In their essay, “FACE-TO-FACE COURSES ARE SUPERIOR TO ONLINE COURSES” the authors Tiffany Bourelle and Andy Bourelle, and in her essay “Chasing The Elusive ‘Quality’ In Online Education “, Anya Kamenetez, focus on the idea that face to face courses are better than online courses. They also address the idea that online courses aren’t as challenging compared to face-to-face courses. They mention that this is a bad idea because online courses are actually adaptive, and their way of teaching is innovative. Instead of falling for this misconception, the Bourelle’s and Kamenetez say it’s better to think of online courses to be a modern and adaptive, because technology is continuing to evolve, and the pedagogy promotes collaboration and helps students take control of their learning.
In her essay, Kamenetez states,” A meta-analysis by the U.S. Department of Education in 2010 showed that students performed modestly better in courses with some online component.” (Kamenetez 11), this demonstrates how when face to face courses implement some type of online learning, students did better, which shows that online courses and online courses should be both implemented for better learning. Adaptive learning software such as Pearson’s Mylab, Scholastic’s Math 180, Dreambox Learning, Cerego, and Khan Academy are examples of online learning that instructors have implemented. They have innovated their way of teaching to help students retain information instead of throwing all the facts at once. In her article, Kamenetez states that “Students on average memorized the basic facts in just 11 hours, using Cerego. And of the more than 20,000 who signed up initially, 2,370 actually passed. That’s a 12 percent pass rate — compared to the 5 percent that’s typical for most MOOCs.” (Kamenetez 37) Which shows that using adaptive learning software can help students learn content faster.
Furthermore, Kamenetez states that, “The Columbia researchers, as well as other critics, argue that the reason students so often fail in these classes is because of the way the instruction is designed.” (Kamenetez 13) which shows that online instruction has to be designed in a way that makes students more interactive and collaborative. The Bourelle’s state,” While online education continues to grow at a rapid rate, the pedagogy within remains cutting-edge, comparable to f2f classes.”(T.Bourelle and A.Bourelle 5) and Kamenetez gives an example of this when she mentions that,” Cerego uses an artificial intelligence algorithm, based in part on the science of memory, to decide which item to show you next, and when to show you the same item again. The goal is that you memorize them in an optimal amount of time.” (Kamenetez 26), this proves how technology is getting more advanced and learning new material is becoming easier and takes less time.
In their essay, A. Bourelle and T. Bourelle point out that,” Instead of using f2f classes as the barometer to measure online writing instruction, the time has come for instructors, administrators, students, and others interested in the quality of education offered in our universities to start recognizing that both f2f and online writing classes can provide challenging, intellectually stimulating educational experiences for students.”(T.Bourelle and A.Bourelle 9), online courses can be just as difficult and demanding as face to face courses. Technology will continue to advance and so will online courses, but that doesn’t mean face to face courses will be gone. Online and face to face courses are both ways students can succeed.
Works Cited:
Bourelle, Tiffany and Bourelle, Andy. “Face-to-Face Courses are Superior to Online Courses,” in Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, 351-355. Web. https://textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf
Anya Kamenetz, “Chasing The Elusive ‘Quality’ In Online Education.” 27 June 2014
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/06/27/323329818/chasing-the-elusive-quality-in-online-education