Cmhubbard.weebly.com



Fulfilling the Community College Completion Agenda using MOOCsChristina M. HubbardGeorge Mason UniversityAbstract:Community colleges are facing widespread problems with credential completion. This paper will provide community college administrators with a description of ways Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are gaining attention and providing students with creditable knowledge that can be considered for transfer in an effort to support credential completion. Discussion will include the role of the American Council on Education (ACE), a description of innovative practices by other regionally accredited institutions to accept learning that occurs using MOOCs, and the emergence of new providers that are offering classes at significantly lower cost than colleges. The premise is that the technology is available and students are beginning to demand credit. However, we should not only award credit, but also use this technology in our own curriculum to lower costs institutional cost. By embracing MOOC technology into community college programs, we can increase student persistence and completion rates. Fulfilling the Community College Completion Agenda using MOOCsRates of success among community college students are as dismal as ever. Current data indicates that just 46% of those that entered community colleges with the goal of earning a degree or certificate have completed the credential, gone on to a university, or are still enrolled after six years (Association of Community Colleges, 2012). In light of an ever-increasing demand for successful student outcomes, community colleges around the country are diligently working to find ways for more students to complete employable credentials. In fact, in 2011, the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) laid out a plan to help 5 million more students earn degrees, certificates, or other credentials by 2020. In order to fulfill this goal, it is critical for community college administrators to recognize the knowledge students gain outside the classroom. One format that is gaining recognition is referred to as Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC). Many of these courses are free to participants and provide an opportunity to learn from masters in the field of study. These courses have become an international phenomenon with participants and providers from around the world converging on the internet. This paper will provide background information on MOOCs, before describing emerging models for awarding academic credit to recognize this non-traditional method of learning. I will describe practices including evaluation of MOOCs by the American Council on Education (ACE), which would provide a simplified articulation of credit. Next, I will describe a new agreement between the Saylor Foundation and Thomas Edison State College to administer credit-granting exams based upon content available through MOOCs. I will then discuss an international reciprocity agreement available through Open Educational Resources University (OERu). The final articulation of college credit I will discuss is StraighterLine which is a non-college provider of online coursework that is accepted at 40 regionally accredited institutions. These partnerships will explain how expansively MOOCs are already affecting higher education. After discussing the ways students are able to attain credit to transfer into our institutions, I will present an opportunity for community colleges to integrate this MOOC technology into our curriculum to foster greater levels of student success and help our students toward credential completion. Instead of reactively waiting for students to pursue the content on their own and then seek credit from their local community college, the “import/export” model offers an opportunity for institutions of higher education to proactively incorporate MOOC materials into their online curriculum. This provides students with cutting edge content and administrators with oversight of the learning and potential for revenue.This paper is intended to provide an overview of existing MOOC articulation options available to community college administrators. By staying current on available options, higher education administrators can prepare for the influx of students that will be seeking recognition for the knowledge gained through non-traditional methods. The content of this paper will also empower them to take a proactive approach to ensure that they are ahead of this issue by identifying ways to use this phenomenon as a means of maintaining excellent content at a lower cost to their institutions. BackgroundWhen MOOCs first started in 2007, the quantity of participants seemed very impressive when compared to the typical number of students in online classes offered by colleges. Early on, MOOCs were drawing a few thousand participants in many courses. By 2011, they had earned their description as “massive” with participant volumes of more than 100,000 in some MOOCs (Schroeder & Levin, 2012). MOOC providers partnered with some of the most elite institutions in the world including Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford, and Yale. With the vast quantity of participants, the potential for enterprise brought new providers to the market seeking to distribute their content on a platform that would reach people around the world. With the incredible proliferation of MOOC courses in the past few years, the field of higher education is scrambling to determine if the content is worthy of college-level credit and how to award the credit if it is due. Success En MasseInstitutions of higher education have long focused on student access and student success. Most people would agree that student access has been achieved via MOOCs. Impressive content is now widely available and is reaching hundreds of thousands of students around the world. The problem of student success, however, remains. Based on a survey of MOOC professors, pass rates among students in MOOCs are around 7.5% (Mullins, 2013). Presently, vast quantities of students sign up, but few actually complete the courses. That said, others would argue that in light of the high volume of participants the focus should be on the quantity of successful completers instead of the percentage of successful completers (Wood, 2013). In other words, in a class of 100,000 students, is it not impressive that 7,500 participants successfully learned the subject matter effectively enough to complete the course?Many experts suggest that the low completion rates are due to the fact that those that sign up do not necessarily intend to finish and, instead, are just trying to understand the MOOC phenomenon. They compare enrollees’ intent to be comparable to the reason people do a Sunday crossword puzzle. It is intellectually stimulating, but it has low stakes, so they do not feel pressed to finish (Rivard, 2013). Regardless of the reason for non-completion among the majority of MOOC participants, there are still thousands that complete the requirements and have often met impressive standards in order to earn their completion certificate. Credit Where Credit is DueThough completion rates are low, those that complete MOOCs are beginning to question how they can receive credit for the hard work they have accomplished. Some experts recommend treating the completion of a MOOC as badges similar to those offered by information technology providers like Microsoft and Cisco (Schroeder & Levin, 2012). This method suggests that the majority of employers would know what it means to have completed the MOOC listed on one’s resume, without the usual parameters that help employers to comprehend the level of the content (via standard education levels such as associate, baccalaureate, graduate, etc.). One MOOC provider’s site even goes so far as to reference certificates. This term may hold promise among students, but upon close examination of the site, the certificates described are simply certificates of completion or certificates of mastery, which may not be well-received by employers (Open Culture Course Website, 2013). It seems that the lack of associable merit would lead to confusion about what the knowledge gained from a MOOC would prepare one to do. Expecting employers to articulate the relevance of MOOC content to their work environments seems like a lot to ask, and unlikely to occur.Although direct recognition of these courses may not be possible, there may be promise in having an external body articulate the credit. The American Council of Education (ACE) has long been recognized as a reputable evaluator of professional training for academic credit. By having ACE evaluate MOOC content, employers and institutions of higher education can better understand the content that is delivered. The evaluation of MOOCs for credit seems to have also resulted in an effort by MOOC providers to better align with academic standards by improving identify verification of participants (Wood, 2013; Lederman, 2013). Though not mandated by ACE, some MOOC providers improved their identify verification processes to meet the requirements established for institutions of higher education. This is another indication of increasing consumer interest in having pathways to academic credit for MOOC participants (Lederman, 2013). Though these improvements hold promise, it is important to remember that with added software for identity verification, additional expense is absorbed by MOOC providers, which have been offering MOOCs at no cost. Additional services have the potential to push expenses to a point that demands a fee to be charged by MOOC providers.Having credit automatically awarded without additional demonstration of knowledge is possible at many community colleges when coursework is recognized by ACE. This would provide an exceptionally affordable way for students to earn college credit. However, due to the significant quantity of MOOCs, with more being added regularly, it seems unlikely that ACE will be able to evaluate all MOOCs for credit articulation. Pioneering Efforts to Award Credit for Learning Free Online ContentA promising alternative to direct credit application for completion of MOOCS may be directing students to standardized assessments taken by students after completion of MOOCs. Assessment of college-level knowledge has long been recognized by community colleges through the articulation of CLEP and DSST exams. Thomas Edison State College, a regionally accredited institution in New Jersey, has taken this a step farther by establishing a relationship with the Saylor Foundation, a MOOC provider. This partnership has resulted in credit for over 280 college-level courses articulated from MOOC content. Students complete select MOOCs through the Saylor Foundation and then complete a test offered by Thomas Edison State College to earn college credit for the class. Some Thomas Edison exams were already a good match for content delivered by the Saylor Foundation. Others have been developed as a result of this partnership and more are being added. Successful completion of these tests will result in college credits that can be used toward a degree at Thomas Edison State College or transferred to colleges nationwide (Thomas Edison State College, 2013). This is not the first time that credit has been offered for completing an assessment based on a MOOC. Some students enrolled in an Artificial Intelligence MOOC offered by Stanford (Ruth, 2012) could receive college credit at various institutions for testing conducted at Freiburg University, in Germany (University of Freiburg, n.d.). However, the example with Thomas Edison State College shows great promise as a means of helping more American students earn college credit for independent learning. Thomas Edison Sate College is also a participant in another initiative, Open Education Resource University (OERu). Recognizing the high number of students gaining knowledge outside of traditional classrooms, 15 universities from around the world have collaborated to offer full academic credit to students that complete custom final exams offered by any of the partner institutions for work completed through Open Educational Resources (OER). Students are charged for taking the test, but at a far lower rate than tuition for the same course (Schroeder & Levin, 2012). So far, there are four regionally accredited American universities in OERu (OERu Homepage, 2013). On its website, OERu notes the following purpose:The OER university network will facilitate pathways for OER learners to gain credible credentials from participating institutions who will be formally accredited institutions in their national jurisdictions. Quality assurance and institutional accreditation is the foundation stone on which this parallel learning universe is based. The OER university concept must ensure equivalence and parity of esteem for qualifications gained through the OER university network (OERu Logic Model, 2013). OERu partner institutions agree to create at least two courses using OER, essentially creating their own MOOC (OERu FAQs, 2013). As such, they are providing an environment that allows students to not only test on existing knowledge, but also providing a vehicle for the student to learn new material. By demanding high standards and limiting acceptance into OERu to reputable institutions, the organization has established a framework for allowing students to earn credit in a way that is verifiable demonstrable for institutions that are interested in helping students expedite their education through these non-traditional means. Although OERu intends to eventually offer its own undergraduate and graduate programs, their greatest impact may be in that they are forging the way for institutions to have a standardized metric for accepting knowledge gained through MOOCs and other OER.Students are Willing to PayMOOCs are not the only alone in implementing technology available to students. Online education providers like StraighterLine are gaining recognition by institutions of higher education. With StraighterLine, students pay a subscription to enroll in classes at a low rate. Course content is comparable to that of many community colleges or the first two years of a university degree. Classes are facilitated by program partners like McGraw-Hill, MOOC providers such as Saylor Foundation, or by professors affiliated with online institutions. StraighterLine is offered at a significantly less expense than college. Depending on the facilitator course costs vary, but they advertise that one year of tuition and fees with StraighterLine costs just $1,299 (StraighterLine, 2013). They even provide a chart to show students the significant amount of savings that can be achieved through StraighterLine as compared to various college options. StraighterLine seems to have pioneered a way for students to earn college credit using technology while providing strong student support. Students can elect to study on their own or within a group. Each class includes 10 hours of tutoring help by a reputable tutoring company. The assessments for each class are proctored to ensure identity verification. Student grades are based on a combination of assignments, essays and exams graded by tutors. Students can elect to take classes with a professor, though most offerings do not have one, and there is an added expense for professor led courses. All courses have required text books that can be purchased online. In addition, all courses have ACE recommendations for credit (StraighterLine, 2013). The most impressive aspect of this program is that the courses are already recognized by 40 regionally accredited institutions. Some institutions are more selective about the classes for which they will award credit, but some institutions have articulated nearly all StraighterLine courses. StraighterLine is offering a reputable learning experience at an incredible low cost due to the integration of MOOC technology (StraighterLine, 2013). Partnering to Incorporate Delivery of MOOC ContentThe options described above are good solutions for students, because they have significant impact on reducing the cost of higher education. It is clear that MOOCs are changing higher education. No longer will we look only to other regionally accredited institutions along with a few test providers. Community college administrators will see requests from students to recognize the knowledge gained from the experiences described above, and to compete, we will. However, for colleges that accept these credits, the revenue that would have been generated by having their students enroll in the courses through their institutions is lost. To add to this concern, many MOOCs are recognized for having esteemed faculty from prestigious institutions teaching the courses with engaging and content rich pedagogy. In other words, students are able to get a robust learning opportunity at minimal cost and community colleges receiving these students have little to gain financially by awarding credit for these student experiences. This provides a great opportunity for institutions to incorporate the impressive content available from MOOCs into their curriculum. Ruth (2012, February 8) suggests adaptation of an “import/export” model that benefits the MOOC provider as well as the institution that would be using the content while serving the needs of students. MOOCs are often taught by lead faculty in premier institutions. Few students have the opportunity to participate in the classes these faculty teach at their elite institutions. However, by bringing the engaging content and professors to a MOOC, thousands of students can be taught by a single outstanding faculty member. Once the course is created, the MOOC provider could then export the course to institutions paying to import the course. The course would then be offered by the importing institution. However, critics would indicate that to simply offer the course as it is delivered by the exporting provider is not adequate (Legon, 2013). Success rates in MOOCs are poor. Therefore, to ensure higher levels of success, the gaining institution would need to integrate student support tools. The first consideration is how to deliver the course. Some institutions may elect a hybrid format to allow face-to-face interactions; others may elect to keep it online. Either way, the course would not require a highly-paid faculty member. Instead, a course facilitator would be needed to promote discussion, grade assessments, and monitor student progress. Because this role would not require faculty credentials, it would cost the importing institution far less than offering the course by tenured faculty. Student outcomes could be further bolstered by offering existing student services such as tutoring, library services, and technological support to ensure that student success rises while costs decrease. Other benefits can result by integrating MOOC content into online education offered by the institution. For example, many institutions have expressed concern about inconsistencies in online education. In other words, students in online classes are not getting the same content as those in face-to-face classes, or even other online versions of the course. By using the imported coursework, the content is aligned and streamlined for more consistent student experience (Mullins, 2013).This format will not only lead to higher rates of student success through online classes, but it will also provide revenue to the importing and exporting institutions. Ruth (2012, February 8) describes that profits for the exporting MOOC provider could be garnered per student taught by the importing institution or per course imported by the institution. Although the importing institution would be paying the exporting institution, costs would be mitigated by the tuition paid by students, combined with the decreased expense of having a facilitator instead of a professor (Ruth, 2012, February 8). Students would receive world-class content from premier professors while having the supportive environment of their home community college. SummaryThe American Association of Community Colleges has noted the need to incorporate technology in order to foster greater student persistence and success. They specifically emphasize “predictive analytics, Web-based learning environments, games, embedded assessments, and sophisticated remote laboratories” (Association of Community Colleges, 2012). These technologies are expensive to develop individually at each community college nationwide. However, those technologies already exist in MOOCs (Ruth, 2012, February 8). Still, just 44% of community colleges report that they are exploring options for incorporating MOOC content into their programs (Mullins, 2013). This paper has described emerging opportunities for students to earn credit for content available online. One thing is certain: the knowledge our students gain from non-collegiate environments cannot be ignored any longer. ACE is already beginning to articulate credit for some MOOCs. Schools like Thomas Edison State College are already forging partnerships with MOOC providers. Multiple universities have already taken steps to develop reciprocity-of-credit agreements for students that demonstrate knowledge gained from free content online. And StraighterLine is offering coursework at a cost that is makes it impossible to compete. However, community colleges have an advantage: we are reputable, accredited education providers and students will still come to us in hopes of earning a recognized, employable credential. By welcoming their learning experiences, we can help them and achieve our completion agenda.In order to maintain our commitment to credential completion, we should not stop at simply awarding credit for what they do outside our institution. Let’s reshape what we are doing on the inside to provide our own students with an online experience that keeps them enrolled from the time they complete their application until they have walked across the state at graduation. Although some of our students will have used MOOCs to learn outside our institutions, we have an opportunity to use MOOC content to improve our online offerings and benefit our institutions in the same way it is benefiting our students – by lowering costs and improving quality. Integrating MOOC content into curriculum for distance learners has great potential for improving the student experience while delivering exceptional content to students at a lower cost than developing and teaching the material using our community college resources. Most community college students will never be afforded the opportunity to take classes at elite institutions like Yale or Stanford. However, community college administrators can now integrate that experience into their coursework at local community colleges. The application of MOOC content into community college programs through transfer of MOOC credit and integration of MOOC content in online classes will lead to greater rates of credential completion. It is time for institutions to engage the technological options available in order to fulfill the Community College Completion Agenda. ReferencesAmerican Association of Community Colleges. (2012, April). Reclaiming the American Dream: A report from the 21st-Century Commission on the Future of Community Colleges. Washington, DC: Author. Available from Lederman, D. (2013, February 7). Expanding pathways to MOOC credit. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed website: Legon, R. (201, April 25). MOOCs and the quality question. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed website: Mullins, C. (2013, April). Distance learning survey results trends in elearning: Tracking the impact of elearning at community colleges. Retrieved from: OERu Home Page. (2013, February 14). OER university. Retrieved April 22, 2013 from: OERu Logic Model. (2011, March 11). Logic model. Retrieved April 22, 2013 from: FAQs. (2012, November 18): FAQs. Retrieved April 22, 2013 from: Culture course website (2013). 300 Free MOOCs from great universities (Many offering certificates). Retrieved from Rivard, R. (2013, March 8). Measuring the MOOC dropout rate. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed website: Ruth, S. (2012). Can MOOC’s and existing e-learning paradigms help reduce college costs? International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 8(1), 21-32. Retrieved from: Ruth, S. (2012, February 8). “The import/export paradigm for high-quality college courses: An answer to tuition’s through-the-roof spiral?” IEEE Internet Computing 16(2), 82-86. Retrieved from: Schroeder, R. & Levin, C. (2012). EduMOOC: Open online learning without limits. Proceedings of Annual Conference of Distance Teaching & Learning. Retrieved from: Thomas Edison State College. (2013, February 20). College and Saylor Foundation collaborate on creating flexible pathways to earn college credit via open online courses and assessments. Retrieved from: University of Freiburg (n.d.). Introduction to AI web site. Retrieved from . Wood, M.T. (2013, January 6). Opportunities in online education – staying ahead of the curve: The case of the MOOC. Proceedings of the Council of Independent Colleges Presidents’ Institute. Retrieved from: ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download