Tempering the Rise of the Machines

[FarCenter]

Online education has enabled many colleges to transition into the prevailing modern medium while adding new sources of revenue in times of scarcity, according to the Ithaka report. However, these innovative colleges have shown less interest in using the novel medium to curb tuition charges and measure learning outcomes.

The report, called "Barriers to Adoption of Online Learning Systems in U.S. Higher Education," was co-written by Lawrence S. Bacow and William G. Bowen, the former presidents of Tufts and Princeton Universities, respectively, along with several Ithaka analysts. It was bankrolled by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The report contained little advocacy one way or another; rather, the authors appeared to strive for a dispassionate analysis driven by a general sense that the rise of machine learning is inevitable and universities should be prepared. Their findings were based on interviews with senior administrators at 25 public and private, four-year and two-year colleges, including “deep dive” analyses at five of them.

Their objective was to assess the potential roadblocks that might prevent these traditional institutions from adopting sophisticated, “machine guided” learning tools into their curriculums. Technology designed to usher students through new material is thought likely to play a significant role in the future of higher education, although critics have worried that relying too heavily on such technology could harm learning.

In 2009, a team of machine-learning researchers for Carnegie Mellon University’s Online Learning Initiative tested autonomous software that taught a statistics course twice as efficiently as a human lecturer. Companies such as Pearson and Knewton have developed tutoring software that senses weaknesses in the students’ understanding and adapts to their needs. Engineers at Khan Academy, the free learning website, have built similarly adaptive tools into the companion exercises for Khan’s popular video tutorials. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology says it wants to develop virtual electrical engineering laboratories where students -- hundreds of thousands at a time -- can experiment with circuits.


Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/05/01/report-barriers-rise-artificially-intelligent-tutors-traditional-universities

Based on the experience of other industries, it is unlikely that higher education will gracefully adopt online learning systems. Instead, there will be resistance and backlash. The result will be that adoption will be accompanied by a lot of churn, with both institutions and personnel being replaced along with the instructional techniques.

[MadHound]

1. The trouble with online education is that many people simply can't learn that way,

Or learn a lot less than traditional teaching methods.

Another problem is that online education isn't being pushed for altruistic reasons, but rather by a corporate agenda. More online programs means more revenue for tech corporations, including Microsoft, Gate's baby.

Is there a place for online learning, certainly. But it has to be used wisely and it isn't a replacement for normal learning.

[FarCenter]

2. The trouble with traditional education is that many people simply can't learn that way either

The most successful learners are those with the talents and psychological attributes that best match the instructional method.

When the instructional method changes, the subset of learners that do best will change. It will not necessarily be smaller, particularly if the online methods are supplemented with traditional techniques.

[MadHound]

3. Really?

Considering that the top method, virtually the only method of online education assessment is testing, and pretty standardized testing, I would say that traditional education has online education beat by a mile. In traditional education you are assessed in a number of ways, tests, writing, presentations, virtually every mode that is out there.

Furthermore, in traditional education, the material is also presented in a number of ways, the better to reach the broadest number of students. Verbally, written, aurally, kinisthetically, and more, all the better to reach the broadest number of students.

Online education is very much a cookie cutter process, one size to try and fit all. Traditional education comes in a broad range, the better to reach the largest number of students. Like I said earlier, online education has its place, but only as a supplement, not as the main method of teaching.

[cynatnite]

8. My daughter is doing very well with her online education...

It's been a great fit for her and she prefers it better than traditional classroom learning. She has learned a lot from it and the work has been challenging. She is not attending a for-profit school either. She wanted to be able to transfer her credits should she decide to go further with her education.

I, on the other hand, prefer classroom learning. I like sitting in a room with other students.

I think this shows how different generations approach the subject. I don't see online learning as being less in quality because it's not in a classroom. Some of the best universities in the country offer online classes and degrees.

[RC]

4. Where I worked, they had mandatory on line courses.

No one liked them. They were time wasters, even though they had to do with the job. Usually someone came up with an answer sheet for the "Test", which consisted of multiple choice questions. The Test would sometimes rearrange the order of the questions or reword the questions, or the order of the answers, but that just slowed the test taking down slightly. The whole thing was basically a waste of everyone's time, as few could remember much of what they were supposed to have learned by the next day. Mensa members included. We were a smart, above average group, so that wasn't the problem.

With real people teaching, you can ask for clarification. Try that with a computer script sometime.

[Posteritatis]

5. I'd imagine part of the problem is that they're hard to design properly

I'll bet a large chunk of online courses - especially job-related training ones like what you're alluding to - don't exactly have a lot of input from people who actually get different approaches to education.

A course put together because some middle-to-senior manager has Imposed Standards that someone under them Must Adhere To Precisely is gonna have some problems, especially if they're putting it together that way in part because some company selling the course software or format has pitched it to them.

Most online classes/training sessions I've seen are those types and were complete disasters, but I've also seen a few others - either less formal ones more oriented towards hobbies, or academic ones where the instructor actually had the time and space to prepare materials - that were night-and-day different.

[RC]

6. You pretty much nailed it.

The courses were from a 3rd party company that specialized in on-line courses and the work itself was fairly specialized, State Office problem solving involving customers from the satellite offices. Dealing with people does not lend itself well to computer generated answers. Given time people will always find a way to get the 'divide by zero' as the only answer.

[FarCenter]

7. What they are considering are more than simple "read this, answer these questions" courses.

To help clarify this situation, we invented a new term to describe more precisely the form of online learning we wish to investigate: “Interactive Learning Online” or ILO. By ILO we mean highly sophisticated, interactive technologies in which instruction is delivered online and is largely machine-guided (although of course such technologies may be used in conjunction with more traditional modes of instruction). The best of these systems rely on increasingly sophisticated forms of artificial intelligence, drawing on usage data collected from hundreds of thousands of students, to deliver customized instruction tailored to an individual student’s specific needs—a technology often termed “adaptive.” These systems also allow instructors to track students’ progress through a course of study at a fine-grained level of detail, thereby enabling more targeted and effective guidance. Such systems are far beyond the capability of individual instructors to create on their own, and are typically developed by teams of cognitive scientists, software engineers, instructional designers, and user interface experts. Relatively few ILO systems currently exist, and full implementation of any that do exist remains quite rare.2 However, the technology is currently in a state of rapid evolution, and we believe it is possible that a wide variety of such systems, of varying quality and sophistication, will proliferate in the next three to five years.

http://www.ithaka.org/about-ithaka/announcements/barriers-to-adoption-of-online-learning-systems-in-us-higher-education.pdf

[HiPointDem]

9. "shown less interest in using the novel medium to curb tuition charges"

perhaps because the corporations pushing on-line ed have no interest in reducing tuition charges, only in increasing profits?

[saras]

10. The OP reeks of bias.

"enabled" "prevailing" "modern" "novel" "innovative" - propaganda without content. None of them imply, let alone guarantee, "better". New as an excuse to push corporate anti-education.

Online learning won't (and doesn't in the real world - my school charges exactly the same for it) reduce tuition, because it doesn't address the reasons for rising tuition.

The very TITLE of the report ASSUMES what it should be INVESTIGATING, which is whether online learning WORKS and SHOULD be introduced into America, not what the BARRIERS are. The barriers are perfectly reasonable cultural desires that shouldn't be overridden.

"report contained little advocacy one way or another; rather, the authors appeared to strive for a dispassionate analysis driven by a general sense that the rise of machine learning is inevitable"
That IS advocacy. "It's inevitable so there's no point in resisting it, even though it destroys everything you value."

"traditional institutions" "sophisticated, machine guided learning tools"
more namecalling and propaganda

"In 2009, a team of machine-learning researchers for Carnegie Mellon University’s Online Learning Initiative tested autonomous software that taught a statistics course twice as efficiently as a human lecturer."

Was it twice as efficient at getting students to understand how statistics are misused by the process of defining what to study, or was it just checking computational skill? To my mind, a class that is twice as efficient will produce twice as many students who are twice as likely to reject the application of statistics to human populations for the purposes of social control.