Infrastructure for Promotion of eLearning in Korea

Infrastructure for Promotion

of eLearning in Korea

Dae Joon Hwang, Ph. D.Professor of School of Information and Communication

Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea* Former President of Korea Education and Research

Information Service(KERIS) [email protected]

June 3rd, 2010

eLearningRussia2010_Moscow

eLearning Russia 2010, Moscow, June 3rd – 4th, 2010

Summary

I. Introduction

II. eLearning Business

III.eLearning Best Practice

in Education

IV.Current Issues on

eLearning

V. ConclusionseLearningRussia2010_Moscow

I. IntroductionI. IntroductionI


Overview of eLearning in Korea

•eLearning business in revenue : $2.09B•eLearning in schools : 76.8%

• Primary (83.5%), Secondary(76.6%), High(67.8%), Junior High(45.1%)

• HE : Junior college(57.6%), 4Yr University(77.5%), Cyber University(100%), Open university(85%)

• Strategy of HRD • Gov. official training : 517,700(‘08)• Job training : 1.55M 명 (‘08) cf. 20,000(1999)• Teacher training: 130,000/year

• Legal foundations : Primary and Secondary Education law, HE law, LLL law,

Presidential decree, IPR protection law, Privacy protection law, eLearning

Industry Promotion law, e-Training in Labor Education Law • eLearning quality management:

• Establishment guidelines : Cyber university, eLearning institutes

• QA guidelines : CHLS, Regional eLearning e-Teacher training, Cyber university, eLearning institutes

• Certification guidelines : content and SW for education and training

• Overall satisfaction of eLearning : Cost saving(4.1/5) > Learning time(3.82/5) > System stability(3.8/5) > Content quality(3.72/5) > Diversity(3.68/5)> Learning effect(3.4/5)


eLearning Strategy of Government • eLearning policy

– Nurture eLearning as core business in knowledge based economy

– Provide equal opportunity for diminishing digital, education, and social divides

– Tools for training human resources• eLearning infrastructure : CHLS, HE institutes, Cyber universities, eLearning

institutes, eLearning training centers

• Government support – Pay back of tuition by Employment Insurance

– Host export exhibitions and show cases for strategic regions

– National SW Awards

– Adopt international open standards

– Financial support to create oversea market and promote export

– KOTRA provide Korean industry with the right information in the target region


eLearning Ecosystem


Legal Foundations of eLearning


eLearning Industry

Promotion Law

Privacy Protection Law

Protection Law of Intellectual Property Right

Life Long Education Law

Primary and Secondary

Education Law

Act

of Pr

omot

ion

of Jo

b Tr

aini

ngPresidential D

ecree

No. 20942

Act of promotion of Government officials training

QA

guid

elin

es

Est

ablis

hm

ent

guid

elin

es

Issues on eLearning • Sea changes in education policy : data based -> evidence based• Adoption of web 2.0 notions : education, learning, research, and governance • Status of eLearning : Learning method -> a pillar of competence development • Evolution of Learning Management System

– LMS -> PLE -> CWE – Types of learning : LMS centric -> SNS centric – Participation, Openness, and SNW highly valued

• Enhancement of EQL : Learning Design, e-Portfolio management• Adoption of International Open standards : IMS CC and LTI, LOM, SCORM, OKI, Korea

28%(16.7%, SCORM)• Encourage use of Open Sources : OER, OSS, OCW, Korea 18%

• Content : Open Educational Resource : MIT OCW, Curriki, GLOBE, OpernLearn)• OSS : sourceforge.com, OBRR(Open Source Business Readiness Rating)

• Strengthen global partnership in eLearning : JV, ISP, Consulting, Funding(ODA, EDCF)


Utilization of International Standards

• Major standard in Korean industry is SCORM and ISO• What int’l standards used :

•SCORM: widely used since 2004•KEM: KEM 7001, 7003 are available since 2005•IMS-CC: under adoption since 2009

* Source: 「 2009 Survey of eLearning Industry 」 NIPA, March 2010, http//www.kiec.or.kr

72.1Total

66.4Content

None KS-7001(KEM)SCORM

56.6Solution

Adoption Ratio of Int’l Standards

76.6Service

16.7 2.2

1.9

1.6

5.7

13.6

23.8

20.8

ISO

10.7

12.0

13.1

17.0

Adoption Ratio of

Company

27.9

23.4

33.6

43.4

(unit: %)

eLearningbusiness

MESI-Jun2009-DJ.Hwang

II. eLearning BusinessII. eLearning BusinessI


eLearning Cooperation Triangle


Min

istr

y of

Edu

cation

and

S&

T

Ministry of

Labor

•Customer ‘s market•Best practice•Pilot test-bed

Ministry of Knowledge Economy

•Create Job training market• Support Employment Insurance

•Promote eLearning industry•Support eLearning technology development•Promote export of eLearning products and service

Legal foundati

on

Growth of eLearning Markets

YearDemandMarket

SupplyMarket

　

2006 1,612 1,618 　

2007 1,728 1,727 　

2008 1,866 1,870 　

2009 2,071 2,091 　


eLearning Supply Market

•Average annual growth ratio (in revenue): 5.4% during 2005 - 2009•$1.47B(‘05) , 1.62B(‘06) , 1.73B(‘07), $1.87B(‘08), $2.09B(‘09)

•Business category of eLearning: service, content, and solution •Market growth in revenue : 11.8% increase in 2009

•Service business leads the supply market : $1.39B•Company average: $1.53M


* Source: Survey of the eLearning Industry in Korea, NIPA, 2009, http//www.nipa.or.kr

11.8

13.4

-4.5

YoY(%)YoY(%)

1.53Total

1.57Content

1.39

Average Average Revenue/CompanyRevenue/CompanyRatioRatio

(%)(%)

14.2 1.5465.01,216Service

Solution

RevenueRevenueRatioRatio

(%)(%)Revenue Revenue

(Unit: $1 M)(Unit: $1 M)

BusinessBusiness

CategoryCategory

2009200920082008

1,870

433

221

66.4

23.1

11.9

100.0

(Unit: $1 M)(Unit: $1 M)

1,389

2,091

491

211

23.5

10.1

100.0

• Total revenue in 2009 : $2.07B• Average annual growth ratio in revenue: 11%

•$1.7B(‘07) expanded to $2.07B(‘09)• Individual leads the eLearning demand market since 2008

eLearning Demand Market

(unit: USD 1 M)

Individual

Corporation

Public Institutions

Regular Education Institutions

2007 2008 2009

735

760

70

163

15.7%

36.2%

-14.0%

9.1%

42.6%

44.0%

4.0%

9.4%

Total 1,728 11.0%1,866

816

812

71

167

43.7%

43.5%

3.8%

9.0%


Groups of Category

Avg. Growth RatioRevenue Revenue

(Unit: $1 M)(Unit: $1 M)Revenue Revenue

(Unit: $1 M)(Unit: $1 M)Revenue Revenue

(Unit: $1 M)(Unit: $1 M)RatioRatio

(%)(%)

RatioRatio

(%)(%)RatioRatio

(%)(%)

100.0% 100.0%


2,072

945

886

96

144

45.6%

42.8%

4.7%

6.9%

100.0%

Analysis of Individual eLearner


Gender

Age Group

2007(%) 2008(%) 2009(%) Growth Ratio(%)

Male

Female

40-49

More than50

47.641.9

29.6

13.5

2.8 4.2

6- 19 70.9 1.1

20-29 61.3 1.3

30-39 30.5 10.3

2.1

4.9

EducationalBackground

Pre/Elementary

Middle

High

University,Graduate School

VocationalBackground

StudentProfessional

Clerical

HousewifeJobless

Service/Production

69.3

70.3

64.5

26.5

70.5

48.8

81.2

10.5

22.4

-7.6

19.7

9.3

Total 45.0 3.3

Category

45.831.5

23.4

11.2

67.0

50.7

27.2

69.5

61.3

65.6

21.1

66.8

43.5

77.4

10.0

16.1

39.4

0.9


50.446.1

31.7

18.4

72.0

62.6

40.8

70.2

62.7

84.2

90.5

48.3

NA NA

III. eLearning Best Practice in III. eLearning Best Practice in EducationEducation


Allow students to have equal opportunity for learning • Provide students with opportunities for seamless learning Reduce private tutoring expenses Enhance quality of public education

Cyber Home Learning SystemCyber Home Learning System

Student-centered

Blending of learning and education

Curriculum-based

Supplementary

Customized Learning

Major ServicesMajor Services

Q&A LevelAssessment

Career PathCounseling

Cyber Teacher1:1 Learning Management

Tutor

LMS / LCMS (SCORM 2004)

Knowledge DB

Content Repositor

y

2.2 M8,218


ContentContentCHLS LMSCHLS LMS

Integration of Standards with CHLSIntegration of Standards with CHLS

SCORM RTE (Data Model & API)

Content Packaging

Simple Sequencing & Navigation

Metadata (KEM, KS-7001)

LearnerLearner


How to Operate CHLS : by 16 MPOEsHow to Operate CHLS : by 16 MPOEs

16 MPOEs run their own CHLS with common design guideline, which are networked nationwide through KERIS

Learning Resource

Configuration Window

Learning Design Window

RestructureManagement

Window

Resource Management

Window


Three Types of Learning Design Three Types of Learning Design ModelsModels

For implementation of branching, assessment results and Learner’s decisions are considered. Selection model is the most popular

IntroMainstudy

Evaluation

Summary

Intro Main study EvaluationSumma

ry

Selectionmodel

Sequencingmodel

IntroPre

requisiteMain study

Summary

Basicmodel

Prerequisite

Prerequisite

FurtherStudy

Supplemen-taryStudy

Provide teachers with guided LD models with SCORM content packaging


32.5

20.7 20.1

25.3 25.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Interest has increased

Gained confidence

Improved grades

Self- motivated study

Other

(unit : %, n=54,775)

Impacts of Cyber Home Learning System: Learner Impacts of Cyber Home Learning System: Learner achievementachievement

• More interested in subjects : 32.5%

• Enhanced self-motivated study habit : 25.3 %

• Confidence gained in problem solving : 20.7 %

• Overall improvement in grades : 20.1 %


Impact s of CHLS in Cost Saving

• Those students who have and are willing to quit private tutoring : 12.9% (6,275 in numbers)

• $22.8 expected to save : 6,275 students * $300 USD * 12 months, where $300 is the average monthly payment for private tutoring

cf) Total private tutoring expenses : $42 B in 2009

Extra Cost Savings

YearCost

estimatedRemarks

2005 51 Million 1.6 M * 16 MPOE * 2 Semesters



( unit : USD )

Replacing private tutoring opportunity


IV. Current Issues on eLearning


Issues on eLearning Technologies• Emerge new type of digital contents and alternative learning platforms

– eBook(Book + adaptive tutors + open content + simulations) -> Integration of eLearning business and publishing business

– eBooks as a new learning platforms

• Need to support collaborative and social learning

• More attentions to learning technology standardization : W3C, IMS CC, and LTI

• Must respond to the customer’s voices on quality of learning outcomes

• Accommodate device mobility and diversity

• Use of OSS and OER in education becomes globally popular

• Cloud computing affects eLearning business ecosystem : cost reduction, smart sourcing


Innovations of Content Providers

• Books + Adaptive Tutors + Open Content + Simulations


*source : IMS GLC Overview, 2009

Adoption of Int’l eLearning Standards

• Challenging issues to catch up transition web 2.0 era: eLearning 2.0, education 2.0, research 2.0, governance 2.0, etc….

• eLearning industry and government of Korea recognize importance of eLearning standards for global collaboration and creating business in global markets

• HE institutes concerns more about adoption of Int’l Open Standards to challenge LTI issues and reasoning issues on sustainability in ICT investment : ISO, IEC, IMS, CEN, IEEE

• Learning Design and e-Portfolio management draw more attentions from academia and industry


Global eLearning Standardization System

Proposal

Collaboration

•Countries/Publ Insts.: 10 •Universities/Ed Insts: 30 •Companies : 60 •Specs : 21Documents, 100items

• Countries: 28• Specs : 11Documents, 23 items

IMS Specs(de Facto Standards) ISO Specs(de Jour Standards)

* IMS Global Learning Consortium : International non-profit organization* ISO/IEC JTC1 SC36 : Information Technology for Learning, Education, and Training (ITLET) * CEN : European Committee for Standardization* IEEE LTSC•ADL : SCORM

* Sources: IMS Global 2009

...


http://www.iso.ch/

http://www.imsglobal.org/

http://www.adlnet.gov/index.aspx

http://www.cen.eu/cenorm/index.htm

Learning Technology Interoperability among Multiple LMS


* Source : IMS Global 2009

Issues on OER

• Establishing nationwide OER repository under discussion through

participation from broadcasting stations and national institutions

• OER, and OSS draws much attentions from academia and public in

Korea

• Education institutes are encouraged to use OER for enhancing quality

of education/learning and ROI in education

• KOCW as a member of GLOBE has been leading OER movement in

Korea

• International cooperation of OSS among Korea, Japan, and China

began since 2000:


GLOBE Partnership• ARIADNE: Collaboration among University Teaching and Learning Service Center

•Katholiek Universiteit Leuven (KUL)•University of Lausanne (UNIL)•Université Joseph Fourier's Centre d'Autoformation et d'Innovation Multimedia (UJF-CAFIM) •Université Paul Sabatier's Informatics and Telecom Research Institute and the Toulouse Campus •Computing Centre (UPS-IRIT/CICT) •Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL)

•EDNA : education.au.limited • Leads OER in education institutions : Primary and secondary education, HE, and LLE • Operation in cooperation with private and non profit organization

•EUN: European Schoolnet • Organized by Ministry of Education of EU member country : Denmark, France, Norway, Italy

•LORNET: Organization of 6 Institutes in Canada•Tele university•Simon Fraser University•University of Saskatchewan•University of Waterloo•University of Ottawa•Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal

•JOCW•Keio University•WIDE University•Shinshu University

•MERLOT: OER community of U.C. California• Types of Membership: Person, Institution

• KERIS, Korea• NIME, Japan


Issues on Learning Design• Provide content developers and teachers with various learning design

models to

enhance eLearning quality through their active participation

• Establish nationwide repository of LD models and best practices to encourage sharing of experience among teachers and content developers

• Encourage use of OSS tools in classroom


B

C

B

C

B

C

B

C

V. Conclusions V. Conclusions


Conclusions• Policy

• Nurture eLearning as a strategic business of knowledge based economy • Coordinated approaches to support promotion of eLearning among private,

public, and

education sectors• Motivate eLearning industry to create eLearning markets in abroad with

government

support• eLearning Quality management

• Learning Design and e-Portfolio draw attentions • More concerns about outcome and context from learner’s perspective• Strengthen application of QA guidelines to operation, content, service, and staff

• Encourage OER use and International Open standards• Focuses on global collaboration and competence of HE institutes and eLearning

industry• More concerns about ROI in education

•Technology Innovation• Technology innovation to maximize mobility : u-Learning, m-Learning, content

packing,

eBook as learning platform• Interoperability among multiple learning platforms • Recognize science of learning as the core part of future education innovation• Need attentions to cloud computing emerging new business model


Dae Joon Hwang Ph. D.Prof., Sungkyunkwan University, Korea

[email protected]

감사합니다Thank You

eLearning Russia 2010, Moscow, June 3rd – 4th, 2010

Infrastructure for Promotion of eLearning in Korea

Documents

Transcript of Infrastructure for Promotion of eLearning in Korea