We applaud the local school district’s efforts to continue making college credit courses available to high school students as described in our page one story, “Some college classes switch to online,” but have to wonder what motivated colleges and the organization that governs them to dictate a change that will force students in small towns like ours to receive instruction via computer terminal instead of from an actual teacher. Unfortunately, as is all too often the case in education these days, we’re pretty sure institutional greed and bureaucratic instinct influenced the decision far more than a desire to serve the best interests of students.
The cost of higher education has risen at an escalating rate over the past couple of decades, which has led to a crippling amount of student loan debt that has proven to be a growing burden on taxpayers. To make matters worse, an alarming number of college grads are having trouble finding employment in their field, and that makes it even less likely that they will be able to pay off the tremendous debt they accumulate while earning their degree.
Politicians and education officials have shown no ability whatsoever to rein in those costs over the past several years, but concurrent enrollment programs like the one in place at Newcastle High School have provided families some hope of financial relief because they allow students to complete college and enter the workforce a year or two earlier than they would have been able to otherwise.
It appears students at NHS will still have that opportunity, but we fear that the quality of learning will decrease substantially when the material is all delivered online, as opposed to being presented by teachers who have Master’s degrees in education and an expertise in specific areas of study honed by practicing the teaching craft in front of students for years.
We’re sure there are a slew of high-dollar education consultants out there who will tell you that the only way to demonstrate a level of expertise suitable to delivering instruction in college courses is to possess a Master’s degree in that particular discipline, and we’re not surprised to hear that colleges will hurry to comply with the mandate because they won’t risk losing their precious “accreditation” by questioning the policy now or opposing it when it was proposed.
But at the end of the day, we aren’t buying any of it.
When last year’s high school graduates return for the summer, nearly every one of them will have a story to tell about a graduate assistant who ‘taught’ at least one of their freshmen or sophomore level courses. Of course, a professor signed off on grades— thus preserving precious “accreditation” by filing the proper bureaucratic paperwork— but for all intents and purposes the class was taught by another student and not the professor.
Of course, having that student teach the class provides the professor with time to do research and publish works, which brings money and fame to universities, and at the end of the day we’re pretty sure what this is all about, and that’s why you shouldn’t count on colleges to help lower the cost of higher education.
The rising cost of education is our problem. Not theirs.