Date post: | 30-Oct-2014 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | ljs-infodocket |
View: | 876 times |
Download: | 3 times |
CIC CIOs Page 1
Is This Time Different? Questions for MOOCs and Online Learning Beyond 2012 Committee on Institutional Cooperation Chief Information Officers August 2012
Foreword Each decade has proffered a new IT-‐enabled alternative to traditional, residential education, yet universities have continued to thrive. Early in the last decade, several university-‐backed online ventures fizzled while more recently some universities and for-‐profit institutions (e.g., Apollo group) have established successful online degree programs. Most recently, news of Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs), venture-‐backed startups like The Khan Academy, Coursera, Udacity or institutional consortia like EdX have renewed the question of IT-‐enabled alternatives to residential education. Is this time different? Does the confluence of improving technologies in HD video, adaptive tutors, and fast connections; economic pressures regarding student debt and tuition; and social readiness to embrace distributed education with different relationships between students and instructors signal a substantial change for higher education? The CIC CIOs believe this time will be different in its effect on residential universities relative to previous experiences, but the more enduring effects may not be the focus of the 2012 press. The CIOs offer our (1) near-‐term actions for campuses, (2) discussion questions for campus leaders, (3) additional context for recent developments in IT-‐enabled education, and (4) State of the Union – Higher Education: Competitive Challenges to the Traditional Higher Education Model, a compelling analysis by the Education Advisory Board.1
1) Near-‐Term Actions
1. Engage purposefully in near-‐term trials of MOOCs, adaptive learning systems, and emerging technologies to develop institutional understanding while also formulating a longer-‐term strategy for engaging online learning for badges, professional development, MOOCs, credit-‐bearing courses, and degree programs.
2. Ramp up institutional capacities for online course production to support instructional design,
media development, assessment, and analytics.
3. Develop IT system readiness to integrate with a range of educational software that may need to link to campus system information for rosters, identity, services in a legal, secure and policy-‐compliant way.
1 Shared with CIC Provosts by special permission of Education Advisory Board.
CIC CIOs Page 2
2) Discussion Questions for Campus Leaders 1. What kinds of online experiences are needed as substitutes or as complements for current
models? • Freely available online resources (videos, exercises, assessments, etc.) empower the
flipped classroom model and serve as complements that improve satisfaction, efficiency, and efficacy of the residential learning experience?
• Online, large-‐scale experiences that become substitutes to traditional, residential classroom experiences through the engagement of thousands of peer learners and adaptive software?
• Online experiences that establish by certification basic competency in disciplines – what is the form of that certification and does it serve as a complement or substitute to the curriculum and major and direct interaction with faculty?
2. Why does scale matter for distributing university content, modules, courses, or degrees beyond current models?
a. For fee reasons i. Grow new sources of revenue with “profit” margins that scale faster than costs? ii. Reduce costs per credit hour for students? iii. Grow base of click-‐stream training data for refining adaptive analytics and
tutoring algorithms to enhance learning effectiveness? iv. Grow access to courses/degrees to satisfy demands for educating more citizens?
b. For free reasons i. Institutional brand amplification and awareness? ii. Recruit top students? iii. Social good?
c. For research reasons i. Develop deeper understanding of human cognitive growth? ii. Refine better methods for teaching specific content?
3. What is lacking within the institution to achieve its online objectives?
a. Foundational components i. Capital to invest and risk in online course production? ii. Access to markets of potential students via course placement in
portals/aggregators for discovery, marketing, access, etc.? iii. Technology platform and integrated infrastructure for conducting online courses
or courses at Internet scale? b. Skills required
i. Content Expertise for online course development? ii. Process Expertise in how to do instructional design for online, faculty
pedagogical training, analytics expertise, business model development, etc.? iii. Staff to support services to distant students, maintain accreditation and legal
compliance? c. Organizational change
i. Political Will regarding change and uncertainty? ii. University Partners to offer a broader array of lessons, courses, or degrees? iii. Construct that amalgamates and presents college offerings in a cohesive
outwardly facing CIC or University view iv. Construct that amalgamates and presents college offerings in a cohesive
outwardly facing CIC or University view
CIC CIOs Page 3
4. What kinds of partners are needed and why? What are the non-‐negotiables in any
partnership and why? a. What are the walk-‐away provisions? b. Are there exclusivity expectations? c. How will conflicts be resolved? d. What is the basis for cost and revenue sharing? e. What are the reputational risks related to partners’ actions? f. Who owns the IP and on what terms is it licensed for reuse?
5. What is the degree of urgency and why?
a. What opportunities are perishable? b. What is the ramp up time to desired outcomes? c. What are the explicit risks/benefits of moving too early or too late? d. Does participation enable an ability to shape the terms of engagement? e. What is the degree of institutional readiness to engage in online learning?
3) Additional Background 1. A number of factors provide incentives and context for growth in online learning, and these
may combine to have a significant impact on higher education. a. Governments, Boards and stakeholders desire and are acting to create more affordable
education options (e.g., Western Governor’s University, etc.). b. Universities are experimenting and seeking potential first mover advantages as innovators
and parts of consortia. c. Venture funds are investing in new commercial models and see the Internet as creating a
low barrier to entry. d. Reduced costs to produce and deliver mixed media for traditional educational experience. e. Improvements in information technology infrastructure extending reach.
2. The path to monetizing “free” courses at Internet Scale remains unclear. “MOCs” or Massive
Online Courses (not free) may provide an interesting middle path to access (a) the benefits that only occur at a scale larger than traditional courses, (b) have a sustainable revenue stream to cover their costs, and (c) provide valuable university credit. New models of pay, subsidized, and free may rapidly evolve with experience, and institutions will want to remain nimble to adapt with opportunities. This is a time of caution for any long-‐term deals.
3. Early commercial innovators are aggregating courses across known university brands to establish scale in distribution rather than developing their own content from scratch. This differs from some previous online commercial ventures. If scale matters – and it appears that it does – then should the CIC directly and urgently assess the value in creating scale together? A number of factors may affect the desirability of CIC affiliation relative to the growing options.
4. Faculty support for pedagogy and creation of online materials will take enhanced and integrated support from campus providers of pedagogical, technological, audio visual, content expertise, etc. These are not specific to MOOCS or distance learning and are needed for campus blended and “flipped classroom” courses also.
CIC CIOs Page 4
4) State of the Union See appended document from Education Advisory Board.
State�of�the�Union�– Higher�Education
Competitive�Challenges�to�the�Traditional�Higher�Education�Model
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company��•��Washington,�DC
Road�Map�for�Discussion
3
p
1 A�Tipping�Point:�New�Teaching�Methods�Gain�Legitimacy
2 The Incumbent’s Innovations2
3
The�Incumbent s Innovations
3 Overview�of�Additional�PresentationsResourcing�Strategic�Priorities
Preparing�for�Cloud�Migration
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
4
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
5
Disruption�FatigueWho�Knew�that�Innovation�Could�Sound�So�Familiar?
p g
Required Reading at Board The Conventional Litany of theRequired�Reading�at�Board�Meetings�and�Planning�Retreats
The�Conventional�Litany�of�the�Broken�University�Business�Model
• Uncontrolled�cost�increases
• Graduates�lack�critical�skills
• Resistance�to�pedagogical�innovation
• Irrelevant�scholarship
• Tenure�protects�faculty�from�accountability
• Undergraduate�tuition�subsidizing�faculty�researchy
• Traditional�universities�captive�to�the�prestige�arms�race—real�change�will�come�from�radical,�low�cost�models
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
,
6
The�Incumbent’s�Dilemma
Premium�Position�Captivity
Certain�Downside,�Speculative�Upside�for�Exiting�Prestige�Arms�Race
I’ C t i l N t G i Fi tClayton�Christensen�in�a�Nutshell:�
“Be�More�Like�BYU�Idaho”
I’m�Certainly�Not�Going�First
“I�understand�that�as�an�organization�we�could�be�a�lot�
ff f dEnd�tenure
Dismantle�departments
Refocus research on pedagogy
more�efficient.�But�if�I�tried�to�make�some�of�the�changes�that�are�being�recommended,�the�accreditors�would�be�all�over�me,�Refocus�research�on�pedagogy
Switch�to�fully�online�degrees
Enroll�the�marginally�qualified
I’d�have�a�faculty�revolt,�and�pretty�quickly,�I’d�be�out�of�a�job.”�
Provost
Reduce�number�of�programs
Scale�back�merit�based�aid
Cut back big�time sports
Public�Research�University
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
Cut�back�big�time�sports
7
Featured�Models�of�Efficiency�Impossible�to�Emulate
Premium�Position�Captivity
Nascent�Small�Scale�Publics�Built�from�Scratchy p
N STEM F d I tit ti Fill M Cli i P t BNew�STEM�Focused�Institution�Fills�Unmet�Need�at�Low�Cost
Mayo�Clinic�Partner�Becomes�Learner�Focused�System�Branch
• Opened�in�2005 • Opened�in�2008�to�serve�nearby�M Cli i• Single�16�story�building
• No�sports,�gym,�or�dorms
• No�tenure;�12�month�contracts
Mayo�Clinic
• First�class�of�57�undergrads�in�2011
• No�departments;
• No�departments
“From�the�beginning�we�decided�we�didn’t�t thi t b t diti l i tit ti
• Differentiated�faculty�model�separates�curricular�design,�teaching,�and�targeted�projects
want�this�to�be�a�traditional�institution,�because�we�in�business�who�had�been�involved�with�other�higher�education�institutions�felt�that�everything�took�too�long.”
“The�bad�news�at�the�beginning�was�that�we�had�no�faculty;�the�good�news�was�that�we�had�no�faculty.”
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Reinventing�Higher�Education:�The�Promise�of�Innovation,�Ed.�Kevin�Carey,�Andrew�P.�Kelly,�and�Ben�Wildavsky,�Harvard�Education�Press,�2011.
Chair�of�Planning�Committee Chancellor�Stephen�Lehmkuhle
8
Not�In�Our�LeagueStartups�Hardly�Look�Like�a�Threat�to�Established�Universities
g
• Peer�to�peer�learning
• Unaccredited
N fit t iti f
• Free�video�micro�lectures
• Unaccredited
N fit t iti f• Non�profit,�tuition�free
• 1,300�students
• Non�profit,�tuition�free
• 3,000+�lectures�available
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
9
The�Song�Remains�the�SameFor�Decades�Productivity�was�Synonymous�with�Lower�Quality
g
B l’ C t Di U S N B t C llBaumol’s Cost�Disease U.S.�News�Best�Colleges�and�Universities
Musicians�Can’t�be�More�Productive,�Costs�Rise�with�Wages
Cost�is�Proxy�for�Quality
Fewer�Musicians
Play�Faster
Faculty�Salaries
Class�Size Faculty�/�Student�Ratio
Spending�per�Student
Replace�with�Androids Use�of�Adjuncts Alumni�Giving�Rate
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
10
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
11
Opening�the�Floodgates
A�Genuinely�Disruptive�Moment
Sebastian�Thrun’s Massive�Open�Online�Course�(MOOC)�Goes�Viralp g g
Two�Fashionable�Brands One�Hot�Global�Topic Truly�Amazing�Uptake
Celebrity FacultyCelebrity�Faculty
From�Topics�Covered
160,000
Dr.�Sebastian�ThrunStanford�Professor
Announcement�to�Launch:2�months
• Knowledge�Representation
• Inference
• Machine Learning
Cutting�Edge�Corporation
• Machine�Learning
• Planning�and�Game�Playing
• Information�Retrieval
190
• Computer�Vision
• RoboticsEnrolled�Students
Countries
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Steven�Leckart,�“The�Stanford�Education�Experiment,”�Wired�Magazine,�April�2012.
12
A�Seminar�at�Scale
Infrastructure�for�a�Massive�Open�Online�Course
New�Teaching�Technologies�and�Social�Models�Essential�to�Course�Design
Instructional AutomatedPeer to Peer Student Designed
Relatively�Common Still�Rare
Instructional�Videos
Automated�Assessment
Peer�to�Peer�Academic�Support
Student�Designed�Tools
Instructors�Thrunand�Norvig record�
Students’�homework,�quizzes,�and�exams�
Students�post�and�answer�thousands�of�
Students�create�software�tools�to�support�the�course,�g
traditional�lectures�and�post�online
q ,graded�by�computerquestions�on�various�
message�boards
pp ,including�an�AI�“playground”�for�testing�code
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Tamar�Lewin,�“Instruction�for�Masses�Knocks�Down�Campus�Walls,”�The�New�York�Times,�March�4,�2012.
13
Parting�Ways�Over�AssessmentThrun and�Stanford�Differ�Over�Credentialing
g y
Open�to�All,�But�Winnowing�the�Elite Connecting�to�Industry
Enrolled 160 000
Certificates�of�Completion
Enrolled
Completed
160,000
28,000
Casual�Learners
p ,
Students�completing�class�can�add�certificate�to�CV
World�Resumes�Requested 1,000
Employer�Introductions
WorldClass�Talent Perfect�
Scores 248Top�student�resumes�passed�
(None�from�Stanford�students)
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Steven�Leckart,�“The�Stanford�Education�Experiment,”�Wired�Magazine,�April�2012.
p palong�to�employers
Notes:
14
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
15
A�Venture�Capital�Backed�StartupYour�Revenue�Model�Is�Thrun’s Loss�Leader
p p
An�Inverted�Revenue�ModelA�MOOC�Incubator
• Courses�are�free
• Assessment�and�certificates�are�free
• Revenue may come from value added services
• Private�company�founded�by�Dr.�Thrun and�funded�by�Charles�River�Associates
• Infrastructure,�instructional�design,�and� • Revenue�may�come�from�value�added�services�to�students�and�employers:
�Premium�Tutoring
�A th ti t d C d ti l
, g ,business�services�for�global�MOOC�courses
• Eleven�STEM�courses�now�available;�eight�more�by�end�of�2013
�Authenticated�Credentials
�Lead�Generation• Taught�by�prominent�faculty�on�leave�from�prestigious�traditional�universities
$10M $30M1,000 $100,000� 10�30%
Imagining�a�Multi�Million�Dollar�Human�Capital�Search�Opportunity
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Steven�Leckart,�“The�Stanford�Education�Experiment,”�Wired�Magazine,�April�2012.
$10M�$30M,Students
$ ,AI�Starting�Salary Recruiter�Commission
16
The�Burning�PlatformEconomic�Conditions�Accelerating�the�Rise�of�Alternatives
g
The Unpleasant Economic RealitiesThe�Unpleasant�Economic�Realities
• State�budget�cuts• Federal�budget�pressure• Soaring student debt
• Bankruptcy�rates�rising• Falling�home�equity• High graduate unemployment• Soaring�student�debt • High�graduate�unemployment
The�Threat�You’ve�Feared:�Regulation
• Caps�on�Tuition�and�Fees • Governors�launching�charter�
The�Real�Threat:�Irrelevance
p
• Limits�on�Collective�Bargaining
• Faculty�Productivity�Mandates
universities�and�other�alternatives• Venture�philanthropists�funding�alternative�projects
• Non�traditional�students�flocking�
• Performance�Based�Funding
• Academic�Program�Elimination
to�for�profit�universities• Traditional�undergraduates�opting�for�community�colleges
• Faculty�launching�educational�
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
• Forced�Articulationy g
technology�startups
17
The�Incumbent�ResponseNew�Venture�Offers�Elite�Universities�a�New�Platform
p
The�Start�of�a�Larger�ConversationA�Venue�for�Star�Faculty
• Private�company�founded�by�Stanford�computer�scientists�Andrew�Ng�and�Daphne�Koller
• Partners�with�elite�universities�to�showcase�
“This�is�good�news.�Experimentation�with�new�initiatives�in�technology�use�is�an�important�part�of�the�substantive�inquiry�that�will�help�inform�the�University’s�academic�leaders�about�the�best�course�of�action�in�this�area.�The�B d f Vi it ’ i i t t i i ti th hi h t
“the�world’s�best�courses”
• No�money�exchanged�in�partnerships;�Coursera serves�primarily�as�central�web�portal
Board�of�Visitors’�primary�interest�is�in�promoting�the�highest�order�of�excellence�in�our�students’�learning�and�enrichment,�especially�in�a�resource�constrained�environment.”
Helen�Dragas
Sustainable�Business�Model�or�Marginal�Revenue?
Rector,�UVA�Board�of�Visitors
Certificates
Lead�Generation
Tutoring Enterprise�Platform
Tuition�Sharing AdsSecure�Assessment
Screening�Tests
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Coursera contract�with�the�University�of�Michigan;�Helen�Dragas’s emailed�statement�to�The Washington�Post,�July�16,�2012;�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
Nominal�Revenue Potentially�Lucrative
18
A�Tipping�PointFrom�Inspiration�to�Fruition�in�Only�a�Year
pp g
July�2011Thrun and Norvig
January�2012Two Stanford professors
July�2012Coursera expands to 12Thrun and�Norvig
announce�that�their�Stanford�AI�course�will�be�open�to�anyone
Two�Stanford�professors�found�Coursera;�Venture�capital�firms�invest�$16�M
Coursera expands�to�12�universities�and�100+�courses
March�2011Thrun sees�SalmanKhan speak at TED
December�2011MIT�announces�“MITx”
May�2012MIT�and�Harvard�announce�“edX” free online courses andKhan�speak�at�TED
Thrun gets�venture�capital�to�create�Udacity
“edX”�– free�online�courses�and�certificates
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Steven�Leckart,�“The�Stanford�Education�Experiment,”�Wired�Magazine,�April�2012.
19
Disruption�from�Above,�Then�Below
A�Battle�on�Two�Fronts
New�Models�Will�Threaten�Incumbents�from�Both�Ends�of�the�Spectrump ,
U li “Q lit ” f
Selective�Institutions
Growth�of�High�Quality�Online�Only�Curriculum
Uncoupling�“Quality”�from�Price�and�Exclusivity
• Celebrity�Faculty�Open�Courses
• Hot Employer Partnerships
Squeezed�in�the�Middle
• Hot�Employer�Partnerships�
• Top�Global�Brands�Crowd�Out�Mid�Tier�Institutions
Gathering Legitimacy of
Pressure�on�Graduate&�Professional�Revenue
Eroding Margins on Lower Division Gathering�Legitimacy�of�Low�Cost�Models
• Legislator�and�Parental�Support�for�“No�Frills”�Programs
Eroding�Margins�on�Lower�Division
Expensive�and�Undifferentiated
Access�Focused�Institutions
• Flipped�Classrooms�and�Technology�Assisted�Instruction
• Employer�Acceptance�of�Non�Traditional Educators and
Unbundling�of�General�Education
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Traditional�Educators�and�Credentials
Notes:
20
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
21
Three�Emerging�Business�Models:�QualityElite�Institutions�(or�Faculty)�Betting�on�Three�Models
g g Q y
Bypass TraditionalScaling Elite ProgramsEnable Faculty�Driven Bypass�Traditional�Accreditation
Scaling�Elite�ProgramsEnable�Faculty�Driven�Pedagogical�Innovation
P t hi ith 12 lit E t bli h d i 2008 b f d f • Founded by Dr Thrun in 2012 and• Partnership�with�12�elite�universities�and�growing
• Provide�infrastructure�for�online�and�hybrid�teaching
• Established�in�2008�by�founder�of�Princeton�Review
• Exclusive�partnerships�with�premier�graduate�programs:�
• Founded�by�Dr.�Thrun in�2012�and�funded�by�Charles�River�Associates
• Provide�certificates�valued�by�l d 20 i i i l
y g
• Will�offer�courses�in�all�disciplines,�with�assessments�and�certificates
• USC�� MAT�• Georgetown�� Nursing�• UNC�Chapel�Hill�� MBA• Wash�� U�LL.M.
employers,�not�degrees.�20�initial�partner�companies
• Infrastructure,�instructional�design,�and�business�services�for�
• Massive�data�set�will�fuel�cutting�edge�pedagogical�research�for�hybrid�and�online�learning
• Provides�start�up�capital�and�expertise�for�cutting�edge�online�pedagogy�and�marketing
global�MOOC�courses
• Targeting�continuing�education�in�STEM�market;�19�courses�by�2013
T ht b i t f lt
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
• Taught�by�prominent�faculty�on�leave�from�prestigious�traditional�universities
Notes:
22
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
23
Three�Emerging�Business�Models:�CostEmerging�Models�for�Reducing�Cost�of�Degrees
g g
Credit�BankCompetency�Based�CreditsTargeting�General�Education
B i M d l N “ ” “ dit ” j t • Founded in 1971 by SUNYBusiness�Model• Most�affordable�provider�of�online�general�education�courses
• 30�50�courses�account�for�1/3�of�all higher ed
• No�“courses”�or�“credits,”�just�competency�exams
• No�traditional�instructors;�800+�faculty�a�mix�of�assessment�
• Founded�in�1971�by�SUNY�System�as�Regents�College
• Became�independent�institution�in�1998
30 000 d ( lall�higher�ed
Pricing• $99�a�month�+�$39�course�registration�fee
designers,�subject�matter�experts,�and�student�mentors
• 32,000�students�nationwide
• 30% annual growth
• 30,000�students�(mostly�undergraduate)
• “Students�have�educational�paths�that�are�as�unique�and�di th E l i• $999�a�year�for�10�courses
Enrollment• 1,000�students�in�2010;�3,000�students in 2011
• 30%�annual�growth
• Tuition:�$5,780�per�year;�hasn’t�been�increased�since�2007.�Eligible�for�aid�in�select�states
diverse�as�they�are�…�Excelsior�College�revolutionized�adult�higher�education�by�recognizing�learning�wherever�and�whenever�it occurs.”
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
students�in�2011• New�subsidiaries�in�Indiana,�Washington,�and�Texas
it�occurs.
Notes:
24
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
25
The�Platform�Wars
Quality�at�Scale
Big�Data�Fueling�Emerging�Market�for�Education’s�“Google�Equivalent”
Next�Gen Learning PlatformNext�Gen�Learning�Platform
• Course�administration
• Multimedia�content�delivery
• Live�collaboration�tools
• Real�time�performance�data
• Predictive�analytics
• Adaptive�assessment
• Automated�advising
“It's�hard�to�predict�who�will�win�the�platform�wars,�but�it's�easy�to�predict�that�someone�will.�Th f b ildi li l f li ibl I h bil h h i
The�Power�of�a�Platform
The�costs�of�building�an�online�platform�are�negligible—Instagram,�the�mobile�photo�sharing�platform,�had�nine�employees�at�the�beginning�of�this�year.�They�were�just�another�group�of�young�people�gathered�around�a�table�staring�at�MacBook�Airs.�The�rewards�of�building�the�winning�platform�are�vast,�as�Instagram found�when�it�was�bought�by�Facebook�for�$1�billion.”
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Kevin�Carey,�“Revenge�of�the�Underpaid�Professors,”�The�Chronicle�of�Higher�Education,�May�20,�2012.
Kevin�Carey,�New�America�Foundation
Notes:
26
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Road�Map�for�Discussion
27
p
1 A�Tipping�Point:�New�Teaching�Methods�Gain�Legitimacy
2 The Incumbent’s Innovations2
3
The�Incumbent s Innovations
3 Overview�of�Additional�PresentationsResourcing�Strategic�Priorities
Preparing�for�Cloud�Migration
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
28
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
29
The�Incumbent�ResponseChanges�in�Fundamental�Beliefs�Allow�for�a�Wider�Array
of�Responses�From�Traditional�Universities
p
T di i li B li B t I t Sh
Quality at Scale1
Traditionalists�Believe… But�Innovators�Show…
Quality�means�small�courses� Academic�rigor�is�possible�in�Quality�at�Scale1 with�tenured�faculty large�scale�settings
Competing�on�Cost2 An�education�is�worth�what�you�pay�for�it
Lower�costs�can�be�achieved�by�taking�new�paths�to�a�degree
Integrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
3Degrees�represent�mastery
of�a�disciplineDegrees�can�represent�employer�
relevant�competencies
4 Curiosity�driven�disciplinary�research�is�most�fruitful
Grand�challenges�can�only�be�solved�by�multidisciplinary�collaborationProblem�Focused�Research
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
30
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
31
How�Will�Disruption�Manifest?Pressures�on�the�Traditional�Higher�Education�Business�Model
p
Elite institutions and faculty rapidlyDisruptive�Competitors:
1
• Elite Open Course Credentials
Quality�at�Scale
Elite�institutions�and�faculty�rapidly�legitimize�technology�intensive,�globally�scalable�instructional�models�
• Elite�Open�Course�Credentials
• Signature�Online�Master’s�Programs
• Prestigious�OnlineUndergraduate�Universities
Competing�on�Cost2
Incumbent�Responses:
g
3Integrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
• Course�Sharing�Consortia
• Flipped�Classrooms
• Adaptive�Learning
• Learnin Anal ti s
Problem�Focused�Research4
• Learning�Analytics
• Online�Community
• Gamification of�Education
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
32
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
33
Filling�Gaps�in�the�Course�Catalog
Course�Sharing�Consortia
Comprehensiveness�Achieved�by�Combining�Offerings�Onlineg p g
Shared�Course�
Lowering�the�Cost�and�Risk�of�Launching�Online�Programs
Taking�Niche�Offerings�to�Scale�Without�Sacrificing�Breadth
Online�Consortium�of�Independent�Colleges�&�Universities�(OCICU)
New�Paradigm�InitiativeAssociated�Colleges�of�the�South
Portal• Courses�broadcast�via�teleconference;�remote�students�participate�in�real�time
• Declining�viability�of�language�d k l
• New�Ventures�of�Regis�University�provides�online�infrastructure
• Course�design,�maintenance,�and�
Departments�offer�many� Yet�colleges�still�struggle�
departments�a�key�catalystfaculty�training�included
sub�scale�courses to�afford�breadth
Chinese Art HistoryPhysics Biology Arabic
16�Institutions83�Institutions
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Leigh�Brown�Perkins,�“A�New�Paradigm�For�Learning,”�Rollins�Magazine,�March�2012.
Chinese Art�HistoryPhysics Biology Arabic
Notes:
34
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
35
Winning�on�All�Fronts�with�Course�Redesign
Flipped�Classrooms
Alternative�Model�Expands�Capacity,�Improves�Quality,�and�Costs�Lessg g
� Concept�1� Concept�2� Concept�3
TAs�and�Peer�MentorsFaculty
Pre�Reading Pre�Quiz Lecture Practices Problem�Solving Homework
Pre�Lecture
Embedded�Videos Mini�Tests
e�Tutore�TutorPre�Lecture�
Prep
12% 45% 31%Reduction�inDFW�rate
Increase�inenrollment�cap
Cost�savingsper�student
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�“Physics�Large�Course�Redesign�Project�Report,”�UNC�Charlotte,�Center�for�Teaching�&�Learning,�Sept.�8,�2011.
Notes:
36
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
37
Few�Excuses�LeftCourse�Redesign�Gaining�Traction�Across�Institutional�Types�and�Disciplines
PhysicsPhysics• Clickers�and�frequent�feedback�opportunities�keep�students�on�track
“I�always�thought�I�was�a�pretty�good�lecturer,�but�…�I�had�come�to�a�realization�that�even�my�most�successful�students�weren’t�retaining�a�lot�of�the�material�I’d�covered from one course to the next.”
English• From�3�hours�to�1�hour�in�class�per�week
• Students�grouped�based�on�answers�to�questions
covered�from�one�course�to�the�next.
Elizabeth�AlexanderTexas�Wesleyan�History�Professor
Historyl h d l
• Additional�time�spent�in�one�on�one�sessions,�peer�tutoring,�and�multimedia�lessons
• Historical�Methods�class�won�“Radically�Flexible�Classroom”�award
• Movable�furniture�and�tech�enabled�classrooms�facilitate�group�work
M th“Do�our�students�actually�learn
Math• Emporium�model:�1�hour�in�class,�2�hours�in�large�computer�lab
• Significantly�improved�completion�
during�class,�or�do�they�simply�feverishly�scribble�down�everything�we�say,�hoping�somehow�to�understand�the�material�later?”
Eric Mazur
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�The�National�Center�for�Academic�Transformation�(www.thencat.org);�“Texas�Wesleyan’s�
Classroom.NEXT:�21st Century�Learning�in�Action,”�Campus�Technology,�April�10,�2012.��
g y p pand�retention�rates
• 19%�instructional�cost�savings
Eric�MazurHarvard�Physics�Professor
Notes:
38
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
39
Transforming�Commodity�Courses
Adaptive�Learning
Breaking�the�Cost/Capacity�Curve�With�Self�Paced�Learningg y
Dramatic Improvement inAdaptive Software Promotes Dramatic�Improvement�in�Remediation�Results
Finished
Adaptive�Software�Promotes�Engagement�and�Provides�Analytics
50%
25%
Finished4�weeks�early
Moved�into�regular�freshman�mathActivity�Based�Learning
Sh t i “ l ld”Short,�engaging,�“real�world”�problems�to�solve
Achievement�PointsUses game�like badge system to track
66% 75%Uses�game like�badge�system�to�track�progress�and�motivate�students
Automated�AssessmentBuilt�into�activities�and�diagnostic�exams,�
Remedial�Math�Pilot5,000�students
13%6%
Pass�Rate Withdraw�Rate
which�adapt�to�performance
Performance�DashboardsInstructors�focus�face�time�on�bi t t bli bl k
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Bruce�Upbin,�“Knewton Is�Building�the�World’s�Smartest�Tutor,”�Forbes�Magazine,�Feb.�22,�2012.
Before After
biggest�stumbling�blocks
Notes:
40
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
41
“Moneyball”�for�Education
Learning�Analytics
Instructor�Dashboards�Provide�Real�Time�Outcome�Data,�Predictive�Analyticsy
Open�Learning�Initiative�Introductory�Statistics�Dashboard
Predictive map of AccuracyPredictive�map�of�overall�learning�
outcomes
Accuracy�distribution�bysub�objective
Performance�distribution�for�each�objectivej
Participation�by�assignment�
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Candace�Thille,�“Changing�the�Production�Function�in�Higher�Education,”�American�Council�on�Education,�March�2012.
ass g e tcategory
Notes:
42
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
43
A�Homegrown�“Build”�with�Impressive�Resultsg p
Average�GPA
Improving�Grades�and�Persistence�Gator�Online�Student�Association
2.96
3.04
2.76
Non�GOSAMembers
All�ActiveStudents
GOSA�Members
• “Facebook”�for�online�undergrad�business�program
50%
Difficult�Course�Drop�Rates• Built�and�managed�by�volunteer�students�and�alumni�using�open�source�programs
• Peer to peer academic social and job 50%32% 33%
23% 20% 17%
• Peer�to�peer�academic,�social,�and�job�search�support�
• Advisor’s�Corner�for�staff�to�answer�questions�and�receive�private�messages�
Before�GOSA
After�GOSA
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Gator�Online�Student�Association,�available�at:�http://www.ufonlinestudents.org/,�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
Fall Winter Spring
Notes:
44
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
45
Game�Based�Learning�on�the�Horizon
Gamification of�Education
Motivating�and�Educating�a�Generation�of�Gamersg
6�Million�Years 200�Million�MinutesTotal�worldwide�playtime Total�playtime�per�day
10�Million�Players 1�Billion�DownloadsSince�2009Currently�subscribed
Built�in�Assessment Contextual�Learning Motivating�Progression
• Players�must�solve�problems,�coordinate�teams,�and�develop�mastery�to�“beat�the�game”
C l ti i ifi k
• Players�learn�by�doing,�not�reading�or�watching
• Puzzles�placed�in�compelling,�i t iti ti
• Games�must�be�accessible�and�fun,�yet�challenging
• Huge�amount�of�data�used�to�lib t i ti• Completion�signifies�known�
competencies�and�objective�achievements
intuitive�narrative
• Crowd�sourced�“theorycrafting”�for�serious�players
calibrate�incentives
• “Experience�points”�and�items�provide�social�recognition
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Source:�James�Paul�Gee,�“Games�and�21st Century�Learning,”�Games�for�Learning�Institute,�May�6,�2009;�Jane�McGonigal,�“Be�a�Gamer,�Save�the�World,”�The�Wall�Street�Journal,�Jan�22,�2011.
Notes:
46
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
47
Incentivizing�Pedagogical�ChangeThree�Lessons�in�Encouraging�Faculty�to�Improve�Their�Courses
g g g g
1 2 31 2 3
Provide�Centralized�Instructional Design Support
Focus�on�New�Hires�to�Create�Culture of Innovation
It’s�Not�About�Technology.It’s About Assessment.Instructional�Design�Support Culture�of�Innovation It s�About�Assessment.
Typical�Problem:• Multiple,�duplicative�services
Typical�Problem:• Political�capital�spent�trying�to�
Typical�Problem:• Faculty�recoil�at�“online”�and�
• No�integration�of�tech�&�instructional�design�expertise
Exemplar Model:
convert�eternal�skeptics
• Research�remains�the�priority
Exemplar Model:
“machine�aided”�teaching
• Wasteful�tech�investments
Exemplar Model:Exemplar�Model:• Center�for�Teaching�&�Learning�combines�tech�and�pedagogy�staff
• Staff�directly�involved�with�course�
Exemplar�Model:• Faculty�Development�Institute�focuses�on�new�hires
• 100s�of�short�courses�available
Exemplar�Model:• Faculty�required�to�submit�self�assessment�studies�yearly
• Agnostic�about�end�product;�design�at�all�levels on�every�facet�of�teaching experimentation�encouraged
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
48
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
49
Mapping�the�World�of�the�PossibleHow�Ontario’s�Best�Faculty�Approach�High�Capacity�Instruction
pp g
Problem Feeling�of�“anonymity,”��no�personal�connections
More�students�mean�more�work�for�faculty
Few�incentives�or�resources�for�instructional�innovation
SolutionCreating�a�Sense�of�Community
Improving�EfficiencySupporting�a�Culture�
of�Teaching
Supplementary�tutorials
“ h k h ”
LMS�administration
l
Teaching�&�learning�center
Scholarship of teaching
Strategies
“Think�Pair�Share”
Extensive�course�websites
Social�media
Clickers
Commercial�assessment�software
Pre�recorded�content
Open�educational�resources
Scholarship�of�teaching
Teaching�emphasis�in�promotion�guidelines
Dean�&�chair�supportClickers
Pre�class�availability
Peer�mentorships
p
TA�led�tutorials
Team�based�instruction
Professional�development�workshops
Teaching�awards
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Source:�Angelika�Kerr,�“Teaching�and�Learning�in�Large�Classes�in�Ontario�Universities:�An�Exploratory�Study,”�Higher�Education�Quality�Council�of�Ontario,�2011;�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
50
“ h l d h f l l
Aiming�Higher�than�Equivalence
“While�continuing�to�study�the�impact�of�online�learning�on�completion�is�important,�the�question�to�be�answered�is�not�‘is�online�education�as�good�as�(or�better�than)�traditional�education?’�but�rather,�‘how�can�the�technology�be�used�most�effectively�to�support�and�accelerate�colleges’�efforts�to�dramatically�increase�student�progress�and�completion?’”
Candace�ThilleDirector,�Open�Learning�Initiative
A Change of Heart
“I�have�been�on�record�for�some�time�as�being�skeptical�about�the�likely�effects�on�productivity�in�higher�education�of�various�new�technologies…�But�the�evidence...about�the�work�at�Carnegie�
A�Change�of�Heart
Mellon�has�caused�me�to�rethink�my�positions.”
William�BowenPresident�Emeritus,�Princeton�University
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Candace�Thille,�“Changing�the�Production�Function�in�Higher�Education,”�American�Council�on�Education,�Feb�2012.
51
Disruptive�Competition�and�Incumbent�InnovationPressures�on�the�Traditional�Higher�Education�Business�Model
p p
Quality�at�Scale1 Disruptive�Competitors:
• Affinity�Population�Marketing
• Competency Based Placement
Competing�on�Cost
Lower�cost�options,�more�convenient�
2
• Competency�Based�Placement
• Pay�by�the�Course�Subscriptions
• No�Frills�Charter�Universities
delivery�modes,�and�targeted�marketing�attract�students�who�would�not�otherwise�have�enrolled Incumbent�Responses:
3
• Flexible�Articulation
• 2+2�Models
• 3+2�and�4+1�Master’s�Programs
• Credit A re ator
Integrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
Problem�Focused�Research4
• Credit�Aggregator
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
52
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
53
The�$10,000�Degree
Competing�on�Convenience
Early�Attempts�at�Drastic�Price�Reduction�Will�Affect�Few�Students$ , g
Targeted Merit Aid for Accelerated 2+2 ProgramTargeted�Merit�Aid�for�High�Achieving�STEM�Majors
Accelerated�2+2�Program�Starts�in�High�School
University�of�Texas�of�the�Permian�Basin Texas�A&M�University�� San�Antonio
N di l
Accepted�into�selective“Texas�Science�Scholar”�program
Majoring in IT and Security
Qualifies�for�dual�enrollment�program�in�high�school
No�remedial�courses
Majoring�in�STEM�field
Majoring�in�IT�and�Security
27�credits�at�a�community�college
$10 000 $10 000
4�year�completion 36�credits�at�Texas�A&M�� SA
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
$10,000 $10,000
Notes:
54
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
55
The�Path�Dependency�of�Total�Cost
Competing�on�Convenience
Reducing�Degree�Costs�through�Articulation�and�Faster�Time�to�Completionp y
Six�Years�at�Public�University
Typical�Option
$103�K
Three Years in BA Program Two Years in Master’s
3�+�2
Three�Years�in�BA�Program Two�Years�in�Master s
$86�KSix�years�of�room�and�board�significantly�increase�total�cost
Two�Years�at�PrivateTwo�Years�at�CC
$83�K2�+�2�Private With�this�option,�degree�
from private university
“On�Time”�Graduation
Four�Years�at�Public�University
$69�K
from�private�university�costs�less�than�six�year�degree�from�public
Graduation
By�far�the�cheapest�$40 K
Two�Years�at�PublicTwo�Years�at�CC
2�+�2�
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�College�Board,�Trends�in�College�Pricing�2011.
1 Assumes�in�state�tuition�at�public�four�year�($8,244)�and�two�year�($2,963),�tuition�at�private�university�($28,500)�and�room�/ board�while�at�the�public�four�year�($8,887)�and�at�the�private�four�year�($10,089)
option,�in�part�due�to�fewer�years�on�campus
$40�KPublic
Notes:
56
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
57
Marketing�a�Transfer�Friendly�AdvantageEnrollment�Strategy�Adapts�as�Student�Demand�Shifts�to�Completion
g y g
New Message and New Policies
2100Transfer�Friendly
New�Message�and�New�Policies�Reinvigorate�Campus
• No associate’s degree required
1900
2000
D li i E ll t Th t i
No�associate s�degree�required• Community�college�partnerships
• Marketed�transferscholarships on
1700
1800
rollm
ent
Declining�Enrollments�Threatening�Long�Term�Viability
scholarships�on�CSU�campuses
1400
1500
1600
Fall�En
r
Targeted�Marketing
R i d C lif i B d
• Systematic�review�of�program�demand�and�market�share
• Focus on demographics with
1200
1300
1400 Recession and�California�Budget�Cuts�Lead�to�Course�Reductions�
at�Public�Institutions
• Focus�on�demographics�with�highest�persistence
• Individualized�degree�mapping�toward�on�time�completion
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
12002004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
58
The�Net�Price�Calculator�Does�Its�Job
“We’re�definitely�seeing�students�and�parents�looking�more�closely at retention rates time to degree and net price Theyclosely�at�retention�rates,�time�to�degree,�and�net�price.�They�understand�that�these�factors�are�important,�and�the�data�are�now�much�easier�to�get�your�hands�on.”�
Kathleen DawleyKathleen�DawleyPresident�&�CEO,�Maguire�Associates
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
59
Disruptive�Competition�and�Incumbent�InnovationPressures�on�the�Traditional�Higher�Education�Business�Model
p p
Quality�at�Scale1
Disruptive�Competitors:
I t ti A d i
2 Competing�on�Conveniencep p
• Digital�Badges
• Employer�DefinedStackable�Credentials
Integrating�Academicand�Career�Preparation
Schools�compete�on�ability�of�students�to�l d “ b f h ” h h l
3
Incumbent�Responses:• Competency�Based�ePortfolios
land�“job�of�choice”�through�employer�relevant�curriculum,�experiential�learning,�and�comprehensive�career�advising�services
p y
• Workforce�Development�Campuses
• “Applied”�Liberal�Arts�Curricula
Problem�Focused�Research4
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
60
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
61
Dismal�Job�Market�Making�Career�Prep�a�PrioritySpotlight�on�Higher�Ed�as�Graduates�Search�for�Employment
g p y
Chasing�the
Of�those�who�graduated�since�2006…
• Over�11%�were�unemployed
• Only�51%�were�employed�full�timeAmerican�Dream
Of�those�who�graduated�since�2009…
• Fewer than half were employed within a year of graduating• Fewer�than�half�were�employed�within�a�year�of�graduating
• Three�times�as�likely�to�be�unemployed�as�2006�08�graduates
“Given�that�the�unemployment�picture�for�young�college�graduates�has�yet to show substantial improvement the Class of 2012 will be joining a
A�Vicious�Cycle
yet�to�show�substantial�improvement,�the�Class�of�2012�will�be�joining�a�significant�backlog�of�unemployed�college�graduates�from�the�Classes�of�2009,�2010,�and�2011�in�an�extremely�difficult�job�market.”
“The�Class�of�2012:�Labor�Market�for�Young�Graduates�Remains�Grim”
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Carl�Van�Horn,�Charley�Stone,�and�Cliff�Zukin,�“Chasing�the�American�Dream:�Recent�College�Graduates�and�the�Great�Recession,”�John�J.�Heldrich Center�for�Workforce�Development,�May�2012.
Economic�Policy�Institute
Notes:
62
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
63
Beginnings�of�a�Marketplace�for�Digital�Badges
Integrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
Will�Micro�Certifications�Replace�the�Symbolic�Power�of�Diplomas?g g p g g
What’s a Digital Badge? What’s Needed for a Liquid Market?What s�a�Digital�Badge? What s�Needed�for�a�Liquid�Market?
Proof�of�Concept�FundingMacArthur�Foundation�launches�$2M�contest�for�badge�design
O IT St d d
Mozilla’s Open BadgesInfrastructure makes it easy to issue display
1
Open�IT�StandardsMozilla�developing�interoperabilityspecs�for�badge�formats
issue, display,and manage badges across the web.
2
Government Affinity Industry Individual
Credible�SponsorsFamed�organizations�designing�and�recognizing badges
3
• Collectable,�sharable�certifications�of�specified�competencies• Acquired by examination demonstration proof of experience
Government Affinity�Groups
Industry�Associations
Individual�Employers
recognizing�badges
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
• Acquired�by�examination,�demonstration,�proof�of�experience• Help�students�find�a�job,�collaborator,�or�social�media�followers
Source:�www.DMLCompetition.net;�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.�
Notes:
64
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
65
Using�Badges�as�Infrastructure�for�Learning�OutcomesEarly�Adopter�Rethinking�Assessment�in�a�Digital�Age
g g g
Internship DeliverablesBeyondMere Grades Internship�Deliverables
E�Portfolio
Sustainable�Agriculture�& Food Systems
�
�
�
Beyond�Mere�GradesNew�Major�Building
Learner�Centric�Toolkits
Recorded�Presentations
Suzy�Smith
Strategic�Management
&�Food�Systems �
• Agriculture�students�will�earn�badges�based�on�competencies,�skills,�classes,�
Interpersonal�Communication
Experimentation�& Inquiry
p , , ,and�internships
• Mix�of�pre�determined�standards�and�self�assessment�with�peer�review
Experimental�Results�and�Analysis
&�Inquiry• Intended�to�capture�learning�that�occurs�outside�of�traditional�classroom�setting�and�beyond�graded�assignments
• Operationalizes�emphasis�on�learning�outcomes
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
Peer,�Mentor,�and�Faculty�Feedback EvidenceInstruction
66
Approaching a Tipping PointApproaching�a�Tipping�Point
“A�lot�of�the�foundation�for�competency�based�education�is�in�place�now.�Employer�identified�competencies,�a�growing�inventory�of�high�quality�online�courses,�enough�accredited�two�year�and�four�year�institutions�so�that�working�students�can�get�degrees�
ll kill It ill ll t k ff h ti i l t f t thas�well�as�skills.�It�will�really�take�off�when�a�prestigious�employer�or�two�features�the�credential—people�may�downplay�online�education,�but�would�they�if�a�Boeing�or�a�John�Deere�were�on�board? If�even�one�of�those�firms�endorses�the�concept,�it�will�get�a�lot�of�legitimacy�quickly,�and�I�think�we'll�see�a�big�part�of�the�'applied‘�market�split�their�education among traditional and non�traditional models ”education�among�traditional�and�non traditional�models.
Burck SmithCEO,�StraighterLine
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
67
A�Streamlined�Pipeline�for�Local�Industry
Integrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
Accelerated�Degree�Program�Focuses�on�Workforce�Developmentp y
A�new�value�proposition�for�parents�and�students
Cohorts�Begin�Courses�in�Local�High�Schools
2�Year�Campus�Curriculum�Focuses�on�“Real�World”�Skills
Graduates�Hit�the�Ground�Running�at�Local�Businesses
St d t l t ti l D l ti / i l l I d t f d i l• Students�explore�potential�careers,�apply�in�9th grade
• Successful�applicants�assigned�an�industry�mentor
• Dual�counting�/�special�general�ed credits�accelerate�“core”
• Students�intern�with�local�employers,�earn�credit�and�financial assistance
• Industry�focused�curriculum�mitigates�cost�of�training�new�employees
• Developing�stackable�certificates�for continued training
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Missouri�Innovation�Campus�White�Paper:�http://www.ucmo.edu/about/mic/documents/micpaper.pdf
• Free�college�credit�earned�in�11th and�12th grades
financial�assistance
• Results�in�BS�in�Systems�Engineering�Technology
for�continued�training
• Hope�to�attract�new�businesses�in�“research�park”�model
68
Not�an�Unfunded�Mandate Anymorey
$500�K $10�MBlock�grant�to�support�initial�Innovation�Campus�initiatives
Competitive�funding�to�adapt�Innovation�Campus�model�throughout�Missouri
“…[C]ompanies in high�growth sectors need a highly skilled…[C]ompanies in�high growth�sectors�need�a�highly�skilled�workforce�to�grow,�innovate�and�compete�…�but�the�current�business�model�for�higher�education�is�not�keeping�pace.”
Governor Jay NixonGovernor�Jay�Nixon
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056AJay�Nixon,�“Missouri�Innovation�Campus�Will�Speed�Students�Toward Degrees,�Jobs,”�The�Kansas�City�Star,�Feb.�26,�2012.
69
Liberal�Arts�2.0
Integrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
Articulating�“Return�on�Education”�to�Outcome�Focused�Students
Liberal arts college in Motto: “Challenge Convention.
“LEEP�provides�a�greater�return�on�
Liberal�arts�college�in�Worcester,�Massachusetts
Motto:� Challenge�Convention.�Change�Our�World.”
“Develop�focused�skillsto�make�immediate�contributions�to�the�workplace”
“Turn�your�talentsand�passions�into�a�rewarding�career”
your�educational�investment�by�preparing�you�to�thrive�in�today’s�highly�interconnected,�competitive,�and�dynamic�global�economy”y g y
1 2 3 “Return�on�Education”Alliance�&�Mentors“Effective�Practice”
• Clark’s�“defining�contribution”�on�top�of�AAC&U�core�learning�outcomes
• Employers�and�alumni�partner�with�Clark�to�provide�career�guidance
• New�interactive�website�focusing�on�alumni�placements�and�salaries
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
outcomes
Notes:
70
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
71
Disruptive�Competition�and�Incumbent�InnovationPressures�on�the�Traditional�Higher�Education�Business�Model
p p
Quality�at�Scale1
2 Competing�on�ConvenienceDisruptive�Competitors:• Competitive�“Grand�Challenges”
3
Incumbent�Responses:
• Venture�PhilanthropyIntegrating�Academic�and�Career�Preparation
Problem�Focused�Research
Philanthropy,�corporate,�and�government�
4
p• Alternative�Research�Structures
• Incubator�Campuses
• Community�Based�Scholarshipfunding�concentrates�on�handful�of�universities�with�demonstrated�capabilities�to�solve�business,�technical,�and�social�problems
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
p
Notes:
72
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
73
Science�in�the�Service�of�SocietyFunders�Emphasizing�“Grand�Challenges,”�Not�Disciplinary�Research
y
University�Model
Department Faculty Salary Disciplinary Research Idea Publication
Journal
“Grand�Challenge”�Model
Department Faculty�Salary Disciplinary�Research Idea Publication
Foundation Idea Global Competition Invention Prize Money
A Push to Remake Science Policy in Canada
Foundation Idea Global�Competition Invention Prize�Money
“The�current�suite�of�programs�is�mainly�(but�not�exclusively)�focused�on�investigator�led�‘idea�push’�projects…�However,�there�remains�a�gap�with�respect�to�collaborative�R&D�and�innovation�projects�that�are�large�scale,�industry�facing,�demand�driven�and�outcome�oriented…”
A�Push�to�Remake�Science�Policy�in�Canada
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Innovation�Canada:�A�Call�to�Action
Notes:
74
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
75
Does�Anyone�Actually�Read�This�Stuff?
Problem�Focused�Research
Even�Faculty�Questioning�the�Benefits�of�“Publish�or�Perish”y y
1616
11 11 11Citations�of�Essays�Published by English
4
13
43
12 2Mark�Bauerlein
Published�by�English�Departments�in�2004
U�of�Georgia SUNY�Buffalo U�of�Vermont U�of�Illinois
0�2�Citations 3�6�Citations >6�Citations
“Yes,�research�is�an�intellectual�good,�and�yes,�we�shouldn't�reduce�our�measures�to�bean�counting.�But�we�can�no�longer ignore the costs of supporting research—financial costs (salaries sabbaticals grants travel; the cost to
A�Worthy�Cause,�But�At�What�Cost?
longer�ignore�the�costs�of�supporting�research financial�costs (salaries,�sabbaticals,�grants,�travel;�the�cost�to�libraries�to�buy�and�store�material,�to�scholarly�presses�to�evaluate,�produce,�and�market�it;�and�to�peers�to�review�it),�opportunity�costs (not�mentoring�undergraduates,�not�pushing�foreign�languages�in�general�education�requirements,�etc.),�and�human�costs (asking�smart,�conscientious�people�to�labor�their�lives�away�on�unappreciated�things).”
Mark Bauerlein
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Mark�Bauerlein,�“Literary�Research:�Costs�and�Impact,”�Center�for�College�Affordability�and�Productivity, Nov�2011;�“The�Research�Bust,”�The�Chronicle�Review,�Dec�4,�2011.
Mark�BauerleinProfessor�of�English,�Emory�University
Notes:
76
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
77Problem�Focused�Research
Will�Research�Dollars�Migrate�to�the�Private�Sector?Venture�Philanthropists�Playing�Increasingly�Central�Role�in�R&D
g
“…[U]niversity� and�government�financed�l b t ff d th l d
Paul�Allen Leaving�the�Academy
labs�cannot�afford�the�personnel�and�equipment�to�perform�the�multidisciplinary�work�that�Mr.�Allen�wishes�to�encourage”
• $500M�investmentRi d D l t h
• Attracting�top�faculty�from�elite�institutions
• Doubling size to 360 staff
Ricardo�Dolmetsch(Former)�Professor�of�Neurobiology
Stanford�University
• Doubling�size�to�360�staff
• Marketing�accountability,�speed,�and�publicly�accessible�results�to�funders
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Peter�Monaghan,�“Microsoft�Co�Founder’s�Brain�Institute�Attracts�Top�Academic�Researchers,”�The�Chronicle�of�Higher�Education,�April�1,�2012.
Notes:
78
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
79
Competing�in�the�Age�of�Venture�PhilanthropyCDOs�Hear�Major�Donors�Critique�Higher�Education�as�Destination�for�Big�Gifts
p g g py
Stewardship
Can’t�Quantify�Impact
p
“Big�donors�are�now�demanding�business�plans—we’ll sustain funding after the initial gift
Less�Attractive�the�Closer�We�Look
“We�did�a�survey�of�trustees�trying�to�find�out�what drove their giving behavior. We wereplans we ll�sustain�funding�after�the�initial�gift�
is�used�up�and�report�on�progress�against�goals�on�a�quarterly basis.”
what�drove�their�giving�behavior.��We�were�discouraged�to�learn�that�several�were�lessinclined�to�give�after�becoming�a�trustee,�because�they�saw�up�close�the�vision�and�efficiency challenges.”
CDO,��Selective�Private�University
efficiency�challenges. �
CDO,�Tuition�Dependent�Private�University
Academic�Vision
Funding�Transformations,�Not�Operations
“You�won’t�get�an�eight�figure�gift�for�financial�aid�or�deferred�maintenance.��Venture�
Organized�around�Disciplines,�Not�Problems“Social�entrepreneurs�want�to�solve�big�problems�that�are�inherently�interdisciplinary,�
philanthropists�want�to�seed�transformational�ideas.”
like�public�health�or�sustainable�energy.��It’s�a�struggle�to�get�all�our�disciplines�synchronized,�and�we’re�starting�to�lose�out�to�NGOs�who�have�more�integrated�marketing�pitches.”
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis.
CDO,��Private�Research�University CDO,��Flagship�Public�University
Notes:
80
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
81
Restructuring�the�Research�EnterpriseOvercoming�the�Limits�of�Departmental�Autonomy
g p
Energy�Initiative Thematic�Divisions
• More�than�a�dozen�new�interdisciplinary�schools�(i.e.,�Human�Evolution�and�Social�Change,�Earth�and�S E l ti )
• Established�in�2006�to�transform�global�energy�system
• More than 50 industry partners provide financial Space�Exploration)
• Large�scale�research�initiatives�(Sustainability,�Biodesign)
• Eliminated�many�traditional�departments�(Biology,�Sociology Anthropology Geology)
More�than�50�industry�partners�provide�financial�support�and�tech�transfer�relationships
• Connects�more�than�50�departments,�laboratories,�centers,�and�programs�involved�in�energy�related�research on campus
Innovation�Collaborative
Sociology,�Anthropology,�Geology)research�on�campus
Key�Themes�Initiative
• Baylor�Research�and�Innovation�Collaborative�(BRIC)�will�provide�faculty,�industry,�and�start�ups�with�
• University�will�focus�on�one�major�global�challenge�every�two�years�(starting�this�year)p y y p
330,000�square�feet�of�space
• International�partnerships,�interdisciplinarity,�commercialization,�and�workforce�development�are�central themes
y y g y
• First�theme,�“Water�in�Our�World,”�will�address�global�water�crisis�from�all�angles
• Builds�on�existing�institutional�strengths�and�focuses�
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
central�themesenergies�of�nearly�every�academic�unit
Notes:
82
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Road�Map�for�Discussion
83
p
1 A�Tipping�Point:�New�Teaching�Methods�Gain�Legitimacy
2 The Incumbent’s Innovations2
3
The�Incumbent s Innovations
3 Overview�of�Additional�PresentationsResourcing�Strategic�Priorities
Preparing�for�Cloud�Migration
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
84
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
You�Can’t�Go�Home�Again85
Major�Revenue�Sources�Under�Attack…. …While�Costs�of�“Big�Bets”�Increasing�
External�Pressures�Forcing�Schools�to�Reassess�Ability�to�Make�Strategic�Investments
Flat�Or�Declining
Tuition: “Net tuition growth will be muchOnline�Degree�Programs$5M t h lTuition:� Net�tuition�growth�will�be�much�
lower�than�past�10�years.”�(Moody’s)
State�Funding:�7.6%�decline�in�FY�11�12�is�largest in at least 50 years. (Grapevine)
• $5M�technology• $1M�marketing
Global�Campus�Development• $75M infrastructurelargest�in�at�least�50�years.�(Grapevine)
Winner�Take�AllCenter�for�Sustainability
• $75M�infrastructure�• $5M�faculty�and�staff
Philanthropy:�Top�25%�of�schools�received�84%�of�2011�$.�(Commonfund)
Research Funding: “Future growth will Multidisciplinary Research*
y• $8M�infrastructure�• $1M�increased�operating
Research�Funding:� Future�growth�will�slow�dramatically…�top�programs�will�be�best�positioned.”�(Moody’s)
Multidisciplinary�Research• $10M�infrastructure• $3M�special�equipment
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis
*While�support�for�personnel,�facilities,�and�equipment�can�vary�widely�by�research�area,�a�typical�threshold�level�for�a�multidisciplinary�center�is�approximately�10M�one�time�costs�and�$1�3M�in�continuing�funds.
86
A More Activist Central Role of NecessityA�More�Activist�Central�Role,�of�Necessity
“There�are�clear�differences�of�opinion�among�our�board�about�how�much�we�need�centrally…but�I�would�argue�that�our�most�important�initiatives�are�inherently�interdisciplinary�y g p y p yand�require�coordination�and�investments�above�and�beyond�what�a�unit�can�provide.”
Vice�Chancellor,�AdministrationLarge�Research�University
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis
87Strategic�Plans�Unhelpful�For�Resource�Allocation�
All�Things�to�All�People
Percentage�of�Strategic�Plans�That�Include�Indicated�Strategic�Goal�
Strategic�Plans�a�Declaration�of�Values,�Not�a�Roadmap�Toward�Differentiation
Based�off�Education�Advisory�Board�Audit
(n=32�strategic�plans;�ACC=9;�Ohio=11;�SLA=12)*
94% 94% 88% 78% 59% 56%All = 97%100%
94%� 94% 88% 78% 59% 56%All� �97%�
50%
0%Academic�Excellence
Student�Success Secure�Finances Student�Satisfaction�
Community�Ties Increase�Research Organizational�Processes
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis
*Audit�participants�include�a�selection�of�schools�from�the�Atlantic�Coast�Conference,�the�University�System�of�Ohio,�and�several�small�liberal�arts�conferences.
ALL SLA ACC Ohio�
88
Over�Investment�in�Priority�Accumulation�Means�Plans�Become�Expansive�Wish�Lists
Number�of�Individual�initiatives(Per�Plan�by�Category)
Number�of�Total�Initiatives(Per�Plan)
2.62.4
2.2
1.8
34%
25%28%
1.61.4 1.4
1.31.1 1.013%
<10 10 to 19 20 to 29 >40<10 10�to�19 20�to�29 >40�
Experts�recommend�that�plans�identify�no�more�than�seven�strategic�initiatives�
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
gper�planning�cycle.
Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis
h l k h ld d
89
While�An�Opportunity�to�Assess�Stakeholder�Needs,�Strategic�Plans�Not�Designed�to�Enable�a�Differentiated�Strategy�
Strategic�Plans�Serve�Multiple�Constituencies�…
A dit Pl d t l
And�Have�Many�Productive�Uses
1. Maximize�Fundraising�Dollars:�A�broadly�written�
State Legislatures:Many states
Accreditors:�Plans�need�to�comply�with�accreditation�requirements
g ystrategic�plan�allows�for�flexibility�in�matching�donor�interests�with�goals.
2. Promote�Inclusivity:�The�consensus�based�nature�State�Legislatures:�Many�states�require�funding�requests�to�be�in�line�with�the�strategic�plan
F d i B dl itt l
yof�higher�education�strategic�planning�enables�multiple�stakeholders�to�voice�their�opinion�on�the�direction�of�the�university.
Fundraisers: Broadly�written�plans�allow�for�flexibility�in�matching�donor�interests�to�goals
3. Inspire�Big�Thinking�Among�Star�Faculty:�Strategic�plans�encourage�faculty�to�think�expansively�about�the�school’s�value�proposition
Incoming�Presidents:�Many�new�presidents�use�the�planning�process�to�conduct�stakeholder�analyses
4. Boost�Morale:�In�a�time�of�seemingly�unending�cuts,�aspirational�plans�help�energize�the�community
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
90
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
91
Needing�a�Push�from�the�CBO
CBO�As�Agent�of�Change
As�Outcomes�of�Planning�Gain�Importance,�Attention�Shifts�to�Implementation�and�Execution
Higher�Education�Strategic�Planning�Cycle�at�Average�University�
T diti l FDefine�Strategy�
Most�planning�efforts�stop�at�the�definition�stage,�leaving�units�to�complete�remaining�steps.
Traditional�Focus
Quantify�Requirements
Communicate�Results
14
Emerging Model
CBO’s�Role
23
Emerging�ModelIncreased�demands�and�bigger�bets�will�push�leading�institutions�to�focus�additional�energies�on�the�execution�
f h l lAlign�Unit�Strategy
Measure�Performance
3stages�of�the�planning�cycle.
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056ASource:�Reuss,�“Successful�Strategic�Planning:�A�Guide�for�Nonprofit�Agencies�and�Organizations”�(1993);�Education�Advisory�Board�interviews�and�analysis
Notes:
92
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
93
Operationalizing�Strategic�InitiativesTranslating Institutional Priorities into Resource Requirements and Budget AllocationsTranslating�Institutional�Priorities�into�Resource�Requirements�and�Budget�Allocations
Defining�Actionable�Initiatives Enhancing�Transparency�and�Accountability
IIAligning Unit�Led
IVCultivating Institutional
IIIMeasuring Implementation
IQuantifying Resource Aligning�Unit Led�
Strategy�Development
3. Defined�Initiative�Parameters
Cultivating�Institutional�Perspectives�Among�Faculty
10. Chief�Business�Officer�Simulator
Measuring�Implementation�and�Impact
7. Outcome�Progress�Reviews
Quantifying�Resource�Requirements
1. Cost�Revenue�Feasibility Planning Parameters
4. Business�Case�Support�Services
Simulator
11. Outside�Expert�Review
l
Reviews�
8. Probationary�Approval�Periods
Feasibility�Planning
2. Strategic�Plan�Implementation�T
5. Gain�Sharing�Guardrails
12. Faculty�Communication�Toolkit
13. Anonymous�
9. Strategic�Goal�Owners
Teams�
6. Budget�Reduction�Scenario�Plans
Prioritization�Voting
14. Paperless�Budget�Requests
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Requests
Notes:
94
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Road�Map�for�Discussion
95
p
1 A�Tipping�Point:�New�Teaching�Methods�Gain�Legitimacy
2 The Incumbent’s Innovations2
3
The�Incumbent s Innovations
3 Overview�of�Additional�PresentationsResourcing�Strategic�Priorities
Preparing�for�Cloud�Migration
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
96
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Many�Hands�Make�Light�Work
97
Cloud System
Users�Gain�Accessibility�While�Institutions�Offload�Maintenance�&�Ownershipy g
Cloud�SystemExternal�Owner�of�at�Least�One�Major�Component�Group
Application or Software as a Service (SaaS)
MonitoringCollaboration Content
Application�or�Software�as�a�Service�(SaaS)
Platform�as�a�Service�(PaaS)
Any�Internet�browserInfrastructure�as�a�Service�(IaaS)
Identity File�Storage Database
A d i ithBlock�Storage ComputeNetwork
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Any�device�with�internet�connectivity
Source:�CIO�Research�Center,�“Making�Cloud�Less�Cloudy:”�http://cioresearchcenter.com/2010/12/107/��(accessed�12�April�2012);�Education�Advisory�Board�Interviews�and�analysis.
98
Ramifications�of�a�Cloud�Based�Infrastructure
• Accessible�from�any�device�with�Internet�connection• System�is�flexible�and�can�easily�add�users�or�capacity
• If�hardware�and�software�is�owned�by�external�party,�payment�can�be�based�on�actual�consumption
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
99
A�Conductor�Rather�than�a�One�Man�BandIT�Staff�are�Better�Able�to�Coordinate�Delivery�of�Wide�Array�of�Services�than�
to�Provide�them�DirectlyApplicationsEnterprise�Systems Applications�Development
Security
Desktop�Support�and�User�Services
Infrastructure�Maintenance
Business�IT�Staff�Coordinate�
Service�Delivery�by�Cloud�Providers�Network�ServicesIntelligence
W b S i d D t C tWeb�Services�and�Development Academic�
Technology
Data�Center�Management
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
100
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
101
DeduplicationPaying�only�for�IT�Services�Consumed�Could�Save�Considerable�Amounts�by�
Eliminating�Duplicative�Spend
p
b d dl d$300�Million�Total $195�Million
Distributed�IT�SpendTotal�University�IT�Spend
Central�IT Spend*
Duplicates�centrally�
35% 65%
DistributedIT�Spend
IT�Spend$100�M 85% 15%
provided�services
Dept�specificIT�spend
$165M�in�duplicative�spend
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A Source:�Education�Advisory�Board�Interviews�and�analysis.
*NB:�All��benchmarking�surveys�of�IT�spend�identified�in�the�research�process�reported�only�central�spending�or�was�not�specific about�the�total�amount�.��These�figures�represent�the�approximate�average�of�several�IT�benchmarking�reports�done�by�onsite�consultants�for�several�large�research�institutions.�
Notes:
102
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Higher�Education�Cloud�Roadmap
Cloud�Roadmap�For�Higher�Education 103
g p1:�Ready�to�Go• Commodity�technologies• Proven success in higher
2:�On�the�Cutting�Edge• Commodities�proven�in�industry but less so in
3:�In�the�Waiting�Room• Major�providers�not�yet�offering higher educationProven�success�in�higher�
education• Likely�to�get�cheaper�over�time
industry�but�less�so�in�higher�education
• Solutions�currently�being�developed�specifically�for�higher education
offering�higher�education�solutions
• Higher�Education�solutions�offered�by�niche�vendors
higher�education
C l d & E M il Data Center/IaaS Enrollment Management
Unit�Driven�ExperimentationRoad�Tested A�Year�or�So�Away
Wireless�Management
D S
Calendar�&�E�Mail Data�Center/IaaS Enrollment�Management
Student�Information�System
Under Construction
Productivity�Apps
Enterprise�Resource�Planning�(ERP):
FinanceP
Data�Storage
Research�&�High�Powered�ComputingData�Backup
Under�Construction
eProcurementSelf�Service�Portal
HRIS/Payroll
Research�Administration
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
CRM
Notes:
104
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
105
Preparing�for�the�Storm�Cloudp gKey�Organizational�Capabilities�for�Effective�Cloud�Adoption�Across�Campus
IVI II IIIPreventing�Shadow�
Systems
IVEffective�Contracting�
and�Security
ILegacy�Systems�Retirement
IIIT�Staff�Change�Management
III
CRM/Enrollment�Management
Calendar�and�Email
Data�Backup
Data�Center HRIS
Research�Computing
Ready�to�Go In�the�Waiting�RoomOn�the�
Cutting�Edge
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
Notes:
106
©�2012�The�Advisory�Board�Company�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com�• 24056A
University�Business�Executive�Roundtable�� Education�Advisory�Board
2445�M�Street,�NW�•�Washington,�DC�20037Telephone:�202�266�6400�•�Facsimile:�202�266�5700�•�www.educationadvisoryboard.com