On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:25 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > But the reality is that education is a relationship between two or more > people, and between one generation and the next, it is not a pouring of > content from one head into another. amd it should not be shaped by MBAs. > > In the current context, what I see happening is that a few star teachers > will create the lectures (possibly with the promise of royalties), and then > everyone else will be paid tomato-picker salaries to interact with students > about the "content" of the lectures.
No doubt this will happen to a certain extent (this is the scenario that I had in mind when I worried about Goldman Sachs partners bearing business plans earlier in this thread..). Online educational content is not a *substitute* for real in-person teachers. It is a complement. When used in that way, it could be a tremendous resource. Think of the 150,000 students who took that Stanford AI class. They got something very valuable from it. And now, think of the possibilities if resources are made available to do this sort of thing systematically. I don't think we have any disagreement here. I just think you are way too pessimistic about the whole thing just because there is the possibility of some Wall St hustlers exploiting it for their ends. -raghu. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
