A good response to the myth that the labor of an online instructor is less valuable than the labor of an in-person instructor.
Most of a college’s budget is labor. When a physical campus moves to online teaching, it doesn’t save much labor at all. Grading an online student’s paper takes the same amount of time as grading an on-site student’s paper. That’s why it’s silly when the Scott Galloways of the world proclaim that an online class can reach hundreds of students at a time and that therefore the cost savings should be passed on to the consumers. Leaving aside the “students as consumers” idea, the core of a class is the interaction of students with the instructor. Galloway’s model isn’t new; it’s the large-auditorium-with-teaching assistants model that many of us went through in grad school, if not earlier. It’s reminiscent of the MOOC craze of 2012. Yes, technology allows a single presentation to be shared with many more people at once, but viewing a presentation isn’t education. Actual learning occurs in the engagement with the material, and that still requires human interaction. —Inside Higher Ed
Post was last modified on 1 Sep 2020 1:53 am
In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. @thepublicpgh
[A] popular type of generative AI model can provide turn-by-turn driving directions in New York City…
I was perhaps a bit more conversational and chipper than usual during class today. A…
I create five color variations of each #blender3d building I #design, and each of those…