Massive Weapons Of Instruction?
How to turn a massively open online course (MOOC) with a highly informative content into a highly desirable hiring qualification?
Not a day goes by without people fearing some kind of war that is looming, and everybody has his own scenario. North Korea and its nuclear missiles, or a war opposing China and the US, etc. At a time when nationalisms are exacerbated and walls are rising, social networks are filled to the brim with despair (we’ve all heard of that health care price tag in the US. Wanna help on twitter? Just give money to sick patients, or crash courses on how to become a billionaire in two weeks). Wanting to educate people, without distinction of origin, occupation, income, country, sounds like utopia. As an attempt to solve the depletion of natural resources and the bankrupt technology, the best American universities are launching online open-access and free-of-charge courses, in the cutting-edge fields of computer science, robotics and biology. Make the world a better place, out of fear. Fear that humanity might die in its cradle (Earth), no time left for space conquest. The US would be left with nothing to hype about on twitter (and China on Weibo). The end of the (e-)world.
In the US and Europe, money is not being circulated, middle class is losing ground. In Asia, middle class is expanding (and even booming), but this growth effort needs to be sustained and more evenly distributed and hence, Harvard, Stanford, MIT and others dream of creating the Facebook of knowledge. Trying to build a massive weapon of instruction with the army joining on Line (Japan), WeChat and Weibo (China), WhatsApp, Twitter (USA) … So many wanted to give it a try. This MOOC business started after Steve Jobs died.
My own experience is hardly relevant here. In a nutshell: a former ballet student, a teacher in middle and high school, an executive assistant in conglomerates, now employed in logistics and real estate (Europe and Asia), I got interested in MOOCs because in spite of career changes, writing has always been a constant factor in my life. By combining a university background from the Sorbonne, Paris (literature, linguistics, pedagogy) and digital certificates in techno-scientific fields, I can now have fun writing science-fiction or techno-medical thrillers and, why not, try to sell them to movie production companies based in Asia. So earning myself MOOC certificates has to do with writing, fun and creativity; no job hunt. Remembering what I have learned during my post-graduate teacher training (German language) at La Sorbonne, here are a few observations about my MOOC learning experience:
- MITx MOOC on EdX, by Eric Lander, Professor of Genetics at MIT (Boston, USA), 7.00x, Introduction to Biology, is a masterpiece of pedagogy. As a part-time German teacher, taking unpaid leave, I was able to obtain the following MOOC certificates: first off, MITxBio 7.00x, then 7.QBWx, followed by 7.28.1x-2x. Currently, I am trying to get ready for 7.28.3x. My biology holds up to some vague memories from middle-school, and my best grade ever in mathematics, obtained on French Baccalaureate exam day: 7/20, economics section. So you see, science is not exactly my strong suit. It is safe to assume that 7.00x allowed me to be successful when trying for other MITx MOOC certificates. What is so special about this course? The multiplicity of perspectives. To be honest: Lander’s course is an MIT formatted course, and with the exception of the joke at the beginning — “You will learn how to make hydrogen bonds; not bombs”), they’ve set the bar high. I kept thinking that I would have to give up, sooner or later. The beginning, as well as when I was getting halfway through, were the hardest part. On a couple of opportunities, I got rescued by tutorial videos. Those are short videos, made by MIT students, casting new light on the course material. On average, we got four of these videos per week. Sometimes they were showing lab action. I remember one, particularly helpful for me, trying to explain a biochemical reaction (pathways), fancying biochemical components as human characters in some kind of theatre piece. A few students were playing the characters. If you are not an MIT formatted student, that kind of stuff will do the job. The rest was only hard work and taking tons of notes (I’m a 49-year-old old-school person: if I don’t write, I don’t learn). The plurality of perspectives they offered, even more than the coherent pedagogical progression, was what allowed me to obtain a correct score.
2. How about the much-hyped fusion between computer programming and biology? If you want the real-life version of it, go for 7.QBWx MOOC course: Quantitative Biology Workshop. Thanks to my husband, an engineer in computer science, I got help for the programming part of this course (python, R stats). Also, that PlayGrounds app by Apple, teaching kids to code in Swift (and actually teaching them the basics of any computer programming language), is a great place to start learning how to code. I highly recommend this app made by Apple (on iPad only). Having earned myself a digital diploma for the first edition of 7.QBWx, I can tell you that week 5, programming in Python computer language and biology course by Eric Lander, was… tough. Only a happy few survived. Now, this course is available for students wishing to progress at their own pace. Great idea, because that week 5 of 7.QBWx first edition was a python swallowing a whole human (the unfortunate MOOC student).
3. Regarding MOOC courses in the 7.28x series (part 1, 2 and 3): in order to reach a more diverse population, no costly or time-consuming modifications are needed. Instead, how about a better distribution of the workload? Beware of the final week in 7.28.1x and 7.28.2x! You will have to make a one-month-full-time workload fit in just one week. So even if you earned yourself a passing grade before reaching final week of both MOOCs, you could be left with a bitter aftertaste. The other thing would be: please add the 7.00x “tutorials”, these short videos made by MIT students, presenting the course content from a different perspective. My point of view is likely to be biased, because to earn a passing grade for each of the 7.28x certificates, I used my skills in pedagogy (not everyone has had this training). I ended up following this Professor’s courses like I would read books from my favorite author. This is great for me, as I grew very fond of Prof. Stephen P. Bell, so now I can say I gained a fairly good understanding of Prof. Bell’s vision of microbiology. Others might say they want to experience more pluralistic representation. But at the moment, e-empathy with Prof. Bell is what you really need to earn yourself 7.28x certificates. In my experience, online discussions with other MOOC students and online help by the 7.28x dream team cannot replace the tutorial videos by MIT students (like the ones in 7.00x).
You might think of that digital-diplomas-and-MOOCs-in-biology stuff as something abstract, failing to translate into real-world solutions. However, a few weeks ago, I was able to help save someone’s life thanks to my virtual or e-knowledge of biology.
In case or resistant (lung) infection, seek help from the microbiome, not from the petri dish.
Thanks to my twitter network related to MITxBio MOOC courses, and to advanced microbiome sequencing, my uncle (a retired surgeon), who was lying in a coma at George Pompidou European hospital in Paris a couple of months ago, the antibiotic resistant infection that was making his life prognosis incertain was successfully treated. In case or resistant (lung) infection, seek help from the microbiome, not from the petri dish.
A resistant lung infection can kill within a few days, especially a frail elderly person (82 yo) waking up from a coma due to postoperative complications (colon and part of the small intestine were removed, suffered two strokes in the recent past, and as a consequence, taking anticoagulant or blood-thinner treatment). Before his coma, he was in a clinic in Paris (hip surgery). Then the complications happened (necrosis of colon)… For lung infection, there is a recent protocol based on genomics which consists in sending samples to a laboratory (Pasteur, Lyon, Rennes, Lille) to analyse the DNA of bacteria to determine what they are resistant to or sensitive to. This could not be done by the European Hospital Georges Pompidou (they probably do not have the lab to do it). This examination is called: the pulmonary microbiome, which would have revealed which bacteria were present in the lungs, and which genes of resistance, for a better choice of antibiotic. The microbiome test is a DNA (genetic) sequencing test of all the bugs that live in our stomach or in our lungs (or genital tract, skin surface, mouth, ears … etc). When we identify bacteria in this way, we can then, in a second “bioinformatic” round, look for the antibiotic resistance genes known in these bacteria. (If there are resistant bacteria, they adapt). And so, choose the right antibiotic accordingly. With this big-data DNA (lots of DNA sequencing data), what can be done? The microbiome test identifies bacteria that are difficult to grow, and that traditional microbiology cannot identify. In case of resistant (lung) infection, seek help from the microbiome, not from the petri dish!
However in the case of my uncle, they performed a DNA/RNA probe (immediate and culture) that covered pretty much everything. This may sound cryptic. So I asked a friend of mine, a geneticist, Prof. Patrick Merel (startup Portable Genomics in San Diego), if he could explain what had been done. His answer:
“From what I understand, they had to do a molecular test (molecular hybridisation) to detect non-culturable bacteria. Complementary DNA fragments (probes) with those of said bacteria are being used (think of it as a fishing party).
To identify bacteria, one often seeks to identify their RNA16S. In this case of research by molecular hybridisation, RNA probes are used.
Even if it’s less complete than a microbiome, it’s good enough, when you do not have access to NGS (next generation sequencing).”
Special thanks to French biologist Patrick Merel, from Bordeaux, for his expertise. Translating molecular jargon for the broad public seems to be a job in demand. Genomics (and « microbiomics » I guess) can also make the difference between life and death, not only fill in the gaps in Hollywood dystopian fictions (though I’m a Gattaca fan)… If we cannot find people to do the job (translate cryptic stuff for patients and people around those patients), I guess the population in general will go on thinking genetics is bad for you: police surveillance, eugenism, selling my genetic data without my consent to insurance companies, CRISPRing people (and stuff) against their own will, etc.
Can scalability occur for the MOOC niche?
To turn a massively open online course (MOOC) with a highly informative content into a highly desirable hiring qualification, we need to understand that the diversity of the general public is here to stay. A former middle-school teacher in German language won’t turn into a Stanford data scientist and microbiologist just for the duration of one MOOC. Multiplying online tutorials by students in a MOOC course is a cost and time efficient way of enabling the best universities in the world to reach a wider audience. At the moment, MOOCs are primarily a niche market, not a mass consumer product. MIT’s Prof. Eric Lander, in « Introduction to biology: the secret of life » (7.00x, platform: EdX), was able to bring together people of different races, classes, levels of education and cultures. So the answer to that question is: yes, scalability can occur for the MOOC niche. We just need to understand the recipe for success.
Finally, a crazy and insane suggestion: how about a tutorial by sci-fi authors in biology MOOCs? The interviews could be made by the MITx Biology pedagogical dream team, or we could have short segments of video showing rock-star sci-fi writer in China Liu Cixin reacting to the MOOC couse content… I was attending Beijing’s science-fiction convention last winter. A script writer (« Life: Unknown Origin » horror science-fiction, director Daniel Espinosa, 2017) expressed his frustration in reaction to the negative comment made by a scientist about the movie, which he found « not inspiring at all »:
« — Instead of just spouting rhetoric on how we should write sci-fi, they’d better express and address people’s concerns, or they will stay forever without any connection to things beyond their little empire. » As a remedy to this, European physician and futurist Berci Mesko said he was writing sci-fi (stay tuned for more).
There were few people in this small adjoining conference room, and my Mandarin Chinese is not so good, but an exciting debate ensued. Striking a balance between populism and pure science is a thorny issue. Keynote speaker Liu Cixin (« The Three Body Problem ») said that we need more science-fiction writers in China. To me, this sounds very much like Prof. Eric Lander at MIT saying that people need to understand the science of genomics and CRISPR and precision medicine because it is everywhere: on TV, in the press. One last thing: those MITx MOOCs on EdX are the best hype filter I know of.
Catherine Coste, MITx 7.00x, 7.QBWx, 7.28.1x and 7.28.2x certified
