I’ve articulated this idea quite a few times around my place of work, but am yet to find any takers willing to try it out. I’ve had some local and rather limited criticisms and reality checks, mostly pointing to external auditing bodies who may technically have a problem with the idea, but nothing strong enough to deter my thinking/delusion that its a good idea. So I’d like to know, especially from the kiwis, if something like this is being done anywhere else, or if you think I’m totally out of my tree and should go back to Australia?
The idea:
Relating to the scenario in What would it be like to be the rain, and especially Learning for Free, Education for Cost – where a person has the opportunity to attend class activities, and complete assessment tasks for free, but to gain certification – must pay a fee. And thinking only in terms of adult or tertiary education here…
The idea is made up of 4 parts.
1. Make ALL learning environments, resources, and assessment activities for a course freely available, openly, without restrictions such as fees and log ins. This obviously creates havoc for many courses, not least the question of how to sustain it financially (which is dealt with in part 4) but more notably is the issue of quality of the resources to be made openly available, especially the copyright clearances of the content to be used. This open and free access can pretty much rule out almost all courses we offer, as the protection of the passwords and fee paid classrooms ensures few people see, therefore few people question quality or copy. So free and open is a good pressure in my view.
2. Break the course down into as small as practical units of study. Make the study of these as asynchronous as possible. Make the units as scalable to as many paths of study as possible. The smaller the course, the easier it is to offer it more repetitively. The more asynchronous it can be, the more flexible the learning of it can be. The more scalable it is, the more value it can have in other areas of study. A person could choose to do the unit in one hit or over several instances and from different contextual view points. Clearly I am still holding onto the old reusable learning object idea here – but less about software, more about learning design.
3. Allow free access to the course. Free access to the learning resources, participation in class activities, communication with teachers and students, and submission of assessment tasks for feedback – all without charge.
4. Keep records of the students who complete assessment tasks including any feedback given, but only award accreditation to those who have paid the fee. Because good records are kept, recognition of prior learning later in a student’s life is streamlined. You can encourage students to apply for scholarship grants or employer sponsorship and the like and having the assurance of a pass based on the free participation will assist in confidence to pay the fee. Accreditation is only awarded when a fee is paid. Students can’t get formal transcripts of their study until a fee (perhaps a smaller fee if only for transcripts) to avoid students learning through you, but taking their transcripts elsewhere for accreditation.
Basically, it is the freeware model with a bit of lock-in marketing. The flexibility it enables a learner means that people can opt in to study (full or part time) without committing to up front fees, or inflexible time tables and course durations. Up front fee paying students stand to benefit from wider participation with others – think youtube or wikipedia scale… and everyone understands that it is the accreditation that the fees pay for, not the learning. The learning is enhanced by wider participation (depending on how well it is managed) so ‘the more the merrier’
20 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 8, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Don Caldwell
I was surprised and interested to read your “Flexible Learning in New Zealand” article. My son, who built click-a-teacher is now meeting with some universities to discuss exactly what you mention above. It was at their request, and a big surprise to him, but he relayed to me the details and they closely match your suggestions. If you are interested, I will be happy to ask him to provide the results of the trip when he returns.
February 8, 2007 at 9:07 pm
21stCenturyLearner » Blog Archive » Truly flexible learning
[…] https://learnonline.wordpress.com/2007/02/08/flexible-learning-in-new-zealand/ […]
February 8, 2007 at 11:15 pm
leighblackall
Yes please Don! This is exciting to hear, and any indication of the model working, or that it has interest beyond my little evangelical desk would be very useful. I think given all the trends in media going on – this idea is inevitable. Our collective conciousness must be arriving at a similar conclusion
February 9, 2007 at 1:51 am
Michael Coghlan
Leigh – I’ve heard similar approaches touted thus:
For any course
Print/Web/Media Resources only: nominal fee or free
resources plus facilitation: higher fee
the above plus formal accreditation: higher fee again
February 11, 2007 at 11:57 pm
boredkiwi
I’ve heard this kind of thing before and it ranks up there with perpetual energy. Now, most of the PE nutters (not that you necessarily are … but THEY definitely are!!) have some amazing idea which would work perfectly apart from one little detail which isn’t quite ironed out.
Your little detail is funding. At the end of the day, if you have a certification body then there is an infrastructure that needs funds. Who pays? Well that’s the issue. I am happy to pay higher taxes and return to free tertiary education of the 1980’s and before. But that isn’t where we are at. Students pay about 1/3 of the costs with the govt picking up the rest.
If someone wants to study from freely available material then sit an exam then they need to investigate other options. Aussie & NZ have recognition of prior learning to some extent (tho some risk being cert. farms). Some industry – IT is one – have external examinations (MCSE for MS, LPI et al for Linux, CNE for Novell etc).
There are options – but short of re-arranging the entire education system at the moment, a fantasy which simply isn’t happening this decade, or wandering around screaming “its not fair” then it’s not something I’d waste energy on.
February 12, 2007 at 2:32 am
Leigh
Hi ya Bored Kiwi. I’m not sure how this model would not deliver funds to the current system?
EG. An employee goes ahead and does self directed study. They complete all the assessment items and gets feedback from the Polytech that they are very likely to pass if they go for formal assessment. The employee takes that message to the employer and asks for sponsorship to pay for the accreditation. The employer sees that the investment is a sure thing, and pays for the certificate.
I guess needing the certificate (or not) is going to be a key factor isn’t it.
February 12, 2007 at 9:05 am
Robyn Jay
Hi Leigh
In a world (in Oz at least) where the only adult education now deemed worth funding is that which provides economic benefits for the Govt (ie. a technically skilled, if not educated workforce), your concept is a means for education providers to support the notion of life long and life wide learning for ALL post-school citizens.
However, I’d like to suggest a slight variation….
In a pre-elearning life I worked in a support role with Community Colleges across a region in NSW. The Colleges are run by volunteer Boards and while it’s becoming increasingly difficult in our Australian VTE climate, they sought to offer both accredited and non-accredited education options for members of their local communities.
In one particular program we noted a large number of individuals who refused to complete final assessment tasks. The difficulty was that funding to the College was based on ‘successful outcomes’, i.e. issued quals.
So what I’d like to suggest for consideration in your model is that the summative assessment component may not be required by many. The final evaluation of evidence submitted during a program of learning is often the most time consuming and costly for providers, so excluding that may be more enticing for providers to take up your idea.
Of course, learners may later decide that they DO want a formal qual. If we put in place effective means of gathering evidence during a course/program in a formative assessment sense then this should form viable evidence for recognition purposes down the track.
What many seem to have forgotten in our current climate is that everyone in our communities have a right to ongoing educational opportunities. For many engagement with others, critical thought and exposure to new ideas is enough. The bit of paper is irrelevant.
Good luck with your concept. If it can find legs anywhere, it’s probably in NZ.
February 13, 2007 at 1:59 am
Margot
Hi all,
Here’s the link to MIT’s open courseware program. It’s been around for a few years now, so apologies if you’ve seen it before.
Just following on from Robyn’s comments, higher ed providers are increasingly limited by the move towards funding on the basis of completion rates – unfortunately we need some DEST staffers to join the struggle for ‘assessment for learning’ and lifelong learning!
Margot
February 13, 2007 at 5:24 am
leighblackall
Thanks Margot.
I have been bookmarking OCW initiatives as I find them. You may like to see how many more have popped up since MIT. Encouraging isn’t it.
February 13, 2007 at 7:23 am
BoredKiwi
Leigh – that already happens. I’m in IT (sysadmin stuff mostly – and recently in the ed sector). Now this industry might be different to most. But what you describe is already here and present and almost works for some people. Most don’t like it and prefer courses – which go for about $2500 a week.
Anyway, the deal is that you pick the cert you want. Prepare for it (that’s where things vary) and then when YOU are ready you contact prometric or VUE and book an exam time, pay the fees then front up and pass (hopefully) the exam. Employers normally reimburse a pass.
But that preparation bit. In general people prefer going to courses. One’s with teachers. Formal, structured, typical classes. People vote with their feet, their butts but more importantly with their wallet. A full Microsoft cert – say MCSE will set you back more than $15000 for the courses (even though you CAN study on your own for a few hundred $$) and redhat Linux RHCE is way more.
So – your nirvana already exists at least in this sector. Some choose it (I have) but most value classes.
As for me – I’ve attended a couple of courses, always paid by employers. But all of my certs have been done by self-study then sitting the exam when ready. It’s an option available to everyone but very VERY few people choose to do it that way.
The big question is WHY. I think that there is some inbuilt thing that makes us prefer studying with peers. The inter-student contact, AND teacher-student relationship are both important. You loose that with many of the options you propose.
Remember – people are willing to pay BIG money to keep the classroom.
February 13, 2007 at 8:18 am
Leigh
That sounds pretty cool. That in built thing.. that’d be 10-13 years of schooling I reckon. Some schools are trying to teach how to learn more, but there’s a long tradition of behavioral cognitivism to swim against there.
But BoredKiwi.. aren’t you missing one of the key points in this idea? The one about it all being free? Free access to content, classes, teachers, and peers.. and you only pay when you pass.
I’m hoping a teacher’s union rep will take this on and bash me up over work loads.
Anyway – this post idea has progressed a little. Yes it is already here.. in the form of Q4U.
February 14, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Alex Hayes
I get less satisfaction paying for my coffee up front and then having my name called out to receive it in a take away foam cup than I do sitting down, ordering my coffee, waiting for it to arrive in a ceramic cup and then paying for it.
Same cost. Same coffee. Different experience.
Robyn spent great deal of time (obviously) considering your post and inviting you to respond to the content.
I’ve heard you Leigh, and with the greatest respect to your stance and zillion others as you speak of the “free” market approach to education and the participation/accreditation model for summative certification, I am thoroughly confused ( third reading ) as to what your point is with this article.
I’m not expecting you to divulge your literary secrets ( although you know mine ) however I am trying to better understand why you advocate this “free” position repeatedly in the face of all left-brained market driven adversity. Quite frankly it’s boring the life out of me. I’m more inclined to agree with your rampages into the classist and ethnic cleansing modality of online education as we know it, rather than this dry and predicatble topic.
Is it a political persuasion, a market ploy or a deepset philosophical stance that keeps you returning to this one ?
What gets me is the mileage gained by constantly touting that our ethical inclusivity as educators needs to be flattened, broadened and in essence be re-invented.
For what ?
If we as educators and institutions are on the wrong track, then I propose that you organise for a degree burning day much like they did in the 60’s with bra’s. The media attentioned gained could be placarded with FOSS inculcations and we could all look back on the newsreels in 30 years 🙂 …………
I read somewhere recently that it’s not the result that dictates learning rather the journey taken to produce the result.
Any fool would take the journey and be done with the fee to prove the result. Users pay ? K ?
The journey itself should swallow the manager and facilitator whole. Education is a privelege and the treat always costs more money than the ribbon’s themselves.
We live in a time where education is a debt……for the better good of the community. No amount of pie charts will explain the learners journey……nor the constantly overspent budget.
No matter which way you structure it ……it costs….deferred, up front etc. up the ………
Seeking more solutions.
February 14, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Leigh
Hi Alex, and yes – Robyn, thanks for your contribution. At the time I first read Robyn’s comment I couldn’t be sure how it differed. I certainly think summative assessment need not be compulsory – and if a training and education organisation’s funding is pegged to completion rates, then this idea works well… 100% completion rates!! Think about it, no one enrols unless they are ready and willing to be certified.
Alex, I hear you the most. Something about your writing style that send me in a spin. But I don’t agree that this topic is dry or boring (if it wasn’t a question you were asking). It is deep and philosophical (at least I like to think so) and if it can be made to work, can be yet another example of open source changing the way our economies work.
I hate the economic (ir)rationalism age we are in. You’re quite right that it simply can’t measure what the education sector delivers, but then on the other side I do think the education sector is an inflated, inefficient and protectionist sector that needs an over haul. Perhaps economic rationalism is nothing but a tool to do that over haul. Trouble is that such a tool spawns suites parading around in ‘company’ cars and talking the talk of (ir)rationality – and so affecting the very culture of teaching and learning in a very miserable way.
February 14, 2007 at 10:04 pm
Alexander Hayes
Hi Leigh,
I’m glad that it’s as deep set as well earned furrow in the brow of your educators forehead.
I agree that a great deal of what goes on is irrational and according to many of our clients increasingly irrelevant.
I often view the teaching culture as something akin of a plastic bag filled with aging bread slices, slightly green, co-joined at the apex by sporific adulence and soporific ooze.
If only the bag was a little more osmotic we’d have reason to grow things with a little more colour and vibe. Failing that we could book a car out and attend another meeting to decide who will chair the next meeting regarding the onset of changes to the enrolment procedure of students who have decided to dissapear off into their respective MySpace.
Nothing miserable in that – how can we as educators enable online education to be as compelling as a MySpace ?
February 14, 2007 at 11:28 pm
leighblackall
You crack me up Alex. One day we will have that pub poetry night… one day.
“how can we as educators enable online education to be as compelling as a MySpace ?”
Its easy!! Well, technically it is.
But first we have to want it. By want it, I don’t mean WE actually. Institutions of [f]ed-you-cation are as autocratic and dictatorial as they ever were. We (the administrators, workers and teachers) will have to be told.
Just this morning I interviewed a fella who is interested in taking on some contract work with our development unit. I mentioned social media and he lit up and screamed widgets gallor!! He showed me a social media site he set up 6 months ago that already sustains itself and 4000 user blogs, music sharing etc. He quoted me 2 weeks and he’d have a fully functional social webspace that would easily rival myspace in functionality. We may never build it as big and dirty as myspace, and it certainly won’t have adds and lock in. It will display outside blogs within widgets, and offer blogging et al platform in its own right. One big mash up of personalised media and learning space.
One thing is certain – we have a captured audience of paying students so we should be able to pull it off reasonably well. But first (he must tell us) we must want it.
Needless to say, we will employ that fella some how and find a way through to the man who will tell the IT unit that social media is what we want.
February 16, 2007 at 8:40 am
BoredKiwi
Free as in liberty is fine
Free as in beer … well it comes at a cost.
There really is no such thing as a free lunch. Piper’s need paid and so do book authors, tutors and priests.
“Free access to content, classes, teachers, and peers.. and you only pay when you pass.” – what????
Who pays for the content creation, the teachers, the admin etc? If the student doesn’t pay then the tax-payer pays. Someone always pays.
Now if the ONLY people who pay are those who pass – they THEY are the ones who pay for the tuition of those who fail. The successful subsidize the lazy and the failures.
You need to get past wanting stuff for zero cost and start thinking about freedom as in liberty. The truth is – the free beer ain’t cheap.
BTW – the guy you interviewed is a conn. I can’t believe you BOUGHT that hook line and sinker. If he can do all that then why hasn’t he? Are you really going to steal resources from your employer to further your own dreams when they don’t meet the needs and demands of your institution??
February 17, 2007 at 8:28 am
Leigh Blackall
Um.. Oh well, sorry to see you go this way BoredKiwi. I’m not sure what you’re talking about – What interview? What did I buy?
Opportunities for free learning is a freedom don’t you think? I would say that student debt and rising fees in NZ would be a key factor to why our student numbers are dropping – then it would be the inflexibility and questionable future relevance of our subjects and courses, and then it would be the invisability of our services (hidden behind firewalls and LMS, while our competitors release their content to enhance visability, customer relations, and other PR…
I get a strong indication that your idea of content and the business of educational institutions (especially public ones) is quite different to mine.
February 17, 2007 at 9:00 am
Leigh Blackall
reading back through, I see the interview you’re referring to, and thanks for the warning of possible con.. though I’m not sure what exactly you mean. Do you mean to say the skills are not true, or that web 2 and social media is a con?
The success (or not) of that person’s use of social web apps for proffit really wasn’t the point – the point was about the need for social web spaces around our learning institutions. I think most agree (though probably least of all the training sector) that learning is constructed socially. So when social web becomes the primary function of the Internet, shouldn’t we in education sit up and take notice?
Whether or not the person I ‘interviewed’ succeeds in making a profit through setting up social web spaces doesn’t really matter. In an educational setting our uses for social webs would be quite different. Its just the skills and awareness that we need. And a chance to talk web 2 concepts with someone in IT who doesn’t just dismiss it all as a con – hook, line and sinker.
March 12, 2007 at 1:10 am
simonfj
thought this may be of interest. started in oct
http://www.open.ac.uk/openlearn/about-us/our-story.php
February 29, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Flexible Learning in New Zealand part 2 « Learn Online
[…] think this relates very directly to the developing concept of free learning, fee education. Thanks for the comments and suggestions by the way. At the Computing for Free programmes, anyone […]