Friedman Vs Head On The Effectiveness Essay

1196 Words Nov 18th, 2014 5 Pages
Friedman vs. Head on the Effectiveness of Online Writing

***
-----
-----

The Effectiveness of Online Writing Courses (MOOCs)

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are one of the revolutionary trends in education across the world. Many controversies surround it with some education stakeholders viewing it as very costly but of little value. In addition, other critics consider it a cheaper model of teaching especially in higher education (Vimeo, 2014). Cheaper in the sense many students can be reached wherever they are with no travel needed, by a single instructor, but of little value in the sense that there is no face to face interaction between the student and the instructor. For instance, Dr. Karen Head and Thomas
…show more content…
4). His other worry is the creation of a “super professor” that can handle such huge numbers while the rest of the lecturers are left with nothing to handle. Head, however, praises the model as she reports that besides reaching many students in almost all continents of the world, the students have also formed forums where they discuss contents and technology and helps one another with questions. She is also admitting that the most exciting part of all is the weekly “hangout” sessions, which are enabled by the use of Google air (Head, 2013, para. 5).
Friedman and Dr. Head still possess different understanding about the use of MOOCs. For instance, Dr. Head is focusing on the Massive open online courses as an instructional means of disseminating information to the students. However, Friedman sees it as a supplementary to the traditional courses and programs. He contends that, “MOOCs is an example of what colleges have been offering as a remedial aid to students (Friedman, 2013, para. 1) .” Dr. Head, on the other hand, presents MOOCs as comprehensive ways of instruction to the students. For instance, whenever there is a problem the students are always emailed. She adds that the students are kind especially when they become transparent. In this case, the two authors differ on their take on the MOOCs (Friedman, 2013, Para. 2).
While Friedman is questioning the authentic nature of the MOOCs, Head, on

Related Documents