Electronic Business: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (4-Volumes) P34

The Business of Online Education ditional classroom. Distance learning is coming on fast.” In 2001, Arthur Levine, president of Columbia University’s Teachers College, echoed this prediction. While discussing online education, /HYLQHDVNHG:DVKEXUQ 3UHVVS³,I we can do all that…why do we need the physical plant called the college?” While this predicted revolution has not com-pletely materialized, there is ample evidence that RQOLQHHGXFDWLRQLVJURZLQJVLJQL¿FDQWO\,QD study of 274 institutions, 71% responded that they offer some fully online courses and 80% offered hybrid courses that combine in-class with virtual instruction (Arabasz, Pirani, & Fawcett, 2003). In addition, the success of online universities, such as the University of Phoenix and Capella University, attest to the interest in online learning. Undergraduate business programs and MBA degrees, in particular, have seen a dramatic rise in online classes. According to a 2003 study, 51% of public universities offer an online business degree program (Golden, 2006). The rapid movement to online business degree programs can be attributed to many factors including corporate demand, opportunities for a greater market share, and the potential threat posed by private online business degree programs (Folkers, 2005). Institutions of higher education are not the only source of online education. Vocational schools, .VFKRROVFHUWL¿FDWLRQSURJUDPVHJUHDO HVWDWHOLFHQVLQJSURMHFWPDQDJHPHQWFHUWL¿FDWHV special purpose courses (e.g., drivers permit courses) and corporate training have developed VLJQL¿FDQWRQOLQHSUHVHQFH,QDQ,`&,QGLDVWXG\ corporate e-learning is predicted to grow to $21 billion by 2008 (Financial Times, 2005). The rise of online education poses opportu-nities and challenges for education providers. In this chapter, we review these opportunities and challenges, discuss various considerations for developing online programs, and describe strategies for competing in the online educational marketplace. BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF ONLINE EDUCATION Numerous articles and entire journals are devoted to online education. Trade journals and academic research commonly discuss the effectiveness, VWUDWHJLHVIRUVXFFHVVEHQH¿WVDQGZHDNQHVVHV of online education. Inexperience with digital technology, the novelty of teaching outside the traditional classroom, the reluctance of teachers to support online education, the rise of educational competition, and the shift to teaching working students motivate many of these studies and articles. $WOHDVWVRPHRIWKHEHQH¿WVDVVRFLDWHGZLWK RQOLQHHGXFDWLRQDUHVLPLODUWRWKHEHQH¿WVRI distance education. Distance education began as early as 1840 when Sir Isaac Pitman developed correspondence courses (Blake, Whitney, & Blackwell, 2005). These courses delivered learn-ing materials through the mail to those who did not have the means or time to travel to traditional schools. As technology changed, the methods for delivering correspondence courses evolved. ,QVWUXFWLRQDO¿OPVZHUH¿UVWXVHGLQDIHZ organizations experimented with radio-based delivery in the 1930s; and some form of televi-sion-based education has existed since the 1940s. As satellite, cable, and other forms of networks began to appear in the 1970s through 1990s, edu-cational institutions experimented with technol-ogy such as video conferencing and instructional CDs (Williams, Nicholas, & Gunter, 2005). It is only natural that the Internet became a source for distance education in the 1990s. Similar to Pitman’s original motivation, busi-nesses and government, today, are interested in HI¿FLHQWO\ GHOLYHULQJ HGXFDWLRQ WR OHDUQHUV LQ locations other than a centralized location. High levels of skill and knowledge are required to perform knowledge work and, by some estimates, 50% of knowledge and skills become outdated in 3 to 5 years (Blake, et al., 2005). Yet, the cost of 264 The Business of Online Education travel and infrastructure to deliver this education is a disincentive. Cadence Design System, the 7KHVDPHDUWLFOHVLGHQWLI\VHYHUDOGLI¿FXOWLHV associated with online learning, including: world’s largest supplier of electronic design au-tomation technologies and engineering services, reports savings of $260,000 per training session (excluding airfare) through the use of Web-based training of its sales staff (Stroud, 2005). Ford SURYLGHVDVLPLODUMXVWL¿FDWLRQIRULWV:HEEDVHG training program (Pollitt, 2005). A 2005 Bersin and Associates survey of US organizations found that 28% of training hours were delivered online (Business Wire, 2006). Articles related to online learning cite many EHQH¿WVLQFOXGLQJVHH%HUQDUG%ODNHHWDO 2005; Bryant, Kahle, & Schafer, 2005; Demirdjian, 2002; Pollitt, 2005; Stroud, 2005): • High participant attrition rates; students must be self-motivated • 7KHQHHGWRDFFHVVDSSURSULDWHO\FRQ¿JXUHG computer systems • The challenge of technology phobia by some learners and teachers • The need for faculty training • High development costs; the development of e-learning courses is labor intensive • The increased opportunity for dishonesty by learners because of the inability to verify who is doing the work • An effective way to deliver education that improves a learner’s knowledge and skills • A cost-effective way to reach learners that are geographically dispersed • Supports asynchronous learning where learners participate at times that are con-venient for them • Supports self-paced learning • Supports adaptable learning materials that can be updated immediately in response to new knowledge and events • Supports modularity so that learners can design a learning experience that is custom-ized to their individual needs • Allows learners to participate in the comfort RIWKHLUKRPHRURI¿FH • The available tools and the possibility of ano-nymity support interactions among learners and between learners and the instructor. • Supports immediate feedback through au-tomated grading of a learner’s answers • Supports the development of e-portfolios (electronic documents of the students work); students can use the portfolios as part of a job application package. Instructors can use the e-portfolio as part of assessment Perhaps the most important question related to RQOLQHOHDUQLQJLV³,VRQOLQHOHDUQLQJHIIHFWLYH"´ Although there have been positive (Grandzol, 2004) and negative results (Orr & Bantow, 2005), the research to date mostly shows that online education is no more or less effective than tradi-tional classroom education (Bryant et al., 2005). Ultimately, the success of an online program will depend upon how well it is designed in relation to the needs of the learner, and how well it is positioned in relation to online and traditional educational competitors. THE DIMENSIONS OF AN ONLINE LEARNING CURRICULUM The design of an online educational program is a complex endeavor. In order to organize research relevant to distance education, Bryant et al., (2005) highlight four main components: The educational organization, teacher, learner, and communication medium. While these dimensions are important for pedagogical decisions, other dimensions are relevant in light of the online learning marketplace. In the following paragraphs, we describe issues and decisions related to the relationship between 265 The Business of Online Education the educational organizations, teachers, learners, communication methods, curriculum, feedback, media designers, administrative support system, and marketing. Table 1 summarizes some of the key decisions by highlighting the relationship among the various dimensions. The educational organization is the unit that brings together the teachers, learners, and the cur-riculum. From a business standpoint, this is the unit that strives to achieve success in the educational marketplace. Educational organizations include universities, 2-year schools, K-12 schools, as well as specialized trainers. This organization prob-ably, but not necessarily, owns the curriculum that will be delivered. The educational organization PDNHVWKHGHFLVLRQVWKDWLQÀXHQFHWKHVXFFHVVRI the dimensions in Table 1. In most traditional educational settings, the OHDUQHUVDQGWKHWHDFKHUV³EHORQJWR´WKHHGXFD-tional organization. Teachers work full-time or part-time for the organization, and students are admitted to the school. However, this situation is not required. An educational organization may contract with another organization to deliver classes to that organization. For example, ESI International delivers online project management training for many corporations. In a university or K-12 environment, articulation agreements can be reached that will allow students from one school to take online courses from another organiza-tion. In the traditional environment, articulation agreements are commonly reached with nearby institutions because students must be physically present to take the course, but in the online world, relationships can be established between organi-zations that share other common characteristics; physical proximity is less of an issue. Similarly, physical proximity is not necessar-ily a requirement for teachers. Online education allows educational organizations to employ quali-¿HGWHDFKHUVIURPDQ\ORFDWLRQWKDWKDV,QWHUQHW access. At the extreme, some online courses do QRWQHHG³UHDOWLPH´LQVWUXFWRUVDWDOO6WXGHQWV can access instructional materials, take exams, and receive feedback through intelligent educa-tional software. The relationship between the teacher, learner, curriculum, communication method, and media designers must be carefully considered. Within WKHERXQGDULHVGH¿QHGE\WKHFRXUVHREMHFWLYHV professors at traditional universities design the course contents, determine how the contents will be communicated, and determine how the learners will be assessed. Professors are not only teachers, but scholars who develop and update course material based upon their own expertise. Materials, such as textbooks, are one commu-nication method used in the course. Simulating this situation in online teaching requires that the professor have control over the online curriculum and communication methods. Unfortunately, several factors in online edu-cation work against the traditional model. First, many professors do not possess the technical abil-ity to develop quality online material. Expertise is required to create Web sites, develop dynamic instructional media (e.g., an animated PowerPoint or Flash application), and create online assessment material. Second, a consistent and professional user interface is frequently used as a surrogate for the connection students feel to the physical university campus. That is, online educational organizations like a consistent look to all their educational offerings. For these reasons, special-ized media designers are employed to create online material. These media designers may be in-house or outsourced. Rather than developing separate educational media for each professor, economies of scale suggest that the same media be used for all sections of a course. The professor therefore can lose some control over the content, delivery, and assessment of the course. The standardization of course content and delivery is less likely an issue in K-12 education, corporate training, and vocational education. Ideally, standardization in these cases leads to consistent quality independent of the instructor. 266 The Business of Online Education Table 1. The dimensions and issues to consider by an e-learning provider 267 The Business of Online Education Table 1. continued 268 ... - tailieumienphi.vn