An opening briefing for ALT's policy board, held at Intellect, London.

1. Martin Oliver
President, Association for Learning Technology
As briefed by
John Slater
Acting Director of Development, Association for Learning Technology
OPENING COMMENTS
ALT POLICY BOARD
29TH APRIL, 2013

2. WHERE HAVE WE BEEN?

3. • Education is on the brink of being transformed through
technology; however, it has been on that brink for some
decades now.
(Laurillard, 2008)

4. • E-learning exploits interactive technologies and communication
systems to improve the learning experience. It has the potential
to transform the way we teach and learn across the board. It
can raise standards, and widen participation […] It cannot
replace teachers and lecturers, but […] it can enhance the
quality and reach of their teaching, and reduce the time spent
on administration. It can enable every learner to achieve his or
her potential, and help to build an educational workforce
empowered to change. It makes possible a truly ambitious
education system for a future learning society.
(DfES, 2003)

5. • Games and game play tend to be treated as “out there,” beyond
the school gate, in some better, more authentic, more
democratic, more meaningful place, other than the current and
failing educational regime. By bringing games into educational
practice and theory, the hope is, it often seems, that the
diseased, geriatric body of education can be treated through the
rejuvenating, botox-like effect of educational game play.
(Pelletier, 2009: 84)

6. • The UK is seen as world class, and often world leading, in
networking, content and digital libraries, access management,
and many areas of e-learning. Until recently the UK was world
class in providing e-infrastructure for research and in e-science.
We lag behind in generating and making available high quality
modern learning and teaching resources. It is essential that the
UK does not lose its lead, and continues to play a full and
leading role internationally in the ICT world.
(Cooke, 2008)

7. What has contributed to past success?
• Perceived quality (QAA, regulation, etc.)
• English language
• Pedagogy and Technology used
• Historical influence (power, colonies, legacy of status)
• Tourist destination
• Research profile

8. What was the way forward?
• A new approach to virtual education based on a corpus of open
learning content
• Revitalised investment into e-infrastructures
• Development of institutional information strategies
(Cooke, 2008)
How much of this happened? Did it change anything?

9. WHERE ARE WE NOW?

10. • As the Government focuses on growth there are few sectors of our
economy with the capacity to grow and generate export earnings as
great as higher education. Every overseas student on average pays
fees of about £10,000 a year and spends almost as much whilst they
are here. That means 400,000 overseas students bring in almost £8
billion a year.
• Overseas students travelling to the UK to study is just one way we can
grow. Last year 400,000 overseas students came to the UK to study.
But for the first time this was exceeded by the record 500,000 people
who benefitted from British higher education whilst living abroad.
(Willetts, 2012)

11. • The vast majority of ODL offered by HE institutions is at postgraduate level
• It was not easy to find ODL courses through routine searches. This problem
was compounded by a lack of clarity in the terminology used by institutions
to describe their ODL programmes. […] there is no reliable or accurate
consolidated source of information about ODL courses offered in the UK that
is readily available to students, or other parties, interested in finding ODL
programmes, and much of the information on ODL currently remains „hidden‟
in labyrinthine institutional websites.
• Technology was described as „vital but not central‟
• Recognition of the requirement for low student-tutor ratios and regular
feedback and assessment points to ensure that students are engaged and
retained
(White et al, 2010)

12. • No significant differences? (Reeves, 2005)
• The meta-analysis found that, on average, students in online
learning conditions performed modestly better than those
receiving face-to-face instruction. […] Analysts noted that these
blended conditions often included additional learning time and
instructional elements not received by students in control
conditions. This finding suggests that the positive effects
associated with blended learning should not be attributed to the
media, per se.
(US Department of Education, 2010)

13. • A consensus that in order to expand strategically the provision of high
quality ODL courses, a robust institutional infrastructure for
developing, delivering and maintaining courses is essential. A key
consideration is the extent to which institutions provide central support
to facilitate such developments. In many cases, ODL offerings have
evolved from a „cottage industry‟ style approach with developments
led wholly at departmental level. While this approach was seen to
have many benefits, not least ensuring academic quality and
promoting innovation, it was also seen as a challenge and a potential
barrier to expanding provision.
(White et al, 2010)

14. We knew this from the UKeU:
• One of the biggest challenges large-scale e-learning initiatives
face is how to ensure overall coherent coordination of the
project, while still maintaining a balance and respect for the
individualism, idiosyncrasy, creativity and unsystematic working
processes of the academics involved.
(Conole et al, 2006)

15. Perceived threats:
• Cheap private providers, from US and elsewhere
• Specialist distance learning providers, e.g. Phoenix
• Growth of English language courses across Europe
• Cost

16. • Enrollments at the University of Phoenix and in the for-profit
sector over all have been declining in the last two years, partly
because of growing competition from other online providers,
including nonprofit and public universities, and a steady drumroll
of negative publicity about the sector‟s recruiting abuses, low
graduation rates and high default rates ... including many
charges that the schools enrolled students who had almost no
chance of succeeding, to get their federal student aid.
(Lewin, 2012)

17. WHAT PROBLEMS LIE AHEAD?

18. • Here in the US this week I have been struck by the surge of
activity in distance learning. Professor Agarwal President of
Edx, a not for profit set up jointly by Harvard and MIT, told me of
his ambition to getting a billion students across the world
studying online. Here on the West Coast social enterprises like
Coursera spun off from Stanford are similarly ambitious. We
may be at a tipping point in distance learning as technology
offers more efficient and more effective ways of learning than
ever before. British higher education must not be left behind.
(Willetts, 2012)

19. • Whether or not these rates matter depends largely on the perceived
purpose of the MOOCs in the first place. If the aim is to give the
opportunity of access to free and high-quality courses from elite
universities and professors, then high dropout rates may not be a
primary concern (Gee, 2012). However, it is widely agreed that it
would be useful to improve the retention rates of MOOCs by finding
out why and at what stage students drop out of courses.
(Yuan & Powell, 2013)
• If all we want is self-directed learning, why not leave it to wikipedia?
• Can we extend meaningful participation beyond the 1:25 ratio?

20. • The flexible student is not a spontaneous occurrence. Students
(including full-time students) have been engineered to become
more „flexible‟ as a result of policies, which have put more
financial pressures on them to work in particular ways. It has
also the created conditions under which the only way for many
adults to access higher education is via „flexible‟ modes of
delivery. In this sense, students are forced to become „flexible‟
and the flexibility to which they are supposed to conform is a
particular pre-determined set of learning practices or process.
(Clegg & Steel, 2002)

21. • Those with social advantage find it easier to take advantage of
new opportunities; advantage can be perpetuated, not eroded,
by introducing new forms of learning and teaching.
(Holley & Oliver, 2010)

22. • “There is a significant question for higher education institutions to
address: are online teaching innovations, such as MOOCs, heralding
a change in the business landscape that poses a threat to their
existing models of provision of degree courses?”
(Yuan & Powell, 2013)
Will prestige providers‟ MOOCs squeeze out lower prestige fee-charging
institutions?
…if institutions such as Antioch University give degrees for completing
them…?
• “Commercial organisations see MOOCs as a way to enter the HE
market by providing a MOOC platform and developing partnerships
with existing institutions and to explore new delivery models in HE.”
(Yuan & Powell, 2013)

23. • The kind of issues raised in this paper in terms of the UKeU project
(technical, organizational and pedagogical) are crucial in any e-
learning project, which by its very nature, and not only in the particular
form it took in the UKeU as a public/private partnership, brings
together people from different backgrounds and from different sectors
into teams.
• “some of the people I was dealing with within UKEU had no
conception of what we were talking about. As far as they were
concerned these were clients. This was just another client and this
was washing machines that were being sold. I have had people
banging my table saying „I want you to do this‟ and I‟d say „No, and
don‟t talk to me like that. I ain‟t doing that because it is wrong‟.”
(Conole et al, 2006)

24. • The number of Indian students studying at UK universities fell by 24 per cent
last year, as the government‟s tightening of the student visa system took
effect […] Jo Beall, British Council director of education and society, said the
India and Pakistan falls were “very alarming indeed”.
(Times Higher, Jan 2013)
• The government‟s own impact assessment for its early reforms to student
visas estimated the effect on net migration as a reduction of 56,000 by 2015
(UKBA 2011), less than a proportionate contribution to hitting the target. But
it has made further reforms since then, and has indicated that it will continue
to make further adjustments, with the intention of „bearing down‟ further on
numbers, throughout the current parliament.
(Cavanagh & Glennie, 2012)
• With news stories like London Met, and competition from Australia, Malaysia
etc, how will the UK fare?

25. • Vietnam and Malaysia have the top highest growth rates for eLearning
products in the world at 44.3% and 39.4%, respectively. Thailand, the
Philippines, China, and India are also in the top ten countries with the
highest growth rates on the planet.
• There are three major catalysts in Asia. Two catalysts — the massive content
digitization efforts across the school systems in every country in the region
and the large-scale deployments of tablets in the academic segments —
essentially create a new delivery platform for suppliers.
• The third catalyst is the explosive growth of online higher education
enrollments. Combined, these catalysts have created a massive demand for
packaged content.
(Adkins, 2012)

26. SUMMARY
• A period of profound change, with technology set to transform education …
…again.
• “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”;
(Santayana, 1905)
• Preoccupation with MOOCs, standing for wider issues
• Globalisation
• International markets
• Education (not just learning by the few) at scale
• Higher Education‟s social contract
• Relationships between public and private institutions

27. REFERENCES
• Adkins, S. (2012) The Asia Market for Self-paced eLearning Products and Services: 2011-2016 Forecast and
Analysis. Ambient insight regional report. http://www.ambientinsight.com/Resources/Documents/AmbientInsight-
2011-2016-Asia-SelfPaced-eLearning-Market-Abstract.pdf
• Cavanagh, M. & Glennie, A. (2012) International Students and Net Migration in the UK. London: Institute for Public
Policy Research. http://www.ippr.org/images/media/files/publication/2012/04/international-students-net-
migration_Apr2012_8997.pdf
• Clegg, S. & Steel, J. (2002) Flexibility as myth? New technologies and post-Fordism in Higher Education.
Proceedings of Networked Learning, 2002.
http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2002/proceedings/symp/08.htm
• Conole, G., Carusi, A., de Laat, M., Wilcox, P. & Darby, J. (2006) Managing differences in stakeholder relationships
and organizational cultures in e-learning development: lessons from the UK eUniversity experience. Studies in
Continuing Education, 28:2, 135-150.
• Cooke, R. (2008) On-line Innovation in Higher Education.
http://www.dius.gov.uk/policy/documents/online_innovation_in_he_131008.pdf
• DfES - Department for Education and Skills (2003) Towards a Unified e-Learning Strategy. DfES: Bristol.
http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/towards%20a%20unified%20e-
learning%20strategy.pdf
• Holley, D. & Oliver, M. (2010) Student engagement and blended learning: portraits of risk. Computers & Education
54, 693-700.
• Lewin, T. (October 17, 2012). "University of Phoenix to Shutter 115 Locations". The New York Times.

28. REFERENCES
• Laurillard, D. (2008) Digital technologies and their role in achieving our ambitions for education, A professorial
lecture, Institute of Education, London. Republished by the Association for Learning Technologies, Oxford.
http://ioe.academia.edu/DianaLaurillard/Papers/452697/Digital_technologies_and_their_role_in_achieving_our_ambi
tions_for_education
• Pelletier, C. (2009). Games and Learning: what's the connection, International Journal of Learning and Media 1(1),
83-101. http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/ijlm.2009.0006
• Reeves, T. C. (2005). No significant differences revisited: A historical perspective on the research informing
contemporary online learning. In G. Kearsley (Ed.), Online learning: Personal reflections on the transformation of
education (pp. 299-308). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
• US Department of Education (2010) Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis
and Review of Online Learning Studies. Washington DC: US Department of Education.
http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
• White, D., Warren, N., Faughan, S. & Manton, M. (2010) Study of UK Online Learning: Final Report. Oxford:
Technology-Assisted Lifelong Learning. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/projects/UKOnlineLearningStudy-
FinalReport-Mar10-FINAL-FORPUB.pdf
• Willetts, D. (2012) Keynote Speech on international higher education, Goldman Sachs-Stanford University Global
Education Conference. http://rnn.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/Press-Releases/David-Willetts-s-keynote-speech-on-
international-higher-education-67baa.aspx
• Yuan, L. & Powell, S. (2013) MOOCs and Open Education: Implications for Higher Education. A White Paper. JISC
CETIS, http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MOOCs-and-Open-Education.pdf