America is a capitalist society. Yet, the long-standing, academic tradition to combat capitalists, and by extension commercialism, in all forms continues. This is exemplified by David Noble's (1997) rant, Digital Diploma Mills, Part I: The Automation of Higher Education (see the link to this article below). Noble misses the point. Yet, I argue that we have and will continue to embrace our commercial roots and exploit online, e-learning environments to the greatest extent possible just as we have other forms of learning as desired commodities.

The potential of quality online education is no longer a question. Constructivist methods (Tam, 2000; Rudestam, et. al., 2002; White, 1999.), Socratic questioning, and other similar teaching models continually prove to be successful online teaching tools in the hands of properly trained, online facilitators. The combination of solid teaching methods and tools and knowledgeable facilitators has always provided strong, positive educational results, both online and face to face.

As Frank White (1999) disputes Noble's assessment that quality education cannot be delivered in an electronic environment. Noble's assessment that capitalism and education cannot be successfully merged is also disputable.

One of the strengths of online learning environments that follow a constructivist model is that individual learners, through the social and structural settings in online learning environments, are thinking and learning in a capitalist way. While they come together in a single, structured setting, each pursues learning by applying their own thoughts, energy, and resources to pursue the group topic for their individual ends.

As Hooker explains in the European Enlightenment Glossary (1996):

Capitalism as a way of thinking is fundamentally individualistic, that is, that the individual is the center of capitalist endeavor. This idea draws on all the Enlightenment concepts of individuality: that all individuals are different, that society is composed of individuals who pursue their own interests, that individuals should be free to pursue their own interests (this, in capitalism, is called "economic freedom"), and that, in a democratic sense, individuals pursuing their own interests will guarantee the interests of society as a whole.

Noble (1997) also questions the influence of commercialism on education as a market system to be exploited by "Apple, IBM, Bell, the cable companies, Microsoft, and the edutainment and publishing companies Disney, Simon and Schuster, Prentice-Hall, et al" (Noble, 1997). Yet, the author doesn't question the reality that similar "exploitation" has continually been a part of education since its establishment. Think of the suppliers of text books, pencils, blackboards and chalk, back-to-school sales, etc.

Education as a commodity to be exploited is not limited to commercial-based organizations. Nor is it a negative. Parents frequently choose the neighborhood they raise their children in based on the quality of the educational products available: schools, libraries, arts, recreation, etc. Likewise, seekers of higher education search for the institutions of learning that best meet their individual career desires and needs, often traveling to distant and foreign destinations to meet these goals. These simple examples define the capitalist maxim of supply and demand.

Beyond product marketing, merging education, capitalism, and commercialism in a single concept product is not ignoble. If it were, quality, profit-bearing institutions of learning would not exist because investors, educators, and students would not all come together. Yet, we know they do. The University of Phoenix, just one of the Apollo Group's (2005) excellent educational institutions, is a fine example of an accredited, for-profit online university. The American Writers & Artists Institute and EdToGo.com are just a few of the hundreds of other available large-scale programs providing quality education in for-profit settings. Online colleges, universities, and programs successfully provide quality education to diverse student populations. And, because of their very online nature, they enable learners to pursue their goals without having to choose new home neighborhoods in distant and foreign places.



References

Apollo Group, (2005). "Apollo Group Annual Report 2005." Retrieved on April 4, 2007 from http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/2005.pdf.

Hooker, Richard, (1996). "Capitalism." European Enlightenment Glossary. Washington State University. Retrieved April 4, 2007 from http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/CAPITAL.HTM.

Noble, David F., (1997). "Digital Diploma Mills Part I: The Automation of Higher Education." Retrieved on March 31, 2007 from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue3_1/noble/index.html.

Rudenstam, Kjell Erik, Schoenholtz-Read, Judith, (2002). Handbook of Online Learning: Innovations in Higher Education and Corporate Training. Sage Publications, London.

Tam, Maureen, (2000). "Constructivisim, Instructional Design, and Technology: Implications for Transforming Distance Learning." Retrieved on March 31, 2007 from http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_2_2000/tam.html.

White, Frank, (1999). "Digital Diploma Mills: A Discenting Voice." Retrieved on March 31, 2007 from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue4_7/white/index.html.