My older sister, Cynthia Mary Watkins Lack, died this morning at about 9 AM. My heart is broken.
Samuel James at Parchment Farm
Our Bad Press
Since I work at a for profit university I often feel a little twinge of guilt reading about some of the abuses in my industry. This recent NPR piece (“For-Profit Colleges Flexible But Expensive“) is no exception. As always, NPR makes a complex issue look simple. I realize that NPR, like all U.S. news outlets, love cheap-to-produce stories. It makes things seem much too simple sometimes, though.
I don’t mean to suggest that the private online higher education industry has no problems; far from it. I think we should shift to a not-for-profit status, perhaps if necessary through regulations so stringent that for profit status is untenable. I have yet to hear of any other solution that can solve the problems that arise from treating the student as a customer and education as a commodity.
I am willing to listen to other possible solutions, though, and I am certain that there are for profit schools that have minimized these problems. My historical guess is that if the industry doesn’t start aggressively dealing with these problems, the not-for profit status is nearly inevitable. All of that said, the NPR piece has a lot of problems that, as I said, seem to arise from poor research.
First of all, the University of Phoenix may or may not be the worse offender but it should not be held up as the exemplary model. Phoenix is exemplary of the ‘made from scratch’ model, but there are other models too. My school, for example, is a kind of spin off from an already existing institution or set of institutions. Reporters need to start making distinctions.
I have seen lots of horror stories about online education, but very little actual research into the efficacy of the different models. Again, this would mean going beyond Phoenix, which is only one system or model, and into the classrooms to see what is or is not done well. I also think that the discussion of costs is very distorted, becuase the comparison is to the community colleges.
If you are going to make that comparison, then you need to be able to talk carefully about the education these students receive. Again, it’s a distortion to focus solely on Phoenix. I’d like to see the cost of higher education reduced as well, but I don’t think you help that cause by lumping all schools into the same basket and by trivializing the benefits of 24 hour access for working people.
Why not title the piece, “Traditional Education Cheap But Rigid”? Again, this is in no way to minimize problems. But it is important to note that the for profits did not arise in a vacuum. They arose, in part, due to a higher education system that was ignoring the needs of a lot of people. In the long run, the for profits need strict regulation; meanwhile lots of us are trying to teach our students.
What New Media Can Do
The Education news from my old state (perhaps my new state too) is not good. The Texas Board of Education has apparently approved a Taliban style social studies curriculum, designed to reflect a narrow Christian ideology rather than a consensus of historical opinion (“Texas Board Approves New Social Studies Curriculum“). I don’t think calling this Taliban-like is inappropriate, either. Religious fundamentalism hates change and debate, above all else, in Texas as much as in Afghanistan. This is a form of religious belief that’s dependent on enforced ignorance. You can’t believe, apparently, in the face of knowledge.
I think this sort of fundamentalism represents a particularly despicable form of cowardice. It’s one thing to want to disagree with everyone who knows anything about a subject. If you want to believe that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, or that banana peals soaked in lime juice will cure cancer, that’s your own business. This form of fundamentalist thinking, though, fears open debate as a threat to its very existence. It’s as if they worry that we have such a strong natural affinity to credible argument it’s dangerous to expose us to it.
If their beliefs are so strong, why not let them compete openly in the “market” of ideas? In Southwestern Louisiana (where I’ve been staying) local religious factions squeezed out National Public Radio (hardly a communist cabal). As anyone who travels around the country knows, wherever there’s a public radio station there’s a Christian right station that’s so close it can interfere with reception. Choking off debate in public schools and on the radio are all old media strategies; they are sure to loose their efficacy as new media matures. That’s the good news. We have history on our side, as they say.

