The ninth chapter in Eble’s book, “Teaching Without Teachers” discusses alternative ways to instruct students without the professors playing their traditional roles. Presently, the Internet seems to be our modern-day means of teaching without teachers, but computers haven’t been around for that long. The date of this book has finally caught up with itself, as Eble makes the silly statement: “nevertheless, I doubt that the computer will materially improve teaching in its complex and personal and educational dimensions.”

It is interesting, however, how Eble sees other forms of teaching. He talks now of students using resources to instruct themselves, and the method suggested sounds a great deal like the instruction of all of the online courses I once took. He believes a self-pacing system is preferable and that they can “draw on a wide range of technological aids to learning, and they can help students develop the useful ability to learn on their own. Where programmed instruction falls short is in motivating the students.” Finding motivation seems to be key, and I believe these self-directed or self-taught courses do require quite a bit of self-motivation.

Eble introduces the Keller Plan, in which “students work at units of a course on their own in sequence. They must master each unit before moving on to the next, ordinarily demonstrating that mastery by perfect or near-perfect performance on an examination.” This form of education nearly reflects SCAD’s online course units perfectly. I believe it is simply fascinating that a book written in the 70’s could predict how education may be directed in the computer age.

After the chapter above, Eble’s tenth entry, “Texts,” covers the selection, use, and the choice of whether or not to use textbooks at all. As he claims, these are the three most important questions one should ask themselves before choosing their course’s text. When it comes to choice, he states that “a useful strategy is to deliberately choose texts that offer a different kind of material or a different emphasis from that of the instructor.” This way, the classroom environment and instruction refrains from redundancy, as the professor isn’t simply spewing out the same exact information as the text. This allows for a wider range of opinions and instruction, allowing the students to learn from different points of view.

When choosing a text, Eble suggests that “it is always good to choose a text that can be read in a reasonably systematic way and understood without the help of the teacher.” One must be careful when choosing their text, as if the readings are above the student’s comprehension, they won’t absorb the information at all. Whether it’s a plus or a negative, “the text may usefully appear (and often is) more authoritative than the teacher.” That doesn’t mean that the teacher is any less credible; students tend to accept their textbooks as though their words were holier than any physical embodiment found within a professor. Lastly, if one text doesn’t seem to work, Eble points out that “if one wishes students to develop a facility for weighing evidence, for comparing points of view, and for theorizing on matters of opinion as well as fact, then a collection of text materials may be justified.”

In a word of warning, Eble cautions us that “for too many students, textbooks are merely a somewhat bulky form of exchange . . . The fault of texts too encumbered with apparatus is that they draw the student’s attention away from their own exploring, criticizing, thinking and toward accepting someone else’s.” One shouldn’t learn everything they know from readings. If this were the case, what would be the point of having an instructor at all? The textbook should supplement the course, not dictate it. As Eble states, “the kind of suggesting, questioning, and responding that a good teacher can supply is superior to the best of texts in that the teacher offers a wider range of useful and immediate guidance, stimulation, reinforcement, and challenge.” So, choose your text wisely and don’t rely on them as the sole means of instruction. The professor exists for a reason.