I've been reading Stanford's Engineering Everywhere lectures, and the thing I'm most impressed about is how much support there is for students:
Course-specific computer labs with course-specific lab assistants to help you walk you through problems as you're coming up against them in learning to code!
Sections with section leaders who grade your code in front of you and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of your coding style!
There is no advantage to a huge lecture hall over a podcast. But in-person mentoring, one-on-one human interaction is the best way to learn if you can afford it.
Agreed. I'm a TA for a CS course here and we have open office hours where the students can come and do their homework and ask questions as they come up, which I can then answer on the board (I'm not going to say if it's black or white so as not to alienate those who apparently feel strongly about this issue), benefitting not only the student with the question but also whoever else is there. I've had students help each other in my office hours too. That's not something you're going to get with SEE.
Is it possible to tell the difference between in-person presence and immersive telepresence?
Yes. I say this as a parent of a pioneer class student in Stanford's EPGY Online High School.
I'll acknowledge that the several examples I have seen (not just EPGY OHS) of distance learning courses have far from immersive telepresence, but I think there is evolutionary adaptation to real-world, in-person conversation that isn't taken advantage of by any distance learning communication mode I have seen.
Answer: It's far easier to talk to someone over a beer when you're in the same building as them. Or to pop up at their office unplanned with a question. Or to work on a project with team members.
School isn't all about lectures, and even for lectures, pre-recorded lectures don't let you ask questions.
There can be great value in personal interaction. I agree that big lectures like described should and will die off. However, the fastest way to learn anything is to have a series of conversations with an expert. (I guess that could still be reproduced by videochat or something...) I understand this has long been the model in many UK schools.
All that said, in a virtual age it is perfectly possible for someone to learn with out any physical school or personal interaction, just slower.
<i>There can be great value in personal interaction. I agree that big lectures like described should and will die off. However, the fastest way to learn anything is to have a series of conversations with an expert. (I guess that could still be reproduced by videochat or something...) I understand this has long been the model in many UK schools.</i>
The long conversations with an expert are purely an Oxbridge thing, it costs waaay too much to do that for it to be worthwhile for students with less potential/no tradition of doing so.
"(I guess that could still be reproduced by videochat or something...)"
Even if it is delivered as videochat, the attention of the instructor is still a limited resource. And this is the value proposition of a 21st century university. I think this change to the MIT lecture format reflects an understanding of this. Now that MIT has made much of its content available as Podcasts, etc., they are looking for ways they can provide more value to the people on campus.
Absolutely, and that is great for students. It could be that universities will become more relevant in a digital age. In the past, a student sitting in a gigantic lecture hall didn't have too much advantage over one just reading a book (and not paying tuition). If universities move to giving student 1 on 1 (or N on 1) interaction, someone in a university will have a big advantage over someone outside.
Possible but not as good as when you interact directly with people (in my view).
Direct feedback with teachers is far better than a lot of email exchanges, or than videoconference.
Spending a lot of time with other students on the same projects, in the same room and everyday at the university give you the opportunity to know their personality, and how they work. A lot better than doing a project in common with Internet.
You also have more opportunities to meet people from other horizons (i.e. non geeks).
Answer: there is no point.