Comments

The article on MOOConomics and Peggy’s thoughts on the dichotomies made me think about the existing degree programs versus the flexible degree option, and what may/should remain constant regardless of the degree type.

Quality of students graduating with a degree from UW-Parkside depends on:

• Quality of Admitted Students
• Quality of Degree Learning outcomes/Competencies
• Quality of Instruction
• Quality Processes for Assessment & Closing the feedback loop
• Quality of Student Support Services
• Quality of Accreditation

A summary of these dimensions for different undergraduate degree types is outlined below.

Now, if we elaborate on the “one degree, no differences” thought, it means that UW-P, regardless of the type of degree, will have:

1. Similar admission standards for incoming students
2. Similar expected learning outcomes for graduating students
3. Similar instructional quality for students progressing towards their degree
4. Similar assessment processes for evaluating student competencies
5. Similar level of support services for students pursuing different degree types
6. Same accreditation credentials for each degree

If we adhere to the above principles, perhaps (1) and (2) are relatively less difficult to work on. It is not clear if we need to adhere to principle (3). After all, proponents of flexible degrees mention that it should not matter where students learn concepts, as long as they are able to demonstrate degree competencies.  But if we agree on principle (3), implementation will require carefully sifting through myriad instructional materials ranging from MOOCs to instructional videos on youtube, and arriving at acceptable instructional materials/formats for students to achieve their competencies. To implement principles (4) through (6), we need extensive study and planning. 

My two cents worth. Look forward to further discussions.

Theresa,

The article presents a couple of dichotomies that I think provide the tension for our discussion.  On one hand we have the dichotomy of college education v college degree.  It is not necessarily true that getting a degree ( a piece of paper) means the same as getting a college education.  While the author points out, correctly I think, that students increasingly care more about the paper than the education so that they can get a job, I predict that within 5 years of this type of approach the weaknesses of degrees attained in this manner will begin to show.  And institutions that have taken that road will suffer in terms of reputation.

On the other hand, we have the dichotomy of selectivity v open access.  Education is about learning, and learning is not only about teaching.  Students participate and contribute to their education and the education of others through their participation.  This is the basis of selectivity- get the best students into your classes and your programs, and the learning experience will be enhanced.  Open access means that you have less participation, and perhaps of lesser caliber.  A flexible degree completion program such as the one suggested by the Western Governors model at the very least limits participation, and at the worst, completely shuts it out.  This is not conducive to learning.

Finally, there is the dichotomy of traditional (f2f) v online degrees.  Parkside has one degree to offer, we cannot separate the traditional degree from the online degree.  If we do, then one will be second to the other.  Even if we don’t separate them, it is probable that a flexible degree completion will be evaluated differently than the traditional one.  This will reduce the value of the flexible degree program, and make it unattractive to potential students.

The author appears to suggest that a possible solution to these tensions is not to choose one side over the other, but to perhaps look at some sort of hybridization.  I am beginning to think that this is the only way we can provide a flexible degree that will meet the needs of students while maintaining the integrity of our degree and also maintaining our commitment to students willing and able to pursue a traditional degree (on campus).

What is we consider a flexible degree process (not a flexible degree) that is open to all students in all majors?  If we can encourage majors to develop competencies rather than outcomes ( or perhaps a combination of competencies and outcomes) then perhaps some competencies can be met through a flexible online format, or through examination, or through prior experience.  Some competencies may not be able to be achieved this way. 

This actually increases access to degree completion, since students don’t HAVE to pursue degrees in specific areas- they can continue to pursue the original areas of interest ( of course they could be in the areas identified in the concept paper as well).  Adult learners with college credits who wish to complete their degree in sociology, for example, could perhaps achieve some credit through examination ( after pursuing some online learning activities, including MOOCs), use prior learning assessment, and then do the remaining credits in online courses delivered through Parkside, or do f2f classes.  This still accommodates their circumstances, and offers multiple pathways to finishing their degree.  It also means that more programs can be included in the flexible degree.