In Online Ed Content Is No Longer King - Cohorts Are - Literature Notes

Last updated Aug 15, 2023

See Sources/In Online Ed Content Is No Longer King - Cohorts Are - Essay #literaturenotes

• We are currently in a ==post-content age==.
• In the past, educational content was scarce. This was a USP of universities & accelerators.
• Now, content is cheap and abundant (i.e. Youtube, newsletters, blogs, social media).
  • Tons of alternative education programs (e.g. accelerators, incubators, low-cost/free online courses) have also emerged.
• Because of this abundance, it’s been difficult for instructors to make a living from their expertise.
• On the other hand, most learners are worse off for all this abundance, because ==Cards/More access does not translate to more engagement==.
• Self-directed programs (i.e. workout programs, diet plans, online courses) rely on ==learners’ willpower & motivation== to stick through a course. This doesn’t always work out; in fact, MOOC completion rate is just 3 to 6 percent. Cards/Willpower and motivation is finite
• Difference between cohort-based courses and MOOCs:
  • engaging and real-time v.s. just self-paced
    • fixed start and end date
  • community-driven, active learning v.s. solo, passive consumption
    • social contract = cohort

• MOOCs may provide more access to creators and learners, but they don’t help with ==student transformation.==
  • Cards/The goal of education is transformation
• Why was this pledge naive?
  • MOOCs are asynchronous and self-paced.
  • MOOCs’ low (or no) cost colors the perception of quality.
  • MOOCs convey “knowledge transfer,” but not necessarily higher-order skills.
    • Cards/Higher-order skills: those that require analysis, evaluation, synthesis, judgement, and creativity
      • Cards/Critical thinking and skill development are not mutually exclusive
    • E.G. Learning how to use Excel v.s. learning how to segmnt data strategicially to look for patterns and arrive at a recommendation
• Summary:
  • Dominant learning modality for MOOC platforms: passive content consumption
    • no interaction
    • no real community
    • no time constraint
  • Result: tiny percentage of learners who follow through

• While this format takes more effort + is more prone to mistakes, this allows students to learn more
• Versus just listening to a lecture, no matter how much of a star the lecturer is

• CBCs also bring the network beneits of startup accelerators to a wider market
• The value in accelerators isn’t just content; it’s also ==community==
  • Miscellaneous Notes/Literature Notes/Rosieland - Literature Notes

• Cooperative Learning by Spencer Kagan:
  • The single most powerful approach to comprehension and retention is Cards/Interactive processing, which occurs when “students ==engage in interaction with partners or teammates== over the content".
  • Why is this approach so powerful?
    • Classroom discussions and debates produce new ideas and points of view
    • This back-and-forth holds student attention in a way that no lecture can
• Cohort-based courses have more accountability because they’re bi-directional. This indicates:
  • Exchange of knowledge between instructor and students
  • Students with fellow students
  • ==It’s a dialogue, not a static lecture.== See Cards/The State Change Method

• Cards/Interleaving learning: where instructors mix different topics, ideas, and activities together during study, forcing students to intentionally switch between them rather than focusing on a single subject
  • This can result in better learning outcomes for students
  • E.G. BJJ athletes alternates practice between chokes, locks, escapes, and take-downs
  • CBCs are inherently about interleaving; they give students a chance to engage in diferent modalities — breakouts, role-playing, discussions, debates — with the instructor, coaches, and each other.

• Continuing education and adult learning must be ==compelling and carrot-driven==, not stick-driven
  • versus traditional education, which forces students to learn
  • CBCs design can also be inspired by institutions outside education, which are “sticky”
    • E.G. military, dance-a-thons, Crossfit, cults
• Why would people pay more for a CBC v.s. an MOOC?
• CBCs self-select for learners who are willing to (and can) pay a premium for the ==perceived quality of content and follow-through.==
  • Those who need accountability + urgency, which come from time constraints & a peer group

• It’s hard for instructors to monetize their expertise, especially if they don’t have existing followings/networks
• Traditional social platforms create a divison between ==activities for monetization and community building.==
  • Because of this, most creators give away valuable content, but don’t have enough volume to make a living from advertising alone
• CBCs help creators monetize their expertise directly, and without requiring volume.
  • Not just for classic educators, but also “knowledge” influencers

• New quadrant of creator monetization:
  • Instructors can make a healthy amount of money
  • Creators get more leverage with a productized offering
  • Consumers get more payoff, creators get higher monetization potential and scalability