Originally published in the Distance Education Report July 2011
It is a question that refuses to die. I have heard it quite frequently over that past decade. Why does there seems to be greater scrutiny of distance learning courses than the traditional face-face classes? The distance learning faculty members at my college have asked me, even as recently as the past semester. Showing this is not just a regional concern, a couple of my LinkedIn groups have recently taken up similar issues. An interviewer asked Larry Ragan, the distinguished Director of Faculty Development for the Penn State World Campus, this question…again…in the March 15, 2011, Distance Learning Report.
When interviewers ask, the question seems to be an attempt either to stir up a good conversation between the face-to-face and online instructors where there are sure to be individuals on both sides or if talking to distance learning professionals like me to get an indignant reaction.
Having mellowed enough I now accept that there are multiple factors involved in the question, many illegitimate but some expressing warranting concern.
The relative newness of distance learning is an expressed reason. Although our college has been offering distance learning courses for over a decade now, many still perceive it as “new” rather than as is the case a part of the fabric of learning. Distance learning is not new. Classes conducted in learning management systems have been occurring since the 1990s. Classes conducted at a distance have occurred in a variety of other formats going back many decades. Recall correspondence and telecourses. The didactic foundation of most online programs, constuctivism, dates back to Jean Piaget in the 1950s and tributaries to constuctivist thought date back several hundred years.
Degree mills, disreputable, unaccredited institutions, that offer courses with little if any of the academic rigor we expect in our colleges and universities have added to the distrust of distance learning. Actually, I believe we are out of the “Wild West” days during which any institution could post a “degree-granting” program with money as its sole quid pro quo. While it is true that there are unscrupulous programs, I also believe that regulatory agencies are watching and that the average potential consumer of online education programs is better informed.
Some see the greater regulatory scrutiny of distance learning itself as evidence that something is wrong with the whole notion of learning away from campus. The US Department of Education has directed the accrediting organizations to have greater scrutiny over the distance learning programs. Accrediting organizations are particularly concerned with the resources devoted to distance learning programs and to methodology and processes to prevent student cheating, concerns we should have in all our programs. Rather than see this as undue attention, I view this as the attention that places distance learning on par with its sister campus-based programs.
Of all the arguments I hear, perhaps the least reasonable and most pernicious is that regarding whether or not real learning can take place online. It is as if either without the student sharing the same physical space with the instructor or without the student’s ability to see the instructor the human brain cannot retain memories and experiences. This argument is a visceral reaction by those who do not understand and likely have not participated in online learning. It is wrong and rooted in the nostalgia of classroom magic. A synergy that contributes to learning does happen when a student is in a seat on campus but the synergy also happens in a discussion group online. In fact, the US Department of Education’s meta-analysis study, the “Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning” (September 2010) concluded that “online learning is much more conducive to the expansion of learning time than is face-to-face instruction”; that “the effectiveness of online learning approaches appears quite broad across different content and learner types”; and that “students in online conditions performed modestly better, on average, than those learning the same material through traditional face-to-face instruction.”
College administrators sometimes express that they do not feel as in touch with adjunct online instructors. If the instructor is not within the geographical area, they are not able to call the person in for a meeting if needed. Obviously, this hypothetical scenario is also based on a misperception that college administrators are engaged with any appreciable number of adjunct instructors, whether on ground or online. As an adjunct for a number of years at multiple institutions, with just a couple of exceptions, I found it rare that I communicated with anyone at the institution about classroom instruction. I was fond of saying that being an adjunct is a lonely duty. Unless I made it my absolute mission to do otherwise, I could spend an entire semester having no contact with other faculty member or administrator. The most engagement with other faculty and administrators that I have experienced as an adjunct was in teaching online courses where there were discussion groups, online adjunct activities, email, and phone/web conferences. Thus, it is exceedingly rare that we need a face-to-face meeting with an adjunct instructor.
The scrutiny then is both unwarranted when it comes to questioning how it is different than other venues for learning and warranted when we are interested in improving learning overall. It seems that the best concern is the is not that we need to watch this shifty-eyed new fad called distance learning but that we need to take care as we are building all our courses, face-to-face and on-campus. Students can and do learn this way. Distance learning gives us the chance to take a fresh look at courses with a renewed focus on pedagogy. There is the potential to learn from those who care most about learning, those will to put in the effort and time it takes to build and conduct distance learning courses. College opportunities can be expanded with more courses and time conveniences. Why should we have the greater scrutiny? The best argument is that we care about learning and getting it right.
Edtech Synthesis 