This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
MS. HOLLY MORRIS: Thank you for joining the Incubating Strategic Innovation session. I'm Holly Morris. I'm the director of Postsecondary Model Development and Adoption for Next Generation Learning challenges EDUCAUSE. And with us today, I am pleased to welcome, on the far right, Deborah Amory, the acting provost for Empire State College in New York. Next to Deborah, Marie Cini, the provost for University of Maryland University College. And beside Marie, Ed Klonoski, president of Charter Oak State College in Connecticut. Here is a quick look at where we're going this afternoon. Our plan is to go through this pretty quickly so that we can leave plenty of time for questions and answers at the end. I'll give you a little context about Next Generation Learning Challenges Breakthrough Models Incubator so you'll understand where the three college products that we're going to talk about have been residing for the last six months, incubating and percolating. And then we'll have a look at each of the projects individually and collectively, collaboratively, and then talk a little bit about the future of the incubator and these particular projects. Since this is a smallish crowd and these tables up front are not reserved, I'd welcome anybody who wants to come down and get closer so that we can have a more interactive conversation when we get to that point. So a little context about the incubator, Next Generation Learning Challenges is an initiative led by EDUCAUSE, in partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the League for Innovation in Community College. Our work falls under three strategies. First, we invest in innovation. So in October of 2011, we awarded ten postsecondary institutions grant funding to develop science-based personalized learning and blended learning degree programs. Among our grantees in that group were Southern New Hampshire University, Kentucky Technical College System, and Northern Arizona University. All of the Wave 3B grantees are on our website, and their profiles are there if you'd like to look at them. Our second strategy is to multiply the impact of our grantee's work by building community and knowledge among higher education institutions that are interested in exploring that innovative edge. And finally, we accelerate adoption of next generation learning models and business models through two programs. The first model is Incubator, which we'll talk a little bit more about this afternoon, and the Breakthrough Models Academy. There are two sessions later in the ELI conference program for the Breakthrough Models Academy. At 4:00 o'clock this afternoon, we'll be having a learning circle about the 2013 academy in the Rose Down room if you'd like to join us for that. And then Wednesday morning, back here in the Napoleon ballroom at 9:45, the Breakthrough Models Academy winners will be talking about their projects and how that shook out in 2013. The incubator, however, is the subject of today's presentation. The incubator is for leadership teams of institutions like Charter Oak, UMUC, and Empire State, that come together to collaborate, to get exposed to new ideas and new thinking about innovation. And then in this case, in 2013, we had seven institutional teams join the incubator, and they all developed entirely different student success initiative plans that are going to be rolling out somewhere in the next 6 to 12 months, and we'll talk about three of them here this afternoon. So whenever we do these talks, there's always that question that's begged in the room, "Well what is a breakthrough model?" And so up here you will see four different takes on what the answer to that is. And this doesn't bother NGLC, this doesn't bother us, because what we found is our grantees are exploring this frontier of what is a breakthrough model, so there are facets to it, and it's more interesting and productive to talk about the facets of each experience instead of trying to find out what exactly it is. So I'm going to actually sit down with our guests here and turn the talk over to our panelists to talk about their institutions and their experience with this concept of breakthrough models, and then a little bit about each of their projects. So, Ed, why don't you go ahead and start. MR. ED KLONOSKI: You want me to talk about my project now; right? MS. MORRIS: Your project and then the experience of Charter Oak in this concept around breakthrough. MR. KLONOSKI: Okay. Well it's an interesting moment in time for Charter Oak State College. We've been waiting to breakthrough for 40 years, so it's great to be cool suddenly. We've been doing competencybased learning. We've been doing degree aggregation, as has Empire and Excelsior and Edison, and to a
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
different extent and slightly different way UMUC, for a very long time, all of us. And this new competency wave brought us into the game in really kind of an interesting way. So the new competency models that you're seeing in Southern New Hampshire and Northern Arizona and in Kentucky, for example, are different than ours. But at the heart, I think, what is disruptive about this is that we're giving students choices. They can demonstrate what they know, which we will assess and count, or they can learn what they need to know from us. And, to me, that's the differentiator. So I believe that we'll get new, to use my own quote, and that's Christianson's language, we're going to get new or underserved students in our program because we're going to enable them to bring the things that they already know and can do to us. We assess those things, which is faster and cheaper than teaching them. Students make more rapid progress. Kale tells they're going to be retained longer and that they're going to persist at higher rates. So in a nutshell, that's how Charter Oak sees this particular opportunity. MS. MARIE CINI: So at UMUC, we have been in the adult student business, if you will, since 1947, and that model has very much been about giving adult students choices. And it used to be that it was very important to give adult students a lot of choices and a lot of time, and we would all joke about the 20-year plan that many adult students were on. Starting about five years ago, and perhaps even before that, things have changed dramatically. It's a very different group of students that are coming to us, less prepared, underprepared, underserved, people who are needing to get their degree so that they can move on in their lives. And what we discovered, actually through this process, was that we had to take a good look at our own assumptions and kind of our theories in use about how we treat adult students. And so our breakthrough was to think of new ways to increase retention and accelerate time to completion, and so we developed something called "Project Jump Start," which is a free one-credit course that we hope eventually all students will take, and it truly is a jump start. It's a four-week course. It gives them a credit by the end of it, but they will know themselves better, it will set goals, and we're hoping to use, really, research and science, because there's a lot out there that, unfortunately, I think we just didn't use and integrate in our programs as much as we should have. But if you overlay what we know about students, they need a good start, a fast start, a start where they feel like they've become efficacious, that they can do something, that they understand themselves better, and so we'll be telling you more about Project Jump Start, but it moves them quickly into the college degree, and we hope will increase retention. MS. DEBORAH AMORY: I'm drawing on what my colleagues both said. Empire State College has also been serving non-traditional students for 40 years, also a state institution. We're a little bit different in that we have 35 locations across the State of New York, so from Plattsburgh to Riverhead, and from west to east, we serve folks, both face-to-face and online, about 20,000 students. And similarly, we've had a longstanding philosophy and practice of personalized learning, so each of our students designs their own degree, quite literally, with the exception of the nursing program, thank goodness. And so we, in this moment of great innovation and rapid disruptive change, we've had to engage with our faculty around rethinking our educational models, and our project for the breakthrough models incubator, which I realize now was an enormous undertaking, to create a competency-based education program in information technology, with, actually, a structured curriculum. That's the innovation for us. But what I think we share with other institutions in this moment of rapid change is the challenge of sort of fiscal crisis at the national level, at the state level, certainly, at our individual student level, alongside the urgency of changing the very structures and philosophies that we had historically believed in. And the good news in all of that is that, also, there's a lot of excitement being generated about new modes of doing things, and competency-based education is based in a philosophy, as Ed mentioned, of recognizing students' learning that they bring to us, and credentialing and assessing that. And so there's a piece of the philosophy we very much embrace, but we have to think of new ways to do it. So in terms of our
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
definition of breakthrough, I've really come to understand that we had to create a sense of urgency among both the faculty staff and the administration, and some excitement around new possibilities. MS. MORRIS: Thanks. So let's take a closer look at all three of your projects. I'll just start with you, Ed. Why don't you tell everybody a little bit about what Charter Oak has been up to, and start with that first bullet in terms of – MR. KLONOSKI: Well we're facing a challenge that's not our own. It's externally based and it's financialaid based. So students come to Charter Oak. We have financial aid available if they take an online course from us. If they decide to take a portfolio or a test, which are a half to a third the cost of the course, they have to pay out of their own pocket, they can't use their financial aid. So what we look at that circumstances as, as an essential unfairness to students, where the regulation is telling them how do we engage in learning, making them take a more expensive option, a longer option. We make a better return on investment if they take a course than we do from a portfolio or a test, but there's an essential unfairness. So what we decided to do was change the financial aid regulations, which is just as arrogant as it sounds. The good luck for us is that there were other institutions that were thinking along those same lines. Some of them had already gone down the road quite a ways at getting a directive, financial aid assessment. So we put this group together called "Competency-Based Education Network." We've managed to talk, I think, the Department of Education into giving some serious talk to experimental sites. So whether we get the financial aid through Pell or not, our experiment will be to offer students financial aid to support the portfolio or testing choice, if they so desire, and then look to see if we can increase the amount of prior learning assessment credit -- that's portfolio and testing credit basically -- on our graduates' transcripts. Currently, 13% of those credits are from prior learning assessment. We're aiming to get that to 20. If we do that, we have pretty good mathematical proof that students are getting their degree cheaper, because those other options, those PLA options, are dramatically less expensive than even a course at a low-cost provider. So, in a nutshell, that's what we're trying to do. MS. MORRIS: Marie? MS. CINI: Do you want me to look at – MS. MORRIS: Yeah, let's start with internal institution challenges for all three of the projects. MS. CINI: Okay. So what we're calling "Project Jump Start," which is this one-credit course that helps students really jump into their degree, I would have to say that the biggest internal challenge for us is systems and technological integration, because we don't want this to be a standalone course taught face to face. 85% of our courses are taught online, and so we want it to be an online course. We want automatic assessments and integration with all the other data that students can use, data analytics, et cetera. And so that's enormous. I see some of you shaking your heads. I mean that's why many of us are at this conference right now. We have to find ways to make all of these systems work together so that the students are getting a unified coherent experience. I would love to tell you that we have solved all of these problems, but I think we've only just begun listing them. But we are working towards solving them. And when we talk about the role of leadership, I can tell you how important leadership is. So integration. MS. MORRIS: Great. Deb? MS. AMORY: We, too, have technology integration issues, but we're currently looking for a CIO. If anyone is interested in applying, literally, you can go see our website. So we set those challenges aside for a few moments, and what I've sort of focused my comments on are the institutional challenges of engaging faculty and administration in fundamental transformation. And also, we have 200 full-time tenure-track faculty who are unionized. So it's both a shared -- we have a very robust system of shared governance,
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
as well as a unionized environment. And in the radical change that's happening, that's also been a lot of stress, so we have had challenges with governance and with, in terms of our relationships with the union around the workload, around changing definitions of what faculty are expected to do. And, in fact, this sort of conflict was to the extent that a year ago when we started talking about developing a competency-based IT program with IT faculty, we sort of had whispered conversations in the corners of rooms during conferences, because it was such a challenge to some of the received ideas about education at Empire State College. I may be exaggerating a little bit, but there was a sense of trepidation, certainly. And so actually the Breakthrough Models Incubator really helped us to develop a leadership team that could communicate the urgency of the situation and also the excitement about the solutions, and we're able to address the internal institutional challenges that way. MR. KLONOSKI: For me it was much simpler. Our initial challenge was me. I'm coming up on my sixth year anniversary, and I had convinced my admissions staff that best return on investment came from outof-state course-taking students. We have a out-of-state/in-state differential. So if you're an out-of-state student coming to Charter Oak taking courses, we make our best profit on you. Now I'm coming along and saying we need to do more PLA. We need more portfolios. We need more assessments. They looked me in the eye and said, "But we don't make as much money on that." So I have to undo my own work in a sense. So getting the staff to believe and understand that retained students and graduated students represent our purpose and are good for our bottom line, even if, in the short term, they begin to make some choices that are not profitable for us. We really don't make any raw profit on a portfolio. We make nothing on a test. So we're doing the Lord's work in a sense, and trying to gain by better retention and better graduation. So I have to sort of undo myself. MS. MORRIS: I notice you said that your team was able to make sort of record progress on the governance issue. What do you think was the one sort of thing, the nugget that propelled your team forward in the face of the governance issue? MS. AMORY: What Holly is referring to is we had the faculty draft a proposal for the new program that went through governance, and from these sort of discreet meetings in hushed tones with faculty, to, then, they developed the proposal. And it was a series of presentations that the college presented to other faculty, and also to administration, but the concept and some of the -- again, returning to the needs of the students. Our faculty are incredibly eloquent about talking about working with someone who has come up in the IT field, arrives at their door, does not have a bachelor's degree -- this is their target population -but has ten years of experience, has been able to learn on the job and develop, but hits a certain wall. There's a plateau where they just can't get any further, and oftentimes they think it's about a degree, so they come to us looking for, I need a degree, get me a degree, I don't care how I get it. But also what the faculty talk about, that's very inspiring, is that oftentimes it's a level of understanding of - it's about quantitative skills. It's about understanding discrete math and calculus, and math stuff that I don't understand, but that you need to totally understand in order to progress in the IT world, and so they were able to talk in pretty inspiring ways about how if we could just assess the students' knowledge, the quantitative knowledge, when they walk in the door, in a very careful detailed way, then we can both work credit for what they have that is college level and send them off quickly, and this is the time to completion, in the right direction. And, again, it was this partnership between the faculty and, I think, the leadership of the president and the provosts and the Office of Academic Affairs that was able to be presented. The proposal for the governance committee, it was approved within three months. Record. MS. MORRIS: Yeah. MS. CINI: Astounding, and unanimously, and generated some excitement along the way, so. MS. MORRIS: Yeah, so all three of you were able to enroll and partner with different stakeholders to make advancements in terms of –
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
MR. KLONOSKI: Well you did something for us on that front that I had never seen anybody else do. When we put our team together to come out and work on this project with the other teams -- I had to write this down because I forget -- it was the president, the provost, the chief financial officer, our prior learning assessment person, an instructional researcher, a faculty member, an IT member, and an instructional designer. I have never had a meeting with all those people at one time in my college in just that group. And we continue to meet with them. We meet every two weeks. So this created an institutional team that traveled together for two or three days in Seattle, and that is continuing to persist as a team. That's pretty unusual, in a good way. MS. MORRIS: Yeah. MS. AMORY: And we also, as a member of a state, included as the state administration level in our team, so we're able to garner some support at the state level, which is also now linked to the open SUNY Initiative that the chancellor of the State University of New York has launched, as well as connecting some people who don't -- certainly rarely travel across the country to attend a meeting that's exciting and challenging and have conversations across levels. MS. MORRIS: That's a perfect segue into the second bullet. I know all three of these projects were advanced by leadership, and I know you wanted to talk a little bit about that, Marie. Why don't you just dive in there. MS. CINI: Sure. And I've said this to Holly over and over again, the value of having the president, provost, chief financial officer, chief information officer, just those four people all in a meeting, but then we added faculty, program directors, et cetera, and it was incredible, in many ways. One is, it gave the opportunity for some of our faculty to get to know our president, provost, CFO, CIO in a very different way. And our president got to see some of our faculty in ways that he would not normally have seen them. It's great respect that went back and forth. We also, because of that leadership team being together -- we call our project "Project Jump Start." If you walk into my institution, everybody knows what it is. I've never seen anything like it, because it came from this group that -- everybody we knew we went off to Seattle to the Gates Foundation. It really gets you a certain amount of -- you know, so you want to get in on one of these new programs, because that really gets you something. People hear that, they listen to it, and it's a badge of honor. But our president can talk about Jump Start. Our marketers know about Jump Start. Many of our faculty know about Jump Start. We have many, many faculty, so that's why it's not gone all the way down yet. It will as soon as we spread this across all of our students. It just really made a huge different. Had a small group of faculty and a few administrators from lower levels gone off, this would never have taken off the way that it took off in my institution. So as hard as it is to pull those people together, I really highly recommend it if you want to make institutional changes. MS. AMORY: I also, just to follow up on something that -- mentioned, that in this current context we're faced with making really difficult choices. You know, when, do you do the good work that doesn't bring in any money? How do you try create some revenue that will support that work, and having exactly this mix that's the CFO, along with the chief academic officer and the president, understanding the incredible challenges, and being willing to come to compromises around what you can cut, what you can invest in, sort of that's been very helpful. And the finance template, that was part of the breakthrough models incubator, also we got a worksheet that was very fun, that allowed us to model different financial models. And that was incredibly helpful too. MS. CINI: Yeah, I just wanted to add one thing. Amazing things happened during these phases as we all got to know each other. So you would think that the CFO would be the voice of don't spend money, don't spend money, don't spend money. In fact, our CFO had some of the most interesting innovative ideas because he really understood, because he was part of all this in the design of the new program, he understood the value of spending money in certain ways if, in fact, it would increase retention. And we all know, if you increase retention, students are there longer and they're paying more in tuition. It's not the only reason to do it, but if you're trying to balance the books, that's important to look at.
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
So we kept looking at him whenever we would talk about spending money, thinking, oh, he's never going to say this is okay. But he often gave us an idea that helped us to kind of jump forward, again, in ways that would have never happened if we had just all tripped down to his office and said, "Hey, we really need to talk to you about spending some more money." The answer then is usually no. So it was just, again, very, very important. MS. MORRIS: So it sounds like all of you had help in driving things forward from different levels at your universities, and some tools that spurned some conversations that were helpful in driving things forward. Any other comments about moving innovation forward before we move on? I want to leave some time for question and answer, but I did want to open one or more opportunity about driving innovation forward. MR. KLONOSKI: It does require real honest conversations across multiple silos. You can't drive a part of your institution forward and not talk to the rest of it. I mean I sit in that seat where I'm supposed to be able to do that. It's not easy to do. And they're painful conversations, I mean in both directions. So my financial aid director raised her hand and said, "Why would we want to do more of this, we're going to make less money." And she was right. And so coming up with an intelligent answer for that, which someone else in the staff did at that meeting did, not me, and that was really impressive. The PRA person stood up said, "No, we know this and this will happen, so we'll be okay. We just don't know the specific parameters of what okay is." To have sort of senior people, but not executives, having that debate in my presence, that was very good, very scary, but very cool. MS. MORRIS: I want to talk a little bit about the inter-institutional collaboration that happened with these three projects in particular. Hopefully we get to the question and answer. So I invite you to kickoff that conversation. MR. KLONOSKI: First of all, we cheated. We have known each other for 40 years, and we have collaborated across that 40 years in a variety of ways, from honest collaborations where we get to a meeting and talk about things, from stealing from each other the good ideas that we've each produced. So I think if you went to Empire State and asked about Charter Oak, they would know some things about Charter Oak. And if you came to here and asked about Empire, we know a great deal at a variety of levels. And the same with UMUC, who has been in this game even longer, and internationally. So we have that advantage. The thing that we wanted to talk to each other about, first, Empire has a grant, a global learning qualifications framework. In other words, I think, and you can correct me if I get this wrong, but I actually read it and brought it. I did my homework. It's a way for students to create portfolios without a lot of hands-on support. It sort of sets a framework for a portfolio. So for this project we needed to figure out the right language to talk about prior learning assessment. So Charter Oak had the responsibility of doing some interest groups, surveys, and we did all that kind of stuff. And then we agreed collectively that we would try to produce the front-end widget that would link up with the back-end portfolio qualification system that Empire is looking at. And what we want this front-door widget to do is ask enough questions of a student that they could figure out where they're eligible to do your portfolio or a test. So they show up at our advising Center, and I'll confess, that was our weak link at Charter Oak. Our admissions people were not talking students through prior learning assessment, they were just putting them in courses because it was a more efficient admission strategy. That being said, as students show up at admissions and say, "Oh, by the way, I want to do these three tests and I want to do a portfolio in this," it makes it much easier for our admissions people to simply get them in the places they need to be. So the widget was the area in which we thought we could collaborate in this policy. MS. AMORY: And the global learning qualifications framework is an initiative funded by a Lumina grant that our group of experts, faculty within the college, and also with external experts, had developed a framework for assessing for both identifying what college-level learning is and then how to assess it, and sort of like a set of rubrics that would help guide the student through identifying areas of learning, as opposed to simply experience, and then also facilitate the evaluation of that by faculty experts. So it's
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
going to be great to have the prior intake sort of methodology that's web based and interactive for students to help facilitate that. MS. CINI: I would just as in a general sense, you know, we're talking about the huge changes in higher ed., we really are at a point where it's all about collaboration. I think we all have to figure out who are peers are that we can learn from, learn with, and partner with. And that hasn't been something that universities do very easily in the past. I think we all thought we had secret sauce. You know, there's going to be a coming consolidation, and I think it's really important to find out who you are best able to work with so you can start forming those partnerships now. MR. KLONOSKI: That's the sales pitch I always do. So if you want to do more work in competency-based learning, it may be to your advantage to partner with an institution that's already sweat some blood and tears in that arena and learn from them, with them, because there's things that we need from you that we don't do or can't do or shouldn't do financially, and there's things we might be able to do for you. So this is the business-to-business collaboration piece that I think -- this coming consolidation is going to require from all of us. MS. MORRIS: So we'll close out the panel part of this discussion and get to the questions and answers in about two seconds, but I did want to give all of you an opportunity to talk a little bit about the results you're expecting from your Breakthrough Models Incubator projects. They were just turned in at the end of January, and we should be seeing them launch in the spring, in about six months later. So a little bit from each of you. MR. KLONOSKI: Well we've already launched. The one question that I have on my mind is where I'm going to get the dollars for it to substitute for the financial aid that we're not eligible for yet. And I think we have a way to do that. We don't have a really good financial model built because we're a little odd. But we know what the key experimental variable will be. Can we increase the amount of PLA credit on a transcript? That's very easy to measure so that in a year or two, we should see whether or not we've moved that needle, and we measure retention and graduation rates now. So I don't think the map of the experiment is particularly difficult. So I think we're good to go. MS. CINI: So, for us, we're very data driven, and we'd like to be even more data driven. But what we found is that we have a large number of students who come to us who don't return after the first term, because, you know, we have adult students, maybe they're trying college, maybe they didn't understand exactly what they were sort of getting themselves into. They might not have the skills. They might have academic skills but they don't know how to negotiate issues with faculty, et cetera. And, again, as I said, because we have these adult students, we just had this assumption that somehow they knew how to do all this, and, in fact, we know like any group of students, varying levels of skills, et cetera. So for us, Jump Start is very simple in terms of what we hope to see happen. We've tried to address all of the issues that we think are stopping a certain number of students from moving forward. So we'll be looking at course -- well first of all, term-to-term reenrollment. So after the students take Jump Start, do they reenroll the next semester, in the next term; and their course completion rates and grades in the next term; and then eventually we'll look at graduation rates, but that's far down the road. So this spring -- in fact, we started too, we started the pilot in the fall. This spring we should be able to tell you if we have bumped up our term-to-term reenrollment rates. We'll begin that right now. MS. AMORY: And our project, again, is to launch a full program in the fall of 2015, so it's a little bit further out. But our most immediate goals in the next 12 months are to both develop that quantitative skills assessment piece that will incorporate learning analytics and adaptive learning technologies to support the launch of the student into the program. To finalize governance requires one more proposal, the final program proposal to be approved, which we expect to be done next fall as well. And we're also still playing with the financial models and looking at a subscription-based model, as opposed to acquainting the competencies to credits, and some really interesting learning happening as we watch the numbers go up and down, depending on the modeling of how many students doing what when, and looking at our own
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
costs per student in relation to that, so that's going to be something we'll decide by next fall, where the financial model will be. MS. MORRIS: And as to the incubator, we'll be launching our second cohort. We're taking applications. Will be due on February 7th, so if you think your leadership team is ready to go beyond business as usual, look us up at the link there and join. So we'll be going forward with cohort two and they will be all focused on competency-based indication models in 2014. So at this point, I'd like to open it up to the audience for questions and answers. There's microphones at the midpoint. So if you'd come forward, please, to ask your question, that would be helpful. And also, take a look over here at the online streamers. If there's questions, they can channel those through their chat box. Questions for the panel? MR. KLONOSKI: Uh-oh, Jim asks hard questions. JIM: What do you think the opportunities and prospects are for a hybrid-type delivery, where you would use some competency-based curriculum with some standard types of curriculums, and what kinds of issues do you anticipate in doing that? MR. KLONOSKI: Well that's exactly what Charter Oak is trying to do, because that's always been our model, and the only differentiator has been the financial aid only applies to the online courses, which is unfair. So it's a simple mathematical argument to make to Washington, and we've made it, and I think they're listening. But the challenge will be to make sure that our systems don't choke on students who are mixing and matching the choices. In Charter Oak most of our courses are delivered in an eight-week format, so that's fine. But people do portfolios at their own rate. We have to somehow fit that into a semester, because the financial aid rules require that you have some capsule of time, and that will probably just continue to be the semester for us. Tests are easier to encapsulate, but they also don't have any relevance to the timing of our course delivery. So we're asking for waivers from Washington, when we finally get the chance to do that, that would allow the students to have the flexibility to make those choices but not turn the entire institution into a non-time based model. And those of you that are not financial aid directors who haven't spent a lot of time with that, I fall into both of those categories, this is outside my pay grade, But there have been a bunch of institutions at the table helping us think it through, and think it through publicly. So, Jim, as you know, because your model is going to be a similar hybrid model, the financial aid regs are not built for anything except time-based programs, or completely not semester yearlong. I mean it gets really weird. The middle ground is very difficult terrain. But I think we're very close to bing asked to do an experiment in that middle ground. We're looking forward to the challenge. MS. CINI: At UMUC, we actually think the majority of students will be able to take advantage of a hybrid model. That's really the sweet spot. We think there will be a few students who fully take the direct assessment, maybe 5 or 10%, and then there will be students who want the entire model, you know, through traditional classes. So, hopefully, we'll see that it's part of the mix. MS. AMORY: At Empire State College, our model is precisely that mix and transfer credits, as well as prior learning assessments, immersion learning assessments, and direct assessment. MR. KLONOSKI: There's a model for you to look at. Unless your institution is an online institution, you've all got online programs, courses, offerings mixed in face-to-face stuff, that's what higher ed. will look like ten years out. Competency based will be -- it will be everywhere. There will be a few institutions that are just competency based, but most institutions will be some combination thereof. So once again, it's to your advantage, if you're a time-based institution, to find a great competency-based partner and be very nice to their president. MS. AMORY: And I think the other challenge we've talked a little bit about is earn technology systems, transcripts trying to match those and work with both types of transcripts. That's the challenges of bringing it to scale. Empire State College currently does that on individual basis one by one by one, and that's no longer financially feasible in the long term. And there's technologies that can help.
Educause Incubating Strategic Innovation
MS. MORRIS: I should note here, too, that this group of three represents innovations that are sort of directed towards competency-based education, but those aren't the only innovations that were part of the Breakthrough Models Incubator. The other four institutions chose to do completely different types of projects, all rooted around boosting student success and retention. And they've all taken different paths, from highly analytics-driven major choice advising system, APICU. There's Ball State's "Gameification" of how to get Pell grant students to do the things that they know will make them successful, and they've prototyped a really interesting app that will help their students keep track of what they're doing that is going to promote their success and reward them and reinforce that community amongst them. So there's lots of different types of innovations going on, and if your questions are more generally towards innovation, we welcome those as well. So we have a few more minutes, so if there are any other questions from the audience, please take advantage of it now. Any takers? Okay, then I will say thank you for joining us this afternoon. MR. KLONOSKI: Thanks for listening. MS. MORRIS: And if there are any other questions, we'll be around afterwards.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.