<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Udacity Talks A Huge Game	</title>
	<atom:link href="/2012/udacity-talks-a-huge-game/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>/2012/udacity-talks-a-huge-game/</link>
	<description>less helpful</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2012 03:49:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Franklin Chen		</title>
		<link>/2012/udacity-talks-a-huge-game/#comment-414968</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Franklin Chen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:42:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=13213#comment-414968</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve taken or tried out the various free online Stanford, Coursera, Udacity courses, and I&#039;ve also taken actual undergrad and grad courses at Carnegie Mellon. I don&#039;t think it&#039;s possible to compare the experiences in a simplistic way.

I believe there really is a lot of time waste in non-online classes, in my experience. There is time waste in the sense of students getting bored when they could just fast-forward, time waste when they are confused but the lecture must go on. There is time waste in trying to cover too many topics, rather than focusing on what is most important (by some deliberate definition of &quot;important&quot;).

And of course, Thrun is also exaggerating. These online courses have tended to avoid deep coverage of theoretical foundations. That has been an interesting compromise, but I can&#039;t help feeling that there should be some attempt at discussing those (perhaps in optional lectures and assignments) rather than covering the bare minimum.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve taken or tried out the various free online Stanford, Coursera, Udacity courses, and I&#8217;ve also taken actual undergrad and grad courses at Carnegie Mellon. I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s possible to compare the experiences in a simplistic way.</p>
<p>I believe there really is a lot of time waste in non-online classes, in my experience. There is time waste in the sense of students getting bored when they could just fast-forward, time waste when they are confused but the lecture must go on. There is time waste in trying to cover too many topics, rather than focusing on what is most important (by some deliberate definition of &#8220;important&#8221;).</p>
<p>And of course, Thrun is also exaggerating. These online courses have tended to avoid deep coverage of theoretical foundations. That has been an interesting compromise, but I can&#8217;t help feeling that there should be some attempt at discussing those (perhaps in optional lectures and assignments) rather than covering the bare minimum.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
