1. Erika
H
e
i
T
d
a
Future Forecast
i
r
a
A
Research Team One
l
m
a
Karina Bryce
Ashley
Visionary Education Delivery
2. A new model for higher education
Traditional Visionary
One-Way Knowledge
Interactive
Delivery
Exchange of Ideas
Set Curriculum
Learning Facilitator
Professor
Virtual Classroom
Assigned Classroom
Visionary
Traditional Education Structured Hours Anytime Learning
Education Delivery
Delivery Model
Model
Learn how to
Customer learn/ Life long
Student Task based Learning
learning
4. Assertion
Visionary Education Delivery is the innovative creation of an effective mode
of live –time communication essential for an engaged meaningful learning
experience. Delivering quality instruction using interactive online
communities will enhance the student higher education experience.
From this To this
5. Why is visionary education delivery
needed?
Assumptions
• Institutions of higher education are moving toward a brick and
click model
• Online learning is popular, convenient, and cost effective
• Online learning is undervalued
• Online learning lacks face –to –face interaction
• Learners thrive in communities wherein they feel supported
and validated
6. Transitioning from a “brick and
mortar” to a “brick and click” model
Currently there are three types of universities and colleges: ―brick‖ institutions,
―click‖ institutions (primarily ‗for-profits‘) and lastly, ―brick and click‖
academies
Traditional ―brick‖ institutions are transforming
• Develop quickly – University of Phoenix
• Develop slowly and methodically – University of North Carolina Online
External forces responsible for transformation
• Economy - Recession
• Technological Advances
• Increased popularity in modality
• Accessibility and Affordability
• Life-long Learning
7. Are we ready?
• Increased emphasis on learner-centered
• Student/Enrollment trends are shifting
• Non-traditional faculty
• Higher Education landscape is changing
• Use of technology devices
• Local learning is disappearing
8. Online learning is
Convenient for students and faculty
• Staff find online learning full of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards
(Parker)
• Professors notice an increase in participation from all students
(Bhanoo, 2009)
• Sense of community for students and higher level of student
achievement (Droste & Droste , 2004)
• Education has now become feasible for many students because
of online learning (Li & Irby, 2008)
9. Recent economic times have increased
demand for online learning
Students Point of View
• Online learning is in demand for students wanting to
maintain in the competitive edge while learning at
their own time and own pace. (Garcia, 2009)
• Unemployment has increased the demand of online learning (Allen &
Soaman, 2009)
Institutions Point of View
• Availability of more courses online is focus of higher education institutions
(Allen & Soaman, 2009)
• Budget cuts threaten the traditional classroom setting (Parker)
With the recent increased demand and popularity in
online learning higher education practitioners should
focus on providing quality instruction for this trend that is
here to stay.
10. Online learning is undervalued
Do biases exist in regards to online
education?
Which fictional applicant was preferred
among managers, one with a traditional
degree or one with an online degree?
96%
4%
Traditional Online
11. Why biases exist
• Lack of interaction with
instructors and peers Both reasons for biases
diminish with a system
• No spontaneous for online learning that
debate incorporates real-time
discussion and
• Lack of knowledge interaction.
12. Online learning lacks face-to-face
interaction
• Students value interaction.
• Students are fearful to take online courses in the future due to
a lack of interaction.
• Much care should be given to course development.
Berge & Muilenburg Study
• ―The highest mean barrier rating (M = 3.66) found in the study
was for the social interaction barrier when considering the
likelihood of voluntarily taking a future online course.
Clearly, overcoming the lack of social interaction in online
courses is a major contributor to the decision to continue with
online learning‖
13. Successful online learning provides the
ability to interface
• Students and faculty do not believe in the effectiveness of
online learning*.
• Immediacy of interaction is valued.
• Paying students feel they deserve attention (Taylor).
*Ekhaml & Roblyer
quot;Studies reveal deep doubts among students and faculty that
distance learning ever can have the degree of interaction in a
non-distance environment‖
14. Validation in Online Learning
Laura Rendon ‘s Validation Theory concludes
• Validation of the student experience fosters academic success
• Learning is an interactive group process
• Students who experience validation in their higher education
career feel
– Increased Self Worth
– Value and Acceptance
– Capable of Learning
15. Validation in Online Learning
• Richardson and Swan‘s 2003 study of Social Presence in
Online education purports
– Faculty‘s behavior has an impact on student‘s satisfaction,
motivation, and learning
– Students perception of social presence in online learning
contributed to students overall learning, and instructor
satisfaction
– A ―better‖ model of online higher education ―should not
only present the information but should also incorporate the
social aspects of learning in the design and instruction‖
16. Visionary Education Delivery
• “Once students have experienced effective
and innovative distance learning courses, it
will be difficult to satisfy them with traditional
lecture courses” (Armstrong, 2000)
• Integrating different communication methods
will allow for classes to be interactive without
being in a brick and mortar institution.
(IM, video chat, phone conferences, etc.)
17. References
• About online degrees.org (n.d.). Why do employers view an online degree as worth less than a traditional degree? Retrieved April 25,
2009, from http://www.aboutonlinedegrees.org/professionalism/traditional_onlinedegree.php
• Allen, I.E, Soaman, J (2008). Staying the course, online education in the united states.
The Sloan Consortium. Babson Survey Research Group 1-28
• Bhanoo, S. (2009). Colleges go online to cut costs in tight budgets. Retrieved April 28,
2009. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/159570/colleges_go_online_to_cut_costs_in_tight_budgets.html
• Beaudoin, M. F. (2003). Distance Education leadership for the new century. Online Journal of Distance Learning
Administration (6)2. Retrieved April 21, 2009: http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/summer62/beaudoin62.html
• Berg, G. Csikszentmhalyi, M. & Nakamura, J. (2003) Mission Possible? Enabling Good Work in Higher Education. Change Magazine.
Sept./Oct. 2003. American Association of Higher Education.
• Berge, Z., &Muilenburg, L. (2005). Student Barriers to Online Learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education, 26, 1, pp.
29-48. Obtained from http://www.emoderators.com/barriers/stbarr_final_may05.pdf
• Carnevale, Dan (2007). Employers often distrust online degrees. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(18). Retrieved April
25, 2009, from http://chronicle.com/free/v53/i18/18a02801.htm
• Chick, S., Day, R., Hook, R., Owston, R., Warkentin, J., Cooper, P. M., Hahn, J., and Saundercook, J. (2002). Technology and
student success in higher education: A research study on faculty perceptions of technology and student success. McGraw-Hill
Ryerson Limited: Toronto, Ontario.
18. References Continued
• Crow, M. M. (2007). Higher Education in Global Context. Newsweek International. Retrieved
March 27, 2009 from www.myasu.edu.
• Droste, B. Droste, A (2004). A virtual reality. Independent school. 63 (4), 56-62
• Ekhaml, L., &Roblyer, M.D. (2000). How Interactive are YOUR Distance Courses? A Rubric for Assessing Interaction in
Distance Learning. Obtained from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/roblyer32.htm
• Gallagher, R. (2003) The next 20 years: How is online distance learning likely to evolve? 2003 UCEA 88th Annual
Conference: March 28-30, 2003—Chicago, Illinois.
• Garcia, N (2009) Economy leads to increased demand for online learning. Retrieved on
April 28, 2009 http://www.9news.com/includes/tools/print.aspx?storyid=108933
• Kerka, S. (1996). Distance Learning, the Internet, and the World Wide Web. ERIC Digest.
• Neil, J. (2005). John Dewey: Philosophy of education. Wilderdom. Com. Retrieved April 19, 2009, from
http://wilderdom.com/experiential/JohnDeweyPhilosophyEducation.html
19. References Continued
• Li, C. Irby, C. (2008) An overview of online education: attractiveness, benefits,
challenges, concerns and recommendations. College Student Journal. Retrived April 28, 2009
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCR/is_2_42/ai_n25454154/?tag=content;col1
• Lifelong Learning Trends: A Profile of Continuing Higher Education. 7th Edition. (2002, April) University Continuing
Education Association.
• Rendon, L.I. (1994). Validating Culturally Diverse Students: Toward a New Model
of Learning and Student Development. Innovative Higher Education Vol. 19, No. 1, 33-51.
• Richardson, S., Swan, K., (2003). Examining Social Presence in Online Sources in Relation to Students‘ Perceived Learning
and Satisfaction. Journal for Asynchronous Learning Networks. Volume 7. Issue 1. February 2003.
• Taylor, R. (2002). Pros and Cons of Online Learning - A Faculty Perspective. Journal of European Industrial Training; 2002;
26,1; ABI/INFORM Global.
• Winsboro, I.D.S. (2002) Technology and distance learning lessons from the nation‘s newest university: Perceptions and
Reality. The Educational Forum. 66(3): 247-252.
