Moocs being assessed

Those interested in this topic might find the following interesting (here). It is now the received wisdom that MOOCs were hyped when started and their promise, if there is any, was largely in the minds of those that stood to benefit most. The Gates foundation is now funding research on this topic (which, given the monetary source may or may not be "objective," pardon my cynicism) so that we can find out what MOOCs are good for, if anything.

It appears that the one group that they do service are "non-traditional" students and the problem appears to be keeping their attention.

The report names student engagement as a prominent theme. Many students enrolled in MOOCs are nontraditional, so making sure that they are engaged and able to succeed in such a course is even more important. Figuring out how to maintain students’ interest during an online course when “a distraction is literally just a click away” is another important element, Mr. Siemens said.

So putting things on line has some potential drawbacks that researchers are now addressing. Note too the audience, "non-traditional" students. It seems that for the regular college crowd MOOCs may not be on the agenda. Effectively, MOOCs are now filling the role that correspondence courses filled in the pre-digital era. And it seems that they are finding problems analogous to those that such courses traditionally encounter; keeping the student's attention focused on the material. This does not strike me as very surprising. It was never clear to me why presenting the material on line on a screen should make it more engaging than doing so in a book on your lap. At any rate, the discussion goes on, this time with much less hype.