Online Learning

Online Learning — Will it Work for You?

Think online learning is just another flashy gimmick, left over from the late 1990s dot-com feeding frenzy? Maybe it’s time to take another look.

Most people who lived through the 1990s would probably agree that the Internet was at least somewhat overhyped. After all, not enough people were willing to do their grocery shopping over the Internet to save several now-defunct dot-com companies.

As well, much has been said about the nature of online education, in fact several years ago with the advent of online schools, a timely article described the end of brick and mortar education altogether, mainly because of the overhead to operate a school and the time it takes to learn subject matter in a brick and mortar school, to name a few.

With the advent of “entrepreneurial” online teaching, most colleges and universities were totally unprepared, and had to scrabble around to meet the growing demand for online courses which had already been available for months and even years on the Internet. They did this by contacting the developers of courseware and licensing the use of same for their own purpose.

Since that time, enrollment of students taking one or more courses online grew 18.2 percent in 2004 and online courses were available at more than 65 percent of all colleges offering face-to-face courses. That number is projected to have increased to 40% of students taking online courses by early 2006. Though a majority of U.S. higher education institutions offer some form of distance learning, many administrators and governing bodies question whether distance learning is as good as traditional learning.

This scrutiny no longer falls on distance education alone; Congress and the U.S. Department of Education are holding all colleges and universities accountable to higher standards as the demand for federal financial aid increases and uncertainty surrounds the bottom-line contribution of postsecondary education. Much of that attitude is old hat since distance education has proven itself worthy in many areas, particularly in vocational training.

How can higher education cope with escalating demands for institutional accountability? Ask the distance educators. Continuous growth in distance education forces constant evaluation and improvement, is less costly for both the educator and the learner, far less time-consuming, and permits the student to study at her/his own pace at work and at home.

In 1996 Meditec undertook to put all of its courseware online. We had been training our own work force for several years for our own service (medical transcription, coding, billing) so we had the curricula well in hand. Limited templates were then available (Blackboard, etc.,) but none filled the criteria for what we believed was required for true interactive teaching and learning. So, undaunted, we decided to write our own. We employed a platform learning system just like the ones we used to train our own employees, where the learner is presented information sets and then is tested on the knowledge gained. The programs were all structured to learn as fast as possible, though obviously some applicants learned faster than others. The online courseware was well received, but its worthiness had to be tested. With national and international students, would the graduates find themselves well trained enough to enter the work force? Not a problem. The training worked just like we thought it would.

A former student, a professor at a major university sent us his comments – we believe he confirmed our entire philosophy. He said:

I am currently studying the MT (medical transcription) course and I am impressed. My background is: 46 year old male, native English with a BA in English Language and Linguistics and graduate certification in Teaching English as a Second Language. My degrees are fairly recent, 1998, and I have several years of university level teaching experience, while in school and after. In addition, over the last 6 years I have primarily taught grammar and composition classes, which I am currently teaching at [name omitted]. Thus, I am quite well-versed in most fundamental language issues.

As far as I can see to this point (roughly halfway through Volume 2 of the Terminology portion), there is very little that I can say, aside from “nice job.” I believe a student must be well-engaged to fuel the learning process. Moreover, you have absolutely no choice but to utilize this methodology with the variety of students you must encounter, so the courseware must be “user friendly.” You cannot learn it for them, nor can you make it completely simple; however, you can keep them interested by creating a clear and concise approach, which I think you have done.

Too many texts, in the past, have presented a cryptic approach to the learner in my view; thus, teachers mask their own ignorance of material by acting as if they are the vaults of knowledge that the students need to access. Your approach, though, encourages the learning process, attempts to make fairly dry material (for some) interesting and offers a clear and concise method to basic terminology retention. In addition, you have taken the need for an instructor out of the equation. The exercises turn the text into a reference guide and keep the student constantly moving between pages as well as referring to very fundamental ideas learned in the initial units. Your texts have the ring of a truly well-written composition. The thesis is reiterated sufficiently throughout, and the material is “scaffolded” as all new languages should be. For, as you well know, this is a process of truly learning a new language, which quite honestly is never easy. Trust me, I have spent 9 years with Japanese, and even 4 years of living there was not enough to put me in a comfortable position.

Since my education is linguistically based, and I am certain I have studied material intensely more difficult, I find this approach refreshing. Anyone who has ever studied English Transformational Grammar, Semantics, Phonology and Morphology in one year can tell you that this is the kind of learning my colleagues and I had always yearned for. Moreover your approach dispenses with all rote-memorization techniques and focuses on use and familiarization as its basic tenets. If you are the creator of this material, then I commend you for a job well-done. To this point, these texts exhibit a true understanding of how people need to learn through continued use of vocabulary and concepts.

For all of you weighing the pros and cons of the various Medical Transcription courses available, let me add some information for you to consider as well as explain why I chose Meditec.

As a former university composition instructor, with an enviable background in English Linguistics, I was certain this would be the field for me. I tried not to become overconfident and looked at many different courses before deciding on Meditec. Once I selected the course, I began my work in earnest. I breezed right through the terminology portion, took a break from Transcription and completed the Coding course and studied the Billing course, then came back to the transcription. All of this went rather quickly; however, when I began to work diligently on the Transcription reports, I truly began to see the value of Meditec from the sheer volume and variety of reports from which I was to begin gaining crucial experience.

I will never be able to say enough about this company overall; but in particular, their instructors utilize a no nonsense, professional approach that I consider a true benefit to anyone who selects their course. When I needed an answer, it was right there.

Should you decide on Meditec for your training in this field, my recommendation is that you prepare yourself for a lively yet professional training experience.

In addition, I see the staff as an entity interested in and genuinely concerned with properly training you for your future, and not solely motivated by making money. Meditec certainly serves the best interest of Medical Transcription, Billing, and Coding with every graduate they send out from their program, and you will find they are well respected in this field. I chose Meditec because the company philosophy is practical, and there should never be any other consideration. They believe in the two essential parts of basic education that many people seem to have conveniently forgotten: Hard work and practice. This company truly understands the need for people to be instructed properly in this field, and in turn, they comprehend the need for students to take charge of their own learning experience as a means of building additional confidence in their ability.

Simply put, I would choose Meditec because the company follows through on their initial claims. Why am I training? A little disenchanted with teaching, I plan to widen my horizons (and my son has now achieved his MD status and wants me to help with his practice.)

His perspective of online education, a la Meditec style, was certainly refreshing. His comments confirmed what our philosophy intended.