What Makes an Open Education Program

Sustainable? The Case of Connexions

Richard Baraniuk Paul Dholakia W. Joseph King

Rice University

• Open education projects (OEPs)– parallel developments in open source software – free access to quality teaching materials that can be

customized and personalized to match local contexts

• Strong growth of OEPs

• Different models

– open software platform Sakai, Moodle, eduCommons– institutional model MIT OCW– single discipline focus Stanford Encyclopedia

of Philosophy– commons model Connexions

emergence of open education

OEP sustainability

• Common challenge for all OEP models

• Defined here as “long-term viability and stability of the OEP”

• Challenging– traditional revenue models from educational settings

do not apply– due to explosive OEP growth, fierce competition for

scarce financial resources

asking the right questions regarding sustainability

• First blush question:

“How do we acquire an ongoing adequate stream of financial resources in the future to keep our project running?”

– leads to tactical program consideration, selection– revenue model seen as central issue– often results in failure

• Such an approach may be myopic

why is this view myopic?

• Focuses too much attention on the “product” – features of the OEP and technology underlying it

• Not enough attention on

– understanding what its users want – deliberately growing the OEP’s value for

various user groups

our approach to sustainability

• Prior to considering different revenue models, OEP organizers should consider and focus on the issue of increasing the aggregate value of the site to its constituents to the greatest extent possible

– focus on gaining and maintaining a critical mass of active, engaged users

– provide substantial and differentiated value to them

– gain deep understanding of the users

• Naturally leads to revenue-generation opportunities

Connexionsoverview

born of frustration – 1999

• difficult to “connect” across concepts, courses, grades, curricula

– ex: math to science to engineering to applications– grade K | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | … | 10 | 11 | 12 | AP | CC | college – curricular stove-piping, disintegration in spite of …– research indicating that study / education

is made meaningful by connections to other fields

• difficult to engage students in interactive exploration– “I hear, I forget; I see, I remember; I do, I understand”

• difficult to build communities, collaborations among faculty, students– inefficiencies: no economies of scale, glacial time scales

author

publishing

shutouts

日本語 Українська

Gàidhlig

Français Español

لعربية Ido

한국어

कश्मी�री�Hausa Български

Česky Swahili

Laal

தமி�ழ

disconnects

vibrant interactivecommunityconnectedinnovativeup-to-date

createripmixburn

vibrant interactivecommunityconnectedinnovativeup-to-date

createripmixburn

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

bookshelf

closed $

years

pageinterconnected global repositoryopen freeseconds

knowledge ecosystem

日本語

english

Українська

hausa français

español

لعربية

inclusive community

grassroots organization

தமி�ழ

create rip mix burn

日本語

english

Українська

hausa français

español

لعربيةதமி�ழ

our approach to sustainability

• Prior to considering different revenue models, OEP organizers should consider and focus on the issue of increasing the aggregate value of the site to its constituents to the greatest extent possible

– focus on gaining and maintaining a critical mass of active, engaged users fostering communities building collaborations

– provide substantial and differentiated value to them

– gain deep understanding of the users

• Naturally leads to revenue-generation opportunities

users 1 –communities

DSP community

stanfordillinois

michiganwisconsinberkeley

ohio statega tech

uteprice

cambridgenorway

italy

DSPanish

Connexions for theAmericas

catherine schmidt-jones

600,000+ page views per month

growingusercommunityof US K-12musicteachers

users 2 – institutionalcollaborators

national instruments

national instruments

texas instruments

ncpea

“For our teachers, one size never fits all”

Jane Goodall International Spokesperson for TWB

Teachers Without Borders

Vietnam opencourseware

MOET

Vietnam opencourseware

MOET

“open-source culture”

Jeff WrightDean of Engineering

UNESCO North Korea Cambridge University PressIBM – Sakai/Connexions integration

AMD

collaborators

understanding the users

understanding Connexions’ users

• Authors – main goal not to earn royalty, rather to have

maximum impact (traditional engineering book costs $120 at retail, author earns < $5)

– diverse: from professors to “shut-outs”

• Instructors– often have hectic teaching schedule, want a

repository of educational materials in a reusable, modular format

• Students– first visit Connexions through a search engine

or because instructor mandates it

how to grow Connexions’ value for these users

• Increase equity of the Connexions brand (by staying true to our values)

• Content that is high-quality, ample, modular, continually updated, personalized-on-assembly, published-on-demand

• An engaged and involved user community

• Site usability

Connexions’ brand equity

• Brand equity = the added (usually intangible) value endowed to products or services by the brand

• Especially important in the crowded, ever-expanding OEP domain

• Two key challenges to increasing equity:

– to increase awareness among OEP’s potential user base

– to create a differentiated, consistent, and meaningful brand image through brand associations

Connexions’ user community

• Key goal: foster community among users

• OEP communities form and grow through a three-stage process:

Stage 1: community as a resourceStage 2: community as a user networkStage 3: engaged, vibrant community

Connexions’ user community

• Each Connexions module has a discussion forum (USU OLI)

• Authors can create “member profile” web pages to tell Connexions users about themselves

revenue modelsfor sustainability

Connexions’ sustainability

• Connexions online– free– forever

• Offload costs and responsibility– partnerships– open source development of Rhaptos– distributed repository

• Generate mission support revenue– support core project– support developing world & financially

disadvantaged

books+

modularauthored by communitycontinuously updatedpersonalized on assemblypublished on demandinexpensive

book printing

show me the money

“publish on demand” changes the economics of publishing

impending disintermediation of publishing industry

long tail

$

HarryPotter

Connexions

example: RUP & university press

initiative

closed, downsized,restructured

• Rice University Press (closed – 1996)• University of Idaho Press (closed)• Northeastern University Press (closed)• University of Georgia Press (downsized)• University of Iowa Press (downsized)• University of Washington Press (downsized)• Texas Tech University Press (downsized)• Stanford University Press (restructured)• University of Michigan Press (restructured)

why?

• Editorial– manual process– slow

• Production– small runs (300-1000) are expensive– bindings, color very expensive

• Inventory– shipped, stored, tracked, etc.

• Marketing– exposure very limited

Connexions’ solution• Editorial

– entirely digital process– fast(er)

• Production – relationship with QOOP– book is not made until it is sold– highly customized

• Inventory– none

• Marketing– exposure very broad

the Connexions/QOOP enabler

• Connexions– digital publication platform– widely searched content commons– customizable– scaleable architecture

• QOOP– on-demand press

customers include Google, Yahoo, etc. – book is not made until it is sold– highly customized, using CNXML source– handles billing

rice university press

• Rice University Press re-starts as all digital press within Connexions (2007)

• RUP is exploring joint publications– University of Michigan Press– Stanford University Press– Chicago University Press– Columbia University Press– Texas Medical Center– National Academies

• Partner presses are likely candidates for future migration to Connexions platform

branding

• Portal– rup.cnx.org– rup.rice.edu (re-directed to above)

• Style sheet– press-specific

• Print options– press-specific– user-specific

• Press communities– interaction with readers

Connexions economics

• Consortium fee covers direct costs (content facilitation, customization, portal, etc.)– $5K-$50K/year– possibly co-lo staff with Connexions

• 15% Mission Support Fee– 10% goes to directly fund operations

$3/book on average– 5% (+5% QOOP match) goes to fund

free books for economically disadvantaged

mission support fee

Connexions / RUP

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

OER benefit

• University press materials available for free online– fulfills basic non-profit and scholarly mission of

the press and Connexions

• Connexions users can integrate these materials into their courses– possibly with a more restrictive license

(e.g., CC by-nd)

• Materials can be referenced via reliable links (that will not disappear)

summary

• Focusing on revenue stream is myopic and can lead to disaster

• Rather, focus on users and building value for them

• Connexions approach:– build communities– build collaborations– study the users

• Offloading costs and generating revenue are the end and not the means

create rip mix burn

contact

W. Joseph King Richard Baraniukwjking@cnx.org richb@cnx.org