open source software: quality learning, improved productivity, or a distraction? jim farmer, sakai...
TRANSCRIPT
Open Source Software: Quality Learning, Improved
Productivity, or a Distraction?
Jim Farmer, Sakai Community Liaison Modern Language Association 120th Annual Convention
Philadelphia, 30 December 2004
2
Publisher’s Note
This presentation has been revised to include materials presented, responses to questions, and clarifications.
3
Open source, a path toward an end
• Open source software in a method for developing of software.
• A number of open source software projects, including Sakai, are developing software “tools” for education.
• These tools may be used to improve teaching and learning and research.
Added slide
4
Open source and proprietary
Open source Proprietary
Developed by a community to meet their needs
Developed by a firm to meet the anticipated needs of a market
Community “shares” Firm restricts market use
Success depends upon value to user
Firm depends upon long-term fees for profit
Added slide
5
Quality and the futureOpen source Proprietary
Quality Knowledge of the community
Employed expertise; relationship with users
Time horizon
Tends to be immediate
Long term
Vulnerability
Long term support
Industry consolidation, change in management
Added slide
6
Software and eLearning
• The Sakai Project and the Sakai Educational Partners Program will deliver “software tools” that faculty, staff, and students can use to improve their teaching, learning and research.
• The “end goal” is this improvement, not just building software. The Sakai Education Partners are providing guidance to the software development as well as contributing “Sakai interoperable” software they have found useful.
7
eLearning: We know
• There are many different kinds of eLearning.
• It works, but private university CAOs believe traditional classrooms are better.
• Students “study” differently with wide variations on intensity and time to completion.
8
We believe (and have examples)
• eLearning improves retention, completions, and student satisfaction.
• eLearning may improve institutional and faculty productivity.
• eLearning may provide instruction where traditional classrooms cannot– Courses not offered– Geography– Schedule (remember, 73% of students work an
average of 21 hours per week)
9
Learning content is an investment
• Costs per 3-unit course – $5,000 – developed by eCollege from faculty
notes, diagrams– $36,000 – Yavapai and Northland Pioneer
Colleges– $1,000,000 – Coast Community College, full
multimedia– $25,000,000 – British Open University
• And the results differ; more investment yields better results
10
eLearning requires
• Authored learning materials (and authoring software)
• “In context” communications • Content presentation system
Collaborative Learning Environment
• A sophisticated delivery systemCourse management system
• And integration with portals and other systems
The Sakai Project
Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the four
universities
12
The SAKAI project
“The University of Michigan, Indiana University, MIT, Stanford, and the uPortal consortium are joining forces to integrate and synchronize their considerable educational software into a pre-integrated collection of open source tools.”
The Sakai Project, A proposal to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, 2 December 2003
13
Sakai efforts
• Have developed a community [open] source Collaborative Learning Environment in use at the University of Michigan (September 2004) and Indiana University (January 2005).
• Are developing an assessment system (SAMigo) and grade book (available spring 2005).
• Should introduce portal integration (mid-2005).
• Continues to develop an “open standards” architecture.
14
Sakai 1.0 Tools and Features
• Worksite Info• Schedule• Announcements• Resources• Assignments• Discussion• Dropbox• Chat• Web Content• News• Email Archive
• My Workspace• Users Present• Tear off windows• Multiple roles,
permissions• Notification, preferences• Browsable sites list• Membership (self join
sites)• Webdav to Resources• Public view• Message of the Day
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
The Sakai Education Partners Program
Funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the
partners
23
Sakai Education Partners Program
• Facilitates Discussion and Work Groups developing “best practices,” and supporting community development of software “tools” and integration with other projects.
• Supports Sakai software. • Develops and supports a community
advancing eLearning in higher education.Based on expressed interests of the community
• Partners contribute funds and staff time to community projects.
24
Sakai founding partnersUniversity of Colorado at
BoulderCambridge UniversityCarnegie Mellon UniversityColumbia UniversityCornell UniversityFoothill-De Anza Community
College DistrictHarvard UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityNorthwestern UniversityPrinceton UniversityTufts University
University of California BerkeleyUniversity of California, DavisUniversity of California,
Los AngelesUniversity of California, MercedUniversity of California,
Santa CruzUniversity of HawaiiUniversity of OklahomaUniversity of VirginiaUniversity of WashingtonUniversity of Wisconsin, MadisonYale University
25
Additional Sakai partnersArizona State University
Boston University, School of Management
Dartmouth College
Florida Community College, Jacksonville
Georgetown University
Maricopa Community College District
New York UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of ArizonaUniversity of HullUniversity of LancasterUniversity of MelbourneUniversity of NagoyaUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Washington
26
Sakai organization
Sakai Project Sakai Partners
Sakai BoardJoseph Hardin, Chair, University of MichiganBradley C. Wheeler, Indiana UniversityLois Brooks, Stanford UniversityMara Hancock, University of California, BerkeleyCarl Jacobson, University of DelawareAmitava ‘Babi’ Mitra, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyJeff Merriman, Open Knowledge InitiativeVivian Sinou, Foothill DeAnza Community College DistrictIan Dolphin, University of Hull
27
Sakai 2005
• Sakai Project – CLE and SAMigo• Sakai Partners
– Foothill College Melita authoring tool– University of California Berkeley gradebook
• Sakai related– Open Source Portfolio Initiative– CREE Project: JISC Library access portlets– University of Nagoya multimedia
“immersion”
28
In summary
• Sakai is making “open standards” software available to colleges and universities as open source.
• Sakai is cooperating with the efforts to make “open content” interoperable and available.
• Sakai is coordinating its development with other projects, especially library projects, to extend the advantages of interoperability.
29
Sakai may• By making “best practices” and the
implementing software widely available, improve instruction and research.
• Through improved processes and software implementation, advance interoperability of content, course and student management, and inter-institutional data exchanges.
• Facilitate long-term collaboration among colleges and universities leading to future improved outcomes and lower unit costs.
30
Sakai depends
• Upon the motivation and contributions of Partner faculty and staff.
• Having reasonable time, reasonable expectations, reasonable demands.
• Continued support of the Partner colleges and universities, and
• The goodwill of all of the participants, sponsors, and users.
32
e-Learning defined
“e-Learning is the effective learning process created by combining digitally delivered content with (learning) support and services.”
Open and Distance Learning Quality Council (UK)
From www.odlqc.org.uk/odlqc/n19-e.htm, 28 December 2004
33
Types of e-LearningPortion of Content Delivered Online Type of Course Typical Description
0% TraditionalCourse with no online technoloyg used - content is delivered in writing or orally.
1 to 29% Web Facilitated
Course which uses web-based technology to facilitae what is essentially a face-to-face couse. Uses a course management sysem (CMS) or web pages to post the syllabus and assignments, for example.
30-69% Blended./Hybrid
Course that blends online and face-to-face delivery. Substantial proportion of thecontent is delivered online, typically uses online discussions, typically has some fact-to-face meetings.
80+% OnlineA course where most of the content is delived online. Typically has no face-to-face meetings.
34
Online education defined
“OnLine Education allows the study of higher education courses through the electronic medium of Internet. Course Materials, including reference papers, study materials and contact with tutors and fellow students are all accessed through the use of personal computers and telecommunications.”
Greg Kearsley, 1997
From cbdd.wsu.edu/edev/Nigeria_ToT/tr510/page15.htm, 28 December 2004
35
Context of eLearning, some results
36
Rio Salado College and Plato Math
• Using commercially developed Interactive Mathematics Rio Salado offered four courses with one instructor.
• The number of students in a section increased from 35 to 100.
• A course assistant was added to help with course management, freeing the instructor to focus on student learning.
Academic Systems Inc. Profile, October 2002
37
Northern Oklahoma College
• Using Interactive Mathematics, the pass rate for Elementary Algebra increased from 45% to more than 70%.
• Sixty percent of the incoming students at Northern Oklahoma College are deficient in mathematics.
• “Students are passing math and staying in school,” Debbie Quirey said. “75 percent of our students who take one or more developmental math classes go on to pass college algebra.”
Plato Implementation Story, April 2004
38
Student motivation to learn
• “Quirey and others in the department attribute the success to students being able to review the Interactive Mathematics instructional module over and over again until they understand it.”
Plato Implementation Story, April 2004
• “According to instructors, students using Interactive Mathematics reported that they tended to go back and review the software’s instruction more often than ask questions of the instructor or ask for help from tutors.”
Thomas Coe, Mathematics Department Chair, Rio Salado College• Academic Systems Profile, October 2002
39
Student willingness to learn
Students can accelerate their learning and finish more than one course level per term.
“I have had up to 10 percent of my students complete two courses in a single semester. A few have even completed three courses.”
Kim Brown, Mathematics Department Chair, Tarrant County College
Plato Implementation Story, April 2004
• in a distance learning
40
Online enrollment growing in the U.S.
Higher Education Students Enrollment in Online Courses
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
2002 2003 2004
Est
ima
ted
nu
mb
er
of s
tud
en
ts
Sloan, November 2004
41
Most in public colleges and universitiesOnline Enrollment 2003
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
Public Private not-for-profit Private for-profit
Esi
mat
ed n
umbe
r of
stu
dent
s
Sloan, November 2004NCES, various
42
Extensive used in private for-profit
Online Enrollment as a Percent of Total
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Public Piivate not-for-profit Private for-profit
Per
cent
age
of T
otal
Enr
ollm
ent
of t
he S
ecto
r
Sloan, November 2004NCES, various
43
Most institutions have online coursesInstitutions Offering Online Courses
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Public Private, non-profit Pirvate, for-profit
Est
ima
ted
pe
rce
nta
ge
, Fa
ll 2
00
4
44
CAO’s disagree on quality
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Public Private, non-profit Pirvate, for-profit
Pe
rce
nt o
f CA
O r
esp
on
ses
Superior
Same
Superior or Same
Inferior
Soan, November 2004
Comparing Quality of Online Courses to Traditional CoursesOpinion of the Chief Academic Officers
45
Students learn at different ratesTime to Course Completion
Calendar Days and Computer Connect TimeAlgebra 2
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 25 50 75 100
Percent of Students
Ca
len
da
r D
ays
0
5
10
15
20
25
Ho
urs
of C
om
pu
ter
Co
nn
ect
Tim
e
Calendar Days
Connect Time
Poly. (Connect Time)
Poly. (Calendar Days)
Sillinger and Suppes, 1999
46
Students work differently
Distribution of Time to Complete a SessionAlgebra 2
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Number of Hours per Session
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of S
tud
en
ts
47
About Sakai Educational Partners
48
Number of Sakai partnersSakai Educational Partners Program
Number of Partners
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2004 2005 2006
Nu
mb
er
of
Pa
rtn
ers
Projected
Actual
49
Sakai Partners by countrySakai Educational Partners ProgramPartners as of December 10, 2004
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Canada
Denmark
Germany
Japan
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
Non-US
United States
CA
DK
DE
JPZ
AE
SS
EU
KU
S
Number of Partners
50
SEPP Conference by countrySakai Educational Partners ProgramPartners as of December 10, 2004
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Canada
Denmark
Germany
Japan
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
Non-US
United States
CA
DK
DE
JPZ
AE
SS
EU
KU
S
Number of Partners
51
Some Sakai Partners projects
52
The Berkeley Grade Book
An example of collaboration
University of California, Berkeley funded development of an on-line grade book
• Develop the grade book in collaboration with MIT
• Deploy and test the grade book integrated with local student systems
• Re-factor the grade book to Sakai “Tool Portability Profile” to support interoperability
53
The Etudes ProjectAn example of collaboration
Hewlett Foundation funded deployment of Sakai Collaborative Learning Environment at Foothill-De Anza Community College District
• Develop an authoring tool, primarily for faculty• Deploy and test Sakai as an information service
(ASP: Application Service Provider) for 48+ community college districts
• Develop open standards sharable learning materials
54
The Twin Peaks Project
An example of collaboration
Sun Microsystems, Inc. funded deployment of a citation/link authoring tool by Indiana University.
• Transfer a citation and link from a Web search or browser display into a document.
• Integrate into a JSR 168 portlet with an open source on-line WYSIWYG editor.
55
The CREE Project
An example of collaboration
UK JISC-funded project led by the University of Hull, a Sakai partner
• Redevelop search applications as Sakai JSR 168 portlets
• Improve the user interface; explore alternative presentations (by role, experience, disabilities)
• Includes Z39.50 (Jafer), Web Services-based SRW/SRU, Open URL (BALSA), portal environment (HEIRPORT), and Google
• Tested, documented, and made available as open source
56
Publisher’s Note
• uPortal is a project of the JA-SIG Collaborative led by Carl Jacobson at the University of Delaware and funded, in part, from the Sakai Project.
• im+m has contributed to uPortal, and the University of Hull’s CREE project referenced in these presentations.
• The author is Chairman of the Board of im+m and Sigma Systems Inc., contracted by the University of Michigan for the Sakai Educational Partners Program, part-time researcher for the U.S. Department of Education and volunteers as uPortal Project Administrator.
57
Permissions
Sakai and JA-SIG publications are in the public domain and can be freely reproduced. These presentations may contain material reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Users are requested to comply with any copyright restrictions and to appropriately reference any materials that are used in their own works.