Kerr Action Plan; 2-for-1 Design

[James Kerr]

View in Google Docs:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zRm0Ph-eUebndO-5TzlePuVpawj-_kf_eaCO0VhcX5U/edit?usp=sharing

View here:
ocTEL Activity 8.2:
Develop an action plan for your own teaching and learning practice

Stakeholders

Who stands to gain (or lose) from changes to the cost and delivery structure of the practice? It may be helpful to review any thinking you did about learner needs in Module 5 when completing this.
2 for 1 Design
Gain:

• • University-lower design & development costs
• • “Free” learners-access to courses and course materials
• • Enrolled learners-larger student audience for peer tutoring and collaboration (if including “free” learners)

Drivers & opportunities

What factors make different kinds of enhancement (efficiency, accessibility etc) important? Which elements and costs are amenable to being changed? What constraints are you working within?
Constraints:

• • Time
• • Money
• • Format-iTunesU? LMS? Coursera?  Different platforms;

Target area(s) for enhancements

What kinds of enhancement are you aiming for? What elements do you think you might be able to change to achieve them? What means will you use to change them?
Enhancements:

• • Inclusion of more OER
• • Source/compile model for content and platform, i.e. single source code but multiple formats
• • Scripting/batch formatting for platform API & formats

Resources that can help

What technologies and material will you draw on? Where will you source or find them?

• • Creative Commons
• • Jorum
• • MERLOT
• • other OER providers
• • Outline steps to implementation

What do you need to do, and in what order?

• • Learn API of platforms and formats of course “packages”
• • Make course content generic; source code model; 1 source, several compilers
• • Add to course content from OER
• • Success indicators & methods of continuous improvement

How will you know if what you’ve done works? How will you find out how to make it work better?

• • Ability to make changes in one place (source) and push out changes easily
• • Intermingling of “free” and enrolled students
• • Increased overall enrollment in courses and positive student feedback

 

[James Kerr]

Best to view in Google Docs-the editor stripped all the table formatting when it posted. – Jim

[David Jennings]

Thanks, Jim, (and I’ve tweaked the formatting a bit for ease of reading)

So just to check that I have your plan right: you are aiming to source existing OERs to create a new (?) course, which will be available in two versions – a free, open access version with no credit, and a for-credit version? Is the latter essentially the same course, but with added support and assessment? And is it that you’re using the savings in development costs (by virtue of using OERs) to balance the extra costs of the ‘free’ version (as you say here, there are always some costs)?

This may seem a little like semantic nitpicking but the things you’ve listed as enhancements seem more like methods than enhanced outcomes. For example, “inclusion of more OER” is more a feature than a benefit in its own right, no?

You have mentioned some enhancements at the beginning in terms of improved access for new/extra learners, and improved experience for existing learners (I’d be cautious about promising to save money for the university, because if you aim to increase provision and cut costs at the same time, you need to work through the figures to ensure that’s achievable). Good stuff.

Let me try and put myself in the shoes of a sceptical, business-minded but fundamentally lazy (implausible as that might seem!) head of department or pro vice chancellor… why would I bother? If the cost savings really stack up, OK. Extending access to courses seems like a good altruistic thing to do, and if there’s political pressure on me to do that, this might alleviate the pressure. On the downside, what if it cuts the demand for the paid-for course and reduces our enrolments? Might some other institution come along and offer support and accreditation to the people taking our free course?

Hope you don’t mind me posing these challenges – I’m just trying to anticipate what you might get asked if trying this for real.

[Personal note: I’m having a routine operation later today, so if I don’t respond to any follow-up in the next few days, it’s not that I’m not interested, just that I’m recuperating.]

[James Kerr]

David,

The reality is that currently universities are tripping over themselves and each other to develop MOOC content without solid evidence of long-term benefit to their institution, no matter what the costs up front or ongoing.  I’m suggesting that rather than design and develop courses separately for MOOCs and credit delivery, if they are using the same delivery model (online coursework) there is potential for some savings in aggregating the design and development process, inclusion of OER when available and applicable, and streamlining the whole process.  The primary enhancement is in the design process and methods; I didn’t explore the enhancements of OER inclusion much in the post.

I’m not questioning the value of MOOCs or what happens to enrollments if non-credit options are available.  Right now, the model is “if you want an accredited degree you pay for the credits” and no one is sure where open learning is headed.  There are some colorful ideas and theories, including my own, but it is a big unknown territory that HE is charging into.

[David Jennings]

Thanks the elaboration, Jim – that makes sense, and I get it now 😉 In fact it makes such obvious sense that one is tempted to assume that it’s bound to happen sooner or later. But might it take a generation in HE (however long that is – how frequently do departments rethink their courses from first principles in the normal course of events?) to work through the system?

[Author]

Posts