The National Journal Policy Summit hosted industry leaders, labor and workforce experts, and advocacy groups to discuss the future of higher education in the US--given our shifting economy and the changing models of post-secondary degrees. The summit, held on July 10, 2013, was underwritten by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
In his
keynote, Robert Shireman, Executive Director, California Competes, compared education to exercise, claiming that convenience is not the barrier to education, as--like gyms and sidewalks--libraries and internet are abundant but not necessarily well-utilized. So, what role do colleges and universities play in a world of ubiquitous, self-serve information? How do they provide value to people who can directly access information that was once only available through educational institutions?
Shireman suggests that online resources are a supplement--not a substitute--to the classroom. For example, he criticized California's proposal to buy an iPad for every K-12 student to help personalize education. It's not the access to knowledge that needs personalization, he noted--it's the method of delivery. The role of the classroom is to figure out how to help each student reach his or her potential and find his or her own motivation--not to teach students how to use an iPad. Using the technology is merely a tool of learning, not the end goal of learning itself.
Shireman also questioned the variables involved in measuring the cost of educational success. How do you analyze the cost per unit if you do not know what the unit of learning is? If it's a lecture, he says, it seems obvious that information delivery is cheaper online. But something is missing from that experience--the engagement students in have in the class with the teacher and other students, the papers they write, and retention. He believes these should be a part of the unit of learning. Furthermore, affordability proponents should look at how money is spent to lower costs. He recommended putting a stop to spending so much on lecture and regurgitation and instead investing in student engagement.
In this new knowledge economy, Shireman says, the logical thing to do is move the free, online courses to the already motivated students--those already in four-year colleges, who have demonstrated the drive to succeed in this environment. Then move the money to those who do not have the resources--those who need more personalized attention and who need other kinds of motivation to succeed. In 10 years, Shireman concluded, if we do our jobs right, we will identify ways to see if online students are passive or active participants. And, in the meantime, colleges can refocus on real learning.