Prioritize faculty input

Although discussions about the purpose of higher education continue, the debate over for-credit online courses has, for the time being, ended. Last week 75 professors penned a letter to The Chronicle in which they criticized Duke’s partnership with Internet Education Company 2U. Last Thursday the Arts and Sciences Council voted down the proposal to offer for-credit online courses.

The concerns expressed by faculty members, both in the Arts and Sciences Council and in a recent meeting convened by faculty in the humanities, touch upon a number of issues that the editorial board has discussed this year. In particular, many faculty feel that the University, as it continues to pursue online education and interdisciplinary learning, has failed to recognize the value of the humanities in a liberal arts education. 

In our view, these concerns illustrate the need to include faculty in all steps of approving, designing and implementing new University initiatives. We commend the faculty for continuing to insist that the administration consult with them as they develop new programs and encourage administrators to take more interest in faculty concerns.

The concerns outlined by the 75 faculty members who published last week’s letter point to crucial issues that the administration needs to address as it considers the future of online education at Duke. The faculty raised questions about the pedagogical consequences of online courses impugning their ability to effectively replicate in-classroom interaction and face-to-face feedback. Moreover, they rightly identified the need to protect Duke’s liberal arts curriculum from “political and commercial pressures that might otherwise hold sway” in the context of today’s increasingly commercialized approach toward higher education. Prioritizing departments and programs that promise to rake in lots of money threatens the future of many disciplines within the humanities, which, while not always as financially rewarding as other fields, remains integral to a liberal arts curriculum. 

Two weeks ago, we discussed a number of these problems. We suggested that, given the seeming inevitability of for-credit online courses at some point in the future, faculty and administrators should not debate whether or not such a move is desirable, but should instead look at ways to improve platforms for online education so that they are more compatible with the humanities. Although online courses are, for the moment, off the table, the issues will certainly resurface, and any effort to find ways in which online courses can be made worthy of credit must involve faculty input and feedback. 

It is in the University’s best interest to incorporate all stakeholders, especially faculty, into discussions about Duke’s move to online education. As the recent veto of for-credit online courses illustrates, when the administration pursues initiatives without gaining approval from faculty it causes dissatisfaction and narrows the space for compromise over divisive issues. 

Faculty are uniquely positioned to contribute to Duke’s long-term academic projects. They are responsible for and deeply committed to the high quality liberal arts education that Duke prides itself on. The humanities, in particular, form the philosophical core of a liberal arts education. All elite universities, as they navigate the uncertain future of higher education, must continue to value and sustain a strong humanities tradition.