Does anyone remember former Labor leader Kim Beazley's University of Australia Online? As part of the 2001 federal election campaign, Beazley, now Australia's ambassador to the United States, proposed an online university that would create 100,000 new undergraduate places by 2010.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It was the default position for students, particularly those living in regional areas, who missed out on places at bricks-and-mortar universities.
Could the proposal be on the agenda again? Alan Tudge, a parliamentary secretary to Prime Minister Tony Abbott, is keen on online learning. He reckons it has the potential to deliver higher quality, fast and more affordable education to greater numbers of people than face-to-face teaching.
Mr Tudge, who also chairs the government's online higher education working group, has support for his ideas from his boss. At the Universities Australia Higher Education conference in February, Mr Abbott told academics he wanted universities to take advantage of online learning, particularly massive open online courses (MOOCs).
Labor and Liberal politicians basically have the same message about online learning – that it is a convenient, cheap and easy way to obtain a degree. Students don't have to show up to class; all they have to do is sit at a home computer and fit their studies around their busy lives.
Third Degree acknowledges that online learning has its place. It's convenient for students who are working, particularly for those who have already obtained an undergraduate degree and want to further their career with a graduate diploma.
The technology can also be used to improve some lectures, though this takes a lot of effort.
But it's worrying when politicians think online learning is the answer to problems in higher education.
If classes are overcrowded, students can do online courses. If universities want to cut staff budgets, they can employ one lecturer to teach hundreds in cyberspace. If students aren't happy with face-to-face classes, online versions will be superior.
What politicians don't acknowledge is that online courses aren't always appropriate for undergraduates, particularly those straight from school. Many find it hard enough to navigate their new freedom at university, let alone motivating themselves to do online classes.
How many politicians tell their children not to study at Sydney or Melbourne universities, but do a totally online course at the University of New England or Charles Darwin University in the Northern Territory?
Also, university is so much more than the academic side of education. There are clubs to join and real friends to make, not just cyber ones.
It's also true that in many discussions about online learning in universities, the voices and views of academics are often missing. And often it's institutions and bureaucrats pushing for online instruction. Academics have told Third Degree that university administrators have sent Mr Tudge's thoughts on online learning to lecturers.
So what about MOOCs, which Mr Abbott and Mr Tudge have talked up? Some Australian universities are already offering them, but no world university has yet to work out the business model for them.
Some commentators claim MOOCs sound the death-knell for the university lecture. In the new university, a few world experts will give lectures, which all students around the world will log in to watch. But none of the commentators seem to have studied a MOOC. Third Degree has studied a MOOC – a history subject through Princeton University.
Before MOOCs take over bricks-and-mortar universities, someone will have to work out how to retain students.
Of the almost 83,000 students who were enrolled in the course titled "History of the world since 1300" at the time the first essay was due, about 1800 submitted a paper. That's about 2 per cent of students. According to Jeremy Adelman, who taught the subject, the figure "is an impressive feat by the standards of online education"!
Fewer than 1170 did the second essay, 940 submitted the third, 791 the fourth, and 605 the fifth. These figures are typical of most MOOCs.
Even Stanford University, which is at the forefront of the MOOC movement, is still debating the merits of online education for its own students, and its role in Coursera, a company that offers MOOCs.
At its Senate meeting last October, Andy Fire, a professor in pathology, said he doubted that "through online education you can deliver the same quality of education that someone would get even at a struggling university if the faculty there are trying".
But he also warned that this wouldn't be obvious to political and administrative forces. They will conclude that "it's a lot cheaper just to educate all the people in this county with online education, and get rid of the state university, state college, and the odd community colleges".
Is this what the Coalition has in mind?
Link
* The Online Higher Education Working Group's report is yet to be released. Education Minister Christopher Pyne says it is not for public consumption.
Follow Third Degree on Twitter: @thirddegreeblog
