Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
ncseonline
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

ncseonline

3,572

Published on

Presentation explores the

Presentation explores the

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,572
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
55
Comments
0
Likes
1
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
  • There are two very powerful trends in higher education that are converging—the commercialization of OpenCourseWare (OCW) and the strong national and international interest in lowering the cost of degree attainment. This presentation will trace the history and then detail the current events leading up to the converging of these two trends as symbolized by several recent announcements about the granting of credit for learning achieved primarily through OCW.
  • This presentation will also consider some emerging trends that will continue with increased vigor—the proliferation of high-quality open materials, the incorporation of open material in traditional degree offerings,including the "flipped classroom” concept, and the creation of sustained online learning communities.
  • UNESCO calculatesthat by 2015 just about 1 billion people who could benefit from higher education will not be able to get it. Serving these people is impossible with traditional campus-based higher education. The answer to this crisis is in online education as is indicated by a list of the universities (all using online education extensively) enrolling over 100,000.
  • Yet there is absolutely no way that the demand for education, to sustain social and economic growth and to address our many problems, can be satisfied by traditional higher education.
  • The demands for workforce education cannot be met by traditional degree programs. Degree education is not affordable by world economies and is often not the appropriate format for many learning objectives.
  • U.S. students today graduate with an average student debt of about $26,000, but this average masks the scope of the problem for individuals. Debt for a bachelor’s degree can range has high as $50,000 +. For graduates starting out in a tough job market with an obligation to make monthly payments is discouraging to say the least and weighs on the public psychology. This burden is virtually inescapable—such debts, which are usually guaranteed by the federal government cannot be relieved by bankruptcy proceedings and are subject to the same collection methods as those who owe delinquent taxes.  Total student debt in the U.S. now topped $1 trillion in 2012. When compared to the total consumer debt in the U.S. of $11 trillion, which has been falling in recent years, student debt threatens the very economic health of the nation just as mortgage debt did a few years ago.
  • The purpose of this presentation is to make and document the point that this is no longer a vision, but now a prediction. This prediction presents serious threats to traditional higher education, and, in fact, gives us a window into what has been called “post-traditional” higher education. Institutions now have a responsibility to help our institutions recognize the opportunities and threats that this “imperative” holds for their futures.
  • Commoditization pushes the traditional “value proposition” of an industry to the periphery of the good or service. The consequences of the commodification of education are more clearly seen if we observe what happened in the content and communication industries. Providers of content (publishers, encyclopedias) gave way to organizations which provided free content but charged or benefitted from peripheral services (Wikipedia, Google, iTunes and YouTube). Commodification of communications spawned the social network industry and web-based communication (Skype, Facebook, and Twitter). In education we’re seeing the creation of organizations and businesses designed to deliver free services associated with learning pathways (repositories of learning objects and supplemental instruction). Again, the OER/OCW movements are the result of and benefit from the long-term shift in education toward commodification.
  • The growing supply of OER has created a mass with a gravitational pull—this huge asset cannot be ignored any longer. It is too big and has so many high quality learning pathways available for free that traditional higher education institutions have to take notice and begin to use it to reduce the cost of higher education.
  • OER and OCW have been growing rapidly since the 1990s beginning with the creation of several open “learning object” repositories. The movement was spurred in 2001 by MIT with its goal to create an open version of all of its courses. MIT led other institutions into the movement and initiated the creation of the OpenCourseWare Consortium. Soon after, open “utilities” such as YouTube and iTunesU offered easy paths to the expression of open education through video capture and other new technology. And, again in a drive to reduce the cost of education, the open textbook movement was created.
  • OER and OCW have been growing rapidly since the 1990s beginning with the creation of several open “learning object” repositories. The movement was spurred in 2001 by MIT with its goal to create an open version of all of its courses. MIT led other institutions into the movement and initiated the creation of the OpenCourseWare Consortium. Soon after, open “utilities” such as YouTube and iTunesU offered easy paths to the expression of open education through video capture and other new technology. And, again in a drive to reduce the cost of education, the open textbook movement was created.
  • The rise of MOOCs has been astoundingly rapid and influential.
  • MOOCs was started with Stanford in July 2011. Within one year, many of the top universities in the country and theworld were offering MOOCs through one or more start-up entities, and millions of students had signed up for the free courses.
  • A Stanford course in AI offered by two Stanford professors started things. These courses caught the attention of venture capitalists hoping to find another Facebook.
  • Venture capital seeded a number of start-ups with Coursera, Udacity and edX among the leaders.  
  • Coursera is a social entrepreneurship company that partners with the top universities in the world to offer courses online for anyone to take, for free. Coursera envisions a future where the top universities are educating not only thousands of students, but millions. Its technology enables professors to teach tens or hundreds of thousands of students.
  • By mid September 2012, Coursera had agreements with 33 top universities from around the world, including 7 universities outside of the U.S.
  • The possible “monetization” schemes as listed in the Coursera contract with its university partners are listed here. Of these nine possibilities only the first two are in immediate prospect.
  • Not listed in the Coursera contract but clearly under consideration and in prospect are these possible ways of making money.
  • Slightly more than 1/2 of students state they selected their classes because they expect it to be enjoyable; nearly the same number also state the course they selected relates to their current or future career plans.
  • EdX is a not-for-profit enterprise of its founding partners Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology that features learning designed specifically for interactive study via the web. Based on a long history of collaboration and their shared educational missions, the founders are creating a new online-learning experience with online courses that reflect their disciplinary breadth. Along with offering online courses, the institutions will use edX to research how students learn and how technology can transform learning–both on-campus and worldwide. Anant Agarwal, former Director of MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, serves as the first president of edX. EdX's goals combine the desire to reach out to students of all ages, means, and nations, and to deliver these teachings from a faculty who reflect the diversity of its audience. EdX is based in Cambridge, Massachusetts and is governed by MIT and Harvard.Unlike the other start-up entities, edX has a plan by which the participating partners will offer learning assessments and the recognition of learning achievements with certificates from MITX, StanfordX, HarvardX and so on. The linking of these high level “brands” with learning assessments of a non-traditional kind is a major step toward the linking of open education with degree credit.
  • Udacity believes that university-level education can be both high quality and low cost. Using the economics of the Internet, we've connected some of the greatest teachers to hundreds of thousands of students in almost every country on Earth. Udacity was founded by three roboticists who believed much of the educational value of their university classes could be offered online for very low cost. A few weeks later, over 160,000 students in more than 190 countries enrolled in our first class, "Introduction to Artificial Intelligence." The class was twice profiled by the New York Times and also by other news media.
  • Like Coursera, Udacity sees certification as a path to “monetization.”
  • Just now becoming evident is the use of OCW by major institutions and organizations in the offering of low cost degrees. These three examples provide different models for the future of higher education in the U.S. (first) and the world.
  • Coursera and Antioch College have entered “into a contract to license several of the courses Courserahas built. Antioch University, would offer versions of the MOOCs for credit as part of a bachelor’s degree program. ”The deal represents one of the first instances of a third-party institution buying permission to incorporate a MOOC into its curriculum…..in an effort to lower the full cost of a degree for students.” Kolowich, Steve. “MOOCs for Credit,” Inside Higher Ed, October 29, 2012.
  • The linking of open education with transcripted academic credit took a major leap forward with the November 19, 2012 Coursera/ACEannouncementthat ACE was considering supplying learning assessments (tests) for students who had taken a free Coursera course and wanted degree credit for learning achievement. For the first time a national academic credit “bank” would accept credits toward degrees which could be accepted by any institution in the U.S. (and overseas).
  • Transcript

    • 1. Why MOOCs Are Good for Higher Education(And What MOOCs Will Make Your University Do) GARY W. MATKIN, PH.D., DEANCONTINUING EDUCATION, DISTANCE LEARNING AND SUMMER SESSION UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE NCSE ONLINE WEBINAR DECEMBER 20, 2012
    • 2. To Retrieve This Presentation Visit:s l i d e s h ar e . n e t / g a r y m a t k i n / n c s e o nl i n e
    • 3. Summary of Converging Themes1. The commercialization of OpenCourseWare2. The creation of low cost degrees
    • 4. Summary of Emerging Themes1. Improving teaching and learning through online delivery2. Concentration on assessments3. The proliferation of open materials4. The incorporation of open material in "regular" (or traditional) degrees5. The creation of viable and sustained learning communities
    • 5. Low Cost DegreesTHE WORLD-WIDE AND DESPERATE NEED FOR LOW-COST HIGHER EDUCATION
    • 6. By 2025, 98 million graduates ofsecondary education WILL NOT beable to attend college
    • 7. To serve these students, 4 largecampuses, serving 30,000 students,would have to be built EVERY WEEKfor the next 15 years
    • 8. The Cost of Degrees in the U.S. Tuition, Fees, and ENROLLMENT LivingPublic 2-year 10,550 7,285,000Public 4-Year $17,860 9,925,000Private 4-Year $39,518 3,822,000For Profit 4-Year $15,172 (Room and 2,426,000 Board not included) SOURCE: The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2012
    • 9. Inflation-Adjusted Published Tuition and Fees Relative to 1982-83, 1982-83 to 2012-13 (1982-83 =100) SOURCE: The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2012, Figure 5.
    • 10. The Personal Cost and Peril
    • 11. Imagine a World in Which everyone could learn anything anywhere anytime for free
    • 12. Commoditization Pushes the “Value Proposition” to the Periphery Content/Information Wikipedia Google iTunes YouTube Communication/Interaction (Web 2.0) Skype Facebook Twitter Learning Pathways Flat World Kahn OCWC Merlot Connexions Knowledge Academy
    • 13. The Growth and Development of Open Education Channels1. Early Repositories 3. Utilities  Merlot  YouTube  Connexions  iTunes  Subject-matter based 4. Open Textbooks2. OpenCourseWare  MIT  OCWC  UCI
    • 14. The Growth and Development of Open Education Channels Open Repositories  Merlot: 38,000 learning objects  Connexions: 17,000 learning objects, 2 million visits per month OpenCourseWare  MIT: 2,100 courses, 1 million visits per month  OCW Consortium: 25,000 courses, 250 + institutional members  UC Irvine OCW: 90 courses, 300 video lectures, 1,700 learning objects
    • 15. The Growth and Development of Open Education Channels Utilities  YouTube EDU: 700,000 video lectures  iTunes U: 500,000 video lectures Open Text Books
    • 16. MOOCs
    • 17. MOOCsSTANFORD STARTSTHE BALL ROLLING
    • 18. March 2011 Stanford’s Sebastian Thrun attends Ted talk by Salmon KahnJuly 2011 Thrun and Norwig announce the Stanford AI courseOctober 2011 New York Times front page article on the AI course enrollmentsDecember Udacity and MITx launched2011January 2012 Kohler and Ng of Stanford launch Coursera with $16 million in VC fundsMay 2012 MIT and Harvard announce edX with $60 million in start up fundingJuly 2012 Coursera has 16 universities and 100 coursesAugust 2012 Coursera hits 1 million studentsSeptember Coursera expands to 33 institutions offering 200 courses2012November Coursera announces its partnership with ACE2012
    • 19. The Response
    • 20.  Coursera was launched on April 18, 2012 Coursera has raised over $16 million in funding 33 University Partners, 1.7 million followers, 200 courses No solid business plan developed Uses cohort model Wants to present the “world‟s best courses” Admits only elite universities: “top 50”
    • 21. Coursera Partners Stanford University  University of Maryland, College Park University of Michigan  University of Melbourne University of Pennsylvania  University of Pittsburgh Princeton University  Vanderbilt University Berklee College of Music  Wesleyan University  California Institute of Technology Brown University  Duke University Columbia University  École Polytechnique Fédérale de Emory University Lausanne Hebrew University of Jerusalem  Georgia Institute of Technology The Hong Kong University of  Johns Hopkins University Science and Technology  Rice University Mount Sinai School of Medicine  University of California, San Francisco Ohio State University  University of Edinburgh The University of British  University of Illinois at Urbana- Columbia Champaign University of California, Irvine  University of Toronto University of Florida  University of Virginia University of London  University of Washington International Programmes
    • 22. How Does Coursera Plan to Make Money in the Future? Certifications Offering "Secure Assessments” Employee Recruiting Employee or University Screening Tutoring or Manual Grading Corporate/University Enterprise Model Sponsorships Selling Courses to Community Colleges Charging Tuition
    • 23. The Unstated Monetization Models Advertising Selling student data/personal information Selling ancillary materials
    • 24. I selected this course because it was developed by the University of… Im curious about what its like to take an online course This class relates to my current employment or careerI want to earn a credential to add to Slightly more than 1/2 of students my resume/CV state they selected their classes This subject is relevant to my because they expect it to be academic field of studyThis enjoyable; nearly the same number class relates to my future career plans also state the course they selected I think this course will be fun and relates to their current or future enjoyable career plans 0% 20% 40% 60%
    • 25.  Founded May 2012 Harvard and MIT are founding partners with $60 million in backing Currently offers HarvardX, MITx and BerkeleyX classes online for free Beginning in Summer 2013, edX will also offer UTx (University of Texas) classes online for free The UT System is making a $5 million investment in the edX platform More than 150,000 students from over 160 countries registered for Circuits and Electronics
    • 26. More About edX Certificates of completion will be issued by edX under the name of the underlying "X University" from where the course originated, i.e. HarvardX, MITx or BerkeleyX The certificates for courses completed in Fall 2012 will be free There are plans to charge a modest fee for certificates in the future
    • 27.  Launched April 2o12 800,000 students in 16 Open Courses Not a cohort model, Start Class at any Time, Self-Paced Courses Categorized by Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced Upon completing a course, students receive a certificate of completion indicating their level of achievement, signed by the instructors, at no cost. 50,000 certificates of completion issued as of October 2012 Not yet institutionally-sponsored
    • 28. The Udacity Model: Plans for Monetizing Plans to monetize its “students‟ skills” Udacity will help with job placement by selling student leads to recruiters Final exams are proctored for a fee Further plans for certification options would include a "secured online examination" as a less expensive alternative to the in-person proctored exams
    • 29. OCW, MOOCs, and the Universal Degree Excelsior and Saylor University of Washington and Coursera Antioch and Coursera ACE and Coursera
    • 30. The deal represents one of the first instances of a third-party institution buying permission to incorporate a MOOC into its curriculum — and awarding credit for the MOOC.
    • 31. Coursera and ACE Coursera‟s Partnership with ACE will allow the evaluation/assessment of learning and credit recommendations for about five of its courses Learners can receive an ACE transcript These credits can, at the discretion of the accepting institution, be accepted toward a degree Over 2,000 of the nation‟s some 4,600 colleges and universities already accept ACE-generated credits For the first time, a nationally recognized academic credit “bank” is available to students of OCW
    • 32. Predictions About Effects of MOOCs on Higher Education: The MACRO Level MOOCs will: 1. Help higher education institutions, especially the elite institutions, embrace online education in all its forms, including in classroom-based instruction 2. Rapidly advance the creation and use of open educational resources (OER) 3. Increase the use of transfer credits in the achieving of degrees 4. Help lower the cost of higher education
    • 33. Predictions About Effects of MOOCs on Higher Education: The MACRO Level MOOCs will: 5. Be an important factor in the use of new instructional technology by all institutions to improve teaching and learning 6. Promote peer to peer interactions and the learning associated with them and speed the development of viable online learning communities 7. Speed the value, legitimacy, and use of degree-alternative certifications in both personal and employment-related learning projects 8. Promote the use of competency-based assessments for degree and non-degree education
    • 34. Predictions About Effects of MOOCs on Higher Education: The MICRO Level MOOCs will: 1. Continue to proliferate as will the “channels” and the number of institutions engaged in them, to become a permanent feature of the higher education landscape 2. Content will be the most significant driver of MOOC enrollments (what do I want to know?) 3. Elite universities will engage in MOOCs for reputational and revenue generating reasons 4. Second and third tier institutions will engage in MOOCs to reduce costs
    • 35. Predictions About Effects of MOOCs on Higher Education: The MICRO Level MOOCs will: 5. The average enrollment size of MOOCs will decline as MOOCs proliferate 6. MOOC channels, and institutional contributors will specialize along subject matter lines 7. All LMS technologies will incorporate functions and utilities to serve MOOCs 8. MOOC technology, channels, and institutions will continue to add service features for the learner, some of which will be free and some of which will require the payment of a fee
    • 36. Predictions About Effects of MOOCs on Higher Education: The MICRO Level MOOCs will: 9. The „monetization” strategies of MOOC channels will soon become obvious and will feature learning assessment, advertising, data selling, and associated services (tutoring, the sale of supplemental learning materials, the tying of learning assessments to degrees and employment opportunities) 10. Universities will receive enough revenue to cause them to continue to supply content 11. All universities will become more flexible in accepting non- traditional learning assessments for transfer credit
    • 37. Elements for Successfully Implementing Online and Open Education on Your Campus1. Institutionalized Receptivity will:  Flexible staff willing to make changes  An inventory/history of open content  Technical infrastructure  People and skill sets  Institutional credibility  Administrative structure  Money to invest  OER and OCW National and International contacts  Technical capacity  Responsible resource allocation planning
    • 38. For More InformationCONTACT KATHY TAM AT KSTAM@UCI.EDU DOWNLOAD PRESENTATION AT: slideshare.net/garymatkin/ncseonline
    • 39. The Institutional Case for OCW1. Serve current students (supports teaching and learning)2. Attract new students3. Support faculty in both course authoring and delivery4. Facilitate accountability and aid continuous improvement5. Advance institutional recognition and reputation6. Support the public service role of institutions7. Disseminate the results of research and thereby attract research funding8. Serve as a repository for a wide range of digital assets9. Serve learning communities of all types10. Enhance international service and reputation11. Serves as a mechanism for fundraising

    ×