The recent explosion in the number of Google Meets or Zoom sessions has helped spearhead the almost overnight transformation to virtual learning environments. Determined to put their utmost best in controlling the global disruption inflicted by COVID-19 on education systems, administrators were swift to harness the 21st century’s technological arsenal to unite students with teachers. The question remains: what would be the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic, where the virtual classroom is the new mainstream, characterised by MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses), online examinations and chat rooms? There clearly is no hard and fast answer. Yet, by analysing crucial factors associated with e-learning, such as ease of accessibility and successes at fulfilling the role of education, we shall try to develop an insightful prediction.
To begin with, the feasibility of providing access to virtual classrooms is a key factor. Market leaders such as Coursera and edX are committed to provide the majority of content on MOOCs free of charge, with an option of paying about $50-150 to unlock graded assignments or earn a certificate. In theory, there is immense potential for thousands of individuals around the globe to simultaneously obtain an excellent technical understanding of countless disciplines through MOOCs. Professors, too, do not have to confine their expertise within the walls of lecture halls.
Why, then, despite obvious economic benefits, are we unable to witness a transition towards MOOCs as a mainstream system of delivering information to the future workforce? One simple answer is that MOOCs, despite being excellent learning platforms, fail to foster learning environments. It is deceptive to state that internet bandwidth is the limiting factor to a global access to virtual education. Students from poorer socioeconomic backgrounds, often characterised by noiser home environments, higher rates of domestic violence even, would lose out in virtual settings. And the major goal of state-schools to try and bridge these socioeconomic divides is halted…
As they stand, virtual classrooms would largely inhibit schools from serving as communities that integrate individuals with one another and the society at large. No matter how technically sound an online lecture is, it largely fails to deliver informal education. For example, basic social expectations set forth- ‘work hard’, ‘treat each other with kindness’- seem impossible to mimic whilst staring at a screen. Soft skills could virtually cease to develop in students who partake in e-learning without supplementary human contact. How would individuals, even if they are masters in their craft, be able to work in teams in the real-world’s job market?
And what would happen to the plethora of great ideas that are sparked, not strictly within the classroom, but within the environs of a school or university? Kevin Hartnett, a senior writer for the Quanta Magazine, shares his unique perspective on ‘Mathematics in being a Team Sport’, explaining that many research projects that professors pursue are inspired by informal face-to-face conversations- the type that occur over a coffee break or a walk down the hallway. This thought process can best be applied to NES in terms of its breadth of extra-curricular activities, some of which were initiatives taken by students themselves. Allow me to narrate a personal experience. The seed of the CREST Bronze Program was planted last year after a 10 minute talk with Ms. Williams, our CCA coordinator, after our biology class. Can virtual classrooms, too, develop such serendipity? The answer cannot be a simple no either. In the coronavirus times, we have witnessed several youth organisations go online to continue their operations. AIESEC- a global youth leadership development institution who provide volunteering, internship and entrepreneurial exchange programs- are in process of experimenting with virtual internships. In addition to connecting interns with one other and partner companies for work purposes, there could be some scope of connecting with one another non-professionally as well. However, with all said and done, it is still not convincing to believe (at this stage) that the ideas sparked in virtual environments would be nearly as close to those in physical settings.
Another interesting aspect to look at is accountability provided by school systems. Final examinations are supposed to ensure that students study regularly, thereby maintaining a degree of minimum participation. A major setback of MOOCs on platforms such as Coursera entails ineffective assessment. The lack of obligation to do one’s best on these assignments could be a reason for its high-dropout rate. A potential solution to this could be schools stepping in to ensure that students virtually complete such tasks on time. However, robust proctoring systems must go hand in hand with online assessment. Centralised exam boards would have to work closely with proctoring solution providers to deliver this. Currently, CollegeBoardT is set to provide Advanced Placement (AP) exams virtually this May. Countless university departments too have followed this trend, due to no other viable option to conduct summer exams this year. Extensive use of technology to administer exams has been an unprecedented outcome, with clear convenience benefits (although trends in malpractice remain inconclusive still). The ability to take assessments on your mobile screen and at the comfort of your house are novel indeed, with little reason to believe why this process cannot be perfected to replace mainstream methods of assessments.
Even though a virtual end of course exam is a viable outcome, does physical distance hinder the motivation to learn? Some studies show a positive correlation with distance and the Hawthorne/ Observer effect. This effect states that the presence of an observer (in this case, the teacher in our brick and mortar classroom) changes our behaviour. The Hawthorne effect would well explain a higher level of engagement from some individuals in a classroom setting who would otherwise procrastinate endlessly. To help answer this, we could analogously consider speaking to someone in person or behind a screen on text. Is the difference adequately significant?
To conclude, it is unlikely that virtual classrooms would substitute traditional ones in the future. They are simply unable to fulfill all roles of education, namely in socialising one another. Yet, we should not overlook their benefits in a post-COVID era. Rather, efforts to create a dual-system, with MOOCs as providers of technical knowledge and schools as developing individuals socially, could lead to an edu revolution.
