When I read the responses of industry experts to the Pew Research Center’s survey titled The Future Impact of the Internet on Higher Education (2012), I was struck by the extent to which higher education is already being delivered in many new ways, with most of the innovation being connected to the internet. The survey asked experts to choose one of two scenarios that would best describe the changes they anticipated in the world of higher education by 2020. One scenario outlined modest changes involving increasing use of screens and wireless tech but with the majority of educational services delivered in-person on campus by lecture based classes. 39% of respondents chose this scenario. The radical change scenario proposed a higher ed world where distance learning and individualized instruction were the norm, with more mastery-based assessments. 60% of respondents chose this scenario as the one they believed to be more likely.
Choosing between these scenarios was a starting point for
the survey. Written response from experts was what Pew was really after. In their
responses a significant number of those in the survey said they thought the
true future lay somewhere between the two scenarios (Anderson, Boyles & Rainie, 2012).
 |
| Online learning platforms many include many supports for student learning. |
It is hard to get past the word “individualized” in the radical change scenario without calling this one a win for students. Instruction that assesses where you are and gives you scaffolded steps and support to move to the next level is a huge service to students. And it is much more precise than our current in-person instructional model of, “Got this pre-requisite? You can take this class.”
At first glance one might not think “individualized” and “technology”
are instructional words that go together. Doesn’t the word “technology” imply that
we are putting students in a cold, impersonal environment? One might ask, “Don’t
we have the best chance of meeting a student’s precise academic needs by having
them meet personally with human experts who can assess their knowledge about a
subject?” Well, maybe. IF we could afford to have that happen regularly and we
could produce unbiased instructors whose primary interest was properly and carefully
scaffolding learning for students at many entry points into their subjects. I
think that is probably a rare scenario in higher ed. Yet, technological
instruction can do this with infinite patience and great precision.
As a case in point, I look to a woman I tutor at Empire State College who has taken two introductory
statistics classes. The first used an online test and homework application
that provided instant grading, countless instructional videos and endless
examples. She didn’t finish this class because she moves slowly through the
material, so she took another course with a human instructor at a distance who
offered no more feedback than “79% or 83%” on learning activities (multiple choice questions about readings) and that only after a couple of
days. She has told me many times how she misses the instant feedback and
instructional supports of the computer based homework and test system. Granted,
this was an excellent online program vs. a lousy human instructor. The quality
on each side could vary a lot, but this situation has sent me the clear message
that as educators we need to think clearly about student experiences in
technological environments and acknowledge the situations when they are better
at what we do than we are.
Anderson, J.Q., Boyles, J.L. and Rainie, L. (2012). PewResearchCenter. The future impact of the Internet on higher education: Experts expect more-efficient collaborative environments and new grading schemes; they worry about massive online courses, the shift away from on-campus life. Retrieved 8/19/2015 from: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2012/PIP_Future_of_Higher_Ed.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment