ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

Jonathan Darby

University of Oxford

jonathan.darby@conted.ox.ac.uk

The Economics of e-Learning The Economics of e-Learning for Remote Studentsfor Remote Students

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

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

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

Life cycle of an organisation

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

Restarting the lifecycle

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

Student differences

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

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

Economic differences

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

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

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

Online course design objectives

• Simplicity

• Consistency

• Familiarity

• Accuracy

• Navigability

• Economy

• Clarity

• Granularity

• Legality

• Documentation

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

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

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

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

Development team

• 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%)

One year half-time course:

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

Development costs £ Sterling $ US

Staff (5.5 person years) 165,000 264,000

Computers & peripherals 10,000 16,000

Development software 6,000 9,600

Consumables 1,000 1,600

Materials licensing 8,000 12,800

Overheads (including accommodation)

60,000 96,000

TOTAL 250,000 400,000

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

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

Per student delivery costs

£ Sterling $ US

Tutors 200 320

Technical support 50 80

Administration 100 160

Assignment marking &moderation

100 160

Overheads (includingaccommodation)

250 400

TOTAL 700 1120

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

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

Years to break-even

Enrolment Grossincome

Marketing Course-related

Student-related

Totalcosts

Surplus Years tobreak-even

50 125,000 12,500 60,000 35,000 107,500 17,500 14.7

75 187,500 18,750 60,000 52,500 131,250 56,250 4.6

100 250,000 25,000 60,000 70,000 155,000 95,000 2.7

150 275,000 27,500 60,000 105,000 202,500 172,500 1.5

200 500,000 50,000 60,000 140,000 250,000 250,000 1.0

ALT Policy Board – 12 July 2001

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)