The remarks that follow are more of a discussion or a rebuttal. The article is factual and readable, and it explores the roles that learning technologies play in academic settings. We live in a society in which communication technologies are fundamental. Parents expect their children to have technology-rich learning experiences from the day they enter school.

Readers of Communications are typically comfortable with the terminology in the article. Despite the two URLs in the footnotes, scholarly writing is expected to attribute credit to the authors. The acronym MOOC (short for massive open online courses) is used before it is expanded. A blended course may combine MOOCs for the online/content portion of a course with the on-campus portion used for elaboration and discussion.

Technology is a tool; many people must invest time and effort, research, and evaluation before the tool may be considered worthwhile. Today, technology may be found throughout academe. Faculty resistance began in the 1970s with proclamations that teachers were going to be replaced by computers. As Lucas points out, professional growth and promotion is still heavily dependent on traditional accomplishments such as presentation and publication. Today, we bear witness to the growing drop in enrollment across all but the most elite schools. Blaming that drop largely on technology and related costs is wrong. Increasing teaching loads and reducing staff turns dedicated professors into impersonal machines who are unable to develop mentor relationships with students. Lucas’ conclusion that how technology is implemented will be the determinant in success or failure is right on target. However, technology is not the sole issue: university failure may be caused by factors such as bloated administrations, extraneous expenditures, adjunct faculty, and ignoring faculty expertise.