Transcript The Changing Structure of Higher Education

The Changing Structure of
Higher Education
The Challenges We Face
Three forces at work
Cost vs. Access: Can students afford to attend college?
Learning Outcomes: Are our students learning what they
need to know for the world of work? Are they learning
what they need to know for their personal development?
Are they learning what they need to know to be productive
citizens in our society.
Technology: What do the new and very rapid developments
in information technology mean for the way higher education
is organized? The way it functions?
Three forces at work
Cost vs. Access: There is great concern nationally, and within
public higher education, that we are pricing students out of
an education.
We must, somehow, control costs, and permit wide access
to our offerings.
Three forces at work
Learning Outcomes: Those that hire our students complain
that they do not possess the right combination of skills,
or the right level of skill in some very basic areas:
Reading, Writing, Mathematical ability.
Three forces at work
In addition, employers are asking that students have
increased knowledge of the world, better foreign
language skills, better understanding of other cultures.
Employers also want students to have experience in
collaborative efforts, working in teams, and solving
problems.
Three forces at work
Technology: New information technologies may permit
new ways of teaching and learning to occur:
Enhance residentially based undergraduate and graduate
instruction.
Reach new audiences off-site.
Improve communications between faculty, staff, and students.
Creation of a new
competitive environment
The three forces have combined to create a new wave of
change, competition for higher education.
From traditional sources.
From private firms building internal structures.
From private, for profit, teaching institutions.
From state-industry partnerships.
From new state initiatives.
Creation of a new
competitive environment
Traditional Sources: All higher ed institutions face
competition for students from each other.
In the state sector, there are many sources of
competition, internal and from nearby states.
[The main competitor for Rutgers is the
University of Delaware.]
Creation of a new
competitive environment
Private firms build internal structures:
Originally designed to train employees for specific tasks,
firm-based instructional entities are now teaching writing,
problem solving, etc. (Fed in NYC, Motorola, GM, etc.)
Creation of a new
competitive environment
Private for-profit higher ed institutions:
These institutions, like UPhoenix, are searching for
profitable sectors of higher ed, and offering courses to
meet the needs of the students there.
Both in continuing ed and in basic core teaching at
colleges and universities.
Also, many private for-profit and non-profit entities
are trying to establish the infrastructure for course distribution
and design on the web. {World Lecture Hall, Global Network
Academy, Virtual University Enterprises, etc.}
Creation of a new
competitive environment
State and Industry Partnerships:
States are willing to use state resources to assist industry
to meet its educational needs.
Many examples. Focus on Michigan Virtual
Automotive College, a collaboration of Ford, GM,Chrysler,
Michigan and Michigan State.
President is former president of Michigan, J. Duderstadt.
Creation of a new competitive
environment
“In its first 16 months of operation, it (MVAC) has put
together some 115 courses with professors or units from
27 universities (including Phoenix); 300 students are now
enrolled, 2000 set for Fall. When suppliers, dealers, repair shops
and retail outlets are taken as part of the auto industry,
enrollment projections soar to six and seven figures.”
Marchese,T., “Not-do-distant Competitors”, AAHE Bulletin, May 1998, V.50, No. 9, p. 3-7
Creation of a new
competitive environment
“The essential idea behind MVAC-that an industry group
can combine to produce its own education enterprise, entry-level
through lifelong learning, and cease reliance of a “cottage
industry” of existing campuses-has strong appeal among
corporate executives, especially where dissatisfaction with
traditional higher education is high.”
Marchese,T., “Not-do-distant Competitors”, AAHE Bulletin, May 1998, V.50, No. 9, p. 3-7
Creation of a new competitive
environment
New creations by traditional insitutions:
UNEXT, Columbia’s Morningside Associates.
These new entreprenurial enterprises allow traditional
Institutions to experiment in the new technological environment
Without changing their basic structure.
Creation of a new
competitive environment
New State Initiatives: States are experimenting with higher
ed institutions. Asking for articulation with community
colleges, promoting competition within state funded college
and university structure.
States are also working to integrate higher ed activities
across state lines: Western Governors is prime example.
New structures for higher
education.
As the economy continues to develop and change around the
new information technology, and more and more sophisticated
forms of organization are developed, the possibility that
higher ed functions will be “unbundled” is high.
This is similar to what has happened in the medical sector, with
the rise of HMOs.
For example: The certification of degrees
The accreditation of courses
The residential experience are three such bundles.
New structures for higher
education
Again from Marchese,T., “Not-do-distant Competitors”, AAHE Bulletin, May 1998, V.50, No. 9, p. 3-7
“To Wall Street and entrepreneurs-at-large, the postsecondary education and training market looks huge and
ripe for the picking..an “addressable market opportunity
at the dawn of a new paradigm” in the breathless words
of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter…Several Wall Street
houses have set up “education industry” practices to attract
investors.
New structures for higher
education
One vision of the future is this: Groups of faculty, call them
departments, contract themselves to accrediting bodies, EMOs or
educational management organizations.
The EMO guarantees the quality of the courses.
A separate body, a certification agency, examines collections of
courses and curricula, and certifies them as degree worthy.
A hotel and food service operation, like Marriott or Del Webb,
runs a residential site, restricted to the appropriate age group,
Sun City College.
New structures for higher
education
This may seem farfetched to some, but ETS is actively trying to
become such a certification agency. Sylvan Learning Centers
seeks serve the curricular accreditation function, and to coordinate
the activities of groups of instructors.
Caliber Learning Network has had an ipo of $80 million. It now
operates learning centers in shopping malls. It works with
Johns Hopkins, Wharton, etc., to offer “brand name” education
in locations around the country and world.
How soon till groups of faculty, like md’s, opt to set up private
practice as educators?
We can be sure tomorrow
will be different than today
Institutions like Western Governors University, Uphoenix,
MVAC are not creatures of mere technology.
They are new types of educational organizations,
moving higher ed away from a real-estate based enterprise, to
a customer driven system, with serious assessment of learning
outcomes.
The best teaching and best curriculum design can
be purchased from anywhere, and delivered anywhere.
We can be sure tomorrow
will be different from today
Large accumulations of capital will be brought to bear
to achieve new and innovative ways of teaching and learning.
The issue facing today’s faculty is how we will deal with
the tidal wave of change that is coming.
It will not simply go away.
We hide our head in the sand at our own peril, and at the peril
of the values as educators that we hold dear.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Modern universities are organized on a geographic
model, with classes scheduled for a time and place.
A “Course of study” has become a meeting with
Students and faculty at a specific place and time.
The ‘course of study’ has been segmented into
‘courses’ that are often disconnected though included
in a major curriculum.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Modern information technology permits a return to a ‘course of
study that can be accessed across time and place, at the
convenience of the student.
But, modern universities cannot simply ‘paste on’ modern
technology. To use it effectively, they must restructure
themselves in a way that challenges their major function.
[Icarus fell from the sky because one can’t paste wings on a
human and fly. A whole new approach is needed.]
Evolution to a new model of higher
education
We have a duty to our students to use
technology to enhance teaching and research.
We have a duty to ensure that all of our
students have an appropriate
familiarity with the technology that is so
rapidly remaking the world.
How do we use technology to enhance
teaching and learning.
By using technology to enhance teaching and
learning, we improve our core function as a
University, and give our students the skills
they need to function effectively in the
world of work.
:Characteristics of good teaching
•Instructors are well prepared.
•Instructors excite and motivate students
•Instructors communicate effectively
with their students.
•Instructors bring latest information to
students
Characteristics of successful
learning:
•Students gain and retain knowledge of the
content of the course.
•Students develop critical thinking skills.
•Students integrate knowledge within and across
disciplines.
•Students develop the ability to work in a team to
solve a problem.
Using technology to enhance
education
The use of modern instructional technologies
enhances teaching, and learning, by promoting
all of these characteristics.
Enhances how we teach
New instructional tools:
• Require that instructors are
well-organized and adaptable.
Enhances how we teach
New instructional tools:
• Require that instructors are well organized
and adaptable.
• Bring text, sounds and images to enrich and
enliven the classroom.
Enhances how we teach
New instructional tools:
• Require that instructors are well organized
and adaptable.
• Bring text, sounds and images to enrich and
enliven the classroom.
• Improve communications between
instructor and student.
Enhances how we teach
New instructional tools:
• Require that instructors are well organized
and adaptable.
• Bring text, sounds and images to enrich
and enliven the classroom.
• Improve communications between
instructor and student.
• Bring up-to-date content into classroom or
lab.
Further enhancements
•More content available outside the
classroom, asynchronously.
•More interaction in the classroom
•Increased use of research methods in
undergraduate courses.
Enhancements to learning
New instructional tools:
• Assist in the delivery of content knowledge
to students.
• Availability of electronic data resources
and the web
Enhancements to learning
New instructional tools:
• Improve retention
•Increased interaction improves retention
•Empower students who find communication in
traditional lecture to be intimidating.
Enhancements to learning
New instructional tools:
• Improve students’ integration of knowledge within
and across disciplines.
•Research projects can become part of the standard
course
•Students can bring ideas to some stage of
completion, integrating knowledge more effectively.
Enhancements to learning
New instructional tools:
• Improve and encourage teamwork
and problem-solving.
• Email and WWW applications enable
group activities, even in large courses
•Conferencing and chat facilities
promote discussion
Enhancements to learning
New instructional tools:
• Improve the development of critical
thinking skills.
• Students engage content in a mode suited to their
preferred learning style.
Enhancing Education
It is incumbent upon the faculties of research
universities to think carefully and systematically
not only about how to make the most effective
use of existing technologies but also how to
create new ones that will enhance their own
teaching and that of their colleagues.
Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America’s
Research Universities.
Enhancing Education
The best teachers and researchers should be
thinking about how to design courses in
which technology enriches teaching rather
than substitutes for it.
Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America’s
Research Universities.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Evolution: Most universities are not willing to challenge the
concept of a course as the unit of instruction. But, just how a
course is organized is undergoing fundamental change.
If the method of instruction continues to evolve, new
institutional structures will be needed to support them.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education
Modes of Instruction
On campus
Web enhanced
Interactive web tools
Hybrid: on campus for only part of a term, asynchronous
otherwise.
Fully Asynchronous (distance education)
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
A continuum of course structures:
On campus: Traditional lecture or seminar format. Class
meets regularly, at a fixed time and place.
Web Enhanced: Static web page, including syllabi, notes,
homework, links to informative sites, and email or listserv
addresses. This material can be retrieved asynchronously.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Interactive web tools: The use of listservs and threaded
discussions permits asynchronous participation in the course, and
permits discussion, whether synchronous or asynchronous, to
continue and expand outside the classroom in a very organized
and directed manner. It also permits student to student discussion
to continue under the course structure itself.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Hybrid course structure: As interactive discussion tools, web
sites, and the instructor’s skill at using them improve, faculty will
begin to eliminate many class meetings, and instead conduct the
class, either synchronously or asynchronously, in virtual space.
Course meets: 5 September to 20 September.
Meets virtually: 1 October to 31 October.
Course meets: 1 November til the term ends.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Hybrid course structure is very attractive to faculty and
students since it permits more control over their time,without
giving up the traditional teaching model.
Fully asynchronous: Courses are offered online only, never
meet on campus. This model is not embraced by most
faculty, unless it is the only way to teach the intended
audience.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education.
Can we have a hybrid model?
The hybrid model requires an institutional infrastructure that can
.
manage course servers, listservs,
threaded discussion, chat rooms,
and large web sites that must be updated frequently.
The current infrastructure of most universities cannot support this
kind of structure without moving resources from the traditional
model. New managerial matters arise, too, since rooms once
scheduled for class are now empty. How will these be managed?
Evolution to a new model of higher
education
What is a course, anyway?
Course of instruction:
1. Can be any path to learning.
2. Can be personalized to meet a student’s needs
3. Can occur anywhere, inside or outside of a
classroom.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education
Infrastructure: To support new modes of teaching,
Universities must build a new infrastructure.
•Technological: Networks, servers, video servers, enhanced and
networked classrooms. Who will manage them? What kinds of
technologies work best?
•Staff positions: New types of highly skilled and well paid staff
are needed to support new teaching and learning technologies
and new administrative structures. (Instructional designers) Old
positions will be phased out.
Evolution to a new model of higher
education
•Administrative roles: Administrators will be asked to take on new
tasks and transform old ones. Training is key.
•Faculty roles: Just what a faculty members does as a teacher, will
change substantially.
•Intellectual property: Who owns a course? Who can market
it?Teaching as a profit center is a new concept.