Universities for the Future (OE Global 2015)

Universities for the Future:
Disruption and the Role of Open Education
Presentation to Open Education Consortium Global Conference 2015
Banff, AB, Canada, 22 April 2015

DeakinDigital Pty Ltd
Challenges and criticisms

Asking the right question…
• How do we preserve the status quo of higher education?
versus
• What is the role of higher education in the future?
– Role
– Structure
– Function
– Funding
– Stakeholder alignment

CHALLENGES AND THE
POTENTIAL FOR DISRUPTION
Higher Education Sector

Defining the problem: an holistic approach
• Cost and value of a degree
• Graduate employability and time to productivity
• Competency-based education
• Democratization of knowledge (and access)
• Unbundling, re-bundling and credentialing
• Peer-to-peer economy and higher education

Accountability and graduate success
• Employment
– Post-graduation metric of higher education success
• Employability definitions
– Employment-centred: ability [of graduates] to gain initial meaningful
employment, or to become self-employed, to maintain employment,
and to be able to move around within the labour market
– Competency-centred: a set of achievements – skills, understandings
and personal attributes – that makes graduates more likely to gain
employment and be successful in their chosen occupations
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2014. Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Access, Retention and Employability 2014 .
Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Understanding competence
• Competence: it’s not how you teach it’s how you measure
• It is binary – “you can or you can’t”
• Progression is not via scores but levels of competence
– Evident in higher education graduate outcomes or attributes
– Same attributes for all qualifications but at different levels
• Requires context to be valid
• Is independent of how you achieved competence

Enroll in qualification (bundle)
• Core curriculum with approved electives
• Provider delivers courses and content
• Tutorials, Practicals, Labs, etc
• Provider has some responsibility for progress
• Provider’s information resources are included
• Provider examinations and assessments
• Accreditation with an award
• Variable Fees (20k – 38k per year)
• Additional Fees may be charged
• Register in a subject, course, module, certification
• Self-guided according to personal/career goals
• Access content from anywhere (free – fee)
• Fee-based; simulations; experience (incomplete)
• Responsible for own progress and motivation
• The web; community resources
• Variable – badges, vendor & other certifications
• Badges & certifications; Reliant on consortia &
RPL
• Unbundled fees; from free to service-based fees
• Consumer driven
Products and Services: Unbundling of education
From this… To this

UNDERSTANDING THE NATURE OF
DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION

Disruptive vs Sustaining Innovation
From The Innovator’s Dilemma (1997) Clayton Christensen

Sustaining Innovation vs Disruptive Innovation
• Sustaining Innovation
– Improvements in teaching, learning, technology or services
– Neither technology nor content are disruptors in themselves
• Disruptive Innovation changes business and operational models
– Revenue is no longer tied to a time-served model
– Student achievement is recognised in terms of professional competence
(ie: measurable attributes that are industry relevant)
– Recognition of learning outside formal education becomes mainstream
– Alternative accreditation is embraced and integrated (eg badges, certifications, etc)

ROLE AND IMPACT OF
OPEN EDUCATION
In relation to Disruptive Innovation

Open Education…

Open Education is neutral to disruption
• May support existing higher education
– OER – Revise, Reuse, Remix, Redistribute = reduce cost
– Open Courses and MOOCs as outreach
– Opportunity for innovation in content and approaches to learning
• May support disruption to higher education
– Democratisation of knowledge and learning
– Alternative models evolve around free content and recognition

Information wants to be free…
On the one hand, information wants to be expensive,
because it’s so valuable. The right information in the right
place just changes your life.
On the other hand information wants to be free, because
the cost of getting it out is getting lower and lower all the
time. So you have these two fighting against each other.
Stuart Brand, 1984

Success Factors for Open Education
• Impediments to success
– Not the de facto approach to content and courses
– The only reason OER exists is the 4Rs but it’s too hard (ok… 5Rs)
– Quality is often criticised
• But continuous improvement via the 4Rs fixes that
• For Open Education to be successful:
– All content must be easy to Revise and Remix
– Courses should routinely be comprised of Open Educational Content
– Content must be agnostic to platforms and technologies

UNIVERSITIES FOR THE FUTURE
What should they be like?

Breaking down the monolith (1996: Seely Brown et al)
a) to enable students to engage in open learning, exploration,
and knowledge creation
b) simultaneously, to provide the resources to help them work
in both distal and local communities, and
c) to offer them the means to earn exchangeable, equivalent
credentials for work done in class, on-line, or through hands-
on experience.
From The University in the Digital Age

Vision
To provide the most highly valued, evidence-based employability
credentials for continuous career development using smart systems

DeakinDigital’s model is premised upon:
• Democratisation of knowledge and availability of content
• Digital disruption’s trend to make that which was monolithic more
granular (eg music; publishing etc)
• Systemic pressures on traditional education models
– Lack of affordability
– Lack of scalability
– Unmet demand, especially in emerging economies
• Assessment-only model breaks credit-hour models
• Better alignment with transferrable workforce skills

Framework Alignment Model
Communication
Digital Literacy
Critical Thinking
Problem Solving
Self-management
Teamwork
Global Citizenship
Discipline KSA
competency/capability
Graduate
Learning
Outcomes
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
1
2
AQF
Level Descriptor
Level Descriptor
Level Descriptor
Level Descriptor
Level Descriptor
Level Descriptor
Level Descriptor
Discipline KSA Level
Generic
Descriptors
Communication
Digital Literacy
Critical Thinking
Problem Solving
Self-management
Teamwork
Global Citizenship
Discipline KSA
Industry-specific
Assessment
Per Industry / Framework
Credentials
AQF = Australian Qualifications Framework
Incl. Industry Frameworks
Qualification-
(Evidence-based)
In the future…

Critical Thinking
Problem solving
Teamwork
Global citizenship
Professional Expertise
(Discipline-specific KSA)
Digital literacy Digital literacy
Critical thinking
Problem solving
Collaboration
Cultural awareness
Deep discipline
Broad discipline
Professional ethics
Emotional awareness
Self-management Self Management
Communication Communication
Graduate Learning Outcomes Credentials
© DeakinDigital

DeakinDigital Assessment
• Robust assessment model across multiple methods
• Aligned to current best practice in higher education
• Recognition of Professional Practice
– Not just RPL, PLAR, etc
• Assessment Guide derived from Professional Capability Standard
• Is designed to assess professional capabilities (employability skills)
• Comprised of:
– Reflective testimony
– Curated evidence
– Alternative assessments if applicable (eg competency-based psychometrics)
– Video interview

Universities for the Future (OE Global 2015)

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (7)

Similaire à Universities for the Future (OE Global 2015)

Similaire à Universities for the Future (OE Global 2015) (20)

Plus de The Open Education Consortium

Plus de The Open Education Consortium (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Universities for the Future (OE Global 2015)