MOOC Can Be a Good Assistant for Higher Education

MOOCs may be disruptive to higher education as we know it. Is it a disruption? Why or why not? As to this question, my answer is no. From my point of view, MOOC can be a useful way of learning which can exist as an assistant of higher education, a way of long life learning. But it can't replace the traditional higher education, and it is also not disruptive to higher education.
Firstly, MOOCs provide  a lot of people around the world the chance to get excellent education, People who can't afford the high tuition fees , no time to participate in a full-time college study, interested in some courses and want to expand their knowledge along whole life, want to take courses instructed by some particular teachers who people can't learn from  face to face, or people who want to learn with  managing  time freely. This advantages are really salient and beneficial. How could we say they are disruptions to higher education? As my own experience, I like Chinese History, and I really admire a history teacher who teach in Taiwan. I have had no access to his class, until now I sign up his course on MOOC. After all, MOOC has a lot of advantages which people can get knowledge from it. 
Secondly, MOOC has its own limitations which decide that MOOC have no ability to disrupt higher education, not to mention that replace traditional education in my view. As Scott Carlson and Goldie Blumenstyk mentioned MOOCs finally pop the tuition bubble.(For Whom Is College Being Reinvented?) The free courses on MOOC can be a big attraction for many people. However, people who have access to a MOOC and can use it, even with many tools like Blogger, Twitter and so on, most of them are not the real poor people who can't afford college education. Especially in developing country， the people who can't afford the tuition fee also have no money to buy a computer, and don't know how to use it for study. As people said that students from the bottom tier usually need face to face instruction (Scott Carlson and Goldie Blumenstyk).From another perspective, when you put a lot of money in your study, it may be an chip which encourage you to study hard, instead of wasting money. I agree with the view that "Credits is the coin of the academic realm" ( Marc Bousquet, 2012, Good MOOC’s, Bad MOOC’s). It highlights the certificate or diploma of education. Can certificate or diploma from MOOC can be weigh equally as that from a college or university? If yes, then it maybe possible that MOOC can replace the traditional way of education. But my answer is no. The values of the certificate from MOOC and a real college can be different. In a university, we have the experience of face-to-face communication with our teachers and classmates, we have the experience of coping with pressure caused by our huge amounts of assignments, we have to opportunities to debate with each other in class as soon as some ideas come up, we are exposed to a community filled with competition and cooperation, and so on. After all, the university experience can't be replace by MOOC. Moreover, the value of the certificate, we call gold content in China, is also related to the environment you study in and the hard work you have paid. Study in a university is more intensive, relatively laborious and systematic than MOOC. Universities which provide the face-to-fave communications potentially create a personal relationship network for students, which is not only beneficial to the future career, but also a life long treasure.At last, some courses in arts area more suit for real class education. Therefore, I don't agree with the opinion that MOOC may replace many colleges except for the top 50 (Scott Carlson & Goldie Blumenstyk, 2012, For Whom Is College Being Reinvented?).  
All in all, I think, MOOC is a good helper of higher education, and won't disrupt higher education and can't replace traditional education.