|
|
Content v. Context
A debate is quietly taking place in number of academic journals and books these days on the intrinsic worth and relative effectiveness of distance learning versus traditional classroom learning. The arguments are scarcely new. In fact, they date back to the days of William Rainey Harper of the University of Chicago in the late nineteenth century. But in the past year, scholars who assert that distance learning is another "fad," like teaching machines or programmed instruction, have given the forces opposed to the "tsunami" of distance learning a fresh voice. Most vocal are classroom professors who view distance learning as nothing more than an industrialized commodity that is being foisted on students in homogenized, cookie-cutter packages. Their chief objection is that so long as professors are part-time and are paid on a piece rate basis, there will never be quality in distance learning. The anti-distance movement asserts that it is the context of where and how learning occurs that is the true benchmark of quality. It does matter, to them at least, that there is a palpable chemistry between the professor and the student. It also matters that there is an academic environment in which to learn, and that it is the interchange of verbal and non-verbal messages that transpire in this environment which characterize a worthwhile, true, learning experience. Vituperative books and studies are making an all-out assault on distance learning. I suspect some of this earnest effort is motivated by the fear of losing jobs, tenure, and academic freedom. Who wouldn't fight the movement with these sacred cows at stake? The Contest Between Context and Content I recall a contextual learning experience I had in my university days some 35 years ago. The professor was a gentle, much-venerated scholar in his seventies, a full-time tenured faculty member revered for his knowledge of John Milton. One sunny day in May, he entered an overheated classroom where 22 of us were jammed into tiny chairs, glanced out of the window, looked about blinking, and said, "Class dismissed. The hawthorns are in bloom!" It was the shortest and best class on Milton I ever had, and one of the only lectures from my college days that I can recall today. I think it is unfortunate that a small but vocal subset of traditional educators is fighting against a century-old method of education. Distance learning isn't perfect, it certainly isn't for everyone, and its shortcomings are well documented. But classroom instruction, as valuable as it has been for centuries, isn't immune to change an improvement. I submit that there is place in academe for both contextual learning and content learning. I see a day when no one method of learning will dominate, when all learning will use a variety of media and employ a variety of styles. The role of the viva voce professor reading from yellowed notes will evolve into a remote facilitator/mentor/tutor working one-on-one with students in a learning contract custom-designed for that learner. Technology, particularly the Internet, is already transforming how, when, and where people learn from "real" professors. The Internet is allowing the contextual traditionalists a wonderful opportunity to enrich their learning content, enhance their instructional style, and allow for more creativity than we could have thought possible a generation ago. It is my hope that the debate of context versus content dies away quietly, so that all of us can get on with the business of creating and offering the best possible learning opportunities in the world, using every means at our disposal. Class dismissed. The hawthorns are in bloom! Copyright 2000, Converge magazine. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
