As of today online education isn’t as good as an IRL classroom experience but going to (Insert cardinal direct and state) University is not as good as going to Yale either. I still support state universities and more importantly community colleges.

I am happy to hear for more JC funding. If what we’re trying to do is create jobs and infrastructure there is no better placement for educational dollars than community colleges. They are the institutions that educate the people who build infrastructure.

Universities make bridge designers and Community colleges make bridge builders. Both are necessary and valuable.

I’ve taken online courses. I’ve also participated in plenty of online assignments and discussion activities to supplement my courses. None of these even come close to the stimulation provided and progress made in a real, live discussion oriented setting with a qualified professor and fellow students who are equally stimulated.

We’re comparing an academic video game with college. It’s no contest.

If your students enjoy it, that’s great. People learn in different ways. I’m just 100 percent glad I never chose such an isolated path.

Yeah, I know. I consider that a bug, though, not a feature. After all, casual attendance and enrollment is something CCs offer that Universities do not, and it’s not like classes can only have value when they are part of a defined set leading to some standard terminus. In fact, lots of Universities now have extension courses, which appeal largely because you can just go take them without it being something you planned well in advance and something you expect to take up the bulk of your time. If we’re serious about workers continually upgrading their skills, and we should be, we have to move away from the model of full-time school throughout youth and pretty much nothing thereafter.

I will additionally point out that what you’re implying with this comment reflects the thinking of a person who does not highly value the experience of relationships in real life, or who can’t grok the difference between meeting over coffee and meeting over Skype. (And even that’s assuming you require your students to engage video-chat for real-time lectures so that real-time interactivity is not lost.)

Suffice to say, most people feel stronger interpersonal connections and social obligations when working with real people, not screen names. Refer to xkcd for a visual aid. Sure, people can “get over” these interpersonal-communication issues and a good instructor lays down sensible rules for online discussion above and beyond those normally lain down for face-to-face discussions, but “possible to overcome some difficulties related to the online format” does not equate to “preferable format for instruction”.

Jeremy, hassling someone over “ignorance” doesn’t help your cause. Care to explain how you’ve ensured the work you are receiving, for e.g. timed exams, is the students’ own and represents the knowledge they have command of without deferring to resources, e.g. the textbook, mid-exam?

Or perhaps you teach a humanities class in which referencing the text mid-exam is standard. That’s fine, but (1) it doesn’t explain how you ensure compliance with rigorous cheating/plagiarism codes, and (2) it doesn’t explain how instructors in other subject areas will ensure the performance results represent what’s in a student’s head, not their ability to cross-reference in a book or buddy’s head.

As for your comment on student and peer relationships… again that is a bit ignorant of the level of support and interaction that students get from each other in relation to the course. Communities and support groups arise online and are successful online all the time, with very little coaxing students bond and develop the relationships necessary for success. I usually use an early group work assignment to encourage that, but anymore the students have already set up an aim group and have connected on facebook/twitter/etc. before the assignment starts. The space, the community, and the commonplaces are all easily constructed online and as best as anyone can tell there is no significant difference in learning outcomes, other than a generally higher retention rate for material in reading intensive online courses .

In the present case it seems specifically true that the conservative value of distrusting any individual initiative is dominant. There clearly is a fear that the people might want to learn things that are not giving ‘predictable’ returns to the economy.

It should not be part of a ‘stimulus’ because the underfunding of learning is permanent.

Long way round but I am agreeing with Goldrick-Rab in her contention that educating the workers we have would be long term stimulus with some “shovel ready” potential, a much better quality of return than many other “priorities” being touted in Washington.

That doesn’t sound like the money must be spent on infrastructure such as facility upgrades. It sounds like the money might be spent on such needs at the discretion of the college.

Hiring more faculty seems like operating funding to me.

Yeah, one of the reasons, I am way less sure about the money generating improved results, is that even defining improved results for Community Colleges is so difficult.

(After getting my 4 year degree, I took about 6 undergraduate CS level classes at my Community College, but got a certificate and more importantly job placement from a private company. And that might be an easy case to track.)

But this sounds like a decent way to burn money.

Online college is a disgrace. The tuition is the same, the level of academic rigor is much less, and the valuable professor – student and peer relationships that provide guidance or prevent burnout are completely absent.

It might be acceptable for a few assignments or a relativley unimportant course, but should never even (attempt to) approach a comprehensive college experience.

I’m skeptical that focusing on the outcomes mentioned is really fair, and I’m not sure that the outcomes mentioned are relevant. Take completion of credits and earning a degree. Students often choose community college because it allows them to try out college level work without a substantial financial commitment. If we count people who do that and discover that college isn’t for them, will we see community colleges take steps to discourage those students from enrolling? And there are obvious SES differences between community colleges—some are suburban-based, others are urban, and the populations served are different. If there is an obvious and noncontroversial way of accounting for these differences, let’s hear it.

I’m skeptical of infrastructure-for-higher-education proposals in general, unless accompanied by a funding source for operations and upkeep.

I do think that community colleges could be a good source for temporary funding increases to help avoid cut-backs at a time when enrollments could be increasing.