Activity+Ten

In this analysis of Feenberg’s Reflections on the Distance Learning Controversy, I have identified several common factors of agreement and some of disagreement. There are some comments he made that may have been modified had his reflection been written in 2010 instead of 1999.
 * Abstract**

The outlook for online learning certainly appears much differently in 2011 than it did for Feenberg in 1999. Feenberg expresses some of the Frere/Marx philosophy of class warfare with his broad brush painting of administrators as only thinking of money (1999). Many of those in educational leadership were once faculty and are now in a position of fiscal responsibility. His sarcasm regarding politicians thinking that distance education will “solve the parking problem” and replace campuses is far from academic and seems rooted in fear of replacement (Feenberg, 1999).

Feenberg does begin to balance his sarcasm when he states “…the overselling of foolish ideas about technology should not be allowed to discredit the whole field of on-line education. We as faculty need to get beyond defensive contempt for this significant educational innovation and look at specific designs with legitimate pedagogical objectives in mind (Feenberg, 1999). From the mid 1930’s science fiction writers have been writing about far-fetched technology that has actually found itself in reality – long distance video communication being just one example. This “defensive contempt” he speaks of is still a reality in some quarters. I agree that to try to duplicate a face-to-face class online is not appropriate. However, there is an assumption that the face-to-face mode of instruction is the best mode and therefore should be emulated. This is “sage on the stage” mentality and should not have a place in education any more than the claim of totally automated courses.

The lecture-based classroom and the totally text-based virtual classroom have one specific attribute in common – boring. Feenberg argues for using modern technology to enhance the existing text-based systems, but anything beyond that is an attempt to recreate a face-to-face classroom (Feenberg, 1999). I disagree with the enhanced text-based systems approach. This approach assumes that all students learn the same way - by reading. A constructivist approach is more hands-on, student centered, and student directed. In a study conducted by Katherine Schilling, it was noted that when a text-based online course was enhanced with multimedia and multimodal student engagement and student course satisfaction rates went up (Schilling, 2009). What is interesting to note that the instructor proposed changes to: “(1) improve the instructor’s ability to effectively address different learning styles, (2) provide multiple paths for communication and interaction among geographically dispersed participants, and (3) increase opportunities for students to interact meaningfully with content delivered in a variety of formats (Schilling, 2009). The difference here is the instructor looking to improve the student experience and not preserve a tradition. Feenberg states that educational technologists should work with faculty to design systems that meet needs of the students (Feenberg, 1999). What I propose is that educational technology, curriculum development, and program development become a staple of teacher preparation. According to a study authorized by The United States Department of Education, when student outcomes were compared between a traditional face-to-face classroom, and online only classroom, and a web enhanced face-to-face classroom, the winner was the web-enhanced face-to-face classroom closely trailed by the online only classroom. The traditional face-to-face classroom was last. The researchers attributed the major reason as being the required interaction of the students in the web enhanced or online classroom. This means that student engagement in the courses were higher (Means, et al, 2009). Educational technology has forced the redefining of pedagogy. Not only will future faculty need to know their course content and understand how students learn, but pedagogical training will need to include technology, software, hardware and a host of tools for creation of content to add to the web enhanced classroom (Berry & Marx, 2010). The conclusion drawn from this is that web based technology enhanced classrooms will become more and more common, and that faculty will have to embrace the change or find themselves in the minority. “This new report reinforces that effective teachers need to incorporate digital content into everyday classes and consider open-source learning management systems, which have proven cost effective in school districts and colleges nationwide,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan (Press Release: DOE, 2009). The emphasis should not be on the tool, but on the student.

One final point with which I find myself in agreement with Feenberg is his statement that, “The faculty must accept the responsibility now for shaping distance learning and, in the process; it should also attempt to reclaim ground lost in the development of programs for returning students (Feenberg, 1999).” The fault here lies with both administration and faculty. Education should fill a specific need. There is a certain amount of general education one needs in order to be an informed citizen of the world. Beyond that however, educational institutions should provide curricular focus so that students are getting what they need to fulfill their career goals. This vacancy in traditional public education is being filled by the proprietary career college to a greater degree each year. Feenberg is right when he says that online education will meet the returning student’s schedule better. We also need to understand that this same demographic know what they need and our programs had better offer it since they have so many choices today.

References Berry, J., & Marx, G. (2010). Adapting to the Pedagogy of Technology in Educational Administration. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 4(3), 245-55. Retrieved from OmniFile Full Text Select database Feenberg, A. (1999). Reflections on the Distance Learning Controversy. Canadian Journal of Communication, 24(3). Retrieved July 2, 2011, from [] Means, B., Toyama,Y., Murphy. R., Bakia, M., and Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online Learning: A meta-analysis and review of online-learning studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. Press Releases: U.S. Department of Education study finds that good teaching can be enhanced with new technology. Retrieved June 12, 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/06/06262009.html. Schilling, K. (2009). The Impact of Multimedia Course Enhancements on Student Learning Outcomes. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 50(4), 214-25. Retrieved from OmniFile Full Text Select database