2009 Day3 Tony Bates: Is E-Learning Failing Higher Education?

From OUCEL Wiki

http://www.tonybates.ca/

Presentation PPT

Contents 1 Indicators of failure 2 Goals/expectations of technology in HE 3 Possible goals for elearning 4 Good data (Sloan, ITSC, UBC) 5 Enhance the quality of learning 6 Why current teaching model is inadequate 7 Goal: develop skills needed in 21st century 8 Implications for assessment 9 Can we do more with the same or less 10 Millenial students 11 What would innovation look like? 12 What can be done to encourage innovation in elearning? 13 Conclusion

[edit] Indicators of failure

• lack of return on IT investment
• costs of HE continues to rise in EU and USA
• lack of innovation / transformation of education (WEF, Sangra (Phd, Spain), CCL, Anderson (10 wasted yrs in Canada)
• technology absorbed into traditional model (Tierney & Heihkel)
• how good are these indicators
  • perceptions rather than realities
  • lack of both qualitative data and qualitative case studies on technology in HE
  • based very little on hard data
  • lots of little stuff on the ground, very little recorded/measured
  • goals/expectations not clear

[edit] Goals/expectations of technology in HE

• what are we trying to achive by using ICTs in teaching and administration use
• how would we know whether we have met our goals
• different stakeholders/different goals

[edit] Possible goals for elearning

• votes(x)

1. increase access/flexibility (12)
2. enhance quality of teaching (8)
3. develop skills needed in 21st century (4)
4. improve cost-effeciveness of HE (2)
5. meet learning style of 'millenials' (8)

Linda's contribution

1. increase student engagement

[edit] Good data (Sloan, ITSC, UBC)

• Online DE: 14% increase per annnum for 7 years for online course, 2%p.a. overall
• Blended learning: we don't know
• BC flexible training for trades
• Most successful elearning goal

[edit] Enhance the quality of learning

• most common with instructors
• clickers, ppt, multiple screens, etc.
• enhance not imporove; i.e. teaching is already good
• same goals, same students, same teacher-student ratios, mover work
• current model does NOT work well
• More WORK, mass education, industrial model of education

[edit] Why current teaching model is inadequate

• Examples given by Aldo & Patrick
• historical model not adapted to needs of mass higher education
• lack of interaction/engagement
• old model not based on research on how students learn, or on potential of technology

[edit] Goal: develop skills needed in 21st century

• ensure students have intellectual and digital skills needed in their profession/occupation
• skills for knowledge-based society (communicating, independent learning, entrepreneurial, problem-solving, KM, collaborative, digital literacy)
• skills embedded within discipline
• use of ICTs in teaching essential

[edit] Implications for assessment

• assess ability to know and do
• enable students to use digital media to demonstrate competence- e portfolio
• thus needs changes in curriculum + teaching methods + technology
  • (not doing well with this goal)

[edit] Can we do more with the same or less

• reduce overheads: 53% non-teaching costs at UBC, e.g. more buildings - or more distributed learning
• student services: better, quicker, cheaper with IT
• can we do more?, more students, with less instructors
• reduce overhead -53% of non teaching costs at UBC are not related to teaching
• student services, better, quicker , cheaper with IT- Alberta 20,000 more students with less instructors, students register themselves at U of A

[edit] Millenial students

• digital natives
• danger of stereotyping and false assumptions
• research suggests digital divide is not necessarily age-related

[edit] What would innovation look like?

• need new visions for teaching and learning in HE
• vision should combine:
  • skills development embedded in content
  • flexibility and access
  • learner empowerment and differentiation
  • integration of digital technologies
  • success measures
• abolition of semester system, requirement for full-time attendance on campus? (why do we require full time access on campus)
• courses/programs designed to acommodate f2f, blended distance and DE students
• collaborative international online programs with foreign universities
• assessment by challenge, eportfolios, peer assessment, project work
• work and study programs between industry/university
• full cost-recovery models for lifelong learners, to hire new faculty
• team teaching within department, between subject areas, between universities

==Barriers to change== So why not

• No incentives to change
• faculty untrained in modern teaching methods
• research more important than teaching
• poor IT governance, management: no input from the instructional side- manage for making sure system is working -but not what it can do or could do for teaching. (I think this is very important problem, Kim Holland)
• no vision for the future

[edit] What can be done to encourage innovation in elearning?

1. Federal:
   • link elearning to national devlopment knowledge-based society
   • collect statistics/performance measure for use of ICTS in HE
   • earmarked funding for research into ICTS in HE, linked to productivity
   • national standards for teaching in HE
2. Provincial:
   • funding linked to innovation in teaching through annual plans
   • province-wide accreditation for teaching in HE (tenure req)
   • leadership in setting goals for ICTs
   • training programs for senior administrators
3. Institutional
   • develop vision, strategies and performance measures
4. Individuals
   • lobby tenure/prmo
   • work to developm
   • get trained

[edit] Conclusion

Elearning has not failed higher Ed. Higher Ed has failed elearning

How / Where will change occur? ICT at the program or department level