Are some of us missing something here? I mean, how is it that universities justify virtually the same tuition rates for online students as they do for their regular, in resident, 'brick and mortar' students? Usually pricing reflects the cost of the product or service. When a competitive system comes along that costs a lot less to produce the same product or service the prices come down or strong competition inevitably ensues. This is true even when an entire well organized and heavily financed establishment is reluctant to make changes.

Many university students, their families, and even employers have asked similar questions. The decibel level of these questions, however, has not reached an appreciable level yet. One thing is for sure, many consumers are so indoctrinated that they are loathe to question authority for any reason. Perhaps the consumers of education are too busy worrying about the cost of tuition and whether, or not, they can even afford the cost of a university degree, which can go as high as $100,000 USD.

In any event, it seems as if this is the classic situation where, "there is an elephant in the living room, and no one is talking about it!" Certainly, enough people understand the basics of producing online presentations of information for virtually unlimited audiences. Eventually, however, as student loan debts rise and approximately 85% discover they will never obtain what they have been told is the 'Holy Grail', college dropouts begin to ask . Families with bright students, who find that the price of a university education is out of reach, will begin to ask questions as well.

It is equally clear that many degrees can be completed exclusively online. Does it follow then that perhaps students don't require some of the anachronistic standard features of old dominant status quo institutions that are intransigent to progress? Especially arcane campus bound features such as fixed and highly limited class schedules, availability, and attendance requirements, operate to raise tuition rates and deny the dreams of millions of youth each year?

Why is it that the first efforts by traditional 'brick and mortar' institutions to adapt to the internet were denial, reluctance and finally an effort to perserve the status quo, i.e., faculty size and structure, pay, massive benefit and retirement structure, tenure, asset holdings and control, investments, ancillary services (most provided by educators), grant aid and government/industry?

Why do these 'brick and mortar' institutions charge outlandish fees to online students? The answers might surprise you. Why do the new strictly online universities mimic the 'brick and mortar' institutions and charge tuition rates similar to the combo universities? Are they strange but symbiotic bedfellows? Are they real or quasi competitors in the marketplace? What role do the recognized accrediting associations play in all of this and why?

What would happen to this massive educational bureaucracy if a rational cost based bifurcated tuition scheme for the two different products, resident and online education, were to begin to be implemented? How long will the lock on Pandora's box hold? What about the professors' with 50+ page CV's who openly admit to only working 150 to 300 hours per year for top salaries in the industry? What of government's interest in all of this? Did I hear you ask, "What government interest? The federal government doesn't control post secondary education."

The fact is, 39 federal agencies spend 129 billion annually on education....you don't really suppose that they are playing Santa Claus now do you? Military recruiters, DHS officials, and God only knows how many other intelligence and police agencies are skulking about the Ivory Towers these days.

Keep your eyes on Pandora's box. It is only a matter time before this could get very interesting. When civilization is on the cusp of a 500 year and 1000 year mega trend cycle needed change does indeed happen, and educational change is coming in the form of affordable online university education.