http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/06/education/06online.html?_r=1&ref=education
After reading the second paragraph, where Hamilton copied and pasted Wikipedia entries into his paper, the first thought that went through my head was: "Finally they are acknowledging the truths of online coursework." I mean really, adults can't be THAT dumb. Although plagiarism repercussions exist at almost any educational institution, that clearly did not stop this kid. As many of you probably know, online classes are offered here at Penn State just like they are at a variety of other colleges and universities. The difference is that for the most part we can choose to take an online class or opt for a regular classroom experience. However, it seems like according this article, as online coursework filters down to high schools, it poses problems for the students, and in Hamilton's case it is not only a disciplinary problem but a motivation problem.
This article reiterated a lot of the points we've also brought up in class, like, what do you do with sub-par kids who aren't learning or don't have the desire to learn? Well, as the sources in this article so lovingly point out: you stick them in a classroom with the absence of an adult to teach them that plagiarizing is wrong, because the production imperative of literacy argues that since these students didn't invest the effort or desire to learn the first time (e.g. in English 3), you can find an alternative avenue to push them through the system, and at a much cheaper cost.
One final thought: Although this is unrelated to anything I said above, I thought that it was interesting all of the students featured in the photograph for the article were African American. Who is this article portraying to benefit from online coursework, and what are their levels of literacy?
3 comments:
I don't I would readily agree with the notion that technology is synonymous with higher levels or greater expectations of literacy. I think that technology has created a greater need for different types of literacy and perhaps even more complex literacy, but technology has also given us ways to cheat, as one can see from the plagiarism you mention in the your post.
I took an online class two summers ago in order to fulfill one of the GenEds. The class was based on watching one hourish long presentation each week on angel that consisted of pictures (which would change ever five minutes or so) and the voice of the professor droning on in the background. I watching one of these and then stopped.
The problem, besides the opportunities for plagiarism and other methods of cheating, with on-line education is a lack of connection between student and teacher. Even in big lecture halls where the student and teacher may never meet, the teacher is physically there in front of the student, which shows some level of desire to teach from the professor that can carry over to the student. In an on-line situation where the teacher is not present, the student doesn't want to be present either, and that is where the education truly falters. A students doesn't want to learn from someone who is reluctant to teach, and without the physical presence in on-line education, many teachers or educators can come across as reluctant or un-reachable.
I don't think on-line education can be truly useful until this can be fixed or negotiated. There is a tendency to blame the student when they perform badly with on-line education, but the student isn't really being drawn in or engaged by a droning voice on a computer. Nor do I want to imply that it is the teachers fault, there is only so much one can do when setting up a lesson plan for an on-line class. The problem lies in the system, in on-line education itself.
I believe that to be successful with this type of learning, that student needs to have some serious self-motivation or determination, which is why where someone is in life can affect the outcome. A high school student will probably feel the same disconnect that I did and it will effect the outcome of the class. However, an adult student enrolling in on-line classes in order to get a degree to get a higher paying job while raising a family and/or holding another/lower paying job will approach the class with a different mind-set, and may be able to overcome the disconnect.
First, I feel that requiring students to take an online course to graduate is unnecessary. In the case of the students in Memphis, it is sad and unfortunate example of dumbing-down standards. It's especially unnecessary because English, in my opinion, is the one subject that one must experience in a traditional classroom. Mostly because to understand a text, it takes someone who has read it before to guide the students along.
The online classes I've taken here have all been a joke except for one. I've always had difficulty with math but the online system I used here was great. Instead of relying on a teacher’s explanation, I could see step-by-step, just how to work out a problem. It set the difficulty level automatically based on an initial test and from there it would only allow you to advance if you passed the previous quiz. For me this was great but everyone learns differently.
just a quick comment on my thoughts for online classes. The only online class I took was some inart class to fulfill a gen ed requirement. I took it along with about 12 of my friends and we would all get together to take the quiz's with the answer to every question in a word document that on of the kids got from another friend.
I feel that although it served no purpose to me, the ability to receive education online should not be based on some cases of students who are looking for the easiest way to get the best grade (isn't that life?). We should still use these online classes to help those who may be physically impaired, or unable to attend traditional school for whatever reason (parent, full-time job requirement, deployed soldier) and try our best to facilitate these motivated people.
Post a Comment