Good article on MOOCs

[regentrude]

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/07/moocs_could_be_disastrous_for_students_and_professors.html

[Twigs]

Regentrude, thanks for posting.

 

How do you teach tens of thousands of people anything at once? You don't. What you can do over the Internet this way is deliver information, but that's not education. Education, as any real teacher will tell you, involves more than just transmitting facts. It means teaching students what to do with those facts, as well as the skills they need to go out and learn new information themselves

 

Unfortunately, my college/university education was sadly lacking in the above bolded ideals.

 

I think that ultimately, MOOCs will be very good for education.  Right now they are putting traditional universities on the defensive, re-evaluating what they do.  The traditional professors, feeling threatened, emit quotes things like the bolded text above.  A little self-reflection from the academy may be in order, though.  When I went to University back in the day, many of my gen-ed required classes where taught in giant lecture halls with at least 500 students.  Maybe you can't teach 10,000 people anything at once, but where is the line?  Can you teach 500 people anything at once?  In this regard, I totally agree with Twigs above. The linked article complains that MOOCs are pre-canned lectures, but until I got to my upper-division classes, we couldn't ask any questions during lecture.  If the lecture is going to be without questions from the students, I think I'd rather watch an edited, polished one that I can pause, rewind and watch at a time of day where I'm most sharp, one where false steps have been removed, instead of a live performance.

 

Another thing the linked article complains about is the reliance on multiple-choice tests, and how patently invalid they are.  While I agree with that sentiment, MOOCs are hardly the only institution that uses them.  If multiple choice tests aren't sound, we'll have to throw out the SAT, ACT, etc. etc.

 

Moreover, I've gotten a lot out of  pre-recorded Teaching Company lectures over the years.  I have no access to the instructors, and in a perfect world I could sit down and chat with the professors, but their lectures have been stimulating and thought provoking.

 

What I'd really like to see is the rise of the "flipped classroom".  The one thing a live professor offers is the ability to answer questions and interact with live students.  If I'm paying for face time with a subject matter expert, I'd prefer to get the canned lecture out of the way first, on my own time, and spend all of class time in an interactive discussion.

[regentrude]

When I went to University back in the day, many of my gen-ed required classes where taught in giant lecture halls with at least 500 students.  Maybe you can't teach 10,000 people anything at once, but where is the line?  Can you teach 500 people anything at once?  In this regard, I totally agree with Twigs above. The linked article complains that MOOCs are pre-canned lectures, but until I got to my upper-division classes, we couldn't ask any questions during lecture.

 

Did you not have any recitations, labs, or tutorials in smaller groups? Where problem solving is taught, students can interact with the instructor, do group work? We, too, teach 500 students in one course, but in addition to lectures, they are taking recitations in groups of 30 and a lab in groups of 20, and their work is evaluated by actual humans, not computers and scantrons. We also offer 10 hours per course per week of interactive open learning environment in addition to 8 hours of tutoring. I spend several hours a week interacting one-on-one with students in help sessions. No canned lecture can replicate this.

your school had none of this???

 

 

Moreover, I've gotten a lot out of  pre-recorded Teaching Company lectures over the years.  I have no access to the instructors, and in a perfect world I could sit down and chat with the professors, but their lectures have been stimulating and thought provoking.

 

I love TC lectures. However, I do not believe it is possible to develop a skill from just watching or listening.

 

I checked out one of the coursera lectures. 200 words writing assignment per week, laughable for college level, and graded by three fellow students. talk about the blind leading the blind. I do not believe one can learn to write well from watching lectures, without having a human who can write well himself giving constructive personalized feedback, just like one can not learn how to actually do physics without working on problem solving and receiving feedback on one's own work. Lectures are great for talking about things, but for mastering a skill, it has long been known that active learning techniques are far superior than listening to a lecturer

(for interesting examples, check out Eric Mazur's confession of a reformed lecturer)

 

 

 

What I'd really like to see is the rise of the "flipped classroom".  The one thing a live professor offers is the ability to answer questions and interact with live students.  If I'm paying for face time with a subject matter expert, I'd prefer to get the canned lecture out of the way first, on my own time, and spend all of class time in an interactive discussion.

 

 

Yes, that would be a wise use of prerecorded lecture. OTOH, it would not be much different from giving a preclass reading assignment and have the student come prepared to class with the reading read and outlined. We are trying very hard to make students read, by dangling carrots in form of points for reading quizzes in front of their noses - because the vast majority of students prefers to come to class and be spoon fed, not prepare in advance. Maybe they are a bit more likely to watch a video clip than read a book, because it takes less effort to just go through it in a perfunctory manner; I am not holding my breath that they will actually take the time to take notes on the video and be prepared.

 

Lecturing is boring; I would MUCH prefer to spend all my class time on interactive proiblem solving, group work, DOING stuff with the students. Alas, so far it has been an uphill battle to get them to be sufficiently prepared. My colleagues and I would be very glad for any suggestions how to make this happen.

Did you not have any recitations, labs, or tutorials in smaller groups? Where problem solving is taught, students can interact with the instructor, do group work? We, too, teach 500 students in one course, but in addition to lectures, they are taking recitations in groups of 30 and a lab in groups of 20, and their work is evaluated by actual humans, not computers and scantrons. We also offer 10 hours per course per week of interactive open learning environment in addition to 8 hours of tutoring. I spend several hours a week interacting one-on-one with students in help sessions. No canned lecture can replicate this.

your school had none of this???

 

For these big gen-ed required classes, there was usually one recitation session a week in a smaller group (maybe 20 students?), but it was taught by a TA, who was often teaching not just this material for the first time, but was often their first time teaching anything.  One thing I've learned to appreciate is that the craft of teaching takes a long time to nurture and develop.  I know my teaching skills are much better now than when I started.  I recently learned that some schools even have undergraduates working as TAs.

 

If Universities want to put most of their value proposition on the back of their TAs, I think that's going to be a losing proposition.

[Candid]

Did you not have any recitations, labs, or tutorials in smaller groups? Where problem solving is taught, students can interact with the instructor, do group work? We, too, teach 500 students in one course, but in addition to lectures, they are taking recitations in groups of 30 and a lab in groups of 20, and their work is evaluated by actual humans, not computers and scantrons. We also offer 10 hours per course per week of interactive open learning environment in addition to 8 hours of tutoring. I spend several hours a week interacting one-on-one with students in help sessions. No canned lecture can replicate this.

your school had none of this???

 

 

 

 

This description makes me want to know what school this is. It sounds great!

[regentrude]

This description makes me want to know what school this is. It sounds great!

You have a pm.

 

I believe that universities absolutely need to have "value added" to a mere lecture model in order to position themselves as a valid competition to the free MOOCs. Of course a college that charges for pretty much the same experience as watching videos online provides will lose out.

However, if the "added value" comes in the form of interaction with instructors who have subject expertise, know the students personally (by week 3, I can address all my 120 students by their names), take the time to sit down one-on-one to clear up misconceptions, moderate discussions, then a canned free lecture series can not compete.

 

Beause of budget cuts and lack of promised funding from legislators, public colleges are forced into exploring online lectures. Enrollment has been increasing dramatically, without more instructors being hired or buildings built. We are educating many more students with the same resources; when people retire, positions get cut and not refilled. Our classrooms are filled to capacity.

So, some shift towards incorporating online lectures will be inevitable. I can only hope that the administrators recognize that the only chance for the traditional university to remain competetive is to play to its strength: the presence of faculty members who are experts in their fields and who like to interact with students. The danger is that the cost savings that canned lectures promise are too tempting to keep quality standards (and any decline would be gradually and noticeable after several years, when much damage is done).

Our department is working very hard to preserve the personalized interaction, the teaching *by faculty* and not grad students, the many hours of direct interaction in recitations and learning centers. But we are squeezed by financial constraints and large enrollment numbers.

[8filltheheart]

This description makes me want to know what school this is. It sounds great!

 

The last 2 universities our ds has attended--14 hrs apart--have been very similar---lectures, recitations, and labs.   Tutoring and extra time w/the prof has been available, but the latter 2 ds has never utilized, so I don't know much about them (if I remember from the orientation, it is something like 2 hrs of tutoring/every 1 hr of class.....that may not quite be correct, though.)

 

I completely agree with Regentrude's other comments in this thread.   It makes zero sense to me to validate the weaknesses of a system bc they somehow replicate or parallel similar weaknesses?   Maybe the greatest good that will come from MOOC's is that universities will raise the bar vs. MOOC's being the equal lowest common denominator.

[Hunter's Moon]

I am in the process now of transferring over from an online college (American Public University) to a Community College. I completed 24 credits there, but I just do not like the format for myself. Yes, it is easier to work while attending courses online than at a brick and mortar, but I felt my experience was lacking academically. The professors were wonderful -- very helpful. But there is only so much *teaching* one can do through a computer screen. 

 

The main connection between the students were the discussion forums. The teacher would pose a question based off of the week's readings. The students would respond with min. of 250 words answering that question. We were required to respond to at least 2 classmates with a min. of 125 - 150 words. That exercise was useless to me. None of the students care to really discuss, they just wanted the grade --- including myself. Not because I do not care to discuss and debate, but because doing so over the internet felt incomplete and odd. 

 

I do not see a problem with online lectures being offered by brick and mortar schools, but I do hope it does not become the standard. 

[Twigs]

Did you not have any recitations, labs, or tutorials in smaller groups? Where problem solving is taught, students can interact with the instructor, do group work? We, too, teach 500 students in one course, but in addition to lectures, they are taking recitations in groups of 30 and a lab in groups of 20, and their work is evaluated by actual humans, not computers and scantrons. We also offer 10 hours per course per week of interactive open learning environment in addition to 8 hours of tutoring. I spend several hours a week interacting one-on-one with students in help sessions. No canned lecture can replicate this.

your school had none of this???

 

 

I checked out one of the coursera lectures. 200 words writing assignment per week, laughable for college level, and graded by three fellow students. talk about the blind leading the blind. I do not believe one can learn to write well from watching lectures, without having a human who can write well himself giving constructive personalized feedback, just like one can not learn how to actually do physics without working on problem solving and receiving feedback on one's own work. Lectures are great for talking about things, but for mastering a skill, it has long been known that active learning techniques are far superior than listening to a lecturer …

 

Regentrude,

 

I would have loved to be have been in college/university such as you describe in the 1st paragraph. My writing experience is less than you describe in your 2nd paragraph.

 

I took majors physics as the community college. Homework was assigned, but not submitted or graded. The lecture exams were all scantron - each problem was completely correct or completely wrong, no partial credit was given for correct problem solving with just small math mistakes.

 

At the university, I had one professor for over half my courses. I went to ask him a question; he just sent me to the TA. I never tried to approach another professor after that experience.

 

At the CC and the uni, I had 4 semesters of lab in  physics. We generally worked in pairs, but did individual write-ups. There were no problem-solving sessions, no open tutoring sessions, no group work (unless students arranged it among themselves).

 

I had very few papers assigned in any class outside of English classes. Not even 200 words per week graded by anybody. One of my bucket goals is somehow make up for that. (I'm getting some good ideas from this board.)

 

Keep up the good work with your students.

[creekland]

This description makes me want to know what school this is. It sounds great!

 

Many schools are like this now.  They weren't necessarily that way 20 - 30 years ago when our generation went to college.  When I visit colleges now, many times I find myself wanting to go back to school.

 

Regentrude,

 

I would have loved to be have been in college/university such as you describe in the 1st paragraph. My writing experience is less than you describe in your 2nd paragraph.

 

I took majors physics as the community college. Homework was assigned, but not submitted or graded. The lecture exams were all scantron - each problem was completely correct or completely wrong, no partial credit was given for correct problem solving with just small math mistakes.

 

At the university, I had one professor for over half my courses. I went to ask him a question; he just sent me to the TA. I never tried to approach another professor after that experience.

 

At the CC and the uni, I had 4 semesters of lab in  physics. We generally worked in pairs, but did individual write-ups. There were no problem-solving sessions, no open tutoring sessions, no group work (unless students arranged it among themselves).

 

I had very few papers assigned in any class outside of English classes. Not even 200 words per week graded by anybody. One of my bucket goals is somehow make up for that. (I'm getting some good ideas from this board.)

 

Keep up the good work with your students.

Some schools are still this way, so it's worth it to do research and potentially be willing to pay a little more for a better degree ("better" meant in the spirit of this thread as many times "any" degree works for jobs needing college degrees).

 

At some schools all the extras are there, but it's up to the student to take advantage of them if they care to. 

 

College A is not always equal to College B.

[Twigs]

Many schools are like this now.  They weren't necessarily that way 20 - 30 years ago when our generation went to college.  When I visit colleges now, many times I find myself wanting to go back to school. …

Thanks for sharing this. I'm in that "20 - 30 years ago" category, and didn't realize colleges had changed so much in more recent years.

[Candid]

Many schools are like this now.  They weren't necessarily that way 20 - 30 years ago when our generation went to college.  When I visit colleges now, many times I find myself wanting to go back to school.

 

Some schools are still this way, so it's worth it to do research and potentially be willing to pay a little more for a better degree ("better" meant in the spirit of this thread as many times "any" degree works for jobs needing college degrees).

 

At some schools all the extras are there, but it's up to the student to take advantage of them if they care to. 

 

College A is not always equal to College B.

 

This is good to hear. 

[Serenade]

Regentrude, thanks for posting.

 

 

Unfortunately, my college/university education was sadly lacking in the above bolded ideals.

 

Mine, too, except for courses in my major, journalism.  Those were taught more like a trade, perhaps, and that was good.

 

The majority of my general college courses could just as easily have been taught via Coursera-type courses, and there wouldn't have been much difference.  

 

I went to a major, well-respected public university.  However, this was in the early 80s, and I'm thinking that perhaps college education has changed since then.  From what I've read on this board, it seems to me that schools are trying for more discussion and analysis, rather than less.  I often feel so out of the loop with any discussions about college because I attended so long ago, and my experience seems so different from what I read about here.

[elegantlion]

I'm just finishing my first Coursera course on archaeology. It has been a success for students and staff. According to many of the student it's been one of the better organized and executed MOOCs. The professor and her staff were very active on the discussion forums and today hosted a get together on the Brown University campus, mostly requested from students. 

 

The age range I saw was 9 all the way to 70s. We had people from all over the world. I saw work from people in China, we had several Greeks, one assignment I graded the girl was from Eastern Europe, another in Kuala Lumpur. Several people have now signed up for college classes or further education, based upon their experience in the class. 

 

Will it replace a university environment? No. One big con is the peer grading. We did 8 weekly assignments and had to grade a minimum of 5 peers per week. In my grading, I've seen all levels of work. I only had one person basically copy and past from the Internet. We were told to give those a zero and submit them to the staff. Today I graded a video assignment from a woman probably in her 60s. I doubt she has the desire to return to university campus for such a class.  

 

It may be that MOOC continue to stand outside the university model and contribute to a more educated general populace. The enthusiasm by the students and staff was seriously contagious. There are active facebook and google + pages happening as an offshot of the class. The university is already planning to host the class again, possibly additional classes with a different focus. 

 

This is a class that would have served a homeschooler or non-traditional student well. Will it work well for all fields. Probably not. 

 

Several people in the class signed up for a distance degree in Archaeology from a British university. Some people outside the US were aghast the cost of the program, about 25,000. total for the program. They were shocked to hear that American Universities cost so much and that 25,000 for a BA is a bargain. 

 

I think part of it is a game. Employers are requiring BA/BS for jobs where it's not really necessary. Obviously some fields need it, but some field work experience and on the job training are enough. Does the secretary of a small hog farm really need a BA? Yes, around here that was one of the requirements. I've thought long and hard about how much debt I'm willing to incur for a degree. In my case I almost have no choice - it's that or stay at close to poverty level for the rest of my life. I'd love to skip half the general ed requirements for my college. I'm going to spend thousands of dollars (some of it your tax dollars) to learn about health and fitness and a few other classes that are irrelevant to my major. There are no exceptions for those returning to school in their mid 40s. I've compared the cost to a totally online degree. I can still save about 12,000 in tuition by attending the local state university than by attending online school. The online school has one of the lower per credit fees I've seen for a reputable school online. 

 

If a MOOC could save me a few credits a year, it would be great. The system probably won't be worked out enough to help me, maybe not my son, but I am hopeful there will be more alternatives to earning that degree. Homeschooling is an alternative education that doesn't really change the public or private school. Perhaps sometimes the MOOCs will work out so that they can provide an alternative form of education. There are a lot of problems to solve in the MOOC environment, but I don't think they should be written off yet. 

[Hunter's Moon]

I think part of it is a game. Employers are requiring BA/BS for jobs where it's not really necessary. Obviously some fields need it, but some field work experience and on the job training are enough. Does the secretary of a small hog farm really need a BA? Yes, around here that was one of the requirements. I've thought long and hard about how much debt I'm willing to incur for a degree. In my case I almost have no choice - it's that or stay at close to poverty level for the rest of my life. I'd love to skip half the general ed requirements for my college. I'm going to spend thousands of dollars (some of it your tax dollars) to learn about health and fitness and a few other classes that are irrelevant to my major. There are no exceptions for those returning to school in their mid 40s. I've compared the cost to a totally online degree. I can still save about 12,000 in tuition by attending the local state university than by attending online school. The online school has one of the lower per credit fees I've seen for a reputable school online. 

 

It seems that a Bachelor's degree is the new high school diploma. 

[beaners]

Thanks for sharing this. I'm in that "20 - 30 years ago" category, and didn't realize colleges had changed so much in more recent years.

 

I attended a decade ago, and other than a few extremely expensive schools with "boutique experiences," I didn't see this then. Between academic and athletic accomplishments, I was recruited by a wide variety of schools, but it's possible there were more schools like this that weren't on my radar.

[Chrysalis Academy]

For these big gen-ed required classes, there was usually one recitation session a week in a smaller group (maybe 20 students?), but it was taught by a TA, who was often teaching not just this material for the first time, but was often their first time teaching anything.  One thing I've learned to appreciate is that the craft of teaching takes a long time to nurture and develop.  I know my teaching skills are much better now than when I started.  I recently learned that some schools even have undergraduates working as TAs.

 

If Universities want to put most of their value proposition on the back of their TAs, I think that's going to be a losing proposition.

 

I haven't even finished reading this thread, but had to comment on that.  Been there, done that.  I and my fellow grad students were TA's for MIT's hugely popular Intro Psychology class taught by Steven Pinker.  The kids got no interaction with him - they were stuck with us.  At least in my case, I had majored in Psychology - the rest of the first-year MIT Brain & Cognitive Science grad students saw teaching intro psych sections (required for all of us) as *way* beneath them, and they usually knew virtually nothing about the topic.

 

And nobody made sure we even went to the lectures - most of us skipped most of them.

 

And I know at least a few of us staggered into section after pulling an all-nighter - of one form or another - and the students got far from our best.

 

This is just to say, sections don't automatically provide a higher quality experience than that I've had in several Coursera classes.

 

And don't even get me started on my undergrad experience - big state school, and I did not have a single math professor who spoke English as a first language.  Mostly the lectures were completely unintelligible - and I'm not talking the math.  I had one professor, bless his heart, who knew we couldn't understand him, so he would say a sentence, then turn around and write it on the board.  Word for word.  In beautiful handwriting, with proper punctuation.  Can you even imagine how slooowwww and boring it was to try to learn math that way??

 

Just sayin'

[Chrysalis Academy]

Having said all that (and finished the thread), I don't see moocs as a replacement for a college education.

 

But they are an amazing resource for those of us self-educating, or teaching our kids at home, who maybe can't afford to spend hundreds of dollars on TC lectures.  

 

I get the concern of knowledge and education being commodified.  I really do.  But I also don't want to see MOOCs go away because of what they add to the lives of people for whom a college education like you describe maybe just isn't a possibility.

 

This is a hard problem.  But I can't see that the enemy of education is making knowledge more available to more people.  There has to be another level at which to attack this problem.

Many schools are like this now.  They weren't necessarily that way 20 - 30 years ago when our generation went to college.  When I visit colleges now, many times I find myself wanting to go back to school.

 

Some schools are still this way, so it's worth it to do research and potentially be willing to pay a little more for a better degree ("better" meant in the spirit of this thread as many times "any" degree works for jobs needing college degrees).

 

At some schools all the extras are there, but it's up to the student to take advantage of them if they care to. 

 

College A is not always equal to College B.

 

Someone had a good post here, questioning the value of in-person college visits, and whether you could learn anything new that wasn't on a school's web site.  I wonder if there is a good, easy way to find out if College A has this kind of personalized attention or not, without actually visiting.  My impression is that the big state schools haven't changed much, with the exception of adding smaller "honors colleges" within the Universities.  I believe that most LACs have a lot of professorial attention, and ironically, community colleges, having no TAs, offer the most attention.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Someone had a good post here, questioning the value of in-person college visits, and whether you could learn anything new that wasn't on a school's web site.  I wonder if there is a good, easy way to find out if College A has this kind of personalized attention or not, without actually visiting.  My impression is that the big state schools haven't changed much, with the exception of adding smaller "honors colleges" within the Universities.  I believe that most LACs have a lot of professorial attention, and ironically, community colleges, having no TAs, offer the most attention.

Right, CA has an excellent community college system, while our state universities have been devolving in the past - what, 20 years? More? It's ironic that in a very desirable place to live, like ours, you can get stellar profs at the CC - people who have maybe retired, or are coping with the two-body problem, and so have ended up at a cc but are fantastic teachers.

 

When I compare our local (commutable) state U to our local CC, I think my dds would almost be better off doing 2 years at the cc and then transferring elsewhere.  I mean better off educationally, clearly they would be better off financially.

[creekland]

 

It may be that MOOC continue to stand outside the university model and contribute to a more educated general populace.

...

 

This is a class that would have served a homeschooler or non-traditional student well. Will it work well for all fields. Probably not. 

 

...

 

I think part of it is a game. Employers are requiring BA/BS for jobs where it's not really necessary. Obviously some fields need it, but some field work experience and on the job training are enough. Does the secretary of a small hog farm really need a BA? Yes, around here that was one of the requirements. I've thought long and hard about how much debt I'm willing to incur for a degree. In my case I almost have no choice - it's that or stay at close to poverty level for the rest of my life. I'd love to skip half the general ed requirements for my college. I'm going to spend thousands of dollars (some of it your tax dollars) to learn about health and fitness and a few other classes that are irrelevant to my major.

...

I am hopeful there will be more alternatives to earning that degree. Homeschooling is an alternative education that doesn't really change the public or private school. Perhaps sometimes the MOOCs will work out so that they can provide an alternative form of education. There are a lot of problems to solve in the MOOC environment, but I don't think they should be written off yet. 

I am VERY pleased with these options for their ability to increase the overall knowledge of the world's population affordably.  I think many colleges see the plus in this too, and that's why they are participating. 

 

Requiring a BA/BS for so many jobs is a big hurdle, but having seen the education that comes out of an average high school, I can understand wanting to see more.  What we need is a high school education that is worth something - and that will likely include realizing that not all students can complete that education, some due to ability, many due to lack of motivation.  Right now, they make it super easy for anyone to graduate as long as they show up and put forth a VERY, VERY modest effort.  There is no way (in my state) for an employer to tell if a student graduated due to being pushed through the system (there are many As in this group) or whether they actually know something.  This can still happen with a BA/BS, but there are "better" odds since many can still drop out of college.

 

I, for one, have no regrets about you (or anyone) using my tax dollars for education.  I wish there were more available, esp to those with lower income.  Education is a chance for a "way out" of limited job opportunities.  It's not a guarantee, but it's a good path IMO.  I also think having a variety of courses rather than just "job training" is a good thing.  ;)

 

I haven't even finished reading this thread, but had to comment on that.  Been there, done that.  I and my fellow grad students were TA's for MIT's hugely popular Intro Psychology class taught by Steven Pinker.  The kids got no interaction with him - they were stuck with us.  At least in my case, I had majored in Psychology - the rest of the first-year MIT Brain & Cognitive Science grad students saw teaching intro psych sections (required for all of us) as *way* beneath them, and they usually knew virtually nothing about the topic.

 

And nobody made sure we even went to the lectures - most of us skipped most of them.

 

And I know at least a few of us staggered into section after pulling an all-nighter - of one form or another - and the students got far from our best.

 

This is just to say, sections don't automatically provide a higher quality experience than that I've had in several Coursera classes.

 

And don't even get me started on my undergrad experience - big state school, and I did not have a single math professor who spoke English as a first language.  Mostly the lectures were completely unintelligible - and I'm not talking the math.  I had one professor, bless his heart, who knew we couldn't understand him, so he would say a sentence, then turn around and write it on the board.  Word for word.  In beautiful handwriting, with proper punctuation.  Can you even imagine how slooowwww and boring it was to try to learn math that way??

 

Just sayin'

Where middle son goes, no one holds hands as U Rochester believes part of succeeding in life is having the motivation to get out there and DO it yourself.  Therefore, there are students who skip classes and recitations, party, and generally brush off their opportunities.  Such is their choice.  However, my guy knows ALL of his professors (and they know him) and only professors teach classes.  He goes to office hours and all have welcomed him.  He has not had problems understanding anyone.  He's gone to all of his recitations (taught by TAs) and has gotten to know them well too.  Both groups have been useful as he's networked to get his lab/research jobs - he's working two and turned down a third.  When he wanted to get a nice resume he went to the career center and got assistance making a great one.  When he reached a point of not understanding a chemistry section he went and got help and ended up with an uncurved A in the class having gotten one of the highest grades (if not the highest) on the final.

 

What one gets out of the education is completely up to them.

 

Smaller schools and (in general) LACs also have a more personalized education.  My oldest goes to one of these (Covenant) and has enjoyed his time there.  He knows his professors well too.  Since it's a smaller school, it doesn't have nearly the research opportunities, but there are a few.

 

20 - 30 years ago when I went to college (Big State U) research was only for grad students and the rare, loved, senior.  Sink or swim was common - tutoring was only available by paying for it or getting to know someone who had done well in the class.  Recitations didn't happen.  We joked that you'd better know Chinese to do well in labs.

 

Now at my Alma mater it is completely different.  It is far more like URochester, BUT with far more students so the competition for opportunities can be tough.  Middle son picked his smaller research U to have a nice combo of the two since he wanted research.  Oldest picked his LAC because he didn't care about research and wanted smaller more intimate classes.  Small classes aren't unheard of a middle son's school though... both his writing class and his ASL class had < 15 students.  Only his pre-med pre-reqs were large (and large here is around 300 vs 700 at some schools).  He did not have a problem learning the info with more students, and students did ask questions in class.

 

I definitely won't say the more selective the school the better the teaching or opportunities.  I actually think some of the top schools are more "stuck" in the older patterns as they haven't had to change - they are popular no matter what and their names and their prestige will continue to attract oodles of applicants. 

 

In general, larger schools tend to be more "old school" as well, but not nearly as "old school" as when I went.

 

Large schools that attract a lower level of academic students can have more issues too.  Even if they do offer other things, how many students are actually interested in them?  You can lead a student to college, but you can't make them take advantage of all that is there...

 

 

 

Someone had a good post here, questioning the value of in-person college visits, and whether you could learn anything new that wasn't on a school's web site.  I wonder if there is a good, easy way to find out if College A has this kind of personalized attention or not, without actually visiting.  My impression is that the big state schools haven't changed much, with the exception of adding smaller "honors colleges" within the Universities.  I believe that most LACs have a lot of professorial attention, and ironically, community colleges, having no TAs, offer the most attention.

CCs can offer more attention, but generally, the actual content of the classes can be less.  Youngest who took a CC Bio class and sat in on middle son's Bio 101 class at his research U called the CC class "Bio Lite."  Oldest who took CC English 101 said it was far easier than at his LAC when he compared with peers.  Neither had more interaction with their cc prof than they have had at their 4 year schools with profs.  Both have loved their cc profs... and still keep up with some of them.  However, both keep up with some of their 4 year profs too.  Again, I think it really depends upon the student (and the prof) as well as the class.

 

You might be able to get a feel for a school by finding some current students there.  Just be sure the student is one who matches what you would be.  Student A is not equal to Student B either.

[Gwen in VA]

"What one gets out of the education is completely up to them."

 

Yes, yes, and yes. If a student puts in the time showing up at office hours, interacting in class, and pursuing research opportunities, one is far more likely to end up with an excellent education.

 

One caveat though -- a bit of this is luck. My older tow kids went to the same small excellent LAC. One had a prof "adopt" her during the scholars weekend before she was even accepted. He hustled down to the admissions office and told them that they HAD to get her enrolled! He was her mentor and guide for all four undergrad years -- he arranged for amazing internship opportunities, helped her figure out which classes she needed to take when to optimize her internship opportunities, etc. Two years after my dd graduated, they are still in touch. Now, you need to know that dd double-majored, and her other advisor could never even remember what subfield she was interested in. At the department awards ceremony, the prof in department #2 couldn't even remember where dd was headed -- even though it was the #2 program in her field in the country! It was amazing how different the two departments were!

 

Ds went to the same school, but the departments he majored in had less professorial involvement. No one reached out and mentored him. He still had a great education, but he did not get the intense mentoring that my dd did. And this is at the same school!!!!!

 

So honestly even within the same school there is a huge range of involvement, depending on the individual professors, the departmental culture, the individual kid, etc.

 

Some of the college experience really is just plain random luck -- though I am a strong advocate of working hard and getting to know profs and pursuing opportunities!

[Kareni]

 I believe that most LACs have a lot of professorial attention, and ironically, community colleges, having no TAs, offer the most attention.

 

While there were not TAs at the community college my daughter attended during the latter part of high school, there were students on work study who staffed the math center.  They were the ones who helped students who came in with questions.

 

But, yes, my daughter had some excellent professors at both the community college and the liberal arts college she later attended. 

 

Regards,

Kareni

[Arcadia]

Saw this news article for California State Universities system and not sure how it is going to be implemented

"California State University unveils 'radical' new plan for online courses

A program revealed Wednesday by the 23-campus California State University includes more than 30 courses approved systemwide, from Elementary Astronomy to the History of Rock and Roll.

This means a student from San Francisco State can sign up for a microeconomics course taught at CSU Northridge, while students from that Southern California campus can learn all about U.S. politics from a professor who teaches in San Francisco.

....

Meanwhile, the University of California is spending $10 million to develop dozens more such courses, along with a cross-campus online enrollment system."

 

List of eligible courses is here

"Cal State's list of systemwide online classes now available"

[MarkT]

In 2012 I "audited" a Compilers course offered at Coursera from Stanford.  I really enjoyed my Compiler course a long time ago and was curious to see the difference. The theory material covered was very similar to what I had learned back in the 1980s but the practical aspect of the course to implement a subset programming language compiler (we did the same back then) was more challenging because of the improvement in the software tools these days. I was pleasantly surprised with the support provided by the TAs (professor was available only via the videos) since nobody was paying.  The experience was very comparable to a large lecture hall class at state U back in the day.

================================================================

related topic:

Some how the American college system needs to keep their costs down. Currently the cost of college is ridiculous versus general inflation over the last 30 years. I seriously doubt that regentrude's salary tripled in the last 10 years. Colleges need to be run more like a business where it is a trade-off of raising prices versus cutting costs. Many of the administrators at colleges are way over-paid (like most CEOs) and completely out of touch with reality.

 

Research professors should be required to "pay for themselves" by bringing in funding for their particular research.  I am sick of hearing we need to raise Joe Research professor's salary because another university may poach him. Let him go - I prefer the Money Ball approach.

 

 

 

 

[regentrude]

Many of the administrators at colleges are way over-paid (like most CEOs) and completely out of touch with reality.

 

Research professors should be required to "pay for themselves" by bringing in funding for their particular research.  I am sick of hearing we need to raise Joe Research professor's salary because another university may poach him. Let him go - I prefer the Money Ball approach.

 

I agree that administrators are overpaid, and that there are way too many administrator positions.

 

I very strongly disagree with your position on research.  Strong research at universities is essential for the quality of the  education of the students, and for the overall scientific standing of the country.

I would not want my children to be taught by people who only teach. I want them to be taught by people who actually use the material they are teaching - otherwise we end with a situation comparable to public schools, where "educators" who never in their lives actually needed to use math on a daily basis get to say how math should be taught, with disastrous results.

Students need to be taught scientific research, and that has to be done by professors who do research. The time investment by the professors into this apprenticeship model are huge; contrary to popular belief, having a graduate student does not relieve the professor of tedious tasks, but requires a time commitment much greater than the possible time savings from having the grad student assist. With a very good student, it is a break even.

How, in your opinion, is the next generation of researchers to be educated? Already we have to recruit abroad to have enough scientists in this country; we would be very glad for some qualified grad students of US descent.

Btw, public funding for basic research is very low, and companies have a tendency to fund research that brings fruit and applications in the short term. 

Of course, you may be in favor of the US quietly saying good bye to scientific research. Leave it to the Chinese and Indians. That is a possible attitude, but I am very concerned about the long term consequences of such an approach.

 

Lastly, it is worth keeping in mind that the salaries of the professors who do research are not what drives prices in education. A physicist or engineer who chooses to teach and research in academia will earn a much smaller salary than he could with his qualifications in industry. Eliminating the opportunity for those people to pursue their research will leave the universities in a very sorry state, because you would lose the most highly qualified people. A perfect way to ruin the good university system in this country, and to fall further behind educationally compared to the rest of the world.

 

ETA: To a certain degree, btw, researchers are already required to acquire their own funding. A university job pays for 9 months. If you want to be paid in the summer, you need to have a grant that pays you another two months salary (one month is always unpaid, mandatory). Many university researchers work over the summer without pay, because the competition for funding is so big. I'd be curious to see in how many other fields people do that.

 

2nd ETA: And I have not even touched on the bigger issue of academic freedom. Searching for truth, independent of corporate interests and agendas, should be valued, and funded, by society.

[MarkT]

I very strongly disagree with your position on research.  Strong research at universities is essential for the quality of the  education of the students, and for the overall scientific standing of the country.

I would not want my children to be taught by people who only teach. I want them to be taught by people who actually use the material they are teaching - otherwise we end with a situation comparable to public schools, where "educators" who never in their lives actually needed to use math on a daily basis get to say how math should be taught, with disastrous results.

 

 

I didn't mean get rid of all research in universities.  Many "super-star" professors today would never even come close to making what they do in the private world considering some of the junk they come up with, especially outside of the true science and engineering areas.

 

My best college instructors were two industry professionals, one from Digital Equipment and the other from Data General (this was back in the 1980s) so I totally agree with your only teach statement. Half of the full-time professors looked upon classes only as a distraction and came across that way.

[In The Great White North]

 

 

 

 

Quote

What I'd really like to see is the rise of the "flipped classroom".  The one thing a live professor offers is the ability to answer questions and interact with live students.  If I'm paying for face time with a subject matter expert, I'd prefer to get the canned lecture out of the way first, on my own time, and spend all of class time in an interactive discussion.

 

 

Yes, that would be a wise use of prerecorded lecture. OTOH, it would not be much different from giving a preclass reading assignment and have the student come prepared to class with the reading read and outlined. We are trying very hard to make students read, by dangling carrots in form of points for reading quizzes in front of their noses - because the vast majority of students prefers to come to class and be spoon fed, not prepare in advance. Maybe they are a bit more likely to watch a video clip than read a book, because it takes less effort to just go through it in a perfunctory manner; I am not holding my breath that they will actually take the time to take notes on the video and be prepared.

 

 

I'm not a fan of "flipped classrooms".  If I am taking a class, I do expect to be taught.  If I wanted to learn it on my own, then have a discussion with a few like minded people, I could do that for a lot less than $40,000 a year.  

 

The local high school has a few "flipped classrooms".  The reviews are not universally wonderful.  Apparently, the plan is to have the kids watch a 15-20 minute video the night before, ask if there are any questions, get blank stares, have a quiz, teach the lesson, then do the homework. The quizzes are worth 40% of their final grade.   I don't know what the problem is with the textbook or the video, but the kids are not getting it.  The kids who care are spending 2-3 hours a night trying to figure out his 15-20 minute videos.  The kids who don't care gave up on about day 3.  There aren't enough hours in the day for every class to do this.

 

The "carrots in form of points for reading quizzes" have totally overshadowed the point of the class.  The kids who are learning any math are learning it off the Internet, in spite of the class, not because of it.

 

The only difference I see between the "flipped classroom" and the Coursera model is that the test is given in person and the kids have to sit there for the rest of the hour, listening to him tell them what they spent hours last night figuring out.

[regentrude]

I'm not a fan of "flipped classrooms".  If I am taking a class, I do expect to be taught.  If I wanted to learn it on my own, then have a discussion with a few like minded people, I could do that for a lot less than $40,000 a year. 

 

I highly recommend that you  have a look at Eric Mazur's video "Confessions of a converted lecturer".

 

Of course students should be taught! But teaching does not mean regurgitating a text they could have read in preparation. Listening to somebody recite the content of a book is not particularly effective for teaching and learning.

It seems to be a no-brainer that in an English course, class time is not wasted on reading out loud the entire piece of literature that is to be studied - everybody readily accepts that students should do the reading in preparation on their own and use the class time for in-depth analysis, added insights by the instructor, anything but a verbatim reading of the text.

But curiously, students do expect to have their science text read to them in a science class. It is an utter waste of time, but a tradition that is incredibly hard to break. In a "flipped classroom" in physics, for example, I could discuss the implications of the concept, work through applications, do problem solving with the students, work in small groups on conceptual discussions, dissect common misconceptions, clear up questions - guide the students in doing something actively instead of listening passively to content they could easily have gleaned from a textbook reading.

It is through these activities that my students learn physics, NOT through me lecturing. Pre-reading the text does not mean learning on their own - you don't learn physics by reading a textbook either. But it would mean to be prepared for a much more effective use of their costly class time and their tuition dollars.

[Roadrunner]

A year at UC Berkeley runs at about $35k in-state (including lodging and food). I read that many can't graduate in less than six years partly because they can't get into required courses on time. It is my understanding that offering online classes was suppose to ease that burden, allowing kids to take needed courses for timely graduation.

I was lucky to attend a small LAC where the largest class had 30 kids, and mostly we sat around with real professors around a table for discussion. It pains me that I know I can't afford to pay for LACs for my kids at $55k a year. I would hate for my children to get the education online, but I can see the benefit of some online classes in the mixture if it ensures timely graduation for example.

[8filltheheart]

But teaching does not mean regurgitating a text they could have read in preparation. .

My favorite college professor and mentor made a comment something to this effect during the first few minutes of our first class:

 

Since you are all college students, you know how to read. You are paying good money to learn from my teaching. You don't need me to repeat what is in the text. Read it. I will be teaching you what isn't in there. 50% of you tests will be from the material in the book. 50% will be from what I teach in class. If you want to pass my class, don't skip either one.

 

Ironically, most students didn't believe him! But, he was serious and it was exactly how he taught. And he was a fabulous teacher. He made you rise to his bar. (This was an upper level psy class.)

[MarkT]

 

But curiously, students do expect to have their science text read to them in a science class. It is an utter waste of time, but a tradition that is incredibly hard to break.

 

Wow even at the college level!  I am trying to get my 8th grader to actually read his math textbook. If the teacher didn't cover the particular problem type in class he wants me to explain it to him. I push back and make him read the text (then he does the problem himself because he is smart). The father of my son's best friend says the same thing. This is just being lazy. 

 

The students should have to read (at least glance at) the material (or watch a video) before the teacher covers it.

The local high school has a few "flipped classrooms".  The reviews are not universally wonderful.  Apparently, the plan is to have the kids watch a 15-20 minute video the night before, ask if there are any questions, get blank stares, have a quiz, teach the lesson, then do the homework.

 

As always, even the best educational strategy is worthless with a bad teacher.  No teacher should ever just ask "any questions", and hearing none, assume that everyone understands everything.  A half decent teacher would they ask probing question, ideally of each student in the class.  The students would know that they are "on the hook" for reading the material beforehand, and that there is no shame in asking good questions.

 

To put a finer point on what I said earlier -- if I'm paying good money for direct interaction with a subject matter expert, I want to maximize the amount of time that person is doing what can't be done by any other means.  I don't want to pay $40k per year to learn definitions and background information that I could get from a reading.  I don't want the teacher to waste their time proctoring quizes and exams.  I want the teachers to teach.  I think we've got it stuck in our collective heads that "teaching" is standing in front of a whiteboard reading from notes  (or even worse, from powerpoint slides).

[regentrude]

To put a finer point on what I said earlier -- if I'm paying good money for direct interaction with a subject matter expert, I want to maximize the amount of time that person is doing what can't be done by any other means.  I don't want to pay $40k per year to learn definitions and background information that I could get from a reading.  I don't want the teacher to waste their time proctoring quizes and exams.  I want the teachers to teach.  I think we've got it stuck in our collective heads that "teaching" is standing in front of a whiteboard reading from notes  (or even worse, from powerpoint slides).

 

This.

Amazingly, education seems to be the only product where quite a few customers (i.e. students) are happy to get as little as possible for their money.

 

[mamato4]

Did you not have any recitations, labs, or tutorials in smaller groups? Where problem solving is taught, students can interact with the instructor, do group work? We, too, teach 500 students in one course, but in addition to lectures, they are taking recitations in groups of 30 and a lab in groups of 20, and their work is evaluated by actual humans, not computers and scantrons. We also offer 10 hours per course per week of interactive open learning environment in addition to 8 hours of tutoring. I spend several hours a week interacting one-on-one with students in help sessions. No canned lecture can replicate this.

your school had none of this???

 

 

Where do you teach?  I'd love to have ds look into this school since we're in the process of comparing engineering schools.

[regentrude]

 

 

Where do you teach?  I'd love to have ds look into this school since we're in the process of comparing engineering schools.

 

 

I sent you a pm

 

[creekland]

I highly recommend that you  have a look at Eric Mazur's video "Confessions of a converted lecturer".

 

Of course students should be taught! But teaching does not mean regurgitating a text they could have read in preparation. Listening to somebody recite the content of a book is not particularly effective for teaching and learning.

It seems to be a no-brainer that in an English course, class time is not wasted on reading out loud the entire piece of literature that is to be studied - everybody readily accepts that students should do the reading in preparation on their own and use the class time for in-depth analysis, added insights by the instructor, anything but a verbatim reading of the text.

But curiously, students do expect to have their science text read to them in a science class. It is an utter waste of time, but a tradition that is incredibly hard to break. In a "flipped classroom" in physics, for example, I could discuss the implications of the concept, work through applications, do problem solving with the students, work in small groups on conceptual discussions, dissect common misconceptions, clear up questions - guide the students in doing something actively instead of listening passively to content they could easily have gleaned from a textbook reading.

It is through these activities that my students learn physics, NOT through me lecturing. Pre-reading the text does not mean learning on their own - you don't learn physics by reading a textbook either. But it would mean to be prepared for a much more effective use of their costly class time and their tuition dollars.

 

It seems strange to me that this sort of stuff is "new."  Back in the 80's when I was in college the vast majority of my profs had us read the book outside of class and discussed other things (problems, newer material, case studies, etc) during class.  I'd have been bored stiff if all the prof did was read through the book.

 

My high school was similar.

 

The school I work at generally has the teacher working through the book... most kids don't read the book... they don't have to.  Even in English classes much of the time is devoted to reading the book/excerpt, etc or doing the actual writing of the paper.  This school has little concept of kids working on those things outside of class and using class time for teaching.  It frustrates me.

 

My kids (homeschooling) read on their own time.  Time I spent with them was almost all discussion to be certain they were getting the important stuff - and sharing additional info I might happen to know.

[MarkT]

The Mazur presentation is very good.

I recommend you have external speakers since the sound volume is kind of low.