{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023443223443223443, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005860805860805861, 'mean_word_length': 5.383177570093458, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Raising The Level Of Abstraction In Online Education: The Context

A commonly accepted definition of online learning is that students have access to learning experiences in: time, place, pace, learning style, content, assessment, and pathways (Chen, 2003). Although this is true, there is a considerable concern about the level of abstraction involved in online education. Critics of flexible learning call it just another fad (Zemsky & Massy, 2004). These criticisms are founded in claims that online learning failed to launch a pedagogical revolution or attract students in masses. Further, some argue that it is a training and not educational tool. With all the buzz of successes and failures, flexible learning will continue to have an increasingly important role in higher education. Given the many fallacies about online learning, this paper argues that flexibility and transferability are prevailing traits in this explosion of knowledge. There is, simultaneously, a growing concern that online or flexible education has not raised learners’ level of abstraction. This paper concludes with a call for further investigation into flexibility/transferability and the effectiveness of institutions to align faculty development models and infrastructure with the new science of learning as well as to equip faculty with techniques to enhance level of abstraction.