The problem, of course, is that those students represent the precise group MOOCs are meant to serve. “MOOCs were supposed to be the device that would bring higher education to the masses,” Jonathan Rees noted. “However, the masses at San Jose State don’t appear to be ready for the commodified, impersonal higher education that MOOCs offer.” Thrun’s cavalier disregard for the SJSU students reveals his true vision of the target audience for MOOCs: students from the posh suburbs, with 10 tablets apiece and no challenges whatsoever—that is, the exact people who already have access to expensive higher education.
It is more than galling that Thrun blames students for the failure of a medium that was invented to serve them, instead of blaming the medium that, in the storied history of the “correspondence” course (“TV/VCR repair”!), has never worked. For him, MOOCs don’t fail to educate the less privileged because the massive online model is itself a poor tool. No, apparently students fail MOOCs because those students have the gall to be poor, so let’s give up on them and move on to the corporate world, where we don’t have to be accountable to the hoi polloi anymore, or even have to look at them, because gross.
Lisa Levinson on 21 Feb 14Terese Bird and Grainne Conole are holding a webinar on A Pedagogical Look at MOOCs. Funded by the EU project eMundus, they are trying to map out patterns of open educational partnerships between institutions around the world. This webinar will take a pedagogical look at MOOCs. They chose 5 MOOCs, each corresponding to a primary learning approach. They then mapped each MOOC against the 12 dimensions Grainne identified. The blog goes on to attempt to do this with one MOOC as an example.
