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

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