Facilitating Student Success During an Economic and Technological Revolution

Challenges, opportunities, and a few ideas for your

consideration

August 6, 2012Selected slide materials from:George Mehaffy, AASCU, and

Howard Charney, CISCO systems

The Rapidly Changing Higher Education Environment

Economics– State funding support decreasing– Cost per credit hour increasing– Private sector involvement increasing

Technology and the Information Revolution– Amounts of information– Methods of information development– Methods of information dissemination

Accountability and assessment– Student learning outcomes

Smaller state appropriations

SE enrollment has increased

2006 2007 2008 2009 201010,000

10,200

10,400

10,600

10,800

11,000

11,200

Student headcount, Fall Semesters

SE State $/student declined

2001 20104,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Total state appropriation

$/studentheadcount

Price to Public Has Increased

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

Net tuition/FTE State Appropriations/FTE E&R/FTE CPI Index

Price/Cost gap

Source: Delta Cost Project IPEDS database, 1987-2008, 22-year matched set. Notes: Percent change since 1988 based on unadjusted dollar amounts. From the Delta project. Courtesy Jane Wellman

Spending v.State ap-prop

College cost - risen faster than CPI

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

Public Four-YearPrivate Four-YearPublic Two-YearMedian Family IncomeCPI-UPrescription DrugsHousehold EnergyNew Vehicle

Cum

ulati

ve g

row

th s

ince

198

8

Unsustainable student debt

• Student loan debt now greater than credit card debt…

• More than $1 trillion this year…

• Average debt for those with loans is now $ 24,000.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/education/12college.html?_r=2

Private sector involvement

http://chronicle.com/article/A-Boom-Time-for-Education/131229/

Private sectors models that challenge status quo

1. The University of Phoenix - 450,000+ students.• Faculty: no tenure, Lower salaries, Lower

qualifications, No research

2. DIYU (Do It Yourself University)

3. Peer to Peer University - http://p2pu.org/en/

4. Udacity

5. EdX - http://www.edxonline.org/

6. Coursera - https://www.coursera.org/

7. Straighter line

8. Academic Partnerships – Randy Best and Associates

9. Open Learning Initiative – Carnegie Mellon University

10.Khan Academy

11.iTunes University

12.TED-ED (www.ted.com)

Rapid expansion in amount of information

More data was created during any 48 hour period last year then by all of humanity over the past 30,000 years.

By 2020, it will be every hour.

Howard Charney, Senior VP Cisco Systems, coinventor of ethernet, July 2012

Rapid expansion in data volume

If you get a person a fish….

The modern information analogy: If you give students current facts,

they know for a day If you teach students how to find,

create and manage knowledge, they know for a lifetime

Three primary information technology drivers:

Mobility of devices

Cloud storage

Video capabilities

Howard Charney, Senior VP Cisco Systems, 2012

Info is accessed by mobile devices

Source: The Economist

Exponential increase in easy & cheap data storage

1980 – 1 Gigabyte cost $200,000

2011 – 1 Terabyte (1024 GB) cost $100

Howard Charney, Senior VP Cisco Systems, 2012

Digital cameras: a lesson in technology and the information revolution

23 seconds to display the first digital photographs

Steve Sasson – inventor of the digital camera

1972 – BS; 1973 - MS; EE; Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

1975 – @ Eastman Kodak Company, assigned to build an electronic camera

1978 – granted patent for digital camera

2001 – first public disclosure of project

Eastman Kodak company

1975 – developed the digital camera

1976 – 90% market share of photographic film sales in the US

2001 – first public disclosure of digital photography project

2012 – filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy

Innovative disruptionDisruption comes from cheaper and simpler technologies that are initially of lower quality. Over time, the simpler and cheaper technology improves to a point that it displaces the incumbent.

Kodak is an example of a disrupted company.

Christiansen argues that technology, and especially the on-line course, is the disruption enabler in higher education.

Implications for faculty at Southeast

1. Facilitator of student learning vs lecturer

2. Different course delivery models

3. Changes in class configurations

4. Increased collaboration and partnership

5. Increased flexibility in course offerings

6. Increased need for measured student learning and

accountability

Changes in Course Models Cottage industry model – traditional model: everyone

designs his or her own course in isolation

Courses offered collaboratively

Private/public partnership model – universities partner with

private sector entities to jointly offer programming.

Purchased courses?– Straighter Line: $99 per course

student

Course Redesign (“Flipped courses”)

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) – OLI, EdX, etc

Blended courses

Statewide collaboration initiativea new model for program delivery

Disciplines and Courses Teaching institution Partners Enrollment by institution

Enrollment total

Economics

Comparative economics Southeast Missouri State University (SE) 1. University of Central Missouri (UCM) 2. Northwest Missouri State University (NW) 3. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

UCM - 10 NW - 4 SE - 10

24

Money, Credit and Banking

Northwest Missouri State University (NW)

1. University of Central Missouri (UCM) 2. Northwest Missouri State University (NW) 3. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

UCM – 15 NW – 29 SE – 9

53

Econometrics University of Central Missouri (UCM)

1. University of Central Missouri (UCM) 2. Northwest Missouri State University (NW) 3. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

UCM – 14 NW – 2 SE – 1

17

Environmental Science

Environmental Hydrology Lincoln University (LU) 1. Lincoln University (LU) 2. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

LU – 10 SE – 14

24

Foreign languages

Methods for Foreign Language Teachers

University of Central Missouri (UCM)

1. University of Central Missouri (UCM) 2. Missouri Western State University (MW) 3. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

UCM – 4 MW – 2 SE – 1

7

Survey of French Literature II

University of Central Missouri (UCM)

1. University of Central Missouri (UCM) 2. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

UCM – 9 SE – 3

12

20th Century German Literature

Missouri State University (MSU)

1. University of Central Missouri (UCM) 2. Missouri State University (MSU) 3. Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

UCM – 5 MSU – 13 SE - 1

19

Physics

Optics Southeast Missouri State University (SE)

1. Southeast Missouri State University (SE) 2. Missouri State University (MSU) 3. University of Missouri at St. Louis (UMSL)

SE – 9 MSU – 10 UMSL – 12

31

Totals 8 courses 5 universities offering courses 7 partnering universities 187

Collaborationa new model for program delivery

Expert faculty send courses to partnering institutions

Students pay tuition at home institution

Students register at home institution

Students receive credit at home institution

Easy access to sending university instructional technology

Grades are recorded by faculty at home institutions

Faculty committees determine academic details

Increase efficiencyAverage class size

University goal: 26 by 2014

AY10 AY11 AY12

Series1 21.2 22.9 24.0

20.021.022.023.024.025.026.027.028.0

ave.

clas

s siz

e

SE Average Section Sizetrend analysis

Target SCHR - 2014(Credit Hours x Students)/Faculty FTE

College SCH

Education 307

Business 345

Health & Human Services 283

Liberal Arts 314

Science & Math 322

Polytechnic Studies 288

University 312

SCH generation per faculty FTE

University goal: 312 by 2014

AY10 AY11 AY12

Series1 82% 87% 90%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

% o

f SCH

R Go

al

SE SCHR Targettrend analysis

Winter intersessionA new model for program delivery

2011 2012

Courses 11 28

Students 262 665

Faculty 9 21

Faculty pay, average $5416 $7173

“Tuition” - salaries $122,361 $291,617

Characteristics:• One 3 credit course between fall and spring

semesters• 100% online• Managed course selection

Outcomes:• Accelerated student progress toward graduation• High degree of faculty and student satisfaction• No impact on subsequent spring enrollment• Revenue to offset appropriation declines• Increased faculty salary

Summer SessionA new emphasis

Expanded programming and offerings

72% online for 2012 Faculty salary based on enrollment No Pell funding 3 year degree plans?

Student learning outcomesassessment and accountability

Spring 2012 – written for every course

Fall 2012 – written and measured for every course

Faculty training provided this semester

2012 Financial Developments:

$750,000 addl. equipment allocation to

academics (+$250,000 college cost share)

Increased lab fee for specified courses

Increased professional development funds for

faculty

2% faculty raise (1.75%+.25%)

RNTT merit raise from $1200 to $2000

$80+ million in campus physical plant

improvements

~45 new faculty hires

Summary:

We are in a time of exciting,

revolutionary change in higher

education.

Southeast is proactively engaged in

these changes.

Faculty play a key leadership role

bringing these changes to the university

and into the classroom