BlogU

  • Bending the Educational Cost Curve

    By Joshua Kim July 11, 2010 10:01 pm EDT

    Technology will be one of the essential factors if we hope to bend the educational cost curve. Like health care, but unlike other consumer goods and services, tuition in the past two-decades has risen much faster than either real wages or inflation. Where in real dollars the costs of products such as computers, cars, durable goods and food have decreased while quality has improved, education costs have risen between 4 and 6 percent each year. The cost of paying for education is increasingly shifted from public to private payers, as states reduce support for public institutions, forcing students to borrow more to pay the tuition bills.

    How can technology help bend the higher ed cost curve?

    --Hybrid Classes: We are at the point in the evolution of learning technology platforms that we can create technology enabled courses that both increase class quality while reducing the number of "in-classroom" hours that need to occur. Moving one hour out of every three to an online asynchronous environment using a learning management system (LMS) can dramatically free up classroom space. These free classrooms can accommodate more courses, therefore increasing enrollments. Creating more output (students educated) with equal or less inputs (classroom buildings), while maintaining or improving quality is the definition of an increase in productivity. Learning technology platforms are much less expensive and can be scaled faster and more efficiently than new buildings. The argument that quality suffers with hybrid courses is no longer tenable given the twin developments in pedagogy and technology that define the last decade in higher education.

    --Non-Traditional Online Courses: By non-traditional, I mean using online courses to serve the existing student population more efficiently. I've long thought that too much time is wasted in a traditional 4 year degree, and that educational technology platforms and online learning could reduce time-to-graduation (and increase retentionl). We could offer online courses to students during the long breaks that they would otherwise not be on campus, such as summers or over long-holiday breaks. Why do we stick with the traditional 3 credit course, when we could design mini 1-credit courses that students could string together to get closer to meet graduation requirements? Can we get some course work done online during high school, so that students arrive on campus maybe knowing some of our professors and understanding what college level work is all about. What about adding a few extra online courses in each year so that students can receive a bachelor and masters degree in five years?

    --Bigger Classes: I know the idea of increasing class size, so that schools can admit more students and therefore increase overall tuition while reducing costs for individuals, will seem unwise. We all like small classes. Nor would I recommend this methodology for every institution, as hybrid classes and the creative use of online courses may be more appropriate for increasing productivity in some settings. But the fact is that we know how to make big classes feel and act like small classes if we can invest the proper inputs into each course. These inputs include a partnership with the faculty member to build in active, authentic and personalized learning opportunities facilitated by both technology and advanced learning design methods. This is a case where investing up-front dollars in courses yields downstream results of improved quality and higher productivity. I am not saying anything new here, as NCAT has demonstrated time and time again that their methodologies for large-scale course redesign can increase quality while reducing costs.

    One of the main points that Kamenetz brought home to me in DIY U: Edupunks, Edupreneurs, and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education is that tuition trends will not moderate (or decrease) until higher ed becomes more productive. This means educating more students without spending more money. We need our institutions to become less selective, to admit more applicants, while at the same time increasing the quality and relevance of the education that is received. The leadership within our institutions, the presidents and provosts and deans and chairs etc., should be asking the CIOs and the academic technology directors about how we can increase productivity. And people in educational technology leadership positions should be making this our number one priority. We all need to participate and succeed in the bending the educational cost curve.

    Do you have any success stories you can share of projects you were involved with to utilize technology to increase enrollments while both holding costs steady and increasing quality? If your president or provost came to you tomorrow, what specific steps would you recommend?

Advertisement

Comments on Bending the Educational Cost Curve

  • nice ideas .. but
  • Posted by MIS Prof , Mgmt/Mkt at small public teaching university on July 12, 2010 at 11:00am EDT
  • I like most of your ideas in this article. But I worry about the notion of offering "Non-Traditional Online Courses", particularly those offered in short time frames or at non-traditional time periods. This approach might work for some subjects and situations, but perils abound and present challenges to quality and academic integrity.

    Appropriately staffing those courses with willing, qualified faculty could be problematic. I can see an administration taking 'canned' courses and staffing them with less-qualified adjuncts desperate to get more work (not to say that there aren't very qualified adjuncts ... just thinking basic economics involved in trying to balance cost and course offerings). Or I can see regular faculty failing to get their research, assessment data analysis, or committee/accreditation reports done because they have to cover these courses ... those 'breaks' are often very busy times for full-time, tenured or tenure-track faculty. (Students, parents, and some administrator/staff personnel don't always see this work going on.)

    In addition, some subjects need more mental 'gel' time than others. For example, I could not see certain math and information systems courses being taught in short time frames; students taking these courses in short time frames tend to not get enough competency to proceed to the next course successfully. And faculty have trouble really grading student work in compressed time-frame courses (particularly if class size is not restricted). Students frequently sign up for these courses because they know that faculty tend to cut the work short to make it fit the time frame more reasonably.

    Chunking up some concepts or skills into 1-credit courses would work great in some areas, but in others, students might not do as well at integrating the content/skills into the rest of the curriculum. I've seen this with introductory software application courses. Students learn word processing (or spreadsheets, etc.) individually, but they don't learn to move data around between packages or learn to use several packages together to solve a business problem.

    I'm afraid that the end result is likely to be watered-down courses and reduced student learning. I've often observed that outcome when this approach is tried. (My perspective comes from 30 years of experience across different types of schools in different parts of the U.S..) When resources are scarce, administrators (and faculty) feel pressure to cut corners. If these perils are taken into consideration, perhaps careful planning and staffing could maintain academic integrity and quality.

  • Retain full access
  • Posted by CC Diversity Officer , CC Diversity Officer at LACC on July 12, 2010 at 11:15am EDT
  • I'm all in favor of hybrid and fully online courses, along with incorporating U-tube video's and other online snippets into the curriculum -- as long as thoe offerings are fully accessible to students with differing abilities. Building complete access into hybrid and online courses is definitely possible and enriches the curriculum for all students. Closed captioning of any lecture or other auditory input, along with a reader for written and other visual input is critical. On the other hand, the existence of online material which a student has the ability to replay multiple times can be a great asset to students with certain types of learning disabilities. When educators open the doors to new curricular offerings, the need to open them widely enough to allow access to all students is not only in keeping with current educational pedagogy, it is both morally and legally correct. Thanks for an insightful article.

  • Reply to: Retain Full Access
  • Posted by Jackie J. on July 13, 2010 at 1:30pm EDT
  • Incorporating YouTube videos and other online media into the curriculum is a great idea, as it aids in rich media and increased participation from students. I agree with CC Diversity Officer, make these offerings available to all students, including those with disabilities. Building an online community where students can chat and reply to professors' assignments through forums will also aid in engagement and interest.

    http://www.sm4edu.ning.com

  • Eliminate the "savings" from the discussion
  • Posted by Carter on July 14, 2010 at 3:15pm EDT
  • Online and hybrid courses work when done the right way and when costs are not spared. They fail miserably when they're done as a way to save money. Online students deserve the same access to libraries, advisors, tutoring, mentoring, financial aid assistance, and anything else as brick-and-mortar students do. When you start putting services online, THAT'S when the costs come in. And if you're trying to serve online students in other states, time zones, and maybe countries, these services must be available. Do it because it works and, for some students, is better. Don't do it because it's cheap. It's not. If it is, then the school is doing something wrong.