So, I was up on the main stage with a Canadian University President, an industry guru who has created an open software option for creation Reusable Learning Objects (RLO’s), a representative from Creative Commons, another faculty member (nobody realized that I too was a university instructor), and a few others.  Keep in mind that Pearson acquired eCollege (and me) two years ago.  I know as much about publishing as I know about toddler learning behavior.  (With my 3 year old daughter I have some on-the-job training, but nothing from experts…)

But there I was, engaged in a conversation about open resources and reusability with people who desperately wanted me to falter.  I believe they were hoping I’d make some crazy statement about the ineffectiveness of repositories or how publishers hope all of the repositories just go away.  But not only do I not believe that, nor does Pearson for that matter, I actually didn’t have to say anything negative about RLO’s at all.  Why?  Because the experts on the subject explained to the 400 person audience that of the hundreds of thousands (possibly millions) of RLO’s in the world today, less than 1% were actually reusable! 

It was a wonderful, rich discussion about how incredibly hard it is to create an engaging, effective learning object – whether it’s text based, video based, a simulation, a game, etc.  However, adding in the notion that the object you create will also be reusable seems to be nearly impossible.  Think about it.  Why did you create the learning object in the first place? It was likely to teach YOUR students a specific idea / concept within the context of YOUR classroom.  It will flow into the strategic thought you have around scaffolding for YOUR class.  It will be tied to specific outcomes / objectives YOU might have.  It will probably correlate to other learning ideas and other learning objects YOU’VE also designed. 

As an example, I have a game that I use in my online classes.  It reinforces two important, nonverbal ideas around chronemics (the study of how time communicates to others).  It is a Flash-based exercise with fill in the blank trivia of sorts – the answers are cultural and fairly easy, but students see a giant clock with time slipping away as they fill out the card.  My students love it and “get it” as a result of the exercise.  But if I were to place that learning object in a repository, it would take quite a bit of contextual explanation and even more training around how I use it, how it could be used, and finally how to implement it (technically) on a page. 

And so, at the end of the day, we are left with repositories full of good intentions, but unfortunately with little to no real value other than to possibly inspire a teacher to create a similar, but different working learning object for themselves…

So what’s the answer?  Again, from the experts around me there were some answers, but they will take some real effort that isn’t likely to happen.   For example:

Tagging – A common taxonomy or even folksonomy must be created and used by EVERYONE using a repository.  That’s no easy task.  I was once on a campus where the faculty senate had been asked to standardize the term in online classes used for presenting mostly textual / pictoral information.  The word, “Lecture” had been suggested by the administration.  (Online norming of nomenclature across a program is a best practice as students always know how to navigate.)  However, in 2 hours, the faculty could not agree on an appropriate term.  Some staunch opponents wanted “Presentation” while others wanted the term, “Reading” instead.  Another department chair brought up the inclusion of YouTube videos on the pages and pandemonium ensued. 

Design – These (r)LO’s must be designed with re-use in mind.  But again, with the description above, that’s no easy task either.  I barely have enough time to create learning objects for my own class, let alone thinking about the greater good of the world as I create them.  (I realize I’m not as noble as I’d like people to think…)

Standards – After creating and tagging a learning object in ways that others can consume them, we then need to think about standardizing the platforms they are built on.  What about using FLASH?  It’s a nice medium that has been used for years by educators.  There are more and more software options to create FLASH simulations, demonstrations, or games that are easy and cheap, if not free.  So FLASH is perfect, right?  Oh, wait…the iPad.  That’s right, Steve Jobs seems to have made it his personal mission to kill that software.  Well, what if my object is in PowerPoint?  Isn’t it “universal enough” for people then?  (Sorry Open Office users…)  Ok, well how about I create my learning object using simple HTML code.  Everyone knows that these days, right?  (Sorry 90% of instructors out there who can read Latin better than HTML.)

Quality – I recently read a blog by a professor who was pleading for the world to give up textbooks and adopt only open source content.  He was frustrated by his textbook publisher’s edition practices.  (Luckily, it wasn’t Pearson as he called them out by name…)  But I have to say, while I’m not a publisher by any stretch of the imagination, I have come to find great respect for what my new colleagues at Pearson do.  Did you know that a textbook costs over a million of dollars to produce?  Yes, I said million… Why?   Take a marketing book.  How many pictures, slogans, and commercials are represented there?  A thousand?  Two thousand?  Do you know how much it costs to get permission to use that Tide ad or the Toyota picture?  Every time the book is produced, Pearson pays intellectual property license fees.  Add that to the author of the book who gets royalties.  Don’t forget the editors, the auditors, the fact checkers, researchers, and the list goes on and on.  And of course, don’t forget the warehouses and paper, etc.  So, that one learning object (which is likely dozens if not hundreds of learning objects) costs a bunch of money to produce in a way that is educationally beneficial to our students.  Have you ever seen an Open resource that is vetted to that caliber?  What about the MyMathLab product?  It has shown improvement in math comprehension, math retention, and math process orientation in the 20, 30, and even 50 percent quartiles.  It’s based on algorhythms that require tremendous math subject matter experts talking to expert instructional designers working in collaboration with programmers

So what’s it going to take then?  Well…quite frankly it’s going to take people smarter than me (I know, I know…easy enough) to create some innovative solutions that are easy to use, easy to catalogue, and easy to consume.  People like the CETL in the United Kingdom who have created GLO Maker (www.glomaker.org), a planning & design tool that creates learning objects that are much easier to tag, share, and reuse.  Other leaders are groups like Equella, a digital repository company that incorporates learning objects, content management, and integrated content authoring.  Then there are the content repository sites like Merlot, Orange Grove, and others. 

There are answers out there, but it’s going to take some work, some strategy, and some compromise to make it happen.   Do I believe OER will ever replace monetized assets?  No, I don’t think so.  But I do believe that the two worlds can live quite harmoniously, creating a rich tapestry of content that can be pushed and pulled as required based on learning preferences, student needs, etc.   But I think that’s a blog for another time…

Jeff D Borden, M.A.
Senior Director of Teaching & Learning

Interestingly, all of the cases of plagiarism over the past ten years that stand out in my mind were committed by students in on-ground courses. To be sure, there have been a handful of students in my online courses who’ve plagiarized. However, in my experience, cases of online plagiarism have been much less common than cases in my on-campus courses. Is my experience unique? According to recent research, no. Between 1999 and the mid-2000s, a number of studies predicting that the rise in online teaching would witness a corresponding rise in plagiarism appeared. Beginning with George and Carlson (1999), research suggested that online learning environments, precisely because of the distance between teacher and student, were prone to higher rates of plagiarism among students. Such studies pointed to the fact that online students would have more opportunity to cheat as well as to the likelihood that they would have more technological know-how, knowledge they could use to discover new and better ways to cheat. More recently, however, studies have shown that students in online classes are in fact less likely to plagiarize or cheat than their traditional, on-ground counterparts. In a recent study, “Point, Click, and Cheat: Frequency and Type of Academic Dishonesty in the Virtual Classroom,” Donna Stuber-McEwen, Phillip Wiseley, and Susan Hoggatt (2009) argue that for a variety of reasons, cheating in online classrooms may be substantially less frequent than it is in on-ground courses. Similarly, Grijalva et al. (2003) suggests that online courses are less prone to problems of cheating and plagiarism than are traditional, on-ground courses. Why?

One theory is that a significant amount of plagiarism is prompted by panic: the student plagiarizes because he or she has waited too long to begin or is struggling with the assignment and has waited too long to ask for help. Because of the anytime, anywhere nature of distance learning, online students may be less susceptible to problems of this sort (Grijalva et al., 2003). Another is that the premise upon which studies arguing online students would be more likely to cheat—to wit, that they were more at ease with and knowledgeable about the Internet and its resources than their traditional on-campus counterparts—is shaky. Students who take online courses may be more at ease with technology than their on-ground counterparts, but this ease doesn’t by itself produce a willingness to cheat. Nor is it necessarily a safe assumption that students who choose to take on-campus courses are not tech-savvy and thus somehow less able to find ways to plagiarize if they’re so inclined. A third theory is that many online courses are structured to reduce opportunities for plagiarism and cheating: because of the early research suggesting online cheating was going to pose a huge problem, many institutions and instructors built their online courses with this idea uppermost in their minds and thus reduced the incidence of cheating from the start (Grijalva et al., 2003). This theory supposes that a potential problem created by new technology and the increase in online educational programs—cheating and plagiarism—can be at least partly resolved by the same technology and online programs.

Interestingly, the research supporting this third theory—that online courses are less prone to cheating and plagiarism because they’ve been built specifically to avoid it—has at its foundation a number of best practices that we on the Academic Training & Consulting team at Pearson eCollege suggest online instructors incorporate into their courses. When we conduct course reviews for our Educational Partners, these strategies are ones we recommend as pedagogically effective—but not because they deter students from cheating. Rather, each of these strategies has another utility: it enriches the quality of instruction and helps students to achieve the objectives of the course. Consider the following strategies:

• Use the syllabus to articulate clear and specific course policies with respect to plagiarism and cheating. Course policies in general are an essential component of any syllabus, whether it’s for an online or on-ground class. Your syllabus should provide a clear articulation of (ideally) the institution’s definition and policies pertaining to plagiarism as well as your own. These policies should contain clear statements about the consequences for violation. Such policies serve two important functions: first, by being open and clear about what plagiarism is, how it’s defined, and what the consequences for committing it are, you will help to prevent it; second, should punitive action become necessary, it will be fair because it was explained at the outset of the course.
• Establish an instructor presence in the course early. Introduce yourself to the students; they want to know who you are and that you are really there. Use first-person pronouns, provide a few biographical tidbits about yourself (i.e., that your daughter had a dance recital over the weekend, or that you and your dog went hiking—the kind of statements you might make in passing during an on-campus course). Establishing such a presence not only increases students’ comfort level in an online course—they know they’re not being taught by a computer—but if, as George and Carlson suggest, distance between educator and student produces an environment conducive to cheating, creating a connection between yourself and the students will minimize that risk.
• Maintain your instructor presence. Respond to students in the discussion boards throughout the semester, and provide feedback on written assignments. You needn’t overwhelm or dominate the discussions, but you should facilitate those discussions with a few comments or questions. Similarly, if students are submitting written work and hearing nothing from you about its merit, they will conclude, logically, that you either do not care what they submit or that you do not value their work. Either conclusion could potentially lead to cheating.
• Use a mixture of assessment formats. Don’t, in other words, rely exclusively on exams or quizzes. Such assessment formats are much more difficult to monitor for cheating than written assignments, such as essays or research papers. Rather, as we would recommend as a best practice, combine quizzes, self-assessments, exam, graded discussions, informal or response papers (perhaps posted using the Journal tool), and essays. Such a mixture of assessment types does more than make it difficult for a student to cheat his or her way to an A in your course; it also provides you with a variety of ways to interact with the student, thus assuring the student that you are present and interested. It also allows you to become familiar with the student’s “voice” and style as well as giving you a means of comparing expressions of the student’s knowledge of course material (i.e., does the student seem to ace all the exams or quizzes but falters in the discussions and papers?). In addition, it helps those students who may not perform well in one type of assessment format to demonstrate their grasp of the material—some students may freeze during exams, and others may find written expression particularly difficult. If you include both, students have more opportunities to succeed in the course.

It is a truism in teaching that if students want to cheat, they will find a way to do so. It’s inevitable that some students, no matter how much effort we put into prevention and deterrence, will plagiarize a paper. However, a well-structured course can help deter students from cheating while also improving their overall learning experience.

Jennifer Golightly, Ph.D.

Academic Trainer & Consultant

Works Cited

George, J., & Carlson, J. 1999. Group support systems and deceptive communication. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=874068.875945 (accessed August 13, 2010).

Grijalva, T., Kerkvliet, J., & Nowell, C. 2003. Academic honesty in online courses. http://ugs.usf.edu/pdf/courses/0708/cheat%20online%20pap.pdf (accessed August 12, 2010).

Stuber-McEwen, Donna, Phillip Wiseley, and Susan Hoggatt. 2009. Point, click, and cheat: Frequency and type of academic dishonesty in the virtual classroom. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 12 (3). http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall123/stuber123.html (accessed August 10, 2010).

With 3G and 4G connections, with wifi making its way into just about every coffee shop, and with Internet access now even available on many airlines, the opportunity to access content is — truly — everywhere. (Okay, well maybe not in the Kyzylart Pass of Tajikistan, but everywhere else.)

Let’s take a look at some of the logistics for making mobile learning a reality. First, the obvious: the iPhone and iPad. Apple’s App Store (available through iTunes) has pretty much cornered the market — at least for now — on third party applications for delivering content, whether it’s reading an Amazon book from the Kindle app or browsing through a Pearson interactive text delivered through CourseSmart. It’s such a popular business model that competitors like Google and Microsoft have (and are continuing to develop) their own app stores, Google Apps Marketplace and Windows Marketplace, respectively.

But, as tech columnist John Blossom reported in 2009, the “Application-centric” model is not the only option out there. Yes, it’s convenient — the user browses an app store, makes a selection, has fees charged to a pre-authorized credit card, and watches as the app is automatically downloaded and installed on his or her phone. Simple! This model works well for companies like Apple because it keeps users committed to their store.

But what most of these apps do is simply repackage information that is already available via the Internet. For example, need to refill your prescription from Walgreens? You can to go to Walgreens’ mobile site (using your smartphone’s browser, like Safari) and take care of business. Now that site gives you the option to download the “Walgreens App for iPhone,” which does everything you can do on their mobile site, but all in a nicely packaged little app that you can tap to launch, rather than bookmarking a mobile Web site. (Full disclosure: I’m an iPhone and Walgreens mobile app user, and I like both. So please don’t think that I’m denigrating either.)

My point here is that there was already a perfectly usable mobile site for Walgreens. Why was a separate app even necessary? And doesn’t creating an iPhone app — whether from Walgreens or thousands of other developers — suggest that a Google app and a Windows Mobile app are close behind? Three apps all to do the same thing? To quote comic Eddie Izzard, “No one can live at that speed!” It’s certainly not the most efficient business model to be sure. To have to create separate mobile apps for every kind of smartphone would require tons of wasted labor when a better option already exists!

That option is the Web App. And believe it or not, Web Apps are nothing new. That Walgreens mobile site I just mentioned? A Web app. Need to track your spending and balance your checkbook? “There’s a Web for that,” says Blossom. Want to play a game to learn music theory? Yep, there’s a Web for that, too.

Tricia Duryee pointed out in July last year that Apple’s Steve Jobs originally trumpeted the idea of “[building] for the Web,” in other words, of delivering content via the Safari browser. But a year later — and now just about exactly two years since then — he opened the app store and switched our thinking to “There’s an app for that.”

But that was two years ago, and in Internet time, that’s practically an eternity. Apple’s marketing machine notwithstanding, there’s no inherent reason why developers must create separate apps for every platform that exists.

Where does that leave mobile learning? Educational developers and instructional designers cannot (should not) commit themselves to merely one mode of delivery. That is, one should not commit to delivering content via the iPhone at the expense of users of Droids, Blackberries, or Sprint Evos. What’s most important is reaching every student possible using whatever devices they choose to use.

At the same time, to develop separate apps for every existing and emerging mobile platform would be a tremendous waste of time and energy. Yes, there are some instances where an app native to each system may be necessary. But for the most part, delivering interactive content can be accomplished with the same basic code for Safari on the iPhone as for Google’s browser on the Droid — especially with the advent of HTML5 (which is a discussion for another time.)

In short, what we educators should expect to see coming down the pike are new modes of delivering content that are browser based and that are simpler and more cost-effective to deliver. By keeping labor time and costs low, we get more content for less money and in less time than we have seen before. And in that, we all benefit.

Not coincidental with the writing of this blog post, Pearson has recently released Pearson LearningStudio Mobile Solution, a Web App that allows students to check grades and announcements, read and post to discussion forums, and have a dashboard-like view across all their courses in the process. Our developers are thinking ahead on this — there is no app to download; access is available on the iPhone, Droid, Blackberry, etc.; and as new features and updates become available, users won't have to wait for app updates to be approved by an über-store. We end-users reap the benefits of Pearson's quick and cost-effective development. Bonus!

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to refill a prescription…

-- Rob Kadel, Ph.D. --
-- Academic Trainer & Consultant --

For example, a study by Kennedy and colleagues shows that while it is true that for traditional age college students, there is near universal access to certain tools (mobile phone, computer, email), there is variability in the tasks that students are doing with these tools. For example, over 50% of students responding hadn’t built or maintained a website, used RSS feeds, created a blog or commented on one, contributed to a wiki, or used their mobile phone to access services on the web, or send or receive email (although almost 80% sent text messages daily).

Helpser and Eynon considered different types of internet activities (including shopping, entertainment, fact checking, social networking, finance, and diary) undertaken by internet users of different ages. They discuss that while age / generational differences was a convenient initial idea for Prensky to propose, the reality is more complex than that. One needs to consider gender, education, experience, and breadth of use to explore variability in internet usage by task. It is most helpful to consider a “continuum of engagement instead of being a dichotomous divide between users and non-users” (p. 515).

So what’s an educator to do? A study reported by van Amelsvoort and Shiozaki discuss success factors in helping students become more proficient in the educational use of internet technologies. These factors include: requiring the regular use of the technologies in multiple courses, providing active instructor support and engagement through all stages, and allowing sufficient time for students to do the work. Fortunately, with a little planning these shouldn’t be that hard to carry out. So don’t make any assumptions about the level of technological proficiency your students have, and design your course or curriculum to help develop the skills your students will need to be successful.

– Gail E. Krovitz, Ph.D. –
Director of Academic Training & Consulting

Helpser, EJ and R Eynon. 2010. Digital natives: where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal 36(3): 503-520.

Kennedy, GE, TS Judd, A Churchward, K Gray, K-L Krause. 2008. First year student’s experiences with technology: are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24(1): 108-122.

van Amelsvoort, M and Y Shiozaki. 2009. Developing digital natives at a junior college in Japan. Proceedings of the Third International Wireless Ready Symposium. Accessed here: http://opinion.nucba.ac.jp/~thomas/vanamelsvoort2009.pdf

Sometimes you, the instructor, might adopt a particular text that includes a series of videos, flash- or java-based interactive learning tools, etc. These are great, and more are being developed every day. But not every publisher has them, and not every instructor adopts texts from the publishers that do.

But if you want to get that neat content into your course right now, if you want to add that guest lecturer, if you want to engage students at a higher level than just text and some graphics, look to the Internet for some valuable free resources.

Fortunately, there is a lot, and more coming every day. Let's take iTunes U as an example. Even if you're not a fan of iTunes, they are setting a standard for the sharing of valuable academic content (over 250,000 resources for free!) that other content providers are rapidly adopting.

You can access iTunes U by downloading iTunes for Mac or PC. (And don't worry, an online version of iTunes is rumored to hit browsers later in 2010.) Once you've started iTunes, log into the iTunes Store and then click the iTunes U button in the upper-right corner. Voilà, you've found a wealth of Higher Ed. and K-12 content provided by major universities and state departments of education.

Myself, I'm keen on The University of Warwick's Classics in Discussion course. If you right-click on any of the tracks provided there, such as "Epic Poetry: from Homer to Virgil," you can choose "Copy Link" and paste it like this: http://deimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/warwick.ac.uk.2015041076.02015041081.2153917069?i=1893573100

If you're using Pearson LearningStudio, you can even use the Insert Link button in the Visual Editor to add it. When students click the link, it will launch iTunes. (The downside is that, as of the date of this post anyway, your students will need to download iTunes to listen. But again, browser-based access is coming soon.) And of course, this being an Apple-provided item, students who own i devices (iPod, iPhone, iPad, iEnergy Efficient Home, iVersion of Myself, etc.) can download these resources and listen to the audio or watch those videos that are available.

Heck, iTunes U even has spring 2010 commencement addresses from around the country available for your listening or viewing pleasure. Governor Schwarzenegger spoke at my alma mater, Emory University, in May. What a boon!

But I'm not saying here that iTunes U is the only option. It's nice, but you have other choices. Check out the resources available at videolectures.net, for example. It's a European-based site that culls valuable video lectures (often classroom recorded) from distinguished professors around the EU. Right now, it's a bit top-heavy in terms of Information Technology-oriented content, but more content in the humanities, and the social and natural sciences is being added all the time.

And let's not forget that most publicly funded museums (and some private museums) like The Smithsonian and The Louvre have their own vast resources, many of which are interactive flash items or videos that enhance students' understanding of art, science, history -- you name it! Check out Smithsonian Education and The Louvre's official Web site for more information.

In short, just because you don't have an on-ground classroom where a guest lecturer can show up, or just because you don't know a good guest lecturer at all, doesn't mean that you're limited in how you can share new content and ideas with students. In the online environment, the possibilities are seemingly endless!

-- Rob Kadel, Ph.D.
-- Academic Trainer & Consultant
-- Pearson eCollege

Having attended the Sloan-C Blended Learning Conference and Workshop in April, I was able to attend sessions and network with colleagues who have been at that starting point of where do I begin? It seems like a great place to start is a blended or hybrid approach. When planning for a blended course, you decide what will work best F2F and what will work best online. This allows you to examine your content and evaluate each lab and activity to determine what is the best way to learn this concept?

If you are going fully online with your science lab course, you obviously will not have the luxury of deciding which labs you want to do F2F and which you want to do online. So plans need to be made for full online integration. From that perspective I think the best option is collaboration with colleagues. In addition to the contacts I made at the conference above, after further conversations outside of the conference I have a list of other science professors willing to talk to me about what they are doing.

So what if your institution doesn’t have the funds to send you to a variety of conferences (does any institution have the funds right now)? No problem! If you’re scrappy you can find the contacts you need to start the conversations. It is easy to find conference Websites online. Look around for the list of presentations or in the case of the conference above, look for the link to the presentations post conference. If you find someone who might have information you seek, contact that person. I tried it with two people and in addition to their insight, they provided me with names and email addresses of other colleagues as well. So a little digging and you’ll be able to build your own network of colleagues with whom you can collaborate and generate ideas for bringing your science course fully online based on what others have done.

If you are not that adventurous, the other option is to find listservs that focus on teaching science courses. The group of collaborators will already be assembled for you, waiting for you to ask your questions. Some great resources I found are listed below. Just sign up (sometimes the tricky part) and send your questions out or search the archives for previous posts.

Also, any of these resources or tactics will work for any content areas. If you are taking your curriculum online, find others who have gone ahead of you and build on their ideas and experience. You don’t have to do it alone.

ITeach Listservs – resource page for instructors associated with Minnesota State Colleges & Universities. There are a variety quality of sites and listservs for all content areas.

AdjunctNation – a comprehensive resource for adjunct professors of all curriculum areas

 Clemson University Biolab listserv – you have to dig a bit on this one; scroll down to the Visit header and click on BioLab. There are directions for joining the listserv which is described as: a great place to discuss college biology teaching with colleagues.  

Catalist – a fully comprehensive search engine for listservs. You can find a listserv on any topic you can dream up. It led me to the last one:

ISEN-ASTC-L - which links informal science professionals from around the world.

- Pamela Kachka, M.A.Ed. –
Academic Trainer & Consultant

I found support for that idea from an interesting source... Jim Collins’ book: Good to Great. Last fall I saw Jim Collins speak at Educause and I was intrigued by his research on what makes a successful company. In reading his book, Good to Great, there’s a chapter on technology and how people expect technology to make them successful. Jim’s argument is that technology alone can’t make you successful, and it is sound practices and “the pioneering application of carefully selected technologies” (Collins, p. 148) that contributes to success. Technology becomes the “accelerator of momentum, not a creator of it” (Collins, p. 152).

Here is his summary about the use of technology as an accelerator for greatness: “Technology Accelerators. Good to great companies think differently about the role of technology. They never use technology as the primary means of igniting a transformation. Yet, paradoxically, they are the pioneers in the application of carefully selected technologies. We learned that technology by itself is never a primary, root cause of either greatness or decline” (Collins, p. 13-14).

The same is true of success in online teaching. Being a successful online teacher is not about finding the newest technology, but it is instead about carefully applying that technology in a way that enhances student learning in the class. Used correctly, technology can help accelerate the momentum of a good teacher… whether online or on ground.

– Gail E. Krovitz, Ph.D. –

Director of Academic Training & Consulting

Collins, J. 2001. Good to Great: Why some companies make the leap… and others don’t. New York: Harper Business.

At first glance it may sound like a great idea for institutions to promote their success in advancing the student learning experience on their campuses, however, as with most things the issue gets more questionable when you look deeper. Dean Dad explains that academics would be motivated to critically dissect underperforming outcomes to figure out where the gaps are when viewing this dilemma from the internal continuous improvement perspective. Conversely, the external accountability perspective wants to make an institution look as good as possible and marketing these results would have a tendency for academic leaders to hide the bad in order to accentuate the positive. Dad explains that “…too much transparency in the early stages of improvement-driven assessment can kill it, leading to CYA behavior rather than candor (Dad 2010).”

Ultimately, I believe that publishing and promoting success will motivate students and parents to look twice at institutions who can prove their students are learning which will pressure the lagging colleges and universities to step up their efforts. What I have seen in my work with colleges and universities is that campus assessment plans typically start with deans and faculty first with the goal of increasing transparency to other stakeholders once the key internal stakeholders have developed a sense of comfort and trust with the process. In the end, everyone agrees that it is in the best interest of all stakeholders to include students, parents, and the broader community in the outcome management and reporting process but it’s a challenge to be the first to take this transparency to the next level.

Could it be that outcome performance statistics is what will eventually start to chip away at the idea that a degree from an Ivy League school is better than that of an online for profit? That may be decades down the road but it will be exciting to watch this issue work itself out.

Dad, D. (2010, February 22). Assessment as Marketing. Retrieved February 22, 2010 from Inside Higher Ed, Web site: http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/confessions_of_a_community_college_dean/assessment_as_marketing

Brian McKay Epp
Higher Education Assessment Consultant

Do you know the saying, "Measure twice, cut once?" That is exactly what Pearson is getting ready to do with LearningStudio OE (formerly eCollege). For the past year, we've spent tens of thousands of dollars, hired dozens of new employees, and worked overtime to move the current systems into tighter integration so as to be able to measure more than was ever possible before. Measurement of (and subsequently) performance on outcomes has already proven to make online education stronger in some situations than face to face (http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf). But moving forward, and as technology becomes increasingly seamless with life, the measurement that online education brings to the table will change teaching and learning.

For example, we've always had the ability to correlate time on task or clicks in the system to grades, completion rates, retention, etc. In 2009 we helped a number of schools identify hierarchies of outcomes that could be tagged and reported on at any level. Every day we give statistical measures of outcomes, activity, grades, portfolios, etc., to schools so they can better understand their students. Does time in threaded discussions lead to higher completion rates? We know the answer. Does the amount of time a student has to wait for an assignment to be graded lead to program retention? We know that too.

But in the next decade...heck, in the next couple of years, all of the measuring will become much more significant. A much more holistic view of students will be available based on more than formative & summative feedback. It will be based on more than activity or grade data. The LMS is almost to a place where we can both report on and predict behaviors as they lead to learning. This individual learning path that students will be able to take will come with complete measurement by the faculty and the institution.

I'm talking about measuring students on a lot more than tests and project feedback. We're talking about measuring the intensity by which a student acts - the number of clicks, the types of interactions with peers, the amount of time spent with a teacher, the number of hints needed to succeed, etc. We're talking about the measurement of far more than raw scores on tests. We're talking about understanding the p value for a question, the median scores for the class, the confidence by which students answered a question - all much more than the answer itself.

All of this measuring will give teachers and/or schools the ability to set students along a path that pushes them into higher levels of learning, regardless of how much time or how much interaction takes place between the student and the system. We'll measure when learning happens, how learning happens, and we'll give individuals the tools to reshape their learning priorities so as to make it more meaningful.

That is the future of the LMS. That is the decade before us.

Will Apple release a tablet in 2010 that will revolutionize that market? Maybe. Will the iPhone 4G come out in conjunction with Verizon, thereby making it even more prolific in all circles, including education? Probably. And a dozen other cool technologies will change the landscape of how we interact and communicate. But what matters to me as I advise Pearson about education and technology isn't each cool new toy. It's not the fun new widget that Sony or Microsoft or Google brings to the party. (Have you seen Google Wave yet?...)

No, what matters is the big picture. We are heading to a place where technology is simply an extension of ourselves. A place where homework isn't done at home and school work isn't done at school (at least as we know it). Christensen predicted 50% of all K-12 happening online by the end of our new decade. I agree. And if that's the case for K-12, imagine higher ed. We're coming to a place where technology, school, work, life, and everything else just merge together. It's the ultimate mash-up. It's teaching, learning, and living. It's...well...it will be what we just call "life". Not virtual life - just life.

So, if you are looking for what's coming in 2010, it's the set up for all the rest of the next decade. It's going to be amazing I think. I hope you think so too.

So here is to 2009. May all of the preparation and activity help us get to that educational dream as fast as possible. And here is to 2010 - where that dream is going to start to be realized. Here is to changing education and, ultimately, to changing lives for the better.

Here are a collection of my favorite YouTube videos.  They are educational, entertaining, funny, fascinating, and all around helpful when it comes to teaching & learning.  At least I feel that way.  See what you think of this collection.  (I don't think it will take more than 1 hour to watch them (with the exception of the Randy Pausch lecture...)