The global pandemic has without a doubt, disturbed and altered the natural processes of human life throughout the world. As we are cast upon a new and unfamiliar setup of living caused by the dread of the COVID-19 virus, we are placed on a significant change that made almost all of the things of the past strange, impossible to be done, and in effect, quite futile.
In the fear of being contaminated by the virus, the extant status of the world has afforded, very widely, for the majority of the nations if not all, to close their borders and correspondingly implement lockdowns on specific places locally. This sudden drastic change does not at all mean a change in one particular sector—as society, akin to a woven string of mat, is nothing less but interconnected.
Not only that the economy is affected nor the health department is challenged, but even as well to one of those of the societal key factors that a layman could not have reasonably foreseen—the education. The endeavor to contend the novel challenges posed by the pandemic is often unheard and unseen by many in the realm of education. Shifting from the traditional way of face-to-face conduct of classes to blended or purely online classes is definitely new to the table, and just as how the different departments and branches of government are being put to test by the COVID-19 virus, the education system, among others, is thrown in the darkness—without light or anything that could aid itself upon.
We will begin shortly by this threshold question: Does the online class serve its purpose? The elementary goal of education is to chiefly educate—that is to say teaching minds of individuals of the things that are necessary to becoming equipped in whatever areas of one’s life. However, in light of this abrupt paradigm shift insofar as the educational platform is concerned, we are troubled not only by the effectiveness of online classes but more so of its accessibility.
Technology to which online class lays itself from, technically affirms those who can access it, and yet it also negates those who are financially incapable of having it. From this tenor, we can speculate that albeit online classes are done with an intent of goodness as its gravamen is for everyone’s beneficence, it deliberately draws the line of the economic struggles of classes—this is to say that not everyone has the luxury of owning even a single of gadget that is sufficient for its conduct. Correspondingly, there could have been an overwhelming amount of unheard clamor by those who cannot afford online classes—much so, these individuals are only waiting and depending on their procurement of education as to when the traditional way of classes will begin again.
Going to the latter tenor, we now try to assess the effectiveness of online classes. Broad, complex and technical—these are just some of the words that can be attributed to education at least with respect to the higher ones.
If the academic programs of medical related courses vis-à-vis, pharmacy and medical laboratory science students are enough to drain them in an instant in the traditional way of classes, how much more when it is done online? For instance, how would a pharmacy student determine a specific combination of pharmaceutical substance represented by liquids in the test tubes, if it requires a high amount of scrutiny in the actual face-to-face classes? In connection, how would a specific medical laboratory student perform with prudence and caution the phlebotomy if it requires precise and assertive skills in person?
If we are to bring these fundamental educational processes and training of these two academic programs in an online platform, would that in essence, be totally learned and achieved? The answer should be in the negative. While the goal of online classes is mainly to educate, one might not be stopped of thinking that such a quality of education being fostered is being mitigated and directly being lowered. This assertion can nothing less be supported by the power of students’ actual immersion in the process—as this gives them the chance to explicitly ask professors when confused, or they are given opportunities to redo operations or steps if done wrongly.
On the other hand, one might assert that there are two forms of sciences: the hard science and the soft science. The former is discussed briefly in the previous elucidation. As shown, this form of science is very hard and seemingly impossible to be taught in an online class. But one might think that although be that as it may, it is not the only science that comprises education in general. Soft sciences, which deal in philosophy, social science, history, arts, communication, anthropology, politics and among others, can be taught in an online platform as these are fields where concepts are only being studied. Unlike the hard science that requires actual immersion of skills-based learning, soft science only calls for a wise and wide reflection that can be done online. This assertion is fair and considerable but is not right—soft sciences like the hard sciences, also demand an actual teacher that helps stimulate students' wildest imagining to reflect—and such a reflection is something that cannot be offered by the screens of the computers online. Should one ought to study the concepts, one must also be personally present so that such concepts are not only retained but lived.
As shown, the transition from offline to online classes not only aggravates the issue of inaccessibility, it also explicitly reveals that the promise of quality education is indirectly not being fulfilled.
The oral arguments, the fruitful exchange of ideas, the actual interaction of syringe and skin, the tight grip of hand to the test tubes are just some of the necessary manifestations for learning to be truly gained. If these primal educational processes are being deliberately transitioned to the knowledge that comes from computer monitors of relatively far individuals, what more knowledge could it bring?
Online classes are in essence ineffective, oppressive, and selective, bar none.
Comments