GUEST COLUMN
Onkar Singh
It dates back to 2003, when the National Programme on Technology Enhanced Learning (NPTEL) was initiated in the country with the aim to widen the access to good quality learning content. Over time, it has become the largest repository of audio-video learning content in engineering, basic sciences, humanities, and management, with a well-laid mechanism to deliver these courses. Subsequently, the acronym MOOC- Massive Open Online Course first came up in 2008 in Canada and was attempted for the first time in 2012 locally in academic Institutions in India, while MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) gained momentum in 2014. Further, during the COVID-19 pandemic, online education was accepted as a substitute for conventional physical classroom-based learning to ensure continuity of education. Because the online mode of learning facilitates access to good learning content to all with equity, provided the digital divide is absent.
This concept of providing high quality learning content from secondary to post-graduate level of education through online platforms got a push after the launch of Study Webs of Active Learning for Young Aspiring Minds (SWAYAM). With respect to higher education, the University Grants Commission rolled out a regulatory framework enabling the inclusion of online courses by MOOCs in the formal curriculum in 2016. These regulations for a credit framework for online learning courses through MOOCs were superseded by another framework in 2021 and prescribed the evaluation and certification of credits-based MOOCs and credit mobility of SWAYAM based courses in the Universities in India.
A closer look at the SWAYAM dashboard indicates the student enrolment of 59870952, examination registrations being 9827866 and only 6202354 getting the certification of completion, which means slightly more than 10 per cent are only able to complete courses through MOOCs in spite of utilising the state of art pedagogy / technology. However, the UGC regulation 2021 permits the higher education institution (HEI) to allow only up to forty per cent of the total courses being offered in a particular programme in a semester, through the online credit course, through the SWAYAM platform. This brings a paradigm shift in the teaching responsibilities of HEIs, which may continue teaching only 60 per cent of credit courses while up to 40 per cent of total courses in a programme would be met through MOOCs /SWAYAM in the programmes run in the institution. In view of the new practice of online course(s) reducing the on-campus teaching of the courses and dismal passing rate of MOOCs courses, it is obligatory to introspect the blended framework with respect to the quality of education.
The mandated target of gross enrolment ratio of 50 by 2035 has led to capacity expansion, and a large number of higher education institutions (HEIs) are coming up in private and public sectors. Obviously, the increase in intake is accompanied by the need to have a commensurate number of qualified and capable teachers as per the applicable student-to-teacher ratio, and the availability of good quality teachers has been a difficulty for quite some time. So, in the crisis of declining quality of education due to unavailability of good quality committed teachers, MOOCs can be a promising solution. Besides, the HEIs have the advantage of offering specialised courses in the curriculum even if the teachers are not available with them for such courses. Also, for the subjects covered by MOOCs, the learning content from distinguished teachers becomes universally accessible subject to good internet connectivity.
With so many good points in favour of MOOCs, there are concerns which cannot be ignored. Firstly, education should not be looked at as mere audio-visual transmission of learning content of any subject, as teaching essentially calls for requisite engagement of teacher and taught for meaningful transfer of knowledge in a style that suits students, a disciplined learning environment, satiating curiosity, application of knowledge, and infusing confidence for self-learning after the course is over. Remote learning through video content and automated evaluation or only pen-and-paper evaluation may meet the necessary requirements of course completion but do not provide wholesome education. The dismal success rate in SWAYAM courses could be on account of insufficient understanding, lesser analytical abilities, and poor practical competencies. This makes it a fit case to revisit the long term learning outcomes from such a blended model of education, especially at the moment when the quality of education and employability are already not up to the mark.
Secondly, it is never fair to assume that every student reaps equal benefits from self-paced online education. Actually, such initiatives deprive a large number of students interested in learning through human beings as teachers in physical classrooms and widen learning gaps instead of shrinking them. Integrating the uniformly available online courses into the formal curriculum by partly replacing on-campus learning opportunities will lead to one learning model across the HEIs. Such absence of consideration of diversity in capabilities of the students and teachers will eliminate the competitive advantage amongst the HEIs and lower knowledge benchmarks in due course of time. Thirdly, the assignment of the role of a number of teachers teaching a particular subject across HEIs to the digital learning content recorded by one teacher will diminish the role of other teachers involved in education in HEIs. There will also be a decrease in the engagement of teachers in content design and its dissemination, knowledge transfer, experiential learning, supervising and mentoring students while caring for their psychological and ethical concerns with pragmatism. Such mechanisation of the teaching process by using recorded content for uniform telecasting and completing the formal education in blended mode may be perilous from the perspective of student competencies and abilities.
Fourthly, the present provision of up to 40 per cent courses through MOOCs may result in reduced requirements of teachers, and the loss of teaching jobs is inevitable in HEIs. This may have socio-economic impact as well, while reducing the relevance of the HEIs as centres of knowledge and learning. Fifthly, at the time when there is increasing awareness about the rising cost and commercialisation of education, the deviation of HEIs from the conventional teaching-learning in classrooms risks declining HEI relevance in fast growing digital learning opportunities and MOOCs.
Way forward
The ambition of the nation to provide higher education opportunities to all aspirants cannot be fructified well by short term measures of digitising the education process and getting rid of face-to-face interaction in physical classrooms. Despite regulatory enablers being present, the apex regulators and HEIs must critically evaluate the learning outcomes from the digital learning mode and physical learning mode before adapting the blended learning model. The presence of teachers in HEIs is indispensable, so the teachers must be recruited as per the applicable student-teacher ratio and paid as per norms for their whole-hearted involvement in teaching-learning-examination processes. Outsourcing any part of teaching responsibilities of HEIs to MOOCs amounts to the institutions failing to deliver while charging fees and shirking from core responsibilities. Also, in continuation to the ongoing efforts, the higher education regulators must resort to an audit of academic capabilities available in the country. Based on which, the teacher training centres and premier HEIs should charter programmes to improve the competencies and abilities of the existing teachers and develop teachers for future teaching readiness and industry aligned transformations.
Indisputably, MOOCs have the potential to maximize the reach of education, but the important dimension of education calling for empathy, collaboration, and creativity to roll out capable, responsible and lifelong learners from HEIs should not take a backseat. The poor success rate in MOOCs does indicate the learning deficit and demands honest introspection. So, the ubiquitous digital content can be complementary instead of substituting the face-to-face class interactions in respective courses. Present assessment demands that all the subjects prescribed in any programme should be taught by teachers, and the additional subjects intended to be covered through MOOCs can be included in the curriculum as non-credit ones.
(The author is the former vice chancellor of VMSB Uttarakhand Technical University; views expressed are personal)
