The Future of E-Learning and How The University of Macau Can

Report
Professor John V. Dempsey, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama, USA
• Brenda’s spouse
• Director of Innovation in Learning Center
• USA Online – University’s online campus
Faculty Development
• E-learning and course redesign initiatives
• Professor of Instructional Design and Development
• Former Fulbright Scholar in Malaysia
•
Happy to be here!
2
•
•
•
•
E-Learning formats and their effectiveness
Trends and demographics in US e-Learning
Trends and demographics in Asian e-Learning
Case: How we increased quality and reduced costs at
my university
• Changing face of public university education
• How the University of Macau could lead the way
• Other questions?
3
• E-learning comprises all forms of electronically
supported learning and teaching. (Wikipedia)
5
Asynchronous
+ Self-paced formats
Synchronous
6
7
• Web-enhanced
•Less than 5% online or out of class
• Blended (hybrid)
•5-85% online or out of class
• Online
• 85-100% online or out of class
8
USDOE meta-analysis*
“Students who took all or part of their class
online performed better, on average, than
those taking the same course through
traditional face-to-face instruction.”
“Instruction combining online and face-to-face
elements had a larger advantage relative to
purely face-to-face instruction than did
purely online instruction.”
*Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online
Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
11
12
13
14
15
• Australia
• South Korea
• Japan
High use
• Singapore
• India
• China
• Malaysia
• Thailand
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sri Lanka
Indonesia
Philippines
Pakistan
Nepal
Vietnam
Cambodia
Laos
Bhutan
Mid use
Low use
17
• Indonesia strictly controls the quality of academic
distance learning content. It is difficult for foreign
companies to enter into their domestic market.
• China has a strict system to approve e-learning
programs. No foreign countries are allowed to
tender for government contracts.
18
• South Korea intends to use e-learning solutions
to train all primary and secondary school
students.
• Thailand has plans to provide all students with
tablets by 2012.
• China aims to have over 200 million students
online by 2020
19
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
20
• Private K-12 - Edu.china.com and Yuloo.com
• ChinaEdu Corporation
165,000 students in online degree programs
• Corporate training
China-training.com
Enterprise Learning Center – Xuexugang.com
Chinaonlineedu.com
21
• University - Chinese Learning Net & Renmin Univ
• Open University of China (Central Radio and TV U)
68 online colleges
140 majors in 10 areas
2,027 off-campus learning centers
Total enrollment of 1.4 million
22
• 33% English
• 16% Chinese
• 7% Japanese
• 3% Korean
• 3% Arabic
• 38% Other
23
•
•
•
•
•
Financial crisis
Decreasing state support
Increasing demand for
flexible learning
opportunities
LMS decision
Better technology options
Administrative Initiative:
• Critical support--by Senior VP
(Provost)
• Strong buy-in from Deans
• Involved faculty leadership
• 37 faculty Proposals
respond to SVPAA’s
call
• Up to 18,000 annual
course enrollments
affected long term
• 25 pilots started fall
2010 semester
A&S
20
Course
Enrollments
12,220
CESP
6
1,946
CIS
2
1,887
COE
4
445
MCOB
5
1,418
37
17,916
College
Proposals
modernize systems
urban university
economic pressures
Principles:
Improve Quality
Increase Cost Efficiency
USDOE meta-analysis*
“Students who took all or part of their class online
performed better, on average, than those taking
the same course through traditional face-to-face
instruction.”
“Instruction combining online and face-to-face
elements had a larger advantage relative to
purely face-to-face instruction than did purely
online instruction.”
*Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning
Studies, Washington, D.C., 2009.
• Description of specific
innovation
• Instructional efficiency
goals as measured by
instructional salary/credit
hour production
• Rationale for choosing the
innovation
• Costs associated with
implementation
• Time frame Faculty
for Proposal
piloting
redesign
Cont’d
• Evaluation plan to demonstrate
improved quality and cost
efficiencies
• Sources of baseline information
• Baseline instructional costs
• How active learning results
• How student learning is measured
Proposal Review
• The Supplemental Model
• The Replacement Model
• The Emporium Model
• The Fully Online Model
• The Buffet Model
• Linked Workshop Model
Math Emporium Lab at Univ. of South Alabama
• Focus
•High enrollment
courses
•eLearning
• usually blended format
U. South Alabama
• 37 redesign proposals
(first round)
• affecting estimated
4,400 undergrads
11%
Whole Course
13%
Certain Sections
76%
New or Combine
Course
• Creative eLearning technologies
• lecture capture
• interactive instructional materials from publishers
• online tutoring
• guided examples
• team case studies
• expert guests
• Active on-campus learning sessions
• Structured team-based problems
• Cases and inquiry learning scenarios
• Oral and project presentations
• Large group content review
• Strategic quizzing; practice tests
• Critiques and discussion
Professional Development
• NCAT and Sloan-C Conferences
and workshops - 3 groups of
faculty
• Innovation in Learning Center
workshops
• ILC Redesign website
• Evaluation assistance
• Redesign Academy (3 days w/
honorarium)
• Redesign Faculty Get-Togethers
Direct Support
• New Institutional tools
(iTunesU, Camtasia
Relay, Kaltura, Big
blue Button)
• Personal Tools
(laptops, software)
• E-Learning Assistant
Program
ILC staff shooting video of blended course activities
Peer Modeling
• Some eLeader program topics:
• Creating screencasts for Political Science
• Using online debates in Community Health
courses
• Assessment--matching Engineering
outcomes
• iTunes U in Real Estate courses
• Using Wikis in Library Science
• Presentation skills for video in Nursing
courses
• Preparing student review podcasts om
Business
• Virtual Engineering chalkboard
Cost Indicators
• Comparison of Methods
Institutional
• Personnel cost per Student
• % Change in personnel cost per
student
• Course enrollment
• Reduction in part-time instructors
and GAs
Course Specific
• Reassign faculty
assignments
• Time for research and
grant-seeking
Quality Metrics
• Comparison of Methods
Institutional
• Student Success rates
• D/Fs,
• WDs
Course Specific
• Common Final Exams
• Common Content Items
Selected from Exams
• Pre- and Post-tests
• Student Work Using
Common Rubrics
Redesign
Comparison
% Change
Course enrollment
3300
3916
Full-time instructors
29
54
Part-time instructors
20
38
GA’s (teaching only)
0
1
Avg FT instructor cost
per student
$87.17
$123.85
-28.8%
Avg PT instructor cost
per student
$15.53
$25.05
-38.0%
Total Personnel cost
per student incl. GAs
support personnel
$125
$152
-22.3%
Redesign
Comparison
% Change
Course enrollment
3,150
3,296
Full-time instructors
25
38
Part-time instructors
24
31
GA’s (teaching only)
0
1
Avg FT instructor cost
per student
$78.21
$108.83
-28.2%
Avg PT instructor cost
per student
$16.73
$22.43
-25.4%
Total Personnel cost
per student incl. GAs
support personnel
$110.28
$133.35
-17.3%
Redesign
Frequency
Comparison
Percent
Frequency
Percent
2,078
63.0
2,640
67.4
D/F Rate
830
25.2
886
22.6
WD Rate
389
11.8
390
10.0
3
0.1
0
0.0
3,300
100.0
3,916
100.0
Success Rate
Incompletes
Total Students
Redesign
Frequency
Comparison
Percent
Frequency
Percent
2,008
63.7
2228
67.6
D/F Rate
739
23.5
716
21.7
WD Rate
402
12.8
352
10.7
1
0.1
0
0.0
3,150
100.0
3,296
100.0
Success Rate
Incompletes
Total Students
• Working with
administrators and faculty
to improve or restructure
course redesign
• Alert chairs and deans to
problems
• Discuss course redesign
changes with Depts.
• Ongoing reports to VP
• Identify most effective and efficient
courses
• Determine commonalities that resulted
in success
USA Redesign Academy
• Structure
• Activities
• Course formats
• Targeted faculty training
• Student support from faculty members
• Initial student orientation
help create structure
• Changing from online to
more structured blended
format for 100-level courses
• Evaluate savings in classroom
use
Student
Orientation
Video
prepared by
the USA
Innovation in
Learning
Center.
On average (all courses) :
• Success rates were highest for blended and
online courses versus the traditional or webenhanced course format.
• Withdrawal rates were lowest for blended
courses and highest for online courses.
• Class sizes were largest for the blended format;
smallest in the traditional format.
50
• Students in tertiary education worldwide
increased from 28 in 1970 to 165 million in
2010—almost 600% more students.
• Academic degree standards and quality
assurance standards becoming more compatible
(e.g., Bologna Accord)
• Alliances among universities to spread out costs
(e.g., software services) and inter-institutional
exchanges.
52
• What usually occurs in university classrooms will
move from presenting to managing interactions:
• Between students and instructor
• Between students and students
• Between students and learning technologies
53
• Complete Lectures and Materials
• Edx (Harvard & MIT)
• Peer-to-Peer University
• Stanford Project
• Repositories
• Merlot
• EdReNe
• Multimedia University (Malaysia—local to University
and partners)
• Khan Academy
54
Particularly structured approaches
like Team-Based Learning (TBL)
55
•
•
•
•
E-textbooks
Established publishers
University faculty
Consortium faculty
56
• Institutional administrative support - KEY
• Planning – maintaining standards
• Intense redesign initiative
• Instructional design
• Faculty development
• Student development
• Monitoring & Evaluation
58
1. Make sure you have a clear business case
Using resources (time, human talent, space, money) strategically IS
critical to any institution
2. Use Data to guide decisions
Published external research, institutional research and evaluation
systems, analysis of market, timely opportunities,
3. Engage early with all relevant stakeholders
Institutional change is political and personal
4. Focus on integration, open standards and build
upon existing communities of practice
For content (collaborative institutional partnerships, learning
repositories, open educational resources, open-source software
communities)
59
Opportunity
• Bilingual faculty
Innovation Possibility
• Bilingual courses
• Limited summer
courses
• Online and blended
• Working professionals
need educational
upgrades
• Flexible formats for
busy professionals
60
Just a few…
• Electronic textbooks
• Podcasts
• Virtual field guides
• Mobile data collection
• New content creation
• Mobile computing labs
Introduce topic
Illustrate procedure
Scenes from an
instructional
podcast
Provide guidance
62
• Just wanted to let you know--we’ll be in your living room soon..
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Value change and innovation
Don't reinvent wheel
Look for best practices
Visit other places
Bring in a few consultants
Pick and choose and get the best fit for UM
UM can lead the way in developing e-Learning
for the region
64
65
66

similar documents