Chronicle Readers Debate the Merits of Online Learning

If you use something like iChat or GoogleChat or somethin where you can see the student and watch the reaction along with audio plus presentation i don’t see how much of a difference it is? It should be blended with f2f every month or three weeks but it works the same. I wouldn’t mind being home and teaching from my study. I can easily see where this would be an advantage. Saving the two hours a day commuting, especially in rain and snow. Some f2f is good but if you really want to reach a tremendous amount of students this is the way to do it. Furthermore you really can’t stop it from happening. Costs are way to high and this is a driving factor behind the initiative.patrick@theCampusCenter.com

I’m a grad student so I cannot speak to the number of hours it takes faculty to teach an online course. I’ve read in various online forums of professors who complain about this issue; others say that once you become proficient and establish a system, the work is actual refreshing and challenging–in a good way. However, as a student taking a completely online graduate program through a bricks-and-mortar, regionally accredited university, I can tell you that, from my perspective, online learning is extremely valuable: it enables me to pursue my master’s without moving to a new city and at times convenient to me. On the negative side, I do admit that I miss the f2f interaction with my professors and peers–online learning can be a lonely affair.Also, whereas some stress “…that the common denominator in quality courses is not the mode of delivery but the design of the course,” I might disagree. As a student, I learn what I want to learn; I read, research and ponder only as deeply as I want. If I desire a quality education, I will pursue it, using the online course–designed well or not–as a launching pad for deeper learning and thinking. On the other hand, if all I want is a piece of paper–wanting only to “get through the course”–then I’ll do the minimum required and hope for an easy instructor. And that happens whether the class is f2f or online, whether the class is well-designed or not.Would you rather your attorney be an excellent “intent on learning” student from a reputable online university … or a “just get me through this” student from an on-the-ground institution? As for me, I’d choose the latter.Another key indicator of course success–again from my humble grad-student perspective–rests squarely on the personality and online aptitude of the professor. I’ve had surly professors with zero online warmth and persona who put in little face time, provide zero feedback and act as if every e-mail is an intrusion into their already “too busy” schedules. But I’ve also had wonderful online professors: they addressed me by name in e-mails; provided detailed, thoughtful feedback; publicly congratulated superior student work; and seemed to “be there” with us, adding to discussions, prompting new lines of thinking, keeping the class alive.If professors don’t like teaching online, they probably shouldn’t do so. Otherwise, it’s something like hating children but being a pediatrician. You’ll develop a sour attitude, which will (and, trust me, does!) smell like face-pinching lemons to your online students.

I’m an undergrad at Excelsior College and just finished my first online class there — my first class of any kind in 20 years. It seems to me that the discussion here ignores what should be a central consideration (although 1gradstudent does touch on it): the aptitude of the student.The average fresh-from-high-school kid would not do well in an online class. Ditto for anyone of any age who doesn’t possess above-average self-discipline.But isn’t online education aimed primarily at non-traditional students like me? A professor who doesn’t like online classes should not teach them. The class I just finished (Historiography) only had 4 active students, plus 2 more who dropped in occasionally when they weren’t too busy. Even with that relatively low volume of participation, I personally found the discussion board requirement quite burdensome; I can only imagine what it must have been like for our professor, having to read and respond to everyone and grade us as well. (He did a terrific job, by the way.)Speaking of which, another aspect of online education that I don’t see mentioned here is the way it changes the classroom participation dynamic. Since contributing substantively to the discussion was a graded requirement, no one who wanted a good grade could afford to sit silently as we might have done in a face-to-face class.Would I want a heart surgeon who got his medical degree online? Of course not. Would I care if my heart surgeon got his bachelor’s online (from a regionally-accredited school) and then went on to a brick and mortar medical school? Not in the least. And as for the lawyer question, well, I’ve worked for lawyers for 18 years, and I’ve seen what traditional law schools often produce, so I wouldn’t have a problem taking my chances with a lawyer who got his JD online.

One more thing I’d like to add to my post above–Online teaching yields the most consistent content to satisfy accountability measures. It makes sense–consistent fundamental materials and activities, consistent grading using rubrics, same test materials, etc. Makes sense to me.

According to the latest Sloan-C report, only 18 percent of today’s college students are actually, full-time, in-class, traditional students. With over 80 percent attending on a part-time, non-traditonal manner, a large percentage have selected online learning as their mode of education. This is due to a number of factors (I won’t bore you with the details, most have been posted above). Yes, online is a lot of work, for both the instructor and the student. I can assure you, when the proper amount of time is dedicated by both instructor and student, the results bear the fruit of the labor. As noted above, the online learning takes self-discipline. I will give you an example. The State of Georgia has the Hope Scholarship. Students that maintained a “B” average in high school are afforded free books and tuition at any Georgia college or university as long as they maintain their “B” average. Yet, 53 percent of these “B” students lose the Hope in their freshman year, and only 26 percent make it through all four years. How do 74 percent of these students (in F2F classes) transform into “C” or lower, or college dropouts? It is the self-discipline (some might add that there was some grade inflation in the GA high schools). Would they have done better or worse in online courses. I would venture the same or better (they could not get much worse). A main drawback of online learning is the progress that is hindered by naysayers, who fear their turf will be lost by the future of education. They do anything they can to stop the progress of online learning. They continue to preach for the smaller, more “learning-condusive” classrooms, where they can foster learning and get to know each of their students (like in the good ‘ole days). Unfortunately, the economy has somewhat dictated the end of the good ‘ole days. Present-day students are working, married, torn with outside activities that don’t include Rush Week and Pre-game bonfires. They attend at their computer when they can find the time and interact asynchronously with their classmate 1,000 miles away and an instructor 1,000 miles in the opposite direction (and do so in minutes). Can we upgrade and make this better? Of course, and many instructors are doing so, via taped lectures and even live lectures, and open chat sessions and the like, to make this as ‘real’ as possible, given the varied schedules of their students, e.g. setting up three times a week so that all students might make at least one. A problem is instructors that won’t make the effort to be part of this solution (and, that sometimes is due to larger percentages of online instructors being adjunct professors with less stake in the outcome). However, most, at a minimum, have posted online hours. We can look at ourselves and see how open and inviting our F2F faculty are at college campuses (afternoon office hours, home phone numbers for students who work to call at night, or God forbid on the weekends). This is not meant as a rant, this is an observation that nay-sayers could very well focus on being part of the solution, rather than the problem.

There seems to be an implicit assumption here that F2F courses are inherently superior to on-line courses. I’d say that’s an open question these days.In the early days of computer-based courses, the students often remarked that the best thing about these courses was that the organization of the material was superior to what they experienced in their other classes. That might well be true of today’s on-line courses as well.

Hear! Hear! My thoughts on the surgeon and lawyer, exactly. We have students graduating from “accredited” universities that cannot read, write, critically think, etc. Yet, we have a number of faculty entrenched in their capabilities in the F2F classroom that feel that students simply cannot learn online. Comparative tests have shown little difference (and, I’m sure we have all seen both sides). Why are regional accrediting bodies providing accrditation for the online courses and degree programs if they are so TABOO? There is a taboo associated with online diploma mills that some want to attribute to all online courses, their faculty, and students. Compare the product. They do stack up. Granted, many online students would have loved the opportunity to be traditional college students, savoring all of the campus life that it entailed. And, many traditional college faculty feel they are the only ones that can truly mold and shape the future educational world. This is a very noble belief, but very patronizing by those who know their online students, know their work ethic (students and faculty) and know the finished product. Many traditional faculty were even accepting when they counted the tuition dollars coming in to bolster their traditional college life (facilities, office, etc., etc.); but, very dismayed when there was a shift of students from the classroom to the Internet.

Yes, Online education is here to stay. As more of the traditional faculty retire (the old guard), more and more newer faculty will be using online education to aid their teaching as students do demand it more. Why are you teaching? I hope it is to teach students and not just do research and make it all about you, which it is not.I know change is hard, but try to embrace it just like diversity. Nothing beats the diversity of online education.

I wonder why no one addresses the value-added of non-classroom experiences offered by in person college attendance. Online may be a quick way to get a belated credential or meet the needs of those who need to work full-time, but there is tremendous growth and development going on fo students on campus, in interacting with peers, faculty outside classes, extracurricular activities, service learning, study abroad, leadership in organizations, access to libraries, speakers and events, etc. College is so much more than passing classes to receive a stamp of approval; done well, it should be transformational. Living your “life as usual”, while spending time on the computer taking classes, does not offer this added value. It is, indeed, precisely so as NOT to change their lives significantly that students seek online education. Some of us feel that one major outcome of college is to make major changes in understanding of the self and its relation to others and the community; this happens largely outside of the classroom, in the special environment of the college campus, for most of our students.

I’ve taught online (at a private university and community college) and F2F for over 10 years; and I’ve served as both a part-time faculty member, full-time faculty member and administrator. My comments: (1) I would not hire a lawyer or other skilled professional who earned his/her degree entirely online. (2) Teaching online, if done properly, is TONS more work than any F2F class (even one taught for the first time). (3) Many teachers that I know who teach on-line do not do it properly, because it’s too much work. The key is real engagement with students — and that can be done with lots of discussion boards, chats, etc. But this takes hours and hours to monitor. (Case in point: just this semester, a student in my online class told me this is the 7th class she has taken online and she doesn’t know how to use the discussion board or chat features because none of her classes required it. I hear this often, as well as the comment that my class is so much more difficult, and so much more work than any other online class my students have taken. (And yet, the content is precisely the same content I teach in my F2F class.) (4) There is no oversight (which is consistent with what goes on in F2F classes) but of course at least we know faculty have actually shown up in a F2F classroom. This is not always the case in online classes. (5) We need to do real assessment of student success in online learning. In my F2F classes, I retain my students and most are successful. (When I see that look of confusion on my students’ faces, I address it. Can’t see that online.) In my online classes, which cap at 25, at the end of the term I will usually have 18 students, and 2-3 of them will fail. So 15/25 successfully pass the class vs. 34 or 35/35. (Of course, I have a colleague who will disagree with me. She will have 25/25 students all stay in her online section, and all get As. Hmmmmm.)I don’t see online classes going away. The College wants the enrollment numbers, we have inadequate physical facilities, and there is no quicker way of getting students than scheduling an online section of a class – it will fill in a day or two. Still, we are doing a disservice to many of our students by giving them what they want. (And I wonder about the ethics of continuing to offer the classes – no matter how much I work to improve the class. And I work on it constantly.)