Education Dive recently cited an article by Robert Ubell from NYU in which he encourages small private colleges to pursue online programs to avoid “going under.” Although I agree with Ubell’s exhortation, his motivation is shortsighted. The Dive analysis of the article rightly points out that education leaders in general need to “take the plunge” and get on board with online. Again, a worthy admonition, but it lacks resolve. Both of these assessments miss a basic point: Online isn’t something that higher education SHOULD be looking into. It is something that higher education MUST pursue if it is to remain relevant.
The Dive analysis notes that higher participation in online initiatives is reported by faculty and institutions, and that “experiments” with “modest investments” in technology have produced promising financial results. It is suggested that sustained success will depend on things like faculty buy-in and coordination with IT services, since the prevailing attitude in higher education is that online instruction goes against traditional norms.
Eureka! This is the heart of the matter. Outside of higher education, online IS the norm. Major parts of American society are already infused with technology. Retail and finance are good examples. And knowledge (read: information, data) apart from the structure of higher education is now readily available from multiple sources with a few keystrokes. Yet our monolithic higher education structure continues to pretend (and even insist) that knowledge resides solely on campuses and with faculty.
In a recent post I noted The Chronicle of Higher Education’s Beckie Supiano’s report concerning faculty push back over new online programs at Eastern Michigan University and elsewhere. The issues identified regarding faculty resistance involve unions, ownership of program development, and faculty’s general distrust of the efficacy of online education. These elements of resistance are not uncommon. They have pervaded much of higher education for decades, with little movement.
But more ominously, these issues may also be harbingers of an unpleasant road ahead. Articles like Ubell’s and Supiano’s are accurate and timely. They are also increasingly redundant as they report the same issues that continue to plague higher education while the rest of society marches on. Small private institutions are the tip of the iceberg. The rest of higher education is not far below the water line.
