Open online courses – an avalanche that might just get stopped

 Is there really a substitute for face-to-face learning in higher education? Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

These days there are plenty of prophets preaching hi-tech and digital solutions to the problems of expanding access to knowledge and higher education. Barely a week goes by without some new hymn to education technology, open-source software or open-access publishing. In the US, the growing chorus for online education through massive open online courses, or moocs, has been deafening. But in Britain, it has barely registered. Last December, the commercial launch of the Open University's mooc platform, FutureLearn, attracted the participation of a dozen universities and the support of David Willetts, but little response from Britain's beleaguered academics. No wonder that last month Sir Michael Barber, the chief education adviser of Pearson, the world's largest profit-making education provider, proclaimed that universities were powerless to stop the online avalanche.

Across the Atlantic, the debate about online courses and their potential to restructure higher education has been raging for some time. New companies and consortia of universities with hi-tech names such as Udacity, edX and Coursera are competing to provide rival mooc platforms. These moocs are available free to anyone, but they do not earn you any credits towards a degree or diploma. No one has yet figured out how to make money from them. Nowhere has this been more evident than at the University of California, where UCOnline, set up with a $7m (£4.5m) loan in 2011, has spectacularly failed to pay for itself, let alone generate income.

Historically, the University of California has often proved a weathervane for global trends in higher education. It was at the forefront of creating a mass public higher education system in the 1960s, and disinvestment from the 1980s onward generated dramatic fee increases, layoffs, protests and occupations that subsequently spread around the world. So when Californian politicians (led by Governor Jerry Brown, who has pledged $37m for online initiatives) and university administrators still believe online platforms are a golden bullet that promises to expand access while reducing costs and students' time to degree, we have to take them seriously. It is not often that the interests of vote-hungry politicians, resource-starved administrators and academics entranced by the democratic potential of open online courses all converge.

And yet when a Californian senator outlined a bill that would allow students in the state to take online classes from a private provider for credit, it unleashed a storm of criticism. A UC faculty petition collected more than 1,000 signatures in 48 hours. As news spread across the US, condemnation came from the Campaign for the Future of Higher Education and a New York Times editorial.

Those who teach in California's system of higher education are not luddites. Neither were they simply alarmed at the attempts to bypass established mechanisms of peer review and quality control of classes. In the face of the uproar, these have now been dropped. But the stakes are far greater than faculty control and oversight.

If private providers are allowed to run classes for credit in California's public system, it will accelerate privatisation. It will solve the conundrum of how to make profits out of moocs by providing private providers with a revenue stream from public funds. This type of back-door privatisation, rather than the likes of Pearson taking over a whole campus, seems a real and present danger in the English and Welsh system.

Private online providers have long been criticised in the US for profiting on the back of federal-funded loans to disadvantaged students, who rarely complete their classes. While online providers have proved remarkably reticent about making this type of data available, two studies from Columbia University researchers have shown the uneven effects of online classes. In Washington and Virginia they found that underachieving, minority and disadvantaged students fared particularly badly when they took online classes. The promise of moocs to improve access and democratise knowledge is a chimera.

The bottom line is that there really is no replacement for face-to-face interaction between academics and students. Digital and online methods can enrich those interactions, but it seems unlikely they can replace them in anything other than a greatly impoverished way without the investment of considerable resources. No wonder 72% of those who have taught moocs over the past three years believe students who took their classes had not done sufficient work to deserve credit from their institution.

This might just be one avalanche that gets stopped – events in California may well be the test of that.

• James Vernon teaches history at the University of California, Berkeley

View the original article here

Hakitzu: the app teaching kids to code - video

Interview with award-winning teacher David Miller

Jessica Shepherd interviews award-winning teacher David Miller and actor Bill Paterson

View the original article here

Online students and teachers are no different from the rest of academia

 Why is teaching online still viewed with prejudice by some academics? Photograph: allOver photography/Alamy

My name is David Newton, professor of business studies. I'm an online higher education tutor. Some of you may read that last sentence as a confession, rather than a simple statement of fact. Why? In my view, it is because – despite its growing popularity and valuable role in the future of higher education – online learning is still a mystery to many in academia, and viewed with prejudice by some.

Take me, for example. People assume I'm some new breed of academic. I'm not. I am currently a tutor and programme director for undergraduate and MBA business degrees with a respected online learning provider. But my background is no different from any other university professor. I've worked in numerous UK and overseas universities, researched and published widely, and was dean of business and vice-principal at the Royal Agricultural College, where I still hold a visiting professorship in strategic management.

I'm not a radical, or anti-establishment – I've loved and respected working at every university I've joined. I just happen to have moved into a different learning delivery model because I knew it would give me greater flexibility to continue with my academic interests and spend more time with my family. It's a model that fits around my life.

That's something I share in common with my students. They aren't unusual either. They just choose to study online because the flexibility suits them. Online higher education means students can combine education with employment – often fast-tracking their careers as a result – or fit study around family commitments.

These students don't pursue online degrees as second best, nor are they students who have somehow been enticed away from traditional universities with promises of a better answer. They choose to study online because it simply works better for them. In most cases, it's also a far more affordable option than a campus-based degree – and it's clear that financial factors are increasingly driving higher education choices across the board.

So what are online students like? They're just like any other students pursuing academic objectives. The only real difference is that they tend to have more 'real world' experience. Because a lot of my students are in employment, they are much quicker to grasp theory and see how it can be put into practice. They therefore push us to reflect that in the course content; tutorials will commonly feature their real-life experiences, a benefit for all.

Tutorials are another aspect of online higher education that seems to mystify and confuse the onlooker. The popular myth is that online education means reduced contact time and poorer quality provision – whereas in fact the opposite is true.

When I was teaching on campuses, I often found students were reluctant to knock on my office door or kept quiet during a traditional face-to-face tutorial session – particularly those who were struggling with a topic. Technology, now ubiquitous in modern life, has removed those barriers.

In my current role, students are quite happy to email me and debate ideas or take part in interactive 'live chat' video tutorials. These are held very frequently – typically, I will host six tutorials per module, per quarter. Forums are another powerful tool for encouraging quality interaction – again, using familiar technology to encourage the lively exchange of ideas and independent thinking.

And what about the quality of the qualifications themselves? Surely an online degree must have different academic processes or standards? Well, no actually. Where I work, the same academic processes are in place that you would find in any UK university – and in many cases, I would argue that they even go further.

For example, we report to external exam boards four times a year via exam committees and conduct external verification of exam papers, module content, and samples of marking. We are also encouraged to assess and reassess our work continually – for example, producing continuous module reports to highlight student performance, any technical issues, and suggested improvements.

The quality of the learning we provide and the impact it has on students' lives is what has always driven me – and continues to do so. Knowing that I'm able to give people a quality academic experience, via a flexible model that makes learning possible for them, is a great motivator.

I'm not saying that online higher education is a model that will replace traditional universities. It won't and I don't think it should. The two are complementary. But it is a model that meets the needs of an ever growing group that prefers to study this way – and a vital means of ensuring UK higher education retains its share of the international market. There is no mystery about it. All the traditional elements of university learning are still there, they are simply adapted for a technological generation.

Professor David Newton is a module tutor and programme director of undergraduate business programmes for online learning provider RDI – follow it on Twitter @RDIonline

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more articles like this direct to your inbox, become a member of the Higher Education Network.

View the original article here

Careers built on distance learning

 A starting position as a bank teller can lead to bigger things. Photograph: Alamy

James Elwood left school with a clutch of good A-level grades, but despite pressure from his teachers to consider university he took an entry-level job as bank cashier.

Four years and several promotions later, he works for Santander as a business manager, providing advice and support to small companies. He has also completed a degree in business studies with the Open University, which delivers all its courses via distance learning – an experience he thinks has played a key role in his success.

"When I had to write essays, I was analysing my experiences with the companies I worked for, so the process helped me become a better employee," he explains.

Combining work with distance learning has allowed Nick Walker to set up his own business at the age of 19. He is currently taking a degree-equivalent course in games development via the online learning provider train2game. The course typically takes about three years to complete. In the meantime, he earns an income from his app development company Icey Monty, which he set up with fellow student John Esslemont.

According to Zoe Molyneux, external affairs and communications manager at the Studentroom, the UK's biggest online forum for students, more young people are exploring distance and part-time learning options. "This is partly down to rising tuition fees, but also questions about whether a degree will guarantee them a job at the end. So they're keen to find out if there are other ways of achieving their goals," she says.

In recognition of this, more colleges and higher education institutions are upping the range of part-time and distance learning they offer, including blended learning (a mix of distance and face-to-face learning), foundation degrees (two-year courses with a focus on work-based learning) and more vocational courses like higher national certificates.

Walker feels he made the right choice. Not only does the money he is making cover the cost of his studies, but he is debt-free and can afford to take time out when it suits him – he plans to spend a couple of months later in the year skiing. "I've got the time and the funds to actually have a social life as well, which is good."

Now 22, Elwood owns his own home and car and thinks he is "four rungs up the ladder" from friends who chose the university route. "Instead of being 22 with a degree and one year of work experience, I've got a degree and nearly five years of work experience behind me ... I don't regret my decision one bit."

View the original article here

Construction begins on controversial Willits bypass

WILLITS, Calif. (KGO) -- Months of protests have slowed down a controversial Caltrans project, but construction has not stopped. A multi-million dollar freeway is being built on sensitive wetlands in an area that just doesn't have many cars. That money could be spent on roads anywhere in California, including the Bay Area. We bring you up to date on what's happening to your transportation dollars.

The Bay Area is now considered the eighth most congested traffic spot in the world. Los Angeles is number three. But Caltrans is planning to spend $300 million in the little town of Willits in Mendocino County where traffic is going down. Construction has already started.

We first told you about this project last May and we went back to take a closer look at what is happening to your transportation dollars and claims that Caltrans is misleading taxpayers.

"A CEO of a corporation would be fired for this kind of horrible, destructive, costly decision making," said Rich Estabrook, a petroleum engineer who lives near Willits. He has joined a coalition of environmental groups fighting the project.

More than 30 protesters have been arrested. The California Highway Patrol now guards the site 24 hours a day, but Caltrans is determined to keep going. Spokesman Phil Frisbie told us, "This has been a top priority of many agencies including the Mendocino Council of Governments for decades."

Willits is 135 miles north of San Francisco on Highway 101 -- the major route north to Eureka.

Frisbie says, "It's considered by many to be the lifeline to the north coast."

That may be true, but by the time Highway 101 goes through Willits, there are only about 8,000 vehicles a day on the road. Caltrans wants to build a four-lane freeway designed to carry roughly 5,000 vehicles an hour. That's $300 million for six miles of freeway, all designed to bypass a bottleneck where 101 turns into Main Street.

Willits City Council member Ron Orenstein says there are often "two lanes of traffic heading north, just gridlocked." He supports Caltrans' plan. There is no question something needs to be done, but others say Caltrans' solution is way too expensive and does too much damage to sensitive wetlands.

City Council member Madge Strong says, "It's too destructive and it only serves a very, very small segment of the traffic."

Critics point to the bottleneck. Caltrans data shows 70 percent of it is locals just driving around town, so most of the cars there won't even use the bypass. To get an idea of who would drive on the bypass, looked at photos from Caltrans' own traffic cameras on Highway 101 north of Willits. Caltrans data shows 60 percent of those vehicles are driving through Willits, so the area is closer to the level of traffic that might be expected on the bypass. Most of the pictures show just a few cars or none at all on the road.

Caltrans told us the pictures don't give a true understanding of traffic. So we went back to see for ourselves. During the late afternoon when the road is generally busiest we saw more cars on the road, but they were all traveling close to the speed limit. During the rest of the day, we saw just a few cars on the road.

We also checked the Caltrans traffic cam repeatedly for about two months. The only really heavy traffic we saw was during music festivals and on holiday weekends. Caltrans admits they don't design roads for holidays.

Ellen Drell of the Willits Environmental Center says the new freeway "will be mainly empty because the number of cars predicted to use this bypass is so small."

So how did a project that seems so out of scale get approved? It started in the mid-1990's when Caltrans predicted traffic in the area would grow by 60 percent over 20 years. It didn't. In fact traffic went down, but the size of the freeway plan has not changed.

Caltrans first claimed, "Only four-lane routes were considered" due to a Federal Highway Administration requirement." They posted it on their website, told us that in an interview and constantly repeated it to critics. But a letter from a federal transportation engineer says that is not true. It says, "level of service is not determinative of the eligibility for federal aid." That means it's up to the state and Caltrans, not the federal government. Caltrans has revised its website, but claims the earlier statement was still true indirectly.

Frisbie said, "It's true in the context that the Federal Highway Administration requires us to meet the purpose and need for a project."

The first phase of construction is starting with just two lanes, predicted to cost $210 million. Tens of millions of those dollars are being spent to prepare the area for four lanes. Frisbie said, "All the permits are for a four-lane project. We purchased the land for a four-lane project. We are doing the mitigation for four lanes."

The final phase is estimated to cost $80 million to $90 million or more, depending on when construction takes place.

Critics are not giving up. Drell said, "The entire project could be shrunk back to a true two-lane road. So it's not too late."

The environmental impact of the bypass is so extensive, Caltrans is required to do $50 million worth of mitigation to compensate. Both sides are still waiting for a judge to rule in a lawsuit over environmental issues.

Written and produced by Jennifer Olney

(Copyright ©2013 KGO-TV.

View the original article here

Teens put finishing touches on Science of Skateboarding

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- San Francisco's new Exploratorium opened last spring, but it's designed to keep changing and evolving into the future. One new concept is to build portable exhibits that can travel away from the museum. A case in point is the science of skateboarding developed with some expert, but underage advisors.

Whether you are a sidewalk surfer or an X Games superstar, if you skateboard, you also do physics. The Exploratorium has been using skateboarding to teach scientific principles for more than a decade. They even have a video lesson online, exploring concepts such as gravity, inertia and torque. And now exhibit developers are taking the idea even further, with a traveling exhibit for a wider audience. It is not just hands-on, it's feet-on too, with all kinds of skateboard activities.

You can learn about the trucks that turn the wheels as you shift your weight, or why different types of materials are better for different types of skateboarding or how to find the center of gravity by balancing a board on your fingers.

The scientific know-how for display came from The Exploratorium staff. But the exhibit is actually aimed at teenagers, so they were brought in to help design it.

Ramses Roman Cerda, 12, told us he thinks "It's cool The Exploratorium wants to know more about skateboarding." The staff worked with San Francisco middle schoolers from a skate club run by the Jamestown Community Center. The kids helped brainstorm ideas to make the concept come alive. A few months ago they painted murals they designed for the outside of the exhibit.

Eric Dimond is with the Exploratorium. He says, "The kids are starting to refer to this as their project. It's our project together. And when I heard that, that was like the most gratifying thing, that they are really taking ownership."

MetLife funded the collaboration with a grant, but the teens supplied the energy. Noah McManus of the Jamestown Community Center says, "It's hard to kind of get them to focus on anything. And you can see today, all of a sudden, 30 kids were focused on one thing. And it's exciting to see that, to see them care."

When the exhibit was unveiled outside the Exploratorium, the skate club came to check out their work. The activities were a hit, but the artwork is what really made them proud. They looked for the parts they had painted, and speculated they might be famous now.

You can visit the exhibit for free in front of the Exploratorium at Pier 15 now, and expect to see it popping up in other spots around the Bay Area soon. It's a good lesson in physics and fun.

Written and produced by Jennifer Olney

(Copyright ©2013 KGO-TV/DT.

View the original article here

Roots Of Peace helps honor landmine victim's request

MARIN COUNTY, Calif. (KGO) -- A Marin County humanitarian organization has made a historic mission to the Middle East to honor a little boy's request. That child lost a leg to a landmine in Israel and his wish to free the world from landmines started a movement. It ended, with Israelis and Palestinians working together in the fields of Bethlehem.

A little boy skipping along a path through a field doesn't realize just how dangerous the path is. He takes a shortcut through an old minefield in his village in the fields of Bethlehem.

Daniel Yuval is a young boy who started a campaign to get rid of landmines. He won the attention of a California mother who runs a non-profit to remove landmines. What happened is making history. Israelis and Palestinians are working together to remove old landmines, turning a deadly field into a land filled with opportunities.

Mines killed nearly half a dozen children at that location and many adults. However, the Marin County humanitarian organization Roots Of Peace stepped in to get rid of the mines.

The founder of Roots Of Peace, Heidi Kuhn, delicately negotiated a historic partnership between Israelis and Palestinians. She said that partnership "allowed us, Roots Of Peace, to be the first ever humanitarian demining organization in the Middle East, helping bring forth food security and jobs."

"As we remove these landmines from the earth, we pray the children may walk safely and shepherds may tend to their sheep," said Kuhn.

The villagers are extremely grateful to Kuhn -- a California mother of four who answered the call of young Yuval.

Yuval's right leg was blown off by a landmine in Israel's Golan Heights in February 2010. He was playing in the snow with his brothers and sisters. They didn't know it was a minefield. He was only 11.

Jennings: "What did he say to you?"
Kuhn: "He asked me, as a mother, if I could help him create a mine-free world."
Jennings: "How many years did it take you?"
Kuhn: "It took three years."

San Francisco Israeli consul general Dr. Andy David provided immense support.

"It's just the proof that Israelis and Palestinians can work together, can bring peace together," said David.

Yuval and his family came with Kuhn to visit ABC7 News just a few months after he convinced Israel's government to pass a bill to ban landmines that aren't needed for defense. Daniel partnered with Kuhn and Nobel Peace Prize winner Jerry White in that effort. White also lost a leg to a landmine near the same area as Yuval.

The money for the project came from Napa Valley vintners Paul and Shirley Dean who donated $500,000.

Kuhn flew between California and Israel more than half a dozen times. She met with top leaders including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian authority president Mahmoud Abbas and religious leaders. She persuaded a retired Israeli army colonel and a Palestinian mother of four to team up for this project.

"We look to see the Israeli children and Palestinian children playing in the lands without mines," said Fadwa Abu-Laban from Roots of Peace West Bank.

And Kuhn met with the leader of the Catholic church in Jerusalem, who gave her the first-ever Peace Medal in the church's history to honor her life-saving work, in the name of a young hero -- Yuval.

"This little boy helped change the face, not only of his nation, but across borders all over the world. And we are well on track to helping him achieve his dream for a mine free world," said Kuhn.

The next Roots Of Peace project is aimed at removing landmines near the Jordan River, near the baptismal site of Jesus. There are several churches near a popular tourist path which are filled with booby traps and landmines. This is a $20 million project.

How you can help: rootsofpeace.org

(Copyright ©2013 KGO-TV/DT.

View the original article here