There was a recent post here that reported that on-line students (mostly in college) had performed better than students who were taught in the traditional classroom. Before anyone gets all charged up about effectiveness of on-line programs, one should recognize that the data were collected for people who were able to finish the class.
The beauty of statistics is that they give validity to the improbable and plausibility to the impossible. While there are reasons why on-line students might do better when tested than their classroom counterparts, one must also examine the population that completes a class versus one that completes an on-line class. It may be that there is a higher attrition rate for the on-line class, or perhaps the on-line learners may have higher skills than their classroom counterparts. This is not meant to negate the study that showed on-line studies to be superior, but to show that perhaps the superiority was skewed. Better information is necessary.
Then again, the on-line option might be the best way to go. There needs to be a system to analyze what works best. We're a country that loves freedom and self-initiative, but academic freedom is a bit of a crock when it comes to a classroom setting. As Bill Gates said with reference to problems with education, "It is the system." Bill was right. Unfortunately, we don't have the best system to make sure we're using what works the best. Until we have a means to find what works best with students, we might as well have Paris Hilton as the Secretary of Education. While not a role model, at least no one will take her seriously while she sells the bag of goods being sold by Arne Duncan.
The blog promotes education reform and the book "Improving the Odds: A Basis for long-term change" (Rowman and Littlefield).
Showing posts with label classroom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label classroom. Show all posts
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
On-line students outperform students in classroom...
In a recent New York Times article, students (primarily college level) who learned on-line outperformed students who were taught in a traditional classroom. Barbara Means who headed the SRI study said that:
“The study’s major significance lies in demonstrating that online learning today is not just better than nothing — it actually tends to be better than conventional instruction."
Indeed, the classroom students were considered to be the "mean" and scored at the 50th percentile while the on-line students scored at the 59th percentile. Who would believe that such results were possible? Actually, if the curriculum is specialized for an on-line class, one would think that the on-line experience can actually offer significant advantages over traditional lecture classes. The first advantage to a well-thought out on-line class is that it can be continuously improved from year-to-year and can provide immediate access to additional resources to the student. The second advantage is that notes for a class are on the computer, thus a student doesn't have to "take notes" in class and risk missing vital information from an instructor. The third advantage is that an online class can be accessed from any location with an online computer link at any time.
My book, Improving the Odds: A basis for long-term change (Rowman and Littlefield), states that to improve education, we must improve the quality of lessons delivered by the classroom teacher. Our current system of education has no means for long-term improvement of the product. Teachers do not know what techniques work best in the classroom. This is because classroom teachers do not have time to perform studies to compare what they are presenting. It is the education system's job to measure the techniques that work best and to make sure the techniques are employed in the classroom. Thus, it is not surprising that on-line students do better than those in the classroom. It is entirely consistent with the premise of my book.
As with any product, the education of a student is going to depend on the quality of the lessons received. Unfortunately, while k-12 education systems quibble over school size, tougher standards, uniforms, and gender issues, the one thing that isn't mentioned is finding the best way to deliver lessons to children. They should. Apparently, the colleges should also concern themselves with the quality of classroom instruction, or they may find themselves out of work.
As the title of my book suggests, one must "raise the class" if improvement is going to succeed. If not, the students in the class turn their attention to Twitter, Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus, or features of the new PS3 slim. With the advent of computer, we do not have a captive audience. We must find ways to improve the deliver of the lesson if schools are to improve...
“The study’s major significance lies in demonstrating that online learning today is not just better than nothing — it actually tends to be better than conventional instruction."
Indeed, the classroom students were considered to be the "mean" and scored at the 50th percentile while the on-line students scored at the 59th percentile. Who would believe that such results were possible? Actually, if the curriculum is specialized for an on-line class, one would think that the on-line experience can actually offer significant advantages over traditional lecture classes. The first advantage to a well-thought out on-line class is that it can be continuously improved from year-to-year and can provide immediate access to additional resources to the student. The second advantage is that notes for a class are on the computer, thus a student doesn't have to "take notes" in class and risk missing vital information from an instructor. The third advantage is that an online class can be accessed from any location with an online computer link at any time.
My book, Improving the Odds: A basis for long-term change (Rowman and Littlefield), states that to improve education, we must improve the quality of lessons delivered by the classroom teacher. Our current system of education has no means for long-term improvement of the product. Teachers do not know what techniques work best in the classroom. This is because classroom teachers do not have time to perform studies to compare what they are presenting. It is the education system's job to measure the techniques that work best and to make sure the techniques are employed in the classroom. Thus, it is not surprising that on-line students do better than those in the classroom. It is entirely consistent with the premise of my book.
As with any product, the education of a student is going to depend on the quality of the lessons received. Unfortunately, while k-12 education systems quibble over school size, tougher standards, uniforms, and gender issues, the one thing that isn't mentioned is finding the best way to deliver lessons to children. They should. Apparently, the colleges should also concern themselves with the quality of classroom instruction, or they may find themselves out of work.
As the title of my book suggests, one must "raise the class" if improvement is going to succeed. If not, the students in the class turn their attention to Twitter, Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus, or features of the new PS3 slim. With the advent of computer, we do not have a captive audience. We must find ways to improve the deliver of the lesson if schools are to improve...
Labels:
classroom,
computer,
continuous improvement,
education,
education reform,
K-12,
New York Times,
on-line,
students,
Twitter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)