Sep 24 2012: Perhaps one issue to clarify is whether the goal of education is certification, or whether it is to acquire knowledge. If the goal of education is the enrichment of the mind, as we would all (perhaps naively) like to suppose, then classes from something like Coursera are beneficial in that they do not cost anything, they fit around any schedule, and they reach people who might not normally be able to attend traditional university courses.
However, an important thing to note is that because Coursera costs nothing and is attended by thousands of people, assignments are reviewed by peers rather than professors. A person could go through the entire course, complete all of the assignments and watch all of the lectures, and have no idea where their skill and knowledge level lies in relation to the accepted degree of "competency" for that discipline. Some might say that doing away with ranking students is a good thing, because it boosts self-esteem, or because the ranking system is faulty. However, if a person who has completed all the free literature courses in the world submits for a job as a professor, the hiring board will not give them a second look, even if all of their Coursera peers said their essays were "quite good" and "very insightful."
I am taking several Coursera classes and, as someone who already completed a literature degree in a traditional institution, I have found them to be a wonderful chance to further my knowledge, to challenge myself, and to hear other people's perspectives. But as far preparing me for professional participation in my field, the free courses on Coursera are not nearly rigorous enough. Maybe Coursera should amend their webpage where they claim to "Advance your knowledge and career."
TEDCred score: 0.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: e-learning is b-learning
However, an important thing to note is that because Coursera costs nothing and is attended by thousands of people, assignments are reviewed by peers rather than professors. A person could go through the entire course, complete all of the assignments and watch all of the lectures, and have no idea where their skill and knowledge level lies in relation to the accepted degree of "competency" for that discipline. Some might say that doing away with ranking students is a good thing, because it boosts self-esteem, or because the ranking system is faulty. However, if a person who has completed all the free literature courses in the world submits for a job as a professor, the hiring board will not give them a second look, even if all of their Coursera peers said their essays were "quite good" and "very insightful."
I am taking several Coursera classes and, as someone who already completed a literature degree in a traditional institution, I have found them to be a wonderful chance to further my knowledge, to challenge myself, and to hear other people's perspectives. But as far preparing me for professional participation in my field, the free courses on Coursera are not nearly rigorous enough. Maybe Coursera should amend their webpage where they claim to "Advance your knowledge and career."