The Chronicle this week published a news analysis questioning
whether the current nonstop talk over innovation in higher ed is
creating a system for those who can least afford a traditional
education but need it the most. The piece generated plenty of
reaction in the comments, which I’d group into two opposing
camps: - Face-to-face education is the established and verified
mode of instruction, and any other way depersonalizes education,
is uncontrolled, and most of all, is ineffective. - Using
technology to supplement and, in some cases, replace face-to-
face instruction helps personalize learning for students,
focuses classroom time on what they haven’t already mastered,
and most important, meets students where and how they learn
today. As a result, traditional brick-and-mortar colleges are
doomed. As usual with almost any policy debate these days, very
few commenters were trying to forge a middle ground, which is
desperately needed in an age of rising costs, declining public
subsidies, and new ways of delive