Challenges and opportunities for
blended learning in research
universities
Pip Pattison
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)
Sydney Teaching Colloquium: Blended Learning for Engaged Enquiry
University of Sydney, October 2, 2013
Outline
1. International context (MOOCs and more)
2. The case for blended learning
3. An institutional approach
4. Other institutional considerations
5. A few final thoughts on ‘unbundling’ in higher education
International context (MOOCs and more)
International context (MOOCs and more)
1. International context (MOOCs
and more)
1. Global context: some non-ignorable trends
in the higher education environment
• The rapid rise of open online resources, in general, and
MOOCs, in particular (open access, eBooks, “eBookClubs”, …)
• The slower but consistent rise in online degree enrolments, and
the emergence of higher quality for-fee online programs
• Increasingly pervasive and more inclusive mobile connectivity
• Increasing interest in and capacity for learning analytics
• The “unbundling” of higher education
• International and national concerns about cost and access
(government and communities) and funding (universities)
• New models:
– The Minerva Project
– New MOOC sequences: Wharton (Coursera), MIT (edX)
– Georgia Institute of Technology: Master of Computer Science online
The rise of open resources and courses
Approximately linear growth in enrolments
Coursera Enrolments
4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
Coursera Enrolments
Linear (Coursera Enrolments)
1500000
1000000
500000
0
-500000
US students with at least one online
enrolment as a fraction of the total students
*Allen & Seaman (2013): http://edf.stanford.edu/readings/changing-course-ten-years-tracking-online-education-united-states
The state of the internet*
*http://www.businessinsider.com/state-of-internet-slides-2012-10?op=1
Why have universities engaged with
MOOCs? Our reasons are likely typical...
An opportunity to:
–
gain experience in online course development and delivery
at scale (with no direct exchange of funds or IP)
–
build data, expertise for new approaches to learning
analytics
–
develop more effective approaches to automated and
adaptive feedback
–
explore new pathways to higher education
–
support ‘global’ classrooms with international partners
–
build high quality resources for blended learning on campus
–
offer courses at scale with tangible contribution to a public
engagement agenda
–
foster a broader discussion on innovation in L&T
Consensus on reason for engaging with
MOOCs, from Maturing of the MOOC*
Universities
•
•
•
•
Brand extension
Recruitment
Educational innovation
Revenue (or cost reduction) opportunity
Learners
•
•
•
Satisfactory learning experiences
Curiosity
Learning, rather than an award
*UK Department for Business Innovation and Skills, Research Paper No 130, September 2012
Of course we need to be mindful of who
MOOC students are…
Principles of Macroeconomics
Age distribu on - Macroeconomics MOOC cohort
160
140
120
100
Count
80
60
40
20
0
-1
16 5
-2
21 0
-2
26 5
-3
31 0
-3
36 5
-4
41 0
-4
45 5
-5
51 0
-5
56 5
-6
61 0
-6
66 5
-7
71 0
-7
76 5
-8
81 0
-8
5
USA
India
Australia
Spain
U.K
Germany
Portugal
Serbia
Russia
10
20.4%
9.2%
6.4%
4.4%
3.9%
3.5%
3.4%
3.3%
3.2%
Forms of engagement – Discrete Optimization*
88 countries in total
*Van Hentenryck, P. & Coffrin, C. (2013). Teaching creative problem solving in a MOOC. University of Melbourne
A new industry: predicting the future of
higher education
Positive impacts of MOOCs
Heightened general interest in higher education
teaching and learning
Renewed interest in experimentation
Renewed interest in research in higher education
(learning analytics)
Serving an engagement agenda, and providing
something that a largely educated audience wants
But, divergent views on where MOOCs are
leading, from Maturing of the MOOC*
“Strong commitments from top university brands, stoked by
large venture capital investments, have cooked up a
powerful and frothy brew. A tonic for an ailing education
system say some, a poison for Universities say others.”
“The prevalent opinion is that, whatever their faults,
MOOCs herald an unstoppable “Napster moment” which
will break the old business model of Higher Education...”
*UK Department for Business Innovation and Skills, Research Paper No 130, September 2012
International context (MOOCs and more)
International context (MOOCs and more)
2. The case for blended learning
Graham et al, 2013*: Course delivery forms
*Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W , Harrison, J. B (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning
in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003
Technology is supporting an expanding set of
Learning and Teaching possibilities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Online v. face-to-face
Free v. fee
Awards and degrees v.
certificates and badges
Open v. restricted
Self-paced v. in-session
Synchronous v. asynchronous
Group- v. individual-based
Instructor- v. peer-based
Institution- v. student-focused
Generative v. analytical
Immersive and rich v. abstract
and idealised
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Personalised v. standardised
Credential- v. challenge-based
entry
Interactive v. passive
Problem- v. content-structured
Adaptive v. fixed
Experiential v. ‘abstracted’
Reflective v. programmatic
Mobile v. location-dependent
Evidence-based v. tradition-based
Immediate v. delayed feedback
Mastery v. threshold
Question for us all: What parts of this yeasty space to occupy
(especially as MOOCs raise the temperature)?
Blended learning and the broader role
of technology in Learning & Teaching
eLearning
• Digital technologies to enhance interaction, engagement,
learning
• New learning tools that capitalise on the distinctive possibilities
of digital technologies
Online subjects and courses
• Adding diversity and flexibility for on-campus programs
• Online and blended pathways to and through higher education
• Open offerings for broad online engagement
The on campus component of blended
learning
(blended) on campus = online + more
• Balancing the distinctive advantages of online and
face-to-face
Understanding and enhancing the “more”?
• A scholarly community within a richly resourced
(human, physical, virtual) learning environment, and
the opportunities for learning, interaction and
creativity which it supports
• A wealth of opportunities to support broader personal
development (especially for 18-22 year olds)
Blended learning: the ‘in class’ component
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Online v. face-to-face
Free v. fee
Awards and degrees v.
certificates and badges
Open v. restricted
Self-paced v. in-session
Synchronous v. asynchronous
Group- v. individual-based
Instructor- v. peer-based
Institution- v. student-focused
Generative v. analytical
Immersive and rich v. abstract
and idealised
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Personalised v. standardised
Credential- v. challenge-based
entry
Interactive v. passive
Problem- v. content-structured
Adaptive v. fixed
Experiential v. ‘abstracted’
Reflective v. programmatic
Mobile v. location-dependent
Evidence-based v. tradition-based
Immediate v. delayed feedback
Mastery v. threshold
A further question for us all: How to build effective ‘in class’
activities that realise engaged enquiry in a blended learning
environment?
Challenge #1
Challenge # 1
• What will blended learning look like in
2030? (And who will be offering it in
what types of institutions?)
Blended learning: better student learning
outcomes through Engaged Enquiry
Broad empirical support for the effectiveness of:
• “active” learning
• activities that bridge learning and practice
• activities requiring student-student interactions
Learning experiences need to be:
• well designed
• effective
• and often also creative and innovative
Feedback on effectiveness for learning is vital:
• for teachers: rapid improvement and adaptation
• for students: guiding learning
• for stakeholders: broad assurance of outcomes
Challenge #1
Challenge # 2
• What type of information would you like
(but don’t currently have) to help improve
learning outcomes for your students?
The student voice
Responses from a representative sample of 10,000 US
students in 226 colleges & universities (Feb-April, 2013)*
Type of course in which college students say they tend to
learn most:
Courses with no online components
22.1%
Courses with some online components
57.7%
Courses that are completely online
7.8%
No preference
12.4%
*The Chronicle, 2013-2014 Almanac, 23 August 2013
International context (MOOCs and more)
International context (MOOCs and more)
3. An institutional approach
Making blended learning work
Our approach
• Strategic framework developed by Director, eLearning
• Implementation:
–
–
–
–
Design in the hands of staff members
$$ to create affordances (time, help, resources)
Engagement at all points of the technology adoption curve
Mechanisms to foster and disseminate innovation (an eLearning
Incubator)
– Context: broader teaching and learning objectives, including
increased experiential learning opportunities
• Measures of success: outcomes for students
Learning and Teaching Initiatives ($5K-$50K )
Focus on Collaboration, Interaction and Engagement
• Promoting Interaction in large and small group lectures
• Increasing interaction between staff and students and among
students through peer-based learning and social networking
• Improving feedback to students and assessment
• Innovative learning design in technology based learning
environments
• Mobile learning on and off campus
• Connecting distributed learners with rich media & virtual
classrooms
• Some fully online/blended subjects for increased flexibility
The eLearning Incubator
Students
PBC Bid
Learning
Environments
Academics in
faculties
eLI
Information
Technology
Services
Library
Centre for the
Study of
Higher
Education
Some current projects
Project
Faculty
eField Trips, ePracticals
Land & Enviroment
EDUtopia (design and simulation platform)
Engineering
apps@Melbourne (software development lab)
Engineering
Saving the Earth, Organising Mars
Engineering
iiNurse
Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences
Mobile learning
Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences
Sociospatial databases for immersive learning
Architecture, Building & Planning
Construction Unwrapped
Architecture, Building & Planning
Musicians’ Drones (pitch perception and tuning app)
Melbourne Conservatorium of Music
PeerTutor
Business and Economics
Collaboration tools
Arts
Scaffolding and rubric-based marking interface
Education
Do-your-own-experiments-kit
Science
Our initial seven Coursera subjects
Course
Exercise
Physiology
Instructor
Prof Mark Hargreaves
Level
Weeks
3rd year UG
6
Generating the
wealth of nations
Prof Jeff Borland
1st year (breadth) 10
Discrete
Optimization
Prof Pascal van Hentenryck
(NICTA)
Graduate
8
Epigenetic control Dr Marnie Blewitt (WEHI)
of gene expression
Graduate
6
Principles of
Macroeconomics
Prof Nilss Olekalns
1st year
8
Animal
Behaviour
Profs Raoul Mulder &
Mark Elgar
3rd year
6
Climate change
Prof Rachel Webster &
colleagues
1st year (breadth) 9
Dedicated studio
The Learning Analytics Research Group
The focus is large data sets of staff and students'
interactions in electronic learning environments
Six themes:
• Student motivation and autonomous learning in MOOCs
• Gamification and game based learning environments
• Modelling student interactions in open curriculum
structures
• Data mining, machine learning and predictive analytics
• Social network analysis and network modelling
• Feedback and adaptive learning environments
A framework for professional development in
eLearning
PD Opportunities
‘Innovations in T&L’ seminars
LMS Workshops
‘Practical pedagogy’ seminars
Centrally supported faculty workshops
Grad Cert in University Teaching
CSHE Orange guides
‘Online Teaching’ online modules
Learning Technology matrix
Online showcase of good practice
eLearning Incubator showcase
Network of Learning technology educators
eLearning consultations
ePeer Review
International context (MOOCs and more)
International context (MOOCs and more)
4. Other institutional
considerations
Institution-wide adoption of blended learning:
what works?
• Special issue (March 2013) on blended learning policy and
implementation
• Strategic framework includes:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Technology and infrastructure
Intellectual Property
“Seat time” (contact hours) and credit points
Incentives and staffing (tenure, promotion, value, salary)
Funding for change
Evaluation of outcomes, including peer review
Professional development and support for staff
• Whole of institution case studies, including:
– Maastricht University
– University of Central Florida
Technology and infrastructure
• Pervasive wireless?
• Collaborative learning
spaces
• Informal learning spaces
Staffing
• Figlio, Schapiro & Soter: Are tenure track professors
better teachers? National Bureau of Economic
Research, September 2013
• Data: 8 successive cohorts of students at
Northwestern (2001-2008; 15,662 students)
• Outcome: “consistent evidence that students learn
more from non-tenure track professors in their
introductory courses”, across a range of subject
areas, and most pronounced for average and lessqualified students
On outcome measures
It is important to focus on meaningful measures of student
outcomes, not just on what we have available...
Extract from the MyUniversity Disclaimer
“The Department monitors the quality of the information
available on this website and updates the information
regularly. However, the Department does not make any
representation or warranty about the accuracy, reliability,
currency or completeness of any material contained on this
website or on any linked site.”
Group of Eight (Go8) Quality Verification
System (QVS)
An expert/peer judgment system designed to provide light-touch
review of learning outcomes, assessment tasks, assessment
standards
• demonstrate the appropriateness of the standards of learning
outcomes and grades awarded in Go8 universities, without
compromising curriculum and pedagogical innovation
• maintain and improve the academic standards of Go8
universities
• enable comparisons of learning outcomes in similar subjects
across Go8 universities
• promote discussion on good practice in teaching and learning in
the Go8 universities
Distinctive features
• designed to be as ‘light touch’ as possible and hence both
systematic and sustained
• timing is flexible
• focuses on assessment in a sample of final year subjects in
undergraduate fields of education (must cover a minimum of 25
percent of final year assessment requirements);
• conducted by senior discipline-relevant academics (Level D and
above) who will have an understanding of academic
standards in leading universities around the world
Challenge #1
Challenge # 3
• If you had to nominate a single measure
of success for a blended learning
initiative, what would your preferred
choice be?
International context (MOOCs and more)
International context (MOOCs and more)
5. A few final thoughts on
“unbundling” in higher education
Why and how does peer review of standards
work (best)?
• Universities co-locate researchers and research infrastructure,
affording creative interaction
• Research networks connect researchers worldwide
• These networks support a shared culture of open and critical
enquiry and knowledge discovery and exchange, and peer
review processes underpin shared views of academic standing
and academic standards
• Research networks are more extensive, more open and
more far-reaching than teaching networks
Co-publication among co-authors of Erdös and their coauthors (http://www.math.ucsd.edu/~fan/graphs/gallery/)
The value proposition of (blended) teaching
and learning in research-intensive universities
The co-location of research and teaching allows:
– higher education to draw distinctively on and pass on its
culture of open and critical enquiry and discovery
– student learning and interaction within a rich environment for
learning and discovery
– convenient and often efficient synergies (or cross-subsidies)
in funding of research and higher education
– benefits for teaching and learning from depth of expertise
– benefits for research of expertise in learning and teaching
and student flows
The co-location of research, teaching and practice allows:
– open and critical engagement of higher education and
research with public life, professional practice and industry
What must our blended learning
environments be careful not to “unbundle”?
• The research networks and culture
• The (human, physical, virtual) learning environment and the
opportunities for learning and creativity which it supports
• Interaction-rich opportunities for learning and assessment
• The partial overlap among research, teaching and engagement
activities
• Specific forms of interaction-rich experience:
– Programs with broad, skills-rich learning outcomes and/or
broader developmental aims
– Research-teaching-practice partnerships for entry-toprofession programs
– Research training programs
Challenge #1
Challenge # 1
• What will blended learning look like in
2030? (And who will be offering it in
what types of institutions?)
Challenge #1
Challenge # 2
• What type of information would you like
(but don’t currently have) to help improve
learning outcomes for your students?
Challenge #1
Challenge # 3
• If you had to nominate a single measure
of success for a blended learning
initiative, what would your preferred
choice be?