Beyond the Hype: A Rational Perspective on Online Education

Online companies are trying to make education cheaper and easier for students, but sometimes the effect of making education easier is not a good method of learning. This is persuasive essay about online education this topic will be discussed within the book review. “The Problem of Technology Hype” is a book written by John Warner explaining the issues students face when education is received online. Although the author does not give scientific studies, I agree with Warner’s view that taking education online may not be the best learning method for students. 

“The Problem of Technology Hype” by John Warner is about the complication of a massive open online course (MOOC). The way the author portrayed and delivered information in this book, seems to be against online education. Warner addresses a point on a new technology hype, personalized learning, which is talked about as adaptive software. This is a software that detects the students point of defeat while the student goes through a set of problems. The software is programmed to identify that mistake and bring up a mini lesson to help ensure the student understands the concept of that problem, then they will be retested on that material until he or she correctly answer the question. The students are usually almost always tested on a material in the form of multiple choice, which is another issue Warner addresses about online school. Warner emphasizes that this software can help students feel the level of accomplishment to some extent but does not necessarily work, he continues by telling us the student will be shown the same repetitive lesson until the student “learns”. Warner also talks about Doug Levin who addresses the assurance issue students face with this software, he explains how students who use this software tend to not be as excited and not feel as safe in school. I agree with Warner’s point that adaptive software may help a student feel the level of accomplishment to some extent, but that does not mean it is the most reliable and helpful source to be using. Students rely on their teachers to provide them with some sort of motivation if they are not getting the motivation and assurance, they need for school they will feel less comfortable and less engaged. I also agree with his point on the formatting style of tests, if students are constantly being tested through only multiple choice questions and given the same repeated lesson when answered wrong, students are more likely to only memorize that answer so they can get on with the rest of their set of problems, and less likely to actually learn and take any of that lesson into consideration.  

Warner makes another point regarding online grading and human grading. He illustrates the negative outcomes by defining automatic grading as a big problem for the future. He brings up Anant Agarwal, who believed automatic grading was going to become a great tool as it will give a response right away to the student and resembles the way a teacher or professor would grade a paper. Warner disagrees with Agarwal’s proposal of this tool; he makes a clear case of the many problems this tool will face. The biggest problem he mentions, “computers can’t read. Computers can only count.” Meaning the computer will only be able to grade based off specific terms and will not be able to go into depth like a professor would. Warner then continues his argument on the negative outcomes automatic grading can provide by going into depth about human grading. He makes it clear that he is in favour to human grading by reminding us about the irrelevancy of the score attached to a paper and pointing us towards the importance of having a professor go into depth with grading our assignments. I strongly agree with Warner’s point, a grade defining your overall mark for an assignment can be very crucial when using automatic grading. He adds on how having a human grader can be very beneficial for future assignments. By having a professor or instructor grade your writing assignments, you can receive all the guidance into becoming a better writer. He adds on by addressing an issue when students misunderstand an argument they were meant to write about, he explains that a computer will not be able to help find the problem on why the student did terribly on the assignment, and how an instructor would be able to identify the issue and assist the student into the right direction.  

Overall, the author’s argument throughout the whole book was disagreeing with a massive online open course (MOOC), after reading the given sections of this book, I have concluded on siding with John Warner and disagreeing with MOOCs. The only issue I found with this book was it not having any scientific evidence or proof for the research he had provided. If he would have added some scientific proof, I feel it could have made his argument more convincing and effective.