OCTOBER 16, 10:30 a.m.

, Meeting Room 208A/B Anaheim, California

Simplifying Copyright in Online Education: Understanding New Behaviors
R. J. Clougherty, Jr., PhD!
Acting Vice Provost for Research, Innovation, and Open Education!
Robert.Clougherty.esc.edu!

Franny Lee!
Co-Founder, Vice President ! Business Development!
franny@sipx.com!

SIPX and Empire State College
Empire State College is a part of the State University of New York (SUNY) ! We serve 20,000 students annually ! We have 40 physical locations across the state ! We have a Center for Distance Learning (online), School for Graduate Studies (blended), and the Van Arsdale Center for Labor Studies ! Roughly half of our students study at our physical locations; the remainder in the other three programs.
October 16, 2013!

3

Our Challenges
! ! ! ! !
Because we are decentralized physically as well as online, we do not have a physical library—we have an online library only; Faculty are not always fully aware of all potential resources for students; Students have individualized degree programs so library needs are various; We are implementing new copyright policies at the College; We don’t have the data we need for effective decisions.
4

October 16, 2013!

Why SIPX?
! ! ! ! ! !
We were first connected via an introduction by the Gates Foundation; Began with a phone call; Followed by face-to-face meeting; We set up a “jam session” for faculty with an interest to establish a pilot; Overwhelmingly positive response by faculty who saw incredible value; Early stage of pilot – we are trained and targeting a larger ramp for January.
5

October 16, 2013!

ESC and SIPX—Shared Values
! ! ! ! !
We recognize copyright and its legal validity; We do not deny the reality of costs for educational materials, we simply want to reduce them for students by using existing resources; We do not wish to impose on academic freedom; We want to give faculty more options, not fewer; Bottom line: Any learning material resource should support faculty in doing the most effective job in the most efficient manner.
6

October 16, 2013!

The Advantages We See
! ! ! ! ! !
Increasing faculty usage of existing resources; Lowering TCO for students; Empowers our new work in developing MOOCs; Allows us to be compliant within copyright policies; Supporting our online programs which is our area of greatest growth; We can have data for more effective resource allocation.
7

October 16, 2013!

SIPX, Inc.

A web service for managing and measuring digital course materials!

8!

Observing Behaviors!
Copyright  Agents   Open  Sources  (HathiTrust,   Crea?ve  Commons)   Schools   and   Libraries  

Publishers   and   Creators  

MOOC   Provider  

What  kind  of  content   do    educators  select?       Do  students  engage?     What  new  methods   will  publishers  try?  

Librarian  

MOOC  Educator  
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013!

MOOC  Student  

9!

What is SIPX?!
End-to-end solution to manage, distribute and measure course materials for higher education!
•  Cloud-based technology service that solves many copyright frustrations! •  Networks together all stakeholders and critical data; combines open, licensed and publisher content options ! •  Can blend into campus systems like LMS’ and online education platforms like MOOCs! •  Uniquely capable of meeting challenges of new online and multi-institution education models!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013!

10!

Today’s Copyright Maze!
HathiTrust   Copyright   Agents   Crea?ve  Commons   Public  Domain  

Publishers  and   Creators  

#%&?!   What  can  I  use?  Is   there  an  open   version?  

^*@#?!   Can’t  find  the   owner!  

@!#$?   Legal  liability?  

#@??   Where  is  my   content  going?  

#%$?!   Too  expensive!    

#*@?!   Is  this  fair   use?  

#*¥?!     Can’t  figure  out   condi?ons  of  use  

Schools  and   Libraries  

MOOC   Provider  

?&@?   Can  I  put  this   online?  

#%&?!   Permission   denied!?   /%$&?!   I  have  to  pay   for  the  whole   class!?  

@?#$?   Which   subscrip?ons   maUer  most?  

Librarian  

Educator  

Student  

© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013!

11!

Designed to Meet Unique Higher Ed Needs!
Understand   purchase  and   use?   Maximize  use  of   subscrip?ons,  provide   copyright  educa?on,  and   showcase  value?  

Publisher  and   Creator  
Prepare  quality   and  affordable   readings  easily?  

•  Too  many  data  sources   •  Complex  &  confusing   processes   •  High  cost  &  inefficiency   •  Time  delays   •  Lower  quality  of   educa?on   •  Risk  and  liability  

 

Librarian  

Get  convenient   access  at  the   lowest  possible   cost?  

Educator  

Student  

Solution must respect academic independence!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 12!

SIPX in LMS Use!

SIPX’s copyright-intelligent links give users contextually appropriate access and pricing, with no re-training of faculty and students needed!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 13!

SIPX in MOOCs and Online Education !
Flexible SIPX links can be posted anywhere, ensuring each student authenticated, easy access at the lowest price (MOOCs span <90 countries and many school affiliations)!

  •  Professors assign what they want! •  Save schools time and $ from clearing readings! •  Pay-per-use for students to buy and access their own copies! •  Students benefit from their school’s library holdings! •  Publishers experiment with pricing, format!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 14!

Early Observations in Campus Courses !
•  Instructors’ choice of readings influenced by cost, effort to clear, ability to add mid-stream course…!
–  An accessible market of viable options!

•  Student engagement levels in course readings and reserves !
–  # of students who actually retrieved readings! –  Most popular readings!

•  Content development insights for the school, library and course creators are valuable!
–  What content are instructors assigning? Where?!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 15!

Early Observations in MOOCs!
•  Generally…!
–  Very big classes, high attrition rates, global reach!

•  Most MOOC students differ from campus students!
–  Different motivations, desired outcomes and commitment levels! –  Long tail of interest! –  There is a subset who engages in readings!

© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013!

16!

Early Observations in MOOCs!
•  Instructors assign combination of $0 and non-$0 readings; from all sorts of sources! •  Publishers are experimenting – unbundled options, context- and geography-based pricing! •  Instructors and schools are experimenting – self-publishing, services for faculty!
!
!
Daniel A. McFarland and Charles J. Gomez
value we affix to these scenarios. In the logic of consequence model, we calculate the expected utility of each scenario. To do this, all we have to do is multiply the chance of rain (which is 40%) by the preference we have for the scenario of not bringing an umbrella and it rains (which is -10). That gives us the first value of -4.0. That’s the expected utility of not bringing an umbrella and it rains on us. But say it does not rain and we do not bring an umbrella. Then we take the chains of no rain (%60) and multiply it by the value we affix to that outcome (+6). As such, the we have 0.6 times 6 = 3.6. That's the expected utility of not bringing umbrella if it doesn't rain. If we add the two together – of not bringing an umbrella in both cases - then we get the net expected utility of not bringing an umbrella = -4.0 + 3.6 = -0.4. If we go through the same kind of operation in the lower branch for bringing the umbrella, we will find the net expected utility to be 0.6. If we compare the two, then it is clear that bringing umbrella - given our preferences or our sense of costs and rewards for each outcome – is better than not bringing an umbrella because we really do not want to be wet. Now let’s do this for a more interesting case - dating! Many of you are single and perhaps looking for love. Say you are wondering whether to ask someone out. Let’s consider the scenarios. (i) You do not ask them out when they would have said no. That is good, right? You're not embarrassed! (ii) You do not ask them out and they would have said “yes”. In that case, you miss out on someone quite interesting and wonderful. That is a downer. (iii) You do ask them out and they say “no”. That is kind of, mortifying, right? That may be terrible. (iv) And then, there is the last scenario which is you ask them out and they say “yes”. When that happens it is quite gratifying. How would you value each of these options from positive ten to negative ten? It all depends. Are you a high-interest, lowcost person? Meaning, you ask people out all the time and you do not see much cost to it. Or are you a low-interest, low-cost person? Meaning, you seldom ask people out and you do not worry about it. Or are you a high cost person? Here you see it as risky no matter what happens. Let’s say you find it mortifying to be rejected, and you are a high cost person. We can depict this in the table you see here. (i) Not asking someone else and them saying “no”, hey, that is good for us. It saved us the trouble, so it is a plus two. (ii) Not asking them out, and they would have said “yes” - that is a downer. Let’s give that a negative eight. Pretty bad, but not terrible. (iii) But then, asking them out, and them saying “no” is just awful. We feel miserable over that, so it is a negative ten. And last, (iv) us asking them out and them saying “yes” is a plus ten and that couldn't be better. Best of all worlds right there!
No#(90%)# Don’t&Ask&Out& Ask&Out& +2& .10& Yes#(10%)# .8& +10& Net#Expected#U4lity# (2*0.9)&–&(8*0.1)&=&1& (.10*0.9)+(10*0.1)&=&.8& EU=&.0.8& Net& Expected& UClity&=&1&

1)& ept&(0. Acc

Don’t

&Ask&O

ut&

Reject

&(0.9)&
1)&

EU=&1.8& EU=&1.0& Net& Expected& UClity&=&.8& EU=&.9.0&

Ask&O

ut&

&(0. Accept

t&(0 Ambiguity)or)uncertainty) .9)& about)consequences)and)costs?))

Rejec

Figure. Decision Tree for Asking Out If we go through the decision tree again, we can predict the net utility of each option of asking someone out or not. Let’s even say they are very attractive so our chances are low at 10%. If we go through the math again like before where we don't ask them out and get a yes, that equals negative eight. Then we multiply that by the probability of yes at 0.10 (10% chance). As such, negative 8 times .1 = -0.8 expected utility. The opposite of not asking them out and they reject you has a positive utility of 1.8. So, we have a net expected utility of not asking people out equal to one.

Organizational Analysis

19

© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013!

17!

How Important is Understanding Usage?!
•  Course development! •  Collections development!
–  What subscribed content and non-subscribed content is selected?!

•  Student retention and completion rates! •  Efficient market pricing!
–  Cost tolerance across geography!

•  Content discovery and recommendations!
–  Readings used in other astronomy courses?!

•  Predictive data – student success factor?!
–  Inter-vendor sharing of usage data necessary to fully understand user behavior!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 18!

Worldwide View of 3 Fall 2013 SIPX MOOCs!

Interest by subject matter – ! Early data for September 2013 courses: “Age of Globalization” (edX), “Ideas of the 20th Century” (edX), and “Organizational Analysis” (Coursera)!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 19!

Transactions by Country!

Subset of 127 countries represented in overall transaction data; ! 50% of transactions occur from users outside of US and Canada!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 20!

Volume by Price!

Similarly-situated cost comparables (per whole work, not per unit price above)!
© 2013 SIPX, Inc.! October 16, 2013! 21!

22!

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful