EduCause 2014: Introducing Visual Strategic Planning Using Four Higher Education Business-Model Scenarios and Strategic Technology Maps

This session presented by Gartner Vice President and Education specialist Jan-Martin Lowendahl.

Abreviated highlights below.

Gartner Education hype cycle - which is pretty helpful and pretty new (July 2014):

Jan-Martin's presentation was delivered via a number of unpublished slides but main points (unsurprisingly) include:
- Increasing momentum in Higher Education to 'buy' rather than 'do it yourself'
- Education technology ecosystem is expanding and options are many
- Technology is pushing Education and Education is pushing technology

Key issue to address:  "What investments in IT will be strategic in positioning the institution for long-term success?"  Jan-Martin emphasises that extra funding for long term success is not optional.  Significant investment will be required.

A context (not in the presentation) explored in “An avalanche is coming: Higher education and the revolution ahead” , Laurence Summers, Professor and President Emeritus Harvard University, and others argue that the existing HE sector faces an existential threat as a result of rapid technological change and globalisation (Barbe, Donnelly, & Rizvir, 2013). More positively, the paper also suggests that HE is at an opportunity crossroads and a ‘golden age’ over the next 20 years is possible – based on this collision between technology, globalisation and HE.    Laurence's paper is definately worth reading and provides a bit of depth.

Jan-Martin presented a quadrant (of course) of four Higher Education business models comprising 'Only Us Uni, Everybody's Uni, Me not U, All about you'. 

Only Us Unis - e.g. Harvard.  Interestingly, they are planning a MOOC just for alumni.  <1% of institutions.
Me not U - niche University.  10% of institutions.
Everybody's Uni - everything for everyone - driven by volume.  About 80% of institutions.
All about you Uni - Opportunistic, economy of speed, agility, brokerage University (just right, just-in-time, any place education).  About 10% of institutions.

Our University is one of the 80%:

And, 'Everybody's Uni' technology hotspot:

Towards 2050, 'All about you' Unis will grow to 45% - so this is the big growth business model.  The big losing business model will be the 'Everybody's Uni' approach.

Jan-Martin observed that 'no institution is profitably offering MOOCs.  Instead being funded by venture capitalists or by insitutions absorbing the loss'.

So, what are Education focused vs global (i.e. everyone else) priorities according to Gartner?

 

EduCause 2014: The On-Demand Model for HE: Providing Education as a Service across Colleges and Universities

Sponsored by Campus Management, this session concentrated on the idea that "institutions are facing a convergence of forces that, combined with an outdated technology infrastructure, have created the need for a new approach in education technology: the On-Demand Model for Higher Education. Hear from this dynamic panel about rising above technology challenges to empower dynamic models of engagement and delivery and, in turn, positively impact growth, retention, and financial security. "

Perhaps a rather unsatifying session but maybe useful comments about MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses).

Speakers:
Ann Taylor, Director, John A. Dutton e-Education Institute
Navneet Johal ,Education Technology Analyst, Ovum
Karli Grant, Manager, Product Marketing, Campus Management
Connor Gray, Campus Management

I guess this session might be able to be linked back to Professor Clay Christenson's session on disruptive innovation.  Campus Management are pushing online or 'out of class' learning and technology.   With 'Engagement, Flexibility, Agility' being headline words.  From the presentation, it was not entirely clear what the specifics were on the use of technology to deliver an 'on-demand' model for Education.  It was clear that the presenters thought there are a number of challenges around course or module authoring right through to delivery.  When ought the lectures be delivered?  When should blended face-to-face and on-line learning be provided?

Should Education institutions redefine themselves?  Ann Taylor reckoned "big, small, public, private.  They need to really go back to their mission and make sure they are the right kind of institution.  As long as they stay focused at what they are good at then they will be competitive.  But, remember, the next institution is just a click away".  I guess this last point is pretty true - on-line students don't need to move house to move to another institution.  Just move web sites.

What about MOOCs? Navneet Johal of Ovum thought:"without sounding too skeptical, I can see its value as a marketing and branding approach.  For the most part, the hype is reducing and Institutions do not see MOOCs as a priority.  MOOCs need to be offered for the right reasons.  I can see far less MOOC orientated stuff here at EduCause compared to last year".   

Ann Taylor thought much the same: "coming from an institution that provides MOOCs I completely support that.  They have been a fun way to re-enforce our brand.  For personal enrichment then they are great.  We've seen a 24% increase in demand for our traditional online paid for courses - I think because of the marketing presence MOOCs have given us".

So, the panel didn't think MOOCs were much of a threat to traditional higher educational institutions.

Connor Grey did think that there were big challenges and highlighted that a number of CFOs did not believe the current HE funding model is viable "People feel secure 'until the collapse'".  He suggested that 'Agility' is probably a key capability that institutions need to develop to be competitive.  With the Campus Management technology providing a good foundation.

Educause 2014: Main session #1 Disruptive Innovation and the future of Higher Education

On to the main feature - Disruptive Innovation and the future of Higher Education.

The main keynote speaker is Clay Christenson who was voted the ‘most influential thinker’ by the top 100 CEOs and is a leading Harvard professor.  He’s also a lay preacher.

Clay suggests that disruptive innovation tends to be allied to decentralisation.    Sustained innovation is different (I think he perhaps means that incremental improvement of an existing product = sustained innovation as distinct from disruptive innovation). 

Quote  "Words we didn't use 10 years ago: social media, smartphone, apps, WiFi, Twitter, MOOC, WiKi, 3D printing and wearables"

An example from the 80s is Digital.  They were original innovators with their disruptive – to IBM – MINI computer technology.  But Digital too were overtaken by another ‘decentralised’ disruptive innovation.  This, of course, was the PC and upstart Microsoft.    Initially, Digital didn’t recognise the threat, were dismissive and thought PCs were not really suited to the business environment.  But, decentralised business units started buying PCs and new innovators started making cheap software for these PCs.    Digital tried to combat the PC by initially providing better software on their MINI computers – an approach that Clay describes as ‘incremental innovation’ – i.e. make the same product a bit better.  This, of course, was a doomed strategy with IBM, Intel and Microsoft eventually dominating a brand new huge consumer market and vastly bigger business market.  But, the main point is that there is a central thread of decentralisation running through disruptive innovation.  We can also think about Wang, Data General, Sun, Silicon Graphics and others whose demise followed the same track.

Clay makes the point that ‘modularity’ is also a central component of disruptive innovation and is allied to decentralisation.   If a new product can both take advantage of decentralisation and is also modular then watch out.

Adam Smith’s ‘invisible’ hand of informed capitalism suggested that capital will be spent efficiently without need for much central control.   In the 70s Alfred Chandler wrote the ‘visible’ hand of managerial capitalism.  Chandler’s suggestion is that there needs to be a managed and directed approach to some aspects of capitalism e.g. transport infrastructure needs to be co-ordinated and managed to ensure there is a strategic, long term and sustainable investment approach.  Without this longer term and planned approach much of what we, as a society, need will not be provided efficiently or at all.  Other examples might be power infrastructure and perhaps Education which is the focus of this presentation.

Clay suggests that Higher Education is moving more from ‘visible’ to Adam Smith’s original ‘invisible’ informed capitalism via modularity.  What does this mean?  Higher Education is moving towards providing widely available and online modules.  This could be game changing with ‘customers’ able to take individual accreditations from many institutions and put these together towards a qualification.  This probably isn’t what institutions expect or recognise as a serious challenge but, Clay reckons, a momentum might grow.  New Higher Education providers will offer their own accreditation and build on accredited modules provided by traditional Universities.  This would perhaps lead to major disruption with traditional Universities driven towards more short term decision making driven by economic imperatives – leaning towards Adam Smith’s ‘invisible’ informed hand of capitalism. 

Disruptive innovator, Apple, have created their closed, proprietary and interdependent product architecture.  Obviously, this has been tremendously successful and has catapulted Apple to be the most valuable quoted public company.  Clay suggests there is danger ahead.  He draws parallels with Digital et al in the 80s.  Android, with its modular and decentralised approach, now has 80% Smartphone market share.  Will Apple’s technology fall off a cliff? – driven by Android’s decentralised and modular approach?  Clay's not sure but it would fit the theory.
First part of this session was spent congratulating people serving on Educause committees and awards for contributions over the past year. Fair enough and perhaps quite American. We don’t do this in the UK very well. People seem to be taking the awards quite seriously with some tears being shed. In Europe, we’re probably too cynical and lacking in clear eyed confidence to take this stuff as seriously. I could be wrong.

Wireless

Wireless.  Almost ubiquitous and we expect it to be reliable and speedy wherever we are.  Or at least in main centres and, of course, around our university campuses.  As a provider of a Wireless service I know how much effort and technology goes into getting it right.  And, it's not easy to keep up with demand.  But, this is perhaps where we can trip up.

Gartner, a couple of years ago, predicted that we should be planning for 3-4 devices per person.  I was a bit doubtful.  Would people really wander around with so many IP conected devices? Here at the conference Hilton Orlando hotel there is wireless everywhere.  But, I can only really get on reliably after midnight and before 7:30am.  Other times, well, not so feasible.  Actually, it's much the same at the conference venue - using the standard WIFI.  Pretty unreliable.  The conference staff told me they've been complaining for ages.  EduCause, to their credit, have overlaid another wireless network to augment what's there and their wireless is in excellent shape.

So, what's gone wrong?   Well, I can't obviously be sure but I'd bet it's all about capacity planning.  There is obviously an associated cost but I reckon this is probably less of a factor.  The Hilton probably planned for casual use by a limited number of people with a low number of IP devices.  Gartner's device per person prediction is probably in sight of coming true.  Perhaps with the growth of IP connected fitness / medical devices, watches and our desire to be 'always connected' we'll see even more growth.   We're also now absolutely reliant on wireless in a way that wasn't perhaps true only two or three years ago.

What do we need to do?  It's reminded me that we need to be sure our capacity planning is sensible.  How many devices, per person, per area, per campus?  We did this a couple of years ago but could be refreshed.  So 3 devices per person x 4000? people on campus = 12,000 active IP connections at our Cambridge Campus.  We don't yet have this capability.   Actually, need to stop.  The wireless just gave out.

Wireless data goldmine

That's a pretty good segway into the next presentation by Rens van der Vorst from Fontys University where he is Head of Innovation and Roel Smabers CEO of Parantion Group.   Both from the Netherlands.

The premise is that our wireless data are a potentially goldmine: “Using your wireless data, you will be able to improve life on campus, provide exhilarating services to students and staff, enhance learning, and make life easier and a lot more fun. We used our local big data, and you can do it too!”

They extensively used infographics to engage students.  Below is an example showing the ‘garden’ with the number of ‘bees’ representing the number of users online using wireless.  They reckoned showing easy to understand graphics helped students understand why the Wireless gets slow.  This understanding means students are more supportive, they thought.

Bit of statistical data below – which is always interesting.

So, this is showing that over a time period (remember, their language not mine – maybe the Dutch to English translation isn’t quite right!):

·         More Apple than Windows used

·         More Smartphone Android than IOS

·         Girls more active than Boys

·         Students more active than teachers

·         Arts students more active than science based students

Interesting use of data and pretty entertaining presentation. 

The use cases can go quite far, of course.    Correlations between wireless use, location, attendance, results and demographic and data might, they suggest, create a great picture of student behaviour and outcomes.  But, maybe the wireless data is one of the weaker correlations we could make?

EduCause 2014: Implementing IT Accessibility on Your Campus: Sharing Strategies That Succeed - first seminar

Right, first pre-conference on the rather dry subject of  'Accessibility'.  Here goes - and  I do appreciate that I've been on the periphery of Acessibility up until now.

Around 15 in seminar.  Almost all are creating or already have an 'accessibility committee' - couple of participants have 'accessibility' in their job title... 

Great set of accessibility guides, documention here:
http://accessibility.ncsu.edu/

There is also a procurement guide which might be helpful for us:

"All information and communication technology purchases must adhere to the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Accessibility Regulation. Additionally, bidders for purchase orders must provide additional accessibility documentation"

Great but slightly scary templates for vendors to fill in as part of an ITT and procurement process:
http://www.calstate.edu/Accessibility/EIT_Procurement/   A standard US Federal 'VPAT' accessibility set of criteria has been taken up by some forward thinking US Universities. 

10 key facts about English contract law: http://www.seqlegal.com/blog/10-key-facts-about-english-contract-law

All this accessibility stuff might be helpful for our new web site (CMS - SiteCore) and new student management system (SITS Core).

Maybe especially good material here: http://accessibility.oit.ncsu.edu/training/it-accessibility-quick-guide.php

Even more at California State University:
http://www.calstate.edu/accessibility/

A pretty good 'status level' evaluation definition for where you are in the accessibility journey:
https://www.educause.edu/annual-conference/2014/seminar-13p-implementing-it-accessibility-your-campus-sharing-strategies-succeed-separate-registration

Actually, there are pretty well developed templates and guidance for almost everything you might need on the link above.  The presenters from Cal State Uni were keen that their efforts might be of help to others.

Not to be outdone, the UK government provides guidance on how to get to at least AA status

https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/user-centred-design/accessibility

A reminder of the legal position.  The Equality Act 2010 says that "A person ... concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service."
http://www.seqlegal.com/blog/website-accessibility-and-equality-act-2010

Contributions to the round-table discussions may have been compromised by my accent somewhat.  Presenter suggested a good use of 'Captioning' was for the new Scottish Dr Who but he was looking at me.

Finally, the RNIB has a great page on accessibility:
http://www.rnib.org.uk/about-rnib/web-accessibility-statement

http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/

EduCause - some survey data

(US) Undergraduate students and digital engagement.   Survey data below.

Sorry about the carpet.  56% would like better use of VLEs etc.  Seems a bit low.  Julian - watch out.  66% reckon they want better lecture capture systems.   ePortfolios don't get a strong vote at 28% which might be partly because the phrase ePortfolio is a bit clunky - e.g. is this a linkedin profile, online CV, portfolio of what I did at University or?

Next - Rate of change for Admin IT systems - data provided by CDS 2013.                       

Well, we're in the middle of replacing our CMS (with SiteCore) and CRM (with MS Dynamics).  Not sure e-Mail students is really in the same category? but we have moved to 365..  Helpdesk - we're also upgrading our Helpdesk (Hornbill) system.  BI - well, we're also going through major change here as well with the introduction the MS stack of SQL based BI infrastructure (Qlikview also in the mix).                               

And, what qualities, competencies will IT staff need?   Top 5.

Not quite convinced on how the source data was collected but here goes...

I guess there is no surprise on 'communication' being top.  Stephi (our marketing/communications coordinator) spends way to much time putting our techy reports into language our customers can easily digest

Educause 2014 starts...

So,  I thought it might be helpful to capture some of the helpful, interesting, technology related themes and ideas coming out of the EduCause 2014 and Gartner 2014 conferences.

First up Educause which starts in earnest today (Monday 29/9/14) with a couple of preconference sessions.  The venue itself is pretty much the biggest conference centre I've encountered - Orange County Conference Centre - with EduCause taking up the cavernous West buildings.  My hotel is next to the North building with a 35 min walk in the sticky 8am heat to get to the West - where I'm typing at the moment.  I might have got a bit lost right enough.

Registration was pain free and, drum roll, Eduroam seems to be throughout the building.  Sadly, I can't seem to connect and am having to use the free conference WIFI instead.  I will try and fix later.

 Dress code is pretty casual - with most attendees chosing t-shirts and chinos.  Gartner is likely to be straight suits next week.

One of the good things about EduCause is the various survey stuff that members undertake.  UCISA in the UK does the same thing, of course, but still pretty helpful to have another perspective.  And, EduCause surveys are huge - taking in HE but colleges and schools too.  I'll publish anything helpful as I find it.