Because I’m spending all my free time working on the page proofs and index for this:
And the fact that I don’t have the time to dig into this is absolutely killing me.
« This is how MOOCs end… “Sentence first — verdict afterwards.” »
jonrees [at] alumni [dot] upenn [dot] edu
Glad to hear the book edits are coming along! I thought that Ian Bogost was the most interesting of the essays…some of the others read as if no one in the humanities has thought about teaching, outreach, or anything else except perhaps our navels in the past half century…
I guess I should clarify…no one but them. What bothers me is the idea that MOOCs present a challenge for the rest of us, one that we should see as our big chance to finally step forward into the future of teaching, which necessarily involves technologies that can bring the best to show us how it should be done. Since these professors have been working in various iterations of online learning, some of it very creative in terms of reaching people who are not college students, more like the lifelong learners we hear so much about, they do not consider the lives of those who teach and learn in the “average” state schools. We serve students who make great sacrifices for the privilege of coming to college. I think they deserve classes with professors present and actively involved. At my institution and many others like it, I would get no credit for running a class for alumni or for members of the public. Without TAs a large online class would leave little or no time for individual students. I am not saying that we should not listen to the experiences of dedicated and creative professors like those writing the essays, I am saying that we must consider how others, especially administrators who a cash strapped and think mainly if getting students out the door will run with these ideas while we also dream of using technology to educate everyone…