Anthony G. PiccianoCUNY Graduate Center and Hunter College

The Online Education Landscape: Implications for Teaching and Learning

Career Night – Ph.D. Program in Urban Education Graduate Center – City University of New York

February 2016

2

Teaching and Learning in 2016 –

Different Scenarios!

3

Presentation Outline

.The Evolution of Online Learning

.Beginnings - Pre-Internet

.The 1st Wave (Beginnings) – 1990s

.The 2nd Wave (Blending Into the Mainstream) – Early 2000s to 2008

.The 3rd Wave (The MOOC Phenomenon) – 2008 to 2013

.The 4th Wave (Reconciliation of Blending & MOOCs) – 2014 -> 2020s

.The Future – 2030 and Beyond

.Questions

4

“There are more people in the world than ever before, and a far greater partof them want an education. The demand cannot be met simply by building moreschools and training more teachers. Education must become more efficient. Tothis end curricula must be realized and simplified, and textbooks and classroomtechniques improved. In any other field a demand for increased production would have led at once to the invention of labor-saving capital equipment. Educationhas reached this stage very late, possibly through a misconception of its task.Thanks to the advent of technology…These tools are finding their wayinto American schools and colleges...

allowing each student to proceed at his own pace to receive immediate feedback to play an active role [where] there is constant interchange between program and student to have access to charts, maps, graphs, models…”

Skinner, B.F. (1958). Teaching machines. Science, 128 , 969-977.

5

Pre-Internet

.1950s/60s - B.F. Skinner – Teaching Machines

.1960s/70s - Patrick Suppes (Stanford University) – C.A.I.

.1980s/90s - Intelligent/Integrated Learning Systems

(Jostens, Wicat, Computer Curriculum Corporation)

6

Source: Allen, E & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Needham, MA: Babson College Survey Research Group.

The Extent of Online Learning

7

The 1st Wave (Beginnings) – 1990s

•Technology – Slow-speed Internet

•Model – Pedagogical – Asynchronous Learning Network (ALN)/Largely Text-Based

•Key Players – Mostly Public Universities, Community Colleges, and For-Profit Colleges with already established distance learning programs (i.e., UMUC, Penn State World Campus, SUNY Empire State, APUS)For-Profits (i.e., U of Phoenix) invest tens of millions of dollars into online education.

.Enrollment – 100,000s of students enrolled each year in for-credit courses – 1 million in 2000

.Research – Mostly small-scale individual faculty evaluating their own work Phipps, Ronald; Merisotis, Jamie (1999). What's the Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in Higher Education. Institute for Higher Education Policy, NEA, and American Federation of Teachers,

.Concerns – Neil Postman (The End of Education); David Noble (Digital Diploma Mills)

8

The 2nd Wave (Blending Into the Mainstream) – Early 2000s to 2008

•Technology – High-Speed Internet (Cable modems, DSL)

•Model – Pedagogical - Blended Learning /Social and Multi-Media/Open Resources Evolve

•Key Players – Mainstream Public Higher Education, Tuition-driven Non-Profits, For-Profits .Enrollment – Millions of students enrolled each year in for-credit courses – 5 million by 2008

•Research – U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE), Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies, Washington, D.C., 2010. Retrieved November 25, 2014 from: http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

.Concerns – For-Profit Colleges and Universities Scale Up/Issues of Federal Financial Aid

Blended Learning Conceptualization

ConventionalFace to Face Classroom

Fully

Online

Blended

Source: Picciano, A.G, & Dzuiban, C. (2007). Blended learning: Research perspectives. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/books/index.asp

Blended Learning Conceptualization

ConventionalFace to Face Classroom

Fully Online

Minimal Technology/Media

Technology/Media Infused

Blended Blended

Blended Blended

Students meet f2f – teacher uses simple technology such as email, or web for e-lectures.

Students meet f2f – teacher uses technology such as simulations, tutorials, video presentations.

Students meet online - teacher uses simple technology such as CMS, discussion boards, blogs.

Students meet online – teacher uses advanced technology such as interactive videoconferencing, gaming, MUVE.

Synthesis/ Evaluation (Assignments/Assessment) Papers, Tests, Student Presentations (PPT, YouTube), E-Portfolios, Learning Analytics)

Blending with Purpose: The Multimodal Model

Reflection

(Blog, Journal)

Collaboration/Student Generated Content

(Wiki, Mobile Tech)

Social/Emotional (F2F)

Dialectic/Questioning

(Discussion Board)

Content

(LMS/CMS/Media/

Games/MUVE)

Source: Picciano (2009).

12

Blending with Purpose – The Multimodal Model

Synthesis/ Evaluation (Assignments/Assessment) Papers, Tests, Student Presentations (PPT, YouTube), E-Portfolios

Reflection

(Blog, Journal)

Collaboration/Student Generated Content

(Wiki, Mobile Tech)

Social/Emotional (F2F)

Dialectic/Questioning

(Discussion Board)

Blended

Ecosystem

Content (LMS/CMS/Media/ Games/MUVE)

13

The 3rd Wave (Massive Open Online Courses - MOOC) – 2008 to 2013

•Technology – High-Speed Internet – Wi-Fi – Mobile Computing

•Pedagogical Model – MOOC – Access/Cost Benefit Model/ Multi-Media Infused Open Source Expands

•Key Players – Non-Profit Private Universities (Stanford, M.I.T., Harvard). Venture capitalists and corporate-affiliated foundations spur MOOC development.

.Enrollment – Millions of students enrolled each year in credit and non-credit bearing courses. 7 million students enrolled in fully online for-credit courses in 2013.

.Research – High student dropout rates (as much as 95%) Poor student outcomes (San Jose University Study – 2013)

.Concerns – MOOCs create media frenzy/Online learning overhyped as a silver bullet Sebastian Thrun (Founder of Udacity – “We have a lousy product!”)

14

The 4th Wave – 2014 -> 2020s

•Technology – Super High-Speed Internet – Wi-Fi - Mobile Computing/Tablets – Cloud Computing

•Model – Reconciliation of the 2nd Wave Blended Learning Pedagogy & 3rd Wave Access/MOOC Models PLUS I. Learning Analytics II. Adaptive Learning/Differentiated Instruction/Personalized Learning III. Social Media - Collaboration IV. Open Sources/Learning Objects V. Gaming/MUVE

Key Players – All of education. Enrollment – Millions of students enrolled each year in credit and non-credit bearing courses. Almost 8 million students enrolled in fully online for-credit courses in 2014.

•Research – Moving away from modality comparisons. Student issues (retention) and faculty issues (instructional effort, time on task)

•Concerns – What is the future of education?

15

Learning Analytics

16

Adaptive Learning/Differentiated Instruction/ Personalized Learning

17

Social Media and Collaborative Learning

18

Open Source and Learning Objects

19

Gaming and MUVEs

20

The Future – Late 2020s/2030 and Beyond • Nanotechnology -> Quantum Computing

• Super Cloud Computing (IBM’s Watson Prototype)

• Man-Machine Interfaces/Artificial Intelligence ( i.e., Neural Implants, Brainets, Nanobots)

21

Challenge to Educators

The Chronicle of Higher Education in a survey of college presidents (N=349) focused on the future of innovation in higher education. (2014)

•Direction: Two-thirds of presidents of public institutions think that higher education is headed in the right direction, as do well over half of their private campus peers. •Modality: An overwhelming majority of presidents—three quarters at private institutions and even more at public campuses—think that blended courses that contain both face-to-face and online components will have a positive impact on higher education

•Focus: Presidents say that when it comes to innovation in higher education, reformers pay too much attention to cutting costs and not enough to changing the model of teaching and learning.

•Change drivers: Two-thirds of public-institution presidents think that politicians are the most influential drivers of change in higher education and half of private-campus presidents agree with that assessment. The presidents on both types of campuses believe strongly that faculty should be the number one drivers of change.

22

Challenge to Educators

Test / Experiment with the technology.

Use / Improve that which works. Discard that which does not work.

Whatever you do, do not ignore it.

23

Questions?

24

Visit me at:

anthonypicciano.com

http://apicciano.commons.gc.cuny.edu/

25

Further ReadingAllen, E & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Needham, MA: Babson College Survey Research Group.

•Collins, E.D. (2013). Preliminary Summary SJSA+ Augmented Online Learning Environment Pilot Project.•http://www.sjsu.edu/chemistry/People/Faculty/Collins_Research_Page/AOLE%20Report%20-September%2010%202013%20final.pdf

Means, B. , Bakia, M, & Murphy, R. (2014). Learning online: What research tells about whether, when and how. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis, Publishers.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

Phipps, Ronald; Merisotis, Jamie (1999). What's the Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in Higher Education. Institute for Higher Education Policy, NEA, and American Federation of Teachers, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED429524.pdf

Picciano, A.G. (in press). Online Education Policy and Practice: The Past, Present, and Future of the Digital University. New York: Taylor & Francis/Routledge Publishers.

Picciano, A.G., Dziuban, C., & Graham, C. (Eds.) (2014). Blended Learning: Research Perspectives, Volume 2. New York: Taylor & Francis/Routledge Publishers.

Picciano, A.G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 5(1). Kent, Oh: Kent State University. http://www.rcetj.org/index.php/rcetj/article/view/11

Selingo, J.J. (Editor) (2014). The Innovative University: What College Presidents Think About Change in American Higher Education is based on a survey conducted by Maguire Associates, Inc.. Published by The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://app.results.chronicle.com/e/es.aspx?s=2423&e=89593&elq=cd9973526e504845837bbada16e5b345