P. 1
Is this Time Different? Questions for MOOCs and Online Learning Beyond 2012

Is this Time Different? Questions for MOOCs and Online Learning Beyond 2012

|Views: 890|Likes:
Publié parLJ's infoDOCKET
Also available at:
http://www.cic.net/Libraries/Technology/IsthisTimeDifferent_QuestionsonMOOCsandOnlineLearning.sflb.ashx
Also available at:
http://www.cic.net/Libraries/Technology/IsthisTimeDifferent_QuestionsonMOOCsandOnlineLearning.sflb.ashx

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: LJ's infoDOCKET on Nov 07, 2012
Droits d'auteur :Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/17/2013

pdf

text

original

Is  This  Time  Different?

 
Questions  for  MOOCs  and  Online  Learning  Beyond  2012  
  Committee  on  Institutional  Cooperation   Chief  Information  Officers     August  2012  

Foreword  
  Each  decade  has  proffered  a  new  IT-­‐enabled  alternative  to  traditional,  residential  education,  yet   universities  have  continued  to  thrive.    Early  in  the  last  decade,  several  university-­‐backed  online  ventures   fizzled  while  more  recently  some  universities  and  for-­‐profit  institutions  (e.g.,  Apollo  group)  have   established  successful  online  degree  programs.    Most  recently,  news  of  Massively  Open  Online  Courses   (MOOCs),  venture-­‐backed  startups  like  The  Khan  Academy,  Coursera,  Udacity  or  institutional  consortia   like  EdX  have  renewed  the  question  of  IT-­‐enabled  alternatives  to  residential  education.     Is  this  time  different?    Does  the  confluence  of  improving  technologies  in  HD  video,  adaptive  tutors,  and   fast  connections;  economic  pressures  regarding  student  debt  and  tuition;  and  social  readiness  to   embrace  distributed  education  with  different  relationships  between  students  and  instructors  signal  a   substantial  change  for  higher  education?         The  CIC  CIOs  believe  this  time  will  be  different  in  its  effect  on  residential  universities  relative  to  previous   experiences,  but  the  more  enduring  effects  may  not  be  the  focus  of  the  2012  press.    The  CIOs  offer  our   (1)  near-­‐term  actions  for  campuses,  (2)  discussion  questions  for  campus  leaders,  (3)  additional  context   for  recent  developments  in  IT-­‐enabled  education,  and  (4)  State  of  the  Union  –  Higher  Education:   Competitive  Challenges  to  the  Traditional  Higher  Education  Model,  a  compelling  analysis  by  the   Education  Advisory  Board.1  

1) Near-­‐Term  Actions  
  1. Engage  purposefully  in  near-­‐term  trials  of  MOOCs,  adaptive  learning  systems,  and  emerging   technologies  to  develop  institutional  understanding  while  also  formulating  a  longer-­‐term   strategy  for  engaging  online  learning  for  badges,  professional  development,  MOOCs,  credit-­‐ bearing  courses,  and  degree  programs.     2. Ramp  up  institutional  capacities  for  online  course  production  to  support  instructional  design,   media  development,  assessment,  and  analytics.     3. Develop  IT  system  readiness  to  integrate  with  a  range  of  educational  software  that  may  need  to   link  to  campus  system  information  for  rosters,  identity,  services  in  a  legal,  secure  and  policy-­‐ compliant  way.  

                                                                                                                       
1

 Shared  with  CIC  Provosts  by  special  permission  of  Education  Advisory  Board.  

CIC  CIOs    

Page  1  

2) Discussion  Questions  for  Campus  Leaders  
  1. What  kinds  of  online  experiences  are  needed  as  substitutes  or  as  complements  for  current   models?   • Freely  available  online  resources  (videos,  exercises,  assessments,  etc.)  empower  the   flipped  classroom  model  and  serve  as  complements  that  improve  satisfaction,  efficiency,   and  efficacy  of  the  residential  learning  experience?   • Online,  large-­‐scale  experiences  that  become  substitutes  to  traditional,  residential   classroom  experiences  through  the  engagement  of  thousands  of  peer  learners  and   adaptive  software?   • Online  experiences  that  establish  by  certification  basic  competency  in  disciplines  –  what   is  the  form  of  that  certification  and  does  it  serve  as  a  complement  or  substitute  to  the   curriculum  and  major  and  direct  interaction  with  faculty?       2. Why  does  scale  matter  for  distributing  university  content,  modules,  courses,  or  degrees   beyond  current  models?   a. For  fee  reasons   i. Grow  new  sources  of  revenue  with  “profit”  margins  that  scale  faster  than  costs?   ii. Reduce  costs  per  credit  hour  for  students?   iii. Grow  base  of  click-­‐stream  training  data  for  refining  adaptive  analytics  and   tutoring  algorithms  to  enhance  learning  effectiveness?   iv. Grow  access  to  courses/degrees  to  satisfy  demands  for  educating  more  citizens?   b. For  free  reasons   i. Institutional  brand  amplification  and  awareness?   ii. Recruit  top  students?   iii. Social  good?   c. For  research  reasons   i. Develop  deeper  understanding  of  human  cognitive  growth?   ii. Refine  better  methods  for  teaching  specific  content?     3. What  is  lacking  within  the  institution  to  achieve  its  online  objectives?   a. Foundational  components   i. Capital  to  invest  and  risk  in  online  course  production?     ii. Access  to  markets  of  potential  students  via  course  placement  in   portals/aggregators  for  discovery,  marketing,  access,  etc.?   iii. Technology  platform  and  integrated  infrastructure  for  conducting  online  courses   or  courses  at  Internet  scale?   b. Skills  required   i. Content  Expertise  for  online  course  development?     ii. Process  Expertise  in  how  to  do  instructional  design  for  online,  faculty   pedagogical  training,  analytics  expertise,  business  model  development,  etc.?   iii. Staff  to  support  services  to  distant  students,  maintain  accreditation  and  legal   compliance?   c. Organizational  change   i.  Political  Will  regarding  change  and  uncertainty?     ii. University  Partners  to  offer  a  broader  array  of  lessons,  courses,  or  degrees?   iii. Construct  that  amalgamates  and  presents  college  offerings  in  a  cohesive   outwardly  facing  CIC  or  University  view   iv. Construct  that  amalgamates  and  presents  college  offerings  in  a  cohesive   outwardly  facing  CIC  or  University  view   CIC  CIOs     Page  2  

  4. What  kinds  of  partners  are  needed  and  why?    What  are  the  non-­‐negotiables  in  any   partnership  and  why?   a. What  are  the  walk-­‐away  provisions?   b. Are  there  exclusivity  expectations?   c. How  will  conflicts  be  resolved?   d. What  is  the  basis  for  cost  and  revenue  sharing?   e. What  are  the  reputational  risks  related  to  partners’  actions?   f. Who  owns  the  IP  and  on  what  terms  is  it  licensed  for  reuse?       5. What  is  the  degree  of  urgency  and  why?   a. What  opportunities  are  perishable?   b. What  is  the  ramp  up  time  to  desired  outcomes?   c. What  are  the  explicit  risks/benefits  of  moving  too  early  or  too  late?   d. Does  participation  enable  an  ability  to  shape  the  terms  of  engagement?   e. What  is  the  degree  of  institutional  readiness  to  engage  in  online  learning?  

3) Additional  Background  
  1.        A  number  of  factors  provide  incentives  and  context  for  growth  in  online  learning,  and  these   may  combine  to  have  a  significant  impact  on  higher  education.     a. Governments,  Boards  and  stakeholders  desire  and  are  acting  to  create  more  affordable   education  options  (e.g.,  Western  Governor’s  University,  etc.).   b. Universities  are  experimenting  and  seeking  potential  first  mover  advantages  as  innovators   and  parts  of  consortia.   c. Venture  funds  are  investing  in  new  commercial  models  and  see  the  Internet  as  creating  a   low  barrier  to  entry.       d. Reduced  costs  to  produce  and  deliver  mixed  media  for  traditional  educational  experience.   e. Improvements  in  information  technology  infrastructure  extending  reach.     2.        The  path  to  monetizing  “free”  courses  at  Internet  Scale  remains  unclear.    “MOCs”  or  Massive   Online  Courses  (not  free)  may  provide  an  interesting  middle  path  to  access  (a)  the  benefits  that   only  occur  at  a  scale  larger  than  traditional  courses,  (b)  have  a  sustainable  revenue  stream  to   cover  their  costs,  and  (c)  provide  valuable  university  credit.    New  models  of  pay,  subsidized,  and   free  may  rapidly  evolve  with  experience,  and  institutions  will  want  to  remain  nimble  to  adapt   with  opportunities.    This  is  a  time  of  caution  for  any  long-­‐term  deals.     3.        Early  commercial  innovators  are  aggregating  courses  across  known  university  brands  to   establish  scale  in  distribution  rather  than  developing  their  own  content  from  scratch.    This   differs  from  some  previous  online  commercial  ventures.    If  scale  matters  –  and  it  appears  that  it   does  –  then  should  the  CIC  directly  and  urgently  assess  the  value  in  creating  scale  together?      A   number  of  factors  may  affect  the  desirability  of  CIC  affiliation  relative  to  the  growing  options.     4.        Faculty  support  for  pedagogy  and  creation  of  online  materials  will  take  enhanced  and   integrated  support  from  campus  providers  of  pedagogical,  technological,  audio  visual,  content   expertise,  etc.    These  are  not  specific  to  MOOCS  or  distance  learning  and  are  needed  for  campus   blended  and  “flipped  classroom”  courses  also.  

CIC  CIOs    

Page  3  

4)  State  of  the  Union  
  See  appended  document  from  Education  Advisory  Board.  

CIC  CIOs    

Page  4  

State of the Union – Higher Education
Competitive Challenges to the Traditional Higher Education Model

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • Washington, DC

3

Road Map for Discussion p

1

A Tipping Point: New Teaching Methods Gain Legitimacy

2

The Incumbent’s Innovations Incumbent s

3

Overview of Additional Presentations
Resourcing Strategic Priorities Preparing for Cloud Migration

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

4

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

5

Disruption Fatigue p g
Who Knew that Innovation Could Sound So Familiar?
Required Reading at Board Meetings and Planning Retreats The Conventional Litany of the Broken University Business Model
• Uncontrolled cost increases • Graduates lack critical skills • Resistance to pedagogical innovation • Irrelevant scholarship • Tenure protects faculty from accountability • Undergraduate tuition subsidizing y faculty research • Traditional universities captive to the prestige arms race—real change will come from radical, low cost models ,

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Premium Position Captivity

6

The Incumbent’s Dilemma
Certain Downside, Speculative Upside for Exiting Prestige Arms Race

Clayton Christensen in a Nutshell: “Be More Like BYU Idaho” End tenure Dismantle departments Refocus research on pedagogy Switch to fully online degrees Enroll the marginally qualified Reduce number of programs Scale back merit based aid Cut back big time sports

I’m Certainly Not Going First I’ C t i l N t G i Fi t
“I understand that as an organization we could be a lot more efficient. But if I tried to ff f d make some of the changes that are being recommended, the accreditors would be all over me, I’d have a faculty revolt, and pretty quickly, I’d be out of a job.” Provost Public Research University

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

Premium Position Captivity

7

Featured Models of Efficiency Impossible to Emulate y p
Nascent Small Scale Publics Built from Scratch
New N STEM F Focused I tit ti Fill d Institution Fills Unmet Need at Low Cost Mayo Cli i P t M Clinic Partner B Becomes Learner Focused System Branch

• Opened in 2005 • Single 16 story building • No sports, gym, or dorms • No tenure; 12 month contracts ; • No departments
“From the beginning we decided we didn’t want this t b a t diti t thi to be traditional i tit ti l institution, because we in business who had been involved with other higher education institutions felt that everything took too long.” Chair of Planning Committee

• Opened in 2008 to serve nearby Mayo Clinic M Cli i • First class of 57 undergrads in 2011 • No departments • Differentiated faculty model separates curricular design, teaching, and targeted projects
“The bad news at the beginning was that we had no faculty; the good news was that we had no faculty.” Chancellor Stephen Lehmkuhle
Source: Reinventing Higher Education: The Promise of Innovation, Ed. Kevin Carey, Andrew P. Kelly, and Ben Wildavsky, Harvard Education Press, 2011.

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

8

Not In Our League g
Startups Hardly Look Like a Threat to Established Universities

• Peer to peer learning • Unaccredited • N profit, tuition f Non fit t iti free • 1,300 students

• Free video micro lectures • Unaccredited • N profit, tuition f Non fit t iti free • 3,000+ lectures available

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

9

The Song Remains the Same g
For Decades Productivity was Synonymous with Lower Quality
Baumol’s C t Di B l’ Cost Disease U.S. N U S News B t C ll Best Colleges and Universities

Musicians Can’t be More Productive, Costs Rise with Wages
Play Faster

Cost is Proxy for Quality

Class Size

Faculty / Student Ratio

Fewer Musicians

Faculty Salaries

Spending per Student

Replace with Androids

Use of Adjuncts

Alumni Giving Rate

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

10

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

A Genuinely Disruptive Moment

11

Opening the Floodgates p g g
Sebastian Thrun’s Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) Goes Viral
Two Fashionable Brands One Hot Global Topic Truly Amazing Uptake

Celebrity Faculty 160,000 Topics Covered
• Knowledge Representation Dr. Sebastian Thrun
Stanford Professor

• Inference • Machine Learning

From Announcement to Launch: 2 months 190

Cutting Edge Corporation

• Planning and Game Playing • Information Retrieval • Computer Vision • Robotics

Enrolled Countries Students

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Steven Leckart, “The Stanford Education Experiment,” Wired Magazine, April 2012.

Infrastructure for a Massive Open Online Course

12

A Seminar at Scale
New Teaching Technologies and Social Models Essential to Course Design

Relatively Common Instructional Videos Peer to Peer Academic Support Student Designed Tools

Still Rare Automated Assessment

Instructors Thrun g and Norvig record traditional lectures and post online

Students post and answer thousands of questions on various message boards

Students create software pp , tools to support the course, including an AI “playground” for testing code

Students’ homework, q , quizzes, and exams graded by computer

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Tamar Lewin, “Instruction for Masses Knocks Down Campus Walls,” The New York Times, March 4, 2012.

13

Parting Ways Over Assessment g y
Thrun and Stanford Differ Over Credentialing
Open to All, But Winnowing the Elite Connecting to Industry
Certificates of Completion
Enrolled

160,000 160 000

Casual Learners
Completed p

28,000 ,
Students completing class can add certificate to CV

Employer Introductions

World Class Talent

Resumes Requested

1,000

Perfect Scores

248 (None from Stanford students)
p Top student resumes p passed along to employers

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Steven Leckart, “The Stanford Education Experiment,” Wired Magazine, April 2012.

14

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

15

A Venture Capital Backed Startup p p
Your Revenue Model Is Thrun’s Loss Leader

A MOOC Incubator
• Private company founded by Dr. Thrun and funded by Charles River Associates , g , • Infrastructure, instructional design, and business services for global MOOC courses • Eleven STEM courses now available; eight more by end of 2013 • Taught by prominent faculty on leave from prestigious traditional universities

An Inverted Revenue Model
• Courses are free • Assessment and certificates are free • Revenue may come from value added services to students and employers: ¾Premium Tutoring ¾Authenticated Credentials ¾A th ti t d C d ti l ¾Lead Generation

Imagining a Multi Million Dollar Human Capital Search Opportunity

1,000 ,
Students

$ $100,000 ,
AI Starting Salary

10 30%
Recruiter Commission

$10M $30M

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Steven Leckart, “The Stanford Education Experiment,” Wired Magazine, April 2012.

16

The Burning Platform g
Economic Conditions Accelerating the Rise of Alternatives
The Unpleasant Economic Realities
• State budget cuts • Federal budget pressure • Soaring student debt • Bankruptcy rates rising • Falling home equity • High graduate unemployment

The Threat You’ve Feared: Regulation
• Caps on Tuition and Fees p • Limits on Collective Bargaining • Faculty Productivity Mandates • Performance Based Funding • Academic Program Elimination • Forced Articulation

The Real Threat: Irrelevance
• Governors launching charter universities and other alternatives • Venture philanthropists funding alternative projects • Non traditional students flocking to for profit universities • Traditional undergraduates opting for community colleges y g • Faculty launching educational technology startups

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

17

The Incumbent Response p
New Venture Offers Elite Universities a New Platform

A Venue for Star Faculty
• Private company founded by Stanford computer scientists Andrew Ng and Daphne Koller • Partners with elite universities to showcase “the world’s best courses” • No money exchanged in partnerships; Coursera serves primarily as central web portal

The Start of a Larger Conversation
“This is good news. Experimentation with new initiatives in technology use is an important part of the substantive inquiry that will help inform the University’s academic leaders about the best course of action in this area. The Board f Vi it ’ i B d of Visitors’ primary interest i i promoting th hi h t i t t is in ti the highest order of excellence in our students’ learning and enrichment, especially in a resource constrained environment.” Helen Dragas Rector, UVA Board of Visitors

Sustainable Business Model or Marginal Revenue?
Secure Assessment Tutoring Nominal Revenue
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Tuition Sharing

Lead Generation

Ads

Screening Tests

Certificates

Enterprise Platform Potentially Lucrative

Source: Coursera contract with the University of Michigan; Helen Dragas’s emailed statement to The Washington Post, July 16, 2012; Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

18

A Tipping Point pp g
From Inspiration to Fruition in Only a Year

July 2011
Thrun and Norvig announce that their Stanford AI course will be open to anyone

January 2012
Two Stanford professors found Coursera; Venture capital firms invest $16 M

July 2012
Coursera expands to 12 universities and 100+ courses

March 2011
Thrun sees Salman Khan speak at TED

December 2011
MIT announces “MITx” Thrun gets venture capital to create Udacity

May 2012
MIT and Harvard announce “edX” – free online courses and certificates

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Steven Leckart, “The Stanford Education Experiment,” Wired Magazine, April 2012.

A Battle on Two Fronts

19

Disruption from Above, Then Below p ,
New Models Will Threaten Incumbents from Both Ends of the Spectrum
Uncoupling “Quality” from U li “Q lit ” f Price and Exclusivity
• Celebrity Faculty Open Courses • Hot Employer Partnerships

Selective Institutions

Growth of High Quality Online Only Curriculum

Squeezed in the Middle
Pressure on Graduate & Professional Revenue Eroding Margins on Lower Division Expensive and Undifferentiated

• Top Global Brands Crowd Out Mid Tier Institutions

Gathering Legitimacy of Low Cost Models
• Legislator and Parental Support for “No Frills” Programs • Flipped Classrooms and Technology Assisted Instruction • Employer Acceptance of Non Traditional Educators and Credentials

Access Focused Institutions

Unbundling of General Education

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

20

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

21

Three Emerging Business Models: Quality g g Q y
Elite Institutions (or Faculty) Betting on Three Models
Enable Faculty Driven Pedagogical Innovation Scaling Elite Programs Bypass Traditional Accreditation

• P t Partnership with 12 elite hi ith lit universities and growing • Provide infrastructure for online y g and hybrid teaching • Will offer courses in all disciplines, with assessments and certificates • Massive data set will fuel cutting edge pedagogical research for hybrid and online learning

• E t bli h d i 2008 by founder of Established in b f d f Princeton Review • Exclusive partnerships with premier graduate programs: • USC MAT • Georgetown Nursing • UNC Chapel Hill MBA • Wash U LL.M. • Provides start up capital and expertise for cutting edge online pedagogy and marketing

• Founded by Dr. Thrun in 2012 and Dr funded by Charles River Associates • Provide certificates valued by l d i ii l employers, not degrees. 20 initial partner companies • Infrastructure, instructional design, and business services for global MOOC courses • Targeting continuing education in STEM market; 19 courses by 2013 • T ht b prominent f lt on Taught by i t faculty leave from prestigious traditional universities

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

22

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

23

Three Emerging Business Models: Cost g g
Emerging Models for Reducing Cost of Degrees
Targeting General Education Competency Based Credits Credit Bank

Business Model B i M d l • Most affordable provider of online general education courses • 30 50 courses account for 1/3 of all higher ed Pricing • $99 a month + $39 course registration fee • $999 a year for 10 courses Enrollment • 1,000 students in 2010; 3,000 students in 2011

• N “courses” or “credits,” just No “ ” “ dit ” j t competency exams • No traditional instructors; 800+ faculty a mix of assessment designers, subject matter experts, and student mentors • 32,000 students nationwide • 30% annual growth • Tuition: $5,780 per year; hasn’t been increased since 2007. Eligible for aid in select states • New subsidiaries in Indiana, Washington, and Texas

• Founded in 1971 by SUNY System as Regents College • Became independent institution in 1998 • 30 000 students (mostly 30,000 d ( l undergraduate) • “Students have educational paths that are as unique and diverse as th are … Excelsior di they E li College revolutionized adult higher education by recognizing learning wherever and whenever it occurs. occurs.”

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

24

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Quality at Scale

25

The Platform Wars
Big Data Fueling Emerging Market for Education’s “Google Equivalent”
Next Gen Learning Platform
• Course administration • Multimedia content delivery • Live collaboration tools • Real time performance data • Predictive analytics • Adaptive assessment • Automated advising

The Power of a Platform
“It's hard to predict who will win the platform wars, but it's easy to predict that someone will. The Th costs of b ildi an online platform are negligible—Instagram, the mobile photo sharing f building li l f li ibl I h bil h h i platform, had nine employees at the beginning of this year. They were just another group of young people gathered around a table staring at MacBook Airs. The rewards of building the winning platform are vast, as Instagram found when it was bought by Facebook for $1 billion.”
Kevin Carey, New America Foundation
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A Source: Kevin Carey, “Revenge of the Underpaid Professors,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 20, 2012.

26

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

27

Road Map for Discussion p

1

A Tipping Point: New Teaching Methods Gain Legitimacy

2

The Incumbent’s Innovations Incumbent s

3

Overview of Additional Presentations
Resourcing Strategic Priorities Preparing for Cloud Migration

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

28

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

29

The Incumbent Response p
Changes in Fundamental Beliefs Allow for a Wider Array of Responses From Traditional Universities
Traditionalists Believe… T di i li B li
Quality means small courses with tenured faculty

But Innovators Sh B tI t Show…
Academic rigor is possible in large scale settings

1

Quality at Scale

2

Competing on Cost

An education is worth what you pay for it

Lower costs can be achieved by taking new paths to a degree

3

Integrating Academic and Career Preparation

Degrees represent mastery of a discipline

Degrees can represent employer relevant competencies

4

Problem Focused Research

Curiosity driven disciplinary research is most fruitful

Grand challenges can only be solved by multidisciplinary collaboration

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

30

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

31

How Will Disruption Manifest? p
Pressures on the Traditional Higher Education Business Model

1

Quality at Scale

Disruptive Competitors:
• Elite Open Course Credentials • Signature Online Master’s Programs • Prestigious Online Undergraduate Universities g

Elite institutions and faculty rapidly legitimize technology intensive, globally scalable instructional models

2

Competing on Cost

Incumbent Responses:
• Course Sharing Consortia 3 Integrating Academic and Career Preparation • Flipped Classrooms • Adaptive Learning • Learnin Analytics Learning Anal ti s • Online Community • Gamification of Education

4

Problem Focused Research

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

32

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Course Sharing Consortia

33

Filling Gaps in the Course Catalog g p g
Comprehensiveness Achieved by Combining Offerings Online
Lowering the Cost and Risk of Launching Online Programs
Online Consortium of Independent Colleges & Universities (OCICU) • New Ventures of Regis University provides online infrastructure • Course design, maintenance, and faculty training included Shared Course Portal

Taking Niche Offerings to Scale Without Sacrificing Breadth
New Paradigm Initiative Associated Colleges of the South • Courses broadcast via teleconference; remote students participate in real time • Declining viability of language departments a key catalyst d k l

Departments offer many sub scale courses

Yet colleges still struggle to afford breadth

83 Institutions

16 Institutions

Chinese

Physics

Art History

Biology

Arabic

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Leigh Brown Perkins, “A New Paradigm For Learning,” Rollins Magazine, March 2012.

34

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Flipped Classrooms

35

Winning on All Fronts with Course Redesign g g
Alternative Model Expands Capacity, Improves Quality, and Costs Less

Faculty
9 9 9

TAs and Peer Mentors

Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3

Pre Reading

Pre Quiz Pre Lecture Prep

Lecture

Practices e Tutor

Problem Solving

Homework e Tutor

Embedded Videos

Mini Tests

12%

Reduction in DFW rate

45%

Increase in enrollment cap

31%

Cost savings per student

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: “Physics Large Course Redesign Project Report,” UNC Charlotte, Center for Teaching & Learning, Sept. 8, 2011.

36

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

37

Few Excuses Left
Course Redesign Gaining Traction Across Institutional Types and Disciplines
“I always thought I was a pretty good lecturer, but … I had come to a realization that even my most successful students weren’t retaining a lot of the material I’d covered from one course to the next.” next. Elizabeth Alexander Texas Wesleyan History Professor

Physics
• Clickers and frequent feedback opportunities keep students on track • Students grouped based on answers to questions

English

• From 3 hours to 1 hour in class per week • Additional time spent in one on one sessions, peer tutoring, and multimedia lessons

History

• Historical Methods class won l h d l “Radically Flexible Classroom” award • Movable furniture and tech enabled classrooms facilitate group work
“Do our students actually learn during class, or do they simply feverishly scribble down everything we say, hoping somehow to understand the material later?” Eric Mazur Harvard Physics Professor
Source: The National Center for Academic Transformation (www.thencat.org); “Texas Wesleyan’s Classroom.NEXT: 21st Century Learning in Action,” Campus Technology, April 10, 2012.

Math M th
• Emporium model: 1 hour in class, 2 hours in large computer lab g y p p • Significantly improved completion and retention rates • 19% instructional cost savings
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

38

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Adaptive Learning

39

Transforming Commodity Courses g y
Breaking the Cost/Capacity Curve With Self Paced Learning
Adaptive Software Promotes Engagement and Provides Analytics Dramatic Improvement in Remediation Results
Finished 4 weeks early

25% Activity Based Learning
Short, Sh t engaging, “real world” i “ l ld” problems to solve Moved into regular freshman math

50%

Achievement Points
Uses game like badge system to track progress and motivate students

66%

75%

Automated Assessment
Built into activities and diagnostic exams, which adapt to performance

Remedial Math Pilot 5,000 students

13%
Pass Rate
Before

Performance Dashboards
Instructors focus face time on biggest stumbling bl k bi t t bli blocks

6%

Withdraw Rate
After

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Bruce Upbin, “Knewton Is Building the World’s Smartest Tutor,” Forbes Magazine, Feb. 22, 2012.

40

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Learning Analytics

41

“Moneyball” for Education y
Instructor Dashboards Provide Real Time Outcome Data, Predictive Analytics
Open Learning Initiative Introductory Statistics Dashboard

Predictive map of overall learning outcomes

Accuracy distribution by sub objective

Performance distribution for j each objective

Participation by ass g e t assignment category
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A Source: Candace Thille, “Changing the Production Function in Higher Education,” American Council on Education, March 2012.

42

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

43

A Homegrown “Build” with Impressive Results g p

Gator Online Student Association

Improving Grades and Persistence Average GPA
3.04 2.96 2.76

• “Facebook” for online undergrad business program • Built and managed by volunteer students and alumni using open source programs • Peer to peer academic, social, and job academic social search support • Advisor’s Corner for staff to answer questions and receive private messages

Non GOSA All Active GOSA Members Students Members

Difficult Course Drop Rates
50% 32% 23%
Fall

33%
Before GOSA After GOSA

20%
Winter

17%
Spring

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Gator Online Student Association, available at: http://www.ufonlinestudents.org/, Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

44

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Gamification of Education

45

Game Based Learning on the Horizon g
Motivating and Educating a Generation of Gamers

6 Million Years
Total worldwide playtime

200 Million Minutes
Total playtime per day

10 Million Players
Currently subscribed

1 Billion Downloads
Since 2009

Built in Assessment
• Players must solve problems, coordinate teams, and develop mastery to “beat the game” •C Completion signifies known l ti i ifi k competencies and objective achievements

Contextual Learning
• Players learn by doing, not reading or watching • Puzzles placed in compelling, intuitive i t iti narrative ti • Crowd sourced “theorycrafting” for serious players

Motivating Progression
• Games must be accessible and fun, yet challenging • Huge amount of data used to calibrate incentives lib t i ti • “Experience points” and items provide social recognition

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: James Paul Gee, “Games and 21st Century Learning,” Games for Learning Institute, May 6, 2009; Jane McGonigal, “Be a Gamer, Save the World,” The Wall Street Journal, Jan 22, 2011.

46

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

47

Incentivizing Pedagogical Change g g g g
Three Lessons in Encouraging Faculty to Improve Their Courses
1 2 3

Provide Centralized Instructional Design Support Typical Problem:
• Multiple, duplicative services • No integration of tech & instructional design expertise

Focus on New Hires to Create Culture of Innovation Typical Problem:
• Political capital spent trying to convert eternal skeptics • Research remains the priority

It’s Not About Technology. It s It’s About Assessment. Typical Problem:
• Faculty recoil at “online” and “machine aided” teaching • Wasteful tech investments

Exemplar Model:
• Center for Teaching & Learning combines tech and pedagogy staff • Staff directly involved with course design at all levels

Exemplar Model:
• Faculty Development Institute focuses on new hires • 100s of short courses available on every facet of teaching

Exemplar Model:
• Faculty required to submit self assessment studies yearly • Agnostic about end product; experimentation encouraged

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

48

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

49

Mapping the World of the Possible pp g
How Ontario’s Best Faculty Approach High Capacity Instruction
Problem
Feeling of “anonymity,” no personal connections More students mean more work for faculty Few incentives or resources for instructional innovation

Solution

Creating a Sense of Community

Improving Efficiency

Supporting a Culture of Teaching

Supplementary tutorials “ h k Pair Share” h ” “Think Extensive course websites

LMS administration l Commercial assessment software Pre recorded content p Open educational resources TA led tutorials Team based instruction

Teaching & learning center Scholarship of teaching Teaching emphasis in promotion guidelines Dean & chair support Professional development workshops Teaching awards

Strategies

Social media Clickers Pre class availability Peer mentorships

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Angelika Kerr, “Teaching and Learning in Large Classes in Ontario Universities: An Exploratory Study,” Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario, 2011; Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

50

Aiming Higher than Equivalence
“While “ h l continuing to study the impact of online learning on d h f l l completion is important, the question to be answered is not ‘is online education as good as (or better than) traditional education?’ but rather, ‘how can the technology be used most effectively to support and accelerate colleges’ efforts to dramatically increase student progress and completion?’”
Candace Thille Director, Open Learning Initiative

A Change of Heart
“I have been on record for some time as being skeptical about the likely effects on productivity in higher education of various new technologies… But the evidence...about the work at Carnegie Mellon has caused me to rethink my positions.”
William Bowen President Emeritus, Princeton University

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Candace Thille, “Changing the Production Function in Higher Education,” American Council on Education, Feb 2012.

51

Disruptive Competition and Incumbent Innovation p p
Pressures on the Traditional Higher Education Business Model

1

Quality at Scale

Disruptive Competitors:
• Affinity Population Marketing • Competency Based Placement • Pay by the Course Subscriptions • No Frills Charter Universities

2

Competing on Cost

Lower cost options, more convenient delivery modes, and targeted marketing attract students who would not otherwise have enrolled

Incumbent Responses:
• Flexible Articulation • 2+2 Models • 3+2 and 4+1 Master’s Programs • Credit Aggregator A re ator

3

Integrating Academic and Career Preparation

4

Problem Focused Research

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

52

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Competing on Convenience

53

The $10,000 Degree $ , g
Early Attempts at Drastic Price Reduction Will Affect Few Students
Targeted Merit Aid for High Achieving STEM Majors Accelerated 2+2 Program Starts in High School

University of Texas of the Permian Basin Accepted into selective “Texas Science Scholar” program No N remedial courses di l Majoring in STEM field 4 year completion

Texas A&M University San Antonio Qualifies for dual enrollment program in high school Majoring in IT and Security 27 credits at a community college 36 credits at Texas A&M SA

$10,000 $10 000
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

$10,000 $10 000

54

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Competing on Convenience

55

The Path Dependency of Total Cost p y
Reducing Degree Costs through Articulation and Faster Time to Completion
Six Years at Public University

Typical Option
Three Years in BA Program Two Years in Master’s Master s

$103 K $86 K
Two Years at CC Two Years at Private
Six years of room and board significantly increase total cost

3+2

2+2 Private
Four Years at Public University

$83 K $69 K
Two Years at CC Two Years at Public

With this option, degree from private university costs less than six year degree from public

“On Time” Graduation

2+2 Public
1 Assumes in state tuition at public four year ($8,244) and two year ($2,963), tuition at private university ($28,500) and room / board while at the public four year ($8,887) and at the private four year ($10,089) © 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

$40 K

By far the cheapest option, in part due to fewer years on campus
Source: College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2011.

56

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

57

Marketing a Transfer Friendly Advantage g y g
Enrollment Strategy Adapts as Student Demand Shifts to Completion
New Message and New Policies Reinvigorate Campus Transfer Friendly
2100 2000 1900 • No associate s degree required associate’s • Community college partnerships • Marketed transfer scholarships on CSU campuses

Fall Enr rollment

1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 2004

Declining E ll D li i Enrollments Threatening t Th t i Long Term Viability

Targeted Marketing
• Systematic review of program demand and market share • Focus on demographics with highest persistence • Individualized degree mapping toward on time completion 2008 2009 2010 2011

Recession and C lif i B d R i d California Budget Cuts Lead to Course Reductions at Public Institutions
2005 2006 2007

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

58

The Net Price Calculator Does Its Job
“We’re definitely seeing students and parents looking more closely at retention rates, time to degree, and net price. They rates degree price understand that these factors are important, and the data are now much easier to get your hands on.” Kathleen Dawley President & CEO, Maguire Associates

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

59

Disruptive Competition and Incumbent Innovation p p
Pressures on the Traditional Higher Education Business Model

1

Quality at Scale

Disruptive Competitors: p p
2 Competing on Convenience • Digital Badges • Employer Defined Stackable Credentials 3

Integrating A d i I t ti Academic and Career Preparation

Incumbent Responses:
• Competency Based ePortfolios p y • Workforce Development Campuses • “Applied” Liberal Arts Curricula

Schools compete on ability of students to l d “ b of choice” through employer ” h h l land “job f h relevant curriculum, experiential learning, and comprehensive career advising services

4

Problem Focused Research

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

60

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

61

Dismal Job Market Making Career Prep a Priority g p y
Spotlight on Higher Ed as Graduates Search for Employment
Of those who graduated since 2006…
• Over 11% were unemployed
Chasing the American Dream

• Only 51% were employed full time

Of those who graduated since 2009…
• Fewer than half were employed within a year of graduating • Three times as likely to be unemployed as 2006 08 graduates

A Vicious Cycle
“Given that the unemployment picture for young college graduates has yet to show substantial improvement, the Class of 2012 will be joining a improvement significant backlog of unemployed college graduates from the Classes of 2009, 2010, and 2011 in an extremely difficult job market.”
“The Class of 2012: Labor Market for Young Graduates Remains Grim” Economic Policy Institute
Source: Carl Van Horn, Charley Stone, and Cliff Zukin, “Chasing the American Dream: Recent College Graduates and the Great Recession,” John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, May 2012.

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

62

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Integrating Academic and Career Preparation

63

Beginnings of a Marketplace for Digital Badges g g p g g
Will Micro Certifications Replace the Symbolic Power of Diplomas?
What s What’s a Digital Badge? What s What’s Needed for a Liquid Market?

Proof of Concept Funding
1
Mozilla’s Open Badges Infrastructure makes it easy to issue, display, issue display and manage badges across the web.

MacArthur Foundation launches $2M contest for badge design

Open IT Standards O St d d
2
Mozilla developing interoperability specs for badge formats

Credible Sponsors
3
Government Affinity Groups Industry Associations Individual Employers Famed organizations designing and recognizing badges

• Collectable, sharable certifications of specified competencies • Acquired by examination demonstration proof of experience examination, demonstration, • Help students find a job, collaborator, or social media followers
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A Source: www.DMLCompetition.net; Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

64

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

65

Using Badges as Infrastructure for Learning Outcomes g g g
Early Adopter Rethinking Assessment in a Digital Age
Beyond Mere Grades
New Major Building Learner Centric Toolkits
Suzy Smith

Internship Deliverables E Portfolio
Sustainable Agriculture & Food Systems ; ; ;

• Agriculture students will earn badges based on competencies, skills, classes, p , , , and internships • Mix of pre determined standards and self assessment with peer review • Intended to capture learning that occurs outside of traditional classroom setting and beyond graded assignments • Operationalizes emphasis on learning outcomes

Strategic Management Interpersonal Communication Experimentation & Inquiry

Recorded Presentations

Experimental Results and Analysis

Instruction

Peer, Mentor, and Faculty Feedback

Evidence

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

66

Approaching a Tipping Point
“A lot of the foundation for competency based education is in place now. Employer identified competencies, a growing inventory of high quality online courses, enough accredited two year and four year institutions so that working students can get degrees as well as skills. It will really take off when a prestigious employer or two features the ll kill ill ll t k ff h ti i l t f t th credential—people may downplay online education, but would they if a Boeing or a John Deere were on board? If even one of those firms endorses the concept, it will get a lot of legitimacy quickly, and I think we'll see a big part of the 'applied‘ market split their education among traditional and non traditional models.” models Burck Smith CEO, StraighterLine

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Integrating Academic and Career Preparation

67

A Streamlined Pipeline for Local Industry p y
Accelerated Degree Program Focuses on Workforce Development

A new value proposition for parents and students

Cohorts Begin Courses in Local High Schools
• St d t explore potential Students l t ti l careers, apply in 9th grade • Successful applicants assigned an industry mentor • Free college credit earned in 11th and 12th grades

2 Year Campus Curriculum Focuses on “Real World” Skills
• D l counting / special general Dual ti i l l ed credits accelerate “core” • Students intern with local employers, earn credit and financial assistance • Results in BS in Systems Engineering Technology

Graduates Hit the Ground Running at Local Businesses
• I d t f Industry focused curriculum d i l mitigates cost of training new employees • Developing stackable certificates for continued training • Hope to attract new businesses in “research park” model

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Missouri Innovation Campus White Paper: http://www.ucmo.edu/about/mic/documents/micpaper.pdf

68

Not an Unfunded Mandate Anymore y

$500 K
Block grant to support initial Innovation Campus initiatives

$10 M
Competitive funding to adapt Innovation Campus model throughout Missouri

“…[C]ompanies in high growth sectors need a highly skilled …[C]ompanies workforce to grow, innovate and compete … but the current business model for higher education is not keeping pace.”
Governor Jay Nixon

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Jay Nixon, “Missouri Innovation Campus Will Speed Students Toward Degrees, Jobs,” The Kansas City Star, Feb. 26, 2012.

Integrating Academic and Career Preparation

69

Liberal Arts 2.0
Articulating “Return on Education” to Outcome Focused Students
Liberal arts college in Worcester, Massachusetts “LEEP provides a greater return on your educational investment by preparing you to thrive in today’s highly interconnected, competitive, and dynamic g y global economy” y Motto: “Challenge Convention. Challenge Change Our World.”

“Develop focused skills to make immediate contributions to the workplace”

“Turn your talents and passions into a rewarding career”

1 •

“Effective Practice”
Clark’s “defining contribution” on top of AAC&U core learning outcomes

2 •

Alliance & Mentors
Employers and alumni partner with Clark to provide career guidance

3 •

“Return on Education”
New interactive website focusing on alumni placements and salaries

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

70

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

71

Disruptive Competition and Incumbent Innovation p p
Pressures on the Traditional Higher Education Business Model
1 Quality at Scale

2

Competing on Convenience

Disruptive Competitors:
• Competitive “Grand Challenges” • Venture Philanthropy

3

Integrating Academic and Career Preparation

Incumbent Responses: p
4

Problem Focused Research

• Alternative Research Structures • Incubator Campuses • Community Based Scholarship

Philanthropy, corporate, and government funding concentrates on handful of universities with demonstrated capabilities to solve business, technical, p and social problems

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

72

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

73

Science in the Service of Society y
Funders Emphasizing “Grand Challenges,” Not Disciplinary Research
University Model
Journal

Department

Faculty Salary

Disciplinary Research

Idea

Publication

“Grand Challenge” Model

Foundation

Idea

Global Competition

Invention

Prize Money

A Push to Remake Science Policy in Canada
“The current suite of programs is mainly (but not exclusively) focused on investigator led ‘idea push’ projects… However, there remains a gap with respect to collaborative R&D and innovation projects that are large scale, industry facing, demand driven and outcome oriented…” Innovation Canada: A Call to Action
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

74

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Problem Focused Research

75

Does Anyone Actually Read This Stuff? y y
Even Faculty Questioning the Benefits of “Publish or Perish”
16 11 11 11 Citations of Essays Published by English Departments in 2004 2
U of Illinois

4 Mark Bauerlein

3 1 1

3

4 2

U of Georgia

SUNY Buffalo

U of Vermont

0 2 Citations

3 6 Citations

>6 Citations

A Worthy Cause, But At What Cost?
“Yes, research is an intellectual good, and yes, we shouldn't reduce our measures to bean counting. But we can no (salaries, sabbaticals, grants longer ignore the costs of supporting research financial costs (salaries sabbaticals grants, travel; the cost to research—financial libraries to buy and store material, to scholarly presses to evaluate, produce, and market it; and to peers to review it), opportunity costs (not mentoring undergraduates, not pushing foreign languages in general education requirements, etc.), and human costs (asking smart, conscientious people to labor their lives away on unappreciated things).” Mark Bauerlein Professor of English, Emory University
Source: Mark Bauerlein, “Literary Research: Costs and Impact,” Center for College Affordability and Productivity, Nov 2011; “The Research Bust,” The Chronicle Review, Dec 4, 2011.

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

76

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Problem Focused Research

77

Will Research Dollars Migrate to the Private Sector? g
Venture Philanthropists Playing Increasingly Central Role in R&D

Paul Allen

Leaving the Academy
“…[U]niversity and government financed labs l b cannot afford th personnel and t ff d the l d equipment to perform the multidisciplinary work that Mr. Allen wishes to encourage”

• $500M investment • Attracting top faculty from elite institutions • Doubling size to 360 staff • Marketing accountability, speed, and publicly accessible results to funders

Ricardo Dolmetsch Ri d D l t h (Former) Professor of Neurobiology Stanford University

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Peter Monaghan, “Microsoft Co Founder’s Brain Institute Attracts Top Academic Researchers,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 1, 2012.

78

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

79

Competing in the Age of Venture Philanthropy p g g py
CDOs Hear Major Donors Critique Higher Education as Destination for Big Gifts
Stewardship p
Can’t Quantify Impact “Big donors are now demanding business plans we ll plans—we’ll sustain funding after the initial gift is used up and report on progress against goals on a quarterly basis.” Less Attractive the Closer We Look “We did a survey of trustees trying to find out what drove their giving behavior. We were discouraged to learn that several were less inclined to give after becoming a trustee, because they saw up close the vision and efficiency challenges. challenges.”
CDO, Tuition Dependent Private University

CDO, Selective Private University

Academic Vision
Funding Transformations, Not Operations “You won’t get an eight figure gift for financial aid or deferred maintenance. Venture philanthropists want to seed transformational ideas.” Organized around Disciplines, Not Problems “Social entrepreneurs want to solve big problems that are inherently interdisciplinary, like public health or sustainable energy. It’s a struggle to get all our disciplines synchronized, and we’re starting to lose out to NGOs who have more integrated marketing pitches.”
CDO, Flagship Public University
Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis.

CDO, Private Research University
© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

80

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

81

Restructuring the Research Enterprise g p
Overcoming the Limits of Departmental Autonomy
Energy Initiative Thematic Divisions

• Established in 2006 to transform global energy system • More than 50 industry partners provide financial support and tech transfer relationships • Connects more than 50 departments, laboratories, centers, and programs involved in energy related research on campus

• More than a dozen new interdisciplinary schools (i.e., Human Evolution and Social Change, Earth and Space Exploration) S E l ti ) • Large scale research initiatives (Sustainability, Biodesign) • Eliminated many traditional departments (Biology, Sociology, Anthropology Sociology Anthropology, Geology)

Innovation Collaborative

Key Themes Initiative

• Baylor Research and Innovation Collaborative (BRIC) will provide faculty, industry, and start ups with p y y p 330,000 square feet of space • International partnerships, interdisciplinarity, commercialization, and workforce development are central themes

• University will focus on one major global challenge every two y y years (starting this year) g y • First theme, “Water in Our World,” will address global water crisis from all angles • Builds on existing institutional strengths and focuses energies of nearly every academic unit

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

82

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

83

Road Map for Discussion p

1

A Tipping Point: New Teaching Methods Gain Legitimacy

2

The Incumbent’s Innovations Incumbent s

3

Overview of Additional Presentations
Resourcing Strategic Priorities Preparing for Cloud Migration

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

84

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

85

You Can’t Go Home Again
External Pressures Forcing Schools to Reassess Ability to Make Strategic Investments
Major Revenue Sources Under Attack…. …While Costs of “Big Bets” Increasing

Flat Or Declining
Net Tuition: “Net tuition growth will be much lower than past 10 years.” (Moody’s) State Funding: 7.6% decline in FY 11 12 is largest in at least 50 years. (Grapevine) Online Degree Programs • $5M t h l technology • $1M marketing Global Campus Development • $75M infrastructure • $5M faculty and staff Center for Sustainability y • $8M infrastructure • $1M increased operating Multidisciplinary Research* Research • $10M infrastructure • $3M special equipment

Winner Take All
Philanthropy: Top 25% of schools received 84% of 2011 $. (Commonfund) Research Funding: “Future growth will Future slow dramatically… top programs will be best positioned.” (Moody’s)

*While support for personnel, facilities, and equipment can vary widely by research area, a typical threshold level for a multidisciplinary center is approximately 10M one time costs and $1 3M in continuing funds. © 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis

86

A More Activist Central Role, of Necessity Role
“There are clear differences of opinion among our board about how much we need centrally…but I would argue that our most important initiatives are inherently interdisciplinary y g p y p y and require coordination and investments above and beyond what a unit can provide.”

Vice Chancellor, Administration Large Research University

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis

Strategic Plans Unhelpful For Resource Allocation

87

All Things to All People
Strategic Plans a Declaration of Values, Not a Roadmap Toward Differentiation
Percentage of Strategic Plans That Include Indicated Strategic Goal
Based off Education Advisory Board Audit
(n=32 strategic plans; ACC=9; Ohio=11; SLA=12)*
All = 97%
100%

94%

94%

88%

78%

59%

56%

50%

0%

Academic Excellence

Student Success

Secure Finances

Student Satisfaction SLA ACC

Community Ties Increase Research

Organizational Processes

ALL
*Audit participants include a selection of schools from the Atlantic Coast Conference, the University System of Ohio, and several small liberal arts conferences. © 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Ohio

Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis

88

Over Investment in Priority Accumulation Means Plans Become Expansive Wish Lists
Number of Total Initiatives
(Per Plan)

Number of Individual initiatives
(Per Plan by Category)
2.6 2.4

34% 28% 25%

2.2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.0

13%

<10

10 to 19

20 to 29

>40

Experts recommend that plans identify g no more than seven strategic initiatives per planning cycle.
Source: Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

89

While An Opportunity to Assess Stakeholder Needs, hl k h ld d Strategic Plans Not Designed to Enable a Differentiated Strategy
Strategic Plans Serve Multiple Constituencies …
Accreditors: Pl A dit Plans need to comply dt l with accreditation requirements 1.

And Have Many Productive Uses
Maximize Fundraising Dollars: A broadly written g y strategic plan allows for flexibility in matching donor interests with goals. Promote Inclusivity: The consensus based nature y of higher education strategic planning enables multiple stakeholders to voice their opinion on the direction of the university. Inspire Big Thinking Among Star Faculty: Strategic plans encourage faculty to think expansively about the school’s value proposition Boost Morale: In a time of seemingly unending cuts, aspirational plans help energize the community

State Legislatures: Many states require funding requests to be in line with the strategic plan Fundraisers: B dl written plans F d i Broadly itt l allow for flexibility in matching donor interests to goals Incoming Presidents: Many new presidents use the planning process to conduct stakeholder analyses

2.

3.

4.

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

90

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

CBO As Agent of Change

91

Needing a Push from the CBO
As Outcomes of Planning Gain Importance, Attention Shifts to Implementation and Execution
Higher Education Strategic Planning Cycle at Average University

Traditional Focus T diti lF
Define Strategy Most planning efforts stop at the definition stage, leaving units to complete remaining steps. 1 Communicate Results Quantify Requirements CBO’s Role

4

Emerging Model
Increased demands and bigger bets will push leading institutions to focus additional energies on the execution stages of the planning cycle. f h l l

3 Measure Performance

2 Align Unit Strategy

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: Reuss, “Successful Strategic Planning: A Guide for Nonprofit Agencies and Organizations” (1993); Education Advisory Board interviews and analysis

92

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

93

Operationalizing Strategic Initiatives
Translating Institutional Priorities into Resource Requirements and Budget Allocations
Defining Actionable Initiatives Enhancing Transparency and Accountability

I
Quantifying Resource Requirements 1. Cost Revenue Feasibility Planning Strategic Plan Implementation Teams T

II
Aligning Unit Led Strategy Development 3. Defined Initiative Parameters Business Case Support Services Gain Sharing Guardrails Budget Reduction Scenario Plans

III
Measuring Implementation and Impact 7. Outcome Progress Reviews Probationary Approval Periods Strategic Goal Owners

IV
Cultivating Institutional Perspectives Among Faculty 10. Chief Business Officer Simulator 11. Outside Expert Review 12. Faculty Communication l Toolkit 13. Anonymous Prioritization Voting 14. Paperless Budget Requests

2.

4.

8.

5.

9.

6.

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

94

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

95

Road Map for Discussion p

1

A Tipping Point: New Teaching Methods Gain Legitimacy

2

The Incumbent’s Innovations Incumbent s

3

Overview of Additional Presentations
Resourcing Strategic Priorities Preparing for Cloud Migration

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

96

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

97

Many Hands Make Light Work y g
Users Gain Accessibility While Institutions Offload Maintenance & Ownership
Cloud System External Owner of at Least One Major Component Group Application or Software as a Service (SaaS)

Collaboration

Monitoring

Content

Platform as a Service (PaaS)

Identity

File Storage

Database
Any Internet browser

Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)

Network

Block Storage

Compute Any d i A device with ith internet connectivity

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Source: CIO Research Center, “Making Cloud Less Cloudy:” http://cioresearchcenter.com/2010/12/107/ (accessed 12 April 2012); Education Advisory Board Interviews and analysis.

98

Ramifications of a Cloud Based Infrastructure

• Accessible from any device with Internet connection • System is flexible and can easily add users or capacity • If hardware and software is owned by external party, payment can be based on actual consumption

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

99

A Conductor Rather than a One Man Band
IT Staff are Better Able to Coordinate Delivery of Wide Array of Services than to Provide them Directly
Enterprise Systems Applications Development Security

Infrastructure Maintenance

Desktop Support and User Services

Business Intelligence

IT Staff Coordinate Service Delivery by Cloud Providers Web Services and W bS i d Development Data Center D t C t Management

Network Services

Academic Technology

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

100

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

101

Deduplication p
Paying only for IT Services Consumed Could Save Considerable Amounts by Eliminating Duplicative Spend
Total University IT Spend l d
$300 Million Total

Distributed IT Spend b d d
$195 Million

Central IT Spend Spend* $100 M

35%

65%
Distributed IT Spend

Duplicates centrally provided services

85%

15%

Dept specific IT spend

$165M in duplicative spend

*NB: All benchmarking surveys of IT spend identified in the research process reported only central spending or was not specific about the total amount . These figures represent the approximate average of several IT benchmarking reports done by onsite consultants for several large research institutions. © 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A Source: Education Advisory Board Interviews and analysis.

102

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

Cloud Roadmap For Higher Education

103

Higher Education Cloud Roadmap g p
1: Ready to Go • Commodity technologies • Proven success in higher education • Likely to get cheaper over time 2: On the Cutting Edge • Commodities proven in industry but less so in higher education • Solutions currently being developed specifically for higher education
Unit Driven Experimentation

3: In the Waiting Room • Major providers not yet offering higher education solutions • Higher Education solutions offered by niche vendors

Road Tested

A Year or So Away

Calendar C l d & E M il Mail Productivity Apps Data Storage D S Data Backup Self Service Portal

Data Center/IaaS Wireless Management
Under Construction

Enrollment Management Student Information System Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP): Finance eProcurement P

Research & High Powered Computing Research Administration HRIS/Payroll CRM

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

104

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

105

Preparing for the Storm Cloud p g
Key Organizational Capabilities for Effective Cloud Adoption Across Campus

I
Effective Contracting and Security
Calendar and Email Data Backup

II
Legacy Systems Retirement
Data Center

III
IT Staff Change Management
HRIS Research Computing

IV
Preventing Shadow Systems
CRM/Enrollment Management

Ready to Go

On the Cutting Edge

In the Waiting Room

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

106

Notes:

© 2012 The Advisory Board Company • www.educationadvisoryboard.com • 24056A

University Business Executive Roundtable

Education Advisory Board

2445 M Street, NW • Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: 202 266 6400 • Facsimile: 202 266 5700 • www.educationadvisoryboard.com

You're Reading a Free Preview

Télécharger
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->