Is Online Learning Really a Key to Better Education?

A study financed by the US Department of Education which compared the effectiveness of online vs. classroom-based teaching for the past 12 years found that online learning on average beat face-to-face instruction by a modest but statistically significant margin. Not surprisingly, Bill Gates (a Harvard drop out) believes that online learning will ultimately replace much college classroom teaching because he thinks “college needs to be place-based.” In other words, teaching needs to be directly delivered to the students who may be a difference places at different times. 

But, recent research published by David Figlio an economist at Northwestern University (in association with the National Bureau of Economics) found that live, classroom instruction was superior to Internet-based lecture videos for an introductory economics students.

The results were obtained in a head-to-head experiment that compared the grades achieved by 312 online students and those taught in a traditional classroom setting in an introductory economics course taught at a major unnamed state university. Interestingly, Hispanic online students’ grades fell nearly a full grade lower than Hispanic taught in a traditional classroom. Moreover, male students performed almost a half a grade worse than their classroom-based counterparts and low achievers, who had college grade point averages below the university mean also performed more poorly. Finally, online female students outperformed online male students.

The researchers assert that the differences that they observed could not be attributed to computer replacing the traditional tutorial-style human teaching environment because the lecture hall used in the experiment was a very large one that seated hundreds of students at one time. Initially, Figlio thought that the flexibility of online courses—the ability to go back and revisit course materials when time permitted—would give online learning an edge over traditional learning environments. However, based on the results of the study he contends that “the time-shifting convenience of the Web made it easier for students to put off viewing lectures and cram just before the test; a tactic that likely may not produce the best results! 

That may partly explain some of the discrepancies uncovered in the study, but why do online male students perform worse than their online female counterparts? The answer likely lies in the commonly-held belief (fact?) that female students are superior to male students in time management, organizational skills and commitment. Whether or not this is true, there is emerging evidence which suggests that online learning may not be an appropriate learning style for some students despite it obvious advantage of convenience. That said, it is important to note that the traditional didactic methods of instruction commonly employed by most secondary and postsecondary educators is also lacking and needs to be modified to create better learning environments.

While online training is gaining in popularity—and in my opinion, a great adjunctive tool—it will never replace those “magical teaching moments” that often spontaneously arise in a face-to-face classroom setting from student-instructor interactions and student-student repartee.

Until next time,

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

 

Life Sciences Education: The Ongoing Shortage of Qualified Teachers

My oldest son is a high school sophomore and is currently taking “honors” biology. While he is generally an “A” student, it is obvious that he is neither interested in biology nor motivated to perform to his ability in the class. Many of his “A-student friends” are also not doing well in biology class. This gave me pause for concern as a life-long science educator (and certified high school biology teacher). With this as a backdrop, I decided to meet with his teacher to determine why so many good students are underperforming in her class. After meeting with his teacher on two separate occasions, it was readily apparent why so many talented students were performing poorly in her class—she lacks the requisite educational and scientific skills to be an effective biology teacher.  This was confirmed by the head of curriculum development in my school district who told me that the last time that the district had an opening for a high school biology teacher he had two applicants (neither of which had strong biology credentials)—this in the state of New Jersey which is touted to have one of the best public school systems in America.

It is no secret that there is a nationwide dearth of qualified science and math teachers. US officials have been angsting over this problem for about 20 years and have been unable or unwilling to come up with solutions. To that end, I propose the following: induce some of the many currently unemployed life sciences PhDs to consider teaching at the middle and high school levels. While this may sound unorthodox and unappealing to most card-carrying PhDs, there are many benefits to becoming a middle or high school teacher.

  1. Starting salaries for public school teachers with PhDs are very competitive
  2. The school year is only 10 months long and your summers are free
  3. The healthcare and 401 K/pension benefits are better than those in academia and industry (and contributions are usually paid by the school district)
  4. There are guaranteed, negotiated yearly raises and longevity pay
  5. Tenure is awarded after only three years
  6. Curricula requirements and guidelines exists but teachers can run their classes any way that they like
  7. Motivated and innovative teachers are encouraged to create new courses, apply   for grants for curriculum development and sometimes—depending upon facilities—offer students an opportunity to conduct independent research projects
  8. School districts like to hire PhDs because it implies scientific excellence

While there are many benefits to being a teacher, it is not for everybody who holds a PhD degree.  I don’t recommend taking a teaching job (out of desperation) if you don’t like to teach—you, your supervisor and your students will be miserable And, you likely will have frustrated and unhappy parents— like me—visiting your regularly.

We PhDs are enormously invested in the ways that we are perceived by our peers. And, I suspect that the mere mention of teaching high school to your friends, colleagues and supervisors will likely result in surprised looks and lot’s of head shaking. Unfortunately, it is this parochial thinking that has caused America to lose it competitive edge and scientists who chose to teach rather than do research are generally perceived as being less intelligent or competent than their peers. Ironically, it is this close-mindedness and pejorative thinking that has contributed to America’s two-decade long slide in science and technology. Perhaps it is time for PhDs to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

P.S. Please contact me if you are interested in teaching biology in the East Windsor Regional School District in New Jersey.

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend