Critique of Kiefer's argument on student losses in online writing classes

Online Learning

The following is a critique of an article by Kiefer titled: "Do students lose more than they gain in online writing classes?" The article is obtained from chapter eight of the book titled "Brave New Classrooms" as written by Lockard and Pegrum. While analyzing the article, this study will focus on both sides of the argument but will give more weight on the side supported by the thesis statement (Machi & McEvoy, 2012 pp. 13). The article appreciates the growing trend of individuals enrolling in online classes over the physical ones owing to their limited freedom their workplaces. Even with its benefits, I agree with Keifer that students lose more than they gain in online writing classes because the method is not interactive, limits creativity, and the application of concepts in real-life situation.

Analysis

Kiefer explains that it is possible to teach writing students effectively through online classes. She casts very little doubt on its viability as a teaching method. Given this case, it is possible that the author must have been a beneficiary of the same teaching method or might have interacted closely interacted with a beneficiary of his system. Similarly, the author has little doubts on the effectiveness mainly on the part of the practical lessons that are mandatory to this learning (Kiefer, 2007 pp.7).

The author has justified the use of online teaching module for writers in most parts of the essay. One fact about online classes is that they do not completely steal away the teacher's impact on the students while at the same time give the kind of flexibility of learning that'd unrivalled (Kiefer, 2007 pp.10). It is not possible to have a flexible learning regime from the physical classrooms than it is in the online lessons. Teachers and students alike are able to interact and share thoughts from any part if the world they are in. Time flexibility is also an added advantage as a lot of it is saved from, the reduced travels that are avoided.

The reality about the online teaching is that there is a very limited interaction between the teachers and the students. The effect is the loss of personal touch. In such an instance, students will end up only getting the theory part of the knowledge and lack the practical bit that is in most cases very vital (Beardwood, 2013 pp.31). The field of writing is always more about what someone can do on a practical basis with his or her hands and not what can be thought out. In this case, a writer who lacks a practical training, despite being able to think creatively will not bring out the best work needed. Learning that is practical is better than one which is just theoretical as is always witnessed under online training.

The author's assertions about the position of online writing in terms lecturer-student are true. Keifer (p.144) shows that the absence of classroom support software limits the interaction to be only that between the individual student and the teacher atypical of the contemporary classroom scenario. However, the existence of the WebCT enables students have the advantage of studying comfortably at their homes and saving the accommodation fees they would have used in the alternative module (Beardwood, 2013 pp.33). However, what they lose is far much more than these two gains. First, they lose the chance to have a practical perspective of their work while training.

Secondly, they lose the chance to be made more competent in the case of practical work. The reason for this is that their work after school will be very practical and involves working in a dynamic field. The online training limits this practical experience. Thirdly, the option of online training limits the acquisition of interpersonal skills that could be obtained from the interactions in class with fellow students and their respective teachers. Class interactions also encourage socialization skills and abilities among students. As writers, the students need to have a social perspective of how life is. They need to work with people, among people and for people. It is evident that online teaching for writers is inappropriate when the benefits and gains are identified (Kiefer, 2007 pp4).