Letter to the Editor

Sexism and classism have no place in the ‘Monitor vs. Whiteboard’ debate

I am writing to express my disappointment in the publication of a recent column authored by Alyck Horton. In the October 23 opinion piece titled “Monitor vs. Whiteboard,” Mr. Horton couches the issue of online coursework in sexist, judgmental, and offensive language. I believe there are more respectful—and accurate—ways to engage in this discussion that centralize the merits of online learning, not online learners themselves. While I agree with some of Mr. Horton’s assertions about the unsuitability of online environments for coursework that is dynamic and discussion-based, I find his sexist caricature of female online students particularly disgusting, and I disagree strongly with the characterization of students enrolled in online coursework as lazy and unprincipled. This portrait is both offensive and inaccurate.

Sexism and classism have no place in the ‘Monitor vs. Whiteboard’ debate

I am writing to express my disappointment in the publication of a recent column authored by Alyck Horton. In the October 23 opinion piece titled “Monitor vs. Whiteboard,” Mr. Horton couches the issue of online coursework in sexist, judgmental, and offensive language. I believe there are more respectful—and accurate—ways to engage in this discussion that centralize the merits of online learning, not online learners themselves. While I agree with some of Mr. Horton’s assertions about the unsuitability of online environments for coursework that is dynamic and discussion-based, I find his sexist caricature of female online students particularly disgusting, and I disagree strongly with the characterization of students enrolled in online coursework as lazy and unprincipled. This portrait is both offensive and inaccurate.

Online learning increases accessibility for students, particularly non-traditional degree seekers who may work during typical class hours, have family responsibilities, or who cannot access campus affordably. According to the Center for Academic Excellence, PSU currently engages more than 16,000 students in online coursework. Online coursework can demand a high level of student effort and accountability, operating on the same premise as the
brick-and-mortar environment that Mr. Horton champions. I’d venture that both settings ultimately rely on a student’s agency and desire to participate– the rigor of any course, online or not, often functions in tandem with a student’s own application and engagement. As online options expand, the onus seems stronger than ever on all students to take accountability for their own education and learning.

As a campus based student, I appreciate the contact I have with faculty and peers, and would hesitate to substitute this experience with an online format. However, in framing all online students in terms of derogatory generalizations, Mr. Horton effectively closes the door on this debate of online learning as a viable educational modality. Premising the conversation disrespectfully on the demographics and motivations of online learners derails the discussion. Let’s set aside inaccurate and disparaging speculation with regard to online learners, and talk instead about how online formats have and will continue to shift the landscape of post-secondary education, and the implications of such change for students, educators, and employers.

Respectfully,

Renee Huizinga
MSW/MPH student, projected grad. 2014