Guest guest Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 As many of you are aware, much of the curriculum of America's colleges is now available online. There is also mounting research evidence and significant attitudinal shifts in professors and students, both of which tend to favor this form of education, at least for those who self-select to participate. If online education can deliver superior instruction to a majority of students, we must consider it for own profession. While some students may insist on face to face education, studies suggest this is about 1/3 or less, depending on the class. The research literature is varied, but with careful class design drawing from the most successful models, retention, student satisfaction and post test performance can exceed face to face by 50%. OTOH, poor class design leads to worse rates of success. Students who self select to use this type of learning do better than those who are forced against their inclinations. So what master's level classes could go online and what format is most conducive to the goals. Well, pretty much all the herbology, basic theory, internal medicine, western science and nutrition. That's about 1/3 of the program at PCOM. Most of us learned all this stuff on our own anyway, so we know its quite possible. And online learning is hardly a lonely undertaking. In fact, it is far more participatory and interactive for a larger number of students than any lecture environment could ever be. Including quiet students, shy students, deliberative students. The type of students who I usually only discover what they can do when they show up on a clinic shift. We start clinic at PCOM in semester 2, so all these online students would concurrently be immersed in authentic real world experiences to complement their online studies. This would save money for schools and students, plus provide the flexibility in scheduling necessary for adult learners to thrive. But regulation doesn't really seem to be headed that way. In fact, at PCOM, we have been required to set timers when our students go on break to ensure that they receive no more than 6 minutes off from each hour of lecture. If we give them ten minutes, we will be required to add another full week to our semesters. But the whole thing is ludicrous when one considers the superiority of online instruction and how does one control breaks or time spent in that arena. The whole analysis must necessarily shift to meeting successful criteria of achievement, which might require 2 hours for one person and 20 for another. So what? Its pointless and irrational to make everyone keep pace with the lowest common denominator. Online learning as an option for those who choose it allows us to have our cake and eat it too. The format that has been show to work most effectively is the one I describe on this page below: http://.org/education/continuing.shtml I am working on a longterm research project with a professor of mine to develop an online learning environment most ideal for CEUs. So the format presented on the page above is designed for postgrad, but the idea is essentially the same for grad level. The main difference is that research supports greater structure and guidance early on in any program, with more unguided exploratory learning later. I need to digress on this point. Despite claims of the superiority of problem based learning in med schools, a recent meta-analysis revealed it is only superior in later stages of education. That some degree of guided instruction gives superior results in certain aspects of training, especially foundational. And that the only area in which PBL exceeds more guided instruction is problem solving. However the difference is not great and it disappears over time. So a recent grad of a PBL school is more likely to solve your problem, but less likely to have facts right at his disposal. Conventionally trained the reverse. However go a few years into internship and the regulars are just as good at solving problems and the data retention is about the same as well. PBL students do enjoy their education much more after they get over the initial shock of being thrown in the deep end and told to swim. With all this in mind, it seems logical that some moderation between these extremes would be ideal. While hardcore PBL advocates say watering down the style one iota ruins it, those positions are based upon biased research, which recent meta-analyses have put into perspective. Pure unguided PBL is part of the so-called constructivist philosophy of education, which is rooted in a relativistic worldview, in which the explorations of students are given precedence over the accumulated knowledge of experts. See more on PBL at http://www.edtech.vt.edu/edtech/id/models/pbl.html I favor guided instruction, a style that is mostly PBL in the classroom, but still has required lessons and material that must be completed. You can read about this style at http://www.edtech.vt.edu/ edtech/id/models/guided.html Some schools that claim to do PBL are actually doing guided instruction, from what I can tell by talking to their students casually. But others are pretty " pure " I have long tried (perhaps unsuccessfully much of the time) to embrace a worldview that encompasses both flexibility and firmness, which is how Thomas Cleary connotes the yin and yang aspect of psyche in his Taoist I ching. Pure PBL learning only offers flexibility, but no firmness, direct instruction the reverse. I am pleased to see that a careful evaluation of existing educational research is confirming my inference in this domain. Chinese Herbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 My class at tai Sophia is 1/3 online. Because I do not live near the school, I created a class that could work for me structurally. The 660 hour class consists of about 200 on line hours. We meet for one 3 day weekend every 4-5 weeks. Then they have online, open book testing, in multiple choice format. When we meet for class, they take the same test- but not open book. This builds in the repetition necessary to memorize the materia medica and f and s. now that we are nearing the end of the class, I am focusing on small research projects- on a topic that is interesting to them and relevant for their practices ( at tai, they are already practicing. The herb program is graduate level). I spend a lot of time on theory- because I am in a 5 elem. School. And I spend a lot of time on diagnosis. Helping them to avoid jumping to conclusions. ³ how do we know what we know² what do we know about ( this case) for sure?² I work on sloooow diagnosis. Deconstructing cases thoughtfully. overall it¹s been successful. But it hasn¹t created a way to have them learn exclusively on their own. We still need to go over all the material in class. Cara -- Cara O. Frank, R.Ac, Dipl Ac & Ch.H. President China Herb Company Department of Chinese Herbology Tai Sophia Institute for the Healing Arts office: 215- 438-2977 fax: 215-849-3338 Www.chinaherbco.com Www.carafrank.com > As many of you are aware, much of the curriculum of America's > colleges is now available online. There is also mounting research > evidence and significant attitudinal shifts in professors and > students, both of which tend to favor this form of education, at > least for those who self-select to participate. If online education > can deliver superior instruction to a majority of students, we must > consider it for own profession. While some students may insist on > face to face education, studies suggest this is about 1/3 or less, > depending on the class. The research literature is varied, but with > careful class design drawing from the most successful models, > retention, student satisfaction and post test performance can exceed > face to face by 50%. OTOH, poor class design leads to worse rates of > success. Students who self select to use this type of learning do > better than those who are forced against their inclinations. > > So what master's level classes could go online and what format is > most conducive to the goals. Well, pretty much all the herbology, > basic theory, internal medicine, western science and nutrition. > That's about 1/3 of the program at PCOM. Most of us learned all this > stuff on our own anyway, so we know its quite possible. And online > learning is hardly a lonely undertaking. In fact, it is far more > participatory and interactive for a larger number of students than > any lecture environment could ever be. Including quiet students, shy > students, deliberative students. The type of students who I usually > only discover what they can do when they show up on a clinic shift. > We start clinic at PCOM in semester 2, so all these online students > would concurrently be immersed in authentic real world experiences to > complement their online studies. This would save money for schools > and students, plus provide the flexibility in scheduling necessary > for adult learners to thrive. > > But regulation doesn't really seem to be headed that way. In fact, > at PCOM, we have been required to set timers when our students go on > break to ensure that they receive no more than 6 minutes off from > each hour of lecture. If we give them ten minutes, we will be > required to add another full week to our semesters. But the whole > thing is ludicrous when one considers the superiority of online > instruction and how does one control breaks or time spent in that > arena. The whole analysis must necessarily shift to meeting > successful criteria of achievement, which might require 2 hours for > one person and 20 for another. So what? Its pointless and > irrational to make everyone keep pace with the lowest common > denominator. Online learning as an option for those who choose it > allows us to have our cake and eat it too. > > The format that has been show to work most effectively is the one I > describe on this page below: > > http://.org/education/continuing.shtml > > I am working on a longterm research project with a professor of mine > to develop an online learning environment most ideal for CEUs. So > the format presented on the page above is designed for postgrad, but > the idea is essentially the same for grad level. The main difference > is that research supports greater structure and guidance early on in > any program, with more unguided exploratory learning later. I need > to digress on this point. > > Despite claims of the superiority of problem based learning in med > schools, a recent meta-analysis revealed it is only superior in later > stages of education. That some degree of guided instruction gives > superior results in certain aspects of training, especially > foundational. And that the only area in which PBL exceeds more > guided instruction is problem solving. However the difference is not > great and it disappears over time. So a recent grad of a PBL school > is more likely to solve your problem, but less likely to have facts > right at his disposal. Conventionally trained the reverse. However > go a few years into internship and the regulars are just as good at > solving problems and the data retention is about the same as well. > PBL students do enjoy their education much more after they get over > the initial shock of being thrown in the deep end and told to swim. > With all this in mind, it seems logical that some moderation between > these extremes would be ideal. While hardcore PBL advocates say > watering down the style one iota ruins it, those positions are based > upon biased research, which recent meta-analyses have put into > perspective. Pure unguided PBL is part of the so-called > constructivist philosophy of education, which is rooted in a > relativistic worldview, in which the explorations of students are > given precedence over the accumulated knowledge of experts. See more > on PBL at http://www.edtech.vt.edu/edtech/id/models/pbl.html > > I favor guided instruction, a style that is mostly PBL in the > classroom, but still has required lessons and material that must be > completed. You can read about this style at http://www.edtech.vt.edu/ > edtech/id/models/guided.html > > Some schools that claim to do PBL are actually doing guided > instruction, from what I can tell by talking to their students > casually. But others are pretty " pure " > > I have long tried (perhaps unsuccessfully much of the time) to > embrace a worldview that encompasses both flexibility and firmness, > which is how Thomas Cleary connotes the yin and yang aspect of psyche > in his Taoist I ching. Pure PBL learning only offers flexibility, > but no firmness, direct instruction the reverse. I am pleased to see > that a careful evaluation of existing educational research is > confirming my inference in this domain. > > > > Chinese Herbs > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.