可汗学院掌门人：打造网上免费哈佛

您将如何实现这一点呢？

    现在，在四年制大学学习的第一要务就是勤学+备考，然后在课余和暑假期间实习。我认为应该反过来，把重点放在实习上。30年前，一份实习生工作可能只是在收发室里分发邮件；而现在，谷歌的实习生要对算法进行优化，甚至连大学里的学者们至都没有接触过这样工作。今年暑假期间，我们聘用的实习生所做的工作涉及到的理论要比他们的课程作业精确严谨得多。 因此，我所说的实习生，并不是给老板冲冲咖啡、收收邮件这么简单。

    很多大学、尤其是公立大学，都在应对政府资金锐减带来的冲击，同时还得做好准备，应对未来进一步的经费削减。您认为这会对可汗学院带来什么影响？如果有人希望一满18岁就参加工作，帮助供养家庭，他们可以通过可汗学院或其他途径，按照自己的进度安排学习，并借助相关测试，通过自己的努力获得必要的学分。他们也有可能必须到学校实验室呆上一个学期。我们这类学习机构就能满足这样的学习者。这种模式对所有人来说都是好事，也是我十分乐见的情景。话说回来，很多人最终从事的工作跟他们的学西成绩没有多大关系，而是跟他们在学校认识的人有关系。

    我同意这一点。我认为最有力的证明就是商学院。我觉得，商学院有一点做得非常好。他们很清楚自己的定位。但人们也明白，商学院不是非上不可。它是一个强大的工具，正如去念一所昂贵的预备学校，比如安多弗（Andover）或者埃克赛特（Exeter），这很好。但是，我们必须承认，并不是每个人都能有这种机会。

您会一直坚持可汗学院的免费教育理念吗？

    是的。这是我们使命的核心，可汗学院的学习课程将永远免费。我们多教一个学生的增量成本对我们来说是零或者近乎于零。所以我们不会为学习设置费用门槛，这是我们的使命所在。

    我分别思考过可汗学院作为盈利机构或者非盈利机构的最好结局。作为盈利机构的话，可汗学院的最好结果是，我们拥有一定数量的用户，获得丰厚收益，可能会被收购或者找到出路，进行首次公开募股。那么我就可能成为大富翁。这当然不错。但作为非营利机构，我们希望成为新一代教育机构里的斯坦福（Stanford）或者麻省理工学院（MIT），但我们的品牌并不是完全建立在对生源的苛刻要求。我们的品牌是建立在提供高质量课程资源的基础之上。我们希望未来的用户数量能达到百万、千万，甚至几十亿，从而打造一个百年教育品牌。

    译者：李玫晓

How would you pull that off?

    Right now, the priority in a four-year institution is to learn things for exams and in your spare time and your summers you might be able to do an internship. I actually think that should be flipped around. I think the focus should be doing internships. An internship 30 years ago was working the mailroom. An internship today at Google is optimizing an algorithm that researchers at universities don't even have access to. I would say the interns that we had this past summer were doing far more rigorous theory than they would do in their coursework. So when I say internship, it's not getting coffee for the boss or stocking mail.

    Many universities, especially public ones, are dealing with painful cuts in government funding and bracing for the possibility of more to come. How do you think that affects what you are trying to do at Khan Academy?

    I'd like to see a reality where if someone wants to work when they turn 18 to help support their family and they learn at their own pace on something like the Khan Academy or other things, that they can just on their own get a bunch of the credits they need just by testing out of things. And maybe they have to show up on campus for a semester of labs or something. You're getting a person like that to the end point that they need to get to, in a way that's actually good for everybody.

    Then again, so many people land jobs in a way that has very little to do with academic merit. It has to do with the people that they meet while they were at school.

    I agree with that. I think the strongest argument there is business school. I think the one thing business school does very well is that they kind of understand that that's what they are about. But I think society has recognized that business school is an optional thing. What you are describing is a powerful tool, just as going to a fancy prep school -- going to Andover or Exeter -- is great. But that's not something that we necessarily have to say everyone has to have access to….

Is the idea to keep Khan Academy free going forward?

    Yes. It is core to our mission in that the learning part of Khan Academy will always be free. The incremental cost for us to teach an incremental student is zero or close to zero. So it's our mission that we shouldn't put a gate there.

    When I thought about the two home run outcomes as a for-profit or as a not-for-profit, as a for-profit, a home run outcome for Khan Academy is we reach a bunch of users, we capture a bunch of revenue, maybe we get acquired or we have some type of an exit, an IPO, and Sal will be rich. That's not bad, not a bad thing. But the home run as a not-for-profit institution is just maybe we can be this new breed of institution that is kind of like a Stanford or MIT, but the brand isn't built purely on its selectivity. The brand is based on its quality of what it's delivering and it can reach millions, or maybe one day billions, of students and maybe be around for hundreds of years.