Edmundson then goes on to ask the question: Can online
education ever be education of the very best sort? This is a valid question and
one we should continue to ask, but what irks me is the assumption that a
lecture class is the gold standard by which education should be measured. Just
this week Cathy Davidson argued that “If
we profs can be replaced by a computer screen, we should be.” She makes
many excellent points about the need for education reform and how/why online
education will be a major player in that reform but she also points out that
lectures are an economic expedient but not good pedagogy. Davidson points out lectures may (if done well by the expert performers Edmundson lauds) be entertaining,
but research shows students do not retain information presented in this format
or understand how to apply it. Just yesterday Matt Reed agreed with Davidson
and noted that lecture has never been “a
particularly effective way to teach.” Online classes can be and are
designed and taught in similarly ineffective ways all around the world, but as
Davidson and Reed point out there is also great potential for innovation in
both the traditional classroom and the online classroom if we adapt to new
circumstances and knowledge and employ new strategies and new tools. Whether we
like it or not, times are changing and we
profs need to reform and “turn
into the skid” or the university will indeed be torn apart as Edmundson so
fears. The fault will not be with online education but will instead be with
profs (and institutions) that refuse to evolve and grow.
The idea that Edmundson presented which really made my
blood boil is that an online class cannot be a genuine intellectual community
because it is a monologue rather than a dialogue (ironic much?). He goes on to
describe online education as anonymous, sterile, abstract, and lonely. I
thought my head my spin off my shoulders after reading this opinion which was
apparently formed after watching a pre-filmed online class. Well, of course
that model of online education is not as rich as the live lecture (which is
already pretty ineffective) but apparently Edmundson is not aware of the
tremendously rich and varied pedagogy taking place around the world that
harnesses the power of technology to make online and blended classes exciting
and challenging places to learn. It makes me wonder how Edmundson would respond
if his students present such a poorly supported argument.
I would urge anyone who questions the exciting class
design possible in online and blended classes to visit such collectives as HASTAC and Hybrid Pedagogy to find overwhelming
support to counter the idea that online education is anonymous, sterile,
abstract, and lonely. I strive to make my classes an interactive community with
dynamic, collaborative projects and my class activities and assignments are constantly
evolving inspired by the amazing work being done by my friends, peers, and
colleagues around the world. This is an exciting time to be an educator and I
believe our students are enriched by the experience. Sometimes my class
activities and assignments don’t work out as planned (or hoped) but then that
was true when I taught face-to-face. Often my online space is messy but then so
was my traditional class space – we were often loud too. But this week, our
first week of classes at my institution, we have begun building a community. I
shared personal tidbits about my hobbies, family, and dog and invited students
to share as well. As we interact as a group, we have talked about favorite
books, movies, TV shows, and video games as well as tattoos, crafts, and pets.
We are finding out who is creative, who is nervous about technology, and who is
incredibly busy. After only three days, 22 students have posted more than 150
messages to each other in our Community forum. Sure I have included some
prerecorded videos to explain assignments but there are no lectures. Instead we
will continue to share, discuss, challenge, and question – and I know that I
will learn from my students just as they learn from me and from each other. I
don’t know how Edmundson defines a “genuine intellectual community” but I’m
pretty sure we’ve got one going on and I know we are not alone.
I admit I'm conflicted about online courses. I deeply believe in the benefits of the digital humanities, so it may seem counterintuitive that I'm not completely on board with online courses. I firmly believe that online courses do increase access to education, which is great. I haven't taught an online class yet, partly because I'm a little afraid of designing a bad course and I also haven't had the opportunity yet.
ReplyDeleteI have TA'd for online classes that have been wonderfully engaging, but I've also TA'd for online classes that were disasters, both in terms of student engagement and pedagogy. I think that's where my real concerns lie - in the pedagogy. I have seen (and heard) of a lot of laziness in designing online courses (including the horror of basically transcribing lecture notes and throwing them on the course site) and there can also be a lack of institutional support to help profs design good courses. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try; that's not what I'm saying. I just worry that so many don't try and think of it as an easy way to teach, without changing their method at all.
See? I said I was conflicted!
You are exactly right. Many institutions don't provide the support to help instructors learn how to design engaging and effective classes. Similarly, many assign online classes to instructors without ever paying attention to effective teaching. At my own institution there is no oversight at all and I know there is huge variation in the effectiveness but no one checks -- despite the fact students pay a hefty extra fee for the privilege of taking an online class. It is a huge moneymaker for the university but that money is not used to actually support instruction.
ReplyDeleteYou're spot on with the idea that we need innovation in both online and onsite classes. I teach one class that has students both onsite and online and others that are (at least on paper) onsite only. But I post all of the course materials—lecture video in the "blended" course and lecture notes in the onsite courses—to the web so that all my students have the option to come to class or to work independently. (I'm in a somewhat odd position where I haven't quite figured out how to make collaboration work for me.)
ReplyDeleteWhat makes it work, though, it that I believe in the mantra of a former department head who said that "brain time isn't equal to butt time"; that is, the time a student spends in his seat (listening to a lecture) doesn't correlate with what they* learn.
I teach writing in an engineering program, and I want students to learn to write engineering reports. So one of my assignment says, "Critique the abstracts of three papers relevant to your research work in terms of the standards for abstracts given in X, Y, and/or Z resources." Instead of sitting on their butts in my class, the students spend their time studying the principles from X, Y, and/or Z on their own and then applying those principles in their critiques. It's not really less "butt time," but it's much more *engaged* time. (And if I put my mind to it, I think I could build in some of your collaborative work, too....O)
From what I see in this blog, I think you're doing exactly the right thing with your classes. And I, too, hate the popular pabulum that online learning just can't measure up to the best of lecturers. I'm sorry, but while I know education has some of the same "star power" that Hollywood does, I also know that many excellent educators work long and hard for little recognition to do work that does as much or more for the students. Sure, some teachers are not as good as others, but in what discipline is that not true?
And universities are indeed hugely short-sighted in not funding distance education to make it as good as it should be—but they also aren't doing anything about the dull, educationally bankrupt lectures that go on in all too many onsite classes, too. So I don't think we can fault them for one without the other. But that's another point well taken.
I admire your willingness to address all these things in your blog!
(*Yes, I use the singular "they" intentionally.)
Thanks DJ - I love the brain time isn't equal to butt time because that sums it up quite beautifully for me!
DeleteI am currently adapting two of my courses To be offered online instead of in the classroom. They are very different courses and will require very different modes of presentation online, but I think the key is for us to make thoughtful decisions about how best to present the material so that students learn (and we learn from them!). There is no "right" or "wrong" beyond the mandate that knowledge be created between students and faculty.
ReplyDeleteYou are so right! Thoughtful decisions are the key - what works for you, your students, and your content - those are really the issues that matter. Although the more I experiment the more that I learn being open to new ideas and willing to give them a try may lead you in directions you never thought possible.
DeleteA very insightful critique, Deanna!
ReplyDeleteI've never experienced online coursework or education -- as a teacher or student. About five years ago, I would have argued the same point as Edmundson in the Op-Ed you linked to above: "Online education is a one-size-fits-all endeavor. It tends to be a monologue and not a real dialogue." And by extension, "real dialogue" only happens in face-to-face classes, particularly those that are smaller in size.
However, as I've accumulated more experience as a college instructor, and now, professor, I'd argue that "real dialogue" can happen in any forum; it's not really the physical space or lack thereof that matters. Again, while I haven't taught/enrolled in online classes, dialogue in digital spaces has become an important component of my identity and development as a pedagogue and scholar (and not to mention member of the profession). If I can find/create/synthesize intellectual community online, why couldn't students, given the right opportunities?
Exactly! I think some folks get hung up on the idea of the technology and tools providing an additional filter between student and instructor but, of course, the traditional classroom brings with it a lot of filters as well.
ReplyDeleteGosh, this post has sparked a degree of exchange and I understand why. I am like other posters conflicted by on-line learning. I have to admit that I have registered for but so far never managed to complete an on-line course.
ReplyDeleteI certainly have a sense of wanting the physical presence of other students, this seems to enable a stringer emotional engagement. This of course is not to place on-line or lecture beside each other. I loved being a Doctoral student. But have nodded off after a long day at work to many an internationally renowned speaker.
In the end the question is not on-line or face to face but one of redefining pedagogy to acknowledge the varying ways in which we communicate. As much as technology redefines the social - who we are and how we live together - the idea that teaching should be insulated from this change doesn't chime. There are institutional reasons why on-line course don't work with many (perhaps some) Universities (in the UK) seeing them as a cheap alternative.
I think they change the nature of communication, allow for more and different types of engagement, and when done well offer considerable scope. Not inherently better or worse, but different, enabling possibilities that face-to-face does not allow.