New pedagogies; New technologies: Disruptive Threats to open Universities


Published on

Keynote presentation at Asian Assoc. of Open Universities 2012 in Chiba Japan

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The danger of course is that students will abandon the full-service offering and be attracted to the discount service, thus reducing even further the demand for, and profitability and sustainability of the mainstream service. However, in other sectors the activity of low cost providers has served to induce innovation but rarely to kill off mainstream providers (for example the banking sector in many countries).
  • The danger of course is that students will abandon the full-service offering and be attracted to the discount service, thus reducing even further the demand for, and profitability and sustainability of the mainstream service. However, in other sectors the activity of low cost providers has served to induce innovation but rarely to kill off mainstream providers (for example the banking sector in many countries).
  • complementary and sometimes integrated services. These include content development, and related instructional design services, student support services, distribution and sale of learning resources, provision of library services, support for full time research faculty and graduate students, direct instruction, tutorial support, registration services and sometimes social services such as networking opportunities or face-to-face social services
  • New pedagogies; New technologies: Disruptive Threats to open Universities

    1. 1. New pedagogies; New technologies: Threat or Opportunity For Open Universities?Prof. Terry Anderson Athabasca University Canada
    2. 2. • Why have Open Universities succeeded in the past?? – Lower costs? – Higher quality? – Easier access? – More effective use of new technologies (even postal mail!)?
    3. 3. • But, are Open Universities, a solution for the last century?? Photo courtesy of Alan Alaga
    4. 4. Theories of Disruptive Technologies• Disruptive technologies: – Lead to profound change in the business model, customer base or functionality of an existing organization• Sustaining technology – Increases efficiency or effectiveness of current product or process
    5. 5. Disruptive technologies• “are typically: – cheaper, – simpler, – smaller, and, – more convenient to use" Clay Christensen (1997) – access to new users (social justice?) • Classic examples are the micro computer, digital cameras or the innovations of the industrial model of distance education.
    6. 6. Principles of Open Universities• “Athabasca University, Canada’s Open University, is dedicated to the removal of barriers that restrict access to and success in university-level study and to increasing equality of educational opportunity for adult learners worldwide.” Athabasca Mission Statement
    7. 7. Open Principles for Open ResearchUniversities should provide open access (OA) to theirresearch output.Universities should not limit the freedom of faculty tosubmit their work to the journals of their choice.Universities …should continue to bear the costs of peerreview, in order to assure its survival, while recognizingthat the forms and venues of peer review are changing.SPARC Open Access Newsletter, April2008, by Peter Suber.
    8. 8. Principles of Open Scholarship• “open scholarship has a strong ideological basis rooted in an ethical pursuit for democratization, fundamental human rights, equality”• “open scholarship emphasizes the importance of digital participation for enhanced scholarly outcomes” - ACCESSS Veletsiano & Kimmons (2012) Assumptions and challenges of open scholarship. IRRODL 13(4)
    9. 9. Principles of Open Educational Resources• Efficiency• Openness – review, comments, revision• Access – to anyone, anywhere• Cost – FREE• Simplicity – modular, adaptable• Equality –access to all, to reduce multiple potential disadvantages
    10. 10. Principles of Open Market• Individual Rights• Limited government, spontaneous order• No entitlement, property rights• Speed to market• Responsiveness to consumer demand• Driven by potential for Profit
    11. 11. Values Checklist Context Access Equality Simplicity Speed Efficiency Values Social Total Justice Open 3 3 1 1 1 9University OA 3 1 3 3 2 12Research OER 3 3 3 2 3 14 content Private 2 1 3 3 3 12 Educ. Market Open 1 1 1 3 3 8 MarketDisruptive 3 2 3 3 3 14 tech. 1= neutral 2= minor concern 3= driving principle
    12. 12. Values Score Card Within Education Context Access Equality Simplicity Speed Efficiency Value Social s Total Justice Campus 1 2 1 1 1 6 University Open 3 3 1 1 2 10 University MOOCs 3 1 3 3 3 13 (CoursEra)People’s Univ. 3 3 3 2 2 13 MITx 3 3 3 3 2 14 Disruptive 3 2 3 3 3 14 Technology 1= neutral 2= minor concern 3= driving principle
    13. 13. How is your Institution Threatenedby New Disruptive Technologies??Image from
    14. 14. Four Potentially Disruptive Technologies• Open Educational Resources (OERs)• New pedagogies• Open research• Prior Learning Accreditation
    15. 15. 1. Open Educational Resourcesa ‘perfect storm’ of:• capacity• distribution• need
    16. 16. Types of OER• Learning objects, units, textbooks, scholarly articles• Multimedia objects (Videos,Flash etc.)• Courses, programs full curriculum• Open Source Tools
    17. 17. Millions of OERs are available Project Gutenberg
    18. 18. Is your institution a contributor or a consumer?
    19. 19. A learning resource doesn’t become an OER unless it is licensed
    20. 20. Canada’s first Open Access press!!
    21. 21. OER Disruptions• Can you really “de-culture” educational content? Is it necessary to do so?• How many subject matter experts do we really need?• Am I defined by the content I produce?• Is remixing and mashing easier and faster than creating anew?
    22. 22. NO FRILLS Universities• Volkswagen Fiat, Ryanair, Walmart, Easyjet Anderson & McGreal (in press)
    23. 23. NO FRILLS• banking, groceries, department stores, travel agencies, accommodations, mobile telephony, stock brokering e ly tiv e rela ptiv een isru sb hd ha u c i on m s cat fro du ne E u i es imm nolog te ch
    24. 24. No-Frills dangers for Open Universities• Students may abandon full-service• Discount service could replace it• May reduce sustainability of full-service
    25. 25. Howeverin other sectors, low cost providers induce innovation & do not kill off mainstream (eg. airlines, banking)
    26. 26. Open University Services• content development & instructional design• student support• distribution/sales• library services• research faculty & grads• direct instruction, tutors• registration services• social servicesCan we afford and do students need them all?
    27. 27. 2. New Pedagogies• Generations of Dist. Educ. Pedagogies 1. Cognitive Behaviourist 2. Constructivist 3. Connectivist
    28. 28. Behaviourist/Cognitive Pedagogy Is: • Logically coherent, existing independent of perspective or context • Capable of being transmitted • Assumes closed systems with discoverable relationships between inputs and outputs • Readily defined through learning objectives • Works best when produced using industrial models – scaleable • Substitutes student-content interaction for student-student and student-teacher interaction
    29. 29. Constructivist Knowledge• Created rather than transmitted• Confirmed and validated socially• Benefits from challenge and contradiction
    30. 30. Constructivist DE Pedagogy• Group Orientated• Membership and exclusion, closed• Not scalable• Classroom at a distance• Hierarchies of control• Focus on collaboration and shared purpose group 30
    31. 31. Connectivist Knowledge• Is created by linking to appropriate people and objects• May be created and stored in non human devices• Is as much about capacity as current competence• Assumes the ubiquitous Internet
    32. 32. Connectivist DE Pedgaogy 2004• Helps learners create and sustain new networks• Focuses on creation and building of network artifacts• Stresses exposure, filtering, referral and re-purposing• Is scalable• Is international George Siemens,
    33. 33. Disruptions of Connectivism• Demands net proficiency of students and teachers• Openness is scary• New roles for teachers and students• As yet, only emergent business models
    34. 34. Is your Open University exploiting both the old and the New Pedagogies?
    35. 35. 3. Open Research
    36. 36. Free subscriptions at
    37. 37. Open research - Self-Archiving in Institutional Repositories• Public duty to disseminate information• Increases personal and intuitional web presence• Visible indicator of Open University contribution “The results reveal, however, that there is still a great need for promotion in order to create more awareness. If Malaysian universities want institutional repositories to be successful, then authors need to be educated on the importance of self archiving articles into institutional repositories” Singeh, Abrizah & Karim (2012) What inhibits authors to self-archive in Open Access repositories?
    38. 38. How Can Open Universities Succeed and make a Difference (values) ??• Strategic Research Focus • Scholarship of Teaching • Ed Tech R & D • E-learning spinoffs• Open Data/ Open Research• Open Access to Results – Does your University demand public archiving?
    39. 39. 4. Alternative Credentialing
    40. 40. • From measuring time to measuring learning.• Competency rather than credit based• Measuring the learning, not the source of that learning• Decoupling assessment from teaching
    41. 41. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)Coursera Hits 1MillionStudents, WithUdacity CloseBehind(Chronicle ofHigher EducationAug. 2012)
    42. 42. • Is your Institution ready to Credential learning from other sources – even MOOCs?? Open Courses From America Find Eager Audiences in China Chronicle of Higher Education Oct. 3, 2012 Colorado State Becomes the First American University to Accept MOOCs for Credit
    43. 43. MOOCsedX’s course Circuits & Electronics: 155,000 students registered 23,000 earned a single point on the first problem set, 9,300 passed the midterm. 8,200 students took the final. 7,000 earned a passing grade and the option of receivingan informal certificate from edXfrom
    44. 44. Credentialingthrough Mozilla Open Badges
    45. 45. Open Educational Resource University - OERu
    46. 46. Prior LearningAssessment and Recognition
    47. 47. Values of Disruptive TechnologiesContext Access Equality Simplicity Speed Efficiency Total Social JusticeOERs 3 3 2 2 3 13New 3 2 2 3 2 12PedagogiesOpen 3 3 3 3 3 15ResearchAlternative 3 3 2 1 3 12CredentialingDisruptive 3 2 3 3 3 14Technology 1= neutral 2= minor concern 3= driving principle
    48. 48. • How can your university exploit and benefit from these four disruptions?
    49. 49. or Your comments and questions most welcomed! Terry Anderson Blog: