6. Panel Discussion 6. パネルディスカッション Chair

6. Panel Discussion
6. パネルディスカッション
Chair:
Kumiko Aoki
Professor, The Open University of Japan
放送大学教授青木久美子
Participants:
Sir John Daniel
Grace Alfonso
Yoichi Okabe
Andrew Law
Jan Herrington
Education Master, Beijing DeTao Masters Academy /
Former Vice-Chancellor, the Open University, UK
Chancellor, University of the Philippines Open University
President, The Open University of Japan
The Director of Open Media, The Open University, UK
Professor, Murdoch University
Kumiko Aoki
それでは最後の一時間で、パネルディスカッションという形で、今までの講演者の方々お 1
人ずつに質疑応答という形ではなく、全員の方々に答えてもらえるような質問をして議論を
深めたいと思います。まずご質問を受けて、その中から私が選び、私の質問も加えながらデ
ィスカッションに移りたいと思います。
I am just saying that we are going to accept questions first. I may pick and choose for
discussion. The question will be pertaining to all of you, not just one of you.
質問がある方は手を挙げてください。8 人の方に挙手いただきました。順番にできるだけ簡
潔に質問の内容を述べてください。
Q1 Applying other open university credits to OUJ (female):
いくつかあるのですが、まずは通学の形の大学ですとエクスチェンジプログラムなどがあった
りすると思うのですが、オンラインの形でも、例えばオープンユニバーシティの UK の授業も
受けられて、それを日本の放送大学の単位とするとか、そういったことは考えられるのかとい
1
うこと。その簡単な理由としては、オープンユニバーシティのイギリスの方ではあるけども、日
本ではないクラスがあるようなので、そういったことができたら面白いなというのがひとつ。
Q2 Online only graduation (same female):
今 100％オンラインで卒業できるような大学も出ていると思うのですが、そういった MOOCs
といったオンラインを利用することによって、来なくても良く、通学のクラスを賄えるというか、
単位が取れるようなコースをお考えかどうか。
Q3 Business model (same female):
あとはビジネスモデルのところとちょっと関係してくると思うのですが、今アメリカで University
of the People という無料の大学ができたと聞きました。たぶん寄付などで賄われていて、ビ
ジネスモデルとしては成り立っていないのかもしれないのですが、そういった大学について
皆さんがどのようにお考えになっているかということを聞きたいです。
Q4 OUJ (same female):
あともし時間があれば、オープンユニバーシティ UK は、日本から取ろうとするとすごく受講
費が高いのですが、それはライセンスフィーの問題なのかということをおまけで聞けたら嬉し
いです。
Q5 Evaluation (male)
よろしくお願いいたします。先ほども質問させていただいたのですが、私は企業の人間です。
企業というのは漠然としたものを絶対受け付けてくれません。先ほどから聞いていて非常に
心配なのは、いろんなことをやるといいよ、ということは言われたのですが、その成果物として
の評価というものはどうもまだわかりにくい。例えば評価の方法、それから評価の結果として
どういうものがいいというのか。ただ本人が「よかった」と言えばそれでいいということでは、と
てもじゃないけど企業としては、制度として受け入れてくれないので、もしこれを提案していく
場合にはどうしたらいいのかというと、私の方で、もちろん評価の方法と評価の結果としてこう
いうものができてくるのでこういうものがいいのではないか、ということを提案しなければならな
いのですが、どうしたらいいのか全然わからないのでその点をお答えいただければと思って
います。
Q6 Digital divide – Student support (male)
今まだデジタルデバイドの時期だと思いますが、そういう時代にあって、通学制でない放送
大学のような大学で、今まで特にパソコンを使ったことがないような学生がまだたくさんいると
思います。そのような学生にどうオンライン学習を勧めていけばいいのか。オンライン学習を
そういう学生に普及していくにはどのようなサポートや方法があるのかということのアイディア
か何かを聞かせていただければ幸いです。
Q7 Tangible Benefits Chart (male)
I have a question to Mr. Andrew Law mainly.
I am an administrative staff of OUJ in charge of strategic planning on the yearly
management plan or something like that, so I am very interested in your Tangible
Benefits Chart. What is a smart way to show what you do and what you did?
Particularly how to share this idea with your stakeholders and top executives? Thank
you very much.
2
Q8 Academic history/qualifications - study for job advancement (Mr. Okada)
アーネット・岡田と申します。10 年ほどアメリカと関わっていないので、今は変わっているの
かもしれませんが、アメリカというのは超学歴社会だと思います。学卒と MBA で給料が倍違
うとか。それを受け入れる側も送り出す側も認めているのではないかと思います。前の職場
で、シリコンバレーのベンチャーと付き合っていたのですが、その MBA が「岡田さん、勉強
していますか？」と聞くんですね。私はもう数十年勉強なんかやってない、と言ったのですが、
その人は「私は勉強している」と。それでしばらくしたら資格取ってジョブホッピングすると言う
のです。ジョブホッピングしてインテルの部長になっていたのです。アメリカンドリームと言うの
ですか？彼らは、社会から認められている資格を取って次々と上に上がっていくという楽し
みがあるという、そういう社会じゃないかなと。今変わっているのかもしれないですが。そうい
う点で考えた場合、２つあるのですが、放送大学はそういう面で、そういうことを希望する人た
ちに便宜を図れるのか。あるいは先ほどイギリスの元学長さんが「娯楽である」とおっしゃいま
したが、娯楽なのか。本当に勉強したい人たちが上がっていくためのステップとして使えるも
のなのか。それがひとつ。
Q9 Are MOOC studies recognized by employers? (Mr. Okada)
もうひとつは、そういう観点で考えた場合、MOOCs とはいったい何だと。やはりアラカルトで
すよね。フルコースにするには自分で選ぶのか、あるいはそれを社会が認めてくれるのか、
ですね。アメリカの社会がそういうジョブホップでステップアップする時に、企業がそれを認め
てくれるようなところまでいくものなのかどうか。その二つをお聞きしたいと思います。
Q10 Struggle for shift to online - content (OUJ faculty member, Prof. Kishine)
放送大学で物理を担当している岸根と申します。教員の側から、岡部学長がお話になった
ように、今、放送大学と、テレビ・ラジオからオンラインにシフトしていこうとストラグルしていま
す。私は元々、普通のサイエンスの研究者として研究と教育に携わっていまして、MIT の
OCW が出た時はある意味衝撃だったのでした。それから 20 年近く経って、オンライン上で
のレクチャーの見せ方、レクチャービデオがあって、アサインメントがあって、エグザムがあっ
て、たまにフォーラムがあると。そういう見せ方ががなり飽和しているような印象があります。こ
のハード面、インフラ面で、これだけ今日のお話みたいにグローバルにオンライン教育という
のが一般化している中で、コンテンツですね。何をフレームの中に入れるか、という議論がど
れくらい現場でなされているのかにすごく興味があります。今日、そこのお話があまりなかっ
たので、何を入れ物にいれるかということ。それとインフラ面とは密接に絡むと思いますので、
現場のエキスパートの先生方に是非そこのアイディアを伺えればと思います。
Q11 What is the future of online education? What is necessary for that? (OUJ
Mr. Takahashi)
放送大学教養学部の高橋一彰と申します。本日はありがとうございました。質問なのですが、
ご講演された皆様が考えるオンライン教育の未来像とは何でしょうか？そして、それを実現
するための課題というのは何でしょうか？よろしくお願いします。
3
Q12 How to obtain international partnerships? (OUJ grad student & ITC rep, Ms
Nakazato)
中里加奈恵と申します。よろしくお願いいたします。私はこの放送大学の大学院生であると
同時に、先ほど質問させていただきましたが、他大学で ICT、同じ通信教育の担当教授とし
て経済学の指導をさせていただいております。質問の内容は、例えば他大学もしくは、こう
やっていくつかの海外の大学の先生方がお見えですが、海外とのパートナーシップもしくは
リレーションシップをどうお考えか、どうやってつなげていくのか、というのと、
Q13 How are smartphones being used in online education? (OUJ grad student
& ITC rep, Ms Nakazato)
学生の側として私はスマートフォンを持っていません。四街道市に住んでいるのですが、購
入しようと思った時、いまだに上手く使えない、持っている人がどうやって使っているのかわ
からない、というのが正直なところで、近くの住んでいるところのスマートフォンを販売してい
るショップでは「この地域ではほとんど映りません」と言われたままで、実際みなさんどうやっ
て使っているのかな、と思っています。授業に取り入れていくにあたって、使える地域、使え
ない地域、購入以前の問題もあると思うのですが、どのように使用していく計画をお持ちかご
意見をお聞かせください。
Q 14 (male)
Just one point. I’d like you to discuss the quality of online learning which Sir John
Daniel referred to in his presentation. Thank you.
Kumiko Aoki
これで質問を閉め切ります。シンポジウムの課題が、世界に広がるオンライン教育の潮流と
いうことで、この課題に関連のあるものを私からピックアップして議論させていただきたいと思
います。
I should say this in English.
We heard all the questions and now I’d like to actually discuss, pick up some of the
questions, expand and discuss a little bit more. I would like to start out with questions
that are pertaining to online teaching and learning because that’s the topic of this
symposium: Global Trends of Online Teaching & Learning.
There are some very interesting questions in terms of online teaching and learning. A
person over there asked about how we can actually assess or evaluate the outcome
of online learning, which is kind of a tough question. I think it is an important one
because if we can say that online learning is good, good in terms of what?
In terms of the way to evaluate the outcome, there are many different ways to assess
or evaluate the outcomes and many different aspects of it. Since you are from
different aspects of online teaching and learning, some of you are researchers and
administrators and managers, all of you may have a different perspective. I don’t
know if I can actually ask you to take turns this way? Can I ask you, Sir John, to
start?
4
Sir John Daniel
Well, I think there are two principals at stake primarily. The first is that clearly any
assessment has to reflect the purposes of the course. To touch on the question of
quality, a lot of the judgment of the quality of the course has to do with how much the
whole course is an ‘authentic’ interaction, to use Jan’s word, with the virtual learning
environment. Unless the assessment is closely related to the purpose of the course
and the reasons that the student took it, it’s not very effective.
I think in talking about the sort of formalities of the assessment, again, two points.
The first is people who are hostile to online learning make a great fuss about the
security of examinations and tests. I think this is a phony problem, a non-problem
because the problem is no different from the problem of avoiding plagiarism, cheating
and so on, in face-to-face situations. There are many technological solutions to the
problems, say, of identifying that the particular student who is writing a test is the
student who is registered.
The much more important question is can you assess people online as well as you
can in examinations in rooms? I think the answer there is that online gives you
actually a much greater variety of ways of doing assessments. People who haven’t
done much online learning seem to think that the only way you can assess is by
offering people multiple choice questions. But in fact there is a much wider range
than that. In the Guide to Quality and Online Learning that I mentioned during my talk,
there is a whole section on quality of assessment in online learning which gives a
whole range of methods that can be used to produce a much more authentic and
solid assessment than I think you would ever get in most face-to-face teaching
situations.
Grace Alfonso
In the case of assessment, and trying to make sure that we have hit our course
objectives, what we really look at is not testing what the learners remember of what
they have viewed or what they have read, but more of, particularly in my case, I ask
for reflection papers or synthesis papers, so that there will be more insights coming
from the learner and you would be able to know whether they really understood, and
that they have now their own contribution to that learning experience. Thank you.
Yoichi Okabe
私は今、日本が主にやっている知識伝達型教育というのはあまり良くないと思っていまして、
もう皆さんが既に他の国でやってらっしゃるように、参加型とか、考え方をちゃんと作る教育
がいいと思っています。それが必ずしも前提ではないのですが、いずれの教育方法にしても、
現在放送大学で言いますと、知識伝達型は放送を使ってやっていますし、参加型のものは
面接講義の一部でやっていると思います。それとしばらくの間比較することができるので、そ
れで同等のアビリティになればそういうふうに評価できると考えていますので、あまり私は難し
く考えていません。答えになっているかどうかわかりませんがそういうことです。
Andrew Law
Thank you. I don’t notice agreement so far. Not surprisingly, I suspect we all think the
value of an open distance e-learning-based education is just as sound as the value of
5
one in another, I’d say, ‘ordinary’ university as opposed to an ‘extra-ordinary’
university
On a personal front, my daughter went to a good-standing ordinary university, a highstanding ordinary university. I was required to pay twice the size of the fees as the
Open University requires. I was appalled at the quality of the teaching and the
support mechanisms that were available in this prestigious university that I was
working quite hard to support. I knew that all of the materials that my daughter
needed were actually freely available publicly from the Open University on the
Internet. She could use them there and get a better service for free than she was
getting at really quite a high rate from this ordinary university.
I think when we ask about evaluating e-learning and open universities, we need to
make sure it’s a level playing field, and the levelness, sorry ‘level playing field’ is
possibly not a useful English term, that it is ‘fair’, and it’s ‘reasonable’ to ask that
question.
I think somebody asked whether the value of these degrees is worthwhile to industry.
I also think it is worth stating, yes, it is absolutely clear that there are brands and
caches to certain universities where the brand alone will buy that person into their
next job. That is unfortunate, irrespective of the degree and the quality of the
teaching that went behind that. Sometimes that is not well-justified.
But, it is the case in the United Kingdom that of the top one hundred companies in
the United Kingdom, eighty percent of them sponsor Open University graduates at
the moment. They are keen that their employees are doing an Open University
degree. So, they value it. Obviously the students value it. They also reflect very well
on open educational and e-learning processes. So, I just think there is a lot of
evidence that would suggest that both industry and the consumer of open e-learning
materials is strong, and as strong as, if not stronger than other ordinary universities
supply. I think that is absolutely critical in terms of evaluating good open and distance
e-learning.
The only other question I think that was asked was about assessment, forms of
assessment. I would just like to put a pitch in to say that I think the emergence of
peer assessment in open learning is going to be absolutely critical and one of the
most interesting research areas, not just to keep the costs low. If you’ve got five or
six million people learning with you, assessing each one individually with a machine
is sometimes a bit tricky and another human being very expensive. Getting them to
assess each other can be a very, very cost effective thing to do. But most critically I
think it can be a very authentic thing to do because I think actually the assessor can
learn as much in the process as the assesse in the learning experience.
Jan Herrington
Just following up on that authenticity, certainly I think the product that the student
creates has to be something of value in its own right so that then you know what
sorts of criteria can be used to assess it. If it is useful in the real world, if it is useful in
6
business, then it is important I think to have in mind that it has to be something that is
worthwhile doing.
If I can just tell you a little story, it is based on the kind of saying ‘We assess what we
value, and we value what we assess.’ I recently did a MOOC on Science and
Cooking. The very first lecture was on the invention of the pressure cooker. It was
fantastic. We learned all about how the pressure cooker had made food so tender
that people just couldn’t believe it. Even the bones in food could be eaten, like cutting
through butter. It was so soft. It was fabulous learning about the pressure cooker. I
went to do the quiz and I thought here’s a great little quiz to test my knowledge. The
very first question was ‘In what year was the pressure cooker invented?’ So, I
thought, is that what they are valuing? Is that the best quiz question that they could
ask? In what year was it invented? Was that the absolutely the most critical thing?
I think that whole idea about creating a product and using rubrics. Andrew said about
peer assessment. We certainly do that in our teaching. We have students peer
assess with the same rubric that we will us to assess them. Not only do they learn
about the rubric, but they learn to critically view somebody else’s work and then they
can apply that to their own before they hand in their own work. I think that whole idea
of a real product, assessment through peer assessment, and having rubrics which
can really lay out exactly the standard that you are expecting is a really good
combination for e-learning, and face-to-face learning.
Kumiko Aoki
Thank you very much. I think that was a very interesting question and interesting
answers. There are many different aspects we have to think about. How to assess
student learning, which is one thing, and also how to evaluate the courses and also
programs. That is another thing. The whole business of evaluation and assessment
is very important, but it is a very difficult and challenging business I think.
The second question I think I’d like to pose, also coming from the audience, is the
digital divide issue. The digital divide, in Japan you may think ‘Oh no, we are
technologically so advanced. We have good infrastructure. We may not have that
much digital divide.’ But that is not the case. There are digital divide in terms of the
generation, in terms of even though they have physical access, the digital literacy
aspect. How we can actually include everybody who wants to learn can learn online.
What kind of means we can actually provide so that we can actually be inclusive. I
think that is a very challenging question for us in our university because we have
aging students and there are some generational issues as well. How you have
actually dealt with, and if you have any solution or suggestions in terms of minimizing
the digital gap, not in terms of the physical access but in terms more of digital literacy.
Sir John Daniel
I believe that the evidence shows that this digital gap is just not true. One of the
largest studies that’s ever been done was done at the British Open University where
they took a sample of seven thousand students: a thousand between twenty and
thirty, a thousand between thirty and forty, and a thousand over seventy including
one person who was one hundred.
7
They studied their use of technology and found a number of interesting things. The
first thing was that the group over seventy replied to the questionnaire in larger
proportions than the younger groups. But, more significantly, the older group used
the Internet online to respond to the questionnaire more than the younger groups.
They came to the conclusion that there is absolutely no evidence for a split in age in
the use of technology. People use technology in different ways at different ages.
They may use different technologies, but there did not seem to be a gap that
emerged. This is something that has been promoted by books written probably a
decade ago: digital divide, digital immigrants, digital natives. I think this more recent
study shows that it is a bunch of nonsense.
What is also very interesting, and this was actually picked up I think in something Jan
said, is that this study also showed clearly that students who are using technology in
their learning are learning at a deeper level and learning at a more strategic manner
than those who do not. Even if you are not familiar with all this work about deep
learning and superficial learning, you probably understand that deep learning is
better than superficial learning. I think we are making far too much fuss about this
whole question of digital divide. I would not worry much about that if I were the Open
University of Japan. Access to the equipment is another thing. You are a rich country,
a very digital country, so I really don’t think that should be a problem either.
Grace Alfonso
I agree completely that for Japan that will not be a problem. For some developing
countries, we know that there would be some sort of digital divide. But, in terms of
cognitive divide, meaning this can happen because of difference in age, etcetera,
maybe what can be a good program to help out the whole environment would be
some media literacy courses, or maybe how we can make use of this more popular
media to really use to have teaching and learning here. Capacity building: usually the
perception of having the digital divide comes from the faculty as well, so maybe there
can be some capacity building for our faculty to have more appreciation of online
teaching and learning. I would like to probably open up the possibility that you can
have regular training for online learning and teaching regardless of going into it or not.
I think to be able to expose ourselves to this will be a good thing.
Yoichi Okabe
日本は問題ないという発言が多かったのですが、私の経験によるとやはり高齢の方の方が
使ってない人が多いと。その人たちが何故、使わないかというといろんな要因があるのです
が、使わなくても済むというのが一番大きい要因でして、特に放送大学はありがたいことに、
放送チャンネルをもらってしまったが故に、別にインターネットを使わなくても講義が聞けるじ
ゃないかというところからスタートしているので、そこをクリアするのは非常に難しいのが現状
です。さりながら、何とかしてデジタルデバイドは解消しなければならないというので、日本の
放送大学が現在やっているのは、使い方の講義をするということです。もうひとつは、今まで
放送でやってきたが故に、使わなければいけないというインセンティブが働きづらいというこ
とがありまして、今、オンライン授業を放送大学がこれから始めますと言いましたが、その時
にはやはり、インターネットを使えなくても講義は聞けますよと。一応最低限のことは教えるこ
8
とができるけれども、よりよい教育を受けたければ使ってくださいよという、そういう誘導。それ
以外にも段々いろんな誘導をしていこうと思っていますが、使った方がいいよという、そういう
雰囲気を作っていくという環境側から攻める話と、やりたいと思ったけれど誰も教えてくれな
いという人に対してちゃんと我々の方からヘルプをするという両方を組み合わせないとあまり
日本の場合、おっしゃるより簡単ではないなと思っています。
Andrew Law
Great, thank you very much. I think just two observations: one of them is about the
users and one about the digital divide on the supplier side. On users, the Open
University in the UK has always deployed what it describes as both ‘leading edge’
and ‘trailing edge’ technologies. Wherever possible to keep pushing at the edges of
what can be done with the technology, but all the time making sure that we are
looking backwards and not leaving anybody behind. I think there is no question that
there was a deep fear inside the University that when it moved to an almost entirely
online provision, this would skew and change the demographic of the learners that
have access. There is no evidence, despite the fact that there is still a population in
the UK with not regular access to the Internet, but there is no evidence that the move
of the Open University in the UK to online provision has caused anything other than a
greater diversity of users of its services, not a restriction, slightly younger, but no less
disadvantaged than previously, probably the reverse.
In terms of the supplier, one of the things that we do and have done is guarantee that
for the most needy, there was a loaning service of technology so that that can be part
of the fee structure of the university, that those at really difficult edges that are
difficult to reach, we give them equipment and services. That is part of what
everybody has to pay for so that everybody can participate. I think it is possible at the
very fringes to make sure that the fee structure allows that loan service of technology
to take place. Of course there is no point in loaning technology if there are people
who don’t want to use it. I think that’s about pressure on the supplier.
As technologies, we can fall in love with technology and the hundred and one
different platforms and devices that we might use. I think we have to really be careful
in the design of our e-learning. The cognitive load is not greater because of the range
of things that are being used. If you’ve got to go to Twitter, to Facebook, to
OpenLearn, to iTunes, to YouTube just for one learning experience, you’re probably
not doing the learner any favor. Try to just design it so it’s simple to move from one
thing to another. Also try and make sure that you are introducing technologies that
will have other purposes beyond learning. It will be a real advantage to the individual
that they have these things for themselves anyway for other things like dealing with
government tax or searching for shopping or things like that. These are all useful
things that people can make use of.
But, I do think, to be frank, I should be slightly careful here, but I think that the real
digital divide is on the inside of campus, not on the outside of campus. It’s
encouraging our content experts and our scholars to see the value of the digital
media in their teaching and learning. I think that demonstrating that over and over
again is the only way of really having impact there. If anything, it is not the students.
It’s the teachers that are needing to learn and I suspect that is accurate.
9
Jan Herrington
Just at an ordinary university in Australia, we say to our students that they need to
have computer and they need to have Internet access. That’s the bottom line of
studying externally. They don’t need to have those if they study internally. But, if
there is a remote person out in the remote outback for instance, we will, like John
said, we can help them to acquire the equipment that they need. There is actually a
very good broadband all throughout Australia. But that is the bottom line. They need
to have the access. But, pedagogically, too, we also support through different
strategies that we have like through group work, people who feel inadequate in
dealing with technology can be supported by other people as they create their
authentic product. People can bring their strengths to bear without feeling they have
to know everything about every technology. I think that digital divide can be quite well
accommodated in that sense about the access sense and the pedagogical sense.
Kumiko Aoki
Thank you very much. It may be true that the digital divide for students may be easily
accommodated. The digital divide among faculty members may be more challenging.
That may be true.
Another question that I think here is important is about free learning which actually
Andrew and the MOOCs by Sir Daniel and Grace mentioned that it’s to promote free
learning. Free is great for learners. But the business model, Andrew also actually
made a really convincing case that there is actually a tangible business model. There
was actually a question in terms of the tangible benefits. How you actually calculated
the tangible benefits. That’s actually pertaining to only Andrew.
Also there is another part, which is the free learning and also the sharing of content
which Sir John and Grace mentioned. That’s actually promoting more teacher-side,
the sharing. That’s how actually we can promote that sharing of content. Using
somebody else’s is easier, but in order for them to use, they have to first of all have
the shared content. It is very challenging and difficult for us to encourage teachers to
create and share because it is another step, another burden for teachers to actually
step up and share what they actually create. That’s I think actually two aspects: free
learning and the sharing of content, it’s not really two sides of the same coin. It’s
maybe different aspects, but in a sense it’s promoting online teaching and learning.
The sharing and the greater reach would be a very important aspect. There are a
couple of questions about that. I would like to get your thoughts on that aspect. It’s
not really a ‘question’ question, but if you have some thoughts in terms of how we
can actually promote it better, and since we started with Sir John twice, I think I
would like to start from Jan.
Jan Herrington
I think I will just hand this straight over to Andrew because I don’t really have a
comment on that. Sorry.
10
Andrew Law
Okay. So, sharing and the free side. I think the gentleman here asked about the
tangible issues. My education is not good enough. I think there is a very famous
conversation about two philosophers that bump into each other in the night street.
One of them is standing underneath a lamp looking down and the other one wanders
up to him and says ‘What are you doing?’ He says ‘As I was getting in my car I
dropped my car keys and I’m looking for them.’ And he says, ‘But your car is over
there. Why are you searching here?’ He says ‘This is the only place the light is
shining, so this is where I’m looking.’
There is a real danger that in measuring and evaluating free things we rarify, we
bring to the surface only the things that we can measure and then use those to make
the arguments. I’m acutely aware that today I’ve talked about, if it came across, just
the tangible things that can be measured. There is a slight danger that I’m just
looking at the light, where it is, not at the most important things that are changing
because of this. However they weren’t randomly chosen. I think you asked about
stakeholders on campus. When we came up with the list of things that we could
measure, and I know I kept talking about the importance of measurement.
The importance of measurement is not a personal issue. I’ve just realized that like
any other organization, universities have accountants and governance organizations.
They like hard facts and figures. They like to hear the argument on their terms, not
about social good, not about good will and somehow a warm spirit of disruptive
intervention that is taking place on campus. All these things may be happening as
well. They want to see hard facts and figures. The facts and figures that I chose
weren’t simply because they were under the light. I knew that they would be
important to the business of the University.
There are many other things that we can also measure, and there are many other
things that we can also value about free learning. But, those three things I felt and
because I talked to the individuals involved, I thought that those would be the
questions if it ever became difficult and somebody said ‘Perhaps we do need to
phone the Queen.’ Let’s not do it anymore. These questions would be the ones that
they would ask. So, I think understanding your internal governance and what makes
the decision makers make their decisions, is critical. Not to patronize them. They do
that for very good reasons. But, don’t hand them things that they don’t need to worry
about, and won’t worry about. I think that was why we chose those benefits. Not just
because they sat under the light, it happens they are measurable, but there are a lot
of other things we find difficult to measure which we don’t talk about so much.
Probably that’s enough on evaluation. Understanding your stakeholders’ interests,
what drives the organization when it gets tough, answer those questions.
Yoichi Okabe
私の講演では MOOC の将来は危ないと言いましたが、一方で、先ほど Andrew が話をした
ように、MOOC というのは、宣伝のためというのはあまりにもあけすけな言い方ですけれど、
必要だろうと思っています。なので、本当はいいコンテンツをどんどん出していって、自分の
ところに興味を持つ人を増やすという効果は高いと思います。今日は Andrew さんの話を聞
いて一番我々として欠けているなと思ったのは、私はそういう漠然とした方向性は認めてい
11
るけど、一体それは本当にペイするのかといった計算をしたことがありません。残念ながら放
送大学というのは、国の組織なものですからあまりコストとかプロフィットという意識がなくて、
その辺が非常に欠けているということを今日、つくづく痛感しました。今後はなるべくそういう
効果についてなんとか数値化できればいいなと思っていまして楽しく伺わせていただいたと
いう状況です。
Grace Alfonso
Yes, I’d like to comment on this, about the two things. You have free learning and
you have the sharing part. The free learning, for our university, we go into it because
we are a national university. It is our job to be able to help out in terms of helping the
industry itself so we can design things for them, etcetera and so on. But, this is
beyond the formal education that our university is offering. There are practical
applications to it and because we do need the Pilipino workforce to be strengthened.
So, that’s one.
Now, the other is the fact that there is this sharing idea. The OERs and in the case of
a practical move say on integration where five open universities of ASEAN and we
are offering the Master’s in ASEAN Studies and graduate certification, so it depends
on the open university. But, we are exchanging our materials and we are sharing that.
Some will be offering it free. Some will offer it for a small fee. The five universities
were given the option to do what they want with the material. That’s one type of
partnership. I think that as an institution we are very open to partnerships along this
line.
Sir John Daniel
I think that Andrew Law’s talk showed us very clearly that the open universities are at
a great advantage when it comes to reaping benefits for offering free things ‘free’. For
two reasons, the first is they already have a readymade stock of media stuff, so they
don’t have to make it specially as people did when they, say made MOOCs in the US.
Harvard was not making distance learning materials, so it suddenly put money into
that. The open universities we’ve heard didn’t have to do that.
The second of course is scale because the figures that Andrew gave over a thousand
registrations because of a year’s activity on this. I mean, other universities aren’t
looking at that kind of scale. So, I think this is something where open universities
have an advantage.
I believe that the American universities that began the MOOCs craze didn’t really
know why they were doing it. Most of the reasons that they advance now are what
they call ‘post-hoc’ rationalizations, reasons they thought up after they started
because people are asking questions.
I just want to tell a little story that I think shows both the good and the bad of MOOCs.
I showed you a slide which said there were one hundred and fifty thousand
registrations in this first MIT course. Of those, three hundred and forty-two people got
a full hundred percent score on the final examination. Of those three hundred and
forty-four, one was a fifteen year-old boy in Mongolia. I learned when I was at MIT in
the summer that this young lad was admitted to MIT as a regular student to study
12
starting in this last September. This guy had got hundred percent on their course on
circuits and electronics, which is exactly the same course that was being taught on
campus. So, I put my hand up and said ‘Will this boy have to repeat the course that
he took and got a hundred percent in when he comes as a regular student?’ And
deadpan they said ‘Yes, of course he will because study on campus is different.’ To
which I replied ‘Well, that is at least consistent, but it is stupid.’ So, this is the kind of
contradiction that you get with MOOCs.
Just a word on the sharing of content. It’s been very clear to me as I’ve worked on
the open educational resource thing worldwide during 2012 working up to the OER
Congress that there are terrific cultural differences around the world. I find in Africa in
many cases university staff are very reluctant to share materials because some of
them make a substantial income on top of their very small salaries by selling copied
notes from their lectures and so on. Obviously this to them is something that they
earn money through.
But, in general I think it is true that most university professors would rather be famous
within their professional community than earn a little extra money by selling books
and so on. Therefore, I think that once the movement gets going, there will be a sort
of competition to do particularly good elements of open educational resource in their
disciplines that then get known and recommended by their peers, and by students.
I’m told there is a very brisk traffic on Facebook of students recommending open
educational resources to each other. What’s nice about that is that they are
recommending them for the relevance that they had for their own studies and the
quality which probably has absolutely nothing to do with the brand of the university
that developed them. They met them. They decided this was helpful. They told their
friends about it. So, I think this is a very helpful phenomenon.
Andrew Law
If I could just add, I think Sir John is right in that I do think the open universities and
certainly the online universities are in an incredibly strong position to make the most
of the MOOC, a fact because I suspect the costs will be low and the benefits will be
potentially greater.
There are some bazaar anomalies. One of the other things about open universities is
that their brand and the public perception of them lies significantly on their
inclusiveness, on the idea that anybody can come to them. And yet, the worldleading MOOC providers are currently based on a brand proposition that is based
entirely by exclusivity, i.e., there has to be competition to get into those places. There
has to be a barrier. In many ways I’m still slightly perplexed why the Ivy League’s ran
with the MOOC platform because the most damaging thing that might happen to their
brand is the idea that anybody can do an MIT degree.
The most important thing in the world for the Open University in the UK is that
anybody could try to do this degree. We won’t make it easy. We’ll make it as hard as
anybody else will. You will have to learn as much as anybody else. But our brand is
based entirely on the idea that anybody can learn. We trust in that fundamental faith,
13
and the openness is critical. In many ways I think the open universities have the most
to win in what could be perceived as a battle. I think the fear is there could actually
be a battle to be held here because failure in the MOOC world, or success in a very
weak form, could damage the mid-ranking universities I think potentially quite
severely. The Ivy League supplying weak certificate-form learning could mop up a lot
of great scholarship that the open universities could otherwise have been providing in
the long term. That makes me feel quite nervous. I think that is one of the key
reasons we are involved in it.
Kumiko Aoki
Thank you. We have three minutes. I would like to pose one last question because
we had pretty good questions, to actually conclude this whole Symposium, is your
idea of the future of online education and it will be a very difficult question to answer
in short sentences, but you can say ‘bright and rosy’ or ‘sad and gloomy’, but anyway,
as a concluding remark, statement, I’d like to ask each of you what will be the future
of online education in, I would say we should actually make a time span, a ten-year
span?
Jan Herrington
Well, my personal view is that it is an extremely exciting time to be working in the
education sector for the possibilities that online learning now present us, with the
technologies that we have at our disposal, and the ways we can communicate across
the world. I think the future is very rosy, but with one caveat which Grace has
mentioned nearly every time she has spoken, is that if we can get the faculty to come
onboard.
Andrew Law
Yes, I agree entirely. I left television production I guess ten years ago and have been
gently introducing myself into the world of e-learning. I have to say I suspect people
like Tony Bates must be looking at this point and cursing the fact that they are
approaching retirement. I hope he’s not, but approaching retirement. That this is the
year, or this period is possibly the most exciting time to be involved in e-learning. Not
because of the MOOCs, but because of a signal that they send about the potential
that has now been opened up. I couldn’t be more excited, particularly because I’m
still a few years off retirement. This is the most interesting time to be working in elearning.
Yoichi Okabe
先ほどの講演でも説明しましたが、バーチャルキャンパスを SNS でやっていた経験から、そ
れまでは、オンラインのものはフェイス・トゥ・フェイスとは違うと思ったのですが、バーチャル
キャンパスと言うのですか？Facebook などでつきあっていてたまにリアルに会う。そうすると
ほとんど生のキャンパスと変わらない雰囲気を味わうことができます。ということは授業も多分
同じであって、オンラインで十分に直接の講義に代替えしうるというふうに思っていまして、
非常に高いポテンシャルを今感じています。特に日本は今非常にコミュニケーションが下手
な若い人が増えている。そういう人たちはオンラインの方が入りやすいということがありますの
で、そういうことを考えますと非常に効果が高いと。むしろフェイス・トゥ・フェイスより高い部分
14
があると思っていて、私はものすごく期待していまして、私もいい時代に学長やっているなと
いうふうに思っています。
Grace Alfonso
Yes, talking about MOOCs, you know MOOCs will probably have different versions
depending on the university who approaches this. There will be, like for us, we want
to call them MODELs or ‘massive open distance e-learning’ so it is really online
learning. But, at the same time if you give it for free, then you can call it another
name, etcetera. But, the idea is I think for me, I have a couple of more years before I
retire, but, I think of this as a continuing thing because it is an advocacy. In fact, it
goes beyond us in universities. It is really looking at how ideas will be moving all
around the world and how we can contribute to that richness as educators. So, I think
all the things that we want to do for our university can also happen as we go on even
outside our university. I would like to think that OUJ, for example, is willing to, just like
us, to go into experimentation and not to fear it, because I always say that fearing the
medium will always curtail you. When we do some production, we have to leap
beyond that fear before you can do exciting things about the medium.
Sir John Daniel
Forty-two years ago I was a professor of metallurgical engineering at the University
of Montreal in Canada. In connection with some studies of educational technology
that I was doing, I went and spent three months at the Open University UK which was
then just starting. When I returned to Canada having seen what I thought was the
future of higher education, I joined the Quebec Open University, the Tele-Universite,
which was just beginning. My colleagues at the University of Montreal Engineering
thought I was completely mad and throwing away a promising career. I feel that
subsequent events have justified that decision. I am very pleased to see the
developments that have taken place. Having also been president of a conventional
campus university during my career, I am much more concerned about the future of
campus universities in ten years’ time, and the fact that many of them have overbuilt
and will have some very serious problems of adjustment to a very different future.
Kumiko Aoki
Thank you very much. I think we heard a very convincing, bright future of online
teaching and learning. Thank you very much to all the speakers.
会場の皆さま、本日は長い一日でしたが、最後までご参加ありがとうございました。最後に講
演者の方へ拍手をお願いいたします。
END
15
16

Download Report