Members don't see the ad below. Register now!

Here is email I got from coursera today morning

Dear Courserians,

We are THRILLED to announce that 12 universities -- including three international institutions -- will be joining Princeton University, Stanford University, University of Michigan, and University of Pennsylvania in offering classes on Coursera.

On Coursera, you will now be able to access world-class courses from:

- California Institute of Technology
- Duke University
- Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
- Georgia Institute of Technology
- Johns Hopkins University
- Princeton University
- Rice University
- Stanford University
- University of California, San Francisco
- University of Edinburgh
- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
- University of Michigan
- University of Pennsylvania
- University of Toronto
- University of Virginia
- University of Washington

You'll be able to choose from more than 100 new courses, from learning how to program in Scala (taught from the creator of Scala, Professor Martin Odersky from EPFL), to Professor Dan Ariely's course on irrational behavior, to the legendary UVA course "How Things Work" with Professor Louis Bloomfield. You can check out the most current course list here -- keep in mind you can enroll in a class even if the start date is to be announced.

To date, 700,000 students from 190 countries have participated in classes on Coursera, with more than 1.6 million course enrollments total!

To everyone who has taken a class on Coursera, or who has recommended us to your friends and family -- thank you! Education is starting to look very different, and we're excited and humbled to be part of it.

Very best,

Your Coursera Team |

asked 17 Jul '12, 06:11

akrocks's gravatar image


NY Times Article today about Coursera

Interesting comment from the article comment section:

bgoffe Baldwinsville, NY

I wonder how MOOCs use the latest research in how to teach large classes without lecture? In "Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class" Deslauriers, Schelew, and Wieman, Science, May 13, 2011, , the authors find two standard deviations more learning from non-lecture methods than from lecture from a skilled instructor. Note that Wieman is a Nobel Laureate and a U.S. Professor of the Year (given for teaching). He's currently Deputy Science Adviser to the President for science education.

To see such a class in action, here's Eric Mazur of Harvard's physics department: . For Mazur's odyssey to not lecturing in class, see "Farewell, Lecture?" Science, January 2, 2009, .


answered 17 Jul '12, 11:50

rseiter's gravatar image

rseiter ♦

edited 17 Jul '12, 11:50

Martin Odersky on Functional Programming Principles in Scala and Geoffrey Hinton on Neural Networks for Machine Learning, nice to be able to learn straight from the horse's mouth!


answered 17 Jul '12, 09:49

Ale's gravatar image


edited 17 Jul '12, 10:26

Though it's TBA, I'd highly recommend Magnus Egerstedt's (GA Tech) mobile robotics course. Best prof I've had in person.

Too many classes, so little time...


answered 17 Jul '12, 09:05

beard's gravatar image


"Too many classes, so little time..." I totally agree with you on this :(
(17 Jul '12, 09:33) rbk rbk's gravatar image
@beard I overlooked your recommendation in July, but now that the class is live I wanted to call it out. It's a good course and I find Prof. Egerstedt to be engaging and skilled at presenting concepts in formal and informal fashion simultaneously.
(04 Mar '13, 10:07) rseiter ♦ rseiter's gravatar image

I'm intrigued by Equine Nutrition and love the way the narrator pronoundes "MOOC".


answered 17 Jul '12, 14:42

robrambusch's gravatar image

robrambusch ♦

Thanks for this. Some interesting statements from Daphne Koller. I have some interest in equine nutrition as well from an odd angle. I have actually found veterinary nutritional findings interesting in a human nutrition context (as an example, the equine community has significant knowledge about supplements for joint support--like glucosamine and MSM). Are you planning on taking the Equine Nutrition class? It is my perception that veterinary nutrition (and medicine) have less bias from things like agricultural lobbyists and product marketers. My speculation is that this is because the human market is so much larger and distorted by things like insurance (but I would be interested in hearing other ideas). Also, veterinary sites can be a good low cost source of certain nutrients (e.g. Tryptophan).
(17 Jul '12, 15:17) rseiter ♦ rseiter's gravatar image
Don't take this the wrong you eat horse food?
(17 Jul '12, 15:23) beard beard's gravatar image
@beard - Well I don't (at least knowingly) but think of this as the education equivalent of Google. Once upon a time you learned things from reference books - Encyclopedia Britannica is now out of print (literally). If you want to know something you Google it. So looking things up has changed. There are occasional vagrant moments when I want to know more about something (today's odd - and equine - snippet, Tobiano paint). Then there are things I'd like to have a slightly deeper knowledge of that the whole MOOC idea seems to support. Think of it as being in college with an undeclared major in a world full of electives. ;-)
(17 Jul '12, 15:34) robrambusch ♦ robrambusch's gravatar image
Or, for that matter, eat horse meat? [Sorry, just got back from a holiday in Verona in Italy where smart restaurants I did not visit had horse meat on the menu.] On a serious note, and picking up on @rseiter 's post higher up here are the questions I will use in an interview tomorrow with Eric Mazur. Additions welcome.
(17 Jul '12, 15:45) sebschmoller sebschmoller's gravatar image
@beard in some cases I consume veterinary grade supplements. Given that the target market is the high end equine market (i.e. those horses probably eat better than most people, at least from a cost POV) I feel reasonably confident in the quality. Don't underestimate how much the lawsuit happiness of Americans distorts the supplement market. Tryptophan is a special case because of some unfortunate history--if you want to know more Google is your friend.
(17 Jul '12, 15:49) rseiter ♦ rseiter's gravatar image
I hated the subject of animal nutrition in school. By the way, there are a few metric tons of people globally who keep horses commercially and recreationally. A lot of them will benefit from an accessible scientific perspective on feeding them. This has huge practical implications. There is an obesity/diabetes epidemic in ponies, and even for sports horses it might not always be so easy to keep them both fit and lean.
(18 Jul '12, 04:56) BayesianHorse BayesianHorse's gravatar image

I wonder why Coursera is offering redundant courses. They have Algorithm course which is offered by multiple univs/professors and also its introductory programming courses.


answered 18 Jul '12, 14:48

rbk's gravatar image


edited 18 Jul '12, 18:11

There is a good explanation of that in the description of Robert Sedgewick's course. His course is meant to be an introduction to algorithms (with applied character), while Roughgarden's course is more theoretical. How does this course differ from Design and Analysis of Algorithms? The two courses are complementary. This one is essentially a programming course that concentrates on developing code; that one is essentially a math course that concentrates on understanding proofs. This course is about learning algorithms in the context of implementing and testing them in practical applications; that one is about learning algorithms in the context of developing mathematical models that help explain why they are efficient. In typical computer science curriculums, a course like this one is taken by first- and second-year students and a course like that one is taken by juniors and seniors.
(18 Jul '12, 16:36) fastred fastred's gravatar image
I had the feeling that Roughgardens course would be more practical and Sedgewicks courses in algorithms would work up to his two analytic combinatorics courses.
(18 Jul '12, 17:01) BayesianHorse BayesianHorse's gravatar image
@fastred, thanks for that piece of info.. I missed to see it on the FAQs.. so we're getting a choice of whether we want more theory or more practice... @BayesianHorse, I think his analytic combinatronics course would be more of theory and senior/graduate level course while his introduction to algorithms would be a sophomore/junior level course. I have his Algorithms book and the material in it is easier to digest than CLRS!
(18 Jul '12, 17:49) rbk rbk's gravatar image
Sounds like even if they were to have the same amount of theory/application in their approaches, they'd both be worth doing for those interested in algorithms. I thought Andrew Ng's ML class was incredible, but I'm still finding the CalTech ML one helpful as well. It doesn't stand out as being much more theoretical or anything, but getting different approaches from different professors helps me understand subjects much better, and ML is something that especially interests me. Though I agree it seems unexpected that they would offer redundant courses. But hey, the more, the merrier!
(18 Jul '12, 17:58) beard beard's gravatar image
"the more, the merrier!" - I agree with that :)
(18 Jul '12, 18:10) rbk rbk's gravatar image
I'm currently taking Roughgarden's class and it's pretty heavy on the math. There are programming assignments but no discussion of programming in the lectures/materials. Data sets are provided and students implement algorithms (and variations) and submit the results. If you enjoy mathematical modeling and already are a reasonable coder in a language of your choice then this course is great.
(18 Jul '12, 19:25) Norm Deplume ♦ Norm%20Deplume's gravatar image
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this Question via Email

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

Q&A Editor Basics

  • to upload an image into your question or answer hit
  • to create bulleted or numbered lists hit or
  • to add a title or header hit
  • to section your text hit
  • to make a link clickable, surround it with <a> and </a> (for example, <a></a>)
  • basic HTML tags are also supported (for those who know a bit of HTML)
  • To insert an EQUATION you can use LaTeX. (backslash \ has to be escaped, so in your LaTeX code you have to replace \ with \\). You can see more examples and info here

powered by OSQA