Module 3: The Cost Effectiveness of Distance Education Learning
This module discussed efficiency and effectiveness. I think the most important concept I learned was effective does not always mean efficient. To expand, an online course may have a great setup covering all objectives, yet there may not be enough students to pay for the class.
· Efficiency - the ratio of output to input
· Effective - also concerned with outputs, specifically the output meet the needs and demands of the clients, hence achieving set goals.
We had a guest speaker, Greville Rumble, who authored the book, “The Costs and Economics of Open and Distance Learning.”Being able to ask him questions about the chapters was like having a personal narrator. What a great way to learn. We focused on Chapter 13, “Cost Efficiency” and Chapter 14, “Cost Effectiveness.”
From Chapter 13 I found his statement very interesting, "Distance education changes the production function of education by substituting a range of media for classroom teachers, offering to educationalists what Wagner described as a mass production alternative to the traditional craft approach" (p. 121). This statement really says a lot in that for this very reason, some instructors are unwilling to more forward to the online format, they feel they are being replaced, no longer needed, and thus no longer valued. Some veteran instructors I have spoken to actually see technology as a serious threat. Instead if they could only see what it could greatly complement their instruction. Rumble adds to this dilemma by saying, "Teachers have, not surprisingly been resistant to the idea that the number of teaching jobs might be reduced, their status of professionals undermined and their work deskilled" (p. 134). It is remarkable as I acknowledge professors for being the smartest of smart, yet they do not welcome technology and use it to their advantage.
From Chapter 14, an interesting statement by Schramm (1977) is this, "Visual embellishments do not usually help learning unless (like directional arrows) they help organize content that is not inherently well organized or (like animation) help a viewer to understand a process or concept that is very hard to understand without such simplification" (p. 176). I found this quite controversial as it appears to be a reflection of the textbook being dated, 1997. In many of my readings it is proven that learners learn through a variety of modes, some concrete and some abstract. Carter (1996) seems to touch on this by saying, "neurological responses to different media vary and presses for research into the influence of different media on learning (p. 177). In my thinking, multimedia allows for a variety of learning modalities such as visually or aurally, therefore increasing the chances to stimulate the cognitive process necessary for learning. Yet, it is important to note that there can actually be too much media used.
Also in this module we read Rumble’s article, “Social justice, economics and distance education. “ From this reading I suppose the burning question for me it who stands to gain the most by paying for the education. In other words, who harvests the most from human capital? Will it be government, business/company or the individual? From a government standpoint, paying for education puts an edge over other countries as we strive to compete in the global market, and hence, be the smartest country, complete with the fastest, biggest and best. It additionally keeps money in circulation (in the United States) as the world evolves. In comparison, if businesses/companies would be paying for the education for their employees, they stand to reap the knowledge (and potential profits) of the employee if the employee stays with their place of employment. Again, a boost to that particular business entity, consequently also padding the government's pocketbook with tax money. On a different stance, is the individual who pays for his/her education on their own, thus does not owe any give backs to neither the government or to their place of employment. Yet, if the educated stay in the United States they, in turn, help the government as taxes are paid. On that thought, a select few can afford to pay their own way and must rely on others. Globally, it is impossible to think that some in impoverished nations could ever pay for their own education. As one hand constantly massages the other with greenbacks, it can be a blur as to who has the most to gain investing in education. It would seem obvious that government is always in the picture - it invests money (in the form of Pell Grants and student loans) to make lots more money (in the form of taxes and interest on loans).
As well in this module was the article, “From Baobab to Bonsai: Revisiting methodological issues in the costs and economics of distance education and distributed e-learning,” by Hulsmann (2008). It was quite thought provoking. In particular, I noted the following comment, "working through distance teaching materials is an experience quite different from 'just reading through' a textbook" (p. 273). How true. As both require reading/learning by comprehension, yet the distance education student must be more a self-learner and less dependent upon scaffolding that a face-to-face environment provides. I also gleaned from reading the article that the costs of distance education are in direct relation to the sophistication of media used. Thus, there seems to be an invisible fulcrum of teaching material on one side and cost structure on the other side. I also see the unbalancing of the fulcrum as increased students correlate to decreased costs potentially. Hulsmann (2008) makes the comment about using "less glamorous media to lower fixed costs" saying, "the attractiveness of the program leading to declining enrollment rates" (p. 286). How true. I once had a course that strongly used PowerPoint presentations at every avenue. How boring and flat the course was one-way communication, thus no interaction, no captivating the students, nothing to look forward to.
References
Hülsmann, T. (2008). From Baobab to Bonsai: Revisiting methodological issues in the costs and economics of distance education and distributed e-learning. In W. J. Bramble, Panda, S. (Ed .), Economics of distance and online learning (pp. 233-269). London : Kogan Page.
Rumble, G. (2007). Social justice, economics and distance education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 22 (2), 167 -176.
Rumble, G. (1997). The costs and economics of open and distance learning. London: Kogan Page.
