Online learning gains acceptance
"The bottom line is that the preconceived notions that I and many others in higher education had about the supposedly unambiguous inferiority of online classes have proven to be wrong.”
It’s jarring to leave the 1500+ educators taking part in DLAC—nearly all of whom believe in the promise of digital learning—and be thrust back into the larger world where so many people believe that online learning is inherently inferior. It feels, however, that there are more quotes like the one above, suggesting that even as pandemic-induced remote schooling wanes, more people recognize that online learning can work well. As explored below, this example comes from post-secondary education. Although some people might question the relevance to K-12, arguably a post-secondary perspective is especially important, because of the implications of the educational world we are preparing students for.
The article from which I took the quote is titled: Online college classes can be better than in-person ones. The implications for higher ed are profound. There is much to unpack here.
Let’s start with the idea of “preconceived notions” that online learning is “unambiguous(ly) inferior.” The author is an electrical engineering professor at UCLA, as well as co-director of the UCLA Institute for Technology, Law, and Policy, so hardly appears to be a luddite. Therefore, it’s notable that his preconceived notions of online learning being inferior appear to have been in place until 2020—or, to be more specific, the start of the pandemic.
The author recounts how he has come to see online learning as valuable, and recites findings that wouldn’t surprise many of our readers. He discusses reaching different types of students, efficiencies (some which are specific to post-secondary education), and other benefits. He also addresses concerns about equity, and how to deliver content such as science labs. None of these ideas would be out of place in DLAC sessions.
Reading the post, however, raises several questions that are worthy of consideration. First, how can we as a field accelerate these conversions? I must admit that while I welcome another apparently influential person discovering the benefits of online learning, it is frustrating that this is a discovery after 20+ years of online learning being at least somewhat common in colleges and universities—and that Brookings considers this an interesting enough finding to publish. This is somehow both gratifying and frustrating at the same time.
Second, posts like this one leave me wondering the extent to which the common understanding of online learning is rooted in the 2005 version of education. Online schools and courses were good and valuable back then, of course, but they are much improved since then. The technology and, more importantly, instructional practices, have evolved significantly. Is this an issue that we should take on?
Third, is there value in connecting policymakers, media, and other skeptics to the new converts to the benefits of digital learning? If so, how do we balance building on the views of the people and organizations that have been building this field for more than a decade, with centering new voices?
Finally, how do we address the final part of the title: “The implications…are profound”? How do we find and build on trusted voices to deliver the K-12 version of this message?
"Unfortunately, few college administrators are likely to acknowledge the advantages of synchronous online instruction.* Doing so would call into question the entire model of the residential college—a concept that is a multi-billion-dollar business, a central feature of the American cultural landscape, and a rite of passage all rolled up into one.
But a more objective, pandemic-seasoned appraisal of online learning would admit that thanks to technology, the campus classroom—the actual and symbolic core around which all that college has come to mean is constructed—no longer needs to be a physical room. We are probably not ready to imagine how higher education might look if it were redesigned from the ground up, taking full advantage of the opportunities created by technology to maximize student engagement and instructional quality, accessibility, and equity.
One thing is sure: It would look very different from the higher education ecosystem we have today." (emphasis added)
If you’re caught up in the references to higher education in the quote above, re-read the sentences and replace all the college references with K-12. The quote still fits. K-12 education is a multi-billion dollar endeavor, schools are a central feature of the American landscape (physical as well as cultural), and K-12 education entails more rites of passage, for more students, than post-secondary.
To build on and paraphrase the final sentence for K-12 education: if public education was designed today, from the ground up, it would look very different than it does now—and some of that difference would be based on more use of technology, and fewer time and space constraints. But given how much is invested in the current system, and how many people and organizations are threatened by change, it’s still a challenge to implement change at scale.
*This post is focused on synchronous online instruction, but it pertains equally to high quality online instruction that is a mix of synchronous and asynchronous as well.