Its not either/or
Online education as an extension of, and support for, the Kings mission
By Marvin Olasky
As we all know, King’s is a special place. Our goal is to limit maximum class sizes to 17 in writing courses and to 30 in other courses. We make exceptions in some specific circumstances, but we want to emphasize interaction between professors and students. Our professors have substantial office hours and welcome student visits.
Our goal is for all courses to have a special Kingsian emphasis on true ideas based on biblical teaching concerning liberty, human dignity, inalienable rights, limited government, free enterprise, and beauty. Our courses do not marginalize the Bible, ignore the Constitution, or replace ethics with relativism.
Most college education around the country is very different. Students, at least in their freshman and sophomore years, typically sit in large lecture classes and remain largely unknown to professors. (I had the unpleasant experience of teaching courses of up to 500 students at the University of Texas.) Except in rare situations, students receive indoctrination from professors who trash Western civilization and American institutions, present atheism as wisdom, and propose socialism as the equitable answer.
Many students in such situations would learn more from good online courses that require students to respond regularly to professors’ questions and stay involved in other ways. They would especially benefit from learning true ideas. In my view, online education is not as good as learning in a small room with a great professor, but a good online class is much better than anonymously sitting in a large lecture hall, especially when the agenda is indoctrination.
Heres an analogy that might help: The Metropolitan Opera at the end of this past summer showed HD films of ten of its operas in the Lincoln Center plaza. My wife and I went to and enjoyed three of them. Im no opera expert, but being inside the opera hall is great if your seats are up close so you can both hear the music and watch the expressions on the singers faces. Its not so great if youre in the balcony, especially if youre paying $160 to hug the back wall.
Students around the country pay big bucks to hug the back wall. The analogy breaks down at this point because the singers they hear are terribly off-key, but I hope the point is clear: No one is saying that the Metropolitan Opera movie is the same as the live performance, but its a way of offering the opera to people who would otherwise not see and hear it. Some may say NO: If youre not inside, tough. My sense is that it doesnt take anything away from the inside experience to offer the film to folks in the plaza.
Let me bring this home: The Kings board, executive team and faculty are discussing having some courses online as a way to provide a greater number of students the opportunity to learn true ideas. We expect Kings to derive from online education some significant financial benefits that will help us to maintain and improve our classroom offerings. We dont know how far well go with online education, but our goal is to continue to focus on what happens in our classrooms. We envision online courses as worthwhile in themselves but also acting Ill switch from opera to football — as the offensive line that protects our quarterback.
Initial Kings efforts will be focused on high school juniors and seniors who could enroll in a “Get a Jump on College” program that allows them to take a few core classes online. This program will begin in the spring of 2010 with three courses: Introduction to Politics, Introduction to Economics, and College Writing 1. We hope through this program to encourage bright students to come to Kings.
What to do beyond that is still under discussion by the Kings board, executive committee, and faculty. But I can assure you of this: In all our thinking the core of Kings is and will be classroom education. Our mission remains the same: The teaching of true ideas to bright, hard-working students who will one day lead strategic public and private institutions, and the support of professors as they communicate true ideas right now by writing in and appearing on leading media. We believe that in the end, it is ideas that rule, not armies, and that leaders with true ideas can change the world. We want to get these ideas to leaders around the world.
The question weve been discussing is: What is the best way to teach these true ideas to people we cant bring to Kings? We believe that the Bible is true for all people at all times, and that political, economic, and cultural concepts derived from the Bible are good for people not only in New York but in Beijing, Nairobi, and other cities as well. Online education seems to be a good way to spread these ideas. We are interested in your thoughts about this and welcome your suggestions about ways to promote the global vision of the College.
If we can begin to achieve this goal, we believe the reputation of The Kings College, New York City, will continue to grow. We will not do anything that devalues a Kings degree or suggests to students that theyre better off taking online courses than being here in person. Weve been emphasizing Gothamization for two years and will continue stressing the advantage of our location for its educational challenges, its internship opportunities, its ability to attract distinguished visitors, and its provision of the most impressive campus in the world. No online curriculum can match being here.
Ill conclude with a request: Please help us think about how to get Kings ideas out to the world. The speed of innovation is staggering. New technologies and ideas sprout every hour of the day. We appreciate your suggestions.
###
The following report was approved by The King’s Council at a special meeting on Wednesday, November 4th, 2009. It was approved 8-0 with the representative from QE1 being absent. Minutes of the meeting will be available at http://council.tkc.edu.
Student Committee on Academic Affairs Report
The Student Committee on Academic Affairs met on Friday, October 30th, at 6:00 p.m. in order to prepare a report for The King’s Council in reference to Provost Olasky’s letter soliciting student opinion on online education. In attendance were John Hundscheid (Chair), Penelope Gelwicks (Secretary), Jacob Bedlion, Lucas Croslow, Holly Hall, Laura Herrod, and Andrew Schatz (ex officio). The Committee has prepared the following report:
The Committee wishes to thank Provost Olasky for committing his thoughts regarding online education to writing, and for inviting a student response. This document is respectfully submitted in acceptance of his invitation.
It is the understanding of the Committee that the College is preparing to launch a program in online education in order to more widely disseminate “true ideas” and to generate revenue to support existing operations. The scope of the program as described by Provost Olasky seems to the Committee to be acceptable. New student recruitment, granting of dual enrollment credit, raising the public profile of the College, and supplementing the “brick and mortar” education of existing students are laudable goals and well within students’ understanding of the institution’s mission. The Committee therefore endorses the Provost’s vision for online education, with the following concerns.
First, in implementing online education, the institution will have to make choices about where to allocate resources. This will necessarily affect the “brick and mortar” student experience. For example, if online enrollment swells to great levels, more professors will be needed. The quality of new faculty and the division of their time between online and on-campus work should be of foremost concern. Faculty time is a scarce resource that is already in tremendous demand. The creation of a second major source of demand on faculty’s time will force the institution to make allocative choices between the on-campus and the online divisions of the College. We appreciate the Provost’s commitment to “focus on what happens in our classrooms,” and the Committee agrees that the on-campus experience should take strong priority over online education.
Second, the Committee seeks clarification regarding how the admission process would be conducted for online education. Some institutions offer online courses to anyone who will pay. If King’s does the same, it is essential to brand the online program separately, lest the value of King’s classroom credit be equated with the value of King’s online credit.
Third, it is undeniable that the experience of a King’s class online is drastically different from the traditional King’s experience. Online students will not participate in the House system or other important aspects of student life. Without being on location in New York City, the value of Gothamization will be negligible. The Committee is concerned that reducing the King’s experience to what can be learned in a classroom—and a non-Socratic classroom, at that—cannot adequately train leaders and thus fulfill the College’s vision. The Committee finds it particularly troubling that College Writing I, which the College has always treated as the foundation of the curriculum, is being offered online next semester. It seems counterintuitive to offer a writing class-one of the most interactive, discussion-based, and collaborative classes offered by the College-online.
The King’s College mission is to equip students with both ideas and virtue. This virtue—discipline, professionalism, teachability, and humility—issues from a combination of shaping forces: rigorous classes, living in a community of honor in New York City, and a dynamic academic culture with fellow students. The Committee is concerned about the compatibility of online education with the educational philosophy of the College. Just as one would not want to be treated by a doctor who got his degree online, the true ideas taught at King’s are important enough that they require “field experience” to fully equip a student to wield them.
In light of all the above, the Committee offers the following recommendations:
¶ Treat King’s online credits as transfer credits if a student decides to enroll as a traditional student. This distinction would serve to emphasize the institution’s commitment to traditional education.
¶ Limit the number of credits a student can earn online to sixty, just as we limit the number of transferable credits for incoming students to sixty.
¶ The institution should never consider offering a degree program online. To do so, would be incongruent with the mission, vision, and educational philosophy of the College.
¶ Offer only the most objective, lecture-driven courses online.
¶ Never alter the curriculum or class structure in service of the online program.
¶ Limit the number of students admitted to the online education venture. This is made necessary by the institution’s primary commitment to the traditional educational experience and the overriding importance of preserving the fundamental identity of the College.
Posted by kingscouncil
Posted by kingscouncil
Posted by kingscouncil