Stanford Makes Open Source Platform, Class2Go, Available to All; Launches MOOC on Platform Today

Are you on the hunt for a free, open source plat­form that will let you deliv­er free online cours­es? We’ve already told you about one option: Google Course Builder. Now here’s anoth­er: Stan­ford’s Class2Go. The plat­form is open, mean­ing that you can grab the code base for free and run it on your very own serv­er. Class2Go is also portable, giv­ing schools the abil­i­ty to move doc­u­ments and media to oth­er plat­forms if they so choose. The Stan­ford plat­form is inter­op­er­a­ble in the sense that it builds on exist­ing soft­ware (MySQL, Github, Piaz­za, MySQL, Python Djan­go, etc.). And, unlike some oth­er plat­forms, Class2Go gives edu­ca­tors imme­di­ate access to valu­able data, allow­ing them to make refine­ments to the edu­ca­tion­al expe­ri­ence.

Although still under devel­op­ment, Class2Go is ready for action. In the fall, Stan­ford offered two MOOCs through Class2Go (Com­put­er Net­work­ing and Solar Cells, Fuel Cells, & Bat­ter­ies). And it has a new MOOC get­ting start­ed today: Intro­duc­tion to Data­bas­es taught by Jen­nifer Widom, the Chair of Stan­ford’s famed Com­put­er Sci­ence depart­ment. (Watch her intro above.) You can take the course for free and learn all about data­base devel­op­ment. Or you can use it as an oppor­tu­ni­ty to see Class2Go up close.

In the com­ing months, Class2Go will be deployed at the Uni­ver­si­ty of West­ern Aus­tralia. If you’re tempt­ed to do the same at your own uni­ver­si­ty, you can get the Class2Go code here.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

A Com­plete list of MOOCs and Cer­tifi­cate Cours­es from Lead­ing Uni­ver­si­ties

650 Free Online Cours­es from Top Uni­ver­si­ties (a huge trove of video/audio lec­tures)

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 2 ) |

What Makes Us Tick? Free Stanford Biology Course by Robert Sapolsky Offers Answers

First thing you need to know: Before doing any­thing else, you should sim­ply click “play” and start watch­ing the video above. It does­n’t take long for Robert Sapol­sky, one of Stan­ford’s finest teach­ers, to pull you right into his course. Bet­ter to watch him than lis­ten to me.

Sec­ond thing to know: Sapol­sky is a MacArthur Fel­low, a world renowned neu­ro­bi­ol­o­gist, and an adept sci­ence writer best known for his book, Why Zebras Don’t Get Ulcers. Much of his research focus­es on the inter­play between the mind and body (how biol­o­gy affects the mind, and the mind, the body), and that rela­tion­ship lies at the heart of this course called “Human Behav­ioral Biol­o­gy.”

Now the third: Human Behav­ioral Biol­o­gy is avail­able on YouTube and iTunes for free. The course, con­sist­ing of 25 videos span­ning 36 hours, is oth­er­wise list­ed in the Biol­o­gy sec­tion of our big list of Free Online Cours­es (now 575 cours­es in total).

Ok, stop read­ing and just watch.…

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Robert Sapol­sky Breaks Down Depres­sion

Dopamine Jack­pot! Robert Sapol­sky on the Sci­ence of Plea­sure

Stanford “Election 2012” Course Draws to Close with a Post Mortem and Predictions

Worth a quick men­tion: Stan­ford’s Elec­tion 2012 course (pre­vi­ous­ly men­tioned here) wrapped up with a post-mortem. It starts with Steve Schmidt, a for­mer John McCain and George W Bush advi­sor, giv­ing a fair­ly blunt assess­ment of where the Repub­li­can Par­ty stands right now. (The video above starts with his assess­ment.) Then Tom Stey­er, an asset man­ag­er, phil­an­thropist and envi­ron­men­tal­ist active in Demo­c­rat pol­i­tics, explains why Oba­ma’s vic­to­ry is the prod­uct of trends (not nec­es­sar­i­ly healthy ones) already seen in Cal­i­for­nia pol­i­tics for the past decade. And Simon Jack­man, a Stan­ford prof immersed in polling, shows why data mat­ters and Nate Sil­ver (538 blog) got things right.

The rolling con­ver­sa­tion is mod­er­at­ed by David Kennedy (Pulitzer Prize-win­ning his­to­ri­an), Rob Reich, and Jim Stey­er. We’ve pro­vid­ed YouTube links to the remain­ing lec­tures below. You can also find them on iTunes. Plus we’ve  cat­a­logued Elec­tion 2012 in our col­lec­tion of 550 Free Online Cours­es.

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Ayn Rand’s Philosophy and Her Resurgence in 2012: A Quick Primer by Stanford Historian Jennifer Burns

The Col­bert Report Mon — Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Jen­nifer Burns
www.colbertnation.com
Col­bert Report Full Episodes Polit­i­cal Humor & Satire Blog Video Archive

In 2009, Stan­ford his­to­ri­an Jen­nifer Burns pub­lished God­dess of the Mar­ket: Ayn Rand and the Amer­i­can Right, which traced Rand’s intel­lec­tu­al devel­op­ment and her rela­tion­ship to the con­ser­v­a­tive and lib­er­tar­i­an move­ments. It was some­what for­tu­nate tim­ing. Indeed, from the first day Pres­i­dent Oba­ma took office, the defend­ers of pre-2008 cap­i­tal­ism began buy­ing Rand’s well-known book, Atlas Shrugged, by the dozens. Now, with Paul Ryan, a card-car­ry­ing Ran­di­an, get­ting the VP nod from the Grand Old Par­ty, Burns and her book are get­ting anoth­er moment back in the spot­light. They’re help­ing answer some very basic ques­tions peo­ple might have: How do you pro­nounce her first name? What is her phi­los­o­phy of objec­tivism all about? Why does the right adore some­one who mer­ci­less­ly mocked their core reli­gious beliefs? And, what would Rand have thought about a polit­i­cal fig­ure like Paul Ryan? Would the love have been rec­i­p­ro­cat­ed?

They’re all good ques­tions — ones that Burns recent­ly addressed on The Col­bert Report (above), in the Op-Ed pages of The New York Times, and now in the lat­est edi­tion of Stan­ford Mag­a­zine. We’ve extract­ed a few of the key Q & A’s:

First things first, I always stum­ble on her name. What is the cor­rect pro­nun­ci­a­tion of Ayn?

Here’s a good trick to remem­ber it. In keep­ing with her phi­los­o­phy of self­ish­ness, “Ayn” rhymes with the word “mine.”

So what does Rand’s phi­los­o­phy of objec­tivism boil down to?

Here is how Rand summed it up in ten words or less: “meta­physics: objec­tive real­i­ty; epis­te­mol­o­gy: rea­son; ethics: self-inter­est; pol­i­tics: cap­i­tal­ism.”

If I was going to break that down a lit­tle bit, meta­physics is objec­tive real­i­ty, which means we can only rely on our mind and on rea­son. It’s our only guide to thought and action. Epis­te­mol­o­gy, rea­son. The only way we can know any­thing is through the rea­son­ing mind. Ethics, self-inter­est. Rand claimed that self­ish­ness was a virtue. It was vir­tu­ous to pur­sue your own inter­ests and defend your own inter­ests. And pol­i­tics is cap­i­tal­ism because lais­sez-faire cap­i­tal­ism for her was the only sys­tem that allowed the indi­vid­ual to real­ize his or her full poten­tial and to keep the fruits of his or her labor and not be oblig­at­ed to oth­ers or pun­ished for suc­cess.

Was she con­cerned about the less for­tu­nate?

That was not a big part of her ethics. Her ethics were based on the indi­vid­ual and on the individual’s right to pur­sue his or her goals. The indi­vid­ual was not oblig­at­ed to oth­er peo­ple. If you chose, because of your own val­ues, to help oth­er peo­ple or to engage in char­i­ty, that was fine, but that did not make you a moral per­son. What made you a moral per­son is rely­ing on your­self, pur­su­ing your own inter­ests, and not being a bur­den on oth­ers.

Some of the char­ac­ters she depicts the most neg­a­tive­ly in her nov­els are peo­ple like social work­ers. She thought social work­ers were [about] the most evil peo­ple pos­si­ble because they made their lives on the mis­ery of oth­ers. Moral­i­ty and ethics, for her, had noth­ing to do with help­ing oth­er peo­ple.

Why has Ryan start­ed to mea­sure his sup­port for her?

She is very hard for politi­cians to embrace because not only is she not reli­gious, she’s antire­li­gious. The fact that Ryan gave Atlas Shrugged as a Christ­mas gift [to staffers] is a tremen­dous irony because Rand was a fire-breath­ing athe­ist. She did not believe in God. She called reli­gion a psy­cho­log­i­cal dis­or­der. She tru­ly believed you need­ed to use rea­son and log­ic and no faith what­so­ev­er.

So as Ryan’s star began to rise, he quick­ly began to back away from her for that very rea­son. And he made this sort of clum­sy sub­sti­tu­tion of St. Thomas Aquinas as his major inspi­ra­tion rather than Ayn Rand, although he’s on the record in mul­ti­ple places very recent­ly talk­ing about Rand and not talk­ing about Aquinas.

You can read the full inter­view here.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Ayn Rand Instructs John­ny Car­son on the Virtue of Self­ish­ness, 1967

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Do Yourself a Favor and Watch Stress: Portrait of a Killer (with Stanford Biologist Robert Sapolsky)

Intel­li­gence comes at a price. The human species, despite its tal­ent for solv­ing prob­lems, has man­aged over the mil­len­nia to turn one of its most basic sur­vival mechanisms–the stress response–against itself. “Essen­tial­ly,” says Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty neu­ro­bi­ol­o­gist Robert Sapol­sky, “we’ve evolved to be smart enough to make our­selves sick.”

In the 2008 Nation­al Geo­graph­ic doc­u­men­tary Stress: Por­trait of a Killer (above), Sapol­sky and fel­low sci­en­tists explain the dead­ly con­se­quences of pro­longed stress. “If you’re a nor­mal mam­mal,” Sapol­sky says, “what stress is about is three min­utes of scream­ing ter­ror on the savan­nah, after which either it’s over with or you’re over with.” Dur­ing those three min­utes of ter­ror the body responds to immi­nent dan­ger by deploy­ing stress hor­mones that stim­u­late the heart rate and blood pres­sure while inhibit­ing oth­er func­tions, like diges­tion, growth and repro­duc­tion.

The prob­lem is, human beings tend to secrete these hor­mones con­stant­ly in response to the pres­sures of every­day life. “If you turn on the stress response chron­i­cal­ly for pure­ly psy­cho­log­i­cal rea­sons,” Sapol­sky told Mark Shwartz in a 2007 inter­view for the Stan­ford News Ser­vice, “you increase your risk of adult onset dia­betes and high blood pres­sure. If you’re chron­i­cal­ly shut­ting down the diges­tive sys­tem, there’s a bunch of gas­troin­testi­nal dis­or­ders you’re more at risk for as well.”

Chron­ic stress has also been shown in sci­en­tif­ic stud­ies to dimin­ish brain cells need­ed for mem­o­ry and learn­ing, and to adverse­ly affect the way fat is dis­trib­uted in the body. It has even been shown to mea­sur­ably accel­er­ate the aging process in chro­mo­somes, a result that con­firms our intu­itive sense that peo­ple who live stress­ful lives grow old faster.

By study­ing baboon pop­u­la­tions in East Africa, Sapol­sky has found that indi­vid­u­als low­er down in the social hier­ar­chy suf­fer more stress, and con­se­quent­ly more stress-relat­ed health prob­lems, than dom­i­nant indi­vid­u­als. The same trend in human pop­u­la­tions was dis­cov­ered in the British White­hall Study. Peo­ple with more con­trol in work envi­ron­ments have low­er stress, and bet­ter health, than sub­or­di­nates.

Stress: Por­trait of a Killer is a fas­ci­nat­ing and impor­tant documentary–well worth the 52 min­utes it takes to watch.

Relat­ed con­tent:

Sapol­sky Breaks Down Depres­sion

Dopamine Jack­pot! Robert Sapol­sky on the Sci­ence of Plea­sure

Biol­o­gy That Makes Us Tick: Free Stan­ford Course by Robert Sapol­sky

Coursera Strikes Partnerships with 12 Universities, Raises More $$$, Announces a Long List of Courses

There’s an inter­est­ing com­pe­ti­tion shap­ing up between Udac­i­ty and Cours­era. Spe­cial­iz­ing in offer­ing Mas­sive­ly Open Online Cours­es (MOOCs), both ven­tures spun out of Stan­ford ear­li­er this year. But they did so in very dif­fer­ent ways. When Sebas­t­ian Thrun, Udac­i­ty’s founder, left his tenured posi­tion at Stan­ford, he kicked a lit­tle sand in the Uni­ver­si­ty’s face. And true to its name, Udac­i­ty (oh the audac­i­ty!) has posi­tioned itself as an out­sider. It isn’t part­ner­ing with estab­lished uni­ver­si­ties (so far as we know). Rather, it’s cre­at­ing cours­es under its own brand (Ă  la Khan Acad­e­my and The Teach­ing Com­pa­ny) and exert­ing top-down con­trol over the prod­uct (Ă  la Apple). It’s an approach that has obvi­ous upsides and down­sides.

Mean­while, Cours­era is head­ing down a very dif­fer­ent path. The founders (both Stan­ford pro­fes­sors) did­n’t snub their employ­er, and they’ve instead built a plat­form on which tra­di­tion­al uni­ver­si­ties can launch their own open cours­es. The down­side: the com­pa­ny does­n’t exer­cise great con­trol over the cours­es being built. The upside: they can lever­age the brands of great uni­ver­si­ties, and the many cours­es they’ll build. Case in point.…

Today, Cours­era is announc­ing that they’ve signed part­ner­ship agree­ments with 12 new uni­ver­si­ties: Geor­gia TechDuke Uni­ver­si­tyUni­ver­si­ty of Wash­ing­tonCal­techRice Uni­ver­si­ty,  Uni­ver­si­ty of Edin­burghUni­ver­si­ty of Toron­toEPFL — Lau­sanneJohns Hop­kins Uni­ver­si­ty (School of Pub­lic Health)UCSF, Uni­ver­si­ty of Vir­ginia, and the Uni­ver­si­ty of Illi­nois. That’s in addi­tion to their four exist­ing part­ners: Uni­ver­si­ty of Penn­syl­va­nia, Prince­ton, Uni­ver­si­ty of Michi­gan and Stan­ford.

There’s a lot of great insti­tu­tions enter­ing Cours­er­a’s sta­ble. And they’ll bring with them over 60 cours­es in the com­ing months. (Find a com­plete list of cours­es below the jump.) We’ll keep you post­ed on how Cours­era and Udac­i­ty evolve, and, in the com­ing weeks, we’ll care­ful­ly test dri­ve their cours­es and let you know the pros and cons of each. Stay tuned for more from the bat­tle of the MOOCs.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Cours­era Adds Human­i­ties Cours­es, Rais­es $16 Mil­lion, Strikes Deal with 3 Uni­ver­si­ties

Har­vard and MIT Cre­ate EDX to Offer Free Online Cours­es World­wide

Udac­i­ty to Launch 5 New Cours­es, from Sta­tis­tics to Physics. Shoot­ing for Largest Online Class Ever.

Free Online Cer­tifi­cate Cours­es from Great Uni­ver­si­ties: A Com­plete List

(more…)

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Leonard Susskind, Father of String Theory, Warmly Remembers His Friend, Richard Feynman

Leonard Susskind — he’s the father of String The­o­ry, some­one who won the black hole wars with Stephen Hawk­ing, and a Stan­ford pro­fes­sor who likes to bring physics to the broad­er pub­lic. (Find his 6‑course intro­duc­tion to Mod­ern The­o­ret­i­cal Physics in the Physics sec­tion of our col­lec­tion of Free Online Cours­es.) Last year, Susskind head­ed to Cal­Tech to talk about Richard Feyn­man. Of course, he’s the late, great physi­cist who won the Nobel Prize for his work on Quan­tum Elec­tro­dy­nam­ics (find his pub­lic lec­tures on that here). He also shared Susskind’s enthu­si­asm for pop­u­lar­iz­ing sci­ence, cre­at­ing mem­o­rable shows like Fun to Imag­ine, a tele­vi­sion series for the BBC, and The Plea­sure of Find­ing Things Out. In this warm talk, Susskind remem­bers his men­tor and friend, a com­plex per­son few got to know very well. Feyn­man was many things — a great sci­en­tist, a show­man, a philoso­pher, drum­mer, teacher, a bit of an ego­tist who could co-exist with oth­er big egos, and much more.

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Play Caesar: Travel Ancient Rome with Stanford’s Interactive Map

Schol­ars of ancient his­to­ry and IT experts at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty have col­lab­o­rat­ed to cre­ate a nov­el way to study Ancient Rome. ORBIS, a geospa­tial net­work mod­el, allows vis­i­tors to expe­ri­ence the strat­e­gy behind trav­el in antiq­ui­ty. (Find a handy tuto­r­i­al for using the sys­tem on the Web and YouTube). The ORBIS map includes about 750 most­ly urban set­tle­ments of the Roman peri­od. Users of the mod­el can select a point of ori­gin and des­ti­na­tion for a trip and then choose from a num­ber of options to deter­mine either the cheap­est, fastest or short­est route. Select riv­er or  open sea trans­port for the cheap­est route. Pick road trav­el by pack ani­mal or wag­on for the short­est, but most expen­sive, trip. In cre­at­ing ORBIS, his­to­ri­ans used ancient maps and records along with mod­ern-day weath­er infor­ma­tion and results from exper­i­ments sail­ing in ancient-style ships to cal­cu­late the trav­el con­di­tions of 2,000 years ago.

Aside from the site’s inter­ac­tiv­i­ty, there’s enough dis­cus­sion in ORBIS about ancient Roman trans­port to sat­is­fy the biggest his­to­ry buff but the real fun is in explor­ing how peo­ple and goods were moved across the empire. Cities on the edge of the empire, for exam­ple, were more expen­sive to trans­port to, even if they weren’t that far away. All trips vary in time and cost, how­ev­er, depend­ing upon the time of year and mode of trav­el. The fastest route to deliv­er wheat from Cartha­go (mod­ern-day Tunisia) to Lon­dini­um (Lon­don) would take more than 27 days under the best trav­el con­di­tions (dur­ing July). Car­go would move across the Mediter­ranean by open sea, across south­west­ern France by river­boat and along the coast to south­east­ern Eng­land. The cost? A lit­tle less than 8 dinarii per kilo­gram of wheat using a don­key for land trans­port. Com­pare that to oth­er routes that elim­i­nate the open sea dur­ing win­ter months, or road trav­el to save mon­ey, and you’re close to under­stand­ing why it was no pic­nic rul­ing the Roman Empire.

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast
Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.