Faculty Coalition: Forget About Cost Savings with Online Programs — from CampusTechnology.com by Dian Schaffhauser

Excerpts:

Cost savings promised by the expansion of online education are tough to pinpoint, including those programs that promise to be free for students.

According to the Campaign, there are no guarantees that online courses save students money.

The Campaign declared the idea that MOOCs could lower the cost of college degrees a “pipe dream.”

But even as public institutions introduce their own online programs, they frequently charge students more for those courses, the report said.

 

From DSC:
(Dian, these thoughts are not aimed at you. Keep up the excellent work out there!)

The only way that online education costs as much as a face-to-face offering is if such a course/offering is ***highly*** sophisticated — that is, that it incorporates a ***significant*** amount of programing, educational gaming, deep analytics and sophisticated reporting, home-grown animations and/or simulations, etc.

Otherwise, there is no way in the world that an online course costs as much to produce and offer as a face-to-face course.  Consider two key things:

  1. Ask any Director of Physical Plant to lay out their annual budget and expenses ***just to keep their campus(es) up and running*** — let alone enhance them further — and you’ll quickly see what I mean!
  2. In many cases, the infrastructures already exist to serve the face-to-face students (i.e. systems like the CMS’s/LMS’s, Student Information Systems, etc.). So offering online courses only serves to increase the ROI for this infrastructure. (If one couldn’t use the existing systems, then I could see where there would be additional expenses; with that said, the bottom lines are still not the same.)

Many colleges and universities are using the increased demand for online courses to keep the prices up; they are not passing along the savings to the students. (BTW, for those who claim higher education isn’t a business, how do you explain this?  The argument that higher education isn’t a business holds no water at all; such viewpoints can no longer be taken seriously.)

By keeping the costs of online courses as high or higher than F2F courses, such colleges and universities are making a big mistake.  By doing so, they are only causing the existing bubble in higher education to expand even further.  It will pop.  In fact, with the increased use of incentives and lowering the tuition that’s actually being paid by the students (vs. the “list” price), one can’t help but wonder if the bubble hasn’t already popped at many colleges and universities.

We need to start passing along more of the savings to our students.  I can’t think of a good reason why everyuniversity and college in the U.S. should not offer a spectrum/variety of pricing structures.  If you want to take a face-to-face course, you will need to pay more for that course, as there are greater expenses involved in providing that type of learning environment.

Last thoughts:

  • While I think that MOOCs are half-baked, they continue to improve.
  • If MOOCs morph into something that uses technologies like IBM’s Watson, that will be a game-changer for sure.  We will still need SME’s, but the prices that can be offered will be drastically less.  See this recent posting for further thoughts on this perspective.

 

 

CenterForDigitalEducation-2013Yearbook

 

Description:

The Yearbook is a unique publication produced annually by the Center for Digital Education (CDE) that highlights some of the outstanding trends,

people and events over the past year in education technology. The first part of the Yearbook gives readers market awareness by outlining how much money schools spent on education technology, where the funding came from and what technologies have been garnering the most attention.

The second part features 40 education innovators who are using technology to inspire their students, improve learning and better the K-20 education system. We hope that this 2013 Yearbook issue provides inspiration to our readers to continue on their quests towards innovation in education.

 

From DSC:
My quote in the Center for Digital Education’s 2013 Yearbook reads:

 

“Educational technologists need to be bold, visionary and creative. They need to be in tune with the needs, missions and visions of their organizations. We have the opportunity — and responsibility — to make lasting and significant contributions within our fields and for the organizations that we work for.”

 

 

A new pedagogy is emerging..and online learning is a key contributing factor — from Contact North ; with thanks to Stephen Downes (@oldaily) for putting this on The MOOC Newsletter

Excerpt (emphasis DSC):

What is clear is that major changes in the way we teach post-secondary students are being triggered by online learning and the new technologies that increase flexibility in, and access to, post-secondary education.

What drives the development of this new pedagogy? Changes in society, student expectations, and technology are motivating innovative university and college professors and instructors to re-think pedagogy and teaching methods.

As professors and instructors become more familiar with digital technologies for teaching and learning, pedagogical challenges and strategies are emerging. The developments listed below have had an impact on how teaching is structured and how and where learning happens.

 

 

“Learning in the Living [Class] Room” — as explained by Daniel Christian [Campus Technology]

Learning from the Living [Class] Room  — from Campus Technology by Daniel Christian and Mary Grush; with a huge thanks also going out to Mr. Steven Niedzielski (@Marketing4pt0) and to Mr. Sam Beckett (@SamJohnBeck) for their assistance and some of the graphics used in making these videos.

From DSC:
These 4 short videos explain what I’m trying to relay with a vision I’m entitling, Learning from the Living [Class] Room.  I’ve been pulse checking a variety of areas for years now, and the pieces of this vision continue to come into fruition.  This is what I see Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) morphing into (though there may be other directions/offshoots that they go in as well).

After watching these videos, I think you will see why I think we must move to a teambased approach.

(It looks like the production folks for Campus Technology had to scale things way back in terms of video quality to insure an overall better performance for the digitally-based magazine.) 


To watch these videos in a higher resolution, please use these links:


  1. What do you mean by “the living [class] room”?
  2. Why consider this now?
  3. What are some examples of apps and tech for “the living [class] room”?
  4. What skill sets will be needed to make “the living [class] room” a reality?

 

 


Alternatively, these videos can be found at:


 

DanielSChristianLearningFromTheLivingClassRoom-CampusTechnologyNovember2013

.

 

 

Presentations: MOOC Research Initiative — from elearnspace.org by George Siemens

Excerpt:

This past week, in preparation for our upcoming MOOC research conference, I held two online presentations on a) MOOC Research Initiative (a review of literature, research themes) and b) Lessons MOOCs can learn from online education. Slides and recordings are below.

 

Citrix-Mobile-Education-10-31-13

 

 

Citrix-Mobile-Education-TOC-10-31-13

 

Description:

Education is at a tipping point. From the rising cost of a college education and the financial pressures upon local districts and state agencies to fund K-12 schools and programs, to the questions of how to employ mobile technologies and leverage social platforms to support the growing trend toward mobile, collaborative learning models, educators face an almost overwhelming set of challenges. While there are no easy answers to these and other issues, Citrix believes strongly that online learning technologies can help enhance and extend the teaching and learning process and provide greater, more wide-spread access to education to students. We are committed to developing and delivering learning solutions that will meet the evolving needs of teachers and students in this changing landscape. We hope that our sponsorship of this ebook and other projects will help you, the reader, gain a better understanding of the opportunities that online learning technologies provide, increase your mastery of these solutions, and enable you to put them to productive use. We look forward to working with you as we explore new and effective ways to help teachers teach and learners learn.

CaIlin Pitcher
Product Line Director, Collaboration, Citrix

 

Comments/disclosure from DSC:
I do not work for Citrix — I have been at Calvin College since
March 2007.  I was not paid to develop/contribute this piece.

I’d like to thank David Rogelberg for his work on this project.

 

 

 

U.S. teams up with operator of 0nline courses to plan a global network — from nytimes.com by Tamar Lewin

Excerpt (emphasis DSC):

Coursera, a California-based venture that has enrolled five million students in its free online courses, announced on Thursday a partnership with the United States government to create “learning hubs” around the world where students can go to get Internet access to free courses supplemented by weekly in-person class discussions with local teachers or facilitators.

The learning hubs represent a new stage in the evolution of “massive open online courses,” or MOOCs, and address two issues: the lack of reliable Internet access in some countries, and the growing conviction that students do better if they can discuss course materials, and meet at least occasionally with a teacher or facilitator.

“Our mission is education for everyone, and we’ve seen that when we can bring a community of learners together with a facilitator or teacher who can engage the students, it enhances the learning experience and increases the completion rate,” said Lila Ibrahim, the president of Coursera. “It will vary with the location and the organization we’re working with, but we want to bring in some teacher or facilitator who can be the glue for the class.”

 

From DSC:
Some thoughts here:

1)  When institutions of higher education cling to the status quo and disregard the disturbing trajectories at play*…when we don’t respond, people — and governments it seems — will find other options/alternatives.

* Such as middle class incomes that continue to decline
while the price of higher education continues to escalate

2)  I wonder if this type of setup might predominate in some countries.
i.e. blended learning types of setups in learning centers around the world where people can come in at any time to learn with a relevant Community of Practice, aided by faculty, teachers, trainers, coaches, etc.   Some of the content is “beamed in” and shared electronically, while some of the learning involves face-to-face discussions/work. Will schools become more community centers where we will pool resources and offer them to people 24×7?

Also see:

  • The New Innovator’s Dilemma — from huffingtonpost.com by Michael Moe and Ben Wallerstein; with thanks to Lisa Duty for the Tweet on this
    Excerpt (emphasis DSC):
    Increasingly, we’re worried that a generation of entrepreneurs is facing a “new innovators dilemma” — where innovation is stymied by regulatory and political environments focused on outdated needs and the wrong set of “customers.” The truth is, Silicon Valley investors and techies will get by just fine without addressing our big, societal problems. But if we encourage our nation’s top entrepreneurs to join search engines and social networks, we will miss the opportunity to apply their genius to solving society’s most pressing problems.

    This isn’t about the classic political divide of right versus left. This is about policies and regulations written in a different era that are not easily translated to modern technology. It’s no secret that the challenge stems, in part, from the motivations of regulators and the politics of protecting the status quo.

    Change is difficult. And no one is arguing that the transportation, hospitality, and higher education industries don’t need to be regulated. New approaches, in particular, warrant close scrutiny. But if we are ever going to experience the sort of revolutionary change that technology might afford to virtually every sector of the American economy, we need to be willing to rethink the traditional ways of regulation to make innovation easier and more responsive to the consumers and students these regulations were originally enacted to protect.

 

Addendum 11/1/13:

 

Beyond the course: Reducing higher education’s overall cost — from The National Center for Academic Transformation (NCAT)

Excerpt (emphasis DSC):

In the October 2012 issue of The Learning MarketSpace, NCAT announced that this newsletter would undergo a substantial change in its content and format to reflect NCAT’s new direction. NCAT is making a transition from a focus on conducting redesign programs and public events to concentrating on analysis and change strategies based on the data we have collected and the experiences we have had over the past 13 years. The following article came to fruition following a solicitation from the White House asking NCAT for ideas in addition to course redesign about how higher education productivity could be increased. Among the options: redesign the department, redesign the curriculum, redesign academic support and student services, and redesign the administration.

Sixteen years ago, I wrote, “A major problem that continues to confront higher education is that of rising costs. With the average cost of attendance consuming a substantial portion of the median family income, for many Americans what is at stake is nothing less than the continued viability of the American dream. The stakes are high for higher education as well. Caught in a closing vise between new demands for enrollment and declining rates of revenue growth, colleges and universities must figure out a way to do more with less.

Recognizing that tuition increases can no longer be used as a safety valve to avoid dealing with the underlying issues of why costs increase so much, campuses have begun the hard work of cost containment. But after sharpening priorities, sometimes making tough choices in light of those priorities, and asking everyone—administrators and faculty alike—to work harder, campuses are still groping for ways to wrestle costs under control.

At the same time, colleges and universities are discovering exciting new ways of using technology. For most institutions, however, new technologies represent a black hole of additional expense as students, parents, and faculty alike demand access to each new generation of equipment and software. Most campuses have bolted on new technologies to a fixed plant, a fixed faculty, and a fixed notion of classroom instruction. Under these circumstances, technology becomes part of the problem rather than part of the solution of cost containment. By and large, colleges and universities have not yet begun to grab hold of technology’s promise to reduce costs.

Containing costs—and making use of new technologies to help contain costs—requires a fundamental shift in thinking. It requires one to challenge the fundamental assumption of the current instructional model: that faculty members meeting with groups of students at regularly scheduled times and places is the only way to achieve effective student learning.”

These words are more true today than they were 16 years ago.

 

KeepingPace-K12BlendedOnlineLearning2013

 

Description:

Keeping Pace with K-12 Online Learning: An Annual Review of Policy and Practice (2013) is the 10th in a series of annual reports that began in 2004 that examine the status of K-12 online education across the country. The report provides an overview of the latest policies, practices, and trends affecting online learning programs across all 50 states.

Keeping Pace is researched and published as a service to the educational and governmental communities through the generous support of our sponsors. Distribution of the report and graphics for presentations are free.

 

2013BlendedSchoolsStatesUS

 

AUDIO | Looking to the newspaper industry to understand higher education’s transformation — from evoLLLution.com by Byron White | Vice President for University Engagement, Cleveland State University

Except (emphasis DSC):

One of the lessons I do think can be learned is really tailoring a focus to individual students … and moving more toward a reader-driven kind of format, where you really are having to pay attention to individuals who are coming, each one, and having to customize and personalize what they are looking for.

The other thing I think [is] a lesson to learn is to really be focused on the outcomes those individual users … are looking for. I don’t think the newspaper industry ever really redefined the kind of outcome or value newspapers were providing to readers, other than providing them with the news of the day. You know, the New York Times, “All the news that’s fit to print.” In reality, what we should have been shifting toward was helping people make sense and navigate their lives and their worlds. And I think we started talking that way, but we never really developed the evidence we were really helping people do that.

Higher education can learn from that. If we can move from providing students [with] knowledge, information, even a credential, to seeing ourselves as being in the business of developing people to have lifelong success … I think we’ll start to see the ways we provide that might be different than just the traditional ways of sharing knowledge.

That’s a lesson we can learn from what newspapers, I think, weren’t able to transition to.

3. The move to free online content significantly changed journalism, both in terms of the value readers put into written news and their expectations for accessibility and speed of reporting. What kind of an impact do you see the growth of online learning having on students’ expectations of higher education?

 
The attraction of online shopping — from evoLLLution.com by Shaul Kuper | Chief Executive Officer, Destiny Solution

Excerpt:

While there has been much debate on how to attract the dwindling numbers of high school students, there has been much less discussion focused on attracting adult students and corporate partners. To my mind, this is a more important issue. Corporations spend on average $485 billion a year on postsecondary training and development but, currently, little of this money goes to accredited higher education institutions. [2] Combine this market with the 9 million adults already enrolled in higher education and the 80 million potential adult enrollees, and you are left with a big opportunity. [3],[4]

If we are going to attract these students, we need to know more about them, more about how they think and more about how they shop. Here’s what I know:

 

Excerpt from A Direction for Online Courses from LinkedIn.com by Jose Ferreira, Founder at Knewton (emphasis DSC)

The Non-MOOC Landscape
The improvements — such as high quality textbooks, materials, and supporting services —needed to turn MOOCs from lectures into fully developed courses cost money. In response, some MOOC facilitators are beginning to offer non-MOOCs, sometimes called SPOCs — “small, private online courses.” Udacity partnered with Georgia Tech to offer a Masters in Computer Science priced around $7,000.

The program is neither “massive” nor “open.” It is, however, the future. Within a decade, virtually every large university in the United States, and many elsewhere as well, will offer online courses — for credit and for fee. These courses will be particularly useful to students who don’t already have access to comparable courses.

The for-profit universities have just a few years — until there is widespread market awareness that these not-for-profit degree programs exist — to improve and in some cases reinvent their operations.

It will be these high-production value, for-credit online courses that will play the central role in the ongoing educational revolution. It will be the institutions themselves who are the great disruptors.

 
 

DanielChristianWalmartOfEducationCampusTechnology-C-Level-10-16-13

 

From DSC:
This piece is from a recent interview I did with Mary Grush (Campus Technology; @Campus_Tech) re: The Walmart of Education.  Though this vision dates back to 2008, we are most assuredly seeing signs of this vision taking place today.  Thanks Mary for your time!

It’s important to note that this vision also aligns with what I’ve been saying about Learning from the Living [Class] Room.  Videos regarding this vision have been designed, shot, edited — and they are forthcoming.  I’d like to thank Mr. Steven Niedzielski (@marketing4pt0) here at Calvin College and also Mr. Sam Beckett (@samjohnbeck) for their help and assistance with those videos. 

 

 

 

 

Behind the scenes in the making of a MOOC — from forbes.com by Michael Horn

A couple of thoughts hit me here:

1) This article is a great example of the use of TEAMS of people to create and deliver learning materials. Consider some quotes:

…we’ve been working for the past few months with Silicon Schools Fund and the New Teacher Center to create a MOOC on Coursera about high-quality blended learning.

Without the hard work of an entire team—from our team at the Clayton Christensen Institute to our partners and friends at the Silicon Schools Fund and New Teacher Center and from our videographer Eric L. Wong to The Learning Accelerator, which provided support—it’s been clear to me that we could not have pulled this off.

We could not have created this course without the amazing cooperation and insights from the students, teachers, and leaders at these schools.

 

Also see this posting on this topic.

 

2) There is no silver bullet in how to achieve learning objectives. Again, consider some quotes:

What we’ve learned–and what emerges in the course–is that there is no definitive way to do blended learning. The schools that we profile have made many different decisions and all produced wonderful results for students.

In the process, we believe that they will create a host of new innovations and make a series of novel choices around blended-learning design.

 

 

 
© 2025 | Daniel Christian