I don't believe that "high quality, free educational materials" is something that is easily attainable. I will say that the "free" part will exist but "high quality" may not be there. I don't think we can equate educational materials as the same level and quality of open-source software.

If you look at Khan Academy, really the forefront in this area, you quickly realize that someone is absorbing the cost. In this case, Bill Gate's foundation and others. As a result, you have someone with the calibre of John Resig working for the organization and they are putting out job postings.

I really like Coursera. I like the open-course offerings from MIT, Harvard, etc. Someone is definitely paying for these as it is not cheap. In this case, the universities are paying (and implicitly the students).

So, I definitely agree with your sentiments but I do believe we will get high-quality when there is a profit motive. I am not saying free and high-quality cannot co-exist with educational materials but I don't believe its very common.

In addition, my hope is that there is enough traction that the subscription plans stay low for these learning companies. One of the benefits in this area is that it has become very competitive and hence costs are coming down. Just take a look at what Pluralsight was charging five years versus now (or even Tekpub). There is a definate downwards pressure on how much these companies can charge.

I agree. Anyone can make educational materials. Making a relevant curriculum is hard. Making a relevant curriculum for teenagers is very hard. The amount of preparation that goes into just 1 hour of class time is often overlooked by those who haven't spent any time teaching.