糖心Vlog

Moocs hotly debated at Battle of Ideas

Massive open online courses: new horizon or redundancy tool? Experts fight it out

Published on
October 24, 2013
Last updated
May 27, 2015

Source: Devonyu/iStock

The future of massive open online courses 鈥 whether as a new academic horizon or a chance to 鈥済et rid of the duff scholars鈥 鈥 was debated at this year鈥檚 Battle of Ideas Festival, held on 19 and 20聽October.

Chairing 鈥淟aptop University? The Future of HE鈥, an event at London鈥檚 Barbican Centre in association with 糖心Vlog, Toby Marshall, curriculum manager at Havering College of Further and 糖心Vlog, asked whether Moocs were 鈥渁 threat, an opportunity, a tool鈥, or even 鈥渁 mirror into the soul of frustrated academics鈥.

Matt Walton, head of product at FutureLearn 鈥 the first UK Mooc platform, owned by The Open University 鈥 suggested its courses were 鈥済ood for learning new skills alongside a full-time job鈥. Despite predictions, podcasts had actually led to people listening to more radio, he said: in the same way, Moocs might 鈥渞ekindle the love for learning鈥.

But Diana Laurillard, professor of learning with digital technologies at the Institute of Education, noted that although Moocs marked a welcome return of the 鈥渢alking head鈥, 鈥渟tudents need nurturing and guidance as well as lectures鈥. Moocs might be the 鈥21st-century answer to the public libraries of the 20th聽century鈥, but neither in themselves amounted to an education.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

She also commented that the small proportion of people who had completed Moocs tended to be 鈥減rofessionals who already had several degrees鈥. Was there something odd about a situation where 鈥渃ampus students are paying 拢9,000 a year to subsidise the education of highly paid professionals鈥?

Dennis Hayes, professor of education at the University of Derby, was unimpressed by claims that 鈥渋Phones are making universities redundant鈥. He even cited a pro vice-chancellor who believed we could 鈥渘ow get rid of the duff scholars and listen to鈥arvard鈥.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Yet this rested on a fallacy, he said: 鈥淎ccess to information is not only confused with knowledge and understanding but also seen as a substitute for them.鈥

Real education, by contrast, always required 鈥渁n intense engagement with intellectual authorities鈥.

matthew.reisz@tsleducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT