[arghbleargh]

It definitely seems true, in my experience, that one-on-one tutoring achieves educational outcomes far superior to traditional classroom learning. However, I am wary about the ability of technology to scale this up. One-on-one tutoring is more than just providing a customized curriculum and the expertise to answer any questions the student has.

A huge part of learning effectively is developing the right habits. The startups in the article are not really focusing on that, probably because it's the type of thing that people usually learn indirectly through social interactions (e.g. a child emulating their parent). I also believe much of the value of a tutor lies in the social connection with the student, providing them with someone to model their learning habits after as well as someone to keep them focused and motivated.

I think this social aspect of teaching is very hard to capture with technology, sort of like how it's hard to learn a language without living in a country where everyone speaks it. Technology can help, but I feel it will be more like a 0.2 sigma improvement rather than 2 sigma.

[choxi]

I agree that learning habits are important for effective education, but online programs can help students develop those habits better and more consistently than in-person programs can. For example, online programs are much more conducive to gamification. Gamification is essentially a method of shaping user habits into something productive -- it's awkward to do offline but feels natural in an online program.

Our program includes screencasts/videos and pair programming sessions over screenshare, and while it's not exactly the same as pairing in person it does a reasonable job of surfacing how an instructor/mentor thinks to provide queues for social modeling to students. Most people haven't met Richard Feynman, but if you watch enough of his YouTube videos you certainly get a sense for how he thinks and approaches problems.

[intended]

No you are right. It's going to be a 0.1 sigma change. It's one of the reasons why most plans to disrupt teaching were going to fail eventually.

What you described is the inherent road block in education/learning. It's as dependent on the state of the student as it is on the ability of the teacher.

[jacinda]

That is, of course, unless they can crack the (much more difficult) problem of having a machine mimic human interaction to such a degree that the learner develops an emotional connection to the machine.