MOOCs and Executive Education - UNICON€¦ · MOOCs and Executive Education Jennifer Kay Stine,...

MOOCs and Executive EducationJennifer Kay Stine, Ph.D.Research Report Prepared for UNICONPresented at the Directors Conference, April 2013(Updated October 2013)

1

• Environment• History• Players, Stakeholders and Business Models• ‘Disruptiveness’• What This Means for Exec. Ed.• Survey Results• Q/A, Your Thoughts and Suggestions

MOOCs and Executive Education

StineSlide 2

Session Overview

• Education (courses… certificates… credit? degrees?) at scale

• MOOC: Massively Open Online Course– Free (mostly)– Semester‐long (changing)– Online– ‘Innovative’– World‐class institutions and faculty– Order of magnitude


StineSlide 3

What’s the big deal?

Executive Education and MOOCSStineSlide 4

• The cost of a college education continues to be in the US national spotlight– Since 1985 the cost of a college education has increased more than

500% (while the consumer price index increased 115%)*– US student loan debt exceeds credit card debt

• Global internet and broadband access has increased greatly– 2011: 2.26B internet users, 589 million with fixed wire broadband

(5.9B with mobile‐cellular and 1.6B with active mobile broadband subscriptions) **

– This is a greater than 500% increase since 2000, when global internet users numbered 361K.***


StineSlide 5

Environment

* http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveodland/2012/03/24/college‐costs‐are‐soaring/** http://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/2012/the‐state‐of‐broadband‐2012.pdf*** http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

• Over 6.7 million students were taking at least one online course during the fall 2011 term, an increase of 570,000 students over the previous year.

• Thirty‐two percent of higher education students now take at least one course online.

• The proportion of chief academic leaders that say that online learning is critical to their long‐term strategy is at a new high of 69.1 percent (50% in 2002)

• To date, MOOCs are a very small part of this market– 2.6 percent of higher education institutions currently have a MOOC (Massive Open

Online Course), another 9.4 percent report MOOCs are in the planning stages.


StineSlide 6

Online Education Has Grown Steadily

Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States, http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf

1862 Pitman Shorthand training program brought cutting edge stenography

via US Mail

1892 U. of Chicago created first college‐level

distance learning program

1923 ICS, started in 1890 to teach mine safety, had

enrolled over 2.5M students

1921‐1946 FCC grants radio licenses to over 200 colleges (only one course

offered by 1940)

1934 U. of Iowa broadcast courses by

television

1964, U. of WI, funded by Carnegie created the AIM project to identify and systematize distance learning practices,

including multimedia

1970, Coastline College the first without a physical campus

1980s satellite television systems became cost effective for employee training and were

embraced by industry

1985, National Technological University (NTU) started offering degree courses to employees at

corporations and labs

1993, Jones University offered online instruction in 5 bachelors and 24 masters, and was

accredited by the Higher Learning Commission

2002, MIT launches OpenCourseWare in

response to Fathom.com and other initiatives

2005, WebCT and Blackboard merged

under Blackboard brand


StineSlide 7

A Brief Timeline of Distance Learning Innovations

http://www.evolution‐of‐distance‐learning.com/ and “A Journey to Legitimacy: The Historical Development of Distance Education through Technology” by D. Casey


Open Education Developments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Figure_1_MOOCs_and_Open_Education_Timeline_p6.jpg


http://chronicle.com/article/Major‐Players‐in‐the‐MOOC/138817/

Udacity

Thrun(Stanford)

For profit, 2012

$21M venture funding

>750K students

~25 active courses

Select faculty and industry partners

Georgia Tech, SJSU, Google, ATT

Coursera

Ng & Koller(Stanford)

For profit, 2012

$65M venturefunding

4M+ students

~400 courses

80+ institutions

180K in one course (Philosophy, 2012)

edX

Argwal(MIT)

Nonprofit, 2012

$60M+ funds, grants, gifts

~1M registered users

~33 courses

28 universities

160K in one course (Circuits, 2012)

Udemy

Paid course platform, with some free

For profit, 2010

$16M venture

~600K registered

6000 courses

Individual faculty

Generated $15M since launch

Top faculty earn $500K


StineSlide 11


Student Demographics

http://mfeldstein.com/moocs‐beyond‐professional‐development‐courseras‐big‐announcement‐in‐context/


Completion Patternshttp://mfeldstein.com/emerging_student_patterns_in_moocs_graphical_view/

Lurkers –people enroll but just observe or sample a few items at the most. Many of these students do not even get beyond registering for the MOOC or maybe watching part of a video.

Drop‐Ins –partially or fully active participants for a select topic within the course, but do not attempt to complete the entire course. Some use MOOCs informally to find content that help them meet course goals elsewhere.

Passive Participants – students who view a course as content to consume and expect to be taught. These students typically watch videos, perhaps take quizzes, but tend to not participate in activities or class discussions.

Active Participants – These are the students who fully intend to participate in the MOOC, including consuming content, taking quizzes and exams, taking part in activities.

Content Creation

Faculty Specialists/Consultants

Content Development & Delivery (inc. certificates)

Udacity Coursera‐Univ. ‘universityX’ Udemy* Faculty

Platforms

Udacity Coursera edX Udemy Blackboard Google


StineSlide 14

Activities Vary

*more than 10,000 people have taken Udemy’s course on how to design and teach a Udemy course


StineSlide 15

US Provost Survey

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/skepticism‐about‐tenure‐moocs‐and‐presidency‐survey‐provosts


StineSlide 16

US Provost Survey

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/skepticism‐about‐tenure‐moocs‐and‐presidency‐survey‐provosts

• Corporate recruiting (job referrals, sponsored classes)• Educational outsourcing/licensing of platforms, courses, content• ‘Freemium’: Fee‐for‐certificate and/or credit and/or identity verification;

also some free (independent), some fee (academic)• Channeling participants into subsequent for‐fee courses and programs

(loss‐leader)


StineSlide 17

Business Models are Emerging

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324339204578173421673664106.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


Industry Partners and Sponsors

https://www.udacity.com/opened


Business Schools Join the Party…

(Coursera now has 45 business and management courses, 4 to 12 weeks long)

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013‐09‐13/wharton‐puts‐first‐year‐mba‐courses‐online‐for‐free

Executive Education and MOOCSStineSlide 20 http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013‐09‐

19/stanford‐b‐school‐jumps‐on‐the‐mooc‐bandwagon

Prof. Mike Lenox, UVA Darden, “Foundations of Business Strategy” 6‐week MOOC delivered on Coursera, March 2013, 90,000+ enrolled:• As a teacher, I have been thrilled to see the reach and impact of my MOOC,

Foundations of Business Strategy.– Students from over 50 countries are participating including students from

the Philippines, Australia, Rwanda, Croatia, UAE, Mexico, Egypt and Argentina among many others.

– I will have taught more than 5x as many students in a six week period than have graduated from the Darden School over its entire 50‐year plus existence.

– Every day, I receive thanks from students for the opportunity to take the course – many who are applying the concepts in their working lives as they take the course and who otherwise would not have access to such material.


StineSlide 21

Faculty are an Important Driver

http://www.forbes.com/sites/darden/2013/03/29/the‐imminent‐shakeout‐disruptive‐innovation‐and‐higher‐education/

• A cost leader (or leaders) will emerge catering to the mass market.– They will leverage technology to provide an effective and efficient education. They will cater to the population who

may not have had access to higher education thirty years ago.– The emergence of the cost leader position will be bad news for the many for‐profit online universities that have

arisen in recent years and for numerous non‐selective residential universities. This is where the shakeout will be most disruptive.

– This disruption will play out over years, if not decades, as struggling colleges fight to stay alive and student attitudes towards online education evolve.

• Retrenchment and growth of a group of elite differentiated players who compete globally for the best students.

– They will emphasize the benefits of a residential education and they will charge significant tuition premiums.– They will be highly selective and highly sought after.– Some will adopt niche positions catering to elite students of one type or another.– They will leverage technology, but as a way to improve the efficacy of their residential programs.– They will dabble in MOOCs, not as a source of significant revenue generation, but as a way to enhance their global

brand and reach.

The question for a traditional university will be which of these worlds it will sort.


StineSlide 22

Lenox predicts market bifurcation:


• my MOOC does not replicate the Darden classroom experience• at a Socratic case‐based school like Darden, we have been flipping the classroom

for over 50 years• learning that emerges from an engaged, real‐time discussion cannot be replicated

on an online forum.• the fear, and triumph, of presenting your ideas for scrutiny often at the bequest of

the faculty member (what we refer to as a “cold call”) is a powerful learning experience

• this type of engagement cannot be conducted asynchronously and it cannot be scaled

Note: not all faculty active in MOOCs make this distinction


StineSlide 23

That said, Lenox points out:


• The question is not just whether MOOCs are going to disrupt traditional education, but how…. MOOCs do bear the early hallmarks of a disruptive innovation:– Serves non‐consumers– Marches upmarket– Redefines quality

• We believe they are likely to evolve into a “scale business”: one that relies on the technology and data backbone of the medium to optimize and individualize learning opportunities for millions of students.

• …universities are likely investing in MOOCs now because disruption theory is finally widely enough understood that astute leaders know how to identify and chase opportunities early.


StineSlide 24

Clay Christensen Weighs In On Disruption:

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/02/beyond‐the‐mooc‐buzz‐where‐are‐they‐going‐really/

• …over time, an approach where users exchange information from each other similar to Facebook…(a “facilitated network model”) will come to dominate online learning.

• …likely to happen if the traditional degree becomes irrelevant and, as many predict,* learning becomes a continuous, on‐the‐job learning process…the need for customization will drive us toward just‐in‐time mini‐courses.

• In this case, facilitated networks or adaptive learning platforms — like Khan Academy and Knewton — may actually be better positioned than MOOCs

– not unlike what happened in the car industry: The Ford Model T dominated the American car market … until General Motors brought forth choice and variety.


StineSlide 25

Christensen’s Predictions

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/02/beyond‐the‐mooc‐buzz‐where‐are‐they‐going‐really/N. Harden, “The End of the University as We Know It,” In fifty years, if not much sooner, half of the roughly 4,500 colleges anduniversities now operating in the United States will have ceased to exist. http://www.the‐american‐interest.com/article.cfm?piece=1352

• …maybe just 10% of the executive education market is "safe"

• it will upend the rest of the market…a few star professors who deliver the content online (the Khan's of the exec ed market)

• a hoard of "lower‐level" local instructors who will help with the breakouts.

• The traditional exec ed professor will be squeezed out.


StineSlide 26

Morten T. Hansen Weighs in On Exec Ed

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/01/executive_education_is_ripe_fo.html

• Many companies have online learning platforms they need content for, creating demand;

• Spending a week in an exec ed program is consuming so much time that alternatives such as a hybrid online program look attractive;

• Ever‐better technologies make the online experience more appealing;• Pressures on cost will lead to more adoption of online exec ed;• Another reason for getting people together in an exec ed program — that

of networking — can be done through online networking tool, so why meet?


StineSlide 27

Hansen’s Drivers

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/01/executive_education_is_ripe_fo.html


StineSlide 28

What About Our Audiences and Programs?

• Broad agreement this is a rapidly changing landscape and it is difficult to predict the future

• Opportunity for innovation, staying ahead of curve – including capitalizing on press attention

• Opportunities to extend blended learning activities and possibly online learning in organizations

– Deepening engagement at scale

• Several institutions actively working on strategies – work not complete• Likely near‐term threat is to open enrollment (not custom) and skills‐based topics

(not leadership or strategy)– For example, Finance for Non‐financial Mangers


StineSlide 29

Exec. Ed. Interviews

• Sent to ~13,000 past participants of executive education programs from five institutions

– MIT, Columbia, INSEAD, ITAM, University of Alberta

• Of these, 676 responses (5% response rate; range 2.5% to 7.3%)– 241 (36%) of these responses were to a Spanish‐language survey

• Geographic location: 61 countries represented (English, n=414)– 39% of respondents reside in the US, – 7% in Mexico, and – 3% each in France, Brazil, Switzerland, Canada, Germany, followed by 2% each Australia, Japan.

• Age (English, n=417) – 67% of respondents were between ages 30 and 49. – 26% were aged 50‐59. – Under 30 and over 60 were 3% each, respectively


StineSlide 30

UNICON Survey (March 2013)

• English‐language survey participants split in support for face‐to‐face versus blended learning (n=433)


StineSlide 31

Value of Online vs. In‐Person

• Spanish language responses weighted somewhat more towards blended and less face‐to‐face (n=238)


StineSlide 32

Value of Online vs. In‐Person

• Lower‐cost online options are attractive, but they don’t have to be free• Certification is of interest• Course credit mattered more in the Spanish‐language survey


StineSlide 33

Why Enroll in Online?

Which o f the fo llo wing cond itio ns would make yo u MORE like ly to enro ll in a n o nline Executive Ed uca tio n p ro g ra m? (che ck a ll tha t a p p ly)

Answer Op tionsRespo nse

Pe rce nt Eng lish

Resp onse Pe rcent Sp anish

It is lower cost than a similar face-to-face program 45.5% 47.5%It offers certification in a field 44.0% 39.9%I receive academic, graduate-level, or course credit 41.2% 66.0%My company sponsors my participation 34.8% 30.7%It offers a general certificate of completion 29.5% 48.7%It is free 24.0% 17.6%It could help me with a promotion 23.8% 26.9%

(English, n=420, Spanish n=238)

• Most respondents had taken self‐paced online training (n=346, Spanish data similar)


StineSlide 34

Experiences to Date

• Participation in free university courses relatively low

• Awareness of MOOCs was about 30% (n=351)

– 94% of Spanish were unaware of free university courses


StineSlide 35

MOOC‐type, specificallyIn the p a st ye a r, ha ve yo u e nro lle d in a fre e se me ste r-lo ng course o ffe re d b y a unive rs ity? (che ck a ll tha t a p p ly)

Re sp o nse Perce nt Eng lish

Resp o nse Pe rce nt Sp a nish

7.1% 2.5%1.7% 0.0%3.7% 1.0%2.3% 0.5%0.0% 0.5%

16.5% 2.0%8.3% 2.0%69.2% 93.5%

I am not interested in these coursesI have never heard of these courses

CourseraUdacityedXKahn AcademyUdemity

I don't have time to do these courses

Answe r Op tio ns

• For those who did enroll in free online courses (n=130), the completion rates were relatively high (54%)– MOOC completion rates about ~7%


StineSlide 36

Completion rates

• 52.1% of English‐language respondents felt online was highly or well suited for executive education (n=417)


StineSlide 37

Suitability

• An even higher percentage (67.7%) of Spanish‐language respondents felt it was very well or well suited (n=192)


StineSlide 38

Suitability

• 228 (English) chose to comment on why or why not.– Saving time was critical, as was quality– Travel costs were frequently cited– Networking and interactive learning were important– Some subjects and goals were considered more appropriate for online than others– Many felt like a combination of face‐to‐face and online provided the best option


StineSlide 39

Why or Why Not Learn Online?

OnlineHighly orWell Suited –Open Response Word Frequency(n=113):


StineSlide 40

OnlineNot Well orPoorly Suited –Open Response Word Frequency(n=53):


StineSlide 41

• Change won’t happen overnight, but it is happening• Important space to watch / explore for learning and delivery innovations• Space where you can support your clients

– Strategy– Unmet needs– Blended learning (meeting customer needs + preserving margins)

• Implications of global reach not clear – may be a larger force than those currently in play

• Cost implications not clear – quality education remains expensive– Cohort experience, in‐person learning are valued

• Think from your faculty members’ point of view


StineSlide 42

Some Thoughts and Take‐Aways


StineSlide 43

Additions? Reflections? Questions?

MOOCs and Executive Education - UNICON€¦ · MOOCs and Executive Education Jennifer Kay Stine,...

Documents

Transcript of MOOCs and Executive Education - UNICON€¦ · MOOCs and Executive Education Jennifer Kay Stine,...