window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-GEQWY429QJ');

 

Entity reports on why so many students fail online classes.

Technology is making education easier than ever – unless you try to get that degree online. Four years after what New York Times dubbed “Year of the MOOC,” online learning may be in danger of earning a failing grade.

MOOC, or massive open online courses, have emerged in the educational world to combat serious issues relating to cost of admission and living situations. Institutions recognize the financial barriers for underprivileged students who want to pursue higher education. Couple that with the digital age? An innovative solution emerged offering students high quality courses online for a fraction of the cost.

This new wave birthed companies like Udacity and Coursera that teamed up with community colleges, state universities and Ivy League institutions alike to deliver extensive courses to eager, virtual learners.

On paper, the proposition seemed ideal. It means greater opportunities for student success with lower costs for both the student and the school. However, a few years into the new digital wave, alarming numbers emerged. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, Internet-enrolled students completed courses with a 50 percent success rate compared to the in-person campus classes’ of 70 to 75 percent.

From dating to shopping, millennials do everything online. So why doesn’t online learning work? Part of the problem is the lack of connection between students and teacher. According to The New York Times, pre-filmed video lectures have “an anonymous quality” that lacked the improvisational approach so crucial in the classroom setting. Online schooling turned learning into a “one-size-fits all endeavor”; this approach was unaccommodating to the individual’s specific needs.

MOOC may have emerged to meet student concerns, but these courses don’t listen to the students. One San Jose State University case – in which online courses were accepted enthusiastically but were described as a “bust” by the end of the semester – exemplifies this dilemma, according to National Public Radio. Although initially a celebrated idea, online classes proved to deliver poor results – with a price tag similar to in-person lectures.

The problem with the system may ironically lay in its victories. SJSU’s philosophy chair Peter Hadras noticed that the success stories in online education derive from highly-motivated students excelling in the college experience and who may have already earned their degree. Thus, these online courses were not designed with struggling, low-income students in mind. Instead of offering an alternative to a traditional educational system, online classes offered a leg up for already accomplished intellectuals.

Despite the stats, schools are rolling out more and more computer-based courses. Undergraduates clamor for independence and flexibility while schools thrive on the cost-efficiency and profit-making potential. Neither party has considered the best interest of the student, according to The Chronicle. Even Sebastian Thrun – MOOC spokesperson and Udacity’s co-founder – recognized the mistake in 2013, calling his service a “lousy product.” Since then, Udacity has tried combating the issue by implementing a human element into their online courses, according to NPR.

Chronicle writer and associate professor Rob Jenkins insists that these institutions need to offer tests to determine if students could handle the online experience before enrolling in a course. While schools roll out more options spiked by student’s demand, he explains that Internet-based courses aren’t the best path for everyone.

“For students who aren’t able to attend college in the traditional way, ‘good enough’ can be a godsend,” Jenkins said. “But that doesn’t mean that all students, or any student who wants to, should take online courses. Our collective failure to recognize that fundamental reality is primarily responsible for the high failure rates we see in online courses.”

While some students may ace online opportunities, the target audience is flunking out. Online learning is void of hands-on support crucial for the demographic it hoped to reach. Absent of human touch without organic professor interaction or classroom discussion, this alternative form of education needs a serious study session if it hopes to make honor roll.

Edited by Ellena Kilgallon
Send this to a friend