>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.
There has been a great deal of discussion and activity here at the U. of I.
regarding the development of "U I On-Line"--a series of programs and
courses offered over the web. What I find striking in all of this is that
the motivation for most of it, from the administrative side, seems to be
economic angst, worry very focused on the "markets" that are possible for
other universities that are the earliest to develop such programs. The
social niche idea is complicated--both universities and non-university
programs are competing to grab shares of a very broad educational market.
And, much of the debate is carried along by rhetorics of "access"--making
education accessible for all sorts of people otherwise shut out (e.g.,
adult learners, remote communities). I don't doubt that the web makes such
access possible, but the rhetorics of access and capital control are pretty
tightly woven, and I wonder about the extent to which we're just
rearranging geographies of "access"--shifting who learns where and who
profits when.
Jay, I really like your re-vision of what the web can help make possible
in educational activity (e.g., long-term mentoring rather than course
structures, etc.). I'd much rather such visions drive change than present
practices duplicated and marketed on the web, but I'm also worried about
the early, somewhat durable effects that large institutional movers may
have.
Kevin
Kevin Leander
Doctoral Student, Curriculum & Instruction
390 Education, 1310 S. Sixth St.
Champaign, IL 61820-6990
(217) 384-0256