Miscellanea for Branch Campuses

Touching on several subjects, mostly personal:

A few days ago I passed 20,000 views on this blog.  Given how long I’ve been posting, 20,000 is anything but “viral,” but it pleases me that some people either subscribe/follow or simply stumble on the blog, and from the feedback I receive find it to be helpful.  Nice.

Originally I started this blog to provide a service to the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA), as well as to help me organize my thoughts for a book I wanted to write.  That book, Out on a Limb:  A Branch Campus Life was published almost two years ago, and I’m pleased to see that it continues to sell, in both print and electronic versions on Amazon.

Speaking of NABCA, if you haven’t attended the conference, you should consider doing so (www.nabca.net).  Unfortunately, it often isn’t until a person attends that he or she realizes how valuable it can be to meet other people working in the branch world.  If you can make it, you won’t be disappointed.  I can almost guarantee that you’ll come away with some new friends and good ideas.

Aside from pitching my book, I’d also like to remind readers that I work as a consultant and coach.  I enjoy visiting campuses, because I meet interesting people and nearly always discover something that I haven’t encountered before.  Branches certainly share a number of qualities, but they also have their unique stories, bringing a variety of challenges and opportunities. 

Branch work can be isolating or even lonely, especially for new branch administrators.  I hope this blog and my book might help, and I’m sure that attending the NABCA conference is therapeutic.  Working with a coach provides a helpful and safe sounding board outside the organization, which also contributes to professional growth.  To be sure, I’d like to have a few more consulting or coaching clients, but more importantly, branch administrators need a source of support from someone who understands the unique challenges that branch campuses face.

Finally, from time to time I pass along resources that I think may be of value to people leading branch campuses.  I suggest you check out WCET Frontiers (https://wcetblog.wordpress.com/), a blog dedicated to e-learning topics.  It behooves advocates for branch campuses to stay on top of e-learning developments, but I also find information of general value on this blog.  Check out this post: https://wcetblog.wordpress.com/2015/12/21/ipeds-fall-2014-de-highlights/, which reports on enrollment trends, online as well as across other sectors.

If your campus is like many across the country, you may have experienced declining enrollments over the past few years.  In fact, most sectors of higher education have experienced declines, but online continues to grow, with one in seven students now enrolled exclusively online.  Online options are a serious competitor to other choices, especially for the audience served by branches, but my argument is that most institutions will find that their main campus, branches and fully online programs serve different audiences, inviting thoughtful strategies to exploit a range of opportunities to build enrollment and generate revenue.  Check out WCET.

The How of Disruption in Higher Education

I have not written about innovation or disruption in higher education, on Creating the Future, for a while, although I do write about it on my branch campus blog.  This post will be published on both.  (The blog addresses are www.branchcampus.blogspot.com and www.drcharlesbird.com/creatingthefuture.)

I’m intrigued by the rapid progress of MOOCs (massive open online courses) and other online options, but the trigger for this post is the pushback we see, especially from some faculty members.  The defense of traditional classroom education seems disingenuous, appearing to suggest that all faculty members create vibrant learning environments and transform students into sophisticated critical thinkers, even as students also acquire undefined benefits from the residential experience.

Actually, there are remarkable professors out there, and I know full well that important growth can come through the traditional experience.  The issue is how consistently this happens, whether we might find less expensive ways of creating these experiences, and whether the level of debt students are taking on is worth the gain (still undefined and unmeasured).

That said, I also think many defenders of the status quo fail to understand how new developments will disrupt traditional higher education.  Remember, disruptive improvements begin by serving current nonconsumers.  In this case, they attract audiences that are unserved or poorly served by traditional options.

In the case of higher education’s future, like it or not, the issue is money.  Residential education, specifically, has become so expensive that nearly all non-elite institutions fail to cover their cost of operation, especially given declining state support for public education, without extraordinary increases in tuition.  What some have called an “arms race” to compete for students has gone too far. 

The result, as I’ve written many times, is that many institutions require the revenue from branch campuses, online programs and other sources, to survive.  If the “primary” activity is going to lose money, then something else has to offset that loss.

To cause disruption, it isn’t necessary that most students turn to MOOCs or other low-cost options.  All that has to happen is for main campus financial losses to grow larger, and for enough nontraditional students to choose lower cost routes to their goals, to cause many institutions to begin a slide into oblivion.  Add in the developing trend of some employers to value the credentialing of skills over degrees, and we have the opportunity for disruption.

Once institutions pass the tipping point, change will seem to come quickly, but the reality is that it is happening across a much longer period of time, as a result of traditional campuses over-reaching.  This is why second- or third-tier institutions will suffer the most.  Elite public and private institutions will be fine, although they will need to make some adjustments.

Finally, when critics attack new delivery options, especially with regard to quality, they essentially are attacking a straw man.  Disruption moves upstream, from serving nonconsumers to serving traditional consumers, by improving quality through experience.  I believe our culture values education, and few are addressing how the “psychology of going to school” will impact choice.  Nevertheless, even if many people prefer a traditional, residential education, institutions have an unworkable financial model that seems ready to collapse.

As always, leaders who understand how to empower branch campuses and online programs for entrepreneurial outreach have the advantage.  Some institutions will thrive, but to do so, they must understand the challenge.

The Accelerating Rate of Change in Higher Education

A few years ago, I wrote a piece for this blog titled, “Rate of Change and Predicting Which Institutions Will Thrive in the Future.”  You can find it at http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2010/05/rate-of-change-and-predicting-which.html.

The post was based on a quote from Jack Welch:  “I’ve always believed that when the rate of change inside an institution becomes slower than the rate of change outside, the end is in sight.”  Sobering words, but the logic is compelling.  Over and over again, we have seen that established organizations in a wide range of industries lose out to more innovative, nimble organizations with an idea that disrupted the status quo.

I am revisiting this topic, because the rate of change in higher education clearly accelerated in recent months.  The stories are stunning, as the availability of MOOCs and other online options are expanding.  The emergence of “free” courses has rapidly spawned remarkably low-cost options to turn those non-credit experiences into credit-bearing courses; we see more interest than ever in credit for prior learning; and we see a move toward awarding credit and degrees that are based on competencies, rather than on completed coursework.

I could go on, but I no longer have any doubt that higher education will forever be changed.  As I’ve written before, the problem for most institutions is that their traditional, residential programs inevitably lose money, in large part because of the nearly insane competition to expand amenities.  However, if you want to see real confusion about the challenge of serving traditional audiences, while encouraging innovation and attracting new audiences, look at state-level policy makers and boards of trustees.

Here’s the rub:  The institutional financial engine requires increased income from non-residential audiences.  I believe those audiences will be drawn to online or branch campus-based hybrid programs.  Unfortunately for the institution, those students will have excellent options to meet their needs that will be very low cost.  Established institutions will find it difficult to charge enough tuition to meet their broader financial needs, unless they have a very special brand.

We don’t know yet just which of the emerging options will be most attractive to students.  For myself, I wonder exactly how the psychology of going to school will interact with the efficiency and cost advantages of technology-driven choices.  How will students combine various modes of delivery and learning to create what may well become customized lifelong learning portfolios?

I anticipate that students will chose different delivery modes for different purposes and topics, depending on their strengths, interests, and life circumstances.  Degrees may actually become less important than building a portfolio of competencies, although adult learners may aggregate such competencies, add some missing pieces, and eventually claim their diploma.

Organizing Thoughts on Delivery and Assessment

There is no question that lots of things are happening in higher education.  New programs and new strategies show up at a rapid clip.  As you think about the future, you will necessarily make choices about course and program delivery, and those choices will have a major impact on how attractive you are to prospective students.

Consider this range of possibilities for delivery:

·      Face-to-face in a traditional classroom

·      Synchronous delivery with some students in the same classroom as the instructor and others participating through interactive video

·      Hybrid delivery, which may include asynchronous streaming videos, online elements, and occasional classroom meetings, which themselves can occur in a variety of forms; this might include use of the “flipped classroom,” which offers significant creative opportunities

·       What I’ll call “traditional” online, with an instructor teaching 15-25 students

·      Scalable online, enrolling, say, 75-300 students in each course, with one instructor and facilitators supporting smaller “sections” of students

·      What I used to call “massively scalable” courses, with a thousand or more students per section, but still supported by a team of facilitators, working under the supervision of a faculty member

·      Massive open online courses (MOOCs), sometimes with more than 100,000 students enrolled, usually for free, but typically not offered for credit

Now, consider how students might be credentialed for their work:

·      Traditional grades, leading to a degree

·      Traditional grades, leading to certificates that document specific skills and experiences

·      No grades, but the awarding of a badge (similar to a certificate) or a certificate of completion; students might receive traditional course credit through some additional process, probably for a fee

·      Recognition of prior learning and the awarding of academic credit for that work

And how might we assess student learning?  How about:

·      Traditional exams, projects and papers, perhaps with exams taken at a testing center

·      Portfolio assessment

·      Demonstrated competencies

Then, how will institutions generate revenue or otherwise cover their costs?

·      Through tuition, fees, state support, and endowments

·      Employers pay a fee to access resumes of top course/program completers

·      Content producers, such as Coursera and Udacity, license high quality course content to institutions, which then provide support and flipped classroom experiences to students; colleges and universities can create niche opportunities to do the same, including internationally

·      Industries/employers “sponsor” courses and programs, covering the cost of development and delivery

·      Students pay a fee to have competencies assessed and “certified”

Each of these lists can be expanded, and some of my bullet points may need further description to be clear.  My advice is to read newsletters, surf the Internet, and network with creative people.  I don’t think it is all that overwhelming, explored in a thoughtful way, but it does take time and energy.  Hence the concerns I expressed awhile back about making sure that you focus on the so-called “important but not urgent” items that will create your future. 

As you consider audience, cost, price, content, delivery and support services, you can work your way through the options.  You may well make different choices for different programs and audiences, and your competition will affect what makes sense.  It’s important to be nimble and engaged!

Two Examples of Emerging Challenges to Traditional Institutions of Higher Education

Today (February 4, 2013), there are several stories in Inside Higher Education that illustrate the point of my last post, and I want to use two of them to express a relatively strong statement of concern.  I simply do not believe that many leaders in higher education understand the train that is bearing down on them.

The first piece is titled, “Free Course, Inexpensive Exam” (http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/04/free-online-course-providers-pair-credit-bearing-exams).  The story describes the decision of a student to take a free online course, and then receive three credits at his home institution by taking a CLEP exam, for just $99.   The piece then discusses some of the many options that more and more students undoubtedly will choose over paying much higher tuition at a university, or even at a community college. 

The course was a general education course in psychology, and the student makes a perfectly understandable point that it made no sense to him to pay tuition to attend a large lecture class, in which personal attention or interaction would be limited.  However, my own observation is that general psychology is an enormously profitable course at most institutions, as are many other general education courses.  Indeed, a full cost accounting view of most upper level courses at universities would reveal that nearly all are offered at a deficit.  Take away the lucrative general education courses, and it may become impossible to balance a traditional residential institution’s budget.

The second piece is titled, “If a School Adds an Amenity and No One Knows, Does it Really Exist?  ( http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/stratedgy/if-school-adds-amenity-and-no-one-knows-does-it-really-exist#ixzz2JwPL6XBs).  It caught my attention, because it is a blog post, commenting on a recent study that argues it may make economic sense for institutions to spend more on amenities than on improving academic quality.  (A story on the original research can be found at http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/29/many-students-opt-colleges-spend-more-nonacademic-functions-study-finds) 

Leaving aside all sorts of things one might say about the implications of this study, my take is that it illustrates another reason that most institutions are in trouble:  They have bought into a war of competition, to fill first-year classes by building the “next new thing” that will draw students.  Regardless of whether the strategy works to attract students, it certainly increases the cost of operations and contributes to escalating tuition.

These pieces illustrate the dilemma faced at most institutions.  In effect, people are working harder and harder to fill their first-year class, with what may well be negative financial implications in the long run.  Some will succeed; some will fail.

The potentially good news is that many presidents and boards now understand the need to create new sources of revenue, and that could be helpful to branch campuses and providers of online courses.  Unfortunately, however, most leaders are trapped by their frame of reference, and outside of those of us with a branch campus or continuing education background, most leaders at traditional institutions do not understand how to build innovation teams and release the power of entrepreneurship.

Next time:  The leadership dilemma

Staying on Top of Developments in Higher Education

I start most days by checking email and reading/scanning various newsletters.  I work from what I like to think is a holistic, almost intuitive sense of direction, and that seems to require immersion in information.  I wish I did a better job of retaining specific sources and details, but at this point in my life I’m going to roll with my strengths and not worry too much about my deficits.  (That’s a shout-out to all my strengths-based leadership friends!)

I realize that most people lack the time to invest that I do in exploring ideas, whether through reading online newsletters, networking, or otherwise pursuing new developments.  I hope to provide a brief series of posts, here, to capture a few key elements, as I think they might relate to administrators at branch campuses or other small public and private institutions.

I recommend that anyone interested in emerging change subscribe to at least two online resources that I check out every day.  The first is Inside Higher Ed, which I find more valuable to administrators than The Chronicle of Higher Education, although I do subscribe to it, as well. 

You can check out Inside Higher Ed at www.insidehighered.com, and subscriptions to the Daily Update are free.  Inside Higher Ed also supports some useful groups on LinkedIn, and the Update includes a number of interesting bloggers.  My favorite blog is called “Confessions of a Community College Dean.”

Just today, the Update had an interesting story on MOOCs and one that covers a recent study suggesting that there is very little connection between what an institution spends on students and the quality of the education they receive.  There also is an interview with Randy Best, CEO of Academic Partnerships, which just announced a new initiative, called MOOC2Degree.  It is an interesting new idea for awarding credit and attracting students to enroll in online degree programs.

Academic Partnerships is a company that works with public universities to create and market relatively large online programs.  I worked with them, when I was at Ohio University, and, although the partnership was challenging to manage, it also was instructive and successful in attractive several thousand students to our online RN to BSN program.  Randy is innovative, entertaining, and frequently controversial.  The Q and A definitely helps explain the MOOC2Degree initiative.

The second resource is the “Professional, Continuing and Online Education Update by UPCEA,” which is at http://continuingedupdate.blogspot.com/.  It typically provides links to three articles, usually related to online learning.  Some of them can be quite thought-provoking, such as one today, titled, “The End of the University as We Know It,” by Nathan Harden, for the American Interest.  It is long, but makes an interesting argument.  (The particular piece is at http://the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=1352.)

Anyone who hopes to understand and compete effectively in the emerging new world of higher education needs to invest at least a little time in studying trends.  I hope this blog is of help to those in the branch campus world, which can be part of a thoughtful institutional strategy, but also will be challenged to adapt to the educational and potential financial advantages of online options.

From Epic 2020: New Video on Disruption in Higher Education

Back in August, I recommended that readers take a look at a video posted online by my friend, Bill Sams.  If you haven’t watched it, check it out at www.epic2020.org.  On the Epic web site, you’ll find links to other sites of interest.

In the Epic 2020 video, Sams drew on recent and current events to forecast a radically different environment for higher education, by the year 2020.  Regardless of your personal point of view, and certainly regardless of what you want the future to be, I think Sams captures trends that deserve attention.  The video has been viewed over 40,000 times, so lots of people are paying attention.

Now, Sams has posted a new video, providing a “…concise view of what has already happened.”  The video, which is a brief, Ted-type lecture, leads to the conclusion that 2012 may actually be the tipping point, following which traditional higher education will be forever changed.  Check the video at http://epic2020.org/2012-the-tipping-point/.  Again, agree of disagree, but do not overlook the fact that Sams has essentially brought together a summary of current events.

My own best guess remains that we will see a variety of options for the pursuit of educational objectives.  The challenge, however, will be for individual institutions to identify a program niche, develop outstanding services, control costs, and generate enough revenue to thrive.  If an institution sticks primarily to face-to-face delivery to residential students, then I think it will be difficult to be successful.  Indeed, far too many institutions have a financial model that actually loses money on every residential student.  Without strong endowments to support the financial loss, attracting new audiences is the only hope of survival.

The strategic issues for branch campuses are only modestly different than for main campuses, because branches are more like main campuses than they are different.  Delivery and packaging options are extremely significant to diversification and the ability to respond to changing demands.

Check out the Sams videos and consider how your campus or institution will attract sufficient enrollment to stay successful.  Of course, as I’ve said before, even if traditional education does better than I think it will, attracting new audiences will support even greater success and provide better opportunities for your audience.

Distance Learning Administrators Conference

Last month, I had the honor and pleasure of presenting the closing keynote address at the Distance Learning Administrators Conference (DLA), sponsored by the University of West Georgia.  I am grateful to Melanie Clay for the invitation, and to Janet Gubbins, for her help and support in making things go smoothly.

This year’s conference was held on Jekyll Island, GA, a terrific location I had not visited in nearly 20 years.  You can find information about the conference and program at http://www.westga.edu/~distance/dla/, and I believe they plan to use the same venue, next year.

My presentation was titled, “Challenging the Status Quo.” I argued that established institutions are especially at risk in a disruptive environment, because their assumptions, processes, and perspectives make meaningful innovation difficult to achieve.  Established institutions are built to maintain the status quo, not turn it upside down.  Incremental improvements are their strength.

Challenging the status quo requires a different mindset.  When the goal is to attract new student audiences, existing practices are nearly guaranteed to be off the mark.  For that reason, developing a unit dedicated to innovation is typically the best approach.   Innovation teams call for bringing together the right mix of talents and experience, then giving members the time and opportunity to become immersed in their projects.

If you are interested in seeing the PowerPoint slides, you can find them at http://www.westga.edu/~distance/dla/concurrentsessions_2012.php#mon.  On this page, you will find titles and descriptions for all of the conference presentations. Many of the presentations have links to other documents, as well.  Scroll to the bottom of the page for the link to my slides.

I encourage my branch campus friends to consider attending DLA (in addition to attending NABCA or RBCA, of course).  Branch campus conferences these days include a lot of discussion about online/distance learning, but I found it valuable to spend time with a group specifically focused on that topic.  I continue to believe that branch campuses and online programs can strengthen one another through collaborative partnerships.  Indeed, I doubt that branches can thrive in the future, without providing online and hybrid options for their students.

Most institutions would be wise to develop a comprehensive strategy for reaching out to potential students.  Broadly, this might include a more or less traditional approach on their main/residential campus, and a hybrid approach at branch campuses to serve a broader region for which their brand is especially strong.  In that context, a focused set of fully online programs that meet the needs of those for whom maximum flexibility is the first priority, or that attract enrollment in programs that are especially distinctive or that serve a relatively unique audience, completes the strategy.

In addition to DLA, the folks at the University of West Georgia also publish The Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, which you can find at http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/.  The Journal is both interesting and free, so check it out!