AskHN: Why hasn't open education worked yet?

Hiring hasn't changed. Without a degree, your resume doesn't get read, so it doesn't matter what knowledge or experience you have. The unemployment rate for those without a college degree is more than 5% higher than the unemployment rate for those with one.

I think it is a combination of many things.

a. The curious will always learn. Books have been around for a long time. In the west, the books are cheap/affordable. Still you find many people that cannot be bothered to pick one up and read. Online education material is the same.

b. Most people need structure in their lives. It is very easy to procrastinate with online learning. Very easy. Without a set syllabus, and deadlines, it is far too easy to park the lessons.

That said, I still think online education efforts are if not disruptive, democratising. Individuals who were previously interested in a topic, but could not afford to go to college/private lessons, can now do so.

You still need to get individuals fired up about learning, and learning on their own steam, with no deadlines, and possibly no expectations of certification at the end.

As the old addage says, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

I found the main benefit of attending a strong undergrad school (Berkeley) was the network you built and the exposure to other quality students. In many ways, more meaningful learning and skill-building occurs outside the lecture hall than within it.

Education is only half the problem. We also need certification.

Hiring someone who is self-taught has a very high frictional cost -- you need to evaluate what they've taught themselves. I took slightly over 100 hours of final exams as an undergraduate student; what employer wants to spend 100 hours evaluating a potential employee?

In Asian countries (at least) a degree is also a matter of prestige (I also suspect it happens in European countries with their strong culture). When a person has a degree in something useful like engineering, medicine or accounting, they automatically start commanding respect (even if it is not from a good college). While on the other hand, there are a lot of ways to command respect in open and free countries like America. The difference lies in the culture.

Also if you are measuring the success of OCW just by the admissions in colleges then it would be a wrong metric. College is much more than just your studies. Things like networking, employability, easy structure have already been mentioned. One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is Labs. You can easily set up a programming environment, but what about civil engineering, mechanical engineering, bio sciences, economic surveys, medicine, pharmacy? These things require large amounts of money to setup, and cannot be provided in any open way. Furthermore, where will you get willing guides for your research work and such? Refer to my previous comment here, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1648554

i think we will see more experimentation before a few successful models emerge. one of the promising recent initiatives i found is: Peer 2 Peer University http://www.p2pu.org/

some of their courses are being offered in conjunction with established academic institutions. for example: http://www.p2pu.org/general/open-journalism-open-web . even a for-credit course: http://p2pu.org/journalism

i've also posted a separate thread re: P2PU: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2021565

IIRC, Andrew Carnegie was largely self-taught at a time when free libraries were basically unheard of. He donated a lot of his wealth to make sure there were free libraries available so that other people (like him) starting from a lower socio-economic class who wanted to get ahead would have the opportunity to be self-taught as well. So perhaps one issue is that "open education" already exists to some degree and is not actually a new thing.

As others here have said, colleges also serve the purpose of certification or accreditation, not just education. If you want a job, a degree is still useful and can be essential for climbing the corporate ladder. There are circumstances under which knowing how to do something has inherent value and where convincing others of your ability is largely irrelevant. Getting a job is not one of those circumstances. Getting a job is all about convincing others you have the know-how and skills, at which point a degree is a short-hand proof of some qualification. That isn't likely to change much.

Robin Hanson has about worn this subject out. Education is about social signaling. It became institutionalized when labor began to have surpluses.

For social signaling goods, the cost is the point.

Ignoring all the social benefits of institutionalized learning, the structure really hasn't been challenged by any other offering. I think to make individual or even group learning explode online you need a new structure that doesn't exist yet. You need to be motivated to explore an avenue by being presented with goals, milestones, structure and community, mentorship, and rewards as well as compelling course material.

Online learning for the most part is akin to being left in a massive library, where formal education is largely supportive.

The software required to disrupt education needs to be more supportive than a campus full of staff, handing out scholarships and creating lifelong relationships. That's not simple by any means. It has to take you by the hand, ask you all those questions you have horrible, inconclusive or delusion-riddled answers to and then give you a package and point you towards a goal while lumping you in a group with others and placing frightening consequences on failing to complete the job.

This would have to be done by creating the system to automate the process and bring the people together, sprinkling mentors into the mix with rewards for their performance, having 'tuition' in the form of reasonable payment plus a premium that gets donated to charity if the student drops out, and excellent rewards for success, such as company placements at the best employers. It could work as a pilot project with a single class and expand from there.

I think the real problem is, helping people find and commit to their passions. Education is an easy step once that's accomplished. If students don't make the effort to really analyze their goals and passions they will be failed by their education regardless how cheap or accessible it is.