Because on line education is booming there is a sense that
something new and interesting is happening in education. In fact, what is new
is the venue for education not the education itself. The courses that
universities have always offered were meant to put people in seats efficiently
so that less faculty could teach more students. On line education is simply an
extension of that model. Arguments can be made for how this on line
lecture-based model is better than the old classroom model, and arguments can
be made for how it is worse than the old one. But, the new on line models
really are not attempts to solve the real problems in education.
What are the real problems?
1. What is being
taught in universities is academic material derived from research intended to
create students who can do research and become scholars.
2. The idea that
a university education is meant to produce students who can immediately go to
work because they have been taught employable skills is argued against at
research universities and typically is seen as a second rate educational model.
3. The
methodology of lecturing, reading,
essay writing and test taking, is in direct opposition to a learn by doing,
experiential model of education where students go out and do things and learn
from their mistakes.
4. On line
education allows, in principal, the creation of simulated experiences so that
you don’t have to actually crash an airplane in order to learn how to fly nor
do you have to bankrupt an actual business in order to learn how to run one.
5. New models of education are explicitly
rejected by university faculty, who, in general, do not spend much time on
teaching and would rather do research. They don’t want new on line models that
might force them to re-order their priorities. University faculty have a pretty
nice life and will reject changes to their research-focused existence.
The real opportunity in on line
education is to change what is taught and how it is taught, in order to create
graduates who can be immediately be employed by a workplace that needs skilled
workers rather than theoreticians and scholars.
We have been building on line learn by
doing models for over 15 years. Universities are afraid of these models because they are afraid of the
faculty revolt that would ensue if these models became the standard. They are
also expensive to build. Students love them however because they can get jobs
immediately after graduation and because it is really a very enjoyable way to
learn.
The mentored, teamwork, based model
that XTOL (http://xtolmasters.com/) uses
depends upon building a detailed story and simulation of actual work
experiences. This is not as easy to as it sounds.
To start, there needs to be one or
more subject matter experts who guide the development. But, such experts are
typically professors and professors want to teach theories. So, finding the
right subject matter experts can be difficult.
Even more difficult is the design
process itself. We use a team of people who have been doing this kind of work,
in some cases, for twenty years or more. All of our senior designers have been
doing this for at least five years and as far as we can tell it takes three or
four years of apprenticeship to actually be any good at it.
The reason is easy to understand,
Building an all day, full year, learning experience is somewhere between making
a motion picture and writing a textbook. You don’t usually get it right the
first time, in either case. Learning by doing is really how we learn and our
people have been learning design by doing for a very long time.
Teaching others to do this is the next
step in the education revolution.
This is fairly intriguing. I am interested in the negotiation stories Roger has collected, especially since Roger Fisher just died recently.
ReplyDelete