FOREWORD TO THE PAPERBACK EDITION
WHEN THE MANUSCRIPT for the hardcopy edition of this book went to press, it was Thanksgiving 2012. The world was rapt with what The New York Times had called “The Year of the MOOC.” A number of widely known commentators were predicting that disruption was rapidly to come to higher education, mainly based on comparisons to what had happened in other industries. Things have not changed as rapidly as predicted and many now want to proclaim that MOOCs are irrelevant. But Higher Education in a Digital Age was not, and is not, a book tapping into the hype surrounding MOOCs. It is a thoughtful and data-rich evaluation of the economic and political forces that are challenging higher education, and the technological and cultural developments that may provide a way to address them. It continues to be as relevant in today’s fast-moving environment as it was when it was first published, even as Bill Bowen, and those of us who work with him at ITHAKA, continue to conduct research to understand better both the impact and the potential of these developments.
In the time between the publication of the original hardcover and this paperback edition, Bill Bowen has written two papers providing additional commentary on the issues raised in this book. One of them, the written version of the Stafford Little Lecture given at Princeton University in October 2013, is included in its entirety in as an appendix to this paperback. The other paper, published in EDUCAUSE Review on October 2, 2013, is available on the EDUCAUSE web site.1 Both comment on—and speculate about—where these developments are taking us and what barriers exist to making faster progress in using technology to improve educational outcomes without commensurate increases in cost.
In this foreword, I want to provide a brief overview of Ithaka S+R’s current research agenda, which builds on both this book and the two recent essays just mentioned. We believe this research agenda outlines the major questions facing higher education in the coming years. We expect that these projects will lead to further publications.
In brief, Ithaka S+R is embarked on a coordinated series of studies led by ITHAKA staff and its senior advisors, working in collaboration in many instances with Michael McPherson and his colleagues at the Spencer Foundation. The projects listed below, underway now and at various stages of development, are all designed to provide valuable evidence and analysis that will help higher education leaders address the challenges ahead.
The National Context
Our starting point is the proposition that this country’s system of higher education needs urgently to address two inter-related issues:
1. The need for more (and better-educated) human capital if the U.S. is to be competitive in an increasingly knowledge-intensive world; and
2. Widespread concerns about the capacity of the country’s educational system to foster social mobility at a time of increasing inequality in resources and in opportunities (see President Obama’s statements on inequality and, for example, the editorial in the New York Times endorsing Obama’s comments).2
The two concerns interact because it is highly unlikely that the U.S. can increase markedly its stock of human capital without broadening the reach of higher education so that more students receive a high quality education that will prepare them for satisfying and productive lives. Of course, concerns about inequality and the need for social mobility in a society that has prided itself on “opportunity” are also directly relevant. To address these concerns will require our colleges and universities to continue to raise college completion rates and to reduce time-to-degree—for both students overall and for students from lower socioeconomic status (“SES”) families. Achieving these results while managing costs and maintaining quality will be essential if our higher education institutions are to slow increases in tuition and control net costs facing students and their families.
As many have pointed out, there have been substantial cutbacks in public support for higher education in recent years, impacting both four-year and two-year institutions. It seems clear that substantial increases in public support, however desirable or even justifiable, are unlikely to be forthcoming, given fiscal and political constraints. That prospect, and the limited ability of families to afford further tuition increases, has an obvious implication: there will be ever-more emphatic calls for improvements in “productivity”—in output per unit of input. Higher education, writ large, simply has to reengineer its processes to find more cost effective ways to meet students’ education needs.
It is not enough to bewail the shortcomings of the present system of higher education. Nor is it enough simply to exhort colleges and universities to do better. To find possible solutions it is essential that we understand the roots of the problems with the current system and identify the obstacles to overcoming them. That is where we think rigorous research can play a valuable role.
Ongoing Ithaka S+R projects
• Maryland Studies of the Effectiveness of Modified MOOCs and Other Online Systems: Working closely with Chancellor William (Brit) Kirwan, colleagues at the University System of Maryland, and faculty from a number of Maryland campuses, our staff have conducted a series of case studies and side-by-side tests to compare the learning outcomes of traditionally taught on-campus courses with those taught using MOOCs and two adaptive online learning platforms (one based on Coursera offerings and one based on Pearson products). These studies shed light not only on how students’ learning outcomes and experience are impacted by these new platforms, but also provide insight into the practical challenges of using externally generated content and learning platforms to support instruction in particular institutional contexts.3
• The Evolution of Faculty Roles in Governance: For reasons explained in detail in this book and in the other two essays cited earlier, we have come to believe that it is important to understand how faculty roles in governance have evolved over the years within different types of educational institutions. It is by no means obvious that inherited structures of “shared governance” are well suited to ensure that colleges and universities can (1) take full advantage of faculty capacities to contribute constructively in the exploration of new uses of online technologies; and (2) address needs to innovate across established organizational lines, recognizing, for example, that issues of scale and cost argue against every campus or department developing its own solutions at its own pace. We are combining a broad historical overview with a number of case studies designed to highlight different governance approaches at different types of institutions (including public universities, private colleges, and private universities.)
• Protocols for Defining IP Rights: This study focuses specifically on what is still largely uncharted territory—namely, how colleges and universities are recognizing and distributing “ownership rights” to new offerings, whether they be individual courses or platforms, including how to oversee distribution of new materials. More thought needs to be given to how to address complex issues of “sustainability” (for example, how users of new offerings, including users on campuses other than the “home campus,” can be sure that the offerings will continue to exist and even to be improved over time).
• Evolving Staffing Patterns: Staffing patterns, including the growing use of adjuncts and professional teachers, also deserve careful attention. There is a strong case for thinking freshly, as some are now doing, about how non tenure-track faculty are to be employed—what their roles should be, what opportunities for advancement should be offered, and how their increasingly important presence should affect governance arrangements.
• Potential Cost Savings: The potential impact of these new technologies on costs deserves more thought (and rigorous analysis) than it has received. We are interested in exploring both what can be learned from recent experiments with various teaching methods and what educational gains and cost savings might be obtained from fresh uses of new forms of online learning. Because the creation of new courses and platforms incurs additional cost initially, and many potential savings are not fungible and cannot be realized immediately, we are working to develop simulations that model a future state where some of the existing institutional constraints are relaxed. One question of particular interest is how greater flexibility in scheduling might encourage both higher completion rates and some reduction in time to degree.
• Implications of New Patterns of State Support for Public Higher Education: We are interested specifically in the implications of these new patterns for both access and educational success, especially for “near-poor” students who are not eligible for Pell grants but who nonetheless face serious financial challenges as tuition goes up. We are focusing on experiences to date in the public university system in Virginia.
• Public University Collaborations in Developing and Using Technology: With financial support from the Lumina Foundation, Ithaka S+R has conducted nearly 250 interviews at ten public research universities to assess the potential for these institutions to collaborate in developing and using technology. Interviews have been conducted with departmental chairs, faculty, and administrative officers in an effort to understand the needs, benefits, and challenges related to technologically-enhanced collaborations. We expect the report on these interviews will yield insights beyond the potential for collaboration to include such topics as governance, barriers to implementation of new technologies, and the impact of budget structures on incentives and outcomes, among others.
• Update of Summary of Online Research Findings: Ithaka S+R staff are updating the summary review of research findings about studies in online learning. (The original study, by Kelly Lack, is included in this book.)
This list of projects provides an outline of our view of the major issues that face leaders of higher education institutions today. What is going to be the impact of MOOCs and new adaptive learning platforms on learning outcomes? Will these save resources or increase costs? Will governance structures need to be adapted to enable the kinds of innovation required to meet rapidly evolving needs of students and society? How will IP rights in the new learning materials and platforms be managed and maintained over time? And how will the balance between research and teaching be struck in the future? We believe that the thoughtful reflections in this book have lasting value in helping both leaders of colleges and universities, and others actively involved in setting policies, frame these and other issues in ways that are appropriate in their specific settings. The over-riding goal is to help higher education use technology to achieve outcomes that are both better and more cost effective.
Kevin M. Guthrie
September 2014
Notes
1. See http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/potential-online-learning-promises-and-pitfalls.
2. See Remarks by the President on Economic Mobility, the White House, December 4, 2013. Also see “The President on Inequality,” the Editorial Board of the New York Times, December 4, 2013. Also relevant is New York Mayor Bill de Blasio’s “Tale of Two Cities” theme and other commentaries on inequality in the U.S.
3. See http://www.sr.ithaka.org/research-publications/interactive-online-learning-on-campus.