The MOOC movement is not an indicator of educational evolution

Somehow, recently, a lot of people have taken an interest in the broadcast of canned educational materials, and this practice — under a term that proponents and detractors have settled on, massive open online course (MOOC) — is getting a publicity surge. I know that the series of online classes offered by Stanford proved to be extraordinarily popular, leading to the foundation of Udacity and a number of other companies. But I wish people would stop getting so excited over this transitional technology. The attention drowns out two truly significant trends in progressive education: do-it-yourself labs and peer-to-peer exchanges. In the current opinion torrent, Clay Shirky treats MOOCs in a recent article, and Joseph E. There’s a popular metaphor for this early stage of innovation: we look back to the time when film-makers made the first moving pictures with professional performers by setting up cameras before stages in theaters. Two more appealing trends are already big.

The MOOC Guide The purpose of this document is two-fold: - to offer an online history of the development of the Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) - to use that history to describe major elements of a MOOC Each chapter of this guide looks at one of the first MOOCs and some early influences. It contains these parts: - a description of the MOOC, what it did, and what was learned - a description of the element of MOOC theory learned in the offering of the course - practical tools that can be used to develop that aspect of a MOOC - practical tips on how to be successful Contribute to this Book You are invited to contribute. If you participated in a MOOC, add a paragraph describing your experience (you can sign your name to it, so we know it's a personal story). In order to participate, please email or message your contact details, and we'll you to the list of people who can edit pages.

MoocGuide - 0. Home Intro to MOOC Wikiversity Connexions - Sharing Knowledge and Building Communities OER Commons Genius or Madness? 6 November 2012 Genius or Madness? Professor Glenn Wilson “Great wits are sure to madness near allied, and thin partitions do their bounds divide” (John Dryden, 1681). “There is no great genius without a tincture of madness” (Seneca, 1st Century A.D.). Many great artists and scientists appear to have gone slightly mad following their lofty achievements. Beethoven and Van Gogh are also said to have gone progressively mad, though the reasons are equally debatable. For others, the genius and madness appear in parallel. John Nash, the Nobel-winning mathematician who developed “game theory” for the social sciences also suffered paranoid delusions throughout his career. Sometimes it is a matter of chance or social milieu that determines whether an individual is deemed brilliant or crazy. Many lists of creative achievers throughout history have been compiled along with mental health symptoms and diagnostic categories retrospectively assigned to them. Could the environment also be involved?

Khan Academy