I read it over the weekend and liked the idea. There seem to be a recognition (and almost a race) in the market to offer free content. And, of course, there’s a good reason for doing so. Those who come will get a share (or at least an offer) of things other than they bargained for.
However, in my opinion, this reflects more on my point of ‘anyone can teach’ (free course content) as *by-product* of my proposal, rather than its core intention. One of the DISRUPTIVE premises of my idea is that it dismisses traditional publishers’ mindset where they charge for use of their content and instead it allows the discovery and the use of *any* content which results in positive feedback on the use of that content (good results on the test). It is only logical to conclude that learners will tend to use free content, or at least substantially more than they did before. I honestly foresee a demise of traditional publishing, if they don’t capture their customer base through other offerings (targeted advertising, supplemental premium content, learner direct, etc.). Doesn’t the rhetoric “there’s nothing like a real book” sound like “there’s no music like a vynil record”, it just takes time to get there.