Many people are observing that higher education is in serious trouble, and as a student, you are one of the primary stakeholders. Online education solves some problems, creates others, and provides some interesting complications to the ongoing debate about how to shape our higher education policies and experiences. William Bennett, former U.S. Secretary of Education, has something to say about it. He wrote this opinion piece for CNN.com in July 2012.
Read it here: Bennett, "Is Sebastian Thrum’s Udacity the Future of Higher Education?”
- In Bennett’s opening paragraph, he claims that Silicon Valley is an “unlikely source” for realizing educators’ dreams of providing “universal, low-cost, first-class higher education.” Do you agree with Bennett’s assertion? Why or why not? Why might he consider Silicon Valley so unlikely? What presuppositions or assumptions do his assertions reveal?
- All of Udacity’s class offerings (to date) are in the STEM fields; that is, science, technology, engineering, and math. Would Udacity’s educational model, as described by Bennett, be suitable for, say, a literature course? U.S. history? Philosophy? Why or why not?
- Have you taken a Udacity course? Would you try one? Why or why not? Considering your own situation and personal goals, which aspects of Udacity are appealing? Which aspects are drawbacks for you? Explain your responses.
- Bennett’s credentials as an educator are quite solid; he was the Secretary of Education for three years in President Ronald Reagan’s administration. Still, a lot has changed in the more than twenty-five years since he held that post. In your view, how do his age and depth of experience influence his credibility? Why?
- Bennett poses a challenging question: “Do we need a revolution in higher education?” Write an essay in which you address that question, providing evidence from your own experience and world knowledge. In your response, consider such factors as access and inclusivity, cost, social experience with peers, credentials and certification, advisement, and any other issues you think are important to consider.
They Say I Blog 
In his article “Is Sebastian Thrun’s Udacity the future of higher education?”, William J. Bennett discusses recent advancements in higher level education, regarding Google vice president Sebastian Thrun, and his development of Udacity. Thrun’s new technological platform, Udacity, allows students of all ages, from all locations to take online, college-like courses and receive certificates that act somewhat like degrees. The platform allows virtually anyone to receive a high quality education for next to nothing. Could this be too good to be true? Some might argue that an online platform like Udacity cannot be used in place of a traditional college education, or provide similar opportunities and benefits that a college degree would provide. Skeptics may believe that the supposedly “costless”, “miracle” educational medium is not as high quality or legitimate as it is made out to be. However, others might argue that Thrun’s brainchild is a step towards the future of education. His development may be the beginning to a new technological, broadly accessible form of public education. I side more with this outlook. As can be seen in the world today, society is beginning to adopt more heavily technology-based practices. Technology is consuming a large percentage of modern careers and is making its way into education and other aspects of society. It only makes sense that technological advancements and developments will replace traditional practices. Although Thrun’s “Udacity” may not be the fully developed stage of modern education, it definitely serves as a model for future platforms to come. Technology’s consumption of society is inevitable, and there is no argument to deny its growing influence and prominence in modern society.
LikeLike
Online courses take away from the “college experience.” In addition, many people find it hard to focus in their own home surrounded by all the distractions that are well known to them. I find that learning in a classroom, teaches you to stay on task and pay more attention. Interaction is also very important. Being able to ask the teacher a question and talk about problems with other students is crucial to the learning process. On the contrary, taking a class at whatever time is most comfortable for you would be beneficial, however, that may take away from the momentum, if you pause and decide to go back to that lesson later on.
LikeLike
The internet has changed everything, including all aspects of education. Look at us now, remember the days of the classroom overhead projector? Here we are with computers and smart boards and can only imagine what the future has in hold for us. As Bennett insists that the online college experience is the way to go this day and age. Sebastian Thrun has made college an online and FREE experience through his online education company Udacity. I disagree with Thrun’s veiw that online education is the way to go because I still believe that teaching still requires face to face interaction. Online college is good for people that are going back to school. Just coming out of high school, physically go to school.
LikeLike
Free is always better right? In Bennett’s article about education and the answer to our prayers, he educates us on the free education offered through online courses created by Sebastian Thrun. Many say that they chose not to attend college for one sole reason: the cost. Unlike a four-year school, Udacity, Thrun’s free online program is available to everyone. At their own convenience. Thrun allows the 21st century “college” student to take courses from absolutely anywhere, at anytime. In short, this is a milestone that could possibly change the idea of education on a worldwide scale. To an extent, I agree with Bennett when argues that free online courses are a higher form of education in comparison to a four-year school because of its resulting evolution but in conclusion, when it comes down to choosing free online education or a four-year school leaving me in debt, I’d choose the four-year school because I am still a skeptic.
LikeLike
trying to achieve that higher education can be extremely challenging. With paying for education. But there could be a easier way, or it could be a bad way. Having assignments online. Not many people have WIFI available to them. Sebastian thought of the idea of having free courses online for all people.I agree that this idea of a low costing or free higher education is a great idea, but I do not agree in online classes.I think that so much more is able to be gained while sitting in a classroom, and discussing topics than sitting at home and reading to yourself.
LikeLike
To put into a better understanding this article explains how online courses can be very beneficial to students all over the world. Bennett explains how a student teacher in school class usually reached 200 students. As soon as Bennett gave access to his course on the internet, his amount of students increased dramatically to 160,000 . Consider a student who wants a good education but can’t afford going to a physical college. Online school would be extremely beneficial, and less expensive. I’m sure many people around the world benefit from this type of education, but personally would not choose not to do this type of education. In sum online education can be very beneficial to different types of students.
LikeLike
I personally wouldn’t plan on taking a Udacity course, as I feel a physical classroom with a teacher is much better. Bennett’s points do stand strong, how the top 410 students were actually online rather than in class. Don’t get me wrong I am amazed at how well the students have been doing, but I feel there should be the connection between the teacher and student. The fact that you can’t directly ask your teacher a question and you have to look it up, if you’re taking the class online, seems to be the end of the line for me. Although you have all the time possible online to continue to study, which in the physical classroom you get that allotted time slot of 2 hours say and no more than that. I would much rather prefer a physical classroom scenario than an online class.
LikeLike
I’ve yet to take an Udacity course, but I find it very interesting. There seem to be so many benefits to this online source- the first being that it’s free! The author points out the easy accessibility; you can take your classroom with you anywhere and everywhere and can log on anytime that is convenient to you. Not only that, but Bennett fails to mention the fact that with a free education, you have the opportunity to get experience in many different fields in order to figure out if you are actually interested in a certain subject before you dish out thousands of dollars on courses that may not help you if you happened to change majors or even schools; and this is a very big deal to students that are struggling financially. In my case, I have parents who are willing and able to pay for a majority of my higher education, but I could definitely see myself taking some of these online STEM courses to supplement what I am learning in school and explore different fields of work. The main reason that I am not completely committed to doing 100% of my schooling online is that I feel that teaching should be interactive-students should be able to bounce ideas off of each other and communicate on a personal level with their teachers to encourage deeper thinking. Universities and colleges also offer amenities like laboratories and libraries where students can practice team problem solving and collaboration. Online tools like Udacity have a lot to offer students all around the world and even without the real classroom experience, it still gives many the opportunity to further their education when they would not have been able to without it.
LikeLike
In the article, “Is Sebastian Thrun’s Udacity the Future of Higher Education?”, Thrun proves the fact that his new education program contributes more to peoples’ needs of education than most other colleges. He proudly asserts his success by announcing, “We just found over 400 people in the world who outperformed the top Stanford student”. This outcome is due to Thrun’s wide varieties of online courses, free classes, and the fact that anyone is capable of signing up. Thrun is giving a lot of people an opportunity for education without necessarily having to go to college. This helps out people who don’t have enough money to go to college, people who want to learn but are too busy, people currently in college who want to further their education, and even undergraduates who want to take college courses before even going to college. Of course there are other reasons as to why Udacity can be more convenient to others’ lives, but the flexibility and the education Udacity is willing to offer to students for no cost is a new system that has proved to be helpful for those choosing to use it. “Thrun has provided a level of diversity, opportunity and academic rigor not seen before. People from any country, any background and any income level can receive an elite education at virtually no cost.” Thrun not only creates a new system of education that is more convenient to the lives of people, but he proves the fact that this system contributes more to students’ lives than most other colleges.
LikeLike
I do not believe that Udacity’s class type would be suitable for literature, or History. This is because when you learn about physics or algebra you are learning about numbers and angles. These classes don’t require much commentary by a teacher, you could easily sit behind a computer screen and learn about it. When it comes to English and History you need more dialogue from the teacher. The best history and English classes I’ve ever had have come because they were taught by a strong teacher who helped me understand the meaning of a book, or the real social meaning behind a series of actions by a president. While Udacity is a very useful tool for a taste of education in certain topics, like science and math, I do not believe it would be successful in other topics, such as English and History.
LikeLike
Sebastian Thrun has created an opportunity for people who did not have the opportunity for higher education. On the one hand, it is really helpful for people who do not have money and time for college, of access to a higher education campus. We can understand better the potential of people who had no dreams or aspirations of going to college. On the other hand, a college courses towards a deg-reed program are more valuable then online courses. Experience of being in a college classroom goes beyond just the material that is being taught.
LikeLike
I have never taken any of the classes offered by Udacity. I do not plan on taking one anytime soon either. Sure, i can see why people would, it seems like a truly excellent idea, It just doesn’t pertain to me. The set of courses offered are centered around science, technology, engineering, and math, or STEM. I simply don’t plan to pursue any such career in which i would end up needing any of those courses. If the program introduced some kind of art class, i would be all over that, but for now, i don’t see myself partaking. For those that plan on working on a job in the future where they would need this knowledge, i can see why they’d take it. It offers basically free knowledge, all you have to do is put in the effort. The problem i see with it however is this, If this does get huge, it may take the jobs away from many professors. Sure, the program will need some to make the videos and such, but they wont need all of them. Many college professors will become unemployed, and society will continue to complain about robots taking our jobs. But then again, if it remains as is, many people will not be able to receive a proper education in their field of interest simply because they lack the money to do so.
LikeLike
Although Sebastian Thrun does not say so directly, he apparently assumes that his program “Udacity” is the future of higher education. He can, and he should. This free use of education that is having incredible results by people is taking over. It’s just like going to school, taking tests and quizzes, learning, but in a more funner and challenging way. Some questions that are raised are that if this education model is suitable for people that inneed of literature, history, or other courses. This education provides STEM courses -S for science, T for technology, E for engineering, and M for math-. But what happens if someone were to want to take a course about history or literature/english? It’s not there. And this “Udacity” program claims that it’s the best type of education for the future while some other important courses are not there. I’m not saying this program is bad or trying to give it a bad name; in fact, it’s a great program. I’m just saying that I hope in the future, there will be other courses like literature/english, history and others. This would make it a top-notch program giving it its name, “the future of higher education,” as Thrun should claim.
LikeLike
Although Sebastian Thrun does not say so directly, he apparently assumes that his program “Udacity” is the future of higher education. He can, and he should. This free use of education that is having incredible results by people is taking over. It’s just like going to school, taking tests and quizzes, learning, but in a more funner and challenging way. Some questions that are raised are that if this education model is suitable for people that inneed of literature, history, or other courses. This education provides STEM courses -S for science, T for technology, E for engineering, and M for math-. But what happens if someone were to want to take a course about history or literature/english? It’s not there. And this “Udacity” program claims that it’s the best type of education for the future while some other important courses are not there. I’m not saying this program is bad or trying to give it a bad name; in fact, it’s a great program. I’m just saying that I hope in the future, there will be other courses like literature/english, history and others. This would make it a top-notch program giving it its name, “the future of higher education,” as Thrun should claim.
LikeLike
In Bennett’s opening paragraph, he claims that Silicon Valley is an “unlikely source” for realizing educators’ dreams of providing “universal, low-cost, first-class higher education.” Do you agree with Bennett’s assertion? Why or why not? Why might he consider Silicon Valley so unlikely? What presuppositions or assumptions do his assertions reveal?
Potentially because Silicon Valley is not a low income area and the focus of the innovative education is about cutting costs.
All of Udacity’s class offerings (to date) are in the STEM fields; that is, science, technology, engineering, and math. Would Udacity’s educational model, as described by Bennett, be suitable for, say, a literature course? U.S. history? Philosophy? Why or why not?
No, because those things are are subjective and not something that you can just learn.
Have you taken a Udacity course? Would you try one? Why or why not? Considering your own situation and personal goals, which aspects of Udacity are appealing? Which aspects are drawbacks for you? Explain your responses.
I have not and would not. I am not interested in any sort of STEM field. The only convinient thing about Udacity is the cost effectiveness. I believe online learning is not as beneficial and can lead to social isolation.
Bennett’s credentials as an educator are quite solid; he was the Secretary of Education for three years in President Ronald Reagan’s administration. Still, a lot has changed in the more than twenty-five years since he held that post. In your view, how do his age and depth of experience influence his credibility? Why?
He could potentially be seen as outdated but personally I do not think he is, I think his credentials hold just fine.
Bennett poses a challenging question: “Do we need a revolution in higher education?” Write an essay in which you address that question, providing evidence from your own experience and world knowledge. In your response, consider such factors as access and inclusivity, cost, social experience with peers, credentials and certification, advisement, and any other issues you think are important to consider.
I do think we need a revolution in higher education but I believe cost and accessibility are what needs to change. Credentials and social experiences are as good as they will ever be, and online learning would only disadvantage these things. Lower cost would allow for inclusitivity. The revolution we need is about finance.
LikeLike
I absolutely agree with Mr. Bennett that this type of virtual education will go up and potentially take over colleges and universities. There are many individuals that could never dream of having access to quality higher education but now they can. As demand for higher education goes up due to the competitive global economy people from foreign countries are now competing with American students for college opportunities but now this prevents ruthless competition by providing more equal opportunities. Also this helps with college affordability as the courses are now free of charge and there is no longer a financial for reason for not furthering your education. This will have some downsides as it may decrease socialization and the experiences one gets from going to a college or university. Regardless, we can definitely anticipate more of this in the future.
LikeLike
Very informative I love this blog
LikeLike
Many people think that America should have a universally low cost way for a higher education – same mentality for African schools which I think should be encouraged more
LikeLike
This is a very good invention.
Daniel.
LikeLike
Indeed we need a revolution in higher education. That will help in enhancing Quality education and improve the standards
LikeLike