Does Online Education Sacrifice Quality ?
There are certainly two camps when it comes to the notion of open
courseware and its ability to educate tomorrow’s students. Some, like Mark Pesce,
see the concept as breaking down the ivy-covered walls in both the
literal and figurative sense. For them, open courseware would eliminate
current admission barriers, allowing the common man with access to a
computer and an Internet connection a world class education.
Others see the notion quite differently. They note that an exceptionally
high college dropout rate is even higher in online programs. They
further insist that online education, considered by most to be the tool
to a more cost-effective course delivery system, actually is more
expensive currently as schools cover the cost of specific software (that
does not come cheap) on top of having to pay someone to hover over the
students enrolled.
.
The Real Challenge
Randall Stross, a professor of business at San Jose State University, is a veteran when it comes to teaching courses online. Writing about
the release of Walsh’s book and the future of the open courseware
movement, Stross yanks more than a few chains with his opening
assertion.
“When colleges and universities finally decide to make full use of the Internet, most professors will lose their jobs.”
But his chain doesn’t seem to come with a noose. Despite the prediction
of the end of the teaching profession as we know it, Stross goes on to
calmly insist he is not worried.
“Amid acute budget crises, state universities like mine can’t afford to
take that very big step — adopting the technology that renders human
instructors obsolete.”
Indeed, Stross does a great job of articulating one critical
fundamental. While he is a veteran online educator, he insists the
descriptor currently being used is misleading.
Stross teaches what educators now refer to as a hybrid course. It does
feature some elements that make use of software. But it also features a
full-fledged teacher, a “hovering human” as Stross describes.
To
one day replace teachers, an online course would have to remove the
need for the hovering human. It would be 100% software based and would
handle all tasks that the aforementioned human (including assessing
students and providing relevant feedback on their performance)
previously handled.
Of the open courseware movement, Stross notes the costs involved.
“Developing that best-in-the-world online course — in which students
would learn as much, or more, than in an ordinary classroom or a hybrid
online class — requires significant investment. The Open Learning
Initiative at Carnegie Mellon University, which has developed about 15
sophisticated online courses, mostly in the sciences, spent $500,000 to
$1 million to write software for each. But neither Carnegie Mellon nor
other institutions, which are invited to use its online courses, dares
to use them without having a human instructor, too.”
Those costs have Stross confident that his job is safe, especially given
the current shortfall of funds most institutions currently face
Two Schools of Thought
Steve Kolowic recently took a look at
the current state of the open courseware movement at Inside Higher
Education. In discussing the likes of the so-called elite institutions
(Columbia, Oxford, Yale, Princeton, Stanford and the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology), Kolowic indicates that these schools have
defined their value “by exclusivity as much as by excellence” and that
“the classrooms and curriculums that ostensibly transform talented
high-schoolers into cardholding members of the adult elite have been
walled off from the general public.”
But
elsewhere on the University front, Kolowic writes that online education
has been “all but cleansed of its original stigma” and thus become
commonplace.
“The
University of Massachusetts and Penn State University rake in tens of
millions of dollars each year from their online programs,” explains
Kolowic. “The University of California is considering using online
education to help recoup the revenue lost to massive cuts in state
funding
Delivering Open Courseware
Truth
be told, the two views are entirely valid. Open courseware has the
power to transform the national curriculum, increasing rigor and
creating up-to-date, content-rich courses where lectures are delivered
by the best the profession has to offer. It should also eliminate the
need for those impersonal, 500 seat lecture halls. In this way, the
materials offered students could nearly match those currently offered at
the so-called elite institutions.
But there will always be a need for that facilitator, the person with
the ability to poke and prod, to provide the timely pats on the back and
the occasional kick in the seat of the pants. It is for this reason
that public school teachers are talking about the transformation from
“being sages on the stage” to “guides on the side.”
Open courseware should provide the sage – but the learning process will
still need that orchestrator. My guess is that the elite colleges came
to this realization a long time ago.
So those course materials are indeed available in an effort to further
that brand recognition. But those schools are banking on that critical
fundamental tenet, that education is first and foremost a
people-business
