athabasca university as a case study transformational strategies for flexible e-learning delivery:...
Post on 26-Dec-2015
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Athabasca University as a case study
Transformational Strategies for Flexible E-Learning Delivery:
Dominique Abrioux
Overview Flexible E-Learning
– Institutional– Programmatic– Course module
Athabasca University and Flexible Learning
E-Learning Opportunities for Flexible Learning
Key Flexibility Factors– Institutional motivation– Organizational culture– Infrastructure
Concluding Remarks
Flexible E-Learning
Flexible = Student Centered
PROGRAM
COURSE
INSTITUTION
Institutional Flexibility Admission
Cost
Service Delivery Academic Student services Administrative services
Collaboration
Criteria Process Windows
Tuition Other Fees Relocation Foregone Income
How? Where? When?
Program/course design Course delivery Student services Course selection Credit coordination
PROGRAM FLEXIBILITY
Recognition of prior learning-Formal (e.g. transfer credits)-Informal (e.g. portfolio)
Challenge for credit
Time to completion
Residency requirements-On-site obligations
-Courses to be taken from host institution
Program design-Compulsory/optional course balance-Course prerequisites
COURSE FLEXIBILITYVariable / fixed start dates
Time to completion
Module length
Paced / unpaced
Course media (access)
Individualized / collaborative learning
Accommodating of different learning styles
- presentation of learning materials (content)
- variety of learning activities- alternative assessment models
Athabasca University Primer
Brief History
• 1970 Established By Province of Alberta as the 4th public university (June 25,1970)
• 1973 - 75 Pilot Project (First Course opened in 1973)
• 1978 Permanent Mandate: Single Mode ODL
• 1986 9,552 students
• 1994 11,591 students 2 Masters programs open AU’s future in doubt:
• Underperforming / costly• Misunderstood by primary stakeholder (government)
• 2005 35,000 students (@3,000 Master’s level)
• 2006 40,000 students (strategic goal)
AU’s Distinguishing Mission
• Removing barriers to access and success in university-level studies
geographical prior education financial
ENROLMENT DATA &
LEARNER DEMOGRAPHICS
Course Registrations by Location
17,963 19,050 20,963 22,867
31,375
17,289
23,17717,299 20,524 27,066
0%10%20%30%40%50%
60%70%80%90%
100%
1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04
International
US
ROC
Alberta
2003-04 Undergraduate Age and Gender Balance
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
Under 25 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 +
Female Male
UndergraduatePrevious Education
15.40%
66.70%
17.90%
No Post - Secondary Some Post - Secondary
University Degree
Programs
1995/
1996
2003/2004
Undergraduate Degrees 08 14
Graduate Degrees 02 08
Undergraduate University Certificates 09 15
Graduate University Diplomas 01 05
STAFFING 1996 2004
Academics (regular) 65 106Academics (part-time) 31 161Tutors (part-time) 174 258Professionals 53 145Management/Executive 12 17Support/Temporary 132 262Casuals 34 79
TOTAL 501 1028
Budget
1994/
19952004/
2005
Annual budget
(millions)
$24.3 $75
Government grant 72% 30%
AU FLEXIBILITY REPORT CARD
INSTITUTIONAL FLEXIBILITY
Admission -Criteria-Windows
-Process
Cost -Tuition -Non tuition
-Relocation -Foregone income
Service Delivery - Academic
- Student services -How? Where? - Administrative services When?
Inter-Institutional Collaboration - Program design - Course development - Course delivery - Student services - Course selection - Credit coordination
>open – undergraduate>alternative routes– graduate>continuous – undergraduate
>online/paper/phone
+/- +/->anyplace>anytime
>web/email/phone/fax/mail>distributed/anytime exams>service culture
>some joint programs <seldom>some joint delivery>some joint delivery>strategic alliances>online consortia
PROGRAM FLEXIBILITY
Recognition of prior learning-Formal (e.g. transfer credits)-Informal (e.g. portfolio)-Challenge for credit
Time to completion
Residency requirements-On-site obligations
-Courses to be taken from host institution
Program design-Compulsory/optional courses-Course prerequisites
-individualized/articulated-range -all courses
-none (except labs)-@1/3 of total-one credit coordinating degree [BGS]
-10 years(unless time sensitive)
-rationalized in program proposal
COURSE FLEXIBILITY
Variable / fixed start dates
Time to completion
Module length
Paced / unpaced
Course media (access)
Accommodate different learning styles- presentation of learning materials (content)- variety of learning activities- individualized / collaborative Learning- alternative assessment models
•12 per annum
•0 to 6 months•Extensions / Suspensions
•3 credits
•all courses unpaced•some paced alternatives
•Multi-media •in transition to e-learning
•very little
E-Learning Opportunities for Increased Flexibility
INSTITUTIONALAdmission CostService delivery
PROGRAMPLATime to completionResidencyDesign
COURSEStart datesTime to completionModule lengthPaced/unpacedCourse mediaDifferent learning styles
High Medium Low None
E-Learning Opportunities for Flexibility cntd.
COLLABORATION
Program design
Course design
Course delivery
Student services
Course selection
Credit coordination
High Medium Low None
CORE FACTORS IMPACTING FLEXIBLE LEARNING AS A STRATEGIC INSTITUTIONAL GOAL
KEY FLEXIBILITY FACTORS
Organizational Culture
Institutional Infrastructure
Originof Demand
3 Key Factors Impacting Flexibility
Demand for Flexibility– Mandate-driven?– Strategic priority?– Business-driven?
Organizational Culture– Common values– Service as a core business
Institutional Infrastructure– Single/ dual mode– Staffing complement– Size of student body
DEMAND FOR FLEXIBILITY
- Mandate-driven? - Strategic priority?
- Business-driven?
Mandate-Driven Flexible Learning Government determined mandate (1995, 1999) emphasizing:
– Open university– Individualized distance education– Coordination of credit & transfer credit– College collaboration– Assessment of prior learning
Government determined Letter of Understanding (1995) emphasizing learner-driven determination of academic regulations & curriculum articulation:
– Open admission– Minimal course prerequisite restrictions– Maximum course selection flexibility within programs– Minimal residency requirements (courses taken from AU)– Credit coordination options– Course challenge-for-credit– Year-round enrolment– Liberal course completion and extension deadlines– Policies and procedures to facilitate part-time enrollment– Delivery models emphasizing individually-paced learning
MISSION-Driven Flexible Learning
Internal Institutional Mission Statement (1985) emphasizing:
– the removal of barriers that traditionally restrict access to and success in university-level studies
– increasing equality of educational opportunity for all adult Canadians regardless of their geographical location and prior academic credentials
Reaffirmation of Institutional Mission Statement
(1996, 2002)
STRATEGIC Planning for Flexible Learning (1996-1999 Strategic University Plan / 2000-2002 Update)
Identify Individualized D.E. as the core business & defines accessibility/flexibility strategies around:
– Electronic, Multi-Modal Learning Systems– Asynchronous Administrative Access to Services – Partnerships– Prior Learning Accreditation– Tuition and related costs
Identify significant strategic implications for increasing accessibility, individualization and quality:
– Investment in (asynchronous) e-technology and e-systems– Single-window point of access for students (web, alias, call-
centre)– Policy development and benchmarks (e.g. service to students)
STRATEGIC Planning for Flexible Learning cntd. (2002-2006 Strategic University Plan)
Builds on previous SUPs and assigns primordial strategic importance to Meeting Learners’ Needs through flexible learning systems that exploit:
– Open, individualized DE – E-learning pedagogy that engages students in asynchronous
learning and assessment activities– Asynchronous, online e-services to learners (e.g. library)– Quality courses, programs, and student support services
BUSINESS-Driven Flexible Learning(1995 – present)
1995 Reality Check– No growth during past 10 years– Highest tuition, highest grant per FLE– Lowest performance on KPI’s
External environmental assessment (1996 SUP) – Diminishing public resources– Performance-based funding– Increased demands for accountability– Greater competition– Rapid technological change– Uncertainty in all things economic, political, social,
and technical
“Increased competition, both from out of province/out of country
providers of DE and from institutions that historically have not exploited DE systems means
that AU’s growth depends on its ability to continue to distinguish itself from
competitors. This can best be achieved by building on the
learner-centered philosophy…” 1999 SUP Update
BUSINESS-Driven Flexible Learning cntd.
Continuous assessment of marketplace
“Post-secondary institutions will increase offerings of grouped-study
online offerings, particularly in undergraduate and graduate
professional programs…
Competition based on the cost and quality of learning
opportunities and support services will increase…
Athabasca University’s learning flexibility and
openness is unparalleled…”2002 SUP
BUSINESS-Driven Flexible Learning cntd.
Continuous assessment of marketplace
BUSINESS-Driven Flexible Learning cntd.
Institutional 4-Year Business Plan– Premised on 10% growth per annum
– Links growth with meeting learners’ needs for flexibility
– Importance of flexibility represents key attraction of AU to its learners
Reasons for Enrolling in BA Degree
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Self Paced Courses
Diploma Credits
AU Staff & Service
Reputation of AU
Lower Cost
PLAR
Seminar Location
Very Important Important Not Very Not At All
BUSINESS-Driven Flexible Learning cntd.
Continuous Assessment of Client’s Needs
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
- Common values- Flexibility & service culture
Our Values (2002 SUP)
EXCELLENCE
LEARNING
SCHOLARLY RESEARCH
FREE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS
OPENNESS AND FLEXIBILITY
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSIVENESS
OUR EMPLOYEES
ACCOUNTABILITY
Our Values (2002 SUP)
EXCELLENCE
LEARNINGStudent learning and satisfaction are the measures of our success
SCHOLARLY RESEARCH
FREE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS
OPENNESS AND FLEXIBILITYReducing barriers to education enhances access and social equity
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSIVENESSDiversity and inclusiveness enhance the quality both of learning
and of the workplace
OUR EMPLOYEES
ACCOUNTABILITYWe are accountable to students, to each other, and to the public
•Online student have high, ever escalating service-related expectations
•Competition is regional, national, global •Unlike campus-based education, there is no protected market
•Delivering online education is part of the service industry
Flexible Learning & Service Culture
Define/Publicize/Monitor/Review/Revise Benchmarks
Implement Systems
Develop Policies
Provide Systematic Training
Monitor service levels and benchmarks
Turning Values into PracticeFlexible Service as a Core Business
Your Colleagues: Give and Expect the Best
Expect the Best: Student Service Standards
EXPECT THE BEST AU Service Standards
Give and Expect the Best
Staff at AU have a right to expect the best as well. Every day each of us serves our colleagues to assist them with their work in serving other colleagues or students. The standards identified here are meant to provide information about the level of service staff members should expect of each other.
Give and Expect the Best cont.
Qualitative Service Standards
In many ways, these are the standards that speak to a "culture of respect" in which we would all like to work. When asked what aspects reflect a respectful interaction, staff members cite:
addressing the colleague in a respectful way ensuring not to interrupt a colleague who is busy asking, not demanding assistance allowing time for response and action providing an opportunity for problem solution rather than approaching the supervisor understanding that at times a colleague may be under stress and need some special consideration thanking a colleague for a service performed refraining from sending e-mail when angry respecting your colleague’s expertise
Give and Expect the Best cont.Quantitative Standards are outlined for the following areas: General Service Expectations Executive and Senior Managers Office of the President and University Secretariat Office of the Vice-President, Academic Office of the Vice-President Student Services Counselling Unit Ombuds Office Academic Staff Academic Support Unit Learning Services, Tutorial Learning Services, Outreach Collaborations Office of the Registrar Course Materials Production Computing Services Library The Learning Centres
– Edmonton – Calgary
Finance Human Resources Facilities Educational Media Development (under development) VPSS FOIP and Records Management Institutional Studies (under development) Training and Consultation Public Affairs
EXPECT THE BEST AU Service Standards
Know The Level Of Service To Which You Are Entitled We’ve established service levels in the following areas:
General Information Administrative Service Library Service Course Materials Service Electronic Communication Assistance Academic Support Service Counselling, Advising and Ombuds Services
These standards are provided by Athabasca University to:-determine if the service standard is being met; -determine whom to contact for follow-up; and -determine when to involve the Ombuds office.
Academic Support Standards (Cont’d)
Library & Course Materials Standards (Cont’d)
Registry Service Standards
Registry Standards (Cont’d)
SERVICE STANDARD CONTACT
Registry Standards (Cont’d)
SERVICE STANDARD CONTACT
registrar@athabascau.ca
(780) 675 6302
Online Self-Help Ask-AU (IntelliResponse System) Student Information System data Course Management System data Web registration and other web services
Call-Centre Model For non-academic support
Telephone 1-800 lines E-mail access
Academic Call Centre (School of Business) Learning Facilitators Markers Academic Experts
Service: System Drivers
Service: Policies/Procedures
Centralized Policies (examples)
Voice-MailE-MailAvailability of Academic Staff
(described in terms of their accessibility)
Procedures (examples)
Departmental procedures @ benchmarksOmbuds Office procedures
Managerial responsibility (ongoing)
Institutional Studies Responsibility Student Satisfaction With Academic Services
Survey (annual) Student Satisfaction with Service Units Surveys
(bi-annual)
Reporting Reports released individually Through Institutional Key Performance Indicators
reported annually internally& to Board
Monitoring Service Levels
Title of Survey Latest Survey Date Next Survey Date
Library August 2004 August 2007
CS Help Desk (staff) December 2004 December 2007
CS Help Desk (students)
December 2004 December 2007
Registry September 2002 To be included in Academic Services (June 2005)
Learning Centre Students
December 2001 To be included in Academic Services (June 2005)
Counselling August 2004 August 2007
Course Materials Part of Central Student Evaluation (Fiscal Year Summary Available - June)
Part of Central Student Evaluation (Fiscal Year Summary Available - June)
Call Centre Part of Central Student Evaluation (Fiscal Year Summary Available - June)
Part of Central Student Evaluation (Fiscal Year Summary Available - June)
INSTITUTIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE
-Single / dual mode-Staffing complement-Size of student body
Single / Dual Mode Infrastructures&
Flexible Student Learning
Flexible learning is more easily achieved in a dedicated, single mode ODL institution– Differentiated mission minimizes sub-cultures– Institution-wide commitment to FSL more readily
achievable– Flexible academic regulations and modes of
delivery can be the rule rather than the exception – Organizational infrastructure conceived and
developed with a view to FSL
Collaboration across single mode ODL institutions create more opportunities for FSL
AU/Téluq Alliance
In place since Sept. 1999
Each institution delivers its own courses
Courses from either institution accepted as meeting institutional requirements of both institutions
Student advising coordinated across institutions
Students pay fees set by their home institution and register with their home institution
Quasi seamlessness from learner’s perspective
Official launch Fall 2000
Current membership of ten provincial universities
Open to any chartered (AUCC) Canadian university
Common online course catalogue
Unable to deliver on principles around seemlessness – E.g. Transferability, residency, duplicate fees
Staffing & Student Complements
Staffing complement factors– Number of academic faculty– Status of academic faculty
Full-time/part-time Tenured / contract
– Faculty buy-in to mission / rapidity of growth in faculty numbers
– Special incentive systems required (as FSL = less faculty flexibility)
Governance model– Accountability, particularly to learners– Learners as stakeholders
Student complement– Number, rate of growth, age, expectations, mobility
CONCLUSION
Self-help and asynchronous access are the best friends of flexile student services
Growth rate of academic staff & student volume impact flexibility
Flexibility in addressing different learning styles remains elusive
No flexibility is desirable insofar as quality is concerned…
Student Satisfaction ResultsAlberta University Survey 2002
top related