Can opencourseware lead to a true revolution in education?

With the introduction of open educational resources (OER) and opencourseware in higher education some steps were taken to make education more accessible. Many universities put their courses online so that everyone can access them. Some of them think they fulfill a higher purpose by doing this. Students have broader access to knowledge. Professors know more about what's going on in terms of what is being taught at other higher institutions of learning. People who want to learn independently can access those courses. There is a lot of benefits to the world at this point. But in another perspective does this fulfill a marketing purpose when we know that universities are in the business of making money first not education as their first goal ?. That seems very appreciative when courses costing thousands of dollars are accessible online for free. But is "free" really "free"? When you go to the supermarket you are attempted to taste something for free but they give away something in order to attract people to buy their products. In the same way do some universities put their courses online in order to attract more students? I can say yes. But at the same time they think they are doing some thing more disinterested financially. But higher learning institutions have several barriers to reach such a disinterested purpose. Such barriers are economic and social. Higher learning institutions are more concerned about money than education. They don't reach out to people in order to expand education on a global scale and they operate in a closed structure from admissions, tuition, credit transfers, refunds to almost everything. Can true learning happen in such a market structure? Their business rules are stricter than those of stores and supermarkets. Stores and supermarkets offer sales at certain times of the year where items can be purchased at a very low price and other items not sold go to charities. But are they times where universities lower their tuition for students? They are rules that seem unacceptable like you can't transfer more than 2 courses from another university. There is a certain limit of time to finish a program otherwise you lose your credits while you might still pass them and have your knowledge. Alternative assessment such as prior work experiences, prior informal learning are accepted at a small scale at a very small number of universities. When I started my master's degree 27 years ago I had to stop because I didn't have the money to pay. I had to pay travel expenses from where I lived to come to the university. I wasn't qualified for loans and I had to pay higher than the other students. I came back a few years later to continue my master's program to take a few courses but again lack of money, disqualifications for loan prevented me from finishing while I had only four courses to finish. When I came back later for the third time I was told than I can only benefit of two courses in order to finish and then I lost all the other courses. That was unacceptable for me. I was told to contact my professor/advisor because he made arrangements for my former courses to be transferred. Actually he gave me a paper mentioning all these credit transfer courses. I presented this paper and they didn't accept it. My professor was dead and he wasn't there to back me up. I went to another university for the master's degree that I almost finished in the former university. Then from there I started a PhD with another university taking 21 credit courses and passing all the courses with A ( most of these courses are research). Again I had to confront another institution that is part of a structure of not truly educating. With all my abilities and enthusiasm I had to stop. Now recently I embarked myself in this journey of open PhD joining Leigh Blackall, Prawthorne and others who chose this option as well. For me there is a long road for higher learning institutions to take in order to fulfill a meaningful role in society. The following article reports about a global conference on the future of online learning and the debate around opencouseware. Certain universities are threatened by a movement that can force them to change their inadequate structures.  

Leading higher education specialists from across the world convened at Cambridge University in April for a landmark global conference on the future of online learning. The contrast here between the ancient and the modern, the traditional and the new, reflects the challenges of standardising the digital learning revolution across higher education globally.

The Cambridge conference was hosted by the OpenCourseWare Consortium, a non-profit consortium, which is now the largest open online education resource in the world. OCWC comprises some 280 higher education institutions, offers around 21,000 courses online, and has many millions of learners across the globe.

The ambition of open online learning is to cut cost and eliminate geographic distance as obstacles to the exchange of knowledge and ideas. Unlike traditional e-learning, OpenCourseWare (OCW) offers all course materials free to everyone with online access. The logic follows that educators from around the world can upgrade their OCW classes; students can enhance their OCW coursework or pursue self-study; and – for the first time ever – the general public is given a window through which to see the depth and breadth of what leading universities are offering and to benefit from reading lists and lectures.

The potential benefits of open online learning are tremendous. However, in order for it to truly deliver a global knowledge revolution, the higher education sector must collaborate more effectively to enhance the impact of online education resources.

One key sticking point is that traditional institutions have previously enjoyed a knowledge monopoly in higher education. However, in the digital age, knowledge is instantly accessible, and universities and colleges must now actively share their role for developing and spreading knowledge with many other institutions and indeed individuals that require enhanced collaboration.

Concern exists among some higher education institutions that by releasing knowledge into the public domain, they will increasingly become little more than certification factories, with no clear role as the arbiters and producers of knowledge. The worry is that students will study online for free, after which they will shop around for higher education institutions that are willing to test to a given standard and – if they pass – provide them with an appropriate qualification. This point was also discussed in Cambridge last week.

This shouldn't be a threat to higher education institutions, especially given the ambition in Europe, and indeed much of the rest of world, to dramatically increase the percentage of the population with a tertiary education. Online learning offers the opportunity to teach many more students than we do now: a higher education institution could potentially have 1 million students, including lifelong learners who find it difficult to take part in on-campus courses.

The business model for higher education institutions would be different, of course, forcing them to change from a system of tuition fees to one of course-completion or certification fees. However, as long as they have a thorough system of testing and provide high-reputation certified qualifications, offering online learning might even be an advantage, allowing more time for other institutional work, such as research.

For some, the real danger is if higher education institutions lose their monopoly on certification. The answer here must be to enhance the quality and reputation of our institutions.

Students generally attend an institution not only because they want to learn something, but also because a qualification helps them with their future career. The greater the reputation of the certifying institution, the more valuable the diplomas, certificates and degrees will be.

People may well be less willing to pay for tuition at an institution with a poor reputation, preferring to attend a free, virtual one. They will continue to pay, however, for a qualification from high-quality institutions such as Cambridge. These diplomas, certificates and degrees are reliable proof of what they have learned and at what level, providing a valuable ticket for a future career.

In general, the higher education sector has little reason to view the digital learning revolution as a threat and should embrace the massive opportunity it presents through more active participation and collaboration. Online education can not only help provide higher education institutions with increasing numbers of students, but also new potential revenue streams, whilst embedding their reputation for high quality knowledge and teaching in the digital age.

Some key points discussed at the OpenCourseWare conference

• Student numbers in higher education make open education inevitable

The world's higher education system must accommodate nearly 80 million more students by 2025. Sir John Daniel (Common Wealth of Learning) calculated that this would require building three campuses for 30,000 students every week for the next 13 years. Since this is unlikely to happen, other ways to provide education have to be found.

• What is a sustainable model for open education?

Various models are being tested now. Some of these are based purely on volunteers, such P2PU (Peer to Peer University); most focus on combining the existing higher education structure and open education (such as MITx, Open University UK or Delft University of Technology)

• Government interest in open education is growing: In 2011, the US started a four-year programme involving a total of $2bn, which includes development of open educational resources (OER) for community colleges. Many other countries, such as India, Brazil, China, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Poland, South Africa, Turkey, Vietnam, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, have introduced specific measures or subsidies to promote OER. Unesco is pushing this by encouraging governments to sign the Paris declaration on OER next June.

• And has to grow further!

Open education can help governments deal with a number of challenges in higher education, such as bridging the gap between secondary and higher education, reaching life long learners, globalisation, competition for talent and financing the increasing number of students.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2012/apr/25/open-business-universities-opencourseware

The new role of the instructional designer

The role of the instructional designer should now focus on new ways of learning made possible by different technology devices and ways of using them.

"When designing for mLearning we need to put ourselves in the shoes of the user who is walking around with a powerful tablet and smart phone. That person today has different expectations that are informed by social media and You Tube. They expect instantaneous access to what they want, where they are, on the device they have in their hand, And learning is not a one-way push anymore"
(When the teacher is learner, do we need instructional designer?).

"The camera, voice recorder and collaboration features of the devices drive user generated content that enable every user to be both teacher and student" (When the teacher is learner do we need instructional designer?).

The ADDIE process way of creating courses doesn't work anymore. The role of the elearning designer should be to facilitate learning and collaboration instead of dictating it. How can the learning designer create learning experiences that fit the needs of the learner where he is? First the content should should be created in granular and modular ways so that it can be delivered in mobile devices. Second it should not be tied to a certain platform because the latter can change. Third it should be created and managed in XML where the presentation is different from the content. A granular content is stored in the cloud for everyone to access it. An app is the delivery channel.

The designer should facilitate user-generated content. His goal ought to design an entire learning experience not just a piece of content. He has to know his audience in order to crate engaging learning experiences. He creates entire programs combining instruction, social collaboration and self-study.

Social commenting, rating and analytics substitute for need analysis. "The users tell what they want, what's working and where the gaps are. Analytics will tell what's being used and how effective it is" (When the learner is the teacher, do we need instructional designer?)

More on E-learning 

5 Use Cases for Badges in the Enterprise

If you’re not familiar with badging as a concept, you would be wise to visit the fantastic HASTAC community entitled “Badges for Lifelong Learning” for a primer and then further your understanding with information provided by Mozilla’s Open Badges; one of the pioneers in the fledgling badging field.

How can badges play an effective role inside an organization?

1) Credibility

When an employee is able to demonstrate levels of knowledge, experience or acumen to others in the organization via badges, they are instantly gaining credibility with their peers. Employees might not otherwise know that someone has a certain intellect, however, badges can provide this and in return, a level of credibility is gained in the eyes of the knowledge seeker with the badge holder.

2) Awareness

Badges can help bring awareness to other employees that knowledge, experience or acumen actually exists in the organization itself. For example, if an employee is seeking ‘Java’ skills, and the system has been set to display certain levels of competence through badging (and search is enabled) this brings an awareness to employees that was otherwise missing.

3) Motivation

It’s rather obvious, but badges can also be thought of as motivational opportunities. If an employee is interested in a higher degree of credibility or wants to contribute to organizational awareness, employing badges could help push the employee to higher levels of skill, knowledge or other traits. If, for example, your goal is a higher degree of collaboration in the organization, perhaps you could establish participation-based badges in your system to help motivate employees to contribute more.

4) Recognition

Some employees may want to utilize badges as a way in which to highlight how they have been recognized in the company. A ‘badge of recognition honour’ is not out of the question. For example, what if an employee has crossed the 5-year mark at your organization; couldn’t he or she display a 5-year badge on their home profile page to denote the significant achievement? There are many more to consider as well.

5) Career

Career development itself is a badge, isn’t it? Let’s say, for example, an employee enters the organization as a Level 1 Engineer. Over the next four years, she progresses to become a Level 4 Engineer, whatever that means in terms of the job description. Each step of the journey could have a badge associated with it, and the employee can prominently display it on their home profile page as well.

In summary, I’m not tying academic credentials to badges inside the organization; rather, I’m linking the concepts of work-based knowledge, experience, recognition and career development as ways in which to enhance the employee experience.

I’m also not at the stage where external badges may find a home inside the organization.

But when badges are used inside the organization for internal only purposes, there could be fantastic results culturally, collaboratively and educationally throughout the digital walls.

http://www.danpontefract.com/?p=2266