I'm with DKernohan and have been at the banging on as well. Polarizing it may be but ignoring it contributes to misinformation about education (what kind of oxymoron would that be?), not to mention extreme unfairness to the erased. Received history influences future directions and can stifle pesky 'why' questions

Good summary of this transition period, clear, concise and to the point. I'm sharing with many colleague-skeptics whom I suspect of taking their opinions from highered and other media without questioning or examining them...hoping for open discussion among educators on both sides

Jonathon *Rees*, not "Kees". We Welsh should stick together even (*especially*) when we disagree. Unlike most mooc critics, Jonathon uses as much ed-tech teaching as you'll find in the average hybrid course, engages with Digital Historians, even did a THATcamp, accepts challenges from developers, etc. I entertain the possibly unrealistic hope of seeing him in Lisa's next POTcert session, http://pedagogyfirst.org/wppf, because I trust him to give it a fair trial, more that can be said of so many other skeptics. That said, I'd like to see more mooc rats (to borrow Scott Johnson's designation) following More or Less Bunkm http://moreorlessbunk.wordpress.com, With a strong background in labor history, he is also (rightly) concerned with the disruptive effect on academic labor and issues of ethics, not unlike the kinds of concerns you yourself have expressed. Many mooc followers, most in Lisa's recent course, are insecure academic labor ~ sessionals, casuals, adjuncts, precarious knowledge workers, contingent faculty, and no doubt other designations. Although we cherish the equality of association in moocs, too often missing in brick and mortar institution and abysmally absent in online for-profits (what critics fear the MOOC will inevitably feed into), I would like to see more mooc engagement with the "adjunctifiction" issues Jonathon raises. Thanks for opening this discussion.

The answer to the question, 'how does this relate to the course content?,' is 'That's up to you.' Making the connection - or not - is up to the learner. That and deciding what we want to follow is also up to us are the grounds rules going in. Very clearly laid out too. We learners can't have it both ways, deciding what to take, what to leave and how to connect what we keep, but still expecting instructors to hand it out ready to wear