Institutions are changing their dynamics on a daily basis. They must be able to adjust to the changing environment of the type of student they may acquire as well as cater in a different manner than years before to the new types of students that are attending college. Diversity is key to providing a welcoming and engaging experience on college campuses.
Today’s technology advanced student is seeking out avenues that will lessen their cost of attending school as well as innovative ways to access and utilize materials.
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are becoming more popular than ever before due to a variety of issues that face higher education institutions.
“MOOCs have fallen from their peak of inflated expectations in 2012 to the trough of disillusionment. The average student in a MOOC is not the historically underrepresented/minority group of lower socioeconomic status, but a young white American man with a bachelor’s degree and a full-time job (Selingo, 2014, para. 2).
Many in the lower socioeconomic status as compared to the wealthy do not always have access to internet at their homes, thus leaving them behind the mark to have access to online education.
“Changing circumstances mandate that we shift the focus of higher education policy away from how to enable more students to afford higher education to how we can make a quality postsecondary education affordable” (Christensen, Horn, Caldera, & Soares, 2011). But as a member of a lower socioeconomic status, a combination of both of these ideas would be beneficial.
Access to an online education can offer other problems for individuals of a lower socioeconomic status.
Selingo (2014) point out that “when MOOCs replace traditional courses, an extremely high number of students fail. The basic MOOC is a great thing for the top 5 percent of the student body, but not a great thing for the bottom 95 percent”.
These students would more than likely be in the bottom accordingly with their living status. Since “nearly all MOOCs originate from the world’s top universities; their instructors are accustomed to teaching the brightest students, and may not understand the motivations, academic difficulties and self-discipline of the average student” (Selingo, 2014).