This is an interruption to the integration methods segment that I’ve been writing about.
I was leaving a comment on Taylor Belcher’s thoughts in Reservations, Table for One and as is typical, my reply turned into what’s below. Read Taylor’s thoughts first before proceeding.
One of the reasons that online tutorial services seem to be “more effective” than classroom teaching is because of “strength in numbers”. Imagine that an instructor with sub-par effectiveness can only reach 30% of his / her 25-student classroom. That means that probably 7 or 8 students learn from the instructor and the rest are left to their own devices. Now, suppose that same instructor is given a gigantic megaphone that can reach 100 million people. That’s now, 30 million people this instructor helps! And here we have a psychological effect — 30 million is a lot of people and even if they are in the minority, they have a voice that can not be ignored.
What further amplifies this effect is that people who go to the online tutorial services are those who are interested in learning the material. They’re doing it voluntarily and this means that they’re already mentally prepared to be confused, which is, of course, what is required for one to learn.
Another amplifier is that people were already not learning the material in the classroom (or wherever they were originally learning it), so if the online service doesn’t help, then they’re no worse off from where they started. Thus, this is a positive expected value game for online tutorial services. Additionally, the student isn’t going to immediately fault the service, because they’ll first think, “clearly there are so many other people who learn from it, so that must mean that I don’t get it”. And if they do fault the service, then it’s one voice against 30 million who swear by it.
Where this all breaks down, is exactly when instructional methodology requires that people use specific online services. Then the 70 million non-believers will be banded together against the 30 million believers. This is exactly what we have with public school education. Public school education, by and large, does a reasonable job of educating tens of millions of people each year. However, there are enough people who have been forced through the education system that there is enough acrimony to stir up “reform” (I don’t know if it is a 70-30 split though, but it sure feels like it).
There is always reform and it’s useless because the reformers are trying to reform mandatory education so that more people will like it.
A few more sentences, and I’ll cut myself off.
It’s not that public education can’t be improved; it’s more so that it can’t be improved by national mandates. Want to improve schools? Do it one school at a time with smart, open-minded leadership and teachers interested and knowledgeable in their subject of instruction. The same criticism about “one-size-fits-all” education is the same criticism that I’ll level against “one-size-fits-all” reform. There ain’t a formula. Get over it, and work with one school at a time. That’s hard work that few want to do and it’s far more satisfying to the ego for one to see their brand of education be in the (positive) mainstream.
Anyway, those were the few more sentences. I have about 50,000 more words to say, but I’ll stop here and spare my keyboard.