"These are trying times for researchers across the globe, and I think it matters not whether one is in the UK, US or anywhere else; the lack of funding is impacting science in many ways, and not for the better. Scientists are running scared, funds for research are becoming scarce, labs are closing, tenure is being denied. I do my best not to project negativity to the burgeoning scientists (students and post-docs) in my own lab, but they are bright enough to understand what is going on: they see that a career in science is a never-ending fight to keep going. Ultimately, this is leading to the attrition of talented young scientists from the academic track.
But life as an academic scientist is comprised of the triple-threat: research, teaching and service (administration). And it appears that the life of science educators is also hanging in the balance. MOOCs are on the move ... The idea is noble: use the internet and advanced technology to enroll huge numbers of students from around the globe to take pre-recorded courses online given by outstanding lecturers. Indeed, there are reports of some courses where more than 100,000 students have enrolled, and many others with tens of thousands of students registered. So what's not to like? Just like open access to journals, here's open access to lectures and courses. Level the playing field, right? Perhaps ... There are not-for-profit companies set up by some universities to explore the use of MOOCs, and there are for-profit companies hired by a growing number of institutions to work with faculty to develop MOOCs. In same cases, the MOOCs will truly be free to anyone who wants to register. In other cases, universities want to establish online bases that will eventually bring in more tuition, loosely based on the
Open University model. But I think the truth is that at this point no one really understands what the ultimate goal of MOOCs is – or perhaps more accurately it depends which institution or administrator one asks.
Regardless of the goal of MOOCs – be it for profit or idealism – there are genuine educational concerns that need to be closely monitored. A course with 10,000 (or even 1,000) students enrolled cannot foster any significant discussion ... Another serious concern is evaluation. How can one evaluate 20,000 students taking a course? Yes, electronic quizzes and multiple-choice tests can be given to monitor progress – if the material is suitable for such types of questions. But what about material in the social sciences and humanities that might be harder to evaluate (than science) without essay-style answers? ... Another major concern regarding evaluation is ensuring that students are not cheating or copying from one another ... How will students learn in these types of environments? Studies already show that MOOC providers know that a student's attention span online does not resemble that in formal classes. Students get distracted. They check their emails and Facebook status, raid the refrigerator for a snack and take bathroom breaks. MOOC innovators have geared their courses to break down learning periods to no longer than 10-12 minutes, followed by evaluations and activities to keep students interested. Can this type of learning replace an hour in the classroom?But back to the concern that I began with above. What will happen if famous lecturers are recorded doing MOOCs – which become available for free or for a small fee – and institutions of higher learning begin to purchase these for use in their classrooms? Potentially, smaller and less financially viable institutions of higher learning might end up deciding that it's more profitable for them to disband their department of chemistry, for example, and have Prof X of Institution Y deliver the organic chemistry lectures via MOOCs. Then, rather than having to employ full-time tenure-track faculty at the university to teach, they can simply hire a few cheap teaching assistants or adjunct faculty (with no tenure or benefits) to sit with the students, watch the MOOCs and answer questions ..."