Just a brief note to says thanks for a most enjoyable course. I have to admit that a lot of what you taught didn’t get properly absorbed. As you said yourself we probably think we understand the answer to problems like why the square root of 2 is irrational when we probably don’t! Still I must have learnt something as I impressed my son-in-law, who is a high school headmaster and physics graduate, with all those mathematical symbols we have been taught. I showed him the “fooling everybody” quote in symbol form and he seemed most impressed. Or perhaps I am just assuming he was!

Anyone who has an interest in mathematics and how mathematicians think would certainly find this course both useful and thought provoking. Thanks again for giving us the opportunity.

]]>I express to you my sincere congratulations that you and your people have succeeded taking giant steps and accomplishments on this foundational MOOC with 65,000 students, special thanks for your hard work on teaching the crowds and the long hours to make it work, your legacy for us and the future generations on Math-Thinking is and will continue to be really appreciated always, you are a Math Champion Dr Devlin. My deep appreciation to the Coursera.org team and the wonderful organization you represent Standford for such a wonderful work, we as your students are part of the history, we made it together, You made it possible.

-Edgart Gonzalez.

Instituto Tecnologico de Oaxaca, Mexico 1987.

Instituto Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico 1994.

Vertical Sciences Labs. California USA 2012.

e-KnowBrary™.com by the vertical Sciences Labs™{vScLb™.com}

Author Book in production:

Computing in Sciences Youth’s Learning™

Youth’s PhD™ Book Series ©2012 vScLb™

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I would also vote that Prof KD’s IMT is The Math Course of 2012.

]]>Your instruction is first rate, and very clear, so you succeeded well. Peer review became Napster + stickers. As a Class of 1971 Stanford Grad, I’m delighted to see someone start a new paradigm.

Pivot to a freemium test-grading model underwritten by Pepsi. I arrived two days before the end of term, but managed to download all the lectures and assignments. I’m the English Literature student that was curioius about mathematical linguistics and have been converted! Another success.

Thanks for enriching my life.

Mark Richard-Fogg Stanford 1971

]]>I for one learned a lot and enjoyed the course. I am 80 and the last

formal math course I took was 63 years ago.

Thanks for all your work and willingness to explore.

John Carollo ]]>

Thank you so much for your positive and continuous effort to get this first round done til the end and help us learn. I will remember the lightbulb and Edison… thanks for that!

Dani

]]>Not only your teaching, but your blogs are also so much enjoyable to read. I consider IMT as definitely a “success” story! Keep offering more such MOOCs and keep writing such blogs! Thanks…

Regards,

Pranab

I’ve also read some of the harsh comments on the forum. The anger in them is misplaced because this course is most and for all a matter of self-deployement. However, I can understand it a bit in the sense that a certificate is issued at the end. Although this does’t equal credit points it has some value. You will see these courses popping up in CVs. The value of such a certificate will increase in the future, where a formal degree may become less important. After all, a degree is some aggregation of courses that is valued as a ticket to the labour market. This is purely by convention. Perhaps one day a certified shorter online course trajectory will be valued as much as a degree. In this trajectory more general courses can move to a parallel broader self-education thread. Another reason such a trajectory can be shorter is that people will never stop following courses. They will just take less at the same time.

If a certificate represents some value then some people may be upset when they fear it is jeopardised by something beyond their control. That may explain why certain reactions on the forums are somewhat hard.

I would like to conclude by saying that this course was really great. It was an honour to be able to follow it. On top of that it was free, so we should be very grateful. The experimental aspect is exiting rather than disturbing. Who knows later we can proud ourselves for participating in pioneering an educational revolution.

]]>Thank you for blogging about your experience building and running your MOOC. As a college professor who’s been dabbling with online learning, it’s been very helpful to get this info.

Concerning peer grading, I’ve noticed that the MOOCs I’ve participated in (lurked around would be more accurate) have a significant number of ‘students’ who would qualify as TAs or, in some cases, instructors. These expert students seem to play a key role in the online discussions and often provide significant materials to the community. I’m wondering if you have a way to know how many of your peer evaluators are peers and how many are experts? I also wonder if these having the expert participants is sustainable, or if it’s just a startup curiosity phenomenon. This is related to your idea of a body of volunteer TA you mentioned in your post. I’m not sure that’s a sustainable model.

Again, many thanks for you insights. I’m intrigued.

-Bill Kitch

]]>