The Controversy Of Distance Education

It was just really nice to hear that there is abe a cheap replacement for campuses" (A.
developing alternative method available for peopleFeenberg). In his discussion, he looked into the
to avail of education even outside the schoolinterests of the parties involved relative to the
premises. It was interesting to witness that thecost of online education: the government,
world has really been on its track towardscorporations, teachers and students. Feenberg's
globalization and progress. I agree thatidea was that the government is interested in
technological advancement is one of the mostcost reduction for educational expenses while the
evident proofs for almost everyone. I believe thatcorporations which are to provide the resources
the development of distant education is on itsare obviously interested with sales and earnings of
way to being widely accepted by both studentswhich I agree with. So the main concern here is
and educators because of its inherent and obviousthe difference between cost efficiency and cost
benefits for parties (students and teachers), theeffectiveness. As Doug Valentine quoted
government and the business sector. My stand isAtkinson's statement: "it is possible for a program
that distant education, online education, orto be efficient but not cost effective if the
interactive education, whatever anyone prefers,outputs which are actually produced do not
as an alternative method of knowledge acquisitioncontribute to the program objectives: that is it
cannot and should not replace traditional classroommay be efficient at doing the wrong things"
education even if it be an indication of the world's(Atkinson, 1983).
progress.With the actual cost of education as computed by
Andrew Feenberg, in his article entitledWeber, the government does not actually have
"Reflections on the Distance Learningthe assurance of achieving both cost
Controversy" has clearly shown favor for theeffectiveness and cost efficiency. If the cost of
online education as one of the pioneers of suchtraining teachers, the cost hardware and
program. His admiration for the purpose of thesoftware, human resources such as technicians
program is so obvious when he said that "theand other people involved are to be considered,
virtual classroom was a place of intense intellectualwe can say that establishing online education is
and human interaction" (A. Feenberg). I amnot as cheap as it may seem for others.
personally in favor of pursuing distant education,Valentine stressed that "the costs associated with
knowing that such method can help a lottraining technicians and instructors should not be
non-traditional students. It maybe possible thatoverlooked"; citing the fact that online education
"intense intellectual and human interaction", asrequires a minimum of three persons in one
Feenberg claimed, can happen in online education.setting compared with one instructor in a
This is so because intelligent and smart studentstraditional setting.
can be found anywhere else in the world,Another thing is that online education cannot
regardless of their nationality and age, as well aspromise the quality. One reason is that there are
teachers. I also agree that such kind of studentsstill no clear standards set for the accreditation of
can be shaped by online education but likethis type of education. Another concern is that
traditional classroom learning, the case is relative. Igraduates of online courses do not have the
said so because learning depends on how eagerhands-on training of their courses as reflected by
and dedicated students are.the limitation of communication and training
For Feenberg to say that "the quality of thesefacilities. "Students also need the attention of the
online discussions surpasses anything I have beeninstructors" (D. Valentine). Considering the
able to stimulate in my face-to-face" is somethinglimitations of distance learning, I believe that the
I would have to strongly disagree with. Feenbergrequired attention from teachers will be a far
spoke of his personal experience as an onlinemore enduring task for teachers. It maybe far
teacher. The bias here is that not all teachers findeasier to remind students face to face than to do
the same thing. Linda Sweeney, in her articlesome emails, which gives no assurance when the
entitled "Guidelines for Being a Good Onlinestudents will receive the message. Worse, there is
Student" expressed her frustration in havingassurance that the instructions are clear for the
students with bad learning habits who are to bestudents, or if they are, the feedbacks will
kept reminded of their schedules. The obviousobviously be delayed.
factor here is attitude. One problem with onlineOne more point to ponder on is the students'
education is the attitude of instructors, students,social growth. Because distance education involves
and administrators (D. Valentine). The quality ofonly a small group who do not have frequent
education depends on how the parties involvedinteractions, the social aspect of the students
behave towards online education and how muchmight be at risk. Students do not learn only on
importance do they place on the program. As oneformal and educational conversations. As social
Professor stated, "The students' interest,beings, it is important that they too interact with
motivation, questioning, and interaction must be onothers and have informal talks or converse with
display throughout the learning process"lighter topics. "These students miss the social
(A.Arsham). As with the traditional classroomcontact and face-to-face interaction that an
lectures, students and teachers interaction is vitalinstitutional setting provides" (S. Arsham). The
in the learning process. The personal exchange ofchallenge therefore is "for online courses to build
information and views are indications that bothand sustain a sense of growing community at
parties are interested on what they are discussinglevels that are comparable to the traditional
about. When students make queries orclassroom" (D. Valentine).
clarifications on the lesson, it means that studentsLastly, I would like to give credit to Feenberg for
are taking things seriously.navigating both sides of the issue of distance
Face-to-face class discussion has the advantagelearning. While he was able to clearly present the
of on-the-spot monitoring of those who arebenefits of online education, he is open to
showing interest because the students andadmitting the limitations of the program. Yes,
teachers are physically with each other at theFeenberg is right when he admitted that
same time and at the same place. This meanstechnology must be regarded as a medium of
that checking the students' attitudes is immediate.learning and not as replacement for the human
This is hardly possible with distance learning wherefactors, who are the traditional instructors. On the
teachers have to do time-consuming e-mail justother hand, I also agree that teachers should not
to remind students of their schedules. Soresist the development of online education and
Feenberg cannot absolutely claim that onlineview it as a threat to their profession. Distance
discussions can surpass that one done withlearning must serve as a challenge for them to
face-to-face. It is however admirable forcope up with economic and technological changes
Feenberg to admit that distance learning systemsas part of the world's progress. The government
cannot replace face-to-face classroom education,must treat online education as better educational
as he stressed in his conclusion.tools but not as replacement for school
Another vital consideration in the issue of distancecampuses. I believe that focusing on the needs of
learning is the cost involved, which, Feenberg didthe poor people, who cannot even afford to
not fail to pay attention to. While the authorattend even traditional education, is better than
enumerated the benefits of distance learning, heinvesting on distance education where obviously
did consider that "distance learning is not going tofewer people can afford.