MOOCs will mean the death of universities? Not likely

MOOCs, or Massive Open Online Courses, are gaining a lot of attention. Some commentators believe that these free internet-delivered courses are the future of university education. Others meanwhile argue that MOOCs are simply an updated version of the old-fashioned correspondence course. The reason…

Ykmgfgv2-1345081154
Despite online courses available for free, university students still want the experience of bricks and mortar campuses. University campus image from www.shutterstock.com

MOOCs, or Massive Open Online Courses, are gaining a lot of attention. Some commentators believe that these free internet-delivered courses are the future of university education.

Others meanwhile argue that MOOCs are simply an updated version of the old-fashioned correspondence course.

The reason MOOCs are getting this attention is the recent involvement of elite American universities such as Stanford, Harvard, and MIT. These universities, through different platforms, are putting their courses online for free, with some offering accreditation.

However, within all the commentary on the rise of MOOCs, the death of the university campus has been grossly exaggerated.

MOOCs mania

Current online courses are often based on videos of “chalk and talk” lectures. If you thought your economics lecturer was boring in person, try watching him or her on a 50 minute internet video!

MOOCs will not threaten existing university education – and are unlikely to survive – unless they adapt to the internet as a medium of delivery. This involves short audio or video clips based on single topics that can be adapted into different course sequences and used by the students in conjunction with other online tools such as social media and blogs.

For most tertiary students, MOOCs will simply be one part of the university learning experience. They will not supersede on-campus classes for the same reason that telecommuting has not made the office redundant.

People like to interact in person with other people. And students learn from other students. The internet will augment but not replace the face-to-face experience.

A celebration of integration

So what is the future of Australian university education? I think it will involve four integrated elements.

First, the class will be “inverted”. Students will be expected to access a range of materials about a topic before coming to class. Some of this material will be free on the internet, some will be provided on the internet by publishers (and may be tied to a textbook) and some will be provided by the lecturer (e.g. moderated web discussions).

Second, students will be assessed on the material before coming to class. The assessment will involve an online test, with each test worth a few percent at most. The test helps students understand how well they have learnt the material. Importantly, it provides the lecturer with feedback before the lecture.

Third, the lecturer will provide a “classroom experience” to students based on their test results. The lecturer will design the class material to address those areas where the students are having the most trouble.

In the short term, many classes will still require a large lecture format. But the presentation will be dynamic. Even large classes will involve peer-to-peer interaction (periods where students are given a question and a minute to discuss it in pairs) and real-time student feedback (using technology to enable students to answer questions in real time).

Fourth, there will still be small-group tutorials. But these will be based around problem solving in groups with tutors as moderators. Students will present answers and work in groups, learning the “soft” skills that have disappeared from many current university courses.

Ultimately with some courses, the large lecture may disappear – replaced by smaller classes to provide feedback, allow better discussion and to focus on applying new knowledge through problem-based learning.

The professor will design the course and guide the tutors who will, in turn, guide the students. However, many tutors can cost more than one lecturer – so some universities will baulk at the cost of this final step.

Online pioneers

Can this be done? Yes! It is already being done in some of our leading university courses. But at present, reform is being led by individual academics who are devoted to teaching.

Their institutions, at best, simply cheer them from the sidelines, and, at worst, get in their way.

But change is inevitable. Competition for students is intense between Australia’s middle-ranked and lower-ranked universities. Some of these universities have downgraded their on-campus experience – ignoring or undermining their key advantage over MOOCs and other online courses.

If these universities do not change then they will lose students and financial resources, both to internet courses and to universities that do change.

In contrast, universities that act early can build a reputation for innovative, high-quality teaching. While our elite research universities are always likely to attract top students, most Australian universities need to sell themselves on teaching quality.

A reputation for innovative teaching will be invaluable in the fight for domestic and international student dollars.

Tomorrow’s leaders

The biggest barrier to change may be the academics themselves. They will need to be at the forefront of educational reform. However, it is much easier to drag out the yellowed lecture notes for another year rather than to learn new technology and redesign a course.

Incentives at all our universities are based on research output, so academics have little incentive to embrace educational reform. The universities that succeed in transforming education will not be those that work on a top down approach. That cannot work.

Rather, it is the universities that develop the incentives and motivation for “bottom up” academic-led reform who will be tomorrow’s leaders in tertiary education.

Join the conversation

39 Comments sorted by

  1. Gavin Moodie

    Principal Policy Adviser

    Students haven't done the expected reading before class for 500 years: why would they start now?

    I disagree that academics are the biggest barrier to change. Properly supported, teachers readily adopt changes that are demonstrated to work. What they don't adopt so readily are the latest fads pushed by people who long left the classroom, if they ever spent much time in it.

    report
    1. Mat Hardy

      Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University

      In reply to Gavin Moodie

      "Second, students will be assessed on the material before coming to class. The assessment will involve an online test, with each test worth a few percent at most. "

      I tried a similar approach earlier this year. The result was that I was inundated with correspondence looking for extensions, explanations of the content, chances to re-do the test, technical support issues, medical certificates, sob stories and a chunk of students who just didn't bother to do the tests because something worth 5 or 10% just wasn't worth the time they'd invest!

      report
    2. William Julius Valo

      Student (Science)

      In reply to Mat Hardy

      Interesting. It seems you have an insubordinate group of students. 3 out of 4 subjects in my current course utilise the pre-lab/pre-class test and it has proven to be extremely successful. They hammered home the point that there is a strong correlation between the successful completion of the pre-class tests and obtaining a good mark at the end of the course.

      Also, when it comes to a pre-lab test, no pre-lab = no lab for you. missing 2 - 3 labs in a semester usually results in a fail. These expectations…

      Read more
    3. Phillip Ebrall

      Professor of Chiropractic at Central Queensland University

      In reply to Mat Hardy

      Hello Mat

      I've thought about this 'upside-down' approach and am most interested to read of your experiences. In all of what you have been through, is there a way to improve engagement, do you think?

      And William, why do you think your group is so different? Is it the threat of a fail? Or is it a characteristic of students engaged in matters that are quantitative (science) vs. qualitative (Middle East Studies and no doubt, policies)?

      Phillip

      report
    4. Mat Hardy

      Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University

      In reply to Phillip Ebrall

      When I read William's reply, my initial thinking was indeed that perhaps it comes down to the different nature of a science subject and a humanities / social science one. Without knowing what type of science William was studying (or indeed having any experience with how science is taught!), perhaps there is a suitability there for pre-learning a specific skill or small chunk of applied knowledge. I don't think that translates as well into the more abstract discipline areas where the progression of…

      Read more
    5. Mat Hardy

      Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University

      In reply to Mat Hardy

      Also....there may be an economy of organisational scale in some areas too. If you do have a large unit with lots of lab tutors, small groups, sessionals etc, some of the workload gets farmed out or diluted. That wasn't the case in my experience, where it was just two of us teaching two units of study across two campuses.

      report
    6. William Julius Valo

      Student (Science)

      In reply to Mat Hardy

      True, the big stick of failing the course is always at the forefront of your mind when it comes to these things, but that is not to say that it is unfair. In fact, I encourage failing a student due to non-attendance (try getting away with that kind of thing in the workforce! Part of graduate capabilities imo). Labs are a massive part of most sciences and it is pivotal that there is some form of basic understanding before being let loose on the world. Keep in mind there are sometimes as little as…

      Read more
    7. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Phillip Ebrall

      Yep stop haveing a view of University courses as mere credentialism, a means to an end and get back to the passion for and love for learning. I believe the mass HE system has driven the negative side of credential creep. Do all employers need tertiary qualified employees and in which areas? What about the valuing of broad liberal arts qualifications.... how many time have BA students heard the MacDonald's jokes. And what of the backlash againts MBAs a few years back and the sudden surge in JD's wanting to be recognised at Doctoral AQF level.

      Lets get back to valuing learning for learnings sake. Ensure students love their areas of study and the rest will take care of itself. We should, as academics be free to fail students without the fear of administrative scrutiny, fear of falling numbers and lack of class economic viability. Students must own their own learning and assessment outcomes. Stop blaming the messengers.

      report
  2. evanhadkins

    logged in via Twitter

    Hmm. Yes students do like to connect with individuals - and uni's are reducing the amount of contact such as in tute groups.

    Uni lecturers designing worthwhile education. I would like to see it (I won't hold my breath). For a start they could stop with lectures - every piece of educational research show they are rotten way to do learning. And yet they remain the standard. So I conclude that lecturers simply don't care (and this is a case study of how cerebral knowledge doesn't bring change. Which leads to a related and much deeper discussion.)

    I suspect this amounts to an argument for the universities with a name charging a lot for their courses. Which I lament.

    report
    1. William Julius Valo

      Student (Science)

      In reply to evanhadkins

      Way to generalise. My lecturers have all been passionate, approachable people and their lectures are extremely interactive and valuable. To conclude that "lecturers simply don't care" is disgusting and an insult in the extreme.

      report
    2. evanhadkins

      logged in via Twitter

      In reply to William Julius Valo

      Oh really? Have a look at some student satisfaction surveys some time.

      Follow this up by reading some stuff about how people learn. Start with Eric Sotto's When Teaching Becomes Learning. I note that you are respond to being insulted but don't raise anything about learning.

      I don't doubt your lectureres were nice people, I didn't say anything about them.

      I guess your response is a good measure of academic discussion(?)

      report
    3. William Julius Valo

      Student (Science)

      In reply to evanhadkins

      RE: my individual learning, I direct you to a comment I have posted above.

      FYI I am achieving highly and intend to do so for the remainder of the course.

      At any rate, I am familiar with the different modes of learning, and it turns out that (OMG) people learn in different ways! who would have thought?

      Whilst I share your view that tutorials are a more effective learning tool than lectures, this is simply not practical, particularly with some of the more populous courses. I learn a great…

      Read more
    4. William Julius Valo

      Student (Science)

      In reply to William Julius Valo

      NB: I should probably mention that a lot of our lectures are run as mini-tutorials anyway, so maybe YOU should research current practices before saying something else completely ignorant.

      report
    5. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to evanhadkins

      I give very little credence to the existing student satisfaction research tools. They are often carefully constructed instruments to gather the data an Institution needs to fulfil TESQSA requirements and not a tool to honestly examine and improve upon the quality of education provided. They are simply a bureaucratic metric to get over the Quality Assurance audits.

      report
  3. Dennis Alexander

    logged in via LinkedIn

    Thanks Stephen for a slightly more considered view of the MOOCs and their implications. The drawcards so far have been academic "stars" presenting the courses, that they have been open and therefore selected for interest, and they have used peer tutoring and marking. That said, they have about a 10% completion rate and already suffer cheating problems. The Khan academy is actually a bigger threat, because, as you point out as an advantage, it breaks things down into bite sized skills with formative…

    Read more
    1. Dennis Alexander

      logged in via LinkedIn

      In reply to evanhadkins

      Evan, I only said it could be, not that it should be. Biggs work goes down the same path - these things can be done, there is a question as to whether they should be done. It's a bit like having a personal trainer at the gym: if they don't get you working and sweating, there is a question as to who is shirking. The research on deep vs surface modes and what encourages thm is out there for all to find. The benefits of each for the student and their employers are pretty obvious.

      So, Evan, should engagement of students be optional and discretionary for the student in higher education institutions partially funded by governments (i.e. taxpayers)?

      report
    2. evanhadkins

      logged in via Twitter

      In reply to Dennis Alexander

      I notice that you frame education entirely in employment and finance terms.

      My own view is that people love to learn what they are interested in and love to excel in what they are fascinated by.

      That people need to be forced to do what is not interesting or to jump through hoops to the employers tune is not surprising - just regrettable that they are so forced.

      report
    3. Dennis Alexander

      logged in via LinkedIn

      In reply to evanhadkins

      No, I didn't frame it entirely in employment and finance terms. I included employers as beneficiaries of deep learning as well as students. I included the taxpayer as the student is studying partially at the taxpayer's expense and so the taxpayer has a legitimate interest in their engagement or otherwise.

      Are you advocating a return to only full fee paying courses?

      On the interest front, that would be nice, but why bother getting the credential and clogging up classes with people only interested in a grade and a piece of paper? And yes, there are such students in universities: the ones that are interested and engaged don't mind, indeed prefer, the course designs that embed and reward deep learning approaches.

      FYI, just in case you didn't actually know, staff:student ratios (FTE or adjunct) are not the only factor in providing deep learning for students.

      report
    4. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Dennis Alexander

      The last sentence Dennis inflammatory and patronising and definitely denigrating the whole discussion. Academics are very well aware of all the issues surrounding pedagogy, engagement, motivation and student deep learningbut FTE/EFTSUs do impact on the efficacy of all these things and to dismiss this as irrelevant or or a misguiding metric is also a mistake.

      report
  4. Gavriil Michas

    logged in via LinkedIn

    I have the same opinion with the author, face to face communication, so precious, especially when it’s happening from a gifted teacher, then every student has importance to the class. Just to emphasize this point, allow me to tell you a story, a short one.

    When Alexander the Great was already in the middle of his empire expansion, many books from his teacher Aristotle that was used for his education, was reproduced and spread out into the entire Hellenic known world. Alexander was worried a lot about this situation and decide to complain to his teacher saying that “…My dear teacher if you leave others to know the same knowledge you teach me, how many Alexanders are going to be created?”

    And Aristotle replied to him;

    Alexander, you shouldn’t worry for this, they might have my books to read and study, but they haven’t me to teach them.

    report
  5. John Browne

    John Browne is a Friend of The Conversation.

    Surveyor

    The "graduation" for the upcoming generation of tertiary student from MMOGs (online games) to MOOCs (online courses) will be relatively seamless. Not just a rehash of correspondence courses these but highly interactive lectures, tuts and assessments targeted at the generation that have been raised to use them. And all you need is some bandwidth.
    The advantages are many especially to those from Australia's remote and rural areas. Australian academics need to shift from their ivory towers and into the teaching methods of the 21st century.

    report
    1. evanhadkins

      logged in via Twitter

      In reply to John Browne

      The problem John is getting the staff to do the personal interaction. The casualisation of the uni work force doesn't prioritise student experience.

      So a tutor is employed two days a week. They can't be expected to work for nothing of or for 24 hrs a day.

      But then students want to work at odd hours to suit families and jobs and so on. And just have to wait for the times when the tutor is employed.

      The technology can be wonderful and needs to be much better used. It is the stuff that only people can do which is proving tricky for the people I know who are doing online study.

      report
    2. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to John Browne

      Whist this should conquer the tyranny of distance I still worry that this further contributes to the digital divide. Implicit in your response John is that all students can have access to both bandwidth, funds to pay for ISPs, adequate hardware and software and indeed even a simple thing such as a space to locate the laptop and study material (that isn't the one and only family dining table). We are all so middle class we are ignorant of the actuality of some students lived experiences. Also digital…

      Read more
  6. evanhadkins

    logged in via Twitter

    It seems pretty clear from the comments that the academic inclination is to command and control.

    report
    1. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to evanhadkins

      I would say when you use academic in this instance you are implying that academics are defending their turf? Is this not their providence? Are not the greater villains in this the corporate managerialists who run our Universities and respond to only bottom line surpluses and expanded investment portfolios at the expense of actual education?

      report
  7. Chris Booker

    Research scientist

    I think a big part of the MOOC issue hasn't been addressed in this article - which is the cost.

    University education is becoming more and more expensive for an individual, relative to income, and relative to possible future income, all over the world. Spending a few years in university to accumlate a debt that could take 20 years to pay back, when - let's face it - a 3 year uni degree isn't going to do much for your future earning potential? This is the model most young people face now. And don…

    Read more
  8. David Lamond

    Pro Vice Chancellor (Offshore Development) at Victoria University

    Stephen's article make a number of important points but one that has escaped comment to this point is in regard to the assessment of learning. A recent article in Chronicles of Higher Education (http://chronicle.com/article/Dozens-of-Plagiarism-Incidents/133697/) highlights two critical aspects - at this stage the "academic quality assurance" is being done by student "peers" and, even when the work is not being assessed for formal credit, plagiarism has become a problem. It seems to me that, as currently constituted, MOOCs are unlikely to be the next disruptive technology, at least while ever peer review is taking the place of academic quality assurance.

    report
  9. Peter Andrew Smith

    Retired

    Yes, some lecturers are boring but not all. And that is the power of MOOCs: it provides access to the most interesting lecturers to share their ideas with those interested in hearing them. I agree that this will not “threaten existing university education”. Hopefully it will, however, help what has now become an alternative view of university education based on an extended consideration of interrelated topics to survive.

    As an example of an excellent MOOC I strongly recommend:
    http://www.extension.harvard.edu/open-learning-initiative/china-history

    report
    1. Will Billingsley

      Senior research engineer, honorary lecturer

      In reply to Peter Andrew Smith

      This is where I think MOOCs are going to break up and change universities in a different way. http://wbillingsley.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/stanford-ai-class.html

      Yes MOOCs do give you access to "the most interesting lecturers" but "the most interesting lecturers" is plural! If you are taking a course on any subject, there is almost certainly more than one voice that is interesting. The MOOCs' "interesting lectures" will be chopped up and recycled (topic by topic) in a thousand courses across…

      Read more
    2. Peter Andrew Smith

      Retired

      In reply to Will Billingsley

      My hope is that the trend towards many forms of access to content/ideas (and multiple sources of content/ideas) will be supported by tutorials with high levels of class interactivity. For students and staff the excitement of tutorials will, I hope, be in gaining greater understanding of content/ideas through discussion.

      report
    3. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Peter Andrew Smith

      I hope you are correct Peter but I fear in Australia our Universities are so starved of teaching funding, there will be an inevitable impact on the existance and viability of face to face and on campus modes of study. What is a University? Is it not more than a funnel for material? I cannot speak more strongly about the value of shared academic collegiality and exposure to divergent thinking and disciplines... this happens every day on campuses all around the Country. Please let's not discount the social value of HE.

      report
  10. Phillip Ebrall

    Professor of Chiropractic at Central Queensland University

    Stephen makes some interesting predictions and observations, many of which have been addressed already. However it is my experience there is a disconnect between the decision to go 'on-line' with a course, be it a MOOC or not, and the process to actually go on-line. This is a question that has taken me some 4 to 5 years to resolve, not because I'm a slow Tasmanian, but because the institutions themselves have a high degree of doubt, which keeps changing. There is a frightening leadership vacuum and…

    Read more
  11. Andrew Chambers

    logged in via Twitter

    I hope readers arel aware there is more then 1 type of MOOC? The debate is really about distance education versus face to face education. Harvard etc have just taken the concept and run with it in their own style.

    I have done 2 MOOCs now. Both cMOOCs (Connectivist MOOCs). One of them was an exceptionally rewarding experience (MOOCMOOC - A MOOC about MOOCs). The other "quite good" (Curtis Bonk MOOC). In the past I have studied a BA, MEd and 2 other qualifications at TAFE level and post grad. Sometimes…

    Read more
    1. Carol-Anne Croker

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Andrew Smith

      Many were given the opportunity to reply to exactly these questions last year (at least HDR students). A very small number actually saw the relevance of speaking to CAPA (Council of Australian Postgraduate Organisations) as they remain blissfully unaware of the potential to influence higher education policies and directions. Might I recommend that academics read the valuable report Tammi Jonas and I produced for DIISRTE. It suggests room for much more research into exactly the nature of HE in Australia today. It also can be positioned with respect to broader initiatives such as the Worforce Strategy, Research and Training debates and even equity and access policies.
      http://www.innovation.gov.au/Research/ResearchWorkforceIssues/Documents/TheResearchEducationExperience.pdf

      report
  12. Ross Guest

    Professor of Economics and National Senior Teaching Fellow

    I partially agree with Stephen King in this piece - I agree with his fundamental point that the traditional 2 hour lecture + 1 hour tute model will become defunct. Students will be able to get the lecture online. What they want is a value-adding face-to-face experience - by a SKILLED teacher.
    I also agree with his point at the end about incentives biased toward research rather than curriculum and pedagogic development. The only way to change this is to measure and (widely) report teaching performance more effectively. Students, universities and employers will only pay for what they can value.

    report