Bauerlein, an English professor at Emory University, offers an eye-opening explanation of a starting trend in academia: the “publish or perish” dilemma facing young professors hoping to be hired or veteran faculty members on the path to tenure.  According to Bauerlein, between 1980 and 2006, William Faulkner garnered some “3,584 books, chapters, dissertations, articles, notes, reviews, and editions.”  In the same time period, Charles Dickens elicited 3,437 studies.  While there can be little question that scholarly critical works on these authors and others are worthwhile for full understanding of their works, one must begin to question how many works on any one author are required before the topic becomes “overdone.”  Bauerlein cites that the demand for a new book in the English literature area rarely exceeds 300 copies.

Interestingly, as Bauerlein points out, during the most prolific decades for scholarly publications, there were no outside forces demanding that they be produced; few individuals outside of academia were asking for more such works.  In an interesting market twist, however, fewer institutions and individuals are purchasing the works that are being produced on such a vast scale.  Quoting remarks from the director of Yale University Press, Bauerlein notes, “’Yale and every other university press in America ha[ve] seen the sale of scholarly monographs…decline by two-thirds.’”  Even more eye-opening are findings that point to the fact that few college faculty are taking the time to review the vast number of works produced every year by their colleagues.  In the humanities disciplines, this may be the case because there is nothing new to glean from such works and there is no risk to the up-and-coming professor of falling behind in the field if he does not read them.

Bauerlein poses an intriguing question: has “the whole enterprise [of scholarly works produced by faculty] reached a saturation point?”  Based on the dwindling consumer interest in such works, it would seem that this is the case which begs the question, “Why are faculty members continuing to produce such works?”  In any other industry, if consumer interest dwindles, especially to the point that it has in the case of scholarly works in the humanities, most manufacturers would cease to continue to produce the product.  The answer, according to Bauerlein, is that “publication is a fact of survival, the foot in the door and the seat at the table.” 

Institutions of higher education across the country continue to require evidence of publications for hiring and tenure decisions.  This in turn compels faculty and candidates to strive to produce scholarly works to pad their curriculum vitas.  This sequence of events creates a dilemma not just for the faculty wishing to be hired or tenured, but also for their students.  Because faculty members are busy producing scholarly works that few will purchase and review, many of their undergraduate courses are handed to graduate teaching assistants (TAs) to manage.  Interestingly, Bauerlein found many of the courses being sloughed off to TAs are those most fundamental to the success of undergraduate students, including freshman composition and sociology courses.  Undergraduates often find themselves crammed into a stadium seating classroom with 50 to 300 other students and will have little opportunity to interact with the faculty assigned to teach the course. 

Bauerlein also found that few students have any contact with their professors outside of the classroom.  He chastises faculty and the higher education industry as a whole for allowing the notion that learning can take place outside of the classroom to fall by the wayside.  According to the 2007 NSSE survey of freshman students, 37 percent indicated that they “never discussed ideas from readings or classes with faculty members outside of class” and only 41 percent indicated that they did this “sometimes.”  The lack of interaction between students and professors outside the classroom leads to a mentality in which students believe learning takes place only in the classroom, perhaps hindering their motivation to pursue external resources to enhance their own learning.  John Zmirak, the author of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution article, suggests that parents examine the ratio of graduate assistants teaching these introductory courses in the humanities versus full-time professors.

In an interesting contrast to the statistics offered above, however, on the 2007 Faculty Survey of Student Engagement, 79 percent of respondents indicated that they were very satisfied with their professors’ levels of interactions.  Even with their perceived satisfaction, however, Bauerlein suggests that undergraduate students are suffering from the “publish or perish” mentality at most colleges and universities.  Bauerlein states that “the absence of teachers inside the classroom has become normalized.  Student’s don’t even know they’re being shortchanged.”

One of the ironies of this article is the fact that Bauerlein did not make a comparison between contact classes and online classes.  There have been many studies in retention literature noting that the academic and social engagement of a student influences that student’s persistence (graduation) in college (Tinto, 1975).  Institutions with online programs have focused on professor/student interaction because of the fact that the face-to-face contact is unavailable.  While I would assume that the NSSE results for online students would not demonstrate a high level of involvement with professors outside the class, perhaps the interaction would be higher.  Approximately 14 colleges (including APUS) have implemented the Community of Inquiry student survey, a survey specifically designed to measure professor/student interactivity.  According to data from the Sloan Consortium and Eduventures, community colleges and for-profit colleges and universities teach approximately two-thirds of all online classes.  At many of those institutions, tenure is not offered.  But, going back to the title of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution article “The Ugly Secret Why Tuition Costs a Fortune,” these institutions are not our most expensive.  Zmirak suggests that teaching capabilities be taken into consideration for tenure decisions and that the research in the humanities be left to the 300 people who buy the books.   Bauerlein and Zmirak have a point; institutions dependent on tuition seem to understand what the student customer needs.  I wonder if the current funding crisis will instigate the other institutions to evaluate their practice(s).

Online education has gained tremendous momentum in the last several years.  A November 2008 report titled, “Staying the Course: Online Education in the United States, 2008” published by the Sloan Consortium notes that during the fall 2007 semester, some 3.9 million students were taking at least one course online, representing a twelve percent increase over the previous year.  During the same semester, twenty percent of all college students were taking at least one course online.  An Eduventures report from November 2006 predicted this growth; that report found that half of the 2,000 potential students surveyed indicated that they would be interested in completing a degree online.

Though the recently released Department of Education report focuses on online formats for K-12 education, the findings are relevant for online education in general.  The 2006 Eduventures report notes that online education was most popular among adult learners.  The Department of Education report, however, notes that “the number of K-12 public school students enrolling in a technology-based distance education course grew by 65 percent in the two years from 2002-03 to 2004-05.”  In total, the report states that more than a million K-12 students took online courses during the 2007-2008 school year.  Such statistics are promising for online colleges and universities like APUS.  If K-12 students excel in online education in their early education, it seems likely that they may continue with the online format for undergraduate, graduate, and even doctoral degrees.  In Disrupting Class, authors Clayton Christensen, Michael Horn, and Curtis Johnson predict that 25 percent of K-12 classes will be online by 2014 and 50 percent by 2019.  (For a review of Disrupting Class, see my August 2008 blog article.)

In considering the reasons why online courses are growing in popularity, the Department of Education report notes that the ability for students to use their time in a flexible manner boosted online education’s popularity.  According to the study, “learners in the online condition spent more time on tasks than students in the face-to-face condition” finding “a greater benefit for online learning.”  There are obvious cost-saving benefits to online formats and some that are not as obvious including the ability to attend class from one’s home and saving money on the gas a traditional student needs to commute to classes at a brick and mortar institution. 

Additionally, online education expands access to many who may otherwise lack educational opportunities.  Online education could provide significant benefits to those living in rural areas, for example.  The diverse student population found in online classrooms promotes a meaningful exchange of ideas and points of view that is often absent in more traditional classrooms which, especially in traditional K-12 schools are comprised of students from a particular geographic location.  Christensen and his co-authors argue that advances in technology will allow K-12 educators to meet the needs of their students more than ever before.  In the event of smaller school districts with limitations of special teachers, foreign languages like Arabic and Mandarin Chinese could be offered online.  Already, there are providers who offer online advanced placement courses for school districts unable to find qualified teachers.

The implications of the report’s findings for the online education industry are significant.  A recent article in Inside Higher Ed quotes Secretary of Education Arne Duncan as saying of the meta-analysis and its findings, “’This new report reinforces that effective teachers need to incorporate digital content into everyday classes and consider open-source learning management systems, which have proven cost effective in school districts and colleges nationwide.’” 

Today’s students are embracing technology in almost everything they do.  Cell phones, MP3 players, laptop computers, and portable gaming devices are the norm for anyone who can afford them and the cost of technology continues to decrease every day.  The online education market is a part of the technology revolution.  Institutions that embrace online degree programs are expanding access to education for many of America’s students.  Higher education is notorious for its perceived conservation of traditional pedagogies and unwillingness to utilize new technologies to transform the ways that students learn.  With the advent of online education, however, the world of higher education is breaking out of that mold and students are benefitting in the process. 

In addition to affording students some flexibility in their schedules, opportunities for learning are dramatically increased in the online format.  Because students are not tied to classrooms and able to complete work on a more flexible schedule, they are also able to dedicate time to even more non-traditional educational opportunities including volunteer work, memberships in clubs and organizations, and other extracurricular activities that certainly provide invaluable experience.  Working individuals often find that earning a degree online allows them the ability to continue with their careers while working toward attaining their degrees.  In general, I believe that such opportunities help encourage the development of a more well-rounded student and individual.

The meta-analysis released Friday by the Department of Education is not the first study that recognized the advance of online education for students’ learning outcomes.  Coming from the arm of the federal government, its recognized stature makes this report more significant.  As the nation struggles to develop citizens who can effectively compete in our globalizing world, online education is becoming an appealing alternative to traditional brick and mortar classrooms.  With the current economic crisis unfolding as it is, many more individuals will find the economic benefits of online education (ie: lower tuitions, no commuting costs, etc.) worthwhile, allowing online program providers the opportunity to enhance the technologies offered in their classrooms.

In the K-12 market, online schools have been gaining popularity too.  K-12 may be the most famous of the online programs, having gone public in December of 2007 after beginning its online programs in 1999.   K-12 offers online charter schools in 26 states (including the District of Columbia) as well as private programs.  Connections Academy is another educational company that runs online charter school programs in 15 states.   K-12 and Connections Academy aren’t the oldest K-12 distance education programs, but have the advantage of being started after the advent of the internet.

There are several ways that online K-12 programs and classes provide advantages to students, educators, and parents.  Homeschooling has become more popular over the past 20 years.  Not every parent is talented enough to provide supervision and direction to their child through kits from correspondence schools or publishing houses.  Online courses can provide qualified instructors for subjects where the parent feels uncomfortable explaining the content.  In states where there are shortages of qualified teachers, particularly in the areas of science and mathematics, online courses can provide an avenue of instruction for schools unable to find qualified teachers locally.  In thinly populated areas, online instruction could provide a source of education for areas unable to afford or to attract specialists such as advanced placement teachers.   In the event of a natural disaster, school fire, or other disruption, online schools could provide a continuation of education even if the students and faculty were located in separate states.  In such situations, it is unlikely that traditional brick and mortar schools could do the same. Rules and regulations governing K-12 education may block online opportunities in many school districts around the country and have convinced our management team to continue to focus on the opportunities in post-secondary education.