The Disruptive Power of Online Education

Challenges, Opportunities, Responses

Andreas Altmann, Bernd Ebersberger, Claudia Mössenlechner, Desiree Wieser, Andreas Altmann, Bernd Ebersberger, Claudia Mössenlechner, Desiree Wieser

• Editore: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Anno: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781787543270
• Argomento: Education
• Categoria: Education Technology

The higher education sector is being disrupted through the effect that technological innovations have on the educational market. As digital and mobile technologies are developing further, higher education institutions must embrace these developments to meet the needs of their learners and to not become irrelevant. In higher education, disruptive effects are mainly visible on a program/product level, with an increasing number of programs including some element of online education. Disruptive effects also become evident on a pedagogical level, where student engagement, collaboration and social learning, gamification and serious games, competency-based learning, teacher training, and overcoming geosocial divides are high on the agenda. This book considers the effect of online elements and their design on university business models and internationalization, course design, massive open online courses (MOOCs), and the scalability of online programs. It also explores how higher education institutions across the globe respond and react to the challenges and opportunities evolving in online education.

PART I
ONLINE PROGRAMMES AND
PROGRAMME DESIGN

Chapter 1

Scaling Online Learning: The Case for a Programme-Level Approach

Regina Obexer

Abstract

Whilst online and blended learning approaches are now widely used by many higher education institutions, the extent and depth of eLearning implementation often depend more on the efforts of enthusiastic individual lecturers rather than effective institution-wide strategies. Innovation is thus frequently restricted to local settings and the enrichment of existing educational approaches rather than radically questioning current paradigms and creating new ways of delivering education. In recent years, there has been more urgency in calling for a deeper re-thinking of how higher education can be made more flexible, scalable and individualised not only at the level of courses but in a systemic and strategic way. This article describes a strategic approach to implementing blended learning at Management Center Innsbruck in Austria. I argue that the whole-of-programme approach taken in this case is an effective way to strategically introduce sustainable and scalable blended learning, and thus not only respond to but actively shape the disruption brought about by online education.

Keywords: Online learning models; programme development; sustainable innovation; scalability; systems approach; eLearning implementation

1.1. Introduction

After nearly three decades of innovation and gradually increasing use, online and blended learning approaches have entered the mainstream, and some argue that the mere concept of eLearning will be obsolete in the near future as there will be no learning without technology (Cavanagh, 2012). However, the extent of eLearning implementation both in terms of breadth and depth varies significantly across the higher education landscape. Countries with a long tradition of distance education (Australia, Canada, USA) and highly developed technological infrastructure have embraced eLearning as the next step in providing educational opportunities to those not able to participate in traditional learning programmes, and to enhance and expand learning for all students (Brooks & Pomerantz, 2017; Gunn & Herrick, 2012). The UK, given its cultural closeness to those nations, has developed equally advanced eLearning strategies (Walker, Voce, & Jenkins, 2016). Nations with significant unmet needs in education, such as India, China, countries in Africa and South America, are looking to eLearning as the means that will provide their people with the education they seek (Murphy, Farley, Dyson, & Jones, 2017; Pulist, 2013; Rivers, Rivers, & Hazell, 2015), and some are already leapfrogging in terms of the development of new and efficient technologies and methods to fill those unmet needs (Biswas & Hazra, 2016; Ng’ambi, Brown, Bozalek, Gachago, & Wood, 2016).

In Germany and Austria, however, things seem to be taking a slower pace, despite significant investment in eLearning initiatives both at national and at European Union level over the past two decades (Bratengeyer et al., 2016; EACEA, 2014. e-teaching.org, 2017; Gaebel, Kupriyanova, Morais, & Colucci, 2014). The reasons for this lag are multi-layered, and it would go beyond the scope of this paper to discuss them. Instead, what is presented here are two forward-looking propositions: the first is that the current status and pace of digitisation does not suffice anymore in the face of economic, technological and social developments, and the second is that eLearning development and implementation at the programme level is an effective approach for Higher Education institutions to fast-track eLearning adoption, make it more sustainable, and create a better experience for stakeholders. A case study of Management Center Innsbruck, where such an approach was implemented, illustrates the programme-level approach as a practical example.

1.2. Setting the Scene: Where Are We?

During an initial period in the late 1990s, eLearning projects and initiatives were supported by significant government funding across the developed world. Projects mainly involved the implementation of various eLearning technologies (with a strong focus on Learning Management Systems) as well as specific, often course based eLearning content and tool developments (Euler & Seufert, 2011). After the various project funding sources had dried up in the early years of the new millennium, it proved to be challenging for many institutions to continue the innovations and achievements of these early projects, and to embed the changed practices into everyday teaching and learning in a systemic way. Most universities in Austria, for example, have now implemented an institution-wide Learning Management System and sometimes a handful of other centrally supported tools and systems that enable various eLearning activities (Bratengeyer et al., 2016). Generally, there is some degree of support for teaching staff, mostly in the form of technical support (including basic training) and to a varying degree and in various forms, didactic support to assist in the development of learning resources and in approaches to designing online teaching and learning as well as assessment strategies. eLearning at an institutional level means for many universities that they make resources available online, that there is some degree of communication with students via electronic means, and that eAssessment is carried out, particularly through online quizzes in large classes.

However, despite significant investment and efforts at institutional, national and European levels, the progress made in implementing online education approaches across the Higher Education sectors in Austria can at best be described as incremental and evolving rather than strategic and systemic. Whilst there is some evidence of efforts to embed strategic approaches to eLearning at an institutional level, and there are indications that the shift towards more student-centred learning approaches is gaining wider traction, the existing educational paradigms are mainly unchallenged by and at best augmented with technologies. Many enthusiastic and engaged teachers are trialing various innovative eLearning and eTeaching approaches and are often successful at the level of their particular course or group of students. However, many of these individual successes have little or no effect beyond the local level, and evidence of systemic approaches to implementing eLearning or blended learning at a wholeof-programme level is sparse (Germ & Mandl, 2009; High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 2014). A more systemic approach as described in the following is starting to emerge as an important aspect. For example, a recent strategy paper developed by the German initiative Hochschulforum Digitalisierung notes:

In the current phase of digitalising academic programmes, the use of digital teaching and learning formats should only be promoted as an integral part of complex study programmes. This suggestion involves abandoning the exclusive promotion of special digitalisation projects in favour of supporting complete study programmes relating to specialist areas or faculties. (Hochschulforum Digitalisierung, 2017, p. 19)

So far, however, the discussion about strategic measures necessary to achieve institution-wide adoption of eLearning use seems to have failed to translate into practice at a wider scale.

1.3. Strategic Imperative: Why We Need to Go Beyond Gradual Adaptation

While the lack of strategic and systemic adoption may not have been seen as problematic so far, even as eLearning was considered by many to reach maturity during the turn of the decade, the tone in the discourse about technology innovation in education has changed radically in recent years. Especially the hype around Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) has put into question the very nature of Higher Education, and other developments (Open Educational Resources or OER, Learning Analytics, adaptive learning, etc.) are widely debated as game changers (Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Oblinger, 2012). Commercial providers are aggressively pushing into an exploding online higher education market. Industry demands for graduates with a range of evolving skills are putting pressure on education and training systems worldwide, whilst in developing countries such as India and China, the new middle class is clamouring for education at a scale that is impossible to realise with traditional educational models. At the same time, it is recognised that the need for lifelong learning has to move beyond political rhetoric in the face of an ageing demographic, rapidly changing technology developments and the ever-increasing amount of information we have to deal with in this century’s knowledge society and economy. These aspects require people to be engaged in continuing education while they are working, be it in formal degree programmes or in more modular and tailored professional development opportunities, including social and informal learning.

We are currently experiencing a confluence of factors that seems indeed to become a catalyst for the long-awaited transformation of Higher Education through technology. Barber, Donnelly, and Rizyi (2013) describe the main drivers for this increased urgency, arguing that higher education must change due to a number of economic pressures. These include a changing global economy, the global financial crisis and its consequences, the rising costs of education, but at the same time the falling value of a degree, and the fact that global competition in the higher education sector is rising significantly. According to Barber et al. (2013), the changes ahead are significant and will overhaul the existing sector in such a way that institutions that are not prepared risk becoming obsolete in the face of a diversified higher education sector, in which each institution will need to find its particular niche, be clear about their target student population, and articulate clearly their value proposition. In a similar vein, Christensen and Eyring (2011) argue that higher education is facing what other industries have already been going through – disruptive innovation through digitisation. They list a number of examples which illustrate how existing business models were completely transformed through the availability of new technologies or digitally enabled processes. In this scenario, it is mostly new competitors in the market who succeed by employing radically different and new business models rather than existing (and often well established) businesses who may find it difficult to completely change their approach to a new mindset. Christensen and Eyring (2011) maintain that Higher Education is now at a point where the services it offers (or, in the authors’ words, ‘the job to be done’) can be delivered in a much cheaper and more accessible way through online education. The quality may not be as good, but it is good enough and certainly better than the alternative for many, which is no education or training at all.

Oblinger (2012) argues that educational technology can play a significant role in changing education and that in this changed and significantly accelerated environment, more radical strategies are necessary to cater for the needs of higher and further education of today and tomorrow:

Information technology can be a game changer in higher education, as it has been in other sectors. […] Information technology enables new models. It can disaggregate and decouple products and processes, allowing the creation of new value propositions, value chains, and enterprises. These new models can help higher education serve new groups of students, in greater numbers, and with better learning outcomes. (Oblinger, 2012, p. 11)

Many other voices agree. The mere ‘enrichment’ character of eLearning in higher education, i.e. the use of technologies to augment existing teaching and learning, will need to morph into the ‘new normal’ (Cavanagh, 2012). New forms of learning and teaching (not those mirroring the current paradigm) are emerging and will partly need to be invented to truly cater to the needs of this millennium. Indeed, a changed frame of reference is necessary that does not simply attempt to improve current models of delivering education but re-invent them based on the affordances of the digitalisation taking place in the 21st century. This requires a shift from integration to digitisation and serious re-consideration and exploration of how new models of education enabled by technology can work, and what they mean in terms of our existing systems, including institutional and sectorial culture, process and practice, legal and regulatory frameworks, (changing) roles of the various stakeholders (in particular the academic workforce) and others (Boud & Brew, 2013; McFarlane, 2011).

1.4. Strategic Scope: Online Learning Is Not a One-(wo)man Show

Given this degree of disruption and transformation, it is important that higher education institutions have a strategic approach to dealing with the challenges described above, and proactively participate and shape the transformation processes and strategic development required to create the higher education model of tomorrow (Bischof & Stuckrad, 2013; Seufert & Meier, 2013).

In order to be able to achieve this transformational shift, it will be necessary to start with bolder experiments beyond those occurring in individual classrooms, taking into account that the transition from traditional models of teaching to new paradigms is complex and requires significant institutional vision, support and investment.

Many higher education institutions understand that there are changing demands on them which result in requirements to fundamentally rethink their offering, however, there are few institutions that are able to approach this challenge strategically and with confidence. For example, a recent study of eLearning at Austrian Universities shows that whilst the technical eLearning infrastructure is implemented across most if not all institutions, only very few organisations have a specific online learning strategy (Bratengeyer et al., 2016). The study shows that there is an investment in online learning and an understanding that it is important to move towards more digital offerings. Beyond the technical infrastructure, many institutions have implemented various support measures and structures such as eLearning support centres, staff development programmes for online learning, technical support, and various incentives. However, these initiatives are generally geared to support early adopters – those enthusiastic individual teachers who want to experiment with various technologies to enhance their teaching. When driven by this group of early adopters, innovation is usually based on the objectives, interests and abilities of the teacher, very much tailored to their teaching approach and subject area, and it rarely goes beyond their individual courses. Many of the projects funded during the early years of eLearning introduction in Europe were of this character. While some of the projects resulted in innovations and improvements to practice and processes, there were also many that had to be abandoned when project money dried up, or when key individuals left the project or organisation (Haug...

Indice dei contenuti

• Cover
• Title Page
• Introduction: The Disruptive Power of Online Education: Challenges, Opportunities, Responses
• Part I: Online Programmes and Programme Design
• Part II: Changing Classroom Dynamics in the Digital Teaching Space
• Index