Is the Web of Research Related to the 'Net of Teaching?

So . . . it seems that this online learning thing may be for real.  This is a terrifying thought for many professors, because if lectures or notes are fully available online, what use are they (we)?  Isn't it enough that all of the information is available online, or is it really necessary that the dronings of a researcher into obscure South Pacific polydeistic tribal rituals have to be too?  Can't online learning be limited to those trade schools and administrative studies colleges that advertise on daytime TV?  The answers after the jump.

I was sent an article from the New York Times on this topic yesterday.  Many major universities are using online learning to supplement classroom lectures and, in some cases, discussions.  This has been done for various reasons, including space limitations in the university and cost reductions.  The latter is really what is worrying us professors (using "us" loosely, as you will see), because most universities are in a constant cost-cutting mode. 

I have a better reason for why universities should move to more online content: because in many cases the in-class lecture does not add value.  I have written about this recently, and I still firmly believe that the notion that the students should gather at the feet of the learned professor to hang on his or her every word is an antiquated one.  It is not an efficient use of time, whether it is the students' or the professor's.  Having a lecture (or better yet, a transcript) available just makes more sense if the lecture is going to be nothing more than a 3-hour reading.

What this ultimately means is that university classes (ceasing to call them lectures is a good first step) must add value in the sense that there must be a reason for everyone to gather together.  Discussion-based learning or hands-on practical learning (e.g. simulations, group work, decision-making) are good examples of this.  Even discussions, though, are going online, though I don't think that this is as good an idea (no, of course you don't Eric, because that cuts a little too close to home, now doesn't it).  A good discussion requires everyone to be engaged, and this is hard enough to do even in a classroom; with everyone in their own room, and with the internet, TV, music, other people, etc. available as distractions the quality of interaction will likely be low.  It is too easy to tune out the "discussion" and as such the learning will be of a lower calibre.

Of course, what professors are really worried about (constantly, because we're always forced to defend it) is our reason for being.  It is curious situation where a professor is expected to both teach the next generation (often broad and practical topics) and to do academic research (often overly specific and impractical topics).  If there was no teaching it would unlikely that the reseach would continue to be funded.  So if lectures, which form a large portion of all university teaching, were standardized and put on the internet then I would suspect many professors would lose their funding and/or their jobs.  Naturally they are against such methods.

It's easy to say that if reseachers truly added value to society then they could defend their contribution and maintain a paid position just doing research, but this assumes too much on the part of the decision-makers; research or the creation of knowledge often has no immediate or knowable value, as opposed to, say, road-building.  I'm not for professors to lose their jobs, but I also can't abide the current inefficient system.

Is there no compromise whereby we can put lectures online and allow professors to add value where value can actually be added?  It may result in fewer professors, but most jobs become obsolete over time.  Either that or we need to can lectures completely, and move to a more practical education system. 

If you learned something from this, does this count as online learning?