Me, MOOC and St. Paul

A couple of months ago I signed up for a MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) offered by the Harvard Divinity School and taught by Laura S. Nasrallah, Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity.

I was enthralled, pulled in, captivated. From the syllabus

The letters of Paul are the earliest texts in the Christian scriptures, written by a Jew at a time when the word “Christian” hadn’t yet been coined. What is the religious and political context into which they emerged? How were they first interpreted? How and why do they make such an enormous impact in Christian communities and in politics today?

Nasrallah's scholarly passion comes through again and again especially in the numerous videos in the class. The introductory video is a good example.

I will not describe the full course. You may still visit the archived portions of the course. I want to stress the value of the MOOC as a learning platform and from my point of view a learning platform perfectly suited for students interested in a topic but not seeking academic certification (A certificate is available but that did not concern me).

The obvious target I see are those of us who seek exposure to topics, presentations by first-rate faculty, and a community of like-minded students.

Community needs comment. According to the Harvard Crimson 28,000 students from 183 countries signed up for the MOOC course. My impression is that far few than 28,000 people took full advantage of what the Crimson described as

The course consists of video lectures, annotation assignments, online discussions, and other short videos that help students gain a glimpse into the historical world Paul occupied and the controversies, both ancient and new, that surround his letters.

What I realized is that MOOCs, seen as a way to push education to the world, to those students who need access to reliable courses of study, are also a perfect vehicle for those who no longer need "credit" for participation. Well-produced MOOC classes make everyone a learner, including those such as myself who want to pursue topics for the pleasure of learning. I was completely engrossed and satisfied.

Pannapacker at MLA: Digital Humanities Triumphant? - Brainstorm - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Pannapacker at MLA: Digital Humanities Triumphant? - Brainstorm - The Chronicle of Higher Education: "I wouldn’t worry about community colleges. Although two-year schools sometimes show little interest in theory, they have been ahead of the rest of us in using new technologies, at least in pedagogy."

That is a comment by Henry_Adams on Pannapacker's post in the Chronicle. The comment is right on target. I made the same observation when I was directing a tech center for faculty (some years ago--during that fuzzy time between Web 1 and Web 2). The two-year faculty had pedagogical question but mostly they had questions about how to stretch capabilities of common software--from presentation media to web work. As Blackboard made its appearance at the four-year campus, the community college regulars asked for accounts. I gave permission and even assisted in moving content from their WebCT LMS to our Blackboard system.

The reasons? I find them embedded in the post and the comments. The community college faculty members had teaching as their primary assignment and seemed to like the situation. While my local faculty members found themselves tied to the triad of professional responsibilities, and teaching ranked low at most levels of faculty evaluation, the community college faculty members knew that their evaluations would be linked to good teaching.

However, I do not think that all the two-year faculty members were after points in the academic game. Most of my contacts were with people who liked technology and believed that technology could be an aid in their profession. They were professional teachers.

What I did not do then was to try to find our of our community college transfer students if they brought superior technology skills to our campus--compared to our four-year students. Having skills does not predict student preparedness, but having tech skills that might be higher than our regular junior students does suggest good preparation.

Much of this has changed in recent years. The four-year "mission statement writers" finally discovered that students needed a grounding in those tech skills demanded by the employment market and so insisted that professors include tech skills as part of the expectation for students enrolled in our classes.

And that is the saddest part. The community college experience gave students a grounding in technology as a communication aid. I fear that my four-year institution's demand for tech skills is more directed towards knowing spreadsheets and presentation software and whatever other skills of the moment attach to a major. As most of us interested in a deeper view of technology know, the up-to-date skills of the classroom will be not-so-useful in the world of work.

I find satisfaction with the work I did several years ago. I am also grateful for the examples I saw among community college teachers. Those examples remain an inspiration.