Re:Online classes are not worth cost of full tuition
by cylentwolf on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @10:48AM
(#23917608)
I think a real time ranking system for students at a university that is visible by all is just going to be targeted for greedy or ambitious people looking to convert it into jobs or money.
If I am in the top 10 percent of the rankings in Rocket League sure I can make a few grand streaming, but if I am in the top 10 percent of rankings at a school I can get a better job than the rest. What are the bottom 90 percent's motivation for helping people improve at that point?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Online classes are not worth cost of full tuition
by Dwolb on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @11:46AM
(#23918238)
> What are the bottom 90 percent's motivation for helping people improve at that point?
I think that's a great point but one that the Rocket League community somehow solves.
Re:Online classes are not worth cost of full tuition
by CrazyStat on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @12:12PM
(#23918546)
With very few exceptions, everyone who plays Rocket League is playing it because they find it intrinsically rewarding. When I taught intro stats I'd guess less than 2% of my students were studying stats because they found it intrinsically rewarding. Even when you get into upper level classes, even among graduate students, the percentage who are taking a class for the intrinsic reward rarely approaches 100%.
Trying to make education more like Rocket League, ignoring the wildly divergent motivations of the people involved, is a fool's errand.
Re:Online classes are not worth cost of full tuition
by Dwolb on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @02:44PM
(#23920224)
But where does intrinsic motivation come from?
What are the objective differences between getting better at Rocket League and getting better at stats?
Agreed if we don't understand or create a basic framework, trying to put lipstick on a pig and making stats look like Rocket League is dumb.