Online Education Is Everywhere. What’s the Next Big Thing?

August 31, 2011, 4:13 pm

Like many other colleges, Southern New Hampshire University is experiencing an online-education boom. But look under the hood of its digital learning operation, and what you’ll find in many ways resembles traditional education: students forking over substantial tuition payments to study in small, professor-led classes that last from eight to 11 weeks.

So what innovation will put that model out of business?

Answering that question will be the responsibility of a new two-person “innovation team” at Southern New Hampshire.

It’s an unusual job description: Disrupt the disruptive innovation.

And while the next online model remains unclear, Southern New Hampshire’s president, Paul J. LeBlanc, has sketched out one possible blueprint in a “thinking paper” that he wrote as a springboard for discussion. It’s called the “Next Big Thing.”

The vision is that students could sign up for self-paced online programs with no conventional instructors. They could work at their own speeds through engaging online content that offers built-in assessments, allowing them to determine when they are ready to move on. They could get help through networks of peers who are working on the same courses; online discussions could be monitored by subject experts. When they’re ready, students could complete a proctored assessment, perhaps at a local high school, or perhaps online. The university’s staff could then grade the assessment and assign credit.

And the education could be far cheaper, because there would be no expensive instructor and students could rely on free, open educational resources rather than expensive textbooks. Costs to the student might include the assessment and the credits.

“The whole model hinges on excellent assessment, a rock-solid confidence that the student has mastered the student-learning outcomes,” the memo says. “If we know with certainty that they have, we should no longer care if they raced through the course or took 18 months, or if they worked on their courses with the support of a local church organization or community center or on their own. The game-changing idea here is that when we have assessment right, we should not care how a student achieves learning. We can blow up the delivery models and be free to try anything that shows itself to work.”

Many of those things are already happening in various ways. Think of Western Governors University, or Carnegie Mellon’s Open Learning Initiative, or Peer2Peer University, to cite just a few examples. And open online learning could get a big boost from a $2-billion grant program unveiled by the Obama administration this year.

So what do you think online learning will look like in the future? Is Mr. LeBlanc on the right track? If not, why? If so, why haven’t these ideas taken off yet in mainstream higher education? And what are the most exciting innovations happening right now?

This entry was posted in Distance Education, Teaching. Bookmark the permalink.

E-mail

arrive2__net

By being able to more readily earn college credit the potential student population is presented with the incentive and opportunity to gain the knowledge and skills, even if they can’t come to campus or systematically put time into a regular online class. So, I like the idea, provided of course that it is executed in a way to maintain appropriate standards and validity.

The SNHU idea also has something in common with credit by CLEP/DANTES testing. Based on what I have read, CLEP tests are validated based on populations of on-campus students and are designed to establish if the student being tested can score comparably to the on campus student population who took the course. To the extent that the skills and knowledges taught by the course can be accurately assessed by the tests, the testing for credit approach seems valid to me. This proposed courseware idea also seems to have much in common with the courseware offered by VESI, http://www.virtualeduc.com/ .

I think most students will still want and need the full course, and I have to suspect that some courses may be too broad in scope to be accomplished without the full course. Still, if cost savings and convenience of format enables more students to learn more, it’s a good program.

Bernard Schuster
Arrive2.net
Twitter.com/arrive2_net
http://twitter.com/PetraMoolenaar PetraMoolenaar

Assessments make it possible to let students achieve their learning in their own way.An online-education tree in which students renew their knowledge is the new way to learn. If the door is open men becomes creative and in case of online education the door is always open
kuschb

We are actually exploring a very similar model at our institution. Assessment (authentic) is at the heart of our design model. Additionally, we feel strongly that students should learn something new in such a course, even if they can demonstrate competency in meeting the established learning outcomes. We also believe students should be initially assessed before proceeding through such a learning experience to determine if they do, in fact, have sufficient subject-matter knowledge to succeed in the course. We think this is an option that will be attractive to students, but we also want to prevent them from embarking on something they are not really prepared for.
electronicmuse

ICS. International Correspondence School-established in 1890. Not such a new and radical idea . . . uh, “go online” if you never heard of it.

The heart races to imagine that a two-person team ” . . . might put the current educational model out of business.” Not so far-fetched, given that a single person (Archimedes) stated that he could move the earth with a lever. ‘Course, the problem with such earth-shaking enterprises is finding a place to stand in order to apply the lever . . . maybe Southern New Hampshire? (Tell Archimedes.) Perhaps, as per this article, “. . . when we have assessment right . . . ” is a mighty big lever.

Good luck in putting any kind of educational model out of business. You might find that there are vested interests who will push back. Students might actually be among them . . .
paievoli

The growth of the student community is what you are talking about it seems. Many content providers are looking into developing that model for schools.
eelalien

In response to a student’s comments (today, in fact) that “I sure miss the project-based online style of your courses. I’m in an online course that includes an awful lot of busywork and a hybrid class that seems promising but is very lockstep, much like a traditional lecture class. I’m acclimating.”

So, as many of us already knew, it is not the online medium that is the problem, it is the insistence by many instructors/profs to rely on what they consider to be tried-and-true (and outdated) modes of instructional delivery. Many are also relative newcomers to the online
medium, so it will take some time, and, let’s face it – old habits die hard and change can be challenging. Personally, I have always been project-based, even when I taught 7th grade social studies back in the late ‘80s – early ‘90s., so this does not present a problem for me. The future of instructional delivery, then? Focus on project/problem-based learning that assesses learning authentically, and whose content connects to the real world as much as possible. We are already increasingly emphasizing this in PreK-12 education – why not increase the scope to at least include the baccalaureate level…?
tribblek

I like it. This gets back to the way education should be. There are three components to look at: the content, the mastery level, and the time-on-task. 100 years ago (classical education) the content and the mastery level were fixed (the “master” assessed whether a pupil had mastered the material or not), and the TIME was the variable factor. You worked at it until you mastered it, and some people naturally took longer than others to do so.

But when our education system was re-engineered by industrialists looking for a more efficient model, they fixed the content and the time-on-task. This makes the MASTERY LEVEL variable. So now we have a more complicated system of grades (A, B, C, etc.) that identifies to what extent a pupil has mastered the material. This makes time-on-task more important than mastery level (“Okay, 50 minutes is up… too bad if you’ve a hundred questions about that algae under the microscope…
but we’ve got to cover the American Revolution for the next 50
minutes.”).

Of course, In my opinion, we will need to design these online modules to mimic the narrative or storytelling nature of how we’ve learned for thousands of years. Just a tip: stay away from bullet-point-sales-pitch-PowerPoint-style content and tell the story of the science (or history, or grammar rules, etc.). Better yet (as “eelalien” writes), keep plenty of room for project/problem-based modules that allow the student to generate (and answer) many of their own questions.
electronicmuse

The onus is on those who proclaim “tried and true” modes of instructional delivery to be “outmoded.” Where are your data for this “untried” and (probably not true) supposition?

Generally, things become “tried and true” after they’ve actually functioned well for . . . a few centuries.
rlclark

The internet has made many things possible, particularly access to information, and when properly filtered, knowledge as well. The opportunity for “emergent intellects,” those that assimilate knowledge independently and conduct research based upon the massive data sets now made available to the public is even more likely in the future than examples from the recent past. My point is that I agree on the principle of learning independently.

However, the article states that expensive instructors are not needed. I don’t see this as a realistic statement. Someone must generate and maintain the course content to facilitate learning. To develop content in a manner that can stand alone, without the conversation or Q&A that takes place in the classroom will demand far more time than simple preparation for lectures in a conventional setting. The quality of the content is thus paramount.

Technology facilitates many things, and digital learning will continue to evolve. However, when projecting the costs of delivery, I think the assumptions must be carefully evaluated.
eelalien

The very real problem is that these supposed “tried-and-true” methods only work in an extremely traditional setting, featuring lecture and direct instruction, students’ sitting in rapt silence while the “expert” pontificates relying on his/her vast wealth of “knowledge”. This simply does not work in online instructional delivery, and frankly, if you have ever sat in the back of a lecture hall and watched while a tenured professor/”expert” droned on and on utilizing the tried-and-true (and centuries old!) instructional methods, one might notice just what kind of rapt attention/learning those students are actually engaged in…
joemontibello

I wonder, though. Which mode of instructional delivery will you be able to say has “functioned well” for 50 years, 50 years from now? Technology is not going to slow down and wait 50 years to settle on a winner. Medicine is not going to run a 50-year longitudinal study before deciding that this drug or that course of treatment is tried and true.

I’m not saying that everything new is great, or that the pace of technological change should drive everything. However, I do think it’s a little silly to say we should assume that current modes of teaching are the best until they’re proven not to be. (And if there was a study that somehow “proved” such a thing, would everyone just accept it and switch gears based on that?)

If you don’t think that innovation and trying new things belong in education, and that we should only use a mode after it has functioned well for “a few centuries,” then shouldn’t we keep computers out of the whole thing until at least the year 2200?
electronicmuse

There are MANY modalities for “tried and true” methods of education that can be used in concert with each other. Why is it that “droning” is the model set up in apposition to some trendy new thing? Straw Man argument.

By the way, most likely those students’ “rapt attention” is focused on email, texting, online games, etc. (You see, not only have I stood at the back of many rooms filled with students evidencing “rapt attention,” we have a capability (that we repeatedly announce to all students) that can “see” EXACTLY what they are doing with those computers . . .
electronicmuse

” . . . carefully evaluated?” Yes, or course. This would start with simply being considered at all, which so many breathless Brave-New-Worlders don’t stop to do as they get out the news of an earthshaking new “model.”
electronicmuse

I didn’t cheerlead for anything as “the best.” I merely pointed out that mere assertions about anything have little validity . . .

By the way, your analogy about medicine is rather unfortunate. It is precisely because humanity is the “beta testers” of all new meds that we have so many deaths and other unfortunate “side effects” due to ” . . . not slowing down . . . to settle on a winner.” Thalidomide anyone? Sure looked like a “good thing” when introduced.

Fortunately, since many people really are motivated to learn, it’s unlikely we can wreak as much havoc by tweaking the educational system as Big Pharma presently manages. The “look-say” so-called reading method does come to mind, however. It fairly took over our public schools before the “tried and true” phonetics system was given its due. Some things work and some don’t. Some things are compelled by commercial interests-like “look-say.” Oh, my gosh! Could it possibly be that those who SELL “technology” have a vested interest that necessitates that we ” . . . don’t slow down?”

In regard to computers, they are at the center of my teaching, and my students’ interests. This is because one can do unique and novel things with computers. But, I might ask whether you’ve noted that the cohort of students you teach who have ALWAYS had computers is qualitatively better than the cohort you (may have) taught who did NOT have computers at all. Is the former cohort brighter, more motivated, harder working, more skilled, etc. Are they? I’ve taught both cohorts . . . and say “no.” In fact, there is a growing body of research that indicates that spending 6-8 hours daily with “technology” might actually be debilitating this generation.
eelalien

Your painting of anyone who might entertain the possibilities of allowing innovation in education as “breathless Brave-New-Worlders” speaks VOLUMES on your behalf.
electronicmuse

It’s my prerogative to raise questions here, Picasso . . . You’ve yet to provide data, or even a meaningful argument . . . My guess is, that over the years, that I’ve ushered in more “innovation in education” that you could possibly imagine. For instance, my first formal educational contact with computers was the IEEE school, where one learned using a Rockwell 6502 on a breadboard, with HEX keypad, and a nixie display.

Perhaps I’ve heard enough blaring trumpeting that wound up amounting to only a muted report, that I don’t necessarily swallow whole ” . . . the latest new thing.”

“Entertaining” any notion might be fun, for “anyone.” I await some solid evidence . . . even a cogent theory based on known physiological, neurological, psychological, educational principles might do.

Again, the onus is always on those who posit, uh, “Brave New Worlds.” By definition, tried and true things have a lot of positive results to show.
jandersen

Nothing new here. Universities have been shortening the course schedule for summer school for many years. I have always wondered why we (higher eduction) does not move to a 5 week semester or maybe a ten week as in summer school schedules. What is the value of the magic off the 16 week semester other than it “fits” in with the calendar.
It could be that the “higher education structure” is coveted by current administrators and the accreditation organizations that they are beholding to.

I look forward to the time when change in higher eduction is not seen as a threat by the administrators and accreditation organizations.
http://twitter.com/JeffSunStudio Jeff Davidson

Saylor.org has 150+ free college level courses, built and peer reviewed by credentialed professors – with more courses to come. http://www.saylor.org
jmazoue

Mr. LeBlanc is definitely channeling the zeitgeist of change
that is occurring in higher ed. I agree that he is on the right track, as
discomfiting as that may be to those who are resistant to fundamental change in
the legacy practices of educational institutions.

The next big thing, as I see it, is precision education, the application of the
learning sciences to educational practice. As Mr. LeBlanc points out, there are
a number of converging change-agents moving toward the transformation of
educational practices away from the handifcraft model of teaching toward
evidence-based practices that inform the design of optimal learning
environments. The recent “Cognitive Coursewares Design” initiative
sponsored by the APLU, AACC, OLI, and funded by the Gates Foundation is a good
example of where the smart money is being spent on strategies that
operationalize and institutionalize precision education. And there are others
as well being funded by foundations and the U.S. Dept. of Education based on
the OLI model that are driving improvements in subject-specific learning
architectures. As Candace Thille and others have pointed out, the
transformation of teaching and learning into a scientific endeavor is perhaps
our only way to solve the Baumol-Bowen ‘Cost Disease’ Dilemma: the seemingly
insoluble tradeoff between increasing the quality of learning without
restricting access or increasing costs. All the indicators are that precision
education, supplemented with the kinds of tutoring services Mr. LeBlanc
mentions, will enable us to expand access, improve the quality of learning, and
reduce the cost of instruction.

The theoretical framework within which to understand the changes taking place
can be found in Mr. Christensen’s notion of “disruptive
decentralization.” The pattern of industries (including service industries
like medicine and education) is to centralize the provision of services and
then, under the influence of disruptive innovation, experience a rebound effect
that moves in the opposite direction toward decentralization. We are in the early
stages of decentralization (and the personalization of learning) wherein online
education has expanded access and increased convenience for students in new
markets and at the low-end of the performance trajectory. The next phase of
disruption that will be a game changer for traditional institutions will be
core service innovation: improvements in the quality of learning itself using
Web-based cognitive architectures (e.g., adaptive assessment analytics) that
will surpass the learning occurring in traditional classrooms. Although we are
in the very early stages of the development of precision learning, I don’t
think it is unreasonable to think that, in comparison to the development of
highly interactive and personalized learning environments afforded by Web-based
course exemplars with robust assessment analytics, classrooms in the future
will seem like impoverished environments in which to learn.
I sketch some of these ideas out in more detail in a manuscript draft,
“The Deconstructed Campus,” on which I welcome comments: http://precision-education.blogspot.com/
rhancuff

It’s brilliant stuff. Why go to a restaurant, where you have to pay for the waiter, the chef, etc., when you can get a sandwich from a vending machine?

Actually, it seems the only thing new about this model is that one would get college credit for it. Self-paced course materials and interactive learning communities are available to anyone who wants to buy a book (or view open courseware or etc.) and use google to find discussion boards.
llschandorff

A valuable discussion for higher ed. However, we’re still having difficulty finding research to support best practices in our current model.

I’d like to hear the student’s voice in this conversation. I have two right now that are ready to give up and drop out of an online course (it happens every semester) because they are too overwhelmed and can’t fit the work into their lives which are already filled with family responsibilities, full time jobs, etc. Perhaps not being required to do it all in 5 weeks would make it all more comfortable and attractive. But, with no deadlines, where’s the incentive to ever get it completed (even I – a motivated self starter work better with a deadline)? And would they stick with it if they had no social support? Some would, some would not. Should we be moving toward offering a smorgasbord of “delivery models” to support the variety of different learning styles? We have plenty of research to support that face to face. Why wouldn’t we consider it when doing online delivery?
http://twitter.com/DanielWRasmus Daniel Rasmus

This line of inquiry reflects a very strategic sense for the changes
that are coming and the pace of those changes. Where many institution
may offer online learning, and still have various forms of online
learning in their vision documents, they have yet to take the leap that
as online becomes a primary way to engage students, meet their financial
objectives and reinvent their role for a connected world, they may have
to rethink their strategies.
You can find my entire post here:

http://rasmusatedu.wordpress.com/2011/09/01/whats-the-next-big-thing-in-education-qualified-assessment-tied-to-brand/
susanda

So this is a great idea in the Excellence without Money sweepstakes. These programs are presumably designed by someone. They are self-paced, but somehow students will find peers who can help them. And you don’t need a “conventional instructor” but there is a “subject expert” to monitor online discussions.
Maybe I’m dim, but where I come from, an instructor is a “subject expert” who monitors discussions. At least that’s part of my job. The other part is sometimes helping students to understand things they have not previously been exposed to.
balthazar

There are several approaches to self paced course completion many of which are good, but in an asynchronous course the real hindrance is discipline. Self motivation is the killer here, but, if you are going to earn a degree this is part of being in the degree club–discipline. Web-Ed. is the economical way to educate the masses because what we are really doing is just simply raising the standards of our population which is a beautiful thing! That should be the focus.

Now, with the afford-ability of self-web-ed virtual classroom.designers can really get creative. Other than great course plans, interaction and deadlines need to be in place to maintain interest and order. So, I vote for study groups which are basically classrooms that are arranged by course facilitators for shy people like myself to become involved. Study groups need to be fun so that people will show up and hang along. I am in the on-line program at Ashford U.and for the expense it is not worth it because I never meet any cool like minded people, they all appear to be republican military robots and it is so not fun. So I cannot emphasize the importance of a longer journey through studies with the same classmates!!

Next, assessment is very key. Testing stations that work with the nerve center of the particular school or state program under which a person is studying to proctor exams for validity. Not much else to say on this–quite simple.

Finally, research papers, essays, prose or whatever is very important to keeping writing skills, interest, and achievement abreast with progress. Teachers assistants or moonlighting professors should consider doing this at near voluntary rates or for special state vouchers or coupons.

I am a student interested in intellectual intercourse always on the lookout for anyone with the same likes. louisxvi at juno.com

These are exciting times–the mass education revolution must be affordably accomadated!!
‘
Cheers
http://www.facebook.com/people/Leo-Trudel/100000568233365 Leo Trudel

This innovation is visionary and should stand as an
impetus for many of us to start contemplating how the business of education will operate in the
future.
ychumanities

I’m on board for most of the suggestions in this article. I’m redesigning all my classes to give students control over their own deadlines, choice in how they demonstrate mastery of the learning objectives, options for collaborative learning and projects situated in the real world. I’ve made a promise to my students I won’t assign any textbook over $75, and most classes the cost is under $50. All my classes are hybrid or online, utilizing the vast resources of the Web. But some of the assumptions underlying the “Next Big Thing” here reveal how much contempt there is for teachers in our public discourse these days. As susanda points out, the “expensive instructor” is eliminated in favor of a “subject expert.” Because instructors AREN’T experts in their subject? Or because in addition to their expertise they also bring pedagogical expertise that is unnecessary to pay for? And the idea that “excellent assessment” could be “proctored at the local high school” and evaluated by university staff (evidently not by the subject expert?) Laughable. What could that be? Multiple choice? Short essay where referencing predetermined facts, phrases or vocabulary determines success? Excellent assessment needs to be frequent, individualized and contextualized, and that demands an actual teacher.
davidporter

The Open Educational Resource University (OERu) may be the next big thing. It is an implementation of the ideas discussed in this article.

Online, interactive discussions are underway in earnest here: http://scope.bccampus.ca/mod/forum/view.php?id=8953

Please join the discussion.A background document, “5 things you should know about the OERu network plan” can be found here: http://wikieducator.org/images/7/7d/OERu.pdf

Anchor partners include US, Canadian, South African, Australian and New Zealand institutions in a federated approach. Anchor partners include:

* Athabasca University (Canada)
* Thompson Rivers University (Canada)
* Empire State College (State University of New York)
* University of Southern Queensland (Australia)
* Unisa (University of South Africa)
* Otago Polytechnic (New Zealand)
* Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology (New Zealand)
dld310

Self-paced, self-motivated instruction and assessment isn’t really new or unique. It’s already happening – even at some of the institutions mentioned here such as Western Governors University. And susanda is correct; instructors, professors, and faculty ARE subject matter experts. It’s semantics. But it really has more to do with how those folks interact with the students rather than what they’re called. I’d like to see some way to have online, interactive Internships so students can practice and DO what they’re taught. Give the students a way to show us – and potential employers – what they can do more readily and effectively.
davi2665

With all the gibberish, gobbledygook, and edubabble being tossed around, the main component of a really successful university/graduate education is left dangling somewhere in etherspace- that of being inspired by, mentored by, and getting to know in depth, a truly inspirational educator who takes the time and personal attention to guide the individual student to achieve excellence and acquire integrative skills necessary for professional success. That is not an online process.
11299051

Distance education requires much self discipline of the student, as I believe this concept would require. Frankly I don’t see that in 80% of the students I receive each quarter. How will the feeder groups of students be prepared across the span of their learning life to deal with this kind of system?

I just discussed the article with a friend who wonders how the litiginous society will deal with this kind of learning system. She has a point. Even now I get notes from parents of graduate students and “friends” who threaten a lawsuit should the grade be less than expected.
rwejd

I expect to get a lot of flak for this prognostication, but I think we’re going to see commercial publishers and for-profit schools – along with some well-branded traditional colleges and a few upstarts like Western Governors University – leading the charge. Pearson, for example, is vertically integrating; they are right now perfectly capable of delivering a comprehensive set of propositions right up the post-secondary value chain. Same with someone like the Apollo Group.

Collaborations among groups from the for-profit sector, non-profit sector, and tech players like Amazon, Apple, Electronic Arts, etc. are where it’s going to be at. I fear that in the long run – 15-20 years out, things are not going to be looking so good for many traditional non-profit colleges and universities. I wish I could find a reason why this won’t be the case because I love the non-profit sector; however but I haven’t found a good reason to change my mind, yet.
duppy_conqueror

@e’muse “…most likely those students’ “rapt attention” is focused on email, texting, online games, etc.” And before those were available, they were focused on doodling, writing paper notes to each other or sleeping with their eyes open. From my observations sitting there as student and observing as teacher, that’s the “tried and true” back row behavior! :)
rmmorrison

I’m not clear as to why Mr. LeBlanc would want to “put that model out of business” referring to small, instructor led online courses. I am very familiar with the self-paced model, however those online courses are also instructor led. Self-paced courses allow students more flexibility than a traditional term-based online course and typically have completion deadlines of four to six months. The difference between LeBlanc’s plan and well-designed, academically rigorous courses is the absence of faculty or instructors. His “innovation” is to retrogress to computer-based training. This type of instruction is a fine alternative for learners wanting to acquire knowledge for personal or professional growth, but not appropriate for a student seeking academic credit.

What does a self-paced online course mean for faculty and/or instructors? Answer: serious time commitment. I’ve worked with instructors who are practitioners in their field who have experience teaching both online and traditional classroom courses. Some prefer the self-paced format since they are often able to work one on one with the student(s).

I encourage Mr. LeBlanc to build his “virtual bench” of qualified instructors to teach the
self-paced format. Done correctly, it is a scalable model that retains the academic rigor online courses require.

Online education is designed for the non-traditional student. Most online students are working professionals who also have family obligations. Just because they aren’t able to get their higher education in the traditional sense, they should be given the opportunity to have an equivalent academic experience through online education.

Mr. LeBlanc is looking for quantity, not quality.

Roxanne M. Morrison
rmmorrison

I’m not clear as to why Mr. LeBlanc would want to “put that
model out of business” referring to small, instructor led online courses. I am
very familiar with the self-paced model, however those online courses are also instructor
led. Self-paced courses allow students more flexibility than a traditional
term-based online course. Completion deadlines for self-paced courses typically
have a completion deadline of four to six months. The difference between
LeBlanc’s plan and well-designed, academically rigorous courses is the absence
of faculty or instructors. His “innovation”
is to retrogress to computer-based training. This type of instruction is a fine alternative
for learners wanting to acquire knowledge for personal or professional growth,
but not appropriate for a student seeking academic credit.

What does a self-paced online course mean for faculty and/or
instructors? Answer: serious time
commitment. I’ve worked with instructors who are practitioners in their field
who have experience teaching both online and traditional classroom courses. Some prefer the self-paced format since they
are often able to work one on one with the student(s). I recommend Mr. LeBlanc
look at building his “virtual bench” of qualified instructors to teach in the
self-paced format. Done correctly, it is a scalable model that retains the
academic rigor online courses require.

Online education is designed for the non-traditional
student. Most online students are working professionals who also have family
obligations. Just because they aren’t able to get their higher education in the
traditional sense, they should be given the opportunity to have an equivalent
academic experience through online education. LeBlanc is looking for quantity,
not quality.

Roxanne M. Morrison
jmazoue

You are not at all off-base. The kinds of institutional morphing you mention are already occurring. Content providers/publishers like McGraw-Hill and Pearson are offering learning-optimized courseware in high-consensus subject areas through their Connect/LearnSmart and LearnLab products, respectively. Along with John Wiley & Sons, Cengage, and MacMillan, they are also partnering with LMSs. Other forms of hybrids that combine content provision with accreditation have also been reported in the CHE. Online spinoffs of Western Governors University in Washington State, Indiana, and Texas will be formidable given their competency-based model and scalability. Finally, as reported in the CHE, note the recent acquisition of Carnegie Learning by the Apollo Group, a possible indicator that the inclusion of adaptive learning is in the University of Phoenix’s strategic planning.
rmmorrison

I’m not clear as to why Mr. LeBlanc would want to “put that model out of
business” referring to small, instructor led online courses. I am very
familiar with the self-paced model, however those online courses are
also instructor led. Self-paced courses allow students more flexibility
than a traditional term-based online course and typically have
completion deadlines of four to six months. The difference between
LeBlanc’s plan and well-designed, academically rigorous courses is the
absence of faculty or instructors. His “innovation” is to retrogress to
computer-based training. This type of instruction is a fine
alternative for learners wanting to acquire knowledge for personal or
professional growth, but not appropriate for a student seeking academic
credit.

What does a self-paced online course mean for faculty
and/or instructors? Answer: serious time commitment. I’ve worked with
instructors who are practitioners in their field who have experience
teaching both online and traditional classroom courses. Some prefer the
self-paced format since they are often able to work one on one with the
student(s).

I encourage Mr. LeBlanc to build his “virtual bench” of qualified instructors to teach the
self-paced format. Done correctly, it is a scalable model that retains the academic rigor online courses require.

Online
education is designed for the non-traditional student. Most online
students are working professionals who also have family obligations.
Just because they aren’t able to get their higher education in the
traditional sense, they should be given the opportunity to have an
equivalent academic experience through online education.

Mr. LeBlanc is looking for quantity, not quality.

Roxanne M. Morrison
http://twitter.com/edupdater EdUpdater

Few can afford college (without substantial support) and so, eventually, if the country believes college is essential, then it must be blended with high school. But we can hardly afford h.s. as we knew it. So..,blended hs/college with individual student pace set at earlier grades — most should be able to graduate with 2 years of the “general” coursework by grade 12, specializations by grade 13/14
unemployedacademic

I’m not really sure how you get to decentralization from information technologies that are being used to cut scholars out of the process of teaching. Just like in every other information business, the technology — when combined with the relentless greed of the business class — allows massive consolidation. What is envisioned in this blog post is the elimination of most experts from education. Why go to State U. to interact with its experts when you could “take” a course from Ivy U. and “learn” from its more prestigious experts? The result of this is that more and more students will consume content produced by ever fewer elite intellectuals — Clear Channel U, here we come! It will also result in a rapid decrease in the pace of innovation because it is based on the erroneous assumption that the most prestigious scholars pluck their ideas from the ether rather than benefit from the tumultuous exchange of ideas among numerous scholars. It is also an enormous waste of the talent of non-elite scholars.

True, the technology might allow students to work on courses in the wee hours of the night, during the few periods their 60-to80-hour work weeks allow, but is that really the solution to overwork? Who benefits from this? The students or the CEOs who overwork them? Isn’t it far better to distribute work and wealth more equitably in our society and allow citizens the leisure to attend traditional campuses? Why should we transform education so that workers can conform to the demands imposed by corporations?

None of the detrimental effects of this technology will matter, of course, because in our society what counts is not the effects of any policy on society as a whole, but the concentration of wealth at the top among the CEO class.
http://twitter.com/Mackiwg Wayne Mackintosh

Well done! Our congratulations to Southern New Hampshire university these innovations.

Perhaps the Southern New Hampshire university would like to join the to USA accredited universities who are founding anchor partners of the OER university who are implementing similar model on an international scale?See: 5 things you should know about the OER university - http://wikieducator.org/OER_university/Resources and recent announcements for USA accredited partners: http://wikieducator.org/OER_university/International_media
electronicmuse

Hear, hear. Such limited (human sensory) bandwidth, the online “experience”-regardless of how many bits are a’flying!
electronicmuse

Listen up, there is wisdom here.
wafa_khadra

The Open Culture Courses, the Open Learning Initiative, the Peer2Peer universities and all emerging free cyber educational initiatives are indicators of the necessity to create a new pedagogical paradigm that correlates to the contemporary cultural, socio-economic, political and collective intelligence variables. Time, effort and money should be invested in this significant terrain
http://www.facebook.com/people/Becky-Gamble/1122615007 Becky Gamble

This revolutionary model seems–familiar. As late as the 1990′s, our state university offered correspondence courses in which a student started at any point in the year, completed assignments at any time within a completion deadline (I think it was considerably longer than the school term) and went in for proctored exams. One student, one instructor/moderator, and infinite flexibility. Worked for me.
jwr12

Thank you, unemployedacademic, for addressing the proverbial elephant in the room. All very well put!
http://www.facebook.com/people/Elizabeth-Cooper/638438992 Elizabeth Cooper

translate “subject expert” as underpaid grad student and the only real innovation with this online model becomes the lack of a timeline. a significant portion of these supposedly more democratic approaches to education feel like attempts to remove or devalue teacher input as a cost-saving device. feels a bit ironic to have education questioning the value of, well… education. on the practical level, one wonders who exactly will design the engaging online content and assessment if not an “expensive instructor” or publisher.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Elizabeth-Cooper/638438992 Elizabeth Cooper

translate “subject expert” as underpaid grad student and the only real innovation with this online model becomes the lack of a timeline. a significant portion of these supposedly more democratic approaches to education feel like attempts to remove or devalue teacher input as a cost-saving device. feels a bit ironic to have education questioning the value of, well… education. on the practical level, one wonders who exactly will design the engaging online content and assessment if not an “expensive instructor” or publisher.
dianeseal

You’re painting traditional methods with a very broad brush and also indulging in some very tired stereotypes.
jenniferknott

I like what you said about story-telling. That is the basis for learning. What do you think about including PowerPoints in online courses, with the addition of audio narration and chunking down into smaller pieces? Would the addition of an inset video of the instructor help students learn more?
jenniferknott

I’m not so convinced that it’s not administrators, but instructors who are threatened.
jenniferknott

An an online student, I needed direction from instructor only as to what’s expected with each assignment and where to find the goods. Then I’d go at it and submit my work. I appreciated the challenge of competing with others in the online “classroom” and it made no difference to me whether or not it was an on-ground or online classroom. I acted in the same way I would have if walking into a building. Go in, listen to a lecture, find out the expectations for next time, and leave to go do the work. At least in the online setting you can do all this on your own schedule, for the most part.

On the other hand, the instructors presence is necessary for a student to feel supported in their learning. What some instructors fail to see is that they still need to provide direction and feedback. I had a hard time with an instructor who regularly put bad links in the course, didn’t open the week up on time, was late grading submissions, or was silent or absent for days at a time. The student needs to know that they are “listening” and paying attention to them, if only through observation of their online behaviors. Classrooms, online or not, are still competitive. That’s part of the student’s motivation. The great part about online classrooms is that you can’t easily push another student around to get attention. It’s all utilitarian in the mode of delivery.
jenniferknott

How many people reading this have actually participated as an online student? I’m curious.
22028784

It sounds like European higher education, where you don’t need to attend class. You just prepare yourself in any way you want and take the assessment at the end of the semester. Why haven’t we done that all along? There are many reasons, and they are still valid. Online might overcome them, but we need to be careful.
chemistry_guy

With respect to this:

” . . .engaging online content that offers built-in assessments, allowing them to determine when they are ready to move on. They could get help through networks of peers who are working on the same courses; online discussions could be monitored by subject experts. When they’re ready, students could complete a proctored assessment, perhaps at a local high school, or perhaps online. The university’s staff could then grade the assessment and assign credit.”

For Math from 3rd grade through Precalc and General Chemistry (or Prep Chem), Prep for College Physics, Stats, and a few other courses, ALEKS (A.ssessment and Le.arning in K.nowledge S.Paces, spun off from an NSF funded R&D project at UC Irvine) is doing this better than anything else already, AND many colleges and Universities have caught on. Students work at their own pace, receive the fastest, most accurate assessments yet devised, and can get where they need to go in almost precisely the way Dr. LeBlanc describes above:

http://cns.utexas.edu/academics/placement/aleks-chemistry-assessment

http://www.kent.edu/mathemporium/index.cfm

LeBlanc’s thinking is crystal clear with respect to assessment. This applies as well:

“The whole model hinges on excellent assessment, a rock-solid confidence that the student has mastered the student-learning outcomes,” the memo says. “If we know with certainty that they have, we should no longer care if they raced through the course or took 18 months, or if they worked on their courses with the support of a local church organization or community center or on their own. The game-changing idea here is that when we have assessment right, we should not care how a student achieves learning. We can blow up the delivery models and be free to try anything that shows itself to work.”

Here is how this works:

http://www.aleks.com/about_aleks/Science_Behind_ALEKS.pdf
ardvaark55

The problem is that we won’t get assessment right. There is no incentive to get it right. We have almost never gotten it right. I’m getting sick and tired of this. Let’s get back to teaching, relating, working closely with human beings in person, in the same room, given enough time and the connectedness to help people learn. I wish this craziness would just stop.
ardvaark55

Instruction should not, ideally, be “delivered.” The online medium is, in fact. a problem. What is this enthusiasm, this mad rush, this abandonment of the classroom?

Doesn’t anyone want to teach anymore?
jap64

Nothing so new really. One wonders is the motivation merely a cost saving approach, or a commitment to an open ended learning experience. LeBlanc mentions assessment almost as if it is the ANSWER. I assert, however that any learning organization at any level, regardless of the delivery system must first define what the successful learning outcome (criteria) is to be and state it publicly. It is then a simple process to evaluate (assess if you like) whether student achievement has occurred.

In my considered opinion, these measures should not rely upon Byzantine exams. Rather facilitate asynchronous learning matched with performance based assessments. Now are regional accrediting bodies up to the task? Will employers (if there are any left) accept completers from such programs? Are there sufficient self directed learners who will embrace such programs? And lastly, for now perhaps, will an institution offer such programs for the REAL cost plus a record keeping fee, rather than the type of bloated tuitions found at many self proclaimed cutting edge institutions?
richardtaborgreene

The thinking is fine BUT it bypasses the motivation to complete issue of on line learning. If you read actual evaluations of programs—elearning ones—that worked, what comes through statistically and in first impressions is the same—once a week calls (not emails) from learning coaches works.

So the formula is this:

1) do any learning in any form you like without expensive dedicated instructors
2) once a week or per 2 weeks get a learning coach call to renew motivation and unblock lifestyle interferrences
3) rigorous assessments that turn learning stuff and time into credits.

So I am just adding item 2 above.

Something like that is the Next Big Thing.

BUT the NEXT NEXT BIG THING—is mass workshop learning and design events—mass workshops locally of 3 days in a row, 12 hours a day of work, in parallel workshop teams doing research, design, or customer contact work that builds some One Overall Impressive Product as the event outcome all participants are authors of. These learning events are faster than courses and teach more along with personal networking among participants and research network extensions of contacts as part of the work plus a portfolio of big things build/designed in such events.

Events are a weave with e-mediated contacts in top businesses—punctuate e-processes with intense forms of face-to-face-ness.
richardtaborgreene

Yes episodic memory defeats declarative memory. Recent incidents have reported courses as best that told the history of parts of a science for example. A lot of greats themselves reworked derivations in their own fields’ histories.
richardtaborgreene

Sorry but Christensen’s stuff is just sublimated Intel and Microsoft history—vapid and 30 years out of date. Harvard gets away with it because of their low standards.

As you can see—his dated model actually does nothing to tell us the next big thing in any sort of revolution in education delivery and form. It is smoke and mirrors not thought.

JSBrown is a much better thinker (because West coast) and his model in his old book The Social Life of Information not only provides a real theory (not a sublimation of Intel and Microsoft history) but evidence to back it when applied to higher education.

AND JSBrown’s work gives much more specific guidance about overall components needed for a revolution in education delivery and form. JSBrown’s more recent book, co-written with some bozo, however is NOT good and should be left unread in my opinion.
pnh22

“JSBrown is a much better thinker (because West coast) ”

I laughed out loud–thanks.
pnh22

You’re almost there. “Subject expert” is likely not to be a graduate student, or even a resident of the US.
puddleglum55

Um, I worked for these people for one quarter. Unprofessional and horrible pay. Expensive instructors indeed! No, what this is about is making profs “staff” and lining administrators’ pockets. Odd how their salaries never seem to come up in these discussions.