When Should You Pay for Learning?

"When should you pay for learning?" is a question most of us ask at some point in our lives. Home educators, who generally strive to keep expenses low, constantly perform a cost-benefit analysis to determine whether a particular resource or class will be worth the money. Parents, whether they homeschool or not, wonder if their kids would benefit from a private school or extra tutoring. High school seniors, planning for the future, wisely ask whether it is worth the high cost of tuition to attend college full time. Similarly, older adults weigh the expense of extra courses or special training against the opportunities for pursuing a new career or enhancing their weekly paychecks. 

Lately, the proliferation of free, online courses has encouraged people to think harder about what they are paying for when they pay for learning. Personally, my own experiences with online courses (both free and fee-per-credit ones) have been mixed. When I evaluate online courses, there are five factors I consider:

1. Content: How informative and engaging is the actual course material? Does it include only text and images (similar to a textbook) or are there also embedded videos and interactive experiences?
2. Expertise: Will I have access to a subject matter expert?
3. Social learning: Are there opportunities to learn with others who share my interest in a subject? What type of forums are in place for online discussions?
4. Motivation: Do I have enough self-discipline and interest to work on my own, or do I need a coach to push me?
5. Credentials: Am I studying this subject to improve my understanding or to improve my chances of being accepted into a program (or job) that requires a specific set of credentials? 

Course providers still seem to be in the learning phase, trying to design courses to meet a variety of needs. I believe online courses will continue to improve over time, and many are already quite good. Still, few succeed in doing everything well. That's why it's important to consider exactly what a course offers before spending any money.

www.AcademicEarth.org

Academic Earth, MIT OpenCourseWare, the Open Learning Initiative (from Carnegie Mellon University), iTunes University (with courses from  Stanford, Berkeley, and many other colleges and universities)—all these provide access to content in the same way that libraries give us access to books, but without the due dates or patron ID requirements. I can "take what I like and leave the rest," picking and choosing the lectures or subtopics I need from as many courses as I want. I can then remix the content to suit my own learning goals. If my main interest is in educational content, these free repositories serve my needs well. 

Free courses offered by providers like Coursera and EdX are similarly open to all, but they follow a predetermined schedule so the pacing is less flexible. While it is possible for students to participate as much (or as little) as they want to get what they need from the courses, the experience is less like accessing a library and more like attending a class—which can be a good thing, depending on what you want.

Fee-based online college courses (such as those offered by the Community College System of New Hampshire) package content in an inflexible way that limits access: I have to pay for an entire course, even if I'm interested in only a few topics within that course. "By the module" or "by the hour" options are not available, at least not yet. That's why, when I consider whether it is worth paying for a course, I consider how much of the course content will be of use to me (or my teenage son, who has also taken online courses). I'm also aware that my grade—and any credit I may be hoping to earn—depends upon how well I complete all of the assignments, even the ones that may not be of use to me (for example, if they cover material I have already mastered or have no interest in learning). 

When it comes to accessing expertise and social learning, neither MOOCs (Massively Open Online Courses) nor formal college courses have a monopoly. Quality in either case varies from course to course, just as it does on any college campus. As a consumer, I'm going to seek out the best experiences I can find, wherever they might be. The professors and students who participate in an online program at an accredited college might be uniquely engaged and knowledgeable, and thus worth the expense. However, since I have had some positive experiences with free online courses, I would also consider them as reasonable options for learning. I wouldn't assume a free online course is inferior just because it isn't expensive or accredited.  

If I'm looking primarily for extra motivation, I'm going to need an instructor or peer group that keeps me engaged. For example, when I wanted to be sure I would set aside time every day to write, I enrolled in a formal writing program. Likewise, my son enrolled in a formal Latin course with teacher support when he was required to study a second language because he knew he'd never do it on his own. The course helped him to stay on track. In contrast, when he was looking for a course in programming, a subject he was highly motivated to learn on his own, he chose to enroll in a free online course (MIT 6.00x: Introduction to Computer Science and Programming). The free course lacked formal teacher support but offered forums for asking questions and participating in peer-to-peer interactions. 

Depending on your goals, perhaps credentials are the most important consideration. We've all suffered through at least one boring, ineffective course just to get the grade or degree we wanted. Still, I doubt I'm the only one who believes it would be best if students could choose from the most engaging, educational courses available—regardless of where the courses were offered or how little they cost. But in practice students are inclined, or perhaps required, to choose the expensive course for credit over the free one for no credit. (Not long ago, I saw this truth in action when I audited an undergraduate course at a small liberal arts college in my area. There was no fee for auditing: I simply asked the professor if I could, and he said yes. The subject was interesting, the teacher was good, and overall it was a great learning experience. "So, why don't more people audit classes?" I wondered. I still don't know the answer, but the reaction to my decision to audit a class was revealing as astonished students asked me, "Why are you taking this class if you aren't going to get credit for it?")

So, why do we pay for learning? There was a time when we paid for access to high-quality content and expert instruction. Now, with vast repositories of online information available to us 24/7, we question whether it's worth paying $100 for a single textbook. While we're still willing to pay for expert assistance, we'd like to receive it on our own terms, as occasional tutoring or the educational equivalent of a technical support hotline (especially if those options cost less than hiring a full-time professor for a semester). We'll also pay for coaching to help us stay motivated. And, until other options for demonstrating mastery become more widely acceptable, we're still willing to pay to get official credit for taking classes, even if we wouldn't be willing to take those classes (for free!) without the credit. 

Not Close Enough: Using Google Hangouts for Group Discussions

As I type this, my son and his friends are using Skype to rehearse lines for their production of Shakespeare's "King Lear." This afternoon's practice was cancelled due to icy roads, and given how difficult it usually is to reschedule, an alternative was sought. While the kids can't do anything about the vagaries of New Hampshire weather, new technologies provide a reasonable alternative to meeting in person.

For those who are new to Skype and similar video-chat tools: video chat is faster than email, more personal than instant messaging, and cheaper than long-distance phone calls. Note: "video chat" refers to a one-on-one conversation; video conferencing is conducted with a group.

Google Hangouts uses a multi-user video chat room viewed through a browser. A few weeks ago, I made my first attempt at using Google Hangouts. According to the website, you can "video chat with up to nine friends." Perhaps I was naive, but I thought I would be able to see video images of all the people with whom I would be chatting (as this Google+ video implies). As it turns it, "your 'mileage' may vary."

Getting Started with Google Hangouts, April 2013

My goal was to hold a dynamic class discussion, where everyone would have a chance to talk and contribute, as they do during our usual face-to-face meetings. Of the seven people who participated in our Google Hangout, two were in the same building and five joined from remote locations. We quickly discovered that having two computers in close proximity distorted the audio significantly. To stop the annoying feedback and reverberations, we turned off the audio on one of the computers. That seemed to solve the problem.

Finding Creative Learning Spaces

Homeschoolers have the whole world to use for their "classroom," but most of the time we aren't looking for formal classes. Over the years, I have visited many different parks, museums, and public spaces with my children, and I have been surprised to discover how many places follow the traditional school format: an adult instructor stands in the front and tells a group of same-age children what to do. Few places permit children to enjoy open-ended, hands-on design experiences, and fewer still are appropriate for a wide range of ages. (Homeschooling parents with large families are especially cognizant of how near to impossible it is to segregate children by age for every workshop and outing.) Perhaps that's why my children have generally preferred to set up their own group learning experiences—such as the Backyard Ballistics project in the adjacent photo.

In her essay on "A Dangerous but Powerful Idea" (2007), Geetha Narayanan describes an after school learning center at the MIT Media Lab called the "Computer Clubhouse." She notes that the clubhouse has four core principles: 

1. Supporting learning through design experiences.
2. Helping youth build on their own interests.
3. Creating an emergent learning community.
4. Working always in a climate of trust and respect.

Are there any places in my own community that satisfy these criteria, I wondered? It wasn't easy to think of any at first, but I pushed myself to consider the options. 

FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology) seems like an obvious place to consider. Unfortunately, while it's true that FIRST "celebrates science and technology," it doesn't offer any open workshop hours. Kids must enroll in one of the competitive robotics programs to have access to the LEGO and robot components, and fees for participating are steep (although scholarships are available for some).