Character Education in Online Education
Posted on July 1, 2009 by Li Feng
Recently I read an article (in Chinese) in which the authors explain their perspective in online education in China. I found the following viewpoint, which I translated into English, interesting:
Currently, there are still some issues with the development of online education. First of all, there is a lack of proficiency in internet technology and educational philosophy among online educators. At present, online education in most universities is limited to videotaped lectures or lecture notes that are shared online for students to browse. In this sense, the advantage of interaction which is unique to online education is not given full play. This is partly because technical staff tends to lack in-depth understanding of education whereas many educators lack knowledge of network technology. Secondly, online education is not comparable with traditional education in terms of character education. The role of a teacher is not only to teach a subject, but more importantly to educate a person. It is hard for an online instructor to set a moral example by words and deeds, thus lacking the ability to help students form noble personality.
The first issue with online education pointed out by the authors concurs with what we saw during our visits in China, although in some universities interaction is built into their learning management systems. It would be of interest to examine whether and how students enjoy and benefit from the interactions they have with the instructor and their peers.
What drew my attention was the second issue, namely the lack of the capability of character education in online education. This was the first time that I heard of such a perspective. As a Chinese native, I can easily understand where this concern comes from. The concept of “educating a person” has been deeply rooted in Chinese educational philosophy since the time of Confucius. Teachers are considered not only subject matter experts, but more importantly role models. There are many Chinese idioms associated with this aspect of a teacher, such as “teachers are engineers of human souls” and “a teacher is one who imparts truth, transmits knowledge, and resolves doubts.” Comparatively speaking, western educational philosophies are less concerned with these concepts and attach more emphasis to the development of students’ creativity and individualism. Contemporary western learning theories are more concerned with students constructing their own knowledge. This is probably why I have never heard of the concern about character education here in the U.S.
What are your thoughts? I am really interested in reading your thoughts and comments on the very “Chinese” opinion of the authors.
[Here is the link to the original article: http://iehviivavis.43.gs/lwk/dianziban\200606\023519.htm. It’s in Chinese and please use an online translation tool if you would like to read it.]
Tags: China Column, UMassOnlinePermalink | Trackback |
Print This Post
- Sitting in Rows or in a Circle?
- Real Experience and Reflections
- Learning Mandarin Chinese, Online, In the 6th Grade?
- E-learning in Corporate Training in China
- Lifelong Learning and Distance Education
Comments
2 Responses to “Character Education in Online Education”
Share your comment:
Review our comment policy
|
|
Explore UMassOnline
Millions of minds. Thousands of Possibilities. Endless Opportunity. Learn how global students are woven together by a common thread, a quality education. Click here to watch the UMassOnline One World Class video.
I am doing research on character education. I love that quote about teachers being engineers of human souls. What happened in the US is that teachers did not really know how to teach moral/character education when the Bible/prayer was banned from schools. As school took a more secular turn accountability with core content overshadowed everything else.
In 1993 powerful lobbys were formed to get money for the states to teach character education but the programs were not based on any sort of theoretical foundations. Schools ended up chosing programs based on character traits (and 1920s information.
Current there has been a flurry of research by psychologists dissecting morality (Kohlberg to Rest to Narvaez.The next step seems to get goverment support to fund teacher education programs in character education based on developing skill sets based a sound theoretical base.
Teachers can’t teach what they have no exposure to. I wouldn’t dream of teaching math without any sort of qualification. Why should “engineering of human souls” be any different?
Thank you very much for your insightful and informative comment! I learned a lot about current situation of character education in the U. S.
Many Chinese students follow their teachers’ examples in terms of what the teachers say or do. In this sense, moral standards of teachers in China are crucial. I agree with you that we can’t teach something we are not qualified to teach. In China, the culture, not the government or the law, requires teachers to have high moral standards. I remember when I was a teacher in Beijing, I immediately felt the pressure to “behave” myself in that I felt as though my students were watching whatever I said or did.
Look forward to reading more of your perspectives!