UXjam

In defense of (LIS) online classes

Recently Drexel’s west coast branch ended up in a “turf war” after supposedly intruding on the relationship between San José State University and the California Library Association.

John Berry, editor-at-large at Library Journal, took away from the fairly petty incident two substantial points. The latter was the questionable role of competition in LIS education. Academia is simultaneously fueled by cut-throat competition and good-natured collaborative exchange of knowledge. It’s a tenuous balance, and I tend to shy away from “competition” when it comes to library science because, at least when it comes to developing standards, competitive motivations seem to stunt progress.

The first issue was the quality of distance education as compared to traditional on-campus learning.

I am frequently told that online teaching is more work for the faculty, requires more “output” from the students, and is, thus, more “rigorous.” I’m not convinced that “output” has the richness of classroom interaction.

Now, online classes are not for everyone, nor do they work for every subject. But as far as I’ve experienced, they are wonderful for library science courses, where the tangible and intellectual output is frequently high. While face-to-face discussion has its merits, I’ve found writing discussion board posts for my online classes enables a much more thorough exploration of the material. Writing, like verbal discourse, requires us to reflect on our knowledge and experience.

“The act of putting pen to paper encourages pause for thought, this in turn makes us think more deeply about life, which helps us regain our equilibrium.” 
~Norbet Platt

There is (not surprisingly) a lot of reading in LIS courses. It’s a lot to digest at times, and being able to re-read while writing responses - and actually cite authors directly - only increases understanding in myself and my classmates/professors. During face-to-face discussion we frequently have to make foggy references from memory, which may not always be accurate or complete.

Additionally, modern library & info science is largely dependent on technology, and less on physical places (though public libraries are far from obsolete and still a fundamental part of society - I’ll rant on that next time the City/State threatens them). Learning in a digital environment is entirely appropriate. As more libraries are adopting chat/IM, digital reference service is just as important as knowing how to conduct a face-to-face reference interview. Of course, F2F is still crucial since librarianship is just as much about communicating with people as it is about theory and resources.

Finally, as innately fascinating as LIS material is, I imagine it would be a bit less riveting if I had to sit through dry lectures about it - particularly at Drexel where most on-campus grad courses (at least in the iSchool) are 3-hour night classes.

My ideal program (which I am lucky enough to experience) is a healthy mix. But by no means are exclusively online programs ultimately inferior to traditional, as long as the students are engaged, the faculty knowledgeable and skilled at online teaching, and the proper tools used to convey the appropriate information.

Speaking of which, Blackboard could use some competition. The state of distance education technologies is a somewhat sorry one as far as I’ve seen.