A recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education was headed “Professors Regard Online Instruction as Less Effective Than Classroom Learning.” This is based on partial, pre-release data from a poll.

If you have ever met just one professor, you might believe that headline. However if you have ever met at least two professors, you’ll know it can’t be true. Academic discourse revolves around controversy, debate and opposing viewpoints.

So lets try that headline again. How about, “Some Professors Regard Online Instruction as Less Effective Than Classroom Learning.” Better, no? More logical, more believeable, more realistic? Hell, even if on-line instruction was 100% pure polyunsaturated manure, you could find a Professor or two who would defend it, just to be contrary, or because their salaries or lifestyle depended on it.

So why would a respectable publication like the Chronicle write a headline to misrepresent the truth, when it could be made so much more accurate by adding one little word? Would it not fit on the page, did they run out of ink, or could it be that the truth, (and it is certainly true) that some faculty don’t like on-line courses just isn’t news.

Even more to the point, if you read the article located here: http://chronicle.com/free/2009/02/11232n.htm you will see (buried pretty far down) that the majority of faculty with any experience whatsoever on which to base an informed opinion “felt that online courses provided superior or equivalent learning outcomes when compared with face-to-face classes.”

Now everyone is entitled to an opinion, but does anyone really care what faculty who have never experienced on-line teaching or learning think about it? And even if I did, is it appropriate to state the opinion of a subset, no matter what size, as an incontrovertible fact, binding on all Professors, as the Chronicle headline seems to do?

What’s your opinion? I’d like to know.

–
Martin