The Unstoppable MOOCs

By
Richard Vedder

Although difficult to measure, it is unlikely that higher
education has had any productivity advance in the 50 years since I finished
college. Economists like Princeton’s William Baumol have argued that rising
college costs are inevitable, given inherent limitations on reducing the cost
of disseminating knowledge -only so many people can fit into a room to hear a
lecture.

Yet on-line education, including massive open on-line
courses (MOOCs), are changing that. Prestigious universities like Harvard,
M.I.T., and Stanford are working with various providers to offer courses taught
by well known and often very effective professors. Coursera, Udacity, edX and
others are providing increasing numbers of courses where students can learn.
They join other low-cost options such as provided by StraighterLine and the
extensive, high quality free offerings of the Saylor Foundation, a pioneer in
the free open source movement. Khan Academy also offers materials at all levels
of learning, and some of those materials are used by college providers.

Reaching
100 Times as Many Students

This movement has the potential of being the “disruptive
innovation” that Harvard’s Clayton Christensen talks about, leading to
“creative destruction” within higher education similar to that found in market
capitalism. I think the odds are better than 50-50 that at least 500
institutions of higher education will close within the next decade as
technology and entrepreneurial innovation lead to better, cheaper learning
platforms, forcing out some expensive traditional schools with so-so
reputations and weak outside private financial support.

The best of the new course offerings appear to be of very
high quality: superb lecturers, good, rigorous reading assignments,
opportunities for students to ask questions, etc. Instead of sitting before 200
students in a lecture hall, a first-rate professor can reach 100 times as many
students. A student can advance at his or her own pace. Instead of learning
from tens of thousands of mostly so-so professors, students can gain
comprehension from hundreds of the best and/or brightest teachers, many from
prestigious universities.

I have been particularly impressed by the Saylor
Foundation’s approach.  They offer
roughly courses in about 15 or so “majors,” as well as some other elective
courses in fields as diverse as music and physics. Economics majors, for
example, complete a core of four basic and intermediate level theory courses,
plus additional study in mathematics, statistics, and econometrics. They can
choose from about a dozen other courses to complete a major. And Saylor is
partnering with other providers – like Excelsior, StraighterLine and even the
College Board’s CLEP exam (an underutilized way students can earn credit).

 l was impressed
with materials for economics courses with which I have personal knowledge. To
be sure, the courses are rather cookie-cutter in nature — not eccentrically
brilliant, but covering the fundamentals competently and well. I understand now
why a number of studies have suggested
on-line courses are equal to or even moderately superior to conventional
approaches in terms of learning, and also cheaper.

Hands-On
Experience in Science

There are four issues relating to on-line education,
however: advanced learning, socialization/networking, credentialing and
verification. At higher levels of subject inquiry, the numbers involved sharply
decrease, reducing the potential economic advantages of on-line learning. The
advantages of personal interaction between instructors and students grow.  In the sciences, the need for hands-on
laboratory experience intensifies. Thus a blended on-line/traditional
educational program where students do perhaps a year or so of classroom courses
might often be the ideal, and doable for a small fraction the cost of
conventional higher education.

For many, higher education is as much a consumption
good/service as it is an investment. College is where you make friends, fall in
love, and party, sometimes irresponsibly. 
In residential settings, it is where students learn to make decisions
previously made by parents.  These experiences
are educating in their own way, helping ease the transition from adolescence to
adulthood, and networking with others sometimes helps get jobs. Also, you can’t
make love or party on-line.

Then there is the credentialing function.  Some adult learners take MOOCs just for the
desire of learning new things, expanding their horizons. Some may even take
them to learn specific skills useful at home or at work. But I would guess the
major motivation for college attendance is the desire to earn a degree
typically signifying a level of competence, perseverance, intelligence, and discipline
that nets a good job. College graduates usually make more money, although that
is increasingly less so, as I have written elsewhere.

                                                                             What About Certification?

There is always a question with distance learning: did
the student submitting the materials really do the work? There are ways of
reducing or eliminating this problem, but it must be addressed.

Colleges certify that the bundle of courses students have
taken constitutes a degree. Yet accrediting agencies heretofore have been
reluctant to allow colleges to grant lots of credit for courses provided by
organizations like edX or Saylor that are not accredited. They are a barrier to
innovation. If the cost of an education is very low, however, students need not
borrow federal funds requiring attendance at an accredited school, so
non-accredited “schools” can compete as long as employers recognize the
outcomes as being of high quality. Entrepreneurs are already recognizing this
and are trying to get into the business of bundling courses from alternative
providers and certifying degrees.

I think a national exit exam provided by the College
Board, ACT, anyone creditable (Underwriters Laboratories?) could facilitate
this. A resume saying “I am a graduate of XYZ On-Line University and scored a
92 on the NCEE (National College Exit Examination)” might be considered better
by employers than a degree from a college where students do poorly on the NCEE.
And why doesn’t the US Chamber of Commerce or other employer groups promote
create the NCEE? Longer term, providing national data on the earnings of
graduates by institution would also help employers assess the quality of
degrees.