I'm sorry for not being politically correct, but I took a semester of online classes as a means of maintaining the scholarships I was receiving at a 4-year institution. I was a semester away from graduating early, so I took a semester off to travel. I signed up for a full-time online schedule, and to be quite frank it was a complete joke. The teachers have only a few options on how the students can interact with one another, and my experiences with this were awful. Whereas I was in lots of advanced classes in a f2f setting, the quality of the average student online is much, much lower. Furthermore, cheating in online classes is completely normal. Everyone I've met who took classes online either took quizzes or tests or did homework with their textbooks open or with wikipedia on hand. So here is my experience: teachers expected students to interact in an online message board, much like this, creating dialogue that mimicked a classroom discussion from which everyone was able to learn. These discussions accounted for X% of the grade. The remaining Y% of the grade was determined by tests, which most students took with open books. The same people who were hopeless at writing clear, correct sentences were passing the class with flying colors, because the expectations were so low for everyone. Obviously my experiences aren't necessarily representative of all online classes. They're probably quite the contrary, as all the classes I enrolled in were 100-level general elective classes. I got A's in all of them despite missing over an entire month of work that I simply didn't have a chance to do because I was in China or Poland or at an NABC or whatever. So really, why are we awarding degrees to people who, in my opinion, are doing a minute fraction of the work f2f students do, at a much lower level, with minimal interpersonal contact?