In a move that highlights the potential of the Internet to change the way the world thinks about education, MIT announced last week that it was putting materials for its nearly 2,000 courses on the Web. The 10-year project, called MIT OpenCourseWare, would allow anyone, anywhere in the world, to read lecture notes, try problem sets and browse syllabi for any of MIT’s courses. We hope that MIT’s courageous decision will be copied by other universities—especially Harvard—for the sake of those who will be able to learn from the far corners of the globe, as well as the universities’ students, who will benefit significantly from the project. Such a move would stimulate discussion and learning among scholars both on campus and abroad.

The most immediate beneficiaries of MIT’s program will be those outside of Cambridge. By using OpenCourseWare, teachers can benefit from the expertise that has gone into crafting the MIT curriculum; education researchers can debate what topics should be included in standard courses; high-schoolers without access to quality instruction can download a syllabus and check out a textbook from a public library. Universities frequently spend millions in public-relations gestures to demonstrate the benefits they offer to the outside world; OpenCourseWare could be far more effective in promoting learning at far less cost.

Although some critics have charged that putting so much material on the Web for free compromises the value of an education at the trade school on the Charles, MIT plans to offer no credit to those who might peruse its material. We doubt that anyone will drop out of MIT (or choose not to apply) because they can now sit at home and read syllabi and lecture notes on the Web. Instead, MIT’s decision sets it apart from other universities, notably a coalition of Princeton, Stanford, Yale and Oxford, which last year announced a distance-learning program which will most likely include some form of academic credit. These efforts are far more likely to compromise the value of on-campus instruction.

Harvard was wise to refrain from joining this coalition. Its first priority for instruction must be those on campus—graduates, undergrads and Extension school students. Harvard should not divert its teaching efforts to for-credit instruction of those off campus with whom interaction will necessarily be limited.

But by making sure that the information on the Web is free and easily accessible, Harvard would not compromise the value of the experience of its own students. Indeed, students benefit by having such course material available at the click of a mouse. Many Harvard students can relate to the frustration of going to a course website and finding nothing more than the names of the professor and teaching fellows. Professors should be expected to make all course material—such as handouts, syllabi, lecture notes and problem sets—electronically available to Harvard students. Ensuring that the sites are sensibly designed and regularly updated would do much to help students manage their course load and decide which courses to take in the future.

Furthermore, if this material is to be on the Web for students, it should be made accessible to all Internet users. Digital information exchange changes the old equation of the exclusive university. Reading a syllabus is not like checking out a book from Widener Library—students would not be inhibited in their use of Harvard’s resources should others be allowed to benefit as well. If the marginal cost of transmitting these resources to others approaches zero, Harvard should not impose an artificial scarcity. As a global institution of higher education, Harvard has a responsibility to promote learning beyond its gates.

We also encourage all Harvard professors to have their lectures videotaped and available online. Some professors—especially in the sciences—have already adopted this practice, so that students may review a lecture that they did not understand or missed due to illness. Placing lectures on the Web would likely have little more effect on class attendance than keeping the tapes on reserve in libraries, and any such effect would only spur professors to take more questions and interact with students to a greater degree. Online lectures would also be a benefit to Harvard students not enrolled in the class, who could now audit courses regardless of scheduling and make more informed decisions on their course choices. However, we recognize that many professors may be leery of having their image and presentations available to the general public. Harvard should therefore encourage and provide funding for such efforts, but unlike syllabi, online lectures should remain at the professor’s discretion.

Unfortunately, Harvard’s current venture in online learning is a far cry from such efforts. Called “Harvard at Home,” the service is provided only to alumni and offers access to certain course materials of limited substance. Instead of such fundraising-oriented eye candy, the University should use its resources to benefit current students through online technologies. The best way to do that is to follow MIT’s lead in making more and better information about Harvard’s courses accessible over the Web.

Such a substantial restructuring of Harvard’s Internet presence would not come without expenses. But the costs of such a program are far outweighed by the value of well-ordered, freely accessible knowledge. MIT has already gained much from the publicity surrounding its announcement, and those outside the MIT community have gained even more. Charging a fee—even a nominal one—to access the information would significantly decrease the number of people who would use it, and the loss would not be compensated by enough revenue to be significant to the world’s wealthiest university. We therefore urge the University to fulfill the promise of the digital age and make all course-related information freely available.