I was struck by Eva's note about the relations between continuity of
membership, effectiveness of on-line groups as true communities, and the
difference between the paradigm of a listgroup like xmca and that for
distance education.
I think that the fault may lie in the distance education paradigm. It is
still too much derivative from the paradigms of classroom education. I know
it is fashionable to talk about how on-line learning can never replace
face-to-face instruction (I don't believe this for a minute, by the way),
but there is no reason to associate the subtle psychological benefits of
FTF interaction with the archaic compromises of the mass education model.
The idea that students should change teachers and classmates every several
months has always struck me as a particularly ridiculous artifact of the
local history of educational institutions. I think that everything we know
about the social nature of learning communities suggests that more extended
continuity of learning groups would be beneficial and that the present
standard arrangements can only make sense under highly decontextualized and
individualized (and discredited) models of learning.
So it seems to me very important to begin saying that on-line education
should not inherit this feature of classroom and school-based education.
There should be provision for significant long-term continuity of mentoring
relationships and of on-going learning cohort groups. The technologies of
on-line education certainly can make this possible, and do so without
excluding the degree of mobility and freedom of students to affiliate with
new groups as their interests evolve. But there could be a lot to be said
for some sort of emphasis within on-line learning programs and their
emerging institutions for long-term continuity of discussion groups, either
around large topical areas (such as xmca defines), or around longterm
educational programs (of the kind that exist in contemporary curricula), or
in other ways.
I think this is an important issue that I have not heard much discussion
of. Most efforts at on-line education that I know of are the usual
semester-long course structures. In fact the whole concept of the Carnegie
Unit which is the basis for the 45-semester-hour course makes very little
sense intellectually today, and is quite out of place in the context of new
on-line technologies for collaborative learning. This is one reason, I
know, why some people are beginning to wonder whether in the long term
on-line education and the existing institutional (including economic,
curricular, etc.) arrangements of schools and universities are compatible.
Today most people see on-line education as a supplement to the existing
paradigm. It seems in some ways more likely that it will be an alternative
and competitor to it, especially if it can once establish an autonomous
economic base. I think schools and universities should be very worried
about the consequences for their social niches. I think students should be
very happy that the alternatives may offer them much richer options for
learning.
JAY.
---------------------------
JAY L. LEMKE
CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
JLLBC who-is-at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
---------------------------