On-line learning—why does it really cost more?
A Letter to the Editor

I read the article in the April edition of the Metropolitan concerning on-line classes with keen anticipation. As a soon to graduate student of the university, I have experience with the on-line classes, and have occasion to question the higher price assigned to them. After reading the article, I find myself still looking for an answer!

What was an opportunity to press for some definitive answers became an exercise in “Minnesota nice”. Apparently accepting the President’s explanation that “keeping up with technological advances cost money” was the polite thing to do. I would have preferred pressing for an explanation that required substance—not an unrelated analogy to game systems. If on-line learning is comparable to technology strides in game playing, then my digital watch should cost $4000 since it is so technologically advanced over the simple only digital watches introduced in the early 70’s! Some technology gets cheaper because we don’t require any more of it than it’s present capabilities.

If we take the technological advances excuse (technology becomes obsolete), we must ask what is so technologically cutting edge about on-line learning? Do we need new computers to provide on-line learning? Do we need a major investment in software and hardware in the IT department of the University solely to address on-line learning? Is there any reason the present NetDirect Portal system that is already in place cannot support on-line learning for many years to come? I may be blissfully technologically ignorant, but NetDirect was in response to a need for uniformity in MNSCU. It is perfectly capable of handling on-line teaching requirements as is. No cause for higher costs here!

Perhaps we should look at higher support costs. Does it require more staffing to register, process, or record grades for on-line learning? I don’t see more staffing needed for on-line learning than conventional learning.

Does the university incur extra costs for classrooms, materials, utilities, any overhead expenditures? Virtual classrooms don’t seem to need conventional heat, electricity, classroom scheduling, or any of the other considerations of conventional learning. I don’t see the extra cost justification here either!

Maybe it costs more to hire instructors for on-line learning. Given that instructors can access their class from anywhere on earth, anytime, without leaving the security of their home—it wouldn’t seem prudent to pay more for their convenience. The available pool of possible instructors is near infinite. If instructors incur less travel cost, and are free to schedule time commitments to their own desires, and are part of a near infinite pool of applicants—business practices preclude them charging more for on-line learning. Still no justification for higher on-line costs here!

Would that leave us with the simple explanation—On-line learning will cost more until the client starts questioning the justification?

Is Metropolitan State University charging more because students relish the convenience and aren’t questioning the extra costs? That would seem to be a question our president should be addressing.

-- E. Dan Conlan

The Metropolitan Home || Calendar || Commentary || Masthead || Contact
Metropolitan State University Homepage

All material © Metropolitan 2005, except as noted. All rights reserved.