1 / 20

Jonathan Darby University of Oxford jonathan.darby@conted.ox.ac.uk

The Economics of e-Learning for Remote Students. Jonathan Darby University of Oxford jonathan.darby@conted.ox.ac.uk. Mission statements. Department for Continuing Education

ivae
Download Presentation

Jonathan Darby University of Oxford jonathan.darby@conted.ox.ac.uk

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Economics of e-Learning for Remote Students Jonathan Darby University of Oxford jonathan.darby@conted.ox.ac.uk ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  2. Mission statements • Department for Continuing Education • To make the University of Oxford, and the quality of education and scholarship that it represents, assessable to men and women in ways which complement the University’s provision for its resident members • Technology-Assisted Lifelong Learning • To build on Oxford University’s international pre-eminence to create Internet-mediated courses and educational services of the highest quality ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  3. Rationale • The Department’s mission • Technology can help meet unmet needs • Flexibility is at a premium in lifelong learning • Technology can reduce costs and raise quality • The future success of the Department could depend of learning technology ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  4. Life cycle of an organisation ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  5. Restarting the lifecycle ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  6. Traditional plenty of time in the studying groove want to be told what they need to know limited life experience not in a position to pay full cost Distance learning limited time highly motivated but “out of practice” usually have specific learning needs highly relevant life experiences to share may be able to pay full cost Student differences ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  7. Traditional most funding already committed motivation is to improve quality of teaching no new money must work with existing system Distance learning creating new business motivation is to serve new markets new students bring additional income can work alongside existing system Economic differences ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  8. Course development stages • Feasibility assessment • Course specification • Resource allocation and planning • Learning object creation • Assembly of alpha course version • Testing and review cycle • Delivery and evaluation • Course respecification and redevelopment ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  9. Simplicity Consistency Familiarity Accuracy Navigability Economy Clarity Granularity Legality Documentation Online course design objectives ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  10. Online course design approach • Thorough market research • large markets • niche markets • Very small learning components • Multiple media (not multimedia) • Central role for tutor • Continuous revision • 20% of initial development costs per annum ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  11. Working with limits • Quality • defining learning object mix to give best learning experience for the subject • Time • figure optimum course that can be delivered by fixed deadline • Cost • identify best mix of learning objects for budget ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  12. Less is more • In (conventional) CPD each student on average needs 30% or course • prior knowledge • not relevant to work • Solution • needs analysis/assessment of prior learning • concept mapping/knowledge representation/learning pathways • individualised courses • mentoring ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  13. Programme director (20%) Project manager (40%) Academic course director (50%) Subject specialist course designer (100%) Learning technologist (50%) Information technologist (50%) Graphic designer (50%) Content authors (100%) Administrator (40%) Evaluator (25%) Marketer (20%) External assessor (5%) Development team One year half-time course: ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  14. ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  15. Development costs ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  16. Per course delivery costs • Course maintenance and update • 10 to 20% of development cost • £25,000 ($40,000) to £50,000 ($80,000) • Server costs • £10,000 ($16,000) ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  17. Per student delivery costs ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  18. Student costs • Course fee • £2500 ($4000) • Computer system if not already owned • £0 to £1000 ($1600) • Internet access (4 hours per week) • £100 ($160) • Printing • £20 to £60 ($32 to $96) ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  19. Years to break-even ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

  20. Minimising costs without compromising quality • Development • avoiding multimedia • working to a fine level of granularity • tight project planning and monitoring • establishing market before starting • Delivery • delivering all materials via the Internet • using part-time tutors • automating administration • Activity Based Costing (ABC) ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

More Related