Search News


Browse Archives

News

Open Courses for Community Colleges

April 28, 2010

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

President Obama’s original plan for community colleges included $500 million to create free online courses that individual institutions could then customize for their students. That money never materialized — it was left out of the student aid legislation in last month’s health care bill.

But a foundation-supported effort with similar goals is actually growing. The National Repository for Online Courses (NROC) was hoping for that government money to help expand its existing vault of free courses, says Gary Lopez, the repository's director. Still, with online education becoming mainstream and many community colleges experiencing enrollment booms beyond their physical capacity, NROC’s membership is on the rise. At the same time, the repository's reliance on membership fees calls into question how "free" its courses actually are.

Since 2006 — when the nonprofit started buying online courses, redesigning them, and providing them to its members — the number of higher ed institutions using course materials from the repository has grown from 10 to 200. While the majority of its content is aimed at middle- and high-school students, Lopez says that community and technical college patrons now make up about a third of its users.

The repository, which initially bought its courses from the University of California’s vault of preparatory courses, is also beginning to invest in developing its own courses with a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Responding to requests from its members, it is currently building a four-course developmental math sequence, which is designed to assess the abilities of students in real time, and adapt when certain skills need reinforcing — a popular feature of some commercial e-learning programs aimed at a similar audience.

A Textbook Alternative?

Karen Kaemmerling, a history instructor for Colorado Community Colleges Online who now writes a history blog for NROC, says she thinks the repository’s move toward more sophisticated uses of media and diagnostic tools could put pressure on commercial publishers, who may see some community and technical college instructors eschew their textbooks and supplementary e-learning tools in favor of the “free” resources available through HippoCampus, NROC’s e-learning portal.

“From experience, what I can tell you about publisher material vs. NROC material is NROC material is far and above more usable for students, more concise, and just offers more user-friendly lessons,” says Kaemmerling, who stopped assigning textbooks to her U.S. history class years ago.

Sandy Cook, director of distance learning technologies for the Kentucky Community and Technical Colleges System, says her system is moving toward a new virtual learning curriculum that would drop textbooks in favor of a mix of NROC materials and commercial e-learning tools from Pearson. Cook says that the repository’s materials are equal in quality to the programs the system currently purchases from publishing giant, and that if NROC is able to take the new diagnostic tools it is making for its developmental math sequence and apply them to its other courses, it would be "the complete package." (Pearson had no comment on NROC as a potential competitor.)

(Update, 4/29: An earlier version of this article mistakenly said Sandy Cook is the director of academic affairs. It also contained a paraphrase of Cook's comments to which she objected. The relevant passage has been revised.)

The Cost of Free

Then again, there is a question as to whether NROC should actually be considered among what are known in online education as “OERs,” or open educational resources. While they are free to independent learners, NROC courses are not free to institutions — or, in at least one case, to the students who take them through an institution.

The most famous members of this family of “open-access” course materials — such as MIT’s OpenCourseware, Yale Open Courses, and Carnegie Mellon University’s Open Learning Initiative — provide syllabuses, video lectures, worksheets, and other course materials completely free of charge, to anyone no strings attached.

NROC is more proprietary about its content. Individuals can sign into the HippoCampus and take the courses for free. But if an institution or system wants to deploy the repository’s content at scale, they have to pay an enrollment-based “membership” fee, which can run from $3,000 to $50,000 per year (although the higher range generally applies to state education systems, not single institutions). If an institution or system wants to host the content on its own learning-management systems, it can cost more.

In some cases, institutions pass this cost on to students, eliminating the “free” factor altogether. Colorado Community College Online, for example, charges its students a $49-per-course digital content fee to help cover the NROC membership and other infrastructure costs — as much as many e-books and some used textbooks.

Then again, NROC, which was built on grants from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, is on the brink of achieving self-sufficiency — something most OER projects can only dream of. Lopez says the repository is about 80 percent of the way toward its sustainability goal, and was on track to reach it this year before the financial crisis hit, slowing growth and prompting NROC to excuse a number of cash-strapped patrons from paying last year’s membership fees.

“That’s been a bane of a lot of [open-access] projects, the grant funding runs out and they either slow down or hibernate because they didn’t have a real business model to sustain the grant,” says David Wiley, associate professor of instructional psychology and technology at Brigham Young University.

“I think a lot of other OER projects feel like if educational institutions or anyone else want to pick up their materials and use them, that’s well within the scope of their service to the public,” Wiley says. “[NROC’s model] is a very different approach from the other organizations in this cohort. But Gary’s is the only one that’s running in the black, too.”

For the latest technology news from Inside Higher Ed, follow Steve Kolowich on Twitter.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Open Courses for Community Colleges

  • Let's define some terms here
  • Posted by Betzi Bateman , Doctoral Candidate and Instructor at Kent State University on April 28, 2010 at 8:00am EDT
  • Online "courses" and online course "materials" are different things. Will an online "course" ever truly be free? Won't there always be an instructor needed to facilitate things? Is this person supposed to work for free? Is this debate about students in community colleges being able to take free online courses or is it about students not having to buy textbooks?

    The reason Obama's original plan didn't go through is probably because it wasn't terribly well thought out. And institutions need to think carefully about shelling out a lot of money to content producers. Shouldn't we know by now that education is not information delivery? There is so much more that goes into an online course than the presentation of content. If these "courses" were truly well-designed including interactive activities with engaging use of tools so that students can (co)construct their own knowledge with guidance from an instructor/expert, then fine. And quality presentations that use multimedia may, in fact, be more effective than a textbook. But it's not a "course."

  • Quality Control issue for OERs
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee , Dir., at Florida Higher Education Accountability Project on April 28, 2010 at 8:30am EDT
  • OERs threaten to break the chain of accountability at schools which Title IV accrediting agencies require.
    Typically, institutions have full responsibility for the courses for which they award credit at completion, and federal law requires that agencies have rules for using unaccredited materials. Yet, you cannot accredit OERs because they are not institutions.
    The problem is, how to address the accountability gap? Perhaps the regionals need to begin to monitor OERs, and accredit them; either that, or OERs need a national agency for quality control. We certainly don't need "course mills" in addition to diploma mills to worry about.

  • An important bit of information left out...
  • Posted by David Wiley , Associate Professor at Brigham Young University on April 28, 2010 at 1:45pm EDT
  • This article leaves out an important point about the NROC policy about institutional membership fees. NROC makes an exception for institutions that can't pay. And in fact, I believe that about 40% of NROC members currently aren't paying. Most of the non-paying members are from outside the US, but with the financial crisis there are several institutions within the US (including state departments of education) that can't afford to pay. They are still members and NROC still supports them.

  • More on defining terms
  • Posted by Julie Witherow , Director of Distance Education at Pikes Peak Community College on April 28, 2010 at 5:15pm EDT
  • I want to piggyback on Ms.Bateman's comment. I have been managing a large online program for ten years, and every set of student evaluations of faculty and courses reinforces the concept that faculty are still the most important factor in the success of an online course. There are certainly wonderful materials available from NROC, textbook publishers and other sources, and our faculty sometimes take advantage of high quality online products. But the most beautifully designed set of materials will be ineffective if the instructor is not engaged with the students and concerned about their learning. Well-designed and onsistent interactions that allow students to communicate with both their instrutors and their classmates are what make a set of materials a "course."

  • OER access is open, but what about the content?
  • Posted by John on April 28, 2010 at 10:00pm EDT
  • To truly provide OER, NROC and others should be developing their courses/content in an open format, e.g. IMS Global Learning Consortium's Common Cartridge, rather than proprietary formats (eg Blackboard). I was surprised that this very critical component of OER was not addressed in this article as open content standards provide tremendous academic, financial and operational ROI and reduce the risk of LMS platform lockin. Several open (Sakai, Moodle) and private platforms provide support for IMS standards and many more have committed to releasing future versions that support IMS standards... Standards are more than just passing data, the IMS standards actually help to create enhanced learning environments

  • Room for many business models in education
  • Posted by Jacky Hood , Director at College Open Textbooks on April 29, 2010 at 8:00am EDT
  • Education needs many business models and only viable ones will survive. There is room for for-profit companies, non-profits, and tax-supported institutions. My personal opinion is that far too much of education is tax-supported leaving educators with the impression that it is possible to foster knowledge and skill without cost.

    The traditional publishers including Pearson and Macmillan are embracing both new technologies and new business models. I believe that Sandy Cook was misquoted in this article. She and I were talking today; Kentucky is very happy with Pearson and has no plans to severe that relationship. Moving away from traditional textbooks is something that publishers are also doing! Abandoning textbooks for dynamic online course material does not mean abandoning the talent that publishers bring to education. An excellent example is the partnership of the University Press of Florida with the Orange Grove Repository.

    The digital revolution makes it possible to provide much of education at zero marginal cost but the initial development is very expensive. NROC's and other quality courses cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to create. NROC provides outstanding course material free of cost to individuals and for a modest fee for institutions. Those institutions receive private branding and other special features from NROC. And, as David Wiley pointed out, NROC does not turn away institutions that cannot afford to pay the modest fees.

    NROC's new developmental math course series will be entirely open licensed and in a modifiable format.

    Grant givers like the William and Flora Hewlett and Gates Foundations act like seed capitalists. Repositories for resources, textbooks, and courses must first ensure quality and then design a business model that will maintain that quality. Congratulations to NROC for achieving both.

    Best regards,
    Jacky Hood
    Director, College Open Textbooks
    Funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
    http://collegeopentextbooks.org

  • ONLİNE from cradle to grave
  • Posted by Muvaffak Gozaydin , Founder at Global Online Universities Consortium on August 19, 2010 at 12:30pm EDT
  • It seems I am late to comment, but I will after such remarcable comments.

    1.- Thanks every one. . But it seems teachers do emphisize to much about their being indispensible.

    Yes. To have a teacher for an ONLINE course is good. But I want to claim that 95 of the teachers in the world are just lecturers.

    So ONLINE can be without a teacher as well. But I would prefer to have an instructor for online courses.as well .

    2.- I do not believe OER and NROC. NROC may have beautiful courses but who has done it.

    NROC as an organiser is fine, but courses should carry the name of the accredited and reputable schools. Then one can be sure of quality.

    Look up the colurses offrred by www.academicearth.org .

    3.- I am all for sharing like Obama says. Share any course with the world of 7 billion. Please note this.

    I agree with Colorado College.. Courses should not be free. It can be $ 10 to 50 per 3 credit course. In fact if a course is taken by several thousands students per semester then real investment can be amortised in 2 years. Beautyy of online is cost per person is nill if taken by thousands.

    I was going to say NROC can not be sustainable. But it is so already.

    Solution : Charge every one $ 10-50 per course whereever they are. . If they bring a poor certificate then it is free.

    4.- Yes I agree with NOT using Blackboard platform. They are too commercial. Plus alternatives many and free and as good as Blackboard.

     

    Solution to USA Community Colleges and many other colleges is ONLINE. NROC is a good organiser. But should provide only 3 categories of schools online courses

    1.- Most highly competitive schools ivy league schools, Drexel ( most expensive )

    2.- Highly competitive schools UCLA PennState

    3.- Competitive schools. University of Illinois, Umass ( beautiful one )

    Not every one can go to Harvard and MIT. If one cannot go even a competitive school then let him not to go college anyhow.

    mgozaydin@hotmail.com from Turkey

  • ONLINE or OER
  • Posted by Muvaffak Gozaydin , Founder at Global Online Universities Consortium on August 19, 2010 at 12:30pm EDT
  • I have forgotten to thank to

    Betzi Bateman

    Glenn Mc Ghee

    David Wiley

    Julie Witherow

    Jacky Hood

    for their wonderful comments and information. I have learned a lot from all of you.

    Thanks billion again.