Business and Sustainability Models in Open Education: Concepts and Examples in 2012

  • 2,873 views
Uploaded on

As will be discussed within this report, OE services are not limited to learner assessment and certification against fees. The possible OE value chain that the unbundling of the traditional formal …

As will be discussed within this report, OE services are not limited to learner assessment and certification against fees. The possible OE value chain that the unbundling of the traditional formal education package and the institutional detachment of education in theory do withhold is still to be explored.

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,873
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Business and Sustainability Models in Open Education Concepts and Examples in 2012 June, 2012 Andreas Meiszner, PhD United Nations University | UNU-MERIT | CCG The NetherlandsThe openED project has been funded with support from the European Commission. The content reflects the views only of the author,and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use, which may be made of the information contained therein. | openEd 2.0505667-LLP-1-2009-1-PT-KA3-KA3MP
  • 2. Copyright Notice:This work is published under a Creative Commons License Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported.Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author orlicensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of thework).Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes.Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute theresulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.Content Notice:This work is a derivative of the openED project deliverable D9.1 SustainabilityframeworkVersion Information: June 19th 2012 v3.1 ii
  • 3. Table of Content1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 12 Open Education, OE Services and sustainability ....................................................... 23 A historic perspective: Education services and WTO GATS .................................... 34 Open Education service concepts and supportive market spaces .............................. 4 4.1 Open Education service concepts........................................................................ 4 4.2 Possible examples of Open Education services .................................................. 5 4.3 Supportive market spaces.................................................................................... 65 Sustainability Challenges: The Absence of an OE Service Infrastructure andperceived Lack of Business Models ................................................................................. 76 Comparison of openED concepts against further OE cases....................................... 8 6.1 Case 1: openED ................................................................................................... 9 6.2 Case 2: openSE.................................................................................................. 12 6.3 Case 3 UNUOpen (UN University)................................................................... 15 6.4 Case 4: MITx / EdX (MIT & Harvard) ............................................................. 18 6.5 Case 5: Coursera (Stanford) .............................................................................. 21 6.6 Case 6: Udacity (Stanford) ................................................................................ 24 6.7 Case 7: Saylor Foundation ................................................................................ 27 6.8 Case 8: OERu .................................................................................................... 30 6.9 Case 9: ict@innovation FOSS Business Training Programme ......................... 33 6.10 Case 10: Khan Academy................................................................................. 35 6.11 Case 11: UoP (University of the People) ........................................................ 38 6.12 Case 12: FTA (Free Technology Academy) ................................................... 41 6.13 Case 13: P2PU (Peer to Peer University)........................................................ 447 Reflections................................................................................................................ 47 7.1 Cost per student by OE component part............................................................ 47 7.2 Extension of regular course offerings (combined) vs OE as a parallel undertaking ................................................................................................................. 48 7.3 Currently existing OE business models & service concepts ............................. 49Annex - List of section 6 secondary sources .................................................................. 51References ...................................................................................................................... 52 List of FiguresFigure 1 OE value chain for the learning industry (Source: ELIG, 2011) ....................... 5Figure 2 Cost per student by OE component part; variable, fixed and cost neutral....... 47
  • 4. 1 IntroductionThere are a number of pathways and measures to allow for the sustainability of OpenEducation (OE) and they do depend on the respective OE scenarios. Donations,advertisements, or commission on sales are all viable and well-established means ofrevenue generation, and they are applied successfully within and outside of theeducation sector. In addition to this OE further potentially allows for cost-sharing andan added value for money, and for the provision of OE services (Meiszner, 2011). Cost-sharing means to optimize the use of the resources at hand and might be for exampleachieved through sharing the cost for the production and maintenance of openeducational environments, related open educational resources or through shared onlinelearner support. The openED project shows as a example how such a sharing might berealized in practice and how educational institutions can co-produce and co-deliver acourse, including how support provision and course facilitation can be equallydistributed amongst the participating educational institutions. OE further can provide anadded value to traditional educational offerings and therefore could allow for a highervalue for the same cost involved, or in the best-case even cost savings (Meiszner, 2011).Another possible mean to allow for sustainability of OE, and at a scalable rate, is seento lay in the development and provision of OE services and as will be the focus of thisreport. In the following this report will provide a brief theoretic introduction into thethematic field of OE services, to then compare OE concepts, which have beendeveloped and partially also tested within the openED project, against other currentlyemerging OE cases from across the globe. As will be shown within the final reflectivesection of the report, there are a number of common characteristics within all of suchattempts. But perhaps more importantly from a sustainability perspective; all of suchcases do indicate that OE services are still at its very beginning and that they appear tobe at this point in time often limited to the basic and most obvious OE service concepts,namely an individual learner assessment and certification against fees. As will bediscussed within this report, OE services do are however not limited to learnerassessment and certification against fees. The possible OE value chain that theunbundling of the traditional formal education package and the institutional detachmentof education in theory do withhold is still to be explored. 1
  • 5. 2 Open Education, OE Services and sustainabilityOver the past years the traditional formal education domain has been subject to aprocess of opening up resulting in an ever-blurring border between the formal and theinformal and allowing traditional formal education to take advantage of theopportunities that participatory Web 2.0 provides (Meiszner, 2010, Weller & Meiszner2008). Such blurring of borders can be seen both in the use of informal approacheswithin formal education and release of formal content for less formal use.Over the past years the traditional formal education domain has also started to take moreand more advantage of the practicing and authentic learning opportunities that Web 2.0based real-life context environments provide (Meiszner, 2010). This development bearsthe potential to systematically bring together traditional formal higher education offersand theoretic subjects, and from across higher education institutions, with practicing andauthentic learning opportunities within real-life context environments that Web 2.0provides. Such developments indicate an immense potential to better support learners,but they also change the context of what is to be understood as traditional formal highereducation, and what current or future technologies might need to support. At presentthere is for example a clear absence of concepts and technical solutions that wouldallow for education design and provision across technologies and detached from asingle education provider. Even in the case of supportive licensing for underlying openeducational resources, and the access opportunity to educational communities, thedisconnection of the respective technical solutions and environments has turned out sofar to be a serious challenge. As a matter of fact current technological solutions aretypically not designed or intended to allow for education across higher educationinstitutions, nor to allow all type of learners to learn at any institution of their choice,nor to engage with students from such institutions, nor to obtain support from suchinstitutions. Commercial approaches like Amazon for the retail sector or Sourceforgefor software developer community do provide some insights on how Open EducationEcosystems might be perceived. Amazon and Sourceforge both offer examples thatbring together competing commercial enterprises within their environments, which inthe traditional formal higher education domain do not exist. Thus there is the need toadvance knowledge in such new forms of collaboration in the education sector and tocontribute towards specifications that emerging Open Education Ecosystems wouldneed to meet. 2
  • 6. Based upon those challenges and opportunities that OE potentially withholds, the EULLP funded openED project has been developing and testing a number of new andservice based OE concepts that potentially would allow OE to become sustainable in thefuture. An underlying assumption of such concepts has been that the detachment ofeducation from a single education institution also would go along with an unbundling ofthe typically bundled education package. This is to say that within the traditional formaleducation system a given education institution typically would be the single educationprovider to their learner population. This starts from initial admission and access tophysical or virtual infrastructures, the education itself in form of access opportunities tolearning resources, classes, tutorials and so forth, followed by subsequent assessmentand evaluations of learners, and commonly ending with recognition and formalcredentials of learning outcomes. However, within an OE context this situation might bevery different since traditional formal education offers can be provided from acrosshigher education institutions, and under involvement of authentic real-life contextenvironments that the Web 2.0 provides. From a sustainability perspective this allowsfor the unbundling of the traditional education package and to realize cost-savings andan optimized use of resources, a higher value for money, or for the provision of OEservices to the learner itself, or also to education provider. In the following such newand service based OE concepts will be further discussed.3 A historic perspective: Education services and WTO GATSThe understanding of education as a service is not a novelty itself, and as exemplifiedfor example within the World Trade Organization’s ‘General Agreement on Trade inServices’ as following shown.The World Trade Organization’s ‘General Agreement on Trade in Services’ (GATS)entered into force in 1995. One of the components of this agreement, and a perhapshighly controversial one, has been on ‘Education Services’. The European Students’Union (ESU, nd) has been arguing for example that education is a public good and thatit should be made available to society at large, but that it is not a good to be consumedby those only that are privileged as they can afford to pay for it. Apart from thosecertainly well justified debates, what the GATS show is that education has beenconsidered as being a service for already more than one decade. The rise of the ICT andthe Web are therefore perhaps less a cause for education services, but an enabler toprovide those more efficiently and across borders. Very much in line with the GATS 3
  • 7. notion of education as a service one further can observe a steady rise in the educationservice market at which private market actors offer those components of education thatcan be digitized or delivered at a distance or through networked environments. In 2007CNET (2007), a popular online news service, noted that education would be the nextbig growth market and in April 2011 the FTSE1 100 publishing and education groupPearson (US) acquired New York based Schoolnet for $230 million in cash. Schoolnetis a fast-growing education technology company that aligns assessment, curriculum andother services to help individualize instruction and improve teacher effectiveness. Theundertakings of such private market actors are well aligned with the recommendationsof the UNESCO Report “Towards Knowledge Societies” (2005) that suggest that “thepillars on which genuine knowledge societies can be built consist of a better valuationof existing forms of knowledge to narrow the knowledge divide; a more participatoryapproach to access to knowledge; and a better integration of knowledge policies” (2005,p.188). Though Pearson, as a private for profit undertaking, might not be guided by theobjective of building up knowledge societies, the case of Schoolnet provides someevidence for the validity of the UNESCO report recommendations with regards tosynergies, participatory approaches and consistent policies. The information aboveillustrates that education services are not immature, but a well-established sector inmany parts of our education systems. The recent ‘opening up’ of the higher educationsector therefore provides perhaps just the necessary stepping-stone to enable theprovision of OE services.4 Open Education service concepts and supportive market spaces4.1 Open Education service conceptsThe unbundling and institutional detachment of the traditional formal educationpackage provides the opportunity to develop services around the respective educationcomponent parts. Component parts of the traditional formal education package that havebeen identified alongside the openED project included ‘Open Content’, ‘Open Degrees’,‘Open Assessment’, ‘Open Learning’, ‘Open Tutoring’, ‘Open Technology’, and ‘OpenCommunities’. Each of such component parts allows for the development and provisionof services that might be provided to the learner itself, but also to education provider.1 FTSE: an independent company jointly owned by The Financial Times and the London Stock Exchange. 4
  • 8. OE services might be described as an ‘on-demand’ concept at which services areprovided around freely available educational offers, such as courses and programmes,and perhaps also with free basic support provision. OE services therefore might be closeto a ‘Freemium business model’ at which basic products or services are available free ofcharge, while charging a premium for advanced features, functionality, or relatedproducts and services. OE services are nonetheless not limited to a ‘Freemium businessmodel’ and the ultimate business model will also depend on the respective nationaleducation systems and the funding models in place.As such OE services are a possibly financial viable mean to allow for the sustainabilityof OE. As such OE services are also offering a business opportunity for private marketactors and as depicted within Figure 1. Figure 1 OE value chain for the learning industry (Source: ELIG, 2011)4.2 Possible examples of Open Education servicesOE services might be provided as well to learners as to education providers. Examplesof educational services for learners could include formal assessment, certification, localin-class support, study groups, online tutoring, or mentored internships. Services foreducation providers might include training, course and program development, (cloud) 5
  • 9. hosting and maintenance, online assessment and certification systems, online spaces toprovide tutoring, billing systems, physical ID verification and assessment control.The offering of such services thus potentially would allow (higher) educationinstitutions and third party education providers to generate revenues and as such toallow for sustainability.4.3 Supportive market spacesOE Service concepts are not entirely unrelated to those ones that are already offeredwithin the traditional formal education system. Moreover, OE service concepts wouldprovide clear incentives to education provider such as higher education institutions todeliver course, programs or services through supportive OE market spaces. Altogethersuch OE market spaces could also benefit other sustainability components, such as cost-sharing through co-authored production of courses, programs and other types ofresources, numerous localization opportunities, or joint support provision. To providesuch services would nonetheless require the establishment of supportive market spaceinfrastructures that then would allow for the offering of such services from acrosseducation institutions and real-life context environments that the Web 2.0 provides. Theunbundling of the traditional education package could then allow education providers aswell as learners to customize education. Learners could decide the preferred mode ofstudy, be it the traditional one, be it a mix of traditional and peer studying with servicesubscriptions from one or more providers, or be it learning for free. With this, such aneducation market space would follow common market principles in which supply anddemand determine the price, and in which high quality education could potentially beprovided at local economic rates. The openED project has been conceptualizing andtesting such a market space approach and the results suggest that the joint offer ofeducation from across institutions and competition at a service level might not be aconflict in itself. A conflict potential nonetheless, and as experienced within theopenED case, might lay within the incompatibility of national legal frameworks that areat current in place with OE service and market space concepts. The OERu presentedwithin section 6 and that is currently under development is pursuing a similar approach,by bundling strength across the participating higher education institutions forcurriculum design, the joint use of supportive virtual infrastructures (e.g. for learnersupport), and by allowing participating education institutions to provide services to theirlocal and also virtual distributed learner population. Given that the OERu is still at its 6
  • 10. very beginning it is however not known if national legal frameworks that are at currentin place are of an equal challenge to be overcome as experienced within the openEDcase.5 Sustainability Challenges: The Absence of an OE Service Infrastructure and perceived Lack of Business ModelsAt this point in time the concept of Open Education, as well as of Open EducationServices, is still in its infancy and there is the absence of well-established marketprinciples and concepts. The European Learning Industry Group (ELIG), as an openEDproject partner, has been carrying out a number of stakeholder consultations. Thefindings of such consultations (ELIG, 2011) highlighted in this regard that looking atsimilar market approaches, notably the Open Source Software one, shows that such newmodels are initially often confined to the specialist and fringe developmentcommunities. In this Open Source Software case commercial software companies longlooked on Open Source Software, but did not embrace the concept and failed to see howOpen Source Software could support their highly commercialised world. Twenty yearson, Open Source Software is routinely behind many consumer and industrial products,such as satellite boxes, smart phones, PCs, etc.ELIG has further been carrying out a survey across the breadth of the learning industry(ELIG, 2011) that shows that there are clear indications that the commercial learningindustry has not yet fully engaged with Open Education (OE). The commercialhesitation to adopt OE is in large part due to a perceived lack of associated newbusiness models. Despite this perceived lack of associated new business models,education services are nonetheless already well established for more then a decade ashas been detailed within section 3. What might be thus indeed a novelty is to provideservices within an OE setting that is characterized by institutional detachment, theunbundling of the traditionally bundled education package into its component parts, andthe larger number of stakeholders that might act as education provider. This certainlydoes require a certain infrastructure to support the offering of such services and as hasbeen discussed within section 4. The comparison of currently existing OE case that isprovided within the following section suggest however that such supportiveinfrastructure does not exist at this point in time. 7
  • 11. 6 Comparison of openED concepts against further OE casesThe openED course has been implementing and testing a OE service infrastructureaimed at enabling third party education providers to offer services to the courseparticipants, be it for free or against fee. This service infrastructure had beenimplemented alongside the openED piloting phase and it has been considering a limitednumber of services such as in-class support, virtual tutoring, and marked assessmentand certification. During the openED piloting phase a number of OE service providershave been offering services for the course, though at this point in time remains unclearto which degree those services have been actually used and whether or not theimplemented service infrastructure and approach does workout as envisioned and couldbe ultimately taken further from a research project level into a more formal andmainstream education context.Given that OE and OE services are still at a relatively early stage the openED conceptcan also not be compared against well-established and mature OE cases, which do notexist at this point in time. However, and to allow for a better understanding on thepotential applicability of the openED concepts and its service infrastructure this sectionwill compare a number of currently emergent similar OE initiatives. The purpose of thiscomparison is thus to gain a better understanding on the state of the art of OE conceptsand service approaches and to identify similarities and deviations.The following provided information has been collected via desktop research within theinvestigated OE case websites or via third party sources as detailed within the Annex‘a’. 8
  • 12. 6.1 Case 1: openEDCharacteristics / Cases openEDMaturity ResearchCountry EuropeFunding Grant (EU, EACEA).Stakeholder Higher Education Institutions, Adult Education Provider, Web based communities and social spaces.Formal / Non-formal Formal and non-formal.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Combined approach of traditional and open learning. One course many provider / many provision modes concept.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Use of educational materials from participating education provider. Use of educational material now available for free on the internet. Collaborative development of curriculum and course design.Localizations / Yes, but no supportive technology in placeVersioningModularity Yes, course broken down in modules.Bundling of education Unbundled, broken down in component parts (course design, lectures, support, assessment, certification, etc.).packageInstitutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers Yes, short training course.ProgrammeTechnology Available and adapted OSS & web based technologies. 9
  • 13. Licenses (Content & Open licenses.technologies)Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses. Problem, inquiry, collaborative based learning.Learning, Tutoring, Online chat (IRC) sessions organized by the course team from participating education institutions.Support and Forum based support provided by peers and as required by the course team from participating educationCommunities institutions.(Re-)Use/Integration of Directory for/with learner assignments, including grading and evaluations.(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Yes, such as Scribd, Slideshare, etc.real life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning No.and outcomesTrack of learning No.pathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Yes. Open Evaluation and Rating system for submitted assignments. Both, peer-assessment and assessment via OE service provider (fees might apply).Degrees / Credentialing / Yes, automated Self-Print certificate or formal recognition via OE service provider (fees might apply).Recognition 10
  • 14. Quality Assurance Responsibility of participating education institutions and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms. System for rating and evaluation of the quality of third party OE service provider.Service Concepts & Cost-sharing, higher value for money and OE services to learners such as:Business Models - Formal assessment - Certification - Local in-class support - Study groups - Online tutoring.OtherURLs www.open-ed.eu 11
  • 15. 6.2 Case 2: openSECharacteristics / Cases openSEMaturity ResearchCountry EuropeFunding Grant (EU, EACEA).Stakeholder Higher Education Institutions, Adult Education Provider, Web based communities and social spaces, including OSS developer communities (via internships).Formal / Non-formal Non-formal practice based approach focusing on authentic and real life learning.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Combined approach of traditional and open learning.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Use of educational materials from participating education provider. Use of educational material now available for free on the internet. Use of educational material from real-life learning environments (OSS developer communities). Collaborative development of curriculum and course design.Localizations / Yes, but no supportive technology in placeVersioningModularity Yes, materials are made available by tasks and/or by learning objectives.Bundling of education Unbundled, focused on non-formal component parts (internships, p2p knowledge exchange, shared 2nd levelpackage support etc.).Institutional attachment Detached from single institution. 12
  • 16. Training of Trainers Yes, short training course.ProgrammeTechnology Available and adapted OSS & web based technologies.Licenses (Content & Open licenses, but support of closed licensed third party offers.technologies)Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses. Problem, inquiry, collaborative and project based learning.Learning, Tutoring, Forum based support provided by peers and as required by the course team from participating educationSupport and institutions.Communities Access to support system of embedded authentic real-live environments (e.g. OSS developer communities).(Re-)Use/Integration of Directory for/with learner internship project reports, including grading and evaluations.(A) learning outcomes Directory for/with learner assignments, including grading and evaluations.(assignments, tests, etc.) Directory with learning resources from authentic real-live environments (e.g. OSS developer communities).and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Use/Integration of authentic real-live environments (e.g. OSS developer communities) as part of a virtualreal life learning internship.environments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Yes, via Portable Education Portfolios (PEPS) that allows for single sign on across learning spaces and leveragingand outcomes of all types of data across such spaces (3).Track of learning Yes, via Portable Education Portfolios (PEPS) that allows for single sign on across learning spaces and leveragingpathways within internal of all types of data across such spaces (3).and external learningenvironmentsAssessment Yes. Open Evaluation and Rating system for submitted internship reports. Both, peer-assessment and assessment via OE service provider (fees might apply). 13
  • 17. Degrees / Credentialing / Yes, automated Self-Print certificate.RecognitionQuality Assurance Responsibility of participating education institutions and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms.Service Concepts & Cost-sharing and higher value for money through bundling of 2nd level and peer support and learner generatedBusiness Models contents.OtherURLs www.openSE.net 14
  • 18. 6.3 Case 3 UNUOpen (UN University)Characteristics / Cases UNUOpen (UN University)Maturity ConceptCountry GlobalFunding Conceptual phase only.Stakeholder Higher Education Institutions, Adult Education Provider, Web based communities and social spaces, public and private sector entities (via internship programme).Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach,education approach non-formal practice based approach focusing on authentic and real life learning.Traditional, Parallel or Combined approach of traditional and open learning. One course many provider / many provision modes concept.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Use of educational materials from participating education provider. Use of educational material now available for free on the internet. Collaborative development of curriculum and course design.Localizations / Yes, via supportive technologies (analogue to Amazon / Sourceforge concepts).VersioningModularity Yes, to support re-bundling and education provision in multi contexts, across institutions and collaborative/jointly.Bundling of education Unbundled, broken down in component parts (development, lectures, support, assessment, certification,package internships, p2p knowledge exchange, shared 2nd level support, etc.).Institutional attachment Detached from single institution. 15
  • 19. Training of Trainers Yes, via partnership & training programme.ProgrammeTechnology Two core technologies. (A) Higher level technological OE system framework analogue to Amazon & Sourceforge concept that integrates available third party technologies (e.g. common OSS & proprietary LMS systems, Content repositories, web based technologies, etc.) and allows for multi-technology support. (B) Portable Education Portfolios.Licenses (Content & Open licenses, but support of closed licensed third party offers.technologies)Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses. Problem, inquiry, collaborative and project based learning.Learning, Tutoring, Online lectures or support chat (IRC) sessions organized by the course team from participating educationSupport and institutions.Communities Forum based support provided by peers and as required by the course team from participating education institutions. Remote participation opportunities at classroom based lectures for online learners within the courses of participating education institutions. Access to support system of embedded authentic real-live environments (e.g. OSS developer communities).(Re-)Use/Integration of Directories for/with learner assignments and internship project reports, including their grading and evaluations.(A) learning outcomes Directory with learning resources from authentic real-live environments (e.g. OSS developer communities).(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Yes, flexible embedment options to integrate authentic real-live environments into courses or programmes.real life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Yes, via Portable Education Portfolios (PEPS) that allows for single sign on across learning spaces and leveragingand outcomes of all types of data across such spaces (3). 16
  • 20. Track of learning Yes, via Portable Education Portfolios (PEPS) and through OE software system framework (4).pathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Yes. Open Evaluation and Rating system for submitted assignments and internship reports. Both, peer-assessment and assessment via OE service provider (fees might apply).Degrees / Credentialing / Yes, automated Self-Print certificate based on Portable Education Portfolios (PEPS information and formalRecognition recognition via OE service provider (fees might apply).Quality Assurance Responsibility of participating education institutions and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms. System for rating and evaluation of the quality of third party OE service provider.Service Concepts & Cost-sharing and higher value for money through bundling of 2nd level and peer support and learner generatedBusiness Models contents. Traditional funding and sustainability models for traditional course & program delivery. OE services to learners and to third party OE service provider via marketplace concept, incl. commission on sales and shared revenues: Learner perspective: - Formal assessment - Certification - Local in-class support - Study groups - Online tutoring Provider perspective: ! Commission on service fees generated through UNU Open ! Course & Programme hosting & update services.OtherURLs n/a 17
  • 21. 6.4 Case 4: MITx / EdX (MIT & Harvard)Characteristics / Cases MITx / EdX (MIT & Harvard)Maturity Under developmentCountry USAFunding Own funding ($60 million).Stakeholder Transformational partnership of MIT and Harvard in online education to collaborate to enhance campus-based teaching and learning and build a global community of online learners (1).Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel. Enriching traditional on-campus experience while offering high level online education to learners aroundCombined approach (e.g. the world (1).one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Use of educational materials from MIT and Harvard.Localizations / No.VersioningModularity Yes, course broken down in modules.Bundling of education Traditional version bundled; Open version bundled.packageInstitutional attachment Attached to single education institution.Training of Trainers No.Programme 18
  • 22. Technology Online learning platform that [envisioned]: • organizes and presents course material to enable students to learn worldwide • features interactive instruction, online laboratories and student-to-student and student-to-professor communication • allows for the individual assessment of any student’s work and allows students who demonstrate their mastery of subjects to earn certificates awarded by MITx • operates on an open-source, scalable software infrastructure in order to make it continuously improving and readily available to other educational institutions, such as universities and K-12 school systems.Licenses (Content & Open and closed licenses.technologies)Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses (1).Learning, Tutoring, Video lesson segments, embedded quizzes, immediate automated feedback, student-ranked questions and answers,Support and online laboratories, and student paced learning.Communities(Re-)Use/Integration of Homework can be published at the course wiki.(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Noreal life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Noand outcomesTrack of learning Nopathways within internaland external learningenvironments 19
  • 23. Assessment Yes, automated and optional (against fees) personalized.Degrees / Credentialing / No course credit, degree or certificate from the universities involved. Instead, successful students can hope for aRecognition signed letter of completion from their well-known instructor or a certificate from the organization (e.g. MITx brand label) (1). Non-formal recognition possible via badges.Quality Assurance Responsibility of participating education institutions and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms.Service Concepts & Yes, via MITx /EdX brand name, and assessment/credentials against fees.Business ModelsOther The edX platform will enable the study of which teaching methods and tools are most successful. The findings of this research will be used to inform how faculty use technology in their teaching, which will enhance the experience for students on campus and for the millions expected to take advantage of these new online offerings.URLs http://www.edxonline.org 20
  • 24. 6.5 Case 5: Coursera (Stanford)Characteristics / Cases Coursera (Stanford)Maturity Under developmentCountry USAFunding Funding ($16 million) from Doerr & SandellStakeholder For profit start-up founded by two Stanford University computer science professors, Coursera is partnering with that school, as well as Princeton University, the University of Michigan and the University of Pennsylvania to offer classes in disciplines including computer science, medicine, literature and history.Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, HEI university-level education.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Lecture videos, which are broken into small chunks, and integrated quiz questions.Localizations / NoVersioningModularity Yes, course broken down in modules.Bundling of education Open version bundled.packageInstitutional attachment Attached to participating education institutions.Training of Trainers NoProgramme 21
  • 25. Technology Coursera’s learning management service (LMS) platform can be used internally by universities to revamp their online course programs. The plan is to shake up how most college classes are typically run — with long, boring lectures. Ng and Koller believe that short online video lectures and interactive assignments, provided with Coursera’s LMS, will open up more time in classrooms for discussions, case studies, and more riveting presentations that will keep students engaged (9).Licenses (Content & All content or other materials available on the Sites, including but not limited to code, images, text, layouts,technologies) arrangements, displays, illustrations, audio and video clips, HTML files and other content are the property of Coursera and/or its affiliates or licensors and are protected by copyright, patent and/or other proprietary intellectual property rights under the United States and foreign laws.Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses.Learning, Tutoring, There is a Q&A forum in which students rank questions and answers, so that the most important questions and theSupport and best answers bubble to the top. Teaching staff will monitor these forums, so that important questions not answeredCommunities by other students can be addressed. Where essays are required, especially in the humanities and social sciences, the system relies on the students themselves to grade their fellow students’ work, in effect turning them into teaching assistants.(Re-)Use/Integration of No, though in principle possible since assignments are systematically collected and stored (including their(A) learning outcomes evaluations).(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Noreal life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning No 22
  • 26. and outcomesTrack of learning Nopathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Peer-evaluation. To participate in peer evaluation one must first submit an assignment, and to receive credit for completing an assignment one must also complete the peer evaluation. That means that an assignment will be reviewed by about five other people.Degrees / Credentialing / Statement of Accomplishment that one earns based on the work submittedRecognitionQuality Assurance Responsibility of participating education institutions and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms.Service Concepts & Business Model still under development. One of their main backers, the venture capitalist John Doerr, a KleinerBusiness Models investment partner, said via e-mail that he saw a clear business model: “Yes. Even with free courses. From a community of millions of learners some should ‘opt in’ for valuable, premium services. Those revenues should fund investment in tools, technology and royalties to faculty and universities.” (6).OtherURLs http://www.coursera.org 23
  • 27. 6.6 Case 6: Udacity (Stanford)Characteristics / Cases Udacity (Stanford)Maturity Under developmentCountry USAFunding Funding ($5 million (8)) from Charles River Ventures (5) and corporate partnership with Pearson VUE (7).Stakeholder For profit start-up founded by three roboticists who believed much of the educational value of their university classes could be offered online.Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, non HEI university-level education.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Use of educational materials from participating education provider. Use of educational material now available for free on the internet.Localizations / NoVersioningModularity Yes, course broken down in modules.Bundling of education Open version bundled.packageInstitutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers NoProgrammeTechnology Online learning platform to use the economics of the Internet to connect some of the greatest teachers to hundreds of thousands of students all over the world. 24
  • 28. Licenses (Content & Freely available materials, unclear licensing.technologies)Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses.Learning, Tutoring, Video lessons.Support and Forum (Q&A) based support provided by peers and as required by the course team.Communities Recorded answers by the course team of selected questions. Life office hours with course team.(Re-)Use/Integration of No(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Noreal life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Noand outcomesTrack of learning Nopathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Yes, automated.Degrees / Credentialing / Badges to recognise actions that benefit the community. For initial AI course: Students get a letter with their gradeRecognition and class rank, signed by the professors in the name of the professor (5).Quality Assurance Responsibility of participating educators. 25
  • 29. Service Concepts & Business Model still under development. One possibility would be to double as a recruiting agency for techBusiness Models companies and engineering firms, says Stavens. Rather than granting credentials that students might use to impress employers, Udacity could cut to the chase by headhunting within its student body on behalf of companies, matching students to jobs and collecting recruiting fees (5).OtherURLs http://www.udacity.com 26
  • 30. 6.7 Case 7: Saylor FoundationCharacteristics / Cases Saylor FoundationMaturity Under developmentCountry USAFunding Saylor Foundation funding and donations.Stakeholder Faculty and peer-review teams from various higher education institutions to package primarily open license educational materials into degree level programs. Saylor is collaborating with both p2pu and the University of the People to create and share courses, and some of Saylors math courses come from the Khan Academy. Thus there seems to be a community working with some cooperation towards similar goals (1).Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, HEI college level education.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Use of educational material now available for free on the internet. They repackage this material into majors, and incorporate it into their individual educational approaches (1).Localizations / NoVersioningModularity Yes, course broken down in modules.Bundling of education Not applicable as content onlypackageInstitutional attachment Not applicable as content only 27
  • 31. Training of Trainers Not applicable as content onlyProgrammeTechnology Online content repositoryLicenses (Content & Except where otherwise noted, content is licensedtechnologies) under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.Pedagogy Rather rudimentary in terms of use of pedagogy and technology compared to what one finds in well funded online programs (1).Learning, Tutoring, Any person can sign up for a course at any time, and it does not appear that there is any peer learning involved atSupport and present (1).Communities(Re-)Use/Integration of No(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Noreal life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Noand outcomesTrack of learning Nopathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment NoDegrees / Credentialing / It is not clear whether Saylor intends to offer a degree to students who succeed in passing the prescribed coursesRecognition (1). 28
  • 32. Quality Assurance Responsibility of participating educators.Service Concepts & Donations and grantsBusiness ModelsOtherURLs http://www.saylor.org 29
  • 33. 6.8 Case 8: OERuCharacteristics / Cases OERuMaturity Under developmentCountry New Zealand (Global)Funding Hewlett Foundation funding and donations.Stakeholder The OER university is a virtual collaboration of like-minded institutions committed to creating flexible pathways for OER learners to gain formal academic credit. Current network HEIs are University of Southern Queensland (AU), Otago Polytechnic (NZ), Athabasca University (CA), Gujarat Open University (IN), Empire State College (US), Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology (NZ), NorthTec (NZ), Open Polytechnic (NZ), Southern New Hampshire University (US), Thompson Rivers University (CA), University of Canterbury (NZ), University of South Africa (SA), University of Wollongong (NZ), Thomas Edison State College (US), University of the South Pacific (FJ).Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, HEI university-level education with the option of obtaining credentials by participating HEIs.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Courseware from network HEIs and other open-education material found on the Internet.Localizations / Unclear, still under discussion.VersioningModularity YesBundling of education Unbundled. Local training provider decide about the type of services offered to their learning population.package 30
  • 34. Institutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers Yes, via wiki based guidelines and/or workshops.ProgrammeTechnology Open Source licensed core technologies (notable MediaWiki), which needs to be integrated with the LMS systems of partnering HEIs (currently Blackboard, Moodle, myUnisa, Sakai). At current OERu is less focusing on technology development, which appears to take on an equal importance within the wider OERu framework amongst e.g. content, pedagogy, support, assessment, certification, etc.Licenses (Content & Open licenses for OERu.technologies)Pedagogy Currently under development.Learning, Tutoring, Currently under development. Intended use of volunteering system, including peer to peer support currently underSupport and test and based on Askbot Q&A forum software.Communities(Re-)Use/Integration of Currently under development and therefore unclear, though open assessment is named and thus could potentially(A) learning outcomes allow for re-use / integration of learning outcomes.(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) At current apparently not foreseen.real life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Currently under development and therefore unclear; but in principle would need to be available to allow forand outcomes assessment and credentials via partner HEIs. 31
  • 35. Track of learning At current apparently not foreseen.pathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Yes, peer assessment as well as personal assessment via partner HEIs.Degrees / Credentialing / Yes, via partner HEIsRecognitionQuality Assurance Responsibility of participating HEIs.Service Concepts & Yes, assessment and certification against fees are foreseen.Business ModelsOtherURLs http://wikieducator.org/OER_university 32
  • 36. 6.9 Case 9: ict@innovation FOSS Business Training ProgrammeCharacteristics / Cases ict@innovation FOSS Business Training ProgrammeMaturity ProductionCountry Africa / GermanyFunding Capacity building grant via German GIZ programme.Stakeholder Volunteers from different backgrounds, incl. HEI and professional education educatorsFormal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, professional level education. One course many provider / many provision modes concept.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials The educational programme of ict@innovation is a collaborative production and exploitation process based on open licensed course materials.Localizations / Yes, with the possibility of feeding back localized versions into the ict@innovation portal.VersioningModularity YesBundling of education Unbundled. Local training provider decide about the type of services offered to their learning population.packageInstitutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers Yes, via training programmeProgrammeTechnology Open Source licensed LMS systems based on Drupal and Dokeos.Licenses (Content & Open licenses.technologies)Pedagogy Case based learning. 33
  • 37. Learning, Tutoring, Self and peer support for online learning. Tutor based support for local learning population (either in-class orSupport and online).Communities(Re-)Use/Integration of Partially via potential availability of past assignments / tests within the LMS system.(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Yes, via associated mentored internship programme.real life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Noand outcomesTrack of learning Nopathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Within the responsibility of local education provider.Degrees / Credentialing / Within the responsibility of local education provider.RecognitionQuality Assurance For course delivery within the responsibility of local education provider. For programme design within the responsibility of participating educators.Service Concepts & For the overall ict@innovation programme: Volunteering and added value / cost sharing amongst volunteers. ForBusiness Models the individual volunteer / local training provider: Fees for in-class support, assessment, certification, etc.OtherURLs http://www.ict-innovation.fossfa.net/ 34
  • 38. 6.10 Case 10: Khan AcademyCharacteristics / Cases Khan AcademyMaturity Production (Advanced)Country USAFunding Donation from Ann Doerr, large grants from Google ($2 million) and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation ($1.5 million).Stakeholder The Khan Academy is a not-for-profit with the goal of changing education for the better by providing a free world- class education to anyone anywhere. All of the sites resources are available to anyone. It doesnt matter if you are a student, teacher, home-schooler, principal, adult.Formal / Non-formal Topic based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Combined approach of traditional and open learning. Traditional education, notably teachers, can make use of theCombined approach (e.g. system and have unprecedented visibility into what their students are learning and doing on the Khan Academy.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Over 2700 10-20 minute long videos on a huge number of K-16 subjects. Most videos are made by the founder Salman Khan, but some come from other sources (1).Localizations / Yes, e.g. translation to other languages.Versioning Plan to allow teachers around the globe to use the Knowledge Map to build their own courses and also have access to the in-depth analytic tools Khan Academy is providing at the back-end, but the content must be put up to Khan Academy’s non-commercial public domain (10).Modularity YesBundling of education Unbundled, since only some component parts are offered (e.g. Full courses or programmes are not supported).package 35
  • 39. Institutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers Yes, sort of including guidance to the teacher through real-time metrics and reporting on student performance.ProgrammeTechnology Open Source licensed LMS system.Licenses (Content & Open licenses.technologies)Pedagogy Individualizing learning by replacing one-size-fits-all lectures with self-paced learning. Taking a mastery-based approach to learning critical knowledge and skills. Creating collaborative learning environments with students solving problems together and tutoring one another. Using focused coaching by the teacher to address students individual needs.Learning, Tutoring, Student can access a number of tools that help to visualize progress and the growing knowledge map. Similarly,Support and teachers who use Khan material can get class statistics (1). Support is available e.g. via Q&A forums, custom self-Communities paced learning tools, or a custom profile, points, and badges to measure progress.(Re-)Use/Integration of No(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Noreal life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Noand outcomes 36
  • 40. Track of learning Yes, via portfolio system.pathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Automated tests for open learning. Teachers can access all of their students data to support their assessments by summary of class performance as a whole or diving into a particular students profile.Degrees / Credentialing / Badges and points for open learning.RecognitionQuality Assurance Responsibility of KA.Service Concepts & Donations and grantsBusiness ModelsOther Teachers and coaches can access all of their students data. You can get a summary of class performance as a whole or dive into a particular students profile to figure out exactly which topics are problematic. The class profile lets coaches glance at their dashboard and quickly figure out how to best spend their time teaching. Khan Academy empowers teachers by giving them access to the data they shouldve had for years.URLs http://www.khanacademy.org 37
  • 41. 6.11 Case 11: UoP (University of the People)Characteristics / Cases UoP (University of the People)Maturity Production (Advanced)Country USAFunding $1 million seed funding through founder.Stakeholder University of the People (UoPeople) is the world’s tuition-free, non-profit, online academic institution dedicated to opening access to higher education globally. Based on the principles of e-learning and peer-to-peer learning, coupled with open-source technology and Open Educational Resources, UoPeople is designed to provide access to undergraduate degree programs for qualified individuals, despite financial, geographic or societal constraints. UoPeople has partnered with Yale University for research, New York University to accept students and Hewlett- Packard for internships.Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, HEI university-level education.Combined approach (e.g.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Basic course material is assembled from open educational materials, some from the Open Courseware Consortium (1). Course designers who modify and enhance the materials. An in house group develops assessment standards for the degrees (1).Localizations / NoVersioningModularity Information not available.Bundling of education Bundledpackage 38
  • 42. Institutional attachment Attached to single institution, though partnership developments under preparation (e.g. NYU, US).Training of Trainers Apparently for volunteering academics.ProgrammeTechnology Online learning platform (access to registered students only).Licenses (Content & Uncleartechnologies)Pedagogy To look at a course one apparently needs to matriculate in order to do so (1). Peer to peer learning is considered core to the approach, so students in a course are divided into groups of 20-30 that work together online on weekly assignments. Each group has an instructor who facilitates the peer to peer process by e.g. assuring that it is working towards correct outcomes, and suggesting other sources of information as needed (1).Learning, Tutoring, UoPeople operates on a limited budget without sacrificing the quality of education by employing collaborative andSupport and open-source e-learning. UoPeople embraces peer-to-peer and collaborative learning to provide university-levelCommunities programs to a global student body. Within the online study communities, students share resources, exchange ideas, discuss weekly topics, submit assignments and take exams.(Re-)Use/Integration of Unclear(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Partnered with Hewlett-Packard for internships.real life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Unclearand outcomes 39
  • 43. Track of learning Unclearpathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Personalized assessment.Degrees / Credentialing / Students who successfully complete the degree requirements are awarded a bachelors degree by the University ofRecognition the People. The University is not accredited, but the website says that it is seeking accreditation at this time (1).Quality Assurance Responsibility of UoP and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms.Service Concepts & UoPeople offers tuition-free education, and presently charges only a nominal Application Processing Fee ofBusiness Models between $10-$50 that is adjusted on sliding scale based on the economic situation in each applicant’s country or place of residence. In the future, UoPeople plans to implement Exam Processing Fees of between $10-$100 that will operate on the same sliding scaled as the Application Processing Fee.OtherURLs http://www.uopeople.org/ 40
  • 44. 6.12 Case 12: FTA (Free Technology Academy)Characteristics / Cases FTA (Free Technology Academy)Maturity Production (Advanced)Country EuropeFunding Grant (EU, EACEA); Revenues; DonationsStakeholder The Free Technology Academy is hosted by the Free Knowledge Institute (FKI). The founding partners are the FKI and two European universities: the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Spain) and the Open Universiteit of the Netherlands. The Associate Partner Network adds to the founding base with a widespread network of organisations that share a common interest in offering courses in the area of Free Technology.Formal / Non-formal Formal traditional course based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel, HEI university-level education with the option of transferring to full degree programmes of participatingCombined approach (e.g. HEIs.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials The educational programme of the Free Technology Academy is a collaborative production and exploitation process based on open licensed course materials.Localizations / NoVersioningModularity YesBundling of education BundledpackageInstitutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers YesProgramme 41
  • 45. Technology The software used in the FTA virtual campus is Free Software and is built upon an Open Standards framework.Licenses (Content & Open licenses.technologies)Pedagogy Online versions of university level courses. A course methodology based on group debates, individual and group assignments and peer and tutor feedback.Learning, Tutoring, Online tutored sessions organized by the course team from participating education institutions, peerSupport and learning/supportCommunities(Re-)Use/Integration of No(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Noreal life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Partially, via transfer of credits to participating HEIs.and outcomesTrack of learning Nopathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment Tutor based assessmentDegrees / Credentialing / Certificate that is recognized by participating HEIs.RecognitionQuality Assurance Responsibility of participating education institutions and based on their respective quality assurance mechanisms. 42
  • 46. Service Concepts & Learners interested in a certain topic form a group of peers willing to take part in a self-organised course andBusiness Models commit to contribute an agreed tuition fee to cover the courses costs. Discounts can be obtained by the group when reaching a certain number of participants.OtherURLs http://ftacademy.org/ 43
  • 47. 6.13 Case 13: P2PU (Peer to Peer University)Characteristics / Cases P2PU (Peer to Peer University)Maturity Production (Advanced)Country USA (Global)Funding Grants from various donorsStakeholder Volunteers from different backgrounds, incl. HEI educators. At P2PU, people work together to learn a particular topic by completing tasks, assessing individual and group work, and providing constructive feedback. The Peer 2 Peer University is a grassroots open education project that organizes learning outside of institutional walls and gives learners recognition for their achievements. P2PU creates a model for lifelong learning alongside traditional formal higher education. Leveraging the internet and educational materials openly available online, P2PU enables high-quality low-cost education opportunities.Formal / Non-formal Non-formal, topic based education approach.education approachTraditional, Parallel or Parallel. p2pu as an institution equivalent that provides a space for asynchronous discussions with other studentsCombined approach (e.g. (2). One course, one environment, potentially many provider.one course manyprovider / manyprovision modes)Education materials Courseware from leading universities and other open-education material found on the Internet. Volunteers, who are expected to have some background in the subjects, submit ideas for courses, create syllabi of open courseware, and organize group study (2).Localizations / NoVersioningModularity Yes, topic focus.Bundling of education Relatively seen unbundled since a variety of providers offer different components of the education package.package 44
  • 48. Institutional attachment Detached from single institution.Training of Trainers Not dedicated, but number of guidance available to providers/volunteers.ProgrammeTechnology Online learning environment by thematic area.Licenses (Content & Open licenses.technologies)Pedagogy Varies by offer.Learning, Tutoring, Volunteer teachers guide students working in groups through open courseware (2).Support andCommunities(Re-)Use/Integration of Varies by offer.(A) learning outcomes(assignments, tests, etc.)and/or (B) internshipreportsUse/Integration of (A) Varies by offer.real life learningenvironments and/or (B)internshipsPortability of learning Potentially via Mozilla Open Badges Backpack.and outcomesTrack of learning Potentially via Mozilla Open Badges Backpack.pathways within internaland external learningenvironmentsAssessment The communities work on tasks, then assess individual and group work, and provide feedback.p2pu awards badges for achievement as part of the Open Badges project (1). 45
  • 49. Degrees / Credentialing / Open Badges Project to recognize skills, achievement, and learning beyond the classroom, issued by organizations,Recognition courses and communities (1).Quality Assurance Responsibility of participants.Service Concepts & Donations and grantsBusiness ModelsOtherURLs http://p2pu.org 46
  • 50. 7 ReflectionsThe foregoing sections provided a comparative overview of the OE concepts that have beendeveloped and partially also tested within the openED project against other currentlyemerging OE cases from across the globe. This comparative overview is providing a numberof insights with regards to the maturity and state of the art of OE itself and also on possibleavenues towards allowing for the sustainability of OE and as following reflected on.7.1 Cost per student by OE component partComponent parts of the traditional formal education package that have been identifiedalongside the openED project included ‘Open Content’, ‘Open Degrees’, ‘Open Assessment’,‘Open Learning’, ‘Open Tutoring’, ‘Open Technology’, and ‘Open Communities’. The costper student for each of such component parts, within an OE setting is seen to vary and asdepicted within Figure 2. Figure 1 Cost per student by OE component part; variable, fixed and cost neutralLearning in general is a self-directed action and therefore understood as being cost neutralfrom an education institution perspective. Equally ‘Open Learning’ might be considered asbeing cost neutral, since no institutional resources are consumed by learning as such. The costof developing and maintaining ‘Open Content’ and ‘Open Technology’ might be overallconsidered as being fixed costs and therefore such cost potentially significantly decrease on aper learner base as larger as the student population becomes. ‘Open Communities’ alone, and 47
  • 51. analogue to the ‘Open Learning’ case, might be at first considered as being cost neutral.However, within an OE setting ‘Open Communities’ likely would require some type of virtualenvironment to be in place and at which such a community could be established. Thus ‘OpenCommunities’ might come along with a fixed cost component, as is the case for ‘OpenContent’ and ‘Open Technology’. In addition to this ‘Open Communities’ might come alongwith a variable cost component since communities typically require for some type ofcommunity support staff and the demand for such staff will be in some way proportional tothe community size. As the Open Source Software case shows nonetheless, the need forformally employed support staff might be reduced to some degree through the involvement ofnon-paid volunteers and through peer support. ‘Open Tutoring’, and analogue to traditionaltutoring, can be overall considered as being a variable cost component, though the cost of‘Open Tutoring’ per learner like decreases with the number of learners since much of thesupport that tutors within an OE setting provide could be preserved and thus remains to beavailable to other learners. Finally, ‘Open Assessment’ and ‘Open Degrees’ are believed toconstitute rather variable cost positions and that do not decrease significantly per learner andare therefore cost that are independent from the number of learners involved. In line with this,assessment and certifications against fees has been considered as a sustainability model bysome of the cases presented in section 6. It remains to be seen however if such services aloneare sufficient to cover all of the cost positions that are depicted within Figure 2.7.2 Extension of regular course offerings (combined) vs OE as a parallel undertakingThe cases of MITx / EdX, Stanford Coursera, Stanford Udacity, Saylor Foundation, OERu,ict@innovation, UoP, Free Technology Academy and P2PU presented within section 6 are allexamples for OE as a parallel undertaking. This is to say that those OE cases are not carriedout as an extension of the traditional formal education system of the respective educationinstitution, but that they constitute a parallel effort that is partly or largely disconnected fromthe institutions traditional formal education system. In comparison to this, there are a numberof Open Courses (Meiszner 2010, 2011) that show how OE can be integrated into thetraditional formal education system and at which OE is thus only an extension of it, but not aparallel effort that the institution undertakes. Integrating OE as an extension into thetraditional formal education system however is also impacting the cost involved, since thetraditional formal education element can be funded by traditional means and therefore lowersthe cost for the OE extension. In addition to this the OE element potentially provides a higher 48
  • 52. value for money and in particular to the traditional formal learner population (Meiszner2010). OE as a parallel undertaking on the other hand has a very different starting point, sincevery likely no traditional formal education element has been in place that could be extendedand re-used, or where cost could be shared across the traditional formal and the OE elements.As a result of this the initially required resources and efforts are likely higher for OE as aparallel undertaking then it would be the case once integrating OE as an extension into thetraditional formal education system. This assumption of higher initial cost is also supportedby the above cited OE cases from section 6, which all feature a significant amount of initialinvestment, which has not been observed in the case of Open Courses (Meiszner 2010).7.3 Currently existing OE business models & service conceptsThe 2011 survey that has been carried out by ELIG across the breadth of the learning industry(ELIG, 2011) has shown that there are clear indications that the commercial learning industryhas not yet fully engaged with Open Education (OE). The commercial hesitation to adopt OEis in large part due to a perceived lack of associated new business models.The cases presented in section 6 do however show that this perceived lack of associated newbusiness models is not a real lack and that OE business models and service concepts alreadyexist or that they are currently under development though still not covering the full potentialvalue chain as introduced at section 4. OE business models and service concepts that can beseen at section 6 are: MITx/EdX and UoP intend to provide, respectively provide already,assessment and certification services against fees, Stanford Coursera is considering to offerpremium services, Udacity considers a headhunting success fee to be paid by employers,analogue to the openED case the OERu is considering to provide a variety of services tolearners and that in the OERu case are provided by partnering HEIs against fee, FTA is usinga tuition fee based business model, and UNUOpen considers the full range of services to beprovided as well to learners as to education providers.Though all of such concepts are still at the very or relative early stage, they all provide aninsight on possible business models and service concepts that might be adopted to allow forthe sustainability of OE.As a concluding note it might be highlighted that none of such cases presented within section6 indicates that up to now the respective national education systems does support OE in thesame way as it support its traditional formal education counterpart. This is an important 49
  • 53. observation in so far as in many countries education is largely public funded and thusconstitutes a part or the entirety of the business and sustainability model of national educationinstitutions. If OE would be equally considered by national education systems then this againmight change the type of business models and lower the burden for OE to become sustainable. 50
  • 54. Annex - List of section 6 secondary sourcesSecondary sources used in section 7: 1 http://www.changinghighereducation.com 2 http://chronicle.com/article/Open-Access-Courses-How- They/131677/?sid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en 3 http://www.slideshare.net/andreasmeiszner/peps-portable-education-portfolios- outline-use-case 4 http://www.slideshare.net/andreasmeiszner/oe-systems-andlearninganalytics 5 http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/01/24/stanford-open-course-instructors- spin-profit-company 6 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/technology/coursera-plans-to-announce- university-partners-for-online-classes.html?_r=1 7 http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidstavens 8 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303299604577326302609615094.ht ml 9 http://venturebeat.com/2012/04/18/coursera-raises-16m/ 10 http://bigthink.com/ideas/41180?page=all 51
  • 55. ReferencesCNET, (2007), ‘The next big growth market: education’, CNET News Service, MichaelKanellos, 11 May 2007, viewed 25 May 2012, <http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9718610-7.html>.ELIG, (2011), ‘Open Education: a wake up-call for the learning industry? Is open educationfundamental to a sustainable learning industry or a noble but commercially flawed cause?’,White Paper 2011, ELIG - the European Learning Industry Group.ESU, (nd), ‘Gats and Education’, The European Students’ Unions, viewed viewed 25 May2012, <http://www.esib.org/index.php/issues/Commodification/88-gats-and-education.html>.Meiszner, A. (2011), ‘The Why and How of Open Education - With lessons from the openSEand openED Projects’, United Nations University, UNU-MERIT, The NetherlandsMeiszner, Andreas (2010), “The Emergence of Free / Open Courses - Lessons from the OpenSource Movement”, submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Centre for Research inEducation and Educational Technology, Institute of Educational Technology, The OpenUniversity, UKUNESCO. (2005). ‘Towards knowledge societies: UNESCO world report’. Paris: UNESCOPublishingWeller J.M. and Meiszner A. (2008) ‘Report on the effectiveness of a FLOSS-like learningcommunity in formal educational settings’, FLOSSCom Project, 2008. 52