Par for the course. Pioneers, as they say, are the ones with arrows on their backs. The "I told you so" crowd are cowards who would never stick their necks out to try anything new. That, or they have ulterior motives such as job security or income protection.

The truth is online education is here to stay and it will get better with time. It will, eventually, replace big chunks out of traditional education. Probably not all.

My son is currently going through MIT's 6.00.1x Intro to Computer Science and Programming on edX. He is 14 and in High School. Watching him progress from mechanically typing conditional statements to having his mind opened to computational thinking has been an amazing experience. Yes, this course is pushing him around and challenging him in big ways. It isn't easy.

From what I've seen, there are only two ways one could succeed with these kinds of courses: self motivation or external support (or both). In our case he has all of my support. I am actually taking the class alongside him so I can see what and how they are teaching in order to help him out.

Motivation is a huge factor. He is a member of the local FRC robotics team and was involved in FLL before that.

We work on every problem set in a collaborative manner, with me guiding rather than providing solutions as well as simply being there to expand on topics that are not covered to a great depth (pointers comes to mind). Lately I've been doing a lot more watching than guiding as he has definitely begun to think like a programmer and is solving most every problem without external help.

For me it's been an interesting review of topics I have not touched in years. Recursion, for example, is something I haven't touched in quite some time as I have not run into problems and systems that could justify the resources required when using these techniques. Playing with recursion in an academic setting and helping my son learn the concept was lots of fun.

I can absolutely see that a course such as 6.00.1x would be impossible to complete for a kid without the support of a parent. Not sure if that parent has to have domain knowledge or not. I can't be a good judge this because I obviously do and all of our conversations have taken advantage of this.

I can also see the difficulties in entering into some of these courses without the necessary preparation. Students who went through school by mechanically doing math without really understanding math tend to not do well on higher level courses regardless of whether these courses are online or in person.

There's also the case of the working engineer who might need to brush-up on skills before attempting a class. Using myself as an example, I have not used statistics in any formal way in a long time. If I wanted to take an online ML class I'd have to spend an amount of time reviewing statistics and probably a couple of other areas in Calculus.

In this sense this is where, perhaps, MOOC's do it wrong. Conventional live courses go through a qualification phase in order to ensure that the "herd" has reasonably uniform and adequate capabilities. The beauty of MOOC's is that anyone can jump in. And that's absolutely fantastic. What might be lacking is a departure from a linear model of teaching. Why can't I enroll in that ML class and, when and as required, take off in a branch and review statistics to then come back and "merge" into the main thread of the class. Perhaps this non-linear approach is what is missing.

All MOOC's are pretty much online versions of some kind of a traditional live class. Lectures, problems, homework, tests. All presented in a linear timescale and on a similarly linear schedule. A learning system that is truly after the acquisition of knowledge must work differently. It must take a highly interactive approach in which the teaching system is flexible enough to, effectively, deliver curriculum that is customized to the needs of each and every person.

This is a challenge. We have to be glad there are people like Thurn who are willing to stick their necks out, try, fail and try again. The critics are usually people who will never compromise their station in life to try and drive progress. They don't want arrows in their backs. Far easier to shoot them at pioneers, eventually you hit one or two of them and for a brief moment in time you might actually sound like you know what you are talking about. Reality, however, is quite different.

What I would tell Thurn is: Don't give up. Don't exit the segment. Try to figure out how to change the approach and make it work.