• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are Classrooms Necessary?

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
As a teacher I think I can add to this topic. First off, brick and mortar classrooms certainly are needed. So are online resources. It isn’t a case where one is necessary more than the other. They work best when working together. When done well in person teaching has many strong features. Also, there is no reason, per se, that live classroom teaching must be unaffordable. Which is not to say that there are not areas of waste as they are currently operated in many places.

Yes, there are some poorly run schools. Just as there are poorly run homeschools and online schools. But one advantage of live schools is that when they are run well they can provide far better education than either homeschooling or online schools. The added dimensions in education that a professional teacher brings can not be overstated nor should they be underestimated. I can say that with confidence. I see it happen regularly at the school where I teach.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Learning centers provide access to teachers without the normal class lesson format.
I am curious how this would work pragmatically on a societal wode scale as I assume normal class lesson format includes beginning and ending at an appointed time.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Some of the online systems have already addressed a few of your issues or there is an easy method to resolve problems. Access to online courses can have a threshold of NC or Fs before one is sent to a physical school. Learning centers provide access to teachers without the normal class lesson format. Software can handle text input for courses that use numbers, letters and symbols (math, chemistry, physics) Software has issues with report/essay formats. Lessons are in recorded video which will reduce staff.

Sorry, but the software is crap. Even after a few iterations, it labels correct formulas as incorrect and simply doesn't address the types of questions that need to be asked.

I've had to deal with this recently because I am teaching online. Sure, Khan academy can produce a slew of questions for them to practice, but it is *still* terrible at quizzes and exams if you want something other than cookie cutter questions and answers.

For example, you can't have it ask some of the most basic questions that are multi-step and be able to grade them correctly. It simply can't do it.

Again, so many people seem to think that understanding is being able to fill in a blank. That is only the most shallow level. And software can do that (unless you don't enter your equation in the exact format it has been programmed to look for).

And that is far, far, far more important.

Also, what happens to the bright student that figures out a different approach? They will get each and every answer wrong even if they are right.

Now, given the poor qualities of our current crop of teachers, that is a problem now. But what we need is better educated teachers (for example, a math teacher in high school that hasn't done abstract algebra simply shouldn't be in the classroom---good luck with that) that know more than copying the text of the book onto the board.

Look up the Distant Education system in Canada. It will cover far more than I could in a post. If you have some questions just ask.

Productive students, or lack of, will be a huge issues. I do not think a majority of students in most grades are going to be suitable and/or have the will power to even handle online courses. Too many variables from family to financial to ruin it for an individual. However use of some systems online could be reformed to replace existing systems in-class. Up here at least most students have an ipad issued by the school.

I agree. Online courses only really work for a very few students. Even fewer than the current system.

I agree that we need some *massive* changes to our educational system and *some* of those will involve online classes and activities. But a *huge* part is going to be finding qualified teachers to actually guide the students through the material. Frankly, we don't have that now. But putting things online doesn't ultimately fix the problems for students. What is often required is more one-on-one interaction rather than less. Students need more mentors who deeply understand what they are teaching and fewer nonsense exercises that don't test real skills. Online courses push to the worst aspects of our system, not the best.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I'm all for wealth disparity being so little an issue that every family has the choice for one person to stay at home. But staying home out of spite for the man won't put food in their bellies. Unless we add the rich to the menu, anyway.
I expect that most of them would taste like sh**, anyway.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
Which is fine as an introduction. But it cannot answer questions the students have, nor can it judge when to go into more detail.
Most people only need an interesting introduction to physics which the current system doesn't give them. A handful of students would be fascinated by it. That group would be tested on IQ with the qualified moving on to be trained in the field.
And a good part of the educational system is dealing with the rest. Those that cannot get the required information from a book or video, those that simply don't study anything unless they have the structure of a course.
Your comments are those of someone who doesn't see that the current system never worked and never will. I see a system that has a high drop-out rate because students are given useless information boringly presented. Teachers have to be courageous enough to go off topic while being gifted as entertainers just to hold a group's attention.
Except that what you propose would not do that. it would give exactly the same lecture to everyone, no matter what their abilities or previous knowledge. To deliver that individual instruction would take *many* more highly qualified teachers to answer millions of questions.

The current system doesn't weed out those with prior knowledge. Well-read students have to sit through instruction they already know just to get credit for the course. The only difference would be that the teachers would be better, the answers would come online, and students wouldn't have to sit through dozens of dumb questions while waiting their turns.
Except that only goes to the most shallow level. Online videos are fine for getting a low level understanding. And, if supplemented with good textbooks and a lot of practice can do some good. But the problem isn't a lack of highly qualified people making videos. The problem is that people think that by watching a video they are getting a real education. In fact, unless the students *do problems themselves*, a video is little more than entertainment.

What problem would you have if, after watching the enlightening video, students *do problems themselves* over the Internet?
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
If you start from the ground up, recruiting a very different type of person as the educator, establish a different and well founded infrastructure, rework an entire system of curricular construction and assessment, filtering up to a change in college admissions and higher education, and probably shift the workforce to a style that leverages online/distance learning even in fields where such an approach is impractical, then maybe you could have a coherent system. But probably not.

I have been studying this and doing it for a long time and I'm pretty open minded and tech savvy and distance learning is less effective, less structured and less cohesive and the flaws in the system are insurmountable.

I was part of a pilot program for an online university. From my experience with both, the online class was much more comprehensive. It was very interactive, I could go at my pace. If there were areas I had trouble with I could focus on that until I could understand the concepts without a need to keep up with the rest of the class. The technology is there but I agree it would take a lot of restructuring of our current system. However our current system seems to favor the rich.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Sorry, but the software is crap. Even after a few iterations, it labels correct formulas as incorrect and simply doesn't address the types of questions that need to be asked.

In regard to math the system up here works fine. Beside any student can contract a teacher which can override any error by the software.

I've had to deal with this recently because I am teaching online. Sure, Khan academy can produce a slew of questions for them to practice, but it is *still* terrible at quizzes and exams if you want something other than cookie cutter questions and answers.

So have I. Online education as a replacement is not going to work. Canada does not use Khan's system

For example, you can't have it ask some of the most basic questions that are multi-step and be able to grade them correctly. It simply can't do it.

Actually you can in the system up here. I am still talking about math.

Again, so many people seem to think that understanding is being able to fill in a blank. That is only the most shallow level. And software can do that (unless you don't enter your equation in the exact format it has been programmed to look for). And that is far, far, far more important.

Except if one fills in the blank with an answer and their work they do show an understanding of the subject if they are correct. However online systems are not for every student as not everyone learns the same way.


Also, what happens to the bright student that figures out a different approach? They will get each and every answer wrong even if they are right.

That is why teachers can be contacted.

Now, given the poor qualities of our current crop of teachers, that is a problem now. But what we need is better educated teachers (for example, a math teacher in high school that hasn't done abstract algebra simply shouldn't be in the classroom---good luck with that) that know more than copying the text of the book onto the board.

That is a separate issue and one that predates the online system. Blame unions and government for that.



I agree. Online courses only really work for a very few students. Even fewer than the current system.

Yah it is a tiny minority. Online systems can not replace physical schools at this time.

I agree that we need some *massive* changes to our educational system and *some* of those will involve online classes and activities. But a *huge* part is going to be finding qualified teachers to actually guide the students through the material. Frankly, we don't have that now. But putting things online doesn't ultimately fix the problems for students.

Online courses are not made to fix those problems.

What is often required is more one-on-one interaction rather than less. Students need more mentors who deeply understand what they are teaching and fewer nonsense exercises that don't test real skills. Online courses push to the worst aspects of our system, not the best.

I disagree as a few of your points are off the mark thus a part of your conclusion is incorrect.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Who is teaching the kids? Actively, I mean.
Teachers, usually two, through an interactive online program. The course is recorded. The teachers write down problems on a chalkboard or overhead projector and the student have to interact with the screen which writes the answers given on the chalkboard and is immediately evaluated. Correct answers are given more information about why they are correct. Wrong answers are given explanations of why they are wrong. Online forums are available to discuss the subject and get help from teachers and other students.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
... But one advantage of live schools is that when they are run well they can provide far better education than either homeschooling or online schools...
How can we tell that your comment isn't simply one of bias? Is there a way to grade the product that excludes the average IQ of the students?

If the average IQ of students in System A is higher than the average IQ of students in System B, System A students will fare better on testing even if the instruction in Systems A and B is equally good or equally poor.
 
Last edited:

Shad

Veteran Member
I am curious how this would work pragmatically on a societal wode scale as I assume normal class lesson format includes beginning and ending at an appointed time.

Centers follow the existing hours of normal schools without the class based schedule. Rooms are divided by subject and grade often have multiple grades in a single room. A teacher is in a room to provide assistance if requested. Student work by themselves.

The system as a replacement will not work as too many people are unsuitable be it intelligence, age and/or will power.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Good teachers are worth a lot more than the type of model you are taking about here. So I would strongly argue that some level of bricks and mortar is required.
However, at the same time I would argue that the current model is fairly archaic, and needs a complete revisit.

In terms of investment, the US spends 5% of their GDP on education currently. That's pretty low by global standards. (Apologies, I'm assuming this is US centric, although the issue is consistent through the first world at a macro level)

Taking that same funding...or even more (eg. 7-8% is normal in Scandanavia, 5.5-6% across Australia, NZ, UK, France) but spending it in radically different ways is what I'd be suggesting.

Looking for ways to cut expenditure in this area doesn't seem sensible to me.

I was more concerned about the quality of education. We hire STEMs and usually have to hire the foreign-educated students because frankly the people coming out of US colleges and universities don't measure up. In our public schools I find the quality of education varies from school to school. Your success in business depends a lot on the area you went to school. I'd like to see a little more equality in our education system.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
I don't know if they are necessary, but they are useful.

Apparently useful in giving parents and children a break from each other. I didn't experience that myself but I have to agree there exist problems in families that have to be accounted for.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
...Looking for ways to cut expenditure in this area doesn't seem sensible to me.
Looking for ways to cut the cost of education isn't the objective. It just happens to be a benefit made possible by technology.

The current system is a Model T Ford. Repairing it is kinda dumb when modern technology gives us the chance to design and build a much better system.
 
Last edited:

rosends

Well-Known Member
I was part of a pilot program for an online university. From my experience with both, the online class was much more comprehensive. It was very interactive, I could go at my pace. If there were areas I had trouble with I could focus on that until I could understand the concepts without a need to keep up with the rest of the class. The technology is there but I agree it would take a lot of restructuring of our current system. However our current system seems to favor the rich.
I see two areas of concern about using your experiences as precedent:

The first is that you were in university. That makes you non-representative of students in K through 12 -- you have chosen to continue your education. The rank and file 10th grader who has no interest in education won't have the motivation to worry about understanding concepts. The second (though I can't be sure of it, I'm just gleaning) is that this seems like it worked in a science or math course. Though even those disciplines are not as effective in an online platform for the more limited student, I can see how an synchronous presentation followed by repeated practice might work in a science type course. But I teach English and our goal has been to reduce the number of lecture based classes and encourage spontaneous interaction and conversation. This is much harder to do (for a variety of reasons) over the internet.
 

Yazata

Active Member
Good thread topic, Nakosis. It's of particular interest to me, since I've been professionally involved with it.

Do you feel the brick and mortar schools are a necessity or should we maybe invest in online schools?

It's complicated. I think that elementary school probably should be bricks-and-mortar since a big part of what they do is socializing kids, teaching them to function without their parents in social groups. I have mixed opinions about secondary school. Bricks and mortar high-schools are wonderful for some kids but horror shows for others.

I feel that health, education and welfare are important to any civilized country. My concern however is the cost.

The biggest cost for any school is going to be pay and benefits for its faculty and staff. So unless an online school can eliminate faculty, it will still be costly.

IMO, brick and mortar schools plus educational staff are costly. Is there a benefit to keeping them around?

You could educate the people at a far less cost using online schooling. Less staff, more automation, more consistency in the curriculum.

I'd personally prefer that secondary schools put more emphasis on teaching kids useful job skills. Then encourage kids to get an entry-level job upon graduation from high school. That would help them to mature psychologically, be socialized into adult life and maybe find an interest and an intellectual direction in life. The time for higher education would be once that's determined.

Contrast that to sending an adolescent off to university, where freed from the strictures of home and parents, kids often fall into disfunctional lifestyles that include anything but studying and can prove a major hindrance to maturation into adulthood. Sending kids to university can sometimes do more harm than good.

Another major consideration here is the fact that the day is long gone when people can graduate from school and then rely on that education for rest of their lives. People often change careers several times in the course of their lifetimes, and most careers require that professionals remain current. So the adolescent learning model is rapidly being replaced by a life-long adult learning model. And that will naturally put a premium on distance learning since it would allow people to keep their current job and residence while taking classes. It wouldn't require that they uproot everything and move to the university.

Something that I'd really like to see used more is prior-learning assessment. People find themselves learning, whether formally or informally, all through life. They learn by doing on the job. They take company training classes. They read books. They take individual post-secondary classes, some for academic credit and some not, from all sorts of providers.

So universities offering degrees by prior-learning assessment set out what they think that a graduate needs to know and be able to do. (Equivalent to a degree syllabus.) Then students are allowed to demonstrate that they possess the required knowledge and abilities in a variety of ways. Those include taking and passing conventional classes, transferring in classes taken elsewhere, passing written or practical examinations of various sorts, or by submitting portfolios of the students' earlier work.

Competency-based education information for higher education institutions

Thomas Edison State University: What is your learning style?

Finish your Degree Online | Charter Oak State College

Online Courses & Credit By Exam - Excelsior College

Accueil - France VAE

This model might start to reduce costs by making professors less central to the whole operation.

Or is there something lacking in this scenario?

There will probably always be the high-end universities and liberal arts colleges that market themselves as finishing schools for tomorrow's elite. So I don't expect Stanford, Columbia or Yale to go away.

And there are some subjects that don't really lend themselves to an online format. The laboratory sciences for example, the studio and performing arts, engineering and many medical and para-medical professions.

But having said that, I expect many subjects that revolve around classroom lectures and tutorials to migrate online. Literature, philosophy, history, mathematics and many subjects like that are probably headed online. Many of these subjects are complaining about declining enrollments (the "Crisis of the Humanities"). So we might see departments trying to expand their applicant pool beyond those willing to move to the school and those within commuting distance. Distance learning opens up the possibility of offering programs to the whole world.

The day might be coming when universities turn primarily into scientific research establishments with some graduate programs in those sciences tacked on. In other words, universities may someday look more like this --

Facts at a Glance | Scripps Research
 
Last edited:

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Apparently useful in giving parents and children a break from each other. I didn't experience that myself but I have to agree there exist problems in families that have to be accounted for.

Not all parents are capable or knowledgeable enough to teach their children on some or all of the subjects necessary for a well rounded education.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Not all parents are capable or knowledgeable enough to teach their children on some or all of the subjects necessary for a well rounded education.

I'm not really looking at relying on parents. There's been quite an innovation in online schooling. Sure there will be issues but I think it's something worth investigating.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
I'm not really looking at relying on parents. There's been quite an innovation in online schooling. Sure there will be issues but I think it's something worth investigating.

I think online schooling should at least be looked at as an addendum to classroom environments. I have noticed that some people take to online environments very well and others don't.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Do you feel the brick and mortar schools are a necessity or should we maybe invest in online schools?

I feel that health, education and welfare are important to any civilized country. My concern however is the cost.

IMO, brick and mortar schools plus educational staff are costly. Is there a benefit to keeping them around?

You could educate the people at a far less cost using online schooling. Less staff, more automation, more consistency in the curriculum.

Or is there something lacking in this scenario?


My biggest concern would be: Who gets to stay at home to take care of the children while they are learning online ?

Many families can't afford that.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
How can we tell that your comment isn't simply one of bias? Is there a way to grade the product that excludes the average IQ of the students?

If the average IQ of students in System A is higher than the average IQ of students in System B, System A students will fare better on testing even if the instruction in Systems A and B is equally good or equally poor.
Education is one of the most thoroughly studied fields. The data is out there. Rigorous studies show that in person classrooms have many advantages. These studies have taken into account factors such as you mentioned.
 
Top