Unlocking Digital Doors...Unlocking Digital Doors Going Digital with Course Materials and Approaches...
Transcript of Unlocking Digital Doors...Unlocking Digital Doors Going Digital with Course Materials and Approaches...
Unlocking
Digital DoorsGoing Digital with Course Materials and Approaches to
Drive Engagement & Retention
Dr Colin Marlaire, AVP, National University System
• Retention and Remediation
Initiatives
• Risks and Barriers
• QA at least 10 minutes
Up to State, Current State, Future State
Focus on Constructing Ecosystem
The National University System Not an advertising plug
Approx. 40,000 FTE students
on annual basis; over 4,000 Master Courses and faculty
National University
City University of Seattle
John F Kennedy University
Pre-College Programs
Extended Learning
NU- One Month Format;
Quasi-Open Enrollment
Spectrum of modalities
Large adjunct population
Center for Innovation in
LearningInstructional Design/Curricular
Consultation
Quality Content/Course
Experience
Faculty Concierge
Tier 2 Helpdesk, trends analysis
Vendor Management
Leverage size for best value
System Admin./Web Development
Custom solutions
Platform improvement
e-text
Leverage economies of scale
Faculty Training, Training
Quality Teaching delivered
Strategic Guidance/Project
Management
Technology implementations
New modalities
Course Development, Multimedia
Course building
Production of leading edge content
Business Intelligence
Reporting and dashboards
Structures for data retrieval
CIL
NU
JFK
City
PCP
AMN
Sanford
Quasi-Open Access NU- One Month Format;
Quasi-Open Enrollment
Balance need for success, and need for course work
(student driven)
Open Access
Preparation
NUS’s Evolution- Understanding Context
Today’s Discussion
Gap Analysis
Strategies for Resolving
Risks that must continue to be accounted for
Be
gin
nin
g
Exp
lora
tory
Inte
rme
dia
t
e Ad
va
nc
ed
Vis
ion
ary
Image borrowed from a discussion concerning the Kardashev Scale and the Fermi Paradox
Delivery and improvement of curriculum via platforms and technologies
Using data to inform those processes; adaptive solutions to remediate
Gap AnalysisSome addressed now, some in strategy
Attributed to…
Varied Stakeholders/”Customers”
Administration, Staff, Faculty and faculty, Students, Accreditors
Cultural Considerations
Ex. Some consistency is necessary for progress, but anathema in academia
Shifting Technological Landscape
Resources
Historical Factors
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4
Progress
Actual Ideal
Early Analytics- The Danger of the Easy Number
This is what (all) you can
have
The lure of user activity/login
Some benefits moving
forward
Extra-faculty structures for
student
retention/remediation
Some careful remediation
for faculty
Thinking how structures
create efficiencies
Costs Carried Forward of Early “Analytics”
Early on, the intersection of
LMS, faculty, students…
Was implicated to be this…
When in many cases, in truth
it was more this…LMS
StudentsFaculty
LMSStuden
tsFaculty
LMS
StudentsFaculty
Interesting Corollary
Interestingly, there may be a move back to this, in two ways….
The technologies are increasingly integrated and sophisticated internal-to-platform solutions
Thus, more students and faculty are spending more time in course
Many are looking at everything on a device… model would be you can have all the behavior around learning
A lot of cost, human, infrastructure
Reward TBD
LMS
StudentsFaculty
LMS
StudentsFaculty
“Cost” Carried Forward of Early “Analytics”
Not for faculty (?)
Leads to a business cost….
Analytics becomes
associated only with
business needs, not
academic ones (interesting)
Presenting activity as
relevant data to faculty is a
non-starter
This data is not valuable:
therefore all data is not
valuable
Current State-Reporting and Action
Some Good News- Low Hanging Fruit
Student services, automated
and human actions
Zero activity report (student)
“Structured” Retention
opportunities
Academic administration
Faculty pre-course zero
activity
Faculty low-activity
Costs had impact, but were also Impactful
IF this data isn’t useful, than
what is
STUDENT PERFORMANCE ON
OUTCOMES*
If Activity is Not Necessary for Outcome, then…
_______________________________
Flipped classroom
CBE
*I should note that this too is controversial
in some disciplines.
Student Performance On Outcomes
Not a small amount of work
Secondary Rubrics on Outcomes Assessed in Courses
Great data, next step is to bring it to the level of dashboard
Faculty are not accountants
Not to say that they can’t, but why ask them to?
From Data Points to Indicators… Student Success
Dashboard
POC, Surface data as actionable via BB, web services and API
Next Iteration…Students…Badges, Self task
(specializations), Self-Profile
Asset mindset, building deliverables on strategic focus
Behavioral self-assessment; what kind of student are you; know thyself and help us see you
What Do You Want to Happen?
Don’t build a report/dashboard without knowing
the action you want that report to engender
Staff Organizations… as second plane of
course
Make business processes more efficient
Make business processes more visible
Make resources more visible
Create arguments of scale
Better/more effective/immediate remediation
Focus on data on activity and outcome
Pearson Opportunity- Staff
Leverage Pearson solutions to add agile
capacity beyond NU staffing
Pilot and scale
Based on iterative expansion of student
population exposed
Indicators
A Priori
Low credits
Time since last course
Behavioral
Early warning assignment
Pearson Challenge- Faculty
Gap between arrangements made
between vendor and faculty during pilot
stage, and willingness of all faculty to
adopt effectively across courses across
Programs involved.
Confusion of terminology: e-text, e-text
plus, institutional pay, all confused into a
single amorphous concept.
Perception that content/services supplant
versus supplement course activity
Source
Marketplace communication
Early initiatives
Fear of unknown, ownership
Administrative/ground level perspective
What Do You Want to Happen?
For faculty, create an environment where they
see what’s happening in courses
Collaborate on innovation and improvement
Quickly see and scale what is moving the needle
Faculty Dashboard…
Master Course Model
Core experience consistent
Actively encourage faculty to innovate
Embedded Course Feedback Form
CIP, still manual, but far less so, and in the end, necessarily so
Dashboard makes it easy for them to ensure student/faculty success and see potential improvements
Focus on data on activity and outcome
Faculty Organizations
Surface adoption of solutions, a transparent
engagement with visible impact
Collaborate on best practices
Cross-pollinate
Archive improvement activities
Accreditors
Data on activity
Pearson Opportunity- Faculty
Leverage relationship to ensure
thoughtful adoption of solutions
Let solutions already adopted speak for
themselves
BST 322
Focus on known pain points
Student remediation
Student baselining
Collaboration, not Commerce
Replace the perception of “plug and play” with transparent engagement, nuance
Pearson Opportunity- Faculty
>60% of texts
Etext as default
Engagement for those not available
eText “plus” opportunities- intra-course
BST 322
Others
eText “plus” opportuinities- extra-course
Writing, Math, Research, Grit, Technology,
Time Management
Pearson Opportunity- Faculty
Increased appetite for reporting solutions
now provide
MyMathLab: Reporting
Dashboard
MyMathLab: Reporting
Dashboard
Students Do what they need to do
Have a better understanding of why they are
doing it
Understand the type of student they are, the
types of actions that can lead to better success
See and use resources
Students- Usable
Behavioral Bench Marking
Strategic Risks
Cost
How are they allocated
Diffusion of solutions
Uneven resources and
politics
Future State- Human and autonomous solutions
across spectrum
Questions, Thank You