Free MEd Course cost
Thank you for the free course, NT156. However, the Requirements would cost me over $1000 mainly because many of them are only available as part of a much larger package. If a course requires certain resources, they should be made available for individual purchase.
This is similar to being given a "free" St Bernard puppy 
Comments
-
The Mobile Ed courses are all this way- even if their free- cost $600- 100 to make them fully functional
0 -
I've watched a number of courses without doing the associated readings, and I still got quite a bit of value from them. (a future version of the Courses Tool may even let you turn off some or all of the readings so that they don't even show up)
David Mitchell
Development Lead
Faithlife0 -
David Mitchell said:
I've watched a number of courses without doing the associated readings
Then, they should not be labeled "Requirements". I understand the different between "Suggested Reading" and "See Also" in the MEd Courses, but the terminology in the course description is misleading and incorrect. Those resources are not "Requirements".
To me, it is also poor—maybe even less than smart—marketing. If I am looking to purchase a course and see "Requirements" totaling several hundred dollars—in addition to the cost of the course itself—I may pass.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:David Mitchell said:
I've watched a number of courses without doing the associated readings
To me, it is also poor—maybe even less than smart—marketing. If I am looking to purchase a course and see "Requirements" totaling several hundred dollars—in addition to the cost of the course itself—I may pass.
I could not agree more. I think the term "suggested reading" or "supplemental reading" would be much better (although I do concede that it should be required reading, because the course isn't technically a completed course without reading the content that the course developers included in the curriculum - its just an issue of terminology, not content), and would reduce some hesitation that may exist with a potential mobile ad consumers.
Myke Harbuck
Lead Pastor, www.ByronCity.Church
Adjunct Professor, Georgia Military College0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Then, they should not be labeled "Requirements". I understand the different between "Suggested Reading" and "See Also" in the MEd Courses, but the terminology in the course description is misleading and incorrect. Those resources are not "Requirements".
I would like the "suggested readings" and "see also" listed on the product page with the accompanying asterisk for not owned resources. I would like them divided like this in the plan details of the courses.
It would be helpful to see also the number of times they are referenced in the course.
All of this data seems available in the documents on the faithlife group page.
0 -
Damian McGrath said:Jack Caviness said:
Then, they should not be labeled "Requirements". I understand the different between "Suggested Reading" and "See Also" in the MEd Courses, but the terminology in the course description is misleading and incorrect. Those resources are not "Requirements".
I would like the "suggested readings" and "see also" listed on the product page with the accompanying asterisk for not owned resources. I would like them divided like this in the plan details of the courses.
It would be helpful to see also the number of times they are referenced in the course.
All of this data seems available in the documents on the faithlife group page.
Thank you for completing the thought I started—but left unfinished—and for the additional recommendations.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Then, they should not be labeled "Requirements". I understand the different between "Suggested Reading" and "See Also" in the MEd Courses, but the terminology in the course description is misleading and incorrect. Those resources are not "Requirements".David Mitchell said:I've watched a number of courses without doing the associated readings
I've taken a number of postsecondary courses over the years without doing some or all of the Required Reading, typically not to any meaningful detriment to my learning (or final mark). At the same time, plenty of the Required Reading that I have in fact done contributed very little to my learning and even less to my final mark. Some Required Reading is worth doing, some isn't, and the percentage of each varies dramatically by course. I have never had any particular reason to expect different from MEd, especially when one doesn't have to do assignments, which is almost the only reason why Required Reading is ever actually required to succeed in any course whatsoever.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
SineNomine said:
I've taken a number of postsecondary courses over the years without doing some or all of the Required Reading, typically not to any meaningful detriment to my learning (or final mark).
Maybe so, but that was not my point in this thread. To call certain resources "Requirements" and then taking them available only as part of a large package is not good marketing. They are not required for the course, and they are not called requirements within the course. The terminology should be consistent.
To someone who does not know about "Suggested Reading" and "See Also", it appears that the "free" course will actually cost several hundred dollars to complete. To replay that Requirements are not actually required misses the point.
0 -
I have a dumb question. When a Mobile Ed course is included in a base package, have the packages been structured so that they include all of the required resources for the course? That would seem like a natural thing to do in order for the base package to really hang together.
0 -
You can buy the resources individually already.
0 -
Jack, your puppy note made me chuckle out loud...thanks for that this morning.
0 -
Joe Griffin said:
You can buy the resources individually already.
Well, sure. My question was a bit different. Let's say I buy Standard Gold in part because that base package includes Mobile Ed: CM328 Preaching the Psalms, and Standard Silver does not. I would find it a source of frustration if I found that the package didn't also include the resources I needed to actually use the course. Basically, I'm trying to understand how meaningful it is that the courses are included in the base packages. If the required reference materials are included too, then it's arguably very meaningful. If they aren't, and you have to buy additional resources to get full use out of the courses, then they don't do nearly as much to improve the attractiveness of the base packages.
0 -
EastTN said:
I would find it a source of frustration if I found that the package didn't also include the resources I needed to actually use the course.
Great question... and I don't know the answer. Hopefully we can find out!
macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!0 -
alabama24 said:EastTN said:
I would find it a source of frustration if I found that the package didn't also include the resources I needed to actually use the course.
Great question... and I don't know the answer. Hopefully we can find out!
That is a good question. Having all the resource material is not crucial to me, but having the basic resources should be a part of the package, so it seems.
Pas far as the free courses that come along in Logos Now, that is not so crucial. They provide a nice add on, and what I glean from the video or audio is sufficient.
Pastor, Cornerstone Baptist Church, Clinton, SC
0 -
EastTN said:
Let's say I buy Standard Gold in part because that base package includes Mobile Ed: CM328 Preaching the Psalms, and Standard Silver does not. I would find it a source of frustration if I found that the package didn't also include the resources I needed to actually use the course. Basically, I'm trying to understand how meaningful it is that the courses are included in the base packages. If the required reference materials are included too, then it's arguably very meaningful. If they aren't, and you have to buy additional resources to get full use out of the courses, then they don't do nearly as much to improve the attractiveness of the base packages.
I checked the course, and Gold includes most, but not all of the extra reading. Handbooks for Old Testament Exegesis: Interpreting the Psalms, by the author of the course, is the most notable absentee. Anointed Expository Preaching is another, as are several Wiersbe volumes.
To be honest, I often skip the extra reading in MobileEd courses anyway. If a few readings are missing, you're not going to notice too much.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
I checked the course, and Gold includes most, but not all of the extra reading. Handbooks for Old Testament Exegesis: Interpreting the Psalms, by the author of the course, is the most notable absentee. Anointed Expository Preaching is another, as are several Wiersbe volumes.
Thanks for the quick answer - that's very helpful.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:SineNomine said:
I've taken a number of postsecondary courses over the years without doing some or all of the Required Reading, typically not to any meaningful detriment to my learning (or final mark).
Maybe so, but that was not my point in this thread. To call certain resources "Requirements" and then taking them available only as part of a large package is not good marketing. They are not required for the course, and they are not called requirements within the course. The terminology should be consistent.
I think you're making two points.
1. Stuff listed as Required Reading should actually be required.
2. Stuff listed as Required Reading for a particular course should be available as a bundle for purchase.
To one, I suspect that implying this policy in a strict sense would lead to many if not not most MEd courses not having any Required Reading whatsoever, just as it would do the same for most accredited post-secondary courses. (I myself am confused about why more than a small percentage of people would think that reading is required just because it's in a list that says it is, but I guess that MEd probably draws a non-trivial number of people who are not used to "Required Reading" on post-secondary course syllabi.)
A secondary problem here is that what one student needs to read in order to understand a lecture, another student does not need to read. If a professor knows or suspects that to be the case with a particular reading or set of readings, what category should s/he put it in? For one, it may be required; for another, useful; for a third, a complete waste of time. I've seen/lived through versions of that a lot in post-secondary courses too, and the reading in question is usually listed as mandatory.
Ultimately, what hermeneutic should you use, especially in a course that is (normally) not assessed, to define a particular reading as "Required"? If everyone can agree on that, then a generalized solution can be worked out. Or, perhaps, that agreement has already more or less occurred (between or among FL's instructors and FL itself) and you would like that agreement changed.
To two, I agree fully. Even if most or all of the resources in a particular bundle were not/could not be discounted, it would be helpful for people to be able to get them all (at least, all of the ones FL offers) in one place.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
EastTN said:
have the packages been structured so that they include all of the required resources for the course
The point I have been making is that the "Requirements" are actually not required to complete the course and are not labeled as required within the individual course. There are two problems
1) The terminology is misleading and counterproductive.
2) Resources listed as required should be available for individual purchase, but many of them are only available as part of a very expensive package.
0 -
SineNomine said:
(I myself am confused about why more than a small percentage of people would think that reading is required just because it's in a list that says it is,
When I attended undergrad and grad schools, "Required" meant that this material was required to obtain credit for the course. The student had to certify that this reading had been completed in order to get credit for the course.
SineNomine said:I agree fully. Even if most or all of the resources in a particular bundle were not/could not be discounted, it would be helpful for people to be able to get them all (at least, all of the ones FL offers) in one place.
I don't necessarily want them available in a package for a particular course—that would be extra complication. Rather, I would like to see them available for individual sale, but at present some are only available as part of a package whose overall content has nothing to do with the course I am taking.
For instance, in this screenshot, I wanted to purchase Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, but FL says not unless you spend much more. The least I can spend to obtain that one resource is $95.00, and several others in the list are also only available as part of a package.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
When I attended undergrad and grad schools, "Required" meant that this material was required to obtain credit for the course. The student had to certify that this reading had been completed in order to get credit for the course.
Ouch. I have happily never encountered that. Well, maybe not ouch... sometimes I have encountered professors doing things to get us to do not-otherwise-required readings that were far more of a pain-in-the-neck than doing the readings. (Occasionally, I wasn't actually able to do all of the readings because of the time required on account of the mechanisms used to get me to do them!)
Jack Caviness said:I don't necessarily want them available in a package for a particular course—that would be extra complication. Rather, I would like to see them available for individual sale, but at present some are only available as part of a package whose overall content has nothing to do with the course I am taking.
For instance, in this screenshot, I wanted to purchase Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, but FL says not unless you spend much more. The least I can spend to obtain that one resource is $95.00, and several others in the list are also only available as part of a package.
That makes sense. But I still do endorse the idea of having course-targeted bundles... the extra complication at FL's end would, I think, be more than made up for in sales of those bundles.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
SineNomine said:
That makes sense. But I still do endorse the idea of having course-targeted bundles... the extra complication at FL's end would, I think, be more than made up for in sales of those bundles.
They've done a few experimental ones, with at least some resources bundled, the most recent being: https://www.logos.com/summer-session
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Jack Caviness said:EastTN said:
have the packages been structured so that they include all of the required resources for the course
The point I have been making is that the "Requirements" are actually not required to complete the course and are not labeled as required within the individual course. There are two problems
1) The terminology is misleading and counterproductive.
2) Resources listed as required should be available for individual purchase, but many of them are only available as part of a very expensive package.
I understand and appreciate your point about the terminology being misleading. I have a slightly different concern. If a course is included in a base package, then it only makes that package more attractive to me if all of the resources reasonably needed to get the full benefit from the course are also included. It may be that that does not include the entire list of resources currently labeled as "required." If so, I fully support clearer language around that point. But I'm also going to be very frustrated if I buy a package in part because it includes a course, only to find that it's effectively crippled because books that genuinely are needed to work through the course aren't available.
0 -
Mark Barnes said:SineNomine said:
That makes sense. But I still do endorse the idea of having course-targeted bundles... the extra complication at FL's end would, I think, be more than made up for in sales of those bundles.
They've done a few experimental ones, with at least some resources bundled, the most recent being: https://www.logos.com/summer-session
That seems like a very reasonable approach.
0 -
EastTN said:
But I'm also going to be very frustrated if I buy a package in part because it includes a course, only to find that it's effectively crippled because books that genuinely are needed to work through the course aren't available.
While I suspect that it says more about my personality with regards to "completeness", I full agree with you here. But I suspect that there is a problem with regards to being able to find broadly useful courses that have nothing but resources that can be made available in highly discounted packages. The most practical solution I can see it to offer a special discount on a bundled of resources used in the course.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
SineNomine said:
But I still do endorse the idea of having course-targeted bundles..
Neither do I. What I would like to see is for the resources to be available individually.
BTW—I recently discovered that two of the "required" resources for that course are no longer sold by FL [:P]
0 -
SineNomine said:
That makes sense. But I still do endorse the idea of having course-targeted bundles... the extra complication at FL's end would, I think, be more than made up for in sales of those bundles.
[Y]
Running Logos 6 Platinum and Logos Now on Surface Pro 4, 8 GB RAM, 256GB SSD, i5
0 -
I took up a similar concern as OP in this thread and got a quite lengthy response from Faithlife showing some of their thinking when it comes to this issue. A comment on bundling has still to come though.
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
They've done a few experimental ones, with at least some resources bundled, the most recent being: https://www.logos.com/summer-session
The certificates are tailored for gold (L6 gold, hope this changes) and seems to include, at least a lot of, the other readings in the certificate bundle.
0
