Some Thoughts on the Hold of the Magical Sage

What accounts for the persistence of the "magical sage" approach to education as embodied in the Open Yale courses discussed in previous posts? Although its persistence is inordinate, there are several reasons why it is not entirely unwarranted...

1) Effectiveness -- as an educational experience, the 'magical sage' approach is good enough for most intents and purposes as they are currently operationally defined in higher education. Improved learning in education is not in demand as a universal good. Schooling experiences are not designed to maximize learning, but to perform a multiplicity of functions (custodial, socializing, sorting, and credentialing among others) of which learning is only a part. Learning is also rather haphazardly connected to future outcomes. Any changes to improve learning have to be negotiated not only in terms of how they affect these other functions, but also to be justified in their own terms. Thus creating a much improved course (classroom or online) is often problematic if it would demand lots of extra work since this conflicts with other demands (typically research or service in higher education).

Ironically, there is one realm where a focus on course improvement has happened with some consistency because its legitimacy was questioned harshly at its onset and is still under scrutiny -- that realm, of course, is online education.

2) Ritual Appeal -- The sage on the stage is a time-honored, familiar ritual with centuries' old roots in particular notions of relationships with authority. The magical sage is arguably merely a purer form of this social construct. Some may see it as anachronistic; others as enduring and worth preserving; others as somewhere between those two. But my sense is that, as a culture, we have some catching up to do in terms of updating this ritual to meet current circumstances.

It is also worth noting that there really are professors out there who are truly sage and their lectures can be truly magical under certain conditions. But such experiences are few and far between, and the lecture as a monolithic delivery form has been outdated for decades. Will the impetus of Web 2.0 technology adoption will be enough to force a needed change, as suggested for example by this student-produced video? [thanks to Chris Weaver for sharing this]

3) Brand Identity -- Open Yale courses are taught by Yale professors; what the professors actually say is not so important. A "Yale education" speaks volumes about status and socioeconomic class; it tells us a lot less about what was actually learned there. Consider the following thought experiment: Open Podunk Community College courses. Who would care? Who would take them? What quality would they have to be before someone wanted to take them? One answer is that the Podunk CC courses could be far superior and it wouldn't matter.

This helps explain why the "magical sage" continues to have such a hold on education.
(More thoughts on this in my next post...