I disagree pretty strongly with that viewpoint. It seems very elitist to me. What defines Phoenix University is the quality of its courses, not the social status of its students.
The idea that you'd no longer have "intelligent people" at Udacity if it were accredited makes no sense to me. If the courses are of sufficient quality, you'll have intelligent people. The fact that it's available to someone who might need an alternative to spending four years and $136,000 at Stanford doesn't lower the intelligence of the students.
Sebastian Thrun, speaking to Charlie Rose, was thrilled at the fact that 150,000 students from around the world had been able to access Stanford's open courseware. He talked about democratizing education. At no point did he say he was worried about it being compared to Phoenix University.
What is the difference between someone who takes a course to earn degree credits and someone who takes it for "personal growth?" Is the course going to be dumbed down for the degree-seeker? I see no reason at all that it should be. I'm sorry, but wanting to deny access to degree credits in the name of worrying that it would be "another Phoenix University wannabe" just sounds snobbish.
"What is the difference between someone who takes a course to earn degree credits and someone who takes it for 'personal growth?' Is the course going to be dumbed down for the degree-seeker?"
There are a few issues. First, for a school to be accredited they need to meet certain requirements, many of which are orthogonal to actual learning. Second, it creates a misalignment between what's good for the school and what's good for the students. Third, it tends to create zero-sum dynamics. Fourth, there is the issue of extrinsic motivation undermining intrinsic motivation. And fifth, it attracts students who are extrinsically motivated.
I'm sure it's possible to create a good program that's accredited. But as it currently stands no one has done that yet, at least not at scale, so my default posture is to bet against anyone trying to do it until they can prove that not only do they know their shit, but that they know their shit in regards to psychology/sociology/education specifically.
Comments
I disagree pretty strongly with that viewpoint. It seems very elitist to me. What defines Phoenix University is the quality of its courses, not the social status of its students.
The idea that you'd no longer have "intelligent people" at Udacity if it were accredited makes no sense to me. If the courses are of sufficient quality, you'll have intelligent people. The fact that it's available to someone who might need an alternative to spending four years and $136,000 at Stanford doesn't lower the intelligence of the students.
Sebastian Thrun, speaking to Charlie Rose, was thrilled at the fact that 150,000 students from around the world had been able to access Stanford's open courseware. He talked about democratizing education. At no point did he say he was worried about it being compared to Phoenix University.
What is the difference between someone who takes a course to earn degree credits and someone who takes it for "personal growth?" Is the course going to be dumbed down for the degree-seeker? I see no reason at all that it should be. I'm sorry, but wanting to deny access to degree credits in the name of worrying that it would be "another Phoenix University wannabe" just sounds snobbish.
"What is the difference between someone who takes a course to earn degree credits and someone who takes it for 'personal growth?' Is the course going to be dumbed down for the degree-seeker?"
There are a few issues. First, for a school to be accredited they need to meet certain requirements, many of which are orthogonal to actual learning. Second, it creates a misalignment between what's good for the school and what's good for the students. Third, it tends to create zero-sum dynamics. Fourth, there is the issue of extrinsic motivation undermining intrinsic motivation. And fifth, it attracts students who are extrinsically motivated.
I'm sure it's possible to create a good program that's accredited. But as it currently stands no one has done that yet, at least not at scale, so my default posture is to bet against anyone trying to do it until they can prove that not only do they know their shit, but that they know their shit in regards to psychology/sociology/education specifically.
Western Governors University.