Major Providers: Online Education Information

Thoughts, corrections, critique? kvalvik@shadowboxdesign.com

An overview of online learning resources
A short time ago I began a literature review of sorts looking into recent findings on the efficacy of online learning.  The idea was to try and canvas as many primary sources as possible and to identify those that seemed to offer consistently strong insights, which serve as a valuable compass for the direction of technology in education broadly and online learning in higher ed specifically. The paper I am finishing reflecting that labor is rather unwieldy at this point.
In addition to the hundreds of referred journal articles I came across, there was, of course, a raft of terrific online materials, much of which was contributed by a handful of organization hubs.
Below I share seven of these primary sites, preceded by two studies. While this list is by no means comprehensive, it does reflect some of the leading indicators out there and may help those who are trying to remain abreast of the field at the level of student, instructor, department, and institution.
Two meta-studies: The starting place
First I will share the results from two meta-studies that seem to be as authoritative and comprehensive as anything I have found.
These include a study by the Dept of Education, 2009 and another from JOLT, (The Journal of Online Learning) 2010. These two impressive studies start the discussion by clarifying the proven significant value of online teaching and learning. Since both studies systematically cover the past 20 years of research in a methodical fashion, they are as close to definitive as one is likely to come.



ed gov.png

Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies
http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2009.

A systematic search of literature on online learning. More than 1000 empirical studies were viewed. While this was directed at informing K-12, the studies covered higher ed almost without exception. The study indicates that the greatest benefits come from blended instruction and guided reflection models.

 

jolt.png

Twenty Years of Research on the Academic Performance Differences Between Traditional and Distance Learning: Summative Meta-Analysis and Trend Examination.

http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/shachar_0610.htm
This journal is under the aegis of MERLOT. (introduced below) Merlot, http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm , is a research cooperative including a large number of participating schools.  Merlot is devoted to organizing research, materials, and strategies of online learning models for higher education concerns. As a meta-study it pays most attention to stats speak.  Yet draws some very clear claims about the value of online ed. The sections below reflect the tenor and substance of the document.
Overall thought summary
Overall, the results of the meta-analyses, based on 125 qualifying studies and using learning outcome data from over 20,800 participating students, demonstrates a sound and statistically significant positive ‘d+’ statistic of .257, p<.01 calculated conservatively by random methods for the study period, indicating that distance education not only is comparable to traditional instruction, but also, subject to our criteria, can outperform traditional instruction.
…in the concluding two paragraphs,
The findings of this study reemphasize prior results and extend it for a period of twenty years. It is clear that the experimental probability of attaining higher learning outcomes is greater in the online environment than in the face-to-face environment. This probability is increasing over time. The future should call for different treatment of online learning by policy makers and regulatory agencies – on one hand, and future research to examine DE learning by: academic subject, asynchronous / synchronous / blended methods etc. – on the other.
The paradigm of the superiority of the FTF modality over its distance learning alternative has been successfully negated. The distance learning approach is becoming the “normal science” (Kuhn, 1962). Yet, this is not fully comprehended by the various decision making institutions where the gate-keeping positions represent, by and large, the past paradigm. Therefore, distance learning is still treated as the anomaly (“step child”) instead of as the emerging standard of quality in higher education. We expect that as a new generation of leaders in higher education emerges, the policy making orientation and regulatory models will change to reflect the new paradigm.
The measures that they endorse address comparing F2F vs. DE in four areas:

 


merlot banner.png


MERLOT
(Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching) site
http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm
The MERLOT site itself is a rather Web 1.0 location, but has an impressive archive of partially reviewed open-source learning materials. Their membership is dominated by instructors and they are aimed at that group rather than institutions.
Their materials are available through a creative commons license. Their 27,000 odd resources are organized by field and they provide an advanced search tool to fish for specific tools. They also have the previously shared JOLT materials, which are dedicated to higher ed research, although it is a pay-to-play journal so one must subscribe or buy access to articles.
The site is only the tip of the iceberg as Merlot has a dedicated community of educator/instructional designers of almost 100,000 members who are notably active and many participate in conferences hosted with the Sloan C group. Knowing tis site and remaining apprised of this community is one way to keep one’s fingers on the pulse of the state of the field.


sloanC.png


Sloan Consortium
http://sloanconsortium.org/
Sloan-C is a “leadership” organization that is devoted to integrating online methods into higher ed. They are aimed at informing institutions at the enterprise level, both academic “for” and “not for” profit ventures. It is not as faculty-centric as Merlot although they share conference space and seem to operate as sister organizations. Their main emphasis centers on their “effective practices”. They are a leading group for understanding the administrative perspective of technology in education.
They have a raft of good studies that are worth reference. One of which is a yearly funded publication on the state of online learning in the U.S.  Note the two linked below.

Restricted to distance ed only or those courses with over 80% of content delivered online. Good number resource and super graphs.

 

educause.png


Educause
http://www.educause.edu/
Educause is a non-profit that is devoted to advancing higher education using information technology. In addition to the Horizon Reports, to be described later, they also manage the .EDU domain for the Department of Commerce. They are aimed primarily at the institution level and their membership is campus level. In other words participating members are colleges more than individuals. They collect “core data” from these participating institutions and crunch that significant amount of data and then share that with their members, and share summary stats with the public at large.   
Because their information is as strong and valuable as any in the field there are a collection of examples below. They generate yearly summaries, The Horizon Report, describing where educational information technology is now and what the “six key trends” that will be of greatest import in the coming years. The work is arguably the best source of summative/predictive information generated by leaders in the field.
Below are several exemplary documents. These reports try to “identify and describe emerging technologies likely to have a large impact on teaching and learning.” These reports do more than cover the obvious, further they add links and background data on each of the technologies mentioned and even share how they imagine these will enter into actual classes…

These reports may serve as a centerpiece of one’s academic compass in regards to educational technologies. However, they can tend to diverge into areas that seem off the radar to be different each year.

This article uses a model that implies that online learning companies both providers and schools are the dilemma that is the cause for disruption, and will serve as the problem and solution, which is the center of “disruptive theory.”

This is a very strong topic and shifting model that should be included in our thinking.

elearnMag.png 

eLearn Magazine

http://www.elearnmag.org/index.cfm
Journal aimed at tech savvy instructors and educational technologists. Aimed at higher ed and a corporate-training target it has a K12 feel as many of the articles are more didactic than objective. Still an important resource as one notes their primary nav buttons above:

It is a rich, if not slightly dated, starting place.
This series below represents meaning-making from an instructor’s POV.  They organize according to the three listed categories. While this is entry-level stuff, the comments below show how much organizing this field into logical categories and whittling down the best into discrete lists is a needed task. AS a rapid overview of tools available this is a terrific place to begin. It is worth a quick click tour. These particular references seem to be aimed at the level of the tech-support staff. But it is worth knowing what is seen as useful, and who these vendors are.

  1. Authoring and course development E Learn article 01
    1. http://www.rapidintake.com/proform/
    2. http://www.articulate.com/products/studio.php/
    3. http://www.ispringsolutions.com/
    4. Adobe elearning suite
  1. Games and interactives E Learn article 02
    1. http://www.raptivity.com/
    2. http://www.sealund.com/seriousgames.php
    3. http://www.learningware.com/quizpoint.html
    4. http://www.thinkingworlds.com/
    5. http://www.quicklessons.com/
    6. http://c3softworks.com/products/
    7. http://www.learningware.com/allplayweb.html
    1. http://www.c3softworks.com/products/online/ping/index.html
    1. http://www.eactivity.net/eActivityNet/product.html
    2. http://www.flypaper.com/product/view-samples
  1. Web conference and LMS E Learn article 03
    1. They list all the usual suspects in web-conferencing
    2. For the LMS section they do NOT list BB nor WebCT, nor D2L
    3. They do list:




WCET (Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications)
http://wcet.wiche.edu/
WCET is self-described “action-based community of practice” that has members who are industry and academic institutions. They are about policy and the macro side of Ed Tech. They are a policy group who do not offer as much value as the others but are worth knowing.  Individuals may not be members, and any of their offerings are limited to that group.  

The campus computing project executive summary of an ongoing survey (below) is an important study that offers many facts derived from 183 campuses in 2009. Current enrolment and trends in DE and touches on ADA compliance issues. Much of this is a PPT summary.

This is a short document that is useful as it has links to the Regional Accrediting Commissions guidelines for review and evaluation of distance education.

 

nea.png

IHEP (Institute for Higher Education )
http://www.ihep.org/  
Independent non-profit research group concerned with global higher ed. They have an emphasis on noting likely changes and future-looking programs so they have a fair amount about technology in their data.

Slightly older doc but asks interesting questions. And gives a list of should be approached on page 32. Study describes strength of on line learning and touches on predictors of success.   Summary states:

 

NSF.png

National Science Foundation
http://www.nsf.gov/
The NSF is worth noting as they have been funding research into what they call “cyber learning” for decades. The NSF funds about 20% of all basic research in U.S higher ed. It is probably wise to keep this funding group’s output on the radar. Below is a recent document on the topic of ed tech.

A host of respected conclusions and recommendations within this internal NSF report. This is a lengthy study aimed at NSF activities within the K12 community, yet informative and broad in its scope.

---

Educational technology and online learning in particular is a moving target. Keeping up with best practices, or even the common practices requires paying attention to the primary resources and the rich array of information available.

Thoughts, corrections, critique? kvalvik@shadowboxdesign.com