Lecturing world-wide

In a digital, twenty-first century world, do we still need universities?  Or, rather, do we still need universities as large collections of buildings occupying physical space?

Universities originally formed around men learned in their fields, who offered to teach any students who cared to hang around and pay for the instruction.  Couldn't scholars provide similar instruction now -- not just to a handful of young people who gather together from distant homes to receive it, but to the entire world via the internet?

Providing university-level instruction over the internet is a "hot issue" in educational circles at present.  Stanford has taken a lead in offering such free courses -- or more precisely, in permitting and encouraging its professors to offer such courses.  Stanford President John Hennessy is particularly enthused about such efforts, at least to the extent of having his school experiment with both the necessary technology and the development of course work amenable to presentation on-line.  Stanford professors are now offering certain lecture courses, complete with interactivity between the professor (or his teaching assistants) and the individual student. 

Stanford's alumni magazine this month contains a lengthy article discussing the issue.

Opinion on campus is mixed. Many professors, understandably, don't care for the idea of providing individual assistance -- or even examinations -- to several hundred thousand students around the world.  The courses so far offered have been ones capable of computer grading -- and have been offered primarily in the computer sciences.  Furthermore, the students tend to work together on-line cooperatively in response to the lectures, largely obviating the need for the faculty to hold, metaphorically, their hands.  Grades and university credit, at present, are not given.  The student who successfully completes the course receives a letter or certificate of completion, but not one written in Stanford's name.

I doubt that these courses will ever replace the experience of "going to college."  Much of the "learning" that I received as a student came from being around fellow students who shared my own interests, or students who had totally different interests and whose enthusiasm was contagious.  It does seem possible, however, that even matriculated students could benefit from viewing large lecture courses on-line, rather than sitting in a huge auditorium.  In experiments of this sort at Stanford, attendance at lectures in some large courses has dropped to thirty percent when the lectures are also available on-line.

The feeling was, "Why should I wake up at 8 in the morning to come to class when I can watch it at 2 a.m. in my dorm room?

The Stanford Magazine article begins with the example of a 16-year-old boy in Greece who joined 100,000 other students worldwide in taking a Stanford professor's on-line course in "applied machine learning" -- defined as the "science of getting computers to act without being explicitly programmed."  The Greek youth received no Stanford credit for the course, just a letter of completion.  But he wrote:

Andrew Ng is truly one of the best teachers I have ever had, even though I've never met him.  I want to thank him from the depths of my heart for offering these amazing learning opportunities.

He's now taking courses in natural language programming and algorithms.  He plans to apply to Stanford in two years.

A moving testimonial to the impact of excellent teaching -- especially when it's received from a youngster on the other side of the globe.

Other students included "a 13-year-old budding physicist, a recovering addict, an unemployed librarian, a thirtysomething stay-at-home mom, and a 72-year-old retiree who once built a computer from scratch."

Obviously, there are a vast number of problems and concerns to be resolved before such courses are offered routinely.  Will professors receive extra pay from their institutions for preparing lectures specifically for on-line use?  Can universities spare the faculty resources when these courses become routine, not experimental?  Is there any way to make money from these courses, or at least defray their expense? Does a university like Stanford "dilute its brand" by opening its instruction to the entire interested world?  (But is this really different from publishing a professor's textbook?)  Will the availability of such courses, taught by world renowned authorities, hurt the ability of smaller schools with less capable faculty to draw student applications? 

Many of these issues are discussed in the article -- discussed, but not resolved.  But, along with Stanford's provost, we can contemplate the potential effects of such innovative teaching methods.  He compared on-line courses to the development of the printing press in the 15th century, which "led to an explosion in the number of universities by radically increasing the efficiency with which knowledge could be transmitted." 

As the cost of a college education skyrockets, any innovation that reduces costs without damaging the education being received is worth our consideration.