What must we invent for tomorrow?

1
What must we invent for tomorrow?

• Five critical forces that will challenge
• the U.S. learning community (and perhaps yours)
  to innovate for the future
• EDEN 2009 Annual Conference
• 10-13 June 2009
• Gdansk, Poland
• Nicholas H. Allen, DPA
• Provost Emeritus Collegiate Professor
• University of Maryland University College
• nallen_at_umuc.edu

2
A Changing World

• What will shape U.S. Higher Education in the next
  10 to 15 years?
• What will be the impact on our Higher Education
  Institutions Especially those serving
  non-traditional students?
• What must we invent to meet these challenges?

3
Forces of Change in the U.S.

1. Acute national need
2. Critical demographic shifts
3. Continued, rapid change in technology
4. Intense competition
5. Growing regulatory pressure for accountability
   and results

4
1. National Need

• Demand for tertiary education in the U.S. will
  come from four sources
• Traditional baseline growth patterns
• The shift to non-traditional students
• National goals in response to global competition
• Rising social expectations tertiary education
  will be a universal requirement

IES National Center for Educational Statistics,
Sep 2008
5
Baseline Growth Patterns

• Baseline enrollment growth at U.S.
  post-secondary, degree-granting institutions will
  continue over 2006-2017
• Projected 13 (20.1M students)
• Average annual growth 1.18
• Down from 1.64 over 1992-2006
• But still healthy based on historical patterns of
  attendance

IES National Center for Educational Statistics,
Sep 2008
6
National Need 2006-2017

• The Baby-Boom Echo Generation moves on
• Age 18-24 10
• 25-34 27
• 35 8
• Level UG 12
• G 18
• Prof 22

IES National Center for Educational Statistics,
Sep 2008
7
Shift to Non-traditional Students

• Traditional students get the attention
• 18-22 years old
• Full-time
• Residing on campus
• But, of 17 million students enrolled in
  post-secondary education in 2006
• Only 16 fit the definition for traditional
  students

Stokes, Peter J. Hidden in Plain Sight,
Eduventures Issue Paper to The Commission on
the Future of Higher Education, 2006.
8
Shift to Non-traditional

• Real change has already taken place
• 58 aged 22
• 40 25 or older
• 40 studying part-time
• 40 at 2 year schools
• Future growth will continue to be driven by
  non-traditional student patterns

Stokes, Peter J. Hidden in Plain Sight,
Eduventures Issue Paper to The Commission on
the Future of Higher Education, 2006.
9
National Attainment Goals

• 60-75 of fastest growing jobs in US require
  education at associate level or higher
• Yet compared to other OECD nations, the U.S.
  ranks
• 11th in entry rate to a tertiary degree
• 15th in tertiary graduation rates (1st in 1995)
• 18th in tertiary science graduates per 100,000
  employed 25-34 year olds

US BLS, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2008-2009
OECD, Education at a Glance, September 2008
10
National Attainment Goals

• Fewer than 40 of U.S. working age adults (25-65)
  have a tertiary degree (2006)
• Nine OECD nations have set attainment goals of
  55 by 2025
• The President and national foundations have
  called for the U.S. to meet or exceed this goal
• To match 55 attainment, U.S. degree production
  must increase by 40 (16M graduates) over the
  period 2005-2025.

NCHE, Adding it up State Challenges for
Increasing College Access and Success, November
2007.
11
Rising Expectations

• Cross cultural belief education offers hope for
  a better job, life, and role in society.
• Education is becoming accepted as a human right
  (Spellings Commission Every citizen shall have
  the opportunity to earn a degree.)
• Universal participation in a post-secondary
  degree will become a 21st century requirement

12
National Need Impact

• The U.S. faces unprecedented need to expand
  capacity and raise attainment rates of a tertiary
  degree
• Opportunities will abound for both for-profit and
  not-for-profit providers to fulfill this need
• Cutbacks in public funding may limit expansion in
  traditional public institutions
• This need cannot be fulfilled through traditional
  bricks and mortar expansion

13
2. Major Demographic Shifts (U.S.)

• The emerging Hispanic immigrant population
• The arrival of The Third Age (55-79) and
  Encore Careers

14
Hispanic Immigrant Growth

• Projected U.S. population growth between 2005 and
  2050 296 to 438 million
• Foreign born residents will double to 1in 5
• Whites drop to 47
• Blacks remain at 13
• Asians grow to nearly 10
• Hispanics will represent nearly a third

Pew Research Center, 2008
15
Hispanic Immigrant Growth

• By 2022 half public high school graduates will be
  minorities with Hispanics making up a fourth

Western Interstate Commission for Higher
Education
16
Impact

• Projected Enrollment Increases in Degree-Granting
  Postsecondary Institutions 2006-2017
• Whites 5
• Blacks 26
• Asian 26
• Hispanic 39

IES National Center for Educational Statistics,
Sep 2008
17
The Third Age Tsunami

• Over 80 million Boomers born between 1945-1965
  reach retirement in next 20.
• First to reach partial retirement (62) 2008
• First to reach full Social Security ret. 2012
• Last Boomers to reach age 85 2051
• By 2030, over 20 of the U.S. will be 65 or older
  (70 million).

ACE, Older Adults Higher Education, 2007
18
Third Age Longevity Revolution

• 
  1950 2001

Average Retirement Age
68
62
Life Expectancy
68
78
19
The Third Age Will Continue to Work

• In 2004, 54.2 million adults in the U.S. were
  between 55-79.
• By 2014, 41 of those 55 will still be in the
  work force.
• 66 of those now 50-59 plan to keep working
• 70 of those 50-70 plan to work at least part
  time

Met Life Foundation Civic Ventures
survey,2005 Merrill Lynch Survey
20
Why They Wont Retire?

• Fear of outliving incomes
• Unable or dont want to continue current careers,
  but want or need to work
• New career interests desire to contribute to
  something of value new directions
• Self fulfillment.

21
Changing Demographics Impact

• No industry ignores demographic shifts that each
  represent 20 of the national population.
• Future tertiary student populations will be
  highly diverse in terms of
• Age
• Ethnic/cultural background
• Previous educational experience
• Degree of preparation
• Economic status
• Technology fluency

22
Changing Demographics Impact

• Additional pressures will be placed on HE to
  respond with programs and services that help
  these students succeed
• Many will come underprepared from previous
  educational experiences
• Many will be F-Gen learners
• Third Agers will need support services and
  programs tailored to their needs
• No one-size approach in delivery format, support
  services, or pedagogy will fit all.

23
3. Technology Shift

• Pervasive growth of online education, especially
  in the non-traditional market
• Interoperability revolution
• Breakthrough innovations in key educational
  applications and hardware, especially mobile
  devices.
• Impact of Web 2.0 technologies on pedagogy,
  access to content, services

24
The Online Delivery Revolution

• From 2002 to 2007 online enrollment grew at an
  annual compound rate of 19.7 (versus 1.6 for
  all HE)
• By fall 2007, 21.9 (3.9 million) of all HE
  students took at least one online course
• By 2020, half of all learning may be online

SLOAN-C, Staying the Course, Nov. 2008
Draves Coates, Nine Shift (2004)
25
Interoperability Revolution

• Increasing importance and use of standards so
  different technology systems, sites, and widgets
  can interact
• Quiet but pervasive change in way that different
  technologies now fit together invisibly at the
  user level
• Unparalleled access to micro and meta content and
  immediate functionality

26
Breakthroughs in Key Applications

• E-reader technology (e-paper and e-plastic)
• iPhone Web-in-the-hand connectivity
• Within 5 years the typical mobile will have the
  computing power of todays PC
• Impact M-learning explosion

27
E-reader Applications

• May 6, 2009 746 AM PDT
• Amazon's big-screen Kindle DX makes its debut

28
E-reader Applications

• Wednesday, May 27, 2009
• Plastic Logic's Touch-Screen E-Reader

29
The Web 2.0 Revolution

• Internet evolving from two dimensional theatre
  to a multidimensional cyber sphere
• The network IS the platform
• Users add value
• Database gets better the more people use it
• Network is about getting the right information
  when you need it

30
Web 2.0 Culture

• Openness as hallmark
• Open source and open content
• Micro content
• Metadata
• Users in charge
• Cloud compting

• Collaboration
• Swarm intelligence
• Social networking
• Networks of networks
• Spontaneity
• Dynamic, continuous change

31
Traditional Delivery Models
32
Transition
Blended
33
The Future
Time
Time
Different
Same
Same

• Computer Lab
• Libraries

• Classroom
• Face to face (f2f)

Wikis
Place
Blogs
OERs
Podcasts
Different
M-Learning
Grass Roots Video
PLEs

• ITV
• Live Telecourses
• IVN
• Audio/Video
• Conferencing

• Correspondence
• -Print Based
• -Audio/Video Tapes
• Voice Mail
• Online/WWW

Social Networking
Virtual Worlds
Asynchronous
Synchronous
34
Technology Impact

• Technology systems will enable HE institutions to
  provide mass access to quality education at
  affordable costs
• Web 2.0 technologies have the potential to
  change the classroom and learning opportunities
  as never before imagined
• Open content offers access to rich learning
  resources not before available to many
  institutions and students

35
But

• Institutions will need to carefully assess which
  of these new technologies and approaches will be
  effective as opposed to fads
• Faculty will need to master basic Web 2.0
  technologies or become irrelevant
• Faculty roles in the classroom must change from
  transferring content to transferring wisdom.

36
4. Competitive Pressures

• Competition for the non-traditional student will
  intensify from both for-profit and not-for-profit
  sectors
• Supply may actually outpace demand
• Online delivery will enable competitors to leap
  over geographic/regulatory boundaries
• Online growth will come from schools that are
  well established and fully engaged

SLOAN-C, Online Nation, October 2007
37
Increasing Competition

• Private for-profit institutions are growing
  online enrollments 5 times the rate of public and
  private non-profit schools (2002 fall 2006)
• Public 59
• Private NFP 49
• Private FP 340

SLOAN-C, Online Nation, October, 2007
38
Competitive Pressures

• Earlier approaches to positioning and
  differentiation based on convenience and
  scheduling alone will not be enough
• Higher education institutions will need to take a
  student centric approach to attract and keep
  more students
• Institutions will need to move from rhetoric
  toward evidence based marketing

Eduventures, February 2006.
39
Competitive Impact

• Front door recruiting and admissions systems will
  become integrated with other institutional
  systems to reach prospective students
• Student success may become a competitive
  differentiator
• Student retention and persistence programs will
  take on strategic importance
• Early warning systems will become critical tools
  of retention

40
Competitive Impact

• Higher education institutions will need to use
  the new technologies combined with process
  re-engineering principles to
• Wrap student support and engagement systems
  around academic programs
• Gather critical operating metrics
• Scale delivery of programs and services
• Mass customize

41
5. Regulatory Pressures

• Issues of cost and accountability will continue
  to demand attention
• Higher education will need to take charge of
  these issues or other interests will.

42
Accountability

• Higher education an industry focused too much on
  inputs and process, and too little on results
• Rising costs, public pressure, and increasing
  political concerns over value for the money
  will continue to push institutions toward a focus
  on results especially mastery of basic skills.

43
Increasing costs
Note growth in current dollars Source
CNNMoney.com Aug 22, 2008 from Bureau
of Labor Statistics
44
Accountability

• Little more than half of all students enrolled in
  four years programs will graduate in 6 years
• Student Retention if not addressed will become an
  explosive issue
• Large numbers of F-Gen and low income students
  will accentuate the problem
• Solutions will require intentional
  interventions designed into new student and
  enrollment management systems

American Enterprise Institute, 2009
45
Higher Education Opp. Act 2008

• Increased regulation reporting
• Assessment of student achievement remains with
  institutions and accreditors
• But will not go away
• Continued focus on accessibility, affordability,
  accountability
• Renewal in 5 years renewed attention in two
  depending on progress

46
Regulatory Impact

• Retention and persistence strategies will take on
  critical importance with increasing numbers of
  low income and first degree seekers
• Non-traditional education programs will need to
  be creative in designing front door systems that
  help students stay connected and succeed
• If higher education does not address this problem
  others will solve it for us

47
What Must We Invent for the Future

• 1. Scalable distance education programs that use
  technology and systems tools wisely to
• Dramatically expand capacity
• Increase access
• Reduce per student costs
• Now is the time for ODL to fulfill its
  potential and its promise in the U.S.

48
What Must We Invent

• 2. Technology driven, scalable support systems,
  wrapped around academic programs and mass
  customized to
• Make students part of the learning community
• Address individual student needs
• Enable students to succeed

49
What Must We Invent

• 3. Intentional persistence programs designed
  around academic programs and services to address
  the needs of high risk students
• Front door systems that focus on individual
  students early in their academic experience
• Early warning systems that intervene before too
  late
• Clear paths through the curriculum

50
What Must We Invent

• 4. Data-driven research that enables institutions
  and faculty to assess the impact of new
  educational technologies, Web 2.0 tools, OER,
  delivery formats on
• Costs
• Efficiency of learning
• Student learning outcomes
• Faculty productivity
• Institutional effectiveness

51
What Must We Invent?

• 5. OER tracking systems that help faculty (and
  students) become aware of high quality resources
  that are appropriate to
• The subject and pedagogical context of a
  particular course or program
• An individual students needs

52
What Must We Invent?

• 6. Professional development as a condition of
  employment for faculty to
• Enable mastery of Web 2.0 technologies
• Facilitate moving from roles of transferring
  content to ones of transferring wisdom

53
What Must We Invent?

• 7. Technology driven processes that reengineer
  and integrate institutional academic and
  administrative systems effectively to
• Raise institutional productivity
• Lower the cost per student
• Support delivery of high quality programs

54
What Must We invent

• 8. Realistic and systemic approaches to learning
  outcomes assessment
• to assure students achieve or exceed baseline
  knowledge and skills in core areas necessary for
  employment and responsible citizenship in the
  21st century.

55
Relevance to EDEN Members?

• U.S. EUR
• National Need Y ?
• Demographic Shifts Y ?
• Rapid Change in Tech Y ?
• Increasing Competition Y ?
• Demand for Accountability Y ?

56
Much Work to Be Done

• Distance learning institutions will need to be
  front and center to lead the changes that must
  take place
• Now is the time to fulfill the promise!