Keep the reins of technology in faculty hands

When United University Professions/AFT (UUP) asked its members about the issue of distance learning within the State University of New York (SUNY), we weren't sure what we would find. Our union comprises 24,000 diverse academic and professional faculty from Buffalo to Manhattan who have a broad array of technical skills and interests. Technology on our 29 campuses ranges from the up-to-date to the out-of-order.

Yet the results of our commissioned survey found a certain commonality. Although our members have long been open to the academic opportunities of technology, they're not bashful when voicing their concerns over how it is used and to what ends.

And that's exactly what our random sample of nearly 500 UUPers found: They are overwhelmingly receptive to the use of distance learning but share a healthy skepticism about its quality, effectiveness and impact on their profession:

• 90 percent of the respondents report that they have not yet taught a distance learning course, but 60.5 percent say they would be willing to do so.
• 76 percent who teach a distance learning course say they did not receive any training; and nearly 67 percent did not get professional assistance in developing their course. Only 37 percent say that available technical support was good.
• 73 percent believe it is likely that their intellectual property rights are at risk with distance learning courses.
• 75 percent of respondents say the possibility of student cheating is a likely disadvantage of distance learning.
• Nearly 69 percent find it likely that distance learning could lead to a greater workload; 72 percent say it will mean more work for the same pay.

Our members' major concern is the quality of distance learning courses, with 68 percent saying they do not believe distance learning courses offer the same quality as traditional courses. And 83 percent say that electronic courses should only supplement--not replace--traditional courses.

High noon for higher ed?

To address these issues, UUP asked David Noble, a leading critic of distance learning, to speak at its Delegate Assembly in Buffalo, N.Y., this fall. Noble's extensive writings on the subject of technology include "Digital Diploma Mills," a four-part critique of distance learning.

"It's the degradation of the quality of education in pursuit of the dollar," Noble said of many distance learning programs. Faculty produce content, and employers market it, he said, adding that online delivery also opens up courses to monitoring and censorship.

Using the term a "high noon for higher education," Noble sees distance learning as "the biggest threat ever" to institutions and faculty.

"Once the faculty converts its courses to courseware, their services are in the long run no longer required," he wrote in "Digital Diploma Mills." They "become redundant, and when they leave, their work remains behind."

Online courses, he said, "are a potential means of generating revenue for universities while cutting labor costs to the core."

Why does this "virtual university's" potential to revolutionize education make Noble and others among us uneasy? Because under the guise of carrying the democratization of education--that great Jeffersonian revolution--even further, the virtual university could become the very occasion for its destruction. More than jobs are at stake; the quality of American higher education could be at risk.

Whatever new technology is introduced, it should not degrade either the professoriate, by recreating the assembly-line approach to education, or students, by delivering more data and less knowledge. Nor should it destroy the traditional brick-and-mortar experience that makes American higher education the best in the world. A recent study by the Institute for Higher Education Policy, "Quality on the Line," enumerates 24 benchmarks for determining quality in distance learning. Many of these echo the AFT's own policy statement, "Standards of Good Practice in Distance Education" (see "Going the Distance," AFT On Campus, October 2000).

Essential points of both documents:

• Faculty must have control of the curriculum;
• Faculty appointed and evaluated through a traditional consultative process who volunteer to use distance and online learning should teach the courses; and
• Faculty must play a proactive role in teaching and mentoring students, including discussion, dialogue and other aspects of the social process of education.

These standards aim at ensuring quality. The problem is their cost. The simple fact: You can't use the new technology as an end to save a buck. Once education is driven by savings, savings become the goal and education slips to a subordinate position.

In today's political environment, where far-right ideologues attack higher education as an oversized, ossified institution in search of students--virtual universities and distance learning courses may begin to look like inexpensive and democratic alternatives, a way to have their cake and eat it too. But, for students, this cake will be a cheap and tasteless alternative to real education. It's our job to make sure that technology is used to enhance the educational experience.