The number of persons in school at various levels takes a pyramidal pattern all throughout the world. There are a lot of kids in elementary school, but as they become older, the number of kids drops, leaving only a handful in higher education. In the autumn of 2015, 65 million students in the United States were projected to enroll in grades K through 12. During the same time span, 20.2 million people were scheduled to enroll in colleges and universities. In the United States, it is anticipated that 25% of new high school students will not be able to graduate. One out of every three freshmen entering schools or universities will not make it through their first year. Because many people do not obtain the entire training they require to participate in society, this dropout rate impedes national growth. More adults receiving education in order to become effective in society will greatly aid national growth.
I’m not implying that all folks who haven’t completed their education aren’t contributing to society. There are a number of well-known people in society who have dropped out of school at some point. Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Oprah Winfrey, for example, all dropped out of school at some time. Though not exhaustive, the number of persons who dropped out of school or chose not to pursue higher education and went on to achieve success is small. The majority of people who dropped out or stopped going to school and never found success in their employment did so because they lacked the information they required to reach their full potential. If you look at the history of people who were successful despite dropping out or terminating schooling, you’ll see that they seemed to have found their life’s purpose and followed it, and, more significantly, they obtained some type of reward of education later.
We all know that education is a lifelong endeavor. Whether you dropped out of school or graduated with honors, you will need education at some point in your life. The school dropout who has found a vocation or gained employment requires education in order to be more productive; the dropout who has realized the need for education but has ‘grown past school-going age’ and desires to return to school requires education, and managers and employees alike require additional education in order to keep up with today’s rapidly changing world and gain increased wages and status. Our search for ongoing education is somewhat limited by the conventional school-reliant society we have constructed for ourselves and regard to be the ‘best.’ For many people, formal schooling came to an end the day they dropped out of high school or graduated. Even if technology allows us to receive a great education while sitting in our homes, we still need to attend college or university.
It looked that the issue of ongoing education for everyone, including dropouts and the working class, had been solved when technology – computers and internet access – replaced physical classrooms and made it possible to study by distance in real-time. It appeared and continues to appear, that the instructor no longer has to leave his students or seek study leave or leave of absence in order to pursue higher education. It looked that the fifty-year-old lady who had dropped out of school a few years earlier could now school from home and that the father could learn what his daughter was learning at college using the same gadget he used to call her. That’s how it seemed to me. Those who dropped out of school owing to financial difficulties and have yet to make a breakthrough would be excluded. Those with money would not want to invest it in a diploma that employers and academicians would disapprove of. Despite the abundance of online colleges and universities, little appears to have changed for these two categories of people.
There are two major factors to blame. For one thing, online education is too expensive for the target population of students, and for another, there is a notion that online colleges and universities do not give a comprehensive education like traditional colleges and universities. According to Ed Vosganian, founder and CEO of College Funding 123, the cost of an on-campus university for undergraduates is projected to be $42,000, whereas online institutions cost roughly $21,000 for the same group. By comparison, we believe that studying online is significantly less expensive. However, we must not overlook individuals who want to study at an online university.
There are two primary causes for this. For one thing, online education is prohibitively expensive for the intended student demographic, and there is a perception that online schools and universities do not provide a comprehensive education comparable to that provided by traditional colleges and universities. According to Ed Vosganian, founder and CEO of College Funding 123, an on-campus university for undergraduates is expected to cost $42,000, while online universities would cost around $21,000. We feel that learning online is substantially less expensive in comparison. Individuals who desire to study at an online institution, on the other hand, should not be overlooked.
The online colleges will assure you that they will not put anything on your diploma to indicate that you had a non-traditional education. This type of advertisement reflects how society views online learning. Online education is seen as a low-cost method of obtaining a ‘watered-down’ education. Until recently, online colleges and universities were regarded as certificate mills. This notion persists, despite actual data indicating that there is no difference in student quality between traditional colleges and universities and online colleges and universities. Online Universities and Colleges are doing everything they can to elevate online learning and reduce study costs, but they can’t do it alone. With government assistance, online learning may become prestigious and accessible to the poor and middle classes.
The government should establish a national framework for online education, support accreditation, and give scholarships and student loans to online college and university students. The state, through the Department of Education or another competent government entity, should establish a national framework to supervise the activities of all online institutions and universities. This framework, which is descriptive rather than prescriptive, would explain, for example, the minimum courses required at each level and the overall mode of operation of online universities and colleges without mandating specific courses or modes of operation. Accreditation is not only time-consuming but also costly for online colleges and universities.
This expense is passed on to students, causing program costs to rise. Though there is no certainty that program costs would be halved if the government agrees to cover half of the cost of accreditation, the program fee will be cut in some way. Finally, most students who attend online schools and universities do not get state grants or student loans. Those who are awarded something do not receive large scholarships or student loans like their contemporaries at regular colleges and universities do. Scholarships and student loans should be available to students of online colleges and universities in the same way that they are for students of traditional colleges and universities.
The consequences of these initiatives would undoubtedly be spectacular. By establishing a national framework for online education, people’s misconceptions about online learning would be dispelled. Many people believe that online learning is simple and that the number of credits required is much lower than in regular classrooms. This belief is based on the fact that some online courses are poorly constructed and offer certificates after just a few assignments have been completed. When a national framework is formed and operationalized, such practices may be put to an end. A national framework will give online learning legitimacy since a national standard for online learning will have to be followed, and no online institution or university will be able to just sell certificates. Accreditation will be subsidized in three ways.
The most obvious benefit is that program fees would be reduced since the amount passed on to students would be reduced. Fees for accreditation would be subsidized, which would encourage online colleges and universities to seek accreditation from accrediting agencies recognized by the Department of Education or the relevant state agency. While accreditation is not required in certain countries, such as the United States, some occupations that need state licensure will not recognize degrees from non-accredited colleges and universities. Prospective online students are frequently concerned about their ability to work with their certifications. Government intervention would alleviate this concern, as well as the public’s bad view of online education.
Government initiatives in the form of scholarships and loans would alleviate the financial load and allow people who would not have been able to attend school otherwise to do so. To summarize, government action would go a long way toward fostering enlightenment by allowing many more individuals to pursue higher education.
Many people wish to obtain higher education through online colleges and universities in order to gain information and skills or to improve their knowledge and abilities, but many are unable to do so due to the expense or the uncertainty of the certificate’s acceptability. Government action in the form of a national framework for online universities and colleges, as well as subsidies for accreditation costs, scholarships, and student loans would make it possible for people who desire to study from home to do so.
Government engagement can ensure that online learning is on par with traditional college or university study and that their certificates will be acknowledged by employers who require state licensing. It would relieve strain on traditional colleges and universities facilities, provide the well-educated populace required for national progress, and transform the existing pyramidal shape into a ‘near’ cylinder.
