Why MOOCs are more like textbooks than classrooms

I wrote this in an email exchange with a friend recently, and I thought it might be of interest here at aiqus. The basic argument is that the MOOC revolution is not poised to replace the classroom. Rather it is poised to replace the textbook. Let me know what you think.

Why MOOCs are the new textbook, not the new classroom

The name MOOC, massive open online courses, implies that these new learning resources are full courses. I think that this terminology is deceptive. MOOCs are more similar to textbooks than they are to a course and we might expect them to fill a similar role in education. Not only does this view give us a better understanding of the nature of this revolution in education, I think by describing these tools as textbook replacers we will avoid generating needless resistance from those millions of teachers who might feel that their jobs are under threat.

Similarities

• MOOCs enable self motivated learners to master a new subject. So do textbooks.
• MOOCs allow students to do sample problems and check their work. So do textbooks.
• MOOCs offer a world class presentation of a discipline because they are taught by leaders of their field. So are textbooks.
• MOOCs (currently) cannot offer legitimate education credentials. Neither can textbooks.
• Most students will not work through MOOCs unless compelled by teachers, parents, or some other authority. The same is true for textbooks.
• It is very difficult to prevent students from posting materials that answer questions posed in MOOCs. The same is true for questions in textbooks.

Differences

• Many MOOCs have lively forum communities. These teach students how to talk about course material. They also offer a 'self healing' property to the class where topics that were poorly covered in lecture are elaborated on by talented students. Mistakes that were made during lecture or on assignments are pointed out and corrected by these same students. It is worth noting that many students do not participate in the forums (according to Gundega an employee at Udactiy). Also, imho, forum participation and the associated Karma points are a good predictor of who is a great student.
• MOOCs actually grade responses to sample problems, unlike textbooks. This is easier on the student and, more importantly, provides a lot of information to the class administrators on how well students are absorbing the material in lectures.

Given this analysis, I still think that the problem of accreditation and motivation will continue to be solved by tradiational institutions for a time yet. MOOCs will serve as super-powered textbooks that supplement the efforts of teachers.

I do expect some radical shifts to happen soon. One, I think that really amazing talent will be discovered in the forums of many MOOCs. Students who communicate well, understand the materials, and are hyper social are extremely valuable to companies and universities. In my experience forum points closely reflect these qualities and we have already seen top forum members getting recruited to work at MOOCs. Two, I think that the lecture format of MOOCs is more comprehensible to many students than textbooks. This means teachers will have to spend less time preparing lectures that simply put the materials of a textbook into spoken words. Finally, I think that the feedback MOOCs get from forums and student responses will allow them to improve at a rate that textbooks simply cannot. This will result in higher quality pedagogical material independent of MOOCs other advantages.

But many thing will stay the same. The challenge of organizing a curriculum, accrediting students, and providing the carrot and stick of education is still a massive one. I think MOOCs will make some of these things easier, but they will by no means solve this problem . I predict that traditional centers of learning will continue to supply these elements to most students for the foreseeable future (~10 years). After that, who knows?