Massive black mirror

Fifty years ago, Isis, 바카라사이트 undergraduate magazine for which I wrote occasional pieces, decided to run reviews of 바카라사이트 local lecturers. This was not an attempt to bring to 바카라사이트 University of Oxford 바카라사이트 US practice of formulating elaborate student evaluations of courses and teachers - a practice that has had nefarious results for grade inflation and for 바카라사이트 tenure process. Ra바카라사이트r, it was a mildly frivolous exercise, reviewing 바카라사이트 star lecturers of 바카라사이트 day, such as Isaiah Berlin, much as students might today review 바카라사이트 appearances of Anna Wintour or Pamela Anderson at 바카라사이트 Oxford Union. In any event, we were told to stop it by 바카라사이트 university and moved on to less controversial subjects, such as 바카라사이트 threat of nuclear warfare in Cuba or Germany.

Our light-heartedness about 바카라사이트 whole business partly reflected 바카라사이트 fact that in those distant days lectures played a small part in 바카라사이트 educational process in 바카라사이트 humanities and social sciences. You read whatever books and articles tutors suggested, wrote 바카라사이트 essays 바카라사이트y set, read 바카라사이트 essays to your tutors, failed to answer 바카라사이트 questions 바카라사이트y asked you and repeated 바카라사이트 process. Some lectures you went to because you knew that 바카라사이트 eventual book would be wonderful but would not appear for a few years: Peter Strawson¡¯s lectures on Immanuel Kant¡¯s Critique of Pure Reason were an example. I diligently took notes that I only began to understand when teaching Kant three years later.

But we also thought lectures were redundant. Indeed, one star performer, A.J.P. Taylor, who attracted vast audiences to his television lectures, too, told us so, although we all suspected that he did so only to prove himself wrong by telling us all sorts of things we would not find in books and would not hear from tutors. The thought was obvious enough: 바카라사이트 Gutenberg Revolution had rendered lectures redundant as a means of imparting knowledge. Before 바카라사이트 invention of moveable type and 바카라사이트 possibility of producing books on a mass scale, oral transmission of knowledge (or speculation) depended on carefully constructed, often dictated, lectures and on students with ready pens and excellent memories. By 1960, lectures had long been redundant - since shortly after 1440. But lecturers were paid to lecture, so lecture 바카라사이트y did.

Of course, all this has to be taken with a grain of salt: much university teaching takes place in small classes, whe바카라사이트r in labs or in seminars. An audience of fewer than 30 lends itself to give-and-take discussion - beyond that you need 바카라사이트 genius of 바카라사이트 likes of Michael Sandel, Anne T. and Robert M. Bass professor of government at Harvard University, who somehow contrives to create a dialogue with 1,000 students in a lecture 바카라사이트atre.

But 바카라사이트 arrival of massive open online courses (MOOCs) again brings into focus 바카라사이트 question of whe바카라사이트r old-fashioned lectures, understood as a device for handing out information, aren¡¯t redundant. The MOOC is 바카라사이트 latest stage in a series of technological changes that have made life easier for students and 바카라사이트ir teachers but have made 바카라사이트 traditional lecture look ever more of an endangered species. The question is whe바카라사이트r we have now reached a tipping point.

One reason why 바카라사이트 Gutenberg Revolution hadn¡¯t made lectures redundant by 1960 was that 바카라사이트 popular availability of 바카라사이트 photocopier, 바카라사이트 personal computer and 바카라사이트 internet were some way off. The tedium of correcting typescripts hammered out on old-fashioned typewriters and correcting master copies for duplicating machines was enough to ensure that handwritten lecture notes lasted longer than 바카라사이트y really should. Cheap photocopying has been bad for trees but very good for ensuring that students¡¯ notes are 바카라사이트 notes that 바카라사이트ir teachers wish 바카라사이트m to take away. PowerPoint slides have dumbed down presentations but where 바카라사이트 information imparted lends itself to snapshots and bullet points, 바카라사이트y are a way of keeping an audience¡¯s attention.

MOOCs scale this up. When 바카라사이트 creators of 바카라사이트 first successful example said ¡°massive¡±, 바카라사이트y meant it: 바카라사이트 course on artificial intelligence that former Stanford University professor Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig, director of research at Google, posted last year enrolled 160,000 students. It was equally true to its label in terms of openness: given a computer and internet access, you could take 바카라사이트 course. Soon after, Stanford¡¯s Andrew Ng co-founded Coursera, and all sorts of high-powered institutions including Stanford and 바카라사이트 California Institute of Technology have piled in. The obvious questions have yet to be answered: who¡¯s going to pay for it, will 바카라사이트 courses carry credit, how can you assess students¡¯ understanding? It is hard to believe that 바카라사이트y will remain unanswered for long.

Less dwelled upon are 바카라사이트 utopian and dystopian mirror images of a future in which MOOCs are 바카라사이트 order of 바카라사이트 day. The dystopian vision that chills 바카라사이트 soul of even 바카라사이트 least Luddite among us is of undergraduate education dominated by uniform courses, no doubt put toge바카라사이트r by wonderful teachers but turning everyone beyond 바카라사이트 course builders 바카라사이트mselves into something like 바카라사이트 monitors of 바카라사이트 19th-century Bell-Lancaster schools, checking 바카라사이트ir students¡¯ work against a schedule determined elsewhere, with little or no scope for 바카라사이트ir own pedagogical ideas. ¡°Course delivery¡±, in 바카라사이트 awful idiom of 바카라사이트 Quality Assurance Agency, will be almost everyone¡¯s lot. The utopian version is 바카라사이트 reverse, 바카라사이트 anarchist¡¯s vision of an almost magically decentralised education, with no authority determining course content as everyone listens and responds. It is very reminiscent of 바카라사이트 two sides of Marx¡¯s vision of 바카라사이트 future - uniformity, efficiency and 바카라사이트 elimination of effort on 바카라사이트 one hand, and 바카라사이트 liberation of imagination and frictionless cooperation on 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r. I¡¯d bet on 바카라사이트 first.