Who Does Quality Control on Online Classes?

With the increasingly widespread use of the internet, it is becoming increasingly common for it to be used as a source of education. While prestigious high schools and universities continue to value the importance of face-to-face camaraderie among students and teachers, as well as real-world social experiences of offline activities on their campuses and communities nearby, plenty of educational services providers have emerged to offer online-only classrooms. By giving people more freedom to choose when, how much, and with whom to study, these online courses seek to transcend the physical and financial limitations of brick-and-mortar school campuses.

At the same time, online-centered education is a more accessible, democratized education. The barrier of entry for a brick-and-mortar school can be high. Investing in building a proper campus, transporting a bunch of qualified teachers to the campus, and succeeding at targeted advertisements toward a geographically particular student population all present massive risks that casual entrepreneurs cannot stomach. But online education can mushroom at a comparatively lightning speed, as setting up websites, signing up remote freelancers, and marketing to a global audience are more cost-efficient.

But as online education spread, there is an issue of quality control. Universities and high schools undergo relatively vigorous vetting processes, in which only the suitable can be properly licensed by local governments. The best of the best undergoing decades, if not centuries of vetting by class after class of students and their parents, who, through word of mouth and their personal success, help schools establish their brand name as providers of quality education. Online education providers, many of them few years old and lie outside government regulation, have different credentials and credibility.

Indeed, given that education does not show results in hours or days, purchasers of online education services have no choice but to go in with some level of blind trust. Short of becoming guinea pigs, clients are often beholden to evolving technologies related to online education, as well as developing business models of service providers. As providers contend with an increasing number of competitors providing similar services at lower price points, they are often forced to adjust their own content, operations, and sales techniques, taking their clients on a sometimes wild ride in the process.

The expectations of high-quality online education become particularly iffy as service content further differs from offline education. Real-time online classes conducted (with video on for all attendees) on Zoom are not so different from classes conducted in a physical classroom. But to target people with busy schedules in multiple time zones, real-time classes are not always possible. Recording of classes, excerpts from textbooks, and PowerPoint slides interspersed with short videos can masquerade as course materials but can quickly bore students craving a more interactive experience.

What is worse, such non-real-time course materials can be quickly generated, through the power of cheap AI tools, without much expert knowledge. Without hiring academic or industry experts to help craft content, educational startups can quickly rack up a whole suite of seemingly inviting curriculums, with little financial commitment. Sure, selling them to skeptical consumers may prove difficult, but given the low cost needed to create educational resources, even minor successes in bringing in new clients can turn into fat margins on paper.

Such a low-cost, potentially high-profit business model can attract many unscrupulous businessmen looking for a quick buck. Official sounding certificates for completing certain courses, from prestigious sounding online educational institutions, can also invite many people looking to pad their resumes through a few quick learnings on the cheap. With no one to check on what exactly is being taught and learned, plenty of confusion could abound as employers navigate the ever-expanding array of educational qualifications from online sources.

In the end, no one benefits from this lack of quality control, beyond the lowest quality educational services providers. Buyers of online education face increasing skepticism that their educational investment is worthwhile from potential employers. Credible online educational institutions face scrutiny for simply operating online. Employers spent more time reviewing applicants' resumes. It is time that government regulators intervene, providing clear structures on not just what constitutes licensed schools, but what qualities are worthy of outright bans on operations.