of undergrad level CS topics online' - I would like the structure and support from an online, instructor led course that offers student assistance/office-hours. This is something I'd pay for, but because I'm working full time, I can't take classes during the workday.
Generally, 2-way interaction is done via message board, but most (maybe all?) of the instructors I've had so far keep specific office hours and available are for web chat or telephone calls during those hours.
Any of the prereqs that you're missing could potentially be taken as a transient at another institution (be it locally, or online). This is how I've handled the few classes I was missing.
Based on the rates listed on the page linked above, it should be around $25k for the whole thing (based on needing 60 credits of upper-division classes, since you already have a Bachelor's), even as a non-resident.
I feel the USD 40,000-50,000 price is overpriced for the on campus course. People should verify independently of me about the University of Leuven and post something here.
The general idea is that the society can afford to foot the bill for education better than it can afford to have people not attain the highest level they could reach.
Hm. Unless this is a master's course that requires that you already have a different master degree, it should only cost about 500 euros for Belgian students.
<edit> To address a question below about GT's program, NC State's is practically equivalent to their campus-based stuff. You apply, and are admitted, following exactly the same process as everyone else. After admission, you follow the same rules and processes as everyone else. The one exception I've found -- besides making it easier to study part time and draw out the total duration -- is that professors are usually much more lenient with deadlines for their online students. They know a large percentage of online students are doing it that way because they're working full time (or are deployed military, or any of a plethora of other situations), and they offer a lot of leeway. This helped me & my peers quite a lot.
As far as I know, they have the exact same work.
Out of curiosity, how does this work with project-based courses where the students design their own projects? Or do those not exist?
At least in the kinds of CS masters projects I'm familiar with, they tend to require a lot of one-on-one meeting time, which seems like it would be hard to scale up. It's certainly possible to do online, so online vs. physical isn't really an issue. But if one of the goals of offering these programs online is also to massively increase student:teacher ratio (as GT seems to be indicating), that seems like it would present a problem for individualized projects.
A typical arrangement is that students propose a project, possibly based on some suggestions from the professor. In the ideal case it intersects students' interests with something active going on in the research world or even the professor's lab, so the students and professor might even co-write a conference paper at the end of the course (for the best projects). They meet with the professor a few times to refine the project idea and scope so it's appropriate for the course, likely to be doable, etc. Then they meet a few more times during the project to ensure they're on track, agree on what parts could be cut if time doesn't allow them to be completed as originally envisioned, etc. Finally they do an oral, conference-style presentation of their work/results, and then hand in a report.
The biggest pain has been exam proctoring. It seems to all be done by hand (exams being emailed/faxed back and forth) and I've experienced every point of failure in the system. And strangely the professors always refuse to tell us when the exam windows are... haven't figure that one out yet.
If the student passes the course, doesn't he deserve a masters? If he doesn't, well, he still paid 7k.
It's the poorly-subsidized, "for profit" nature of the US educational system which has led to the US going from first to twelfth place in the percentage of young people with university degrees (http://completionagenda.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files...) (warning: pdf).
While I applaud what I'm seeing here and I think it's great news, the "low price" of $7000 is only for the Masters program ... you already have to have a Bachelors degree and it's still a far higher price than you'll pay in many parts of the world.
For all the talk about on-line degrees, I don't see them being a good replacement, unless as the cheap/distance option (makes more sense where tuition is high such as in the US), or for mature students with a job/family on the side.
Nothing can replace the full university experience (perhaps until somebody boots up a proper Matrix).
College is not just about book-knowledge, but also about being immersed in a new environment, meeting new people and developing new skills.
Naturally all this can be done in ones sleepy home-village, or on the 10/5-6 city job as well, but very few people find the time, or do the root-cutting necessary to be able to do so.
Online classes have been around for about a decade now. But i cant see how taking a class online from Georgia Tech aint gonna be different than taking an online class from another university.
The benefits of getting a CS degree at a university is gaining that physical connection with the professors. There isn't going to be a single thing these online classes will have that you wouldn't be able to find online yourself or at another online course at another institution.
But what you miss is the personal interaction with the professors and students - something you can't get from an online chat room. Especially at Masters level - where your interaction with professors is much closer.
This is a step in the wrong direction. If this was for a BS, I could understand. Especially because it gives access to those who don't have access to that education. But the real benefit of higher education is the personal connections IMO. There isn't really any additional "knowledge" CS pieces that is taught at MIT and not at a normal university. what separates universities is those personal connections with the faculty and the community.
At GT (I received a BS in Computational Media), the real value came from the people - individual connections that help pave your way through career choices and research topics.
I mean come on, what's next? PhD in CS with 3000 other students? Defending your thesis to a random professor thousands of miles away who you only have email contact?
I agree with your sentiment regarding the value of connections, and that's where the premium cost of on-campus MS programs comes in. But there is a clear value to getting a degree with a reputation and accreditation versus learning the same material independently.
Additionally, defending a thesis to a random professor thousands of miles away isn't far off from my real-world work environment. Worked for IBM and literally never met my manager during my tenure. Currently work at a firm with colleagues predominantly across the world and have to manage direct reports, solve problems, and build rapport all the same. Getting things done despite being remote is the direction.
I agree that online classes from GT aren't guaranteed to be better than online classes from other places. Perhaps one day we'll see an a la carte degree offered by Udacity, so you can pick the courses from the universities or instructors you prefer.
That said, branding and standardization are important. Even if the classes are no better, the perceived value of the degree might be higher than one from Podunk State Online.
Consider this question. How many employers do you know say, "Oh we hire Ga Tech grads all the time! They are great to work with" I hear that quite a lot around where I live. I think it is due to the culture that Georgia Tech has as well as the in person interaction.
It's a notoriously demanding program. I hope they can adapt their "Take a look at the people to your left and right. One of you will not make it to graduation." scare speech/boast to the online format.
I think what makes this more attractive than a simple distance education version of most masters degrees is the following: - Prestige of a decent school (but, USC Viterbi offers a distance degree along with others) - Low cost (can't get a fellowship or assistantship if working full time) - High standard for classes (still have to earn the degree) - Custom pace (my life's schedule no longer fits into semesters) - Being on the forefront of education (how cool to tell your grandkids you obtained one of the first OMS degrees?)
Interaction with people is only one of the many facets of a grad school course. For those intending to go the PhD route, absolutely go on campus, do research, network, etc. But don't assume that's what everybody needs.
Believe it or not, online classes are completely different than regular classes. Being in an online class you simply work with the material you have.
There is nothing you will learn in an online masters class you couldn't find online elsewhere already. It is just an extended bachelors degree.
Your job prospects for having an Online Masters in CS from Georgia Tech will not change too much IMO. The way you will get the job you want is from connections - the kinds that you build while AT a university.
Most jobs that people get are from referrals. In most high skilled MS requiring jobs you have to INTERACT with people. You have to work together in teams. You have to have real world interactions. These are skills you don't obtain from an online masters class.
This clearly isn't a completely replacement for the existing Masters program. Yet it's a huge improvement over a stack of dusty books, and possibly, in some cases, an improvement over a stack of "Certificates of Accomplishment" from non-accredited MOOCs.
I don't think this is necessarily aimed at people just exiting a BS program. It has a strong "professional" focus. If you haven't learned to interact with people fruitfully and work in teams in your professional life, you're at a disadvantage.
As I said elsewhere, I believe a program like this requires more of the student than a traditional degree. You have to bring greater discipline, the ability to learn without interaction with the instructor, and as you point out, an assortment of other skills that you have acquired on your own.
I do hope that online educators find some way to foster similarly valuable interaction between students on team projects as opposed to keeping everybody in individual solipsistic relationships with the course automaton. It's a challenging problem -- who wants to depend on somebody without any, or much, skin in the game? How would it even work with the flexible schedules this kind of thing will attract?
So, as far as working together in teams, and real-world interactions, I have those in spades. I don't need that anymore. Were I to get an MS right after a BS, it'd be a different story. But 15 years in industry gives you that. I need the education itself: horizon expansion and prestige of the school name. That's it. And as far as information that comes from other people, I work around other engineers and people I already contact when I have issues. I estimate that there's not much in an MS non-thesis program that will truly challenge me at this point. Not in an arrogant way, just that industry experience does this for people.
GT may not yet be at the forefront of DL, but they're working closely with Udacity, which is. I will expect a quality program.
Also GT alum here... GT is a great school, but frankly the online classes couldn't be worse than the in real life classes. I bet they'll even be taught by professors, rather than severely English-challenged TA's...
It would be nice if online students were able to go on campus or attend lectures as an option.
I'd do it in a second, but then I'm probably the target audience (other than not having completed my BS). I'm almost 40 years old, with a wife and child, and the flexibility is crucial to me. This isn't an alternative to a traditional MS program; the traditional MS just isn't even an option for me. I see it as a way to get credit for the MOOC work I'm already doing for fun and fulfillment.
If institutions can persuade students to accept an Oxx designation (online prefix), then administrations are modelling that they can not only increase revenues based on free MOOC numbers, but simultaneously protect on-campus degree branding.
I am guessing that many online/distance-learning degrees are conferred without making it clear that the degree was earned in this way. Although this is great for students, I'm sure this causes angst in administrations for fear of brand dilution and obvious revenue threats.
The O-prefix would be a great experiment to see if it sticks. As rsanders said, this really appeals to a certain demographic (older, family/multiple jobs, flexibility, striking distance of employee tuition assistance programs, etc). I am part of that demographic and am sorely tempted to sign up.
One unintended benefit of reducing the cost of such degrees is that it will become (much?) more common for people to hold multiple graduate degrees, which may help offset the perceived 'weakness' of the O- designation.
It also opens opportunities for smaller universities with decent programs to make a dent. My university recently did entirely away with the on-campus format for the degree I received since most students signed up for the online format (I did). My diploma does not say "Online" at all.
If the quality of instruction and coursework is alleged to be equivalent, why not put the full standing of the University's name behind it? To me, adding the caveat of "online" makes it seem like the school is admitting in advance that the degree isn't equivalent to "not-online" MSc degrees.
I wonder if, since this is accredited, the body that certifies Georgia Tech's offerings wouldn't agree to do it without an "online" tag. Though, if that were the case, I wonder how my university was able to change its MSc offering (not Computer Science, though) to entirely-online without adding that word since both GATech and my college are covered by the same body.
The quality of the lecture instruction and coursework is alleged to be equivalent, but maybe they are now trying to differentiate on other dimensions such as physical access to on-campus facilities, easier/more direct access to professors or more implied individual attention.
>>To me, adding the caveat of "online" makes it seem like the school is admitting in advance that the degree isn't equivalent to "not-online" MSc degrees.
That's exactly what they're stating in no uncertain terms -- the two degrees are not equal. The preference for students and smaller universities is to go with an undifferentiated designation, but GT is drawing a line in the sand with this specific online offering. Note that GT offers other distance-learning masters degrees without differentiation, but at much higher cost.
The reduced cost is their justification for the O- prefix.
>> I wonder how my university was able to change its MSc offering (not Computer Science, though) to entirely-online without adding that word since both GATech and my college are covered by the same body.
This is why I suggested that the O- prefix was a deliberate choice that other major universities will push to protect the high fees of on-campus degrees.
I read the http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/faq/ , and found only this hint:
Why is AT&T the corporate collaborator for this initiative?
As a premier global communications company and a champion for innovation in education, AT&T will provide technology access, connectivity and products at inception, as well as evolving service and platform support. The company will serve on an advisory board and, where appropriate, offer corporate projects for credit, be a source from which Georgia Tech draws curriculum content and guest instructors and offer internship opportunities to select students. AT&T will tap into the program to train its own employees and will recruit graduates.
Technology access, connectivity, service and platform support? Aren't those basically solved problems for Udacity?
Advisory board? Does GaTech have corporate sponsorship on the advisory board of their other Master's programs, setting curriculum? (Maybe they should, maybe they shouldn't, but I doubt they think they need to.)
Beyond that, a lot of companies have some kind of tuition assistance for graduate degrees, and a lot of companies are having trouble finding skilled talent to begin with. So it's a way to save money and improve recruiting.
The business models of companies like Udacity and Coursera are probably going to rely heavily on the hunger of companies the size of AT&T, Google, etc. for a steady supply of trained workers. Somebody's got to pay the bills and make the VCs rich.
I like to think of this as shifting part of the cost of the education from the individual to the company that's ultimately benefitting from it. Of course, one might worry about some unspecified negative influence from the corporate sponsors, but in this incredibly transparent educational environment, such influences would be pretty obvious and self-defeating.
They say "AT&T hires about 30,000 employees a year" and that AT&T will provide projects for OMS CS students to work on, as well as internship and job opportunities. It also says they will be having some of their employees get the degree.
(1) There have been quite a few online learning (aka distance learning) degree courses from reputable universities for some time. For MSc / Master degrees until recently they all required at least some in-person workshops (normally 1 week long - for a MSc in the UK afak 6-8 sometimes 12 weeks over 2 years). These workshops were there for the benefit of the students (networking, group work / access to profs in person, socializing, campus feeling etc.) and various other requirements (e.g. degree requirements). The outcome of these degree programs was normally the same degree that you would have received for taking all courses on campus.
(2) All universities that have offered online degrees without in-person workshops in the past differentiate / protect their higher priced and more strongly access-limited on-campus degrees by providing different degrees - GaTech does the same here - after successfully completing this course you will receive an OMS in CS from GaTech not a MS in CS from GaTech. It is to be seen if this will be received differently in the industry (as this was with such degrees in the past) or we finally are getting to a change here.
(3) The course will start Fall 2014. I would be surprised if EdX and/or Coursera will not soon announce something similar.
(4) From the FaQ it looks like ATT is sponsoring the course creation etc. with US$2M.
Also, it costs about $7k a year assuming you are taking one class a semester for 4.5 years.
Udacity already issues credit for a fewer lower level classes via SJSU. I wonder how soon the gap will be closed and a whole online degree available.
I think not only that, but also allows the curriculum to be more focused. Likely they weren't prepared to throw in all the non-major related classes that typically go with an undergraduate degree. Its a great start.
For things like medicine, professional engineering, legal, etc... I care that those degrees are from accredited programs, but not CS. What I do care about is that the school itself is accredited and legally allowed to confer degrees.
For what it's worth: CalTech does have ABET accredited programs in Chemical, Mechanical, and Electrical engineering. So, they must not feel that ABET accreditation offers much for a CS program.
> Why would I care about ABET accreditation for a CS program? I'm not sure why someone would care (some people do though). ABET does not offer accreditation to history departments (now there's a controversial idea). I found the fact that these institutions do not have them as an interesting curiosity.
Source: www.caltech.edu
But it depends on how heavily they lean on their heuristics. If you're interested I wouldn't let your fear that they won't accept BA's stop you from applying. I have a BS in Economics and am currently enrolled in a Master's in Computer Science. I mention that because I know there are plenty of BA in Economics programs around...and I can't imagine they differ that much from the program I graduated in.
[1]Calculus 1 and 2, Intro to Programming, Data Structures, Foundations of CS, Intro to Computer Systems, Intro to Computer Organization, Algorithms and Data Structures, Structures of Programming Languages, Introduction to Finite Automata, Introduction to Operating Systems.
P.S. Anybody know where I can learn any of the above online cheap or free? If I learn it elsewhere I can test out of the classes.
It's not quite the same thing -- watch the video by Charles Isbell on the GT site to hear their differentiation between the "on campus" and online degrees. But it's an amazing value for people who can learn effectively in a MOOC environment and aren't focused on the path into research and academia.
The video is also at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zihmiLx3Xlk.
[edit: added link to video]
looks more like 60K depending on your in state/out of state status
However, I wonder if this would devalue a degree from Georgia Tech. You'd obviously have a lot more people taking the course than you would if it wasn't an MOOC. Thoughts?
While I feel like this is a step in the right direction for online education, the fact that this has the online designation plus its availability to a much, much wider audience seems like it would be a temporary setback in the eyes of employers.
> Galil and Bras both said they did not think the Udacity partnership would cannibalize its existing master’s degree program. They said the residential college experience would still appeal to students who are on a Ph.D. track, who want a full range of career services and who want visas to live in the United States while they study.
A Bachelor's would be easier to accept, but a Master's? I don't think people are ready for that yet.
This only makes sense if you consider degrees to be collector's items. Maybe the problem is not with the degree.
A masters requires a lot less courses, and you don't have to worry about general education requirements, which often involve a routine amount of writing and open-ended discussion (as opposed to a Q&A basis you'd likely find in STEM classes), or, for example, science courses that may require labs.
I think they made a pretty smart choice starting with a CS degree. The field is notoriously full of extremely talented autodidacts, whether because the material is more amenable to that approach or because those who learn it are more capable of doing so.
In any case, the attitude towards educational background in the field of CS/software engineering is already quite liberal and accepting. So there's less of a prejudice against this program than there would be for an online MS in many other fields. Now they just have to make it work.
Despite other comments about not staking their reputation on this degree -- and I agree that the "Online" part of the title seems like a hedge -- Georgia Tech takes its reputation extremely seriously. Smart people are staking their own personal reputations and careers on this program. This is something new and it may fail, but not because there is any intent to deliver a lesser education.
The biggest impact for those who don't qualify for admission may be in advancing the legitimacy of online education, with or without a degree.
As an employer, the difference between an awarded MS and a certificate of completion in this program is not going to be that substantial to me. I'm going to interview both candidates to determine their level of knowledge and skill, and both indicators communicate the same educational background.
I expect a natural outgrowth of this sort of thing will be students providing access to his/her detailed course records as part of their resume. If I'm interested in hiring developers for machine learning applications, being able to read the code from those standardized, well-known assignments would be tremendously more useful in skill assessment than asking somebody to code FizzBuzz on the whiteboard and "riddle me this, batman: why are manhole covers round?"
The "GitHub account as resume" idea is an interesting trend, but they're not standardized and I don't have time to digest 20 unique projects in 20 different languages on 20 different frameworks to ferret out the non-boilerplate bits which may tell me something about the candidate.
As someone who has suffered alongside you (though 6-8 years ago, when it wasn't so bad and scholarship money flowed a bit better), I feel your pain. But if I have overpaid for my education, knowing that I contributed in some small way towards the globalization/openness of post-secondary classwork was well worth the price.
Still, I'd recommend people at least let it run for a full one or two years before giving it a shot. The second mouse gets the cheese and all that.
Also, having a master's in Comp Sci will really help me have a shot for all these software eng. positions I keep applying to as a chemical engineer.
Can anyone tell me how Georgia Tech ranks/is thought of for Computer Science? I know the article says "among the best", but I would rather ask HN.
For arbitrary reference, they're ranked #10 by USN&WR: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-gradu...
The robotics lab at GT's College of Computing is insane.
Right there is one of several reasons where having physical access to College of Computing facilities (e.g. robotics labs) would help justify the cost of the full on-campus MS degree program, as differentiated from an OMS where you may only have remote access to a subset of CoC facilities (e.g. compute clusters).
EDIT: As per rsander's link posted in this thread[1] GT plans to go from 300 on-campus students to 10,000. Without a corresponding bump in facilities, it would seem that MS student projects would (naturally/obviously!) take priority over OMS projects. More specifically, OMS students may have to be resourceful with the money they're saving and rent/buy their own resources for computationally intensive projects.
[1] http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/14/georgia-tech-a...
By the way, how is applying for software engineering positions as a chem eng. working out for you? I'm getting my PhD in chem eng. now from UT, and I am trying to find a job that when I graduate combines my love for both fields.
However, I am enrolled in App Academy, so I can start doing web dev. My advice is to show you've taken at least an Algorithms/Data Structures course, that plus the skills you've picked up from programming on the side should be enough to get a junior dev position.
In terms of a job that combines both fields...the closest thing I know to a software person in ChemE is an Aspen Troubleshooter for Exxon. Personally, I want to do advanced controls and modeling/simulation. Can I shoot you an email? I might have a lead for you with Tesla.
We've got one of the best undergrad CS programs in the world for a few reasons. First up, it's difficult. And I know everyone says that, but Georgia Tech is one of those schools where you come in expecting to easily coast like you have in high school, then you get hit by a bus by the workload and difficulty. The people here are easily the smartest people I've met, and everyone has to work hard.
We've got an awesome threads system, where you can pick your concentrations, and it really lets you specialize in undergrad.
From the people I've worked and collaborated with, I'd say in terms of CS knowledge we're comparable to Stanford and MIT. The biggest difference between MIT, Stanford and Tech is the entrepreneurial culture that Tech doesn't really have yet (and don't get me started on our administration).
My heart sank a little, I have been looking for something like this forever and was planning on applying today after I read the press release.
I joined the mailing list and may even contact the admissions office for the B&M College of Computing to see if there are any pilot programs I could apply to. I am currently in Tokyo for work and finding a decent place online to continue my education in computer science has been difficult. Just set aside $7,000 in a new checking account for the associated fees.
This is the most exciting thing I have seen on HN in a while, awesome time to be a Computer Scientist!
> How will you guarantee academic honesty?
> All exams are proctored using national proctoring standards. We have access to 4,500 physical proctoring facilities and are working with online proctoring institutions.
Does this mean it won't be available outside the US ("national proctoring standards")?
Or does this mean appearing at prometric-style centers for the tests? I for one do not love taking tests in the alien environment of such centers (especially computer-science related tests), from my experience with various certifications.
1) Until now, the majority of University-affiliated MOOCs have been free. This just changed.
2) I find it immensely frustrating that as CS people, we are lowering the bar for what it means to have a Masters degree in our field.
I'd be happy with this sort of activity if it was being done in all other fields uniformly and/or we had unions representing CS workers. Unions, in principal aren't bad ... they are possibly the only way to protect older workers for example. I used to love the CS field because it always felt like a truly meritocracy. As I get older, I realize it is not.
Let me make a third, controversial, and somewhat ungrounded statement:
3) MOOCs will kill CS research. Already CS research is in deep trouble. Exceedingly few private companies fund basic CS research. Academia was the last haven (if you can call it a haven - it was sad seeing the line of professors quitting their jobs to work for Google, and getting a pay raise and increase in respect for it). Govts exceedingly don't want to pay for basic research these days. Undergrad teaching used to be the way academics supported themselves. This is going the way of the dodo. But we are improving the lot of the CS undergrad you say! True .. but tell me what the poor grad student (who actually wants to get a PhD with the romantic notion of advancing the state of the art) going to do to support him/herself financially?
It remains to be seen whether this lowers the bar or merely opens up more opportunities. I don't think education is a zero sum game. And while there may be a glut of PhDs, there is a shortage of employees with the advanced knowledge and skills in demand now. That's why e.g. AT&T is pushing this program.
While the union issue and age discrimination are interesting and important topics, CS graduates don't have a lot to complain about economically. The field has maintained high employment and excellent compensation during recent times when many other professions suffered greatly. Now, at 40 I don't expect to get funded by Y Combinator because I've almost certainly suffered crippling age-related innovation dementia, but there are plenty of employers that don't think that way.
There have been several articles posted here about the glut of PhDs versus available faculty positions. And actual instruction is a pretty small part of what full professors are expected to do. If you aren't pulling in research grants, your career is on a weak trajectory. So the problem was already there, and I don't think this seriously affects it one way or the other.
One might hope that making education available and practical to many more people at much lower costs might actually help advance the field, both within and without the ivory tower.
I absolutely agree that education is not a zero sum game. I actually find it sad that most education has become about job training or making money. Whatever happened to curiosity and knowledge for its own sake? But let me not get into that debate. Degrees and credentialing might be zero-sum, however.
< actual instruction is a pretty small part of what full professors are expected to do.
Similarly, the majority of what students pay in tuition goes towards anything other than the salaries and funding of professors. Also, there is a big difference between top-10 schools which run based on a lot of grant money and smaller teaching institutions.
Look, I think I'm on the losing side of the wider argument. I am all for free access to knowledge. I'm just pointing out that we are likely shooting ourselves in the foot in the long-term.
< One might hope that making education available and practical to many more people at much lower costs might actually help advance the field, both within and without the ivory tower.
This is the best sentence in your response (upvoted you btw). I really hope so.
> 1) Until now, the majority of University-affiliated MOOCs have been free. This just changed.
You can take a free MOOC or a paid one.
> 2) I find it immensely frustrating that as CS people, we are lowering the bar for what it means to have a Masters degree in our field.
This provides the opportunity for thousands of people to obtain there master's degree without wasting large sums of money on tuition and upending their life for a couple years. If helping thousands of people means "lowering the bar," then so be it. Learning isn't a competition.
> 3) MOOCs will kill CS research.
I think the real reason CS research is dying is because the business model of academia is outdated (which, incidentally, is what Udacity et al are trying to fix). If I could have gotten my BS online for $5000, there is no way I would have gone to a physical institution.
> Undergrad teaching used to be the way academics supported themselves.
Right, and now I'm happy I can actually pay for my education directly without paying ridiculous amounts of money just to subsidize an outdated system. To call this a "dark day" is a slap in the face to those who are trying to make education available to everyone.
This has no connection to CS research. Terminal MS students (in most disciplines, not just CS) are not on a research track anyway.
> The second type of student will be “prospective degree-seeking” students who will be admitted to the program tentatively because they will not have to take the GRE as other applicants do. If they do well in two core classes, Georgia Tech will put them on the degree track. The university expects to enroll 2,000 such students in the next three years.
Thanks.
I expect this program will be a big hit with non-US students who want a US credential.
Or is CS a good fit for only a limited number of people, regardless of price?
It's fascinating that this field, which is difficult because it requires precision, lends itself so practically to automatic grading online.
As exciting as MOOCs are, will we be bound to use them in what's left of our free time just to keep up?
Computer science is 7,426, so what are the other 152,574 degrees in?
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/14/georgia-tech-and-udacity-roll-out-massive-new-low-cost-degree-programDid anyone else wonder how much it would cost to live on beaches of South-East Asia or some other cheap and sunny locale while doing this?
I guess the next thing they need to add is a undergrad in CS or something else to help bridge the gap.
I really hope that someone offers an undergraduate CS degree online at some point.
How much does the degree program cost?
We’re not yet ready to announce a specific program cost, but the plan is to offer the Georgia Tech OMS CS for a total cost of under $7,000—a fraction of the cost of Georgia Tech’s on-campus program and even less than that of comparable private universities.
We’re not yet ready to announce a specific program cost,
but the plan is to offer the Georgia Tech OMS CS for a
total cost of under $7,000—a fraction of the cost of
Georgia Tech’s on-campus program and even less than that
of comparable private universities.
You also have to have a Bachelor's degree, which is a disappointment for me. I left college before completing my BS in CS, and I'd love to be in this program, but I wouldn't be admitted.
[disclosure: my wife works in the Georgia Tech Professional Education group, which is how I heard about this]
That would somewhat validate their stated goal of increasing STEM education.
At the next family-attending Georgia Tech Professional Education function I'm going to petition everybody who'll stand still to allow people without a BS to earn the degree. But I think I'll actually be preaching to the choir.
Anyway, it's a huge step for them to create this program as is. And once the concerns about "degree devaluation" have passed, and enough demand has become apparent, maybe they'll be ready for the next step.
Really?! Forget the degree then, I just want the content!
The OMS won't initially have all the same courses (or specializations?), but the plan according to one of the GT videos is to reach approximate parity over time.
I can't wait to hear more on the admission process. Will they require a certain GPA? Will they need recommendation letters (as they do now)?