In this open access article, Doug Lederman argues that "that colleges and universities collectively are unable—or have declined—to measure and prove whether and how much their students learn." This is presented as a Big Problem. "It's hard to persuade people that your primary 'product' is worth paying for when you can't prove they're actually getting it." This argument, though, presumes that 'learning' is the primary 'product' and that it can be measured. I don't think either is true. The objective of higher education, from my perspective, might better be characterized as 'socialization into a discipline'. Sure, maybe there are facts and theorems to be learned. But it's mostly about making connections, internalizing the values, and gaining practical experience. That's what makes online learning such a challenge, and why it's so hard to measure the value.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
