1 / 19

E-learning in tertiary education: where do we stand?

E-learning in tertiary education: where do we stand?. Richard Garrett (Observatory on Borderless Higher Education) & Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin (OECD/CERI). Outline of the presentation. Background and presentation of the study Overview of findings Main conclusions and policy implications.

marnie
Download Presentation

E-learning in tertiary education: where do we stand?

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. E-learning in tertiary education: where do we stand? Richard Garrett (Observatory on Borderless Higher Education) & Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin (OECD/CERI)

  2. Outline of the presentation • Background and presentation of the study • Overview of findings • Main conclusions and policy implications

  3. Study background • E-learning: the partnership challenge • Internationalisation and trade in higher education • University futures • What perspective for e-learning after the burst of the new economy bubble?

  4. What do we call e-learning? • E‑learning refers to the use of information and communications technology (ICT) to enhance and/or support learning in tertiary education • Activities ranging from the most basic use of ICT through to more advanced adoption, reducing or simply supplementing time spent in the physical classroom: • None or trivial online presence • Web supplemented • Web dependent • Mixed mode • Fully online

  5. Methodology of the study • Qualitative survey of 19 higher education institutions from 13 countries • Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Thailand, France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, United States of America • Why? To gain in-depth coverage of the issues • Partnership with the Observatory on Borderless Higher Education (OBHE) • To have a more general and representative picture • Quantitative survey of online learning in the Commonwealth in 2002 and 2004 • 500 institutions contacted, 122 replies, 12 countries

  6. The OECD sample is largely representative of e-learning adoption Weighted online presence – OECD and Observatory respondents Source: OECD and OBHE

  7. Research questions • Why do different kinds of tertiary education institutions engage in e‑learning? What forms of engagements are favoured? • What do institutions perceive to be the pedagogic impact of e‑learning in its different forms? • What do we know about the costs of e‑learning? • What are the current challenges for further progress in e-learning at the tertiary education level?

  8. www.obhe.ac.uk

  9. Themes... • Online presence • Learning management systems • Pedagogy • Funding • Costing & pricing • Cross-border delivery • Mission & competition

  10. Online presence… • Fully online- minority activity for campus-based institutions (none more than 10% by 2006/07) • Mixed mode- slightly greater interest from campus-based institutions (none more than 15% by 2006/07) • Web dependent- only eight at less than 10% by 2006/07 • Web supplemented- dominant ‘positive’ category but predicted to decline • None/ trivial- current dominant category but predicted to decline

  11. Learning Management Systems • currently synonymous with e-learning in higher education (73% of OBHE respondents) • institution-wide implementation, plus local diversity • dominance of leading proprietary platforms • in-house as saleable product; open source consortia; open standards • relative functionality difficult to gauge; pedagogically neutral? Pace of innovation... • gulf between LMS adoption and online presence in the classroom (76% of provision cited in OBHE survey ‘none/ trivial’ or ‘modest’ online presence) • will LMS be supplanted by or absorb innovation?

  12. Pedagogy • all respondents reported ‘positive’ pedagogic outcomes/ experiences • very few could cite systematic evidence • dominance of local control/ craft model (in mainstream institutions) • little evidence of course redesign • learning object economy faces key cultural/ pedagogic challenges • administrative over pedagogic innovation • what does ‘pedagogic innovation’ mean?

  13. Funding • most sample institutions heavily dependent on public funds • much early e-learning seed funded from external sources; plus internal innovation/ special funds • ‘mainstreaming’ as shift to normal funds versus cost recovery • mixed approaches- e.g. dedicated centre is core funded, some provision cost recovery, most provision ‘normal’

  14. Costing & pricing • still insufficient clarity over economics of e-learning • positive correlation between level of experience and view of cost as relative to inputs • …but little systematic data • cost savings require substantial redesign; cultural resistance, operational uncertainty • little evidence of price differentiation (but may change as fee regimes loosen)

  15. Cross-Border Delivery • no evidence of significant scale; high profile ‘failures’ • significant instances largely confined to ‘distance’ institutions • various small-scale initiatives • convenience, pg rather than mainstream, ug market • blurring between online/ offshore/ classroom- mimic ‘supplementary’ domestic impact • US and China markets suggest a capacity role, but not well understood

  16. Mission & competition • has e-learning affected institutional roles? • are mainstream institutions encroaching on ‘distance’ institution territory? • is e-learning as successor to the classroom a flawed vision? • is it possible to achieve visible pedagogic differentiation through e-learning? UKeU… • will e-learning be acculturated or change the culture?

  17. Main conclusions • Most institutions now have an e-learning strategy, with mixed mode delivery appearing as the main target • The impact of e-learning has mainly be administrative so far: far reaching novel ways of teaching and learning facilitated by ICT remain nascent or still to be invented • Engaging faculty and students to use innovatively and effectively existing technological functionalities is the next challenge

  18. Main policy implications • Shifting e-learning to the mainstream and maximise its impact in the classroom is the current priority • Focus on how to develop and change the « soft » social, organisational and legal context of e-learning – rather than on structural investment • Continue to fund e-learning but have a clearer understanding of the costs and (expected) benefits of e-learning • Case for better knowledge management on e-learning

  19. Thank you R.Garrett@obhe.ac.uk & Stephan.Vincent-Lancrin@oecd.org

More Related