Technology is creating virtual universities. Discuss.
"Time is the Enemy" for a new generation of students, according to a recent report about how people are consuming higher education and drifting away from traditional colleges. If the ivied halls become too expensive or too inconvenient, how will they adapt?
Flickr
In the global economy, the entire world's a marketing opportunity, even in education. Disruptive technology is continually creating more and more access to leading professors, coursework, and alternative learning opportunities. So when does the “brand value” of the credentials or degree offered by elite universities fall mightily in the facing of impossibly high costs and increasingly less availability?
Does the “bricks and mortar” experience offered by leading institutions of higher learning become irrelevant in the face of on-line competitors offering a more individualized experience, at times and in virtual places when students are available to learn, not when colleges want to teach them? Who does the traditional university serve anymore, anyway?
A new report from Complete College America gives hard data to a series of findings that should reset perceived norms about college in America today. Called Time is the Enemy, the report measures and tracks the success and failure of all kinds of America’s college students, not just the federally mandated counting of first time and full-time students that underpins most of our current educational policies and practices. For example:
Nontraditional students are the new majority. 75 percent of college students are “college commuters,” juggling families, job, and school, and often attending part-time. Only 25 prcent of students attend full-time residential colleges, and that number is decreasing annually.
Part-time students rarely graduate — even when they have twice as much time to get their degree. Why? These students don’t have the luxury of time to earn needed credits in the traditional semester schedule. They require, and want, the ability to show their competencies to skip unnecessary courses, to block-schedule campus based classes, to be able to schedule work and family duties, and to avail themselves of on-line coursework, peer learning, and social support networks available 24/7.
Students are wasting time on excess credits not required to graduate…and taking too much time to earn a degree. The parent of any sixth-year senior might want to weigh in here, but the reality of engaging in an extended voyage of intellectual development might work as long as someone else is footing the bill, not for folks with limited time and money. If access to needed requirements is limited — because of scheduling, or “lack of inventory” — the demand for alternatives, especially on-line, skyrockets.
Bill Keller’s recent New York Times article titled “The University of Wherever” reports on the pull and tug of demographic differences at elite Stanford University. On the one hand, Stanford is competing mightily with a host of bricks and mortar schools to open a branch campus of applied science in New York City, limited to 2,300 students, at sticker-shock prices. On the other hand, Stanford Professor Sebastian Thune makes the case for open, low-cost educational experiences, offering his “Introduction to Artificial Intelligence” course online, for free, so that 130,000 students around the globe get the same lectures, the same exams, the same assignments, coupled with a worldwide peer review and support network. Sadly, they won’t get the Stanford credit. But which one fulfills the spirit of education, and the needs of students, best?
The bottom line is America is facing its first generation that will be less educated than the one before, and every day we wait to develop educational alternatives puts us further and further behind. It’s not a matter of the name of the college on the degree you get, but a simple matter of getting a degree that is backed up by proven competencies and skills in graduates. And in 2011, how does an educational institution go about creating, and marketing, that?
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!










Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Wed, Oct 5, 4:42 p.m. Inappropriate
Some subjects lend themselves to individualized instruction, some don't.
And some subjects of sufficient complexity require a professor (os assistant) to teach, some don't.
Some subjects require group interaction and social queues that occur with the highest quality while in the presence of others, some don't.
There really is a subset, of a subset, of a subset, where the combination of all three things is essential for producing a learning experience of the highest quality.
Posted Wed, Oct 5, 8:32 p.m. Inappropriate
The American university system, as now configured, does indeed have some serious challenges. The skyrocketing costs are unsustainable for state budgets and the increasingly squeezed middle class, and universities for the most part have failed to keep up with the needs of the middle aged returning to school or those who work and/or raise families. In some sense, due to the cost issue, universities are starting to reinforce the kind of aristocracy that they were intended to prevent.
However, there is still not a viable model for online higher education. Indeed, for-profit universities have so far been a boondoggle, with the generally low quality of the education that they offer and the 30% student loan default rate, the for-profit model has not been unlike the subprime mortgage debacle. One of the key issues to be resolved is how any online model connects students with career opportunities. Another is that it will be extraordinarily difficult to recreate in an online setting the prestige that a four year university, rightfully or not, confers upon a student and is essential in today's job market.
Posted Wed, Oct 5, 8:41 p.m. Inappropriate
Tina Podlowski attended The University of Hartford, which these days charges $29,440 per year for tuition. Having gotten hers while the getting was good, it's hypocritical for her to recommend that young people get their degrees "wherever," including online degree mills such as the ones described in this Frontline expose:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/collegeinc/view/
In societies that value the common good and care about the future well being of their citizens, higher education is free or nearly free for all qualified students. In this country it's becoming the norm to graduate from college or grad school saddled with tens of thousands of dollars (or more) of debt, and enter a labor market that can't possibly absorb all the recent graduates. On top of this, massive blame is heaped on people who "stupidly" didn't seek credentials in lucrative fields like medicine, engineering, business admininistration, etc. These "losers" are urged to content to accept starter jobs as baristas, clerical temps, pizza delivery people, or whatever and live in tiny apartments for the rest of their lives. This is the problem Ms. Podlodowski should be addressing instead of waving her pom-poms for the online education industry.
Posted Thu, Oct 6, 2:02 p.m. Inappropriate
There's an interesting piece by Johann Neem at Western Washington U. about the broader social context that on-campus classes provide which aids in student learning - see http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2011/10/06/neem_essay_on_limits_of_online_education_in_replicating_classroom_culture
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.