Learning Resources

Abstract: This article proposes a framework that can help institutions break down and analyze the costs of online learning so they can make decisions about how to improve the cost-efficiencies of online education. The framework involves looking at costs across elements (which include the two stages of development and delivery plus administration of the enterprise) and seven factors: students, faculty, other staff, course design, content, infrastructure, and policy. The elements and factors may combine and interact, thereby improving (or not improving) cost-efficiencies. Where possible, current research results are included and areas where research is needed are identified.

Abstract: New subscribers to the Harvard Business Review receive as a bonus with their first issue a compilation of fifteen classics, which appeared in previous HBR issues. One article, “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail”, by John P. Kotter, first appeared in the March-April 1995 issue and is often referenced as a guide to strategic change in organizations. It is the purpose of the article to evaluate a change process undertaken at a large comprehensive baccalaureate institution in the context of Kotter’s suggested eight steps in transforming an organization.

Abstract: While many colleges and universities enthusiastically push forward to create new online courses, important campus policies regarding copyright and academic intellectual property in the digital age lag behind. Policy questions regarding ownership and control of online courses and how the new TEACH Act affects the concept of fair use of copyrighted materials continue to go unanswered on many campuses. Results from a survey of more than 180 faculty and administrators representing 60 colleges and universities reveal that policies vary widely by institution type and across higher education as a whole.

Abstract: Drawing on his experiece as Provost for Planning at West Virginia University, Raymond M. Haas deals in the following article with the importance of a proper charge to the Planning Office as a means of achieving integrated planning. He further proposes that the role of the Planning Office should be clearly coordinative in the nature--to the point where its only responsibility for actual planning should be in planning the planning process. Finally, he argues that "... integrated planning can be achieved only when planning is a regularly scheduled activity which occurs frequently, and which produces results that manifest themselves in the allocation, reallocation, and effective use of resources within the institution." The author's remarks have been adapted from his presentation at the Society's 11th Annual Conference in Washington, D.C.