The State of Online
Postsecondary Education
January 2014
In the following report, Hanover Research provides an overview of trends in online
postsecondary education. The report discusses the development of online education over
the past two decades, recent developments that are reshaping online education, and the
challenges that online education providers are facing today, and will continue to face in the
near future.
Hanover Research | January 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary and Key Findings ............................................................................... 4
INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................4
KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................4
General Online Education ..................................................................................................4
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) ...........................................................................6
Section I: The Development of Online Postsecondary Education ....................................... 7
THE RISE OF ONLINE POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION ............................................................................7
New Technology, New Recruitment Strategies, Continued Growth .................................8
Increased For-Credit Online Options, Trouble for For-Profit Institutions .........................9
New Forms of Online Education ......................................................................................12
CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE EDUCATION ............................................................................12
Online Education as a Part of Long-term Institutional Strategies ...................................12
Continuing Faculty Skepticism towards Online Education ..............................................14
Section II: The Current State of For-Credit Online Education............................................ 15
INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................15
CURRENT DEGREE OFFERINGS ONLINE...........................................................................................15
Degrees Offered at the Undergraduate Level .................................................................16
Degrees Offered at the Graduate Level ...........................................................................18
ONLINE PROGRAM TUITION ........................................................................................................20
ONLINE STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS................................................................................................21
Section III: A Brief History of MOOCs .............................................................................. 23
WHAT ARE MOOCS? ...............................................................................................................23
THE EXPANSION OF MOOCS.......................................................................................................25
Increase of Third-Party MOOC Providers ........................................................................26
Increase of Institution-Based MOOC Providers ...............................................................27
Increase in Partnerships between Major Third-Party Providers and Universities ..........28
Growth in the Number of Course Offerings ....................................................................29
For-Credit MOOCs............................................................................................................29
Liberal Arts Colleges and MOOCs ....................................................................................30
TENTATIVE BUSINESS MODELS .....................................................................................................31
Certificate Testing, Validation Strategies, and Course-Based Monetization...................31
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
2
Hanover Research | January 2014
Content Licensing ............................................................................................................32
Career Referral Services and Student Data Charges .......................................................32
University—Provider Partnerships ..................................................................................32
Other Revenue Sources ...................................................................................................33
MAJOR ISSUES AND THE FUTURE OF MOOCS .................................................................................33
Course Retention and Completion Struggles ..................................................................34
Logistical Issues ................................................................................................................34
Uncertainty about MOOCs Effect on Higher Education Structures .................................35
MOOCs, Access to Education, and Elitism .......................................................................35
Section IV: The Future of Online Education ..................................................................... 37
FUTURE ONLINE PLATFORMS .......................................................................................................37
CHALLENGES FACING ONLINE EDUCATION’S EXPANSION....................................................................38
Overall Online Student Retention and Course Content Issues ........................................38
State Authorization and Accreditation Issues ................................................................39
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
3
Hanover Research | January 2014
EXECUTIVE S UMMARY AND KEY FINDINGS
INTRODUCTION
In this report, Hanover Research (Hanover) analyzes the development of online courses and
degree programs, as well as the current state of online education more generally. An online
course is classified as a course in which over 80 percent of content is delivered online, with
few, if any, face-to-face classroom meetings.1 Hanover explores the rapid expansion of
online education from a handful of for-profit institutions in the mid-1990s to over 80
percent of all higher education institutions by 2012.2 Hanover further assesses the current
state of for-credit online education, analyzes the role of massive open online courses
(MOOCs) in the future of online education, and discusses a variety of issues and challenges
with which online education providers continue to grapple.
The report is divided into four sections:

Section I provides an overview of historical trends in online education. The section
assesses the growth of online programs, and changing perceptions of online
education among higher education policymakers.

Section II focuses on the current state of for-credit online education at both the
undergraduate and graduate level. It analyzes in more depth the types of programs
offered online as well as the types of students enrolling in these courses.

Section III discusses the recent rise of MOOCs. The section provides a brief history of
the development of these courses, and discusses the major issues that this fledgling
subsection of online education faces as it continues to expand.

Section IV outlines the future of online education. The section further considers
major challenges facing online education as it continues to grow, especially related
to the rigor of course content possible with online learning.
KEY FINDINGS
GENERAL ONLINE EDUCATION

Online Education has a major role within higher education. Both for-profit and
non-profit institutions have invested heavily in for-credit online learning. In 2012,
over 85 percent of postsecondary institutions offered courses or degree programs
online, a 15 percent increase in institutions since 2002. Furthermore, new learning
platforms, such as MOOCs, are further expanding the reach of online education.
1
This definition, and a broader course classification systems of online learning, has been developed for the Babson
surveys of online learning, see Allen, I., Seaman, J. “Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in
the United States.” p. 7. http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/changing_course_2012
2
Ibid, p. 20.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
4
Hanover Research | January 2014

Even smaller, private non-profit institutions are developing online courses and
degree programs. Over three-quarters of private non-profit institutions now offer
online courses and degree programs. Even smaller liberal-arts colleges have made
efforts into developing online offerings, though the most prominent of these have
not yet pursued for-credit online education.

While initially driven by for-profit institutions, public and private non-profit
institutions are now playing a major role in online higher education. In recent
years, for-profit institutions have received increasingly bad publicity, and seen
enrollment slip and profits decline. Non-profit institutions are finally fully investing
the necessary time and money in their online programs to be successful.

Institutions more commonly offer undergraduate degrees online, though graduate
degrees, especially master’s degrees are also offered by a variety of institutions.
These degrees are offered in a wide range of subjects, though popular options
include business and marketing and the health professions such as nursing. At the
master’s degree level, education programs are especially popular.

The average total tuition for an online bachelor’s program is $43,477 compared to
$21,959 for a master’s program. These figures represent tuition paid over the
entirety of the program, rather than a semester or credit hour, and don’t include
any deductions made via financial aid. Given that a number of one-year master’s
programs are included within this calculation, the average annual cost of an online
bachelor’s program is probably lower than that of an average online master’s
program.

There has been a huge growth in the online student population in the last decade.
Over 30 percent of the postsecondary student population has taken at least one forcredit course online. In 2011, over 6.7 million students enrolled in an online course.
Though, in recent years, the growth in the number of students enrolling online has
slowed, it is still much higher than growth of total postsecondary enrollment.

Online students are typically working females in their early 30s who are receiving
financial support from their employer to complete their online degree. These
students are especially interested in enrolling in business, health professions, and
social science degree programs. Upon completion, they are interested in entering
into the health professions, professional services, education, or computer and
information sciences fields.

Despite its success, for-credit online education continues to grapple with a variety
of issues. Student attrition remains a large issue and there remains little conclusive
evidence on the effectiveness of online learning methods. Furthermore, as for-credit
online learning, more and more institutions are grappling with confusing state
regulation issues that have limited student access in some areas to courses and
degree programs.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
5
Hanover Research | January 2014
MASSIVE OPEN ONLINE COURSES (MOOCS)

Over the last two years, massive open online courses, or MOOCs, have presented a
new option for those interested in online learning. These courses are typically free,
and not-for-credit. Some MOOCs have enrolled over 100,000 students, and they
potentially suggest a new platform through which to deliver education on a large
scale. Third-party MOOC providers such as Coursera have partnered with a growing
number of institutions while international companies and individual institutions
have also developed these types of programs.

There is little consensus on the role of MOOCs in online higher education. While
promising tools to increase access to higher education, higher education leaders
have yet to grapple with how to integrate them with the current for-credit
educational model. In many ways, they remain in an experimental stage, though
some universities are beginning to consider offering them for introductory course
credit.

Liberal arts colleges have started to offer courses via MOOC platforms. Skepticism
remains about whether the small-group, intimate form of learning found in many
liberal arts colleges is compatible with “massive” online courses. However, certain
administrators see MOOCs as an opportunity to publicize their college, particularly
at an international level, and to experiment with online learning in a relatively lowrisk fashion.

Another major issue with MOOCs is that they have only recently begun to develop
effective financial models. Coursera and other major providers, such as edX and
Udacity, have established plans to offer certificates and completion validation to
students for a fee. edX has established a partnership model with universities to
increase revenue. Coursera and Udacity have established ‘headhunting’ services
through which employers can receive data on strong, potential student candidates.

Furthermore, retention and completion issues continue to plague MOOCs. A
recent study completed by Duke University suggests that only a small percentage of
the students who signed up for a MOOC actually complete it. This raises questions
about the financial viability of models charging students for testing and certificates,
with so few actually completing overall.

The future of MOOCs remains cloudy. Due to their relatively recent development, a
variety of issues surrounding MOOCs remain to be confronted. Even professors who
have taught, and are enthusiastic about the benefits of MOOCs do not see them as a
potential replacement for the traditional classroom. Issues relating to student
access, online learners’ rights, and the effect of MOOCs on the financial viability of
smaller, lower-ranked colleges also raise questions about their future.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
6
Hanover Research | January 2014
SECTION I: THE DEVELOPMENT
POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION
OF
ONLINE
This section is divided into two subsections: the first chronicles the expansion of online
courses and degree programs within higher education, while the second assesses the
changing perception of online education by postsecondary faculty and administrators.
THE RISE OF ONLINE POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION
In 1989, the for-profit institution, the University of Phoenix, offered its first course online,
enrolling 12 students.3 This marked the beginning of a period when a number of for-profit
institutions began to experiment with these types of courses, laying the foundation for their
later dominance of the online learning sphere.4, 5 Content was similar to previous distancelearning ventures, and courses continued to enroll a small number of students to ensure
some form of personalized relationship between student and instructor.6 The online format
allowed for-profit institutions to better attract an underserved niche within the higher
education landscape: nontraditional working adults who did not have the time to enroll in
a full-time, classroom-based degree program.7
In the mid- to late-1990s, the number of students enrolled in online courses began to
increase rapidly. While figures outlining the growth of online education did not become
available until the early 2000s, more general data collected by the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES) on the growth of distance education indirectly highlight this
expansion.
Figure 1.1: Student Enrollment in For-Credit Distance Education Courses
YEAR
Fall 1994
Fall 1997
Fall 2000
Source: National Center for Education Statistics.
# OF STUDENTS
754,000
1,344,000
2,876,000
8
The growth in distance education highlighted by Figure 1.1 was not solely due to the growth
of online courses and degree programs at for-profit institutions. By 1995, non-profit
3
Levine, S. “Desktop degrees, University of Phoenix takes education on-line.” Connected Planet. May 26, 1997.
http://connectedplanetonline.com/mag/telecom_desktop_degrees_university/
4
Distance- based courses had been previously offered via correspondence, radio, and television, see Ibid.
5
Young, J. “Sylvan Buys Major Stake in Walden University.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. February 16, 2001.
http://wiredcampus.chronicle.com/article/Sylvan-Buys-Major-Stake-in/7037/
6
For an early discussion of this, see Hedegaard, T. “On-Line Degree Program Is Academically Rigorous.” Letter to the
Editor. The Chronicle of Higher Education. October 23, 1991. http://chronicle.com/article/On-Line-DegreeProgram-Is/82349/
7
Levine, S. Op. cit.
8
This table is available at Kiernan, V. “A Survey Documents Growth in Distance Education in Late 1990s.” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. August 8, 2003. http://chronicle.com/article/A-Survey-Documents-Growthin/27599
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
7
Hanover Research | January 2014
institutions were making more concerted efforts at developing online courses and programs
at both the undergraduate and graduate level. The University of Illinois system, through its
UI-Online, began offering programs in 1997-1998. The Pennsylvania State University system
began to offer non-degree programs online in 1998 through its World Campus,9 and by the
early 2000s was offering full master’s and bachelor’s degree programs.10 By 2000, the
percentage of public institutions offering online courses and degree programs was much
higher than the percentage of private institutions offering online education. This was at
least partially due to the fact that many smaller, private colleges lacked the resources as
well as institutional focus to develop online programs.11
Figure 1.2: Institutions Offering Distance Education Courses by Type and Size, 2000
INSTITUTION TYPE
% OFFERING DISTANCE COURSES
INSTITUTION SIZE
% OFFERING DISTANCE COURSES
Public 2-year
90%
Less than 3,000
41%
Private 2-year
16%
3,000 to 9,999
88%
Public 4-year
89%
Private 4-year
40%
10,000 or More
95%
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
12
NEW TECHNOLOGY, NEW RECRUITMENT STRATEGIES, CONTINUED GROWTH
New technology helped online education further expand. The development of learning
management systems, such as Blackboard and WebCT, made it possible for universities to
provide more integrated online learning experiences. 13 Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and other institutions began to experiment with open course management
systems, which were, and continue to be, freely available for other institutions to access,
modify, and further develop to meet their own needs.14
Though non-profit institutions worked to carve out a niche in online education, many
remained tentative and failed to fully invest resources into these ventures. Throughout the
2000s, enrollment in for-profit institutions grew “far faster than in the rest of higher
education”15 through aggressive recruitment of community college students,16 members of
9
Koeppel, D. “Distance Learning; A Sampler of Cyberschools.” The New York Times. April 4, 1999.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/04/education/distance-learning-a-sampler-of-cyberschools.html
10
For more detailed information about its history and current offerings through Penn State, see “About Us.” Penn
State World Campus. http://www.worldcampus.psu.edu/about-us
11
Selingo, J. “Small, Private Colleges Brace for Competition From Distance Learning.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. May 1, 1998. http://chronicle.com/article/Small-Private-Colleges-Brace/98381/
12
Kiernan, V. “A Survey Documents Growth in Distance Education in Late 1990s.” Op. cit.
13
Arnone, M. “Mixing and Matching Distance-Education Software.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. May 24, 2002.
http://chronicle.com/article/MixingMatching/11982/
14
Vest, C. “Why MIT Decided to Give Away All Its Course Materials via the Internet.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. January 30, 2004. http://chronicle.com/article/Why-MIT-Decided-to-Give-Away/9043/
15
Wilson, R. “For-Profit Colleges Change Higher Education’s Landscape.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. February
7, 2010. http://chronicle.com/article/For-Profit-Colleges-Change-/64012/
16
Blumenstyk, G. “How For-Profit Institutions Chase Community-College Students.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. December 8, 2000. http://chronicle.com/article/How-For-Profit-Institutions/22306
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
8
Hanover Research | January 2014
the armed forces,17 and other adult learners. With the aggressive recruiting practices of forprofit institutions and the increasing expansion of non-profit institutions in the online
sphere, the number of students enrolling in online courses grew significantly through the
2000s.
Figure 1.3, below– highlights the growth in the number of students enrolled in at least one
online for-credit course from 2002 to 2011 (the most recent year for which data is
available). While slowing, the online enrollment continues to expand faster than overall
enrollment in postsecondary education. The figure further provides total postsecondary
enrollment information for comparison.
Figure 1.3: Total and Online Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, 2002-2011
YEAR
Fall 2002
Fall 2003
Fall 2004
Fall 2005
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
TOTAL
ENROLLMENT
16,611,710
16,911,481
17,272,043
17,487,481
17,758,872
18,248,133
19,102,811
20,427,711
21,016,126
20,994,113
% CHANGE OF
TOTAL/YEAR
1.8%
2.1%
1.2%
1.6%
2.8%
4.7%
6.9%
2.9%
-0.1%
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
STUDENTS TAKING AT LEAST
ONE ONLINE COURSE
1,602,970
1,971,397
2,329,783
3,180,050
3,488,381
3,938,111
4,606,353
5,579,022
6,142,280
6,714,792
% CHANGE OF
ONLINE/YEAR
23%
18.2%
36.5%
9.7%
12.9%
16.9%
21.1%
10.1%
9.3%
ONLINE STUDENTS
AS % OF TOTAL
9.6%
11.7%
13.5%
18.2%
19.6%
21.6%
24.1%
27.3%
29.2%
32%
18
INCREASED FOR-CREDIT ONLINE OPTIONS, TROUBLE FOR FOR-PROFIT INSTITUTIONS
Over 85 percent of postsecondary institutions now offer online for-credit courses, with
over 60 percent actually offering full degree programs. This contrasts with much lower
rates even 10 years ago as online education was rapidly expanding.
Figure 1.4: Percentage of Institutions Offering Online Education, 2002 and 2012
2002
28.3%
2012
13.4%
0%
37.2%
24.2%
20%
No offerings
34.5%
62.4%
40%
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
60%
80%
100%
Online Courses
Only
Online Courses
and Full Programs
19
17
Carnevale, D. “Be All You Can Be – Online.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. July 7, 2006.
http://chronicle.com/article/Be-All-You-Can-Be-Online/9176/
18
Allen, I., Seaman, J. “Changing Course.” Op. cit., p. 17.
19
Ibid., p. 37.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
9
Hanover Research | January 2014
At all types of postsecondary institutions, online courses and degree program have become
increasingly available. Even colleges and universities with relatively low student
enrollment numbers have worked to develop some for-credit online options in recent
years. Figure 1.5, below, outlines enrollment by size of student population at institutions in
2002 and 2012. Institutions with less than 1,500 students have made especially concerted
efforts to develop online programs. While only about 45 percent offered online courses in
2002, by 2012 over 75 percent offered these and over 50 percent offered full degree
programs.
Under
1500
2002
7500 - 3000 - 1500 15000+ 14999 7499 2999
Figure 1.5: Percentage of Institutions Offering Online Education by Size, 2002 and 2012
2002
17%
28.4%
2012
51.6%
29.3%
Online Courses
Only
49.9%
2012
54.5%
2002
Online Courses
and Full Programs
26%
33.7%
46%
44.7%
2012
75.9%
2002
18.8%
54.4%
2012
42%
81.5%
2002
16.8%
72.4%
2012
25.3%
82.8%
0%
20%
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
40%
16.3%
60%
80%
100%
20
This expansion of online offerings at smaller institutions is partially due to the
development of online education at private non-profit institutions, including liberal arts
colleges. These institutions have made efforts, particularly in the last five years, of
broadening their student base with online courses. 21 Combined with the continued
expansion of online education at larger private institutions, this has led to a more general
growth in the percentage of private non-profit institutions offering online courses and
degree programs. This accords with the more general expansion presented in Figures 1.4
and 1.5.
20
21
Ibid.
For one example, see Young, J. “Interview: Why a Small Liberal-Arts College Decided to Offer Online Courses.” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. October 6, 2008. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/interview-why-a-smallliberal-arts-college-decided-to-offer-online-courses/4289
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
10
Hanover Research | January 2014
Private Private
for-profit nonprofit Public
Figure 1.6: Percentage of Institutions Offering Online Education by Type, 2002 and 2012
2002
48.9%
2012
43.9%
70.6%
2002
22.1%
24.5%
32.4%
2012
48.4%
2002
48.9%
2012
20%
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
Online Courses
Only
30.3%
43.9%
72.9%
0%
Online Courses
and Full
Programs
40%
12.1%
60%
80%
100%
22
Figure 1.6 highlights the expansion of online education at private non-profit institutions, and
the slight overall decline of the number of for-profit institutions offering online education.
Online for-profit programs expanded quickly throughout the 2000s and, by 2010, some
larger schools such as the University of Phoenix were enrolling hundreds of thousands of
students.23 However, this growth led to questions relating to the recruiting strategies of forprofit institutions, the rigor of their course content, and actual retention and completion
rates at these institutions.
In 2010, U.S. governmental investigations released information on unethical recruitment
practices by for-profit institutions,24 and whistle-blower suits against them highlighted
issues such as their manipulation of federal financial aid packages.25 This bad publicity, in
conjunction with the growing online presence of non-profit institutions, has led to
enrollment difficulties for online programs at for-profit institutions. Furthermore, as
online education has matured, potential students are becoming better informed and
seeking “out online programs based on price and brand strength.” With increasing options
available, students are taking larger consideration into an institutions reputation and “even
less-selective public universities have plenty of brand appeal in their regions.”26 In the
coming years, non-profit institutions are well-placed to capitalize on the growing
sophistication of consumers.
22
Allen, I., Seaman, J. “Changing Course.” Op. cit., p. 37.
Wilson, R. Op. cit.
24
Marklein, M. “For-profit colleges under fire over value, accreditation.” USA Today. September 29, 2010.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2010-09-29-1Aforprofit29_CV_N.htm
25
Lewin, T. “Scrutiny Takes Toll on For-Profit College Company.” The New York Times. November 9, 2010.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/education/10kaplan.html?pagewanted=all
26
Fain, P. “Brand New Online Heavies.” Inside Higher Ed. October 10, 2012.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/10/10/nonprofit-colleges-spark-new-competition-online-study-finds
23
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
11
Hanover Research | January 2014
NEW FORMS OF ONLINE EDUCATION
Since fall 2011, developments in for-credit online courses and degree programs have often
been overshadowed by the rise of freely available online courses offered by prominent
institutions and individual educators. These massive open online courses, or MOOCs, enroll
thousands of students at a time and have become the major focus of much coverage of
online learning. Some have heralded MOOCs, developed at major research universities, as
potentially revolutionary tools to deliver strong, standardized educational content to
individuals across the world.27 MOOCs also highlight new opportunities for smaller, liberal
arts institutions to expand online, apparent in the recent development of these courses at
Wellesley College and Wesleyan University. In Section III of this report, Hanover provides a
detailed overview of the rise of MOOCs as well as assesses their future role in higher
education.
CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE EDUCATION
The expansion of online learning, particularly in the last decade, has led to growing
awareness and changing perceptions of the delivery method by faculty and administrators
at postsecondary institutions. While there were,28 and remain,29 voices critical towards
online learning, an increasing number of individuals are recognizing its benefits, or at least
the inevitability that it will be an important component of postsecondary education in the
near future.30
ONLINE EDUCATION AS A PART OF LONG-TERM INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGIES
The Babson Survey Research Group specifically questions chief academic officers at
postsecondary institutions to get a sense of their role and overall interest in online learning
and further to more broadly outline how they see online education developing in the
coming years. Over the last decade an increasing number of postsecondary chief academic
officers have come to believe that online education is critical to the long-term strategy of
their institution. This can be seen in Figure 1.7:
27
For a timeline of MOOCs, see “What You Need to Know About MOOCs.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. .
http://chronicle.com/article/What-You-Need-to-Know-About/133475/
28
Young, J. “Faculty Report at U. of Illinois Casts Skeptical Eye on Distance Education.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. January 14, 2000. http://chronicle.com/article/Faculty-Report-at-U-of/2187/
29
Bowen, W. “Walk Deliberately, Don’t Run, Toward Online Education.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. March 25,
2013. http://chronicle.com/article/Walk-Deliberately-Dont-Run/138109/
30
Hartz, G. “Why I Changed My Mind About Teaching Online.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. October 1, 2012.
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-I-Changed-My-Mind-About/134674/
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
12
Hanover Research | January 2014
Figure 1.7: Is Online Education Critical to Long Term Strategies at an Administrator’s
Institution? 2003-2012
80%
69.1%
60%
53.5%
40%
59.2%
59.1%
33.7%
27.4%
25.9%
20%
19.7%
11.2%
14.9%
13.5%
12.9%
0%
2003
2006
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
2009
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
2012
31
Furthermore, there is a growing acceptance that online learning can potentially be as
good as, or even superior to, classroom-based learning. While research into the actual
differences in learning outcomes between online education and in-classroom learning
remains inconclusive, 32 based on their own experiences chief academic officers have
become increasingly receptive to the idea that online education can be comparable to faceto-face learning options. In 2012, over 75 percent of them believed that online education
had the same or superior learning options to face-to-face. This, however, still indicates that
chief academic officers at nearly a quarter of postsecondary institutions believe that online
learning is inferior to face-to-face options. This is presented in Figure 1.8.
Figure 1.8: Learning Outcomes in Online Education Compared to Face-to-Face, 2003-2012
60%
40%
45.0%
44.9%
32.1%
56.4%
Inferior
17.7%
Somewhat
Inferior
Same
53.0%
30.3%
23.0%
20%
7.8%
10.7%
9.5%
5.3%
0%
2003
2006
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
2009
2012
33
At institutions with well-developed online programs, chief academic officers are much less
likely to indicate skepticism towards online learning. Those at institutions without online
courses or degree programs are much more likely to consider the delivery method inferior
to face-to-face learning.
31
Allen, I., Seaman, J. “Changing Course.” Op. cit p. 36.
Lederman, D. “Who Benefits from Online Ed?” Inside Higher Ed. February 25, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/25/study-finds-some-groups-fare-worse-others-online-courses
33
Allen, I., Seaman, J. “Changing Course.” Op. cit., p. 39.
32
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
13
Hanover Research | January 2014
Figure 1.9: Consider Online Learning Inferior, by Institution’s Online Offerings, 2012
40%
34.1%
30%
20%
Somewhat Inferior
27.5%
21.7%
Inferior
10.7%
10%
2.5%
0.8%
0%
Online Courses and Full Online Courses Only
Programs
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
No Online Offerings
34
CONTINUING FACULTY SKEPTICISM TOWARDS ONLINE EDUCATION
Chief academic officers recognize that one key to the success of online courses is faculty
acceptance. However, since 2002, few chief academic officers believe there has been a
significant change in faculty acceptance of the value and legitimacy of online education.
Only about 30 percent believe faculty actually recognizes the value or legitimacy of online
education.35 Many educators remain skeptical of online education due to the lack of human
interaction or discussion opportunities in the courses. Others are concerned by the fact that
online learning technologies lend themselves to more general multitasking activities that
make it more difficult to learn complex material.36
Figure 1.10: Faculty at my Institution Accept the Value and Legitimacy of Online
Education, 2006-2012
80%
60%
56.1%
51.8%
40%
32.9%
30.9%
20%
11.0%
57.2%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
30.2%
17.3%
12.6%
0%
2006
Source: Babson Survey Research Group
2009
2012
37
34
Ibid., p. 39.
Ibid., p. 40.
36
Samuels, B. “Being Present.” Inside Higher Ed. January 24, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2013/01/24/essay-flaws-distance-education
37
Allen, I., Seaman, J. “Changing Course.” Op. cit., p. 40.
35
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
14
Hanover Research | January 2014
SECTION II: THE CURRENT STATE
ONLINE EDUCATION
OF
FOR-CREDIT
INTRODUCTION
In this section, Hanover Research analyzes the current state of for-credit online education in
at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. This is presented in two subsections: in the
first, Hanover turns to the Peterson’s Distance Learning Database, one of the most
comprehensive datasets on distance and online learning currently available, to provide an
outline of what types of degree programs are currently offered online, and the cost of these
programs; in the second, Hanover turns to a recent survey of students enrolled in online
degree programs to better outline the demographics of online learners.
CURRENT DEGREE OFFERINGS ONLINE
The Peterson’s Distance Learning Database provides an integral tool in understanding the
current state of for-credit online undergraduate and graduate degree programs.38 One of
the “most comprehensive and complete databases in the field,” it provides information
about accredited online programs from “992 institutions and units in the United States…and
Canada.” While only 904 of these actually report their online enrollment, this account for a
total of 2,119,628 online learners. Furthermore, 715 of these institutions list online degree
programs. In total, the database lists 9,110 different online degree programs ranging from
programs at the undergraduate certificate level to those at the doctoral level.39
Hanover has focused on only the 699 institutions offering online degree programs within
the United States.40 This group provides a useful base through which to outline the current
types of degrees offered online as well as in
which subject fields these are commonly Figure 2.1: Institutions with Detailed Online
Programs Listed within the Peterson’s
offered.
Database, 2012
There are a variety of issues with the
information provided by the Peterson
Database. It only provides information
about a portion of the online education
market and especially excludes a large
portion of the for-profit online education
market. Only 5 percent of the 699
institutions are classified as for-profit
institutions.
4.7%
0.3%
20.7%
14.7%
59.5%
Public,
Nonprofit
Private,
Nonprofit
Private,
Religious
Private, Forprofit
Private,
Unspecified
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
38
For more information on the database, see “Distance Learning Database.” Peterson’s College Data.
http://www.petersonsdata.com/specialized/distance-learning-database.aspx
39
“Distance Learning Licensed Data Set—2012 Database Overview.” Peterson’s College Data. 2012, p. 1.
http://www.petersonsdata.com/specialized/distance-learning-database.aspx
40
This excludes mainly Canadian institutions listing online programs
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
15
Hanover Research | January 2014
While not accounting for much of the for-profit sector of for-credit online education
(including the University of Phoenix), the database does provide a useful tool in assessing
the current state of the other portions of the market and provides a more general overview
of for-credit online education. The database further allows analysis of these portions of the
market in more depth, from the degree level of programs to the subject fields most
commonly offered. Figure 2.2, below, provides a basic outline of the number of institutions
listed offering programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Over 80 percent of
institutions offer programs at the undergraduate level, while only about 56 percent offer
programs at the graduate level.
Figure 2.2: Level of Degree Programs Offered by Institutions by Type
INSTITUTION TYPE
Public, Non-profit
Private, Non-profit
Private, Religious
Private, For-profit
Private, Unspecified
Aggregate
Aggregate % of Total
UNDERGRADUATE
ONLY
227
13
29
12
1
282
40.3%
UNDERGRADUATE AND
GRADUATE
149
51
88
17
1
306
43.8%
GRADUATE
ONLY
40
39
28
4
0
111
15.9%
TOTAL
INSTITUTIONS
416
103
145
33
2
699
100%
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
In total, this selection of institutions offers 8,936 online certificates and degree programs.
The majority of these are offered by public, non-profit institutions though private, nonprofit institutions (when including private, religious institutions) offer about 35 percent of
the offerings listed. This information is presented in Figure 2.3, below. The figure further
provides a breakdown of programs by degree level. Nearly 5,000 are offered at the
undergraduate level, while nearly 4,000 are offered at the graduate level.
Figure 2.3: Certificates and Degree Programs Offered by Institution Type
INSTITUTION TYPE
Public, Nonprofit
Private, Nonprofit
Private, Religious
Private, For-profit
Private, Unspecified
Total
# OF COURSES OFFERED
5,317
1,454
1,535
617
13
8,936
% OF TOTAL
59.5%
16.3%
17.2%
6.9%
0.1%
100%
UNDERGRADUATE
3,246
605
724
362
8
4,945
GRADUATE
2,071
849
811
255
5
3,991
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
DEGREES OFFERED AT THE UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL
More detailed information about the 4,945 certificates and degree programs offered by 588
institutions provide further understanding of the current state of online education.
Peterson’s lists undergraduate degrees at the certificate, associate’s, and bachelor’s award
levels. Associate’s degrees and bachelor’s degrees are both relatively common offerings;
though undergraduate certificates are also are a significant portion of the total
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
16
Hanover Research | January 2014
undergraduate degrees on offer. These are presented in Figure 2.4 on the following page.
They are, again, sorted by institution type as well as degree level.
Figure 2.4: Total Undergraduate Degree Programs Offered by Institution Type
INSTITUTION TYPE
Public, Nonprofit
Private, Nonprofit
Private, Religious
Private, For-profit
Private, Unspecified
Total
ASSOCIATE
1,437
117
127
132
3
1,816
UNDERGRADUATE CERTIFICATE
825
148
109
24
0
1,106
BACHELOR'S
984
340
488
206
5
2,023
TOTAL
3,246
605
724
362
8
4,945
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
These programs are offered in a wide variety of subject fields. Through an analysis of each
program’s assigned 2-digit Classification of Instructional Program group code (the U.S.
education department’s classification system for postsecondary degree programs), 41
Hanover has identified a number of popular degree programs offered at the undergraduate
level. These include programs in computer science, in the health professions, and those in
business and marketing.
Figure 2.5: Top Twenty Most Popular Online Programs Offered at the
Undergraduate Level by Overall Subject Field
CIP
CODE
52
51
11
24
13
43
15
45
9
42
41
CIP CATEGORY
Business, Management,
Marketing, And Related Support
Services.
Health Professions And Related
Programs.
Computer And Information
Sciences And Support Services.
Liberal Arts And Sciences, General
Studies And Humanities.
Education.
Homeland Security, Law
Enforcement, Firefighting And
Related Protective Services.
Engineering Technologies And
Engineering-Related Fields.
Social Sciences.
Communication, Journalism, And
Related Programs.
Psychology.
TOTAL
% OF
TOTAL
ASSOCIATE
UNDERGRADUATE
CERTIFICATE
BACHELOR'S
1,179
23.80%
465
222
492
556
11.20%
139
140
277
520
10.50%
173
191
156
450
9.10%
311
22
117
380
7.70%
96
155
129
342
6.90%
140
58
144
186
3.80%
72
49
65
118
2.40%
30
18
70
113
2.30%
15
22
76
110
2.20%
22
3
85
For more information about CIP codes, see “CIP 2010.” Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. National
Center for Education Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/Default.aspx?y=55
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
17
Hanover Research | January 2014
CIP
CODE
CIP CATEGORY
TOTAL
% OF
TOTAL
ASSOCIATE
UNDERGRADUATE
CERTIFICATE
BACHELOR'S
44
Public Administration And Social
Service Professions.
104
2.10%
47
13
44
22
Legal Professions And Studies.
101
2.00%
60
14
27
30
Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies.
99
2.00%
29
18
52
14
Engineering.
74
1.50%
8
39
27
19
Family And Consumer
Sciences/Human Sciences.
70
1.40%
15
20
35
38
Philosophy And Religious Studies.
65
1.30%
15
10
40
50
Visual And Performing Arts.
61
1.20%
30
6
25
45
0.90%
12
22
11
46
0.90%
9
21
16
44
0.90%
13
7
24
1
31
39
Agriculture, Agriculture
Operations, and Related Sciences
Parks, Recreation, Leisure, And
Fitness Studies.
Theology And Religious Vocations.
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
DEGREES OFFERED AT THE GRADUATE LEVEL
The 3,991 certificates and degree programs offered by 417 different institutions at the
graduate level are primarily master’s degrees. Over 70 percent of the total graduate degrees
are offered at this level, with relatively few doctoral or other graduate degree programs
offered online. This is presented in Figure 2.6, below. Like those at the undergraduate level,
these programs are listed by institution type.
Figure 2.6: Total Graduate Degree Programs Offered by Institution Type
INSTITUTION TYPE
GRADUATE
CERTIFICATE
MASTER'S
Public, Nonprofit
Private, Nonprofit
Private, Religious
Private, For-profit
Private, Unspecified
Total
513
154
98
35
0
800
1,373
623
635
183
5
2,819
GRADUATE
COMBINED
DEGREE
10
5
14
1
0
30
GRADUATE
DOCTORAL
120
57
55
21
0
253
OTHER
ADVANCED
DEGREE
55
10
9
15
0
89
GRADUATE
CERTIFICATE
TOTAL
513
154
98
35
0
800
2,071
849
811
255
5
3,991
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
Again, these programs are offered in a variety of subject fields. Like at the undergraduate
level, health professions and business and marketing degree programs are popular,
particularly as master’s programs. Even more popular are master’s degrees and graduate
certificates in education. Graduate programs in the fields of education make up nearly 30
percent of the total number of online graduate programs.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
18
Hanover Research | January 2014
Figure 2.7: Top Twenty Most Popular Online Programs Offered at the
Graduate Level by Overall Subject Field
CIP
CODE
CIP CATEGORY
TOTAL
% OF
TOTAL
GRADUATE
CERTIFICATE
MASTERS
GRADUATE
COMBINED
DEGREE
GRADUATE
DOCTORAL
OTHER
ADVANCED
DEGREE
13
Education.
1,171
29.30%
178
831
2
87
73
565
14.20%
117
418
14
16
0
454
11.40%
77
274
7
90
6
351
8.80%
66
271
1
10
3
278
7.00%
90
183
0
3
2
117
2.90%
30
85
0
1
1
112
2.80%
29
76
2
4
1
108
2.70%
14
89
1
4
0
74
1.90%
20
52
0
2
0
63
1.60%
14
47
0
2
0
62
1.60%
22
38
0
2
0
62
1.60%
8
47
0
6
1
63
1.60%
1
53
0
9
0
57
1.40%
23
33
1
0
0
52
51
14
11
43
9
44
30
3
15
38
39
1
Business,
Management,
Marketing, And
Related Support
Services.
Health Professions
And Related
Programs.
Engineering.
Computer And
Information
Sciences And
Support Services.
Homeland Security,
Law Enforcement,
Firefighting And
Related Protective
Services.
Communication,
Journalism, And
Related Programs.
Public
Administration And
Social Service
Professions.
Multi/Interdisciplina
ry Studies.
Natural Resources
And Conservation.
Engineering
Technologies And
Engineering-Related
Fields.
Philosophy And
Religious Studies.
Theology And
Religious Vocations.
Agriculture,
Agriculture
Operations, And
Related Sciences.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
19
Hanover Research | January 2014
CIP
CODE
19
42
31
45
26
50
CIP CATEGORY
Family And
Consumer
Sciences/Human
Sciences.
Psychology.
Parks, Recreation,
Leisure, And Fitness
Studies.
Social Sciences.
Biological And
Biomedical
Sciences.
Visual And
Performing Arts.
TOTAL
% OF
TOTAL
GRADUATE
CERTIFICATE
MASTERS
GRADUATE
COMBINED
DEGREE
GRADUATE
DOCTORAL
OTHER
ADVANCED
DEGREE
51
1.30%
16
34
0
1
0
52
1.30%
5
38
0
8
1
47
1.20%
4
42
0
1
0
40
1.00%
9
27
1
3
0
33
0.80%
14
18
0
1
0
31
0.80%
4
27
0
0
0
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database
ONLINE PROGRAM TUITION
Figure 2.8 shows a variety of data relating to the tuition rates of online programs contained
within the Peterson’s Database. The amounts in this table are indicative of total program
tuition, rather than amounts calculated by credit hour, semester or academic year. Thus, if a
typical master’s degree lasts two years and a bachelor’s degree for four years, there would
appear to be little difference between the average annual tuition costs at the two academic
levels (approximately $11,000 per year each). However, the cost of an online master’s
program may be somewhat artificially low owing to the presence of one year, as well as
two-year, programs in the Peterson’s Database. Indeed, the minimum tuition of an online
master’s degree is slightly above that of a bachelor’s degree. Online associate’s degrees
would seem, on the whole, to be less expensive than either bachelor’s or master’s degrees.
Figure 2.8: Tuition for Online Programs (Total)
Average
25 Percentile
Median
th
75 Percentile
Minimum
Maximum
th
Associates
$12,486
$6,882
$8,060
$14,400
$1,200
$69,480
Bachelors
$43,477
$30,256
$41,444
$52,000
$1,796
$145,908
Masters
$21,959
$13,608
$18,600
$27,180
$3,924
$88,830
Source: Peterson’s Distance Learning Database.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
20
Hanover Research | January 2014
ONLINE STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
Students enrolling in online courses and degree programs are generally in their early 30s
and female, according to a recent survey by Aslanian Market Research and the Learning
House. These female students in their early 30s are typically “not the first in their family to
attend college and […] have a total family income of about $66,500. They work full-time for
an employer who offers tuition reimbursement.” Online students are also most likely to use
student loans and other types of financial aid to pay for their studies.42 In many ways, this
matches typical demographics of online learners noted from the 1990s onwards.43 These
students are typically older than a traditional student population and have specific,
professional goals that an online degree program is expected to meet.
These students are especially interested in business and health professions (such as nursing)
degree programs. This is highlighted in Figure 2.8, below.
Figure 2.9: Online Student Enrollment by broad Field of Study
5%
6%
34%
11%
13%
16%
Source: The Learning House.
16%
Business
Health Professions
Social Sciences
STEM
Education
Humanities or Liberal Arts
Other
44
Following completion of their programs, graduates are especially interested in using their
business or health professions degree to find a job within the healthcare industry. This is
especially true of those earning an undergraduate degree online. Other popular career
fields that graduates hope to gain entry into include professional services, education, as well
as computer and information systems fields. This information is outlined in Figure 2.9,
below.
42
Aslanian, C., Clinefelter, D. Online college students 2012: Comprehensive data on demands and preferences. The
Learning House. 2012, p. 27.
http://www.learninghouse.com/files/documents/resources/Online%20College%20Students%202012.pdf
43
Though early online education had a higher proportion of males. At the University of Phoenix in the 1990s, students
were typically “men in their early 40s holding middle- and upper-management positions, with a household
income of between $50,000 and $70,000 a year,” see Levine, S. Op. cit.
44
Aslanian, C., Clinefelter, D., Op. cit., p. 11.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
21
Hanover Research | January 2014
Figure 2.10: Industry Students Plan to Enter On Completion of Online Degree
INDUSTRY
Health care
Professional services
Education
Computer, communications, or information systems
Government
Financial services or insurance
Entertainment, hospitality, or sports or leisure services
Nonprofit
Retail or wholesale
Energy
Building and construction
Other
Source: The Learning House.
45
TOTAL
26%
18%
12%
10%
7%
6%
5%
3%
2%
1%
0%
9%
UNDERGRADUATE
30%
16%
11%
12%
11%
4%
6%
2%
3%
1%
1%
5%
GRADUATE
22%
26%
15%
6%
6%
10%
2%
5%
1%
2%
0%
5%
45
Ibid., p. 31.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
22
Hanover Research | January 2014
SECTION III: A BRIEF HISTORY OF MOOCS
WHAT ARE MOOCS?
Over the last two years, postsecondary institutions have developed massive open online
courses, or MOOCs. These courses are taught online, and are usually offered free of charge
to the participating student. These courses are frequently offered by an established higher
education institution, via a third-party website. Students do not typically have to be fullyenrolled in the higher education institution which is offering a course – in this way, students
can take a course offered at, for example, Princeton University via a MOOC provider, such as
Coursera, without actually enrolling at Princeton. Instruction largely occurs via pre-taped
video lectures. Students are tested on what they have learnt by methods such as automated
quizzes, or assignments that are graded by other students participating in the course. This
combination of relatively “open” access, and the potential for a single, or small number, of
professors to teach a “massive” number of individuals via relatively automated means has
given rise to the abbreviation of “MOOCs.”46
At present, most MOOCs are offered as stand-alone courses. Only a few institutions within
the United States currently consider them for credit, though recent months have seen
growing interest in this possibility. 47 Accordingly, it is not yet possible to obtain a
significant amount of college credit, let alone a full degree, via the completion of a series
of MOOCs.
The recent surge in interest in MOOCs can be ascribed to two phenomena: The huge
number of students that have enrolled in a number of these courses, and the move by
certain, elite higher education institutions to become involved in MOOC provision. The large
number of students that can potentially take a MOOC was first seen in a class offered via
Know Labs (now Udacity). 160,000 people in 190 countries signed up for a single course
offered in the field of Artificial Intelligence by Professor Sebastian Thrun in fall 2011.48 Since
this course was offered, a variety of MOOC providers have developed, led by prominent
educators and higher education institutions.49
The major providers of MOOC providers within the United States are listed below in Figure
3.1. As can be seen in the list, MOOCs are provided in a variety of ways. Some are
partnerships between third-party websites and higher education institutions. Others are
46
“What You Need to Know About MOOC’s.” Op. cit.
For one example, see Fitzgerald, M. “Coursera Courses Approved For College Credit.” Information Week. February
7, 2013. http://www.informationweek.com/education/online-learning/coursera-courses-approved-for-collegecr/240148119
48
Webley, K. “MOOC Brigade: Will Massive, Open Online Courses Revolutionize Higher Education?” Time. September
4, 2012. http://nation.time.com/2012/09/04/mooc-brigade-will-massive-open-online-courses-revolutionizehigher-education/
49
This is discussed in more depth below.
47
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
23
Hanover Research | January 2014
merely platforms for instructional videos or instructors that are not necessarily linked to a
course offered by a higher education institution.
Figure 3.1: Leading US-Based MOOC Providers
MOOC
PROVIDER
edX
Coursera
MOOC2Degree
Udacity
DESCRIPTION
edX is a “not-for-profit enterprise” founded by Harvard University and MIT in May
50
2012 and governed by the two bodies. Currently, twelve institutions offer courses, or
51
are developing courses to be offered, through the MOOC provider. This includes the
liberal arts college Wellesley University, which joined the MOOC provider in early
52
December 2012. Courses are offered in a variety of subjects: including computer
53
science, mathematics, and the humanities.
Coursera initially offered 14 courses when it launched in early 2012, from institutions
54
such as the University of Michigan. Since then, multiple additional institutions have
partnered with the MOOC platform. Currently, 62 institutions offer courses via
55
Coursera. These include Ivy League institutions such as Princeton, one prominent
liberal arts college in Wesleyan University, and prestigious non-North American
institutions, such as the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. Courses are
offered in a number of subjects: including the humanities, business, and STEM fields.
In January 2013, Academic Partnerships – a company that partners with institutions to
develop online learning options – launched MOOC2Degree “to offer credit-bearing
56
MOOCs as a first step and a free start toward earning a degree.” Students
completing a MOOC have the option of enrolling in MOOC2Degree institutions with
57
initial credit options fulfilled. Currently, 7 institutions, including Utah State
58
University and Cleveland State University, have joined this initiative.
Unlike edX, MOOC2Degree and Coursera, instruction on Udacity is provided by
independent professors, rather than partnerships with higher education institutions.
Teaching largely occurs via the same methods (video and automated quizzes). Udacity
59
has stated that its courses will focus on “computer science and related fields.”
50
DeSantis, N. “Harvard and MIT Put $60-Million Into New Platform for Free Online Courses.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. May 2, 2012. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/harvard-and-mit-put-60-million-into-newplatform-for-free-online-courses/36284
51
edX. https://www.edx.org/
52
DeSantis, N. “Wellesley College Joins edX Effort for Free Online Courses.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
December 4, 2012. http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/jp/wellesley-college-joins-edx-effort-for-free-online-courses
53
“Courses.” edX. https://www.edx.org/courses
54
DeSantis. N. “4 Start-Ups are Offering Free Online Courses.” Chronicle of Higher Education. February 10, 2012.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/4-start-ups-are-offering-free-online-courses/35355
55
“Course Explorer.” Coursera. https://www.coursera.org/courses
56
“Conversation About a MOOC.” MOOC2Degree. http://www.mooc2degree.com/about.php#.UWLNAJOG3y0
57
Press Release. “Academic Partnerships Launches MOOC2Degree Initiative.” MOOC2Degree. January 23, 2013.
http://www.mooc2degree.com/MOOC2Degree_Press_Release_012313.pdf
58
MOOC2Degree. http://www.mooc2degree.com/index.php#.UWLNoJOG3y0
59
“What you need to know about MOOC’s.” Op. cit.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
24
Hanover Research | January 2014
MOOC
PROVIDER
Khan Academy
Udemy
Goodsemester
Class2Go
DESCRIPTION
Khan Academy, founded in 2006, is largely composed of a collection of instructional
videos on YouTube, relating to subjects such as math, science, computer science,
finance and economics, humanities, and test preparation. The majority of its content
does not take the form of an actual course in a given subject, although it has recently
begun to offer structured instruction in computer science. Khan Academy does not
have any content partnerships with higher education institutions, but it has received
60
financial assistance from the Gates Foundation.
Udemy offers a platform by which instructors can offer courses in a wide variety of
61
subjects. The most popular courses have over 10,000 participants. Some instructors
are college professors, but many are independent individuals. Udemy has also
launched “The Faculty Project,” in which a small number of professors from leading
62
higher education institutions will provide tuition in a variety of subjects. “Most
63
courses are free on Udemy, although some charge a fee, ranging from $5 to $250.
Goodsemester describes itself as a “global network of teachers, learners, and
64
schools.” The aim of the site is to allow anyone to make a course on any topic, which
they can then teach online. A small number of higher education institutions are
offering courses via the service, although it is unclear whether this is via a formal
partnership or not with Goodsemster. While it is free to sign-up and participate in
courses, certain premium services – mainly relating to data storage on the website –
incur monthly fees of between $5 and $50.
65
This platform is run entirely by Stanford University, and launched in fall 2012. It has
recently partnered with edX to “help realize edX’s aspiration of becoming an opensource platform to provide free and open online learning tools to higher ed
66
institutions around the globe,” and will soon cease to exist independently.
Source: Various MOOC provider websites, as noted.
THE EXPANSION OF MOOCS
As noted, massive open online courses began to first receive considerable attention in fall
2011 with Thrun’s artificial intelligence course,67 though the term had circulated and the
format discussed in educational technology circles as early as 2008.68 By the end of 2012
this attention had ramped up considerably. edX and Coursera, both established early in
2012, began in the fall 2012 to expand at faster and faster rates and media latched onto
stories about the revolutionary potential of massive open online courses. The New York
Times education section dubbed 2012 the “Year of the MOOC” and debate surrounding
60
Ibid.
“Popular Courses.” Udemy. http://www.udemy.com/
62
“The Faculty Project.” The Faculty Project. http://facultyproject.org/
63
DeSantis, N., “4 Start-Ups Are Offering Free Online Courses.” Op. cit.
64
“Home.” Goodsemester. https://www.goodsemester.com/
65
“Class2Go.” Stanford University. http://class.stanford.edu/
66
Emson, R. “edX Merges With Stanford’s Class2Go To Build An Open-Source Online Learning Platform.” Tech Crunch.
April 3, 2013. http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/03/edx-merges-with-stanfords-class2go-to-build-an-open-sourceonline-learning-platform/
67
Webley, K. Op. cit.
68
Waldrop, M. “Online learning: Campus 2.0.” Nature. March 13, 2013. http://www.nature.com/news/onlinelearning-campus-2-0-1.12590
61
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
25
Hanover Research | January 2014
these courses has little abated through early 2013.69 Through March 2013, Coursera offered
over 300 courses to a user-base of over 2.9 million individuals.70
Since late 2012, universities and third-party providers have taken a variety of steps to
increase the number of MOOC options. The number of third-party MOOC providers has
continued to grow, with a small number of international consortiums and individual
institutions implementing MOOC platforms. The major third-party providers – such as edX
and Coursera – have increased their base of universities. Due to these shifts the number of
massive open online courses has also increased. This subsection discusses this growth, and
further outlines how courses within the MOOC universe are becoming viable for-credit
options at a growing number of universities.
INCREASE OF THIRD-PARTY MOOC PROVIDERS
In January, a third-party MOOC platform, MOOC2Degree, designed to compete with
Coursera, edX, and others was launched by the online learning provider Academic
Partnerships. 71 Partnered with seven U.S. institutions and university systems, 72
MOOC2Degree employs massive open online courses in a unique way, more explicitly tying
them to a university credential:73
the initial course in select online degree programs will be converted into a MOOC.
Each MOOC will be the same course with the same academic content, taught by the
same instructors, as currently offered degree programs at participating universities.
Students who successfully complete a MOOC2Degree course earn academic credits
toward a degree, based upon criteria established by participating universities.
A small number of international third-party MOOC providers have also been established in
recent months. The United Kingdom-based third-party platform Futurelearn, launched in
early 2013,74 already has 19 partners: 17 UK universities as well as the British Library and
the British Council.75 It is further working to attract students from across the globe – even
enlisting the British Prime Minister to promote the MOOC provider during a trip to India.76
Futurelearn “marks the first significant entry of a foreign player” into a MOOC market that
continues to be dominated by American providers and universities.77
69
Pappano, L. “The Year of the MOOC.” The New York Times. November 2, 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapidpace.html?pagewanted=all
70
Waldrop, M. Op. cit.
71
Press Release. “Academic Partnerships Launches MOOC2Degree Initiative.” Op. cit.
72
MOOC2Degree. Op. cit.
73
Press Release. “Academic Partnerships Launches MOOC2Degree Initiative.” Op. cit.
74
Redden, E. “Multinational MOOCs.”
75
For the complete list, see “About Us: F/L.” Futurelearn. http://futurelearn.com/about/
76
“British MOOC Provider Expands; Prime Minister Promotes It in India.” February 19, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2013/02/19/british-mooc-provider-expands-prime-ministerpromotes-it-india
77
“British Council Joins U.K. MOOC Platform.” Inside Higher Ed. March 5, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2013/03/05/british-council-joins-uk-mooc-platform
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
26
Hanover Research | January 2014
Other European countries have been slower to create MOOC platforms, and many have
questioned the validity/potential of these ventures.78 The Berlin-based iversity, established
in 2011 (though still getting off the ground), is currently the only third-party MOOC provider
based in continental Europe.79, 80 The rest of the world has also been slow in creating unique
MOOC platforms.81 There is currently only one other international third-party provider:
Open2Study, an all-Australian MOOC platform, which was launched in mid-March.82 Created
by the private distance and online education organization Open Universities Australia,
Open2Study has already partnered with a number of Australian universities.83
INCREASE OF INSTITUTION-BASED MOOC PROVIDERS
A number of institutions have experimented with creating their own platform to provide
MOOCs. While MIT and others pioneered this type of internal platform in the early 2000s
and MOOCs were initially pioneered as single institution offerings,84 they are only now
becoming popular and viable for most universities not yet involved in other MOOC ventures.
Stanford’s Class2Go, though soon to merge with edX,85 was developed and is now run as
Stanford’s internal MOOC platform, which is designed to allow effective online teaching and
research.86 It offered two courses in fall 2012 and one in winter 2013.87 Syracuse University
has also recently offered an in-house MOOC through its School of Information Studies88 and
Florida International University established an open online education platform in January89
offering a variety of business and management courses.90 Other institutions and university
78
For two discussions of this, see Guttenplan, D. “Europeans Take a More Cautious Approach Toward Online
Courses.” The New York Times. February 17, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/world/europe/18ihteducside18.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0; and Katsomitros, A. “Does Europe need its own Mooc?” The Guardian.
March 28, 2013. http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2013/mar/28/european-moocopportunities-challenges
79
“About us: iversity.” iversity. http://www.iversity.org/about/index
80
This is not to say there are no other MOOC platforms within Europe, just no other large, third-party versions. For
example, the University of Amsterdam is currently experimenting with its own in-house MOOC, see Olds, K. “The
making of a MOOC at the University of Amsterdam.” Inside Higher Ed. February 5, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/globalhighered/making-mooc-university-amsterdam
81
For information on this topic and further the overall development of MOOCs, see Olds, K. “Globalizing MOOCs.”
Inside Higher Ed. http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/globalhighered/globalizing-moocs
82
“Australian MOOC Platform.” Inside Higher Ed. March 21, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2013/03/21/australian-mooc-platform
83
Counihan, B. Op. cit.; Other universities within Australia have developed or modified internal MOOC platforms; the
University of Western Australia has adapted the Stanford internal MOOC platform, Class2Go, for its courses, see
Rowbotham, J. “Do the maths – MOOCs break the mould.” The Australian. February 20, 2013. Accessed via the
scalablelearning Blog at http://scalablelearning.org/2013/02/21/do-the-maths-moocs-break-the-mould-theaustralian/
84
Watters, A. “What Impact Have MOOCs Had on Open Courseware?” Inside Higher Ed. March 22, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/hack-higher-education/what-impact-have-moocs-had-open-courseware
85
Emson, R. Op. cit.
86
Johnson, E. “Class2Go launches new massive open online courses.” The Stanford Daily. October 4, 2012.
http://www.stanforddaily.com/2012/10/04/class2go-launches-new-online-courses/
87
Class2Go. Op. cit.
88
Stein, L. “SU launches first massive open online course.” The Daily Orange. March 5, 2013.
http://dailyorange.com/2013/03/su-launches-first-massive-open-online-course/
89
Mikulski, L. “FIU joins the MOOC revolution: Free online courses now available.” FIU News. January 28, 2013.
http://news.fiu.edu/2013/01/fiu-joins-the-mooc-revolution-free-online-courses-now-available/51093
90
“FIU Online: Open Education.” Florida International University. http://www.open.fiu.edu/#courses
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
27
Hanover Research | January 2014
systems, such as the University of Chicago and the State University of New York system,91
are also considering development of these platforms.92
INCREASE IN PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN MAJOR THIRD-PARTY PROVIDERS AND UNIVERSITIES
Perhaps the most significant example of the growth of MOOCs in recent months has been
the increase in size of major third-party course providers, such as edX and Coursera. In
February 2013, both announced they would be building courses with a number of new
university partners. Many of these are international universities.93 edX announced six new
partners in February, to join a growing list of universities, including Wellesley University and
the University of Texas System,94 that have partnered with the provider since the fall 2012.95
The service is now partnered with 12 institutions across the globe (though many of these
will not offer courses until 2014) including universities in Canada, France, the Netherlands,
and Australia.96
Coursera announced 29 new partner universities in February, nearly doubling its number of
partners. This included the first liberal arts college to join the MOOC provider, Wesleyan
University.97 The provider is now partnered with 62 institutions throughout the world,
increasing its reach to universities throughout Europe, Canada, Australia, and China.98 These
new partnerships will also allow Coursera to begin providing courses in a number of new
languages, such as French, Chinese, Italian, and Spanish.99 The university currently has plans
to offer over 20 non-English courses, with nine of these to be offered in French.100
Udacity, another major MOOC provider which generally works with individual professors to
offers courses, has also begun to team with universities and reach out to an international
audience. In late October, the provider announced a partnership with the University of
Alberta.101 This partnership will lead to a number of University of Alberta courses being
offered through Udacity and further will lead to research “for the collaborative
91
Kolowich, S. “SUNY Signals Major Push Toward MOOCs and Other New Educational Models.” The Chronicle of
Higher Education. March 20, 2013. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/suny-signals-major-push-towardmoocs-and-other-new-educational-models/43079
92
Jaganathan, H. “UChicago considers offering open online courses.” The Chicago Maroon. March 8, 2013.
http://chicagomaroon.com/2013/03/08/uchicago-considers-offering-open-online-courses/
93
Kolowich, S. “Competing MOOC Providers Expand into New Territory—and Each Other’s.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. February 21, 2013. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/competing-mooc-providers-expand-intonew-territory-and-each-others/42463
94
DeSantis, N. “Wellesley College Joins edX Effort for Free Online Courses.” Op. cit.
95
Bolkan, J. “U Texas System Joins EdX.” Campus Technology. October 18, 2012.
http://campustechnology.com/articles/2012/10/18/u-texas-system-joins-edx.aspx
96
edX. https://www.edx.org/
97
Kolowich, S. “Competing MOOC Providers Expand into New Territory—and Each Other’s.” Op. cit.
98
Coursera. https://www.coursera.org/
99
Kolowich, S. “Competing MOOC Providers Expand into New Territory—and Each Other’s.” Op. cit.
100
For further information about these offerings, see “Coursera Courses.” Coursera.
https://www.coursera.org/courses?orderby=upcoming
101
Desantis, N. “U. of Alberta Teams Up With Udacity to Build a Better MOOC.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
October 29, 2012. http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/jp/u-of-alberta-teams-up-with-udacity-to-build-a-bettermooc
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
28
Hanover Research | January 2014
development of systems for delivery, measurement and assessment of online learning
courses and experiences.”102
GROWTH IN THE NUMBER OF COURSE OFFERINGS
This increase in universities offering MOOCs has, unsurprisingly, led to an increasing variety
in the types of courses available. While a large number of MOOCs continued to be offered in
STEM fields – especially in computer science related subjects – a growing number of
humanities, business, and social sciences courses are also being offered.103 As noted above,
these courses are also being offered in a variety of different languages, especially French.104
Starting in September, the École Polytechnique Fédérale De Lausanne (EPFL) will offer
French-language courses in history, mathematics, and computer programming through
Coursera.105
FOR-CREDIT MOOCS
Along with this significant growth, for-credit options for some MOOCs are becoming
available. Currently, a number of universities are instituting plans to integrate online course
credit with traditional courses.106 Furthermore, the American Council on Education has
recommended five courses offered through Coursera for credit.107
One of the most ambitious plans to offer MOOCs for credit is currently being considered by
the government of California. This proposal would allow “public college students who are
shut out of popular courses to attend low-cost online alternatives” and receive credit for
completion of them.108 University leaders and others involved with educational policy have
taken a critical view of this proposal and their remains little information on how exactly this
policy would function.109 For-credit opportunities for MOOCs such as this, also suggest a
102
Press Release. “UAlberta, Udacity team up for online learning.” University of Alberta. October 30, 2012.
http://www.news.ualberta.ca/newsarticles/2012/10/ualbertaudacityteamupforonlinelearning
103
For one example, see “Coursera Courses.” Op. cit.
104
Anderson, N. “Providers of free online college courses add schools, including many foreign ones.” The Washington
Post. February 21, 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/providers-of-free-online-collegecourses-add-schools-including-many-foreign-ones/2013/02/20/b2e93832-7b7b-11e2-9a75dab0201670da_story.html
105
Ibid.
106
See Huckabee, C. “Cal State Teams Up With Udacity in a Big Experiment With Web Courses.” The Chronicle of
Higher Education. January 15, 2013. http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/jp/cal-state-teams-up-with-udacity-in-abig-experiment-with-web-courses; or Desantis, N. “Antioch U. Will Offer MOOC’s for Credit Through Coursera.”
The Chronicle of Higher Education. October 29, 2012. http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/antioch-u-will-offermoocs-for-credit-through-coursera/51252
107
Kolowich, S. “American Council on Education Recommends 5 MOOCs for Credit.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. February 7, 2013. http://chronicle.com/article/American-Council-on-Education/137155/
108
Fain, P., Rivard, R. “Outsourcing Public Higher Ed.” Inside Higher Ed. March 13, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/13/california-bill-encourage-mooc-credit-public-colleges
109
See Rivard, R. “Politics and Cautions in California.” Inside Higher Ed. March 14, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/14/california-educational-factions-eye-plan-offer-mooc-creditpublic-colleges; or Gardner, L, Young, J. “California’s Move Toward MOOCs Sends Shock Waves, but Key Questions
Remain Unanswered.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. March 14, 2013. http://chronicle.com/article/A-BoldMove-Toward-MOOCs-Sends/137903/
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
29
Hanover Research | January 2014
variety of opportunities to monetize these courses many of which are slowly being
integrated into third-party MOOC platforms.
LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES AND MOOCS
As one analyst has put it, “The word massive […] seems inconsistent with one of the
hallmarks of an education at a small liberal arts college.”110 As the President of Wesleyan
University, Michael Roth, has stated, most of the classes offered by the institution have
fewer than 20 students, and have a focus on intimate, small-group learning. Accordingly,
many faculty members at liberal arts colleges have been skeptical about MOOCs. Fears have
been raised that the large-scale, potentially anonymous form of educational delivery seen in
MOOCs could ultimately undermine the type of education seen at liberal arts colleges.111
However, in recent months, two prominent liberal arts colleges have become involved in
the provision of MOOCs: Wesleyan University and Wellesley College. The former has started
to offer a small number of courses via Coursera,112 whilst the latter has recently launched a
“WellesleyX” MOOC platform, as part of the edX initiative spearheaded by Harvard
University and MIT. Wellesley will offer four courses via edX from fall 2013, with the courses
in question yet to be determined.113 The Provost and Dean of Wellesley College, Andrew
Shennan stated that by joining edX he hoped that Wellesley could partner with other
“education leaders […] [to] help shape the rapidly evolving online learning environment […]
[and] explore ways to incorporate technology creatively and effectively in the classroom.” In
other words, Shennan feels that being involved with edX will be a “great experiment” for
the college.114 It will allow them to be involved in cutting-edge online education provision,
and gain insight into how students learn online, potentially helping professors in how they
teach their classes.
At a more basic level, being involved with major MOOC providers can potentially provide
liberal arts colleges with publicity. Michael Roth has stated that he hopes that being
involved with edX will raise Wellesley’s profile, particularly at an international level –
something that will possibly benefit the college’s students after graduation.115
110
Alexandra Tilsley, “Unlikely Pairing?” Inside Higher Ed, December 6, 2012.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/12/06/wellesley-and-wesleyan-hope-moocs-will-inform-campusbased-teaching
111
Ibid.
112
“Wesleyan University.” Couresera. https://www.coursera.org/wesleyan
113
“Wellesley College joins edX.” Wellesley College. http://new.wellesley.edu/academics/wellesleyx
114
Andrew Shennan, Can MOOCs work with Liberal Arts?, February 26, 2013. http://www.nebhe.org/thejournal/canmoocs-work-with-liberal-arts/
115
Tilsley, Op cit.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
30
Hanover Research | January 2014
TENTATIVE BUSINESS MODELS
One of the major concerns surrounding MOOC developers and providers since their
beginnings has been how these courses could be monetized. In recent months, Coursera,
Udacity, and edX all have tentatively laid-out and begun to implement realistic financial
models. While, in many cases, these efforts remain experimental, in early April 2013,
Coursera announced that it is actually “beginning to make money.” The company earned
$220,000 in the first quarter of 2013.116 The business models currently in development at
MOOC providers center on a variety of different options: including fees for certificate
testing and validation which prove student completion of a course, content licensing, career
referral and headhunting services, and university—provider partnerships.
CERTIFICATE TESTING, VALIDATION STRATEGIES, AND COURSE-BASED MONETIZATION
Since early January, Coursera has implemented a “fee-based pathway with identity
verification for students who want to earn a more meaningful certificate of completion”
from one of their courses; this is currently referred to as the “Signature Track.” Coursera
splits revenue from this fee-based path with partner universities. Universities keep “6-15
percent of revenue from courses taught by their professors, as well as 20 percent of
profits.” Under this option:117
students will need to submit their pictures to Coursera through a webcam, as well
as an image from a picture ID that the company deems verifiable. Coursera will also
create profiles of students’ unique typing patterns, the company said. Once
students have registered a keystroke signature, determined by typing a short
phrase, they will use the same phrase to log in when submitting work in a course.
Coursera partners are also experimenting with credit-based options. The University of
Washington offers “souped-up” versions of its Coursera-based courses to students for a fee.
Students have the option of earning credits from the university upon completion.118
Udacity and edX have partnered with education giant Pearson “to offer fee-based proctored
exams.” These will provide students further validation and a certificate for completion of a
course. Udacity charges students $89 to take these exams, while edX will likely charge
around $100 per exam. These suggest strong potential revenue streams, though, as will be
discussed below, there potential remains relatively limited at the moment.119
116
Rivard, R. “Free to Profit.” Inside Higher Ed. April 8, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/04/08/coursera-begins-make-money
117
Fain, P. “Paying for Proof.” Inside Higher Ed. January 9, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/09/courseras-fee-based-course-option
118
Ibid.
119
Korn, M., Levitz, J. “Online Courses Look for a Business Model.” The Wall Street Journal. January 1, 2013.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324339204578173421673664106.html
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
31
Hanover Research | January 2014
CONTENT LICENSING
Coursera has also experimented with content licensing. They have developed a relationship
with Antioch University in which “Antioch will pay Coursera an undisclosed amount for
permission to use several courses, including ones from Duke University and the University of
Pennsylvania.” These courses would function as entry-level, for-credit courses at Antioch.
This licensing agreement appears to have a similar fee structure as the student validation
and certificate services discussed above, and the universities and professors whose courses
are licensed will receive a portion of revenues.120
CAREER REFERRAL SERVICES AND STUDENT DATA CHARGES
Coursera and Udacity have both created a service to charge employers for access to student
data.121 These MOOC providers will, with permission from students, sell data on successful
students to companies that sign up for their service. As a Coursera blog post explains:122
If you opt-in to our Career Services, we will try to find companies that match your
interests, skills and knowledge. If you do well in a Coursera class and allow us to
share that information with potential employers (who will have agreed to keep this
information in strict confidence, and use only for the purpose of considering you for
employment), this could make you even more appealing to employers.
Employers such as Facebook and Twitter have already signed on with Coursera. 123 Over 350
partner companies have signed on for Udacity’s matching service.124
UNIVERSITY—PROVIDER PARTNERSHIPS
edX has turned to partnership models with affiliated universities in an attempt to monetize.
The provider currently offers two partnership types to university affiliates: the ‘university
self-service model’ and the ‘edX-supported model.’ The ‘university self-service model’
allows participating universities “to use edX’s platform as a free learning-management
system for a course on the condition that part of any revenue generated by the course flow
to edX.” Under the model, edX does not provide aid in course development. Until courses
pass “a quality-review process” they will be labeled ‘edge’ courses in the edX catalog.125
Under the ‘edX-supported model,’ edX provides universities assistance in designing and
implementing their MOOC. For this service, the provider charges “a base rate of $250,000
120
Kolowich, S. “MOOCs for Credit.” Inside Higher Ed. October 29, 2012.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/10/29/coursera-strikes-mooc-licensing-deal-antioch-university
121
Young, J. “Providers of Free MOOC’s Now Charge Employers for Access to Student Data.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. December 4, 2012. http://chronicle.com/article/Providers-of-Free-MOOCs-Now/136117/
122
Jones-Bey, L. “Coursera and your career.” Coursera. December 4, 2012.
http://blog.coursera.org/post/37200369286/coursera-and-your-career
123
“Coursera Creates Service to Help Its Many Students Find Jobs.” Inside Higher Ed. December 5, 2012.
http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2012/12/05/coursera-creates-service-help-its-many-students-findjobs
124
Young, J. Op. cit.
125
Kolowich, S. “How EdX Plans to Earn, and Share, Revenue From Its Free Online Courses.”
http://chronicle.com/article/How-EdX-Plans-to-Earn-and/137433/
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
32
Hanover Research | January 2014
for each new course, plus $50,000 for each time a course is offered for an additional term.”
Despite high upfront costs, under this model a university receives 70 percent of revenue
generated by a course.126 Though this provides a relatively clear plan of how edX will
structure university relationships, it fails to explain how the provider’s MOOCs will make
money. Those at edX still “don’t quite know what the key source of revenue will be.”127
OTHER REVENUE SOURCES
While business plans discussed above are currently major MOOC monetization plans, there
are other efforts being tested by providers as well as individual universities. Coursera is an
affiliate of Amazon and receives “a sliver of the money each time Coursera students click
through the site to buy recommended textbooks or any other products from Amazon.”128
Cornell University’s online subsidiary, eCornell, has designed a MOOC “to steer students
towards a follow-up course for $1,200 to get a professional certificate,” similar to the
MOOC2Degree model, suggesting another avenue through which to monetize a venture.129
MAJOR ISSUES AND THE FUTURE OF MOOCS
The expansion of MOOCs, particularly in recent months, has led to more questions than
answers about their future. While MOOC providers have made great strides in monetizing
their courses and taken tentative steps in establishing certificate and for-credit options,
their future designs remain unknown. MOOCs appear to have gained a foothold in the
higher education landscape but they still lack the recognition that a traditional classroom
holds as an effective pedagogical tool. This is emphasized in a recent survey, conducted by
The Chronicle of Higher Education, of 103 professors who have taught a MOOC.130
While 79 percent of these professors believe MOOCs are “worth the hype,” few see them
as viable paths to a college education. Only 28 percent believe successful students in
MOOC courses deserve “formal credit” from their institution, and only 34 percent believe
that their home institution will eventually provide “formal credit to students” succeeding in
their MOOCs.131 This lukewarm reception from professors teaching MOOCs on their viability
to overtake traditional postsecondary education models crops up in a variety of other
discussions of the future of MOOCs. These are often driven by course retention and
126
Ibid.
Quote by Anant Agarwal, edX President, taken verbatim from Ibid.
128
Lewin, T. “Students Rush to Web Classes, but Profits May Be Much Later.” The New York Times. January 6, 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/education/massive-open-online-courses-prove-popular-if-not-lucrativeyet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
129
Mangan, K. “eCornell Offers a MOOC That Steers Students to a Paid Follow-Up.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
January 8, 2013. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/ecornell-to-offer-mooc-that-steers-students-to-forcredit-follow-up/41433
130
See Kolowich, S. “The Minds Behind the MOOCs: The Professors Who Make the MOOCs.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. March 18, 2013. http://chronicle.com/article/The-Professors-Behind-theMOOC/137905/#id=overview; for additional results from this survey, see “The Minds Behind the MOOCs: Survey
Results.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. March 18, 2013. http://chronicle.com/article/The-Professors-Behindthe-MOOC/137905/#id=results
131
Kolowich, S. “The Mind Behind the MOOCs: The Professors Who Make the MOOCs.” Op. cit.
127
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
33
Hanover Research | January 2014
completion struggles that have plagued MOOCs, the logistical problems of recent MOOC
efforts, as well as more general uncertainty about MOOCs effect on higher education.
COURSE RETENTION AND COMPLETION STRUGGLES
While thousands of individuals might sign up for a MOOC, only a small percentage will
actually complete the course. Low retention and completion rates have continued to plague
massive open online courses, and an increasing amount of research is devoted to analyzing
when and why students drop-out.132 In February, researchers at Duke University released a
report about completion and retention for its first MOOC, a course on bioelectricity that
was offered by the university via Coursera for eight weeks during fall 2012.133 This provides
detailed information on a variety of student characteristics, and highlights student
persistence in the course. As can be seen, only 313 (2.5 percent) of the 12,725 students who
registered to take the course actually earned a certificate of completion.
Figure 3.2: Student Persistence in Duke’s Bioelectricity MOOC, fall 2012
Registered
Watched at least one video
Took any quiz during the course
Score >0 on both Week 1 quizzes
Scored >0 on either quiz in Week 4
Attempted the final exam
Earned a certificate
Earned a distinction certificate
12,725
7,761
3,658
1,267
561
346
313
261
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
Source: “Bioelectricity: A Quantitative Approach, Duke University’s First MOOC”
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
134
While others have argued that examples such as this do not accurately represent the full
rationale behind MOOCs (as many of those who enroll but do not complete courses are
simply using MOOCs as extra study for other for-credit courses, or signed up simply out of
curiosity), 135 they do raise questions about the validity of certain financial models.
Specifically, only a small percentage of the small percentage of completers is likely to pay
for additional validation and testing services to receive a certificate or other credential.
LOGISTICAL ISSUES
MOOCs require a large amount of time. The median amount of time surveyed professors
spent preparing for their MOOC was 100 hours, with another 8 hours spent each week the
132
For information on some major ongoing studies, see Rivard, R. “Measuring the MOOC Dropout Rate.” Inside Higher
Education. March 8, 2013. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/08/researchers-explore-who-takingmoocs-and-why-so-many-drop-out
133
Belanger, Y., Thornton, J. “Bioelectricity: A Quantitative Approach, Duke University’s First MOOC.” Duke University.
February 5, 2013, pp. 1-21.
http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/6216/Duke_Bioelectricity_MOOC_Fall2012.pdf
134
Ibid., p. 8.
135
Rivard, R. “Measuring the MOOC Dropout Rate.” Op. cit.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
34
Hanover Research | January 2014
course was in session.136 Despite this effort, a variety of issues can go wrong with MOOCs.
Recent examples include a Coursera course that was forced to shut down due to a series of
design flaws.137 Professors and students also must adapt to a new kind of student—teacher
relationship. Professors have to consider “what to do if students post about suicide or
murder,” or other unsavory, potentially dangerous topics.138 They also have to determine
whether or not to engage with students outside of the structured course. Only 51 percent of
surveyed professors indicated they responded to all MOOC student emails, and determining
boundaries such as these will continue to be an issue.139
UNCERTAINTY ABOUT MOOCS EFFECT ON HIGHER EDUCATION STRUCTURES
Furthermore, there remains general uncertainty about the impact of MOOCs on higher
education. As survey responses indicate, few teaching these courses see them as a viable
alternative to the traditional classroom, yet universities continue to scramble to offer their
own open online courses. This expansion will have an effect on services across universities.
For example, a recent conference on the relationship between MOOCs and libraries
suggests that these courses will – along with a variety of other technological shifts –
redefine the role of librarians over the course of the next years.140 As MOOCs create new
teaching opportunities within traditional settings and make it possible to effectively ‘flip the
classroom’ – with the lecturing done outside of class and discussion within it – the role of a
textbook is being outsourced and potentially disappearing.141
MOOCS, ACCESS TO EDUCATION, AND ELITISM
Finally, the rise of MOOCs raises a variety of questions about the supposedly egalitarian
ideals behind these courses. These questions are often central to arguments against the rise
of MOOCs.142 While MOOCs are seen as a potential tool in providing freer access to
education for individuals across the globe, there remains a major barrier to this ideal:
referred to as the “bandwidth divide.” Researchers argue that there is a widening gap
“between those who have access to fast [internet] connections and those who have only
dial-up speeds or access via a cellphone.” This is especially acknowledged as an issue
outside of the United States or Canada, but there remain many students even in these
countries with limited access. Public libraries do provide one option to solve this issue,
136
“The Minds Behind the MOOCs: Survey Results.” Op. cit.
Kolowich, S. “Georgia Tech and Coursera Try to Recover From MOOC Stumble.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
February 4, 2013. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/georgia-tech-and-coursera-try-to-recover-frommooc-stumble/42167
138
Rivard, R. “Dangerous and Possibly Anonymous.” Inside Higher Ed.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/06/professors-wonder-how-deal-suicidal-or-homicidal-studentsonline
139
“The Minds Behind the MOOCs: Survey Results.” Op. cit.
140
Howard, J. “For Libraries, MOOCs Bring Uncertainty and Opportunity.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. March
25, 2013. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/for-libraries-moocs-bring-uncertainty-and-opportunity/43111
141
Young, J. “The Object Formerly Known as the Textbook.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. January 27, 2013.
http://chronicle.com/article/Dont-Call-Them-Textbooks/136835/
142
Boullier, D. “The MOOCs fad and bubble: please tell us another story!” Inside Higher Education. December 18,
2012. http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/globalhighered/moocs-fad-and-bubble-please-tell-us-another-story
137
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
35
Hanover Research | January 2014
though these often have limited hours and long wait times for computer access.143 There
are further concerns about the rights of those enrolling in MOOCs. Though a group of
technology leaders convened in January to outline a potential “Bill of Rights” for online
learners,144 this has been met with skepticism and criticism, and raises concerns about
MOOC providers’ intentions into the future.145
Regardless of student access and rights issues, with the increasing number of universities
offering massive open online courses, there are fears that smaller, lower-ranked institutions
will suffer. This was noted in a report released in September 2012 and has been further
emphasized in more recent months.146 Coursera is “contractually obliged to turn away the
vast majority of American universities.” Its contract ensures that it only partners with
“members of the Association of American Universities or ‘top five’ universities in countries
outside of North America.”147 This effort, seemingly meant to ensure that Coursera does not
dilute the brand of top universities, suggests the competitive nature and potential
exclusivity of online education. As one professor notes, the rise of for-credit MOOCs could
lead to “decreased enrollment and tuition revenue” at smaller, lower-ranked institutions
which could lead to a decrease in “tenure-track faculty positions and/or compensation to
current faculty members as a result.”148
143
Young, J. “ ‘Bandwidth Divide’ Could Bar Some People From Online Learning.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
March 4, 2013. http://chronicle.com/article/The-Bandwidth-Divide/137633/
144
Kolwich, S. “ ‘Bill of Rights’ Seeks to Protect Students’ Interests as Online Learning Rapidly Expands.” The Chronicle
of Higher Education. January 23, 2013. http://chronicle.com/article/Bill-of-Rights-Seeks-to/136783/
145
Kolowich, S. “Authors of ‘Bill of Rights’ for Online Learners Face Criticism.”
http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/authors-of-bill-of-rights-for-online-learners-face-criticism/41971
146
“MOOC’s Could Hurt Smaller and For-Profit Colleges, Moody’s Report Says.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
September 12, 2012. http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/moocs-could-hurt-smaller-and-for-profit-collegesmoodys-report-says/39864
147
Rivard, R. “Coursera’s Contractual Elitism.” Inside Higher Ed. March 22, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/22/coursera-commits-admitting-only-elite-universities
148
Sumell, A. “I Don’t Want to Be Mooc’d.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. March 25, 2013.
http://chronicle.com/article/I-Dont-Want-to-Be-Moocd/138013/
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
36
Hanover Research | January 2014
SECTION IV: THE FUTURE OF ONLINE EDUCATION
There are a variety of indicators suggesting online education will continue to grow. With
new online platforms – massive open online courses being just one example – institutions
are expanding their online reach at a growing pace. With the increased access to these
options, students from across the globe now have increasing opportunities and interest to
enroll in these expanded online options.
FUTURE ONLINE PLATFORMS
Inside Higher Ed has speculated about new types of online learning, and suggested that two
new categories of online education might potentially become more prominent: mid-sized
online closed courses (MOCCs) and micro-targeted online programs (MTOPs).

Mid-sized online closed courses (MOCCs) are, in many ways, the continued
evolution of the original MOOC model. As described by Inside Higher Ed, MOCCs
might be:149
o Online courses taught by “freelance” professors. In this direct-to-student model,
a self-described “eBay for professors,” the individual professor sets the course
price, office hours and class size. Tutors would be available to help students, and
some universities would offer credit for these courses.
o Traditional MOOCs – for a fee. This might be considered a MOCC as registrants
must pay to enroll. This may have the effect of turning massively open courses
into mid-sized open courses – a step in the direction toward MOCCs.
o Licensed content to traditional universities. This is what Antioch University is
doing with Coursera. From the Antioch University website: “Each Coursera
course will be facilitated by an AULA faculty member who will also be enrolled in
the course, thereby enabling both frequent interaction between students and
instructor and augmentation of the course through supplemental exercises and
projects focused on expanding the learning experience.”
o Publishers surrounding content with star instructors and/or facilitators.
University and traditional publishers have a wide array of content and can now
use technology and facilitators to bring it alive for university students and
company clientele alike. One example of this is Pearson College. Some business
school publishers are also doing this.

Micro-targeted online programs (MTOPS) are seemingly described as somewhat
streamlined models of current for-credit online education. They share the following
seven characteristics:150
o An online (or blended) program with 50 or fewer students per year.
149
This information has modified from Catropa, D., Andrews, M. “MOOCs to MOCCs.” Inside Higher Ed. December 16,
2012. http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/stratedgy/moocs-moccs
150
Taken verbatim from Kim, J. “MTOPs: Micro-Targeted Online Programs – (The Anti-MOOC?).” Inside Higher Ed.
March 24, 2013. http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/technology-and-learning/mtops-micro-targeted-onlineprograms-anti-mooc
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
37
Hanover Research | January 2014
o Narrowly focused, with a specialized curriculum and student demand profile.
o A program that leads to an accredited degree.
o Built on the expertise and specialization of a department, rather than individual
faculty members.
o Designed to build strong relationships between students and faculty.
o Has a revenue model that is self-sustaining.
o Is not limited to elite institutions, but is dependent on great academic
departments.
More generally, considerations of the future of online education have focused on the way
that the lessons learned from the development of MOOCs can inform future developments.
One recent commentary noted that while MOOCs themselves do “not ‘fix’ what is broken in
our system of education,” and, in many ways, “massively scale” what is broken in that
system, their commitment to open access and increased interconnectivity highlight new and
important approaches to education. By embracing these principles, the commentary argues,
there is great potential to reinvigorate and rethink approaches to higher education.151
CHALLENGES FACING ONLINE EDUCATION’S EXPANSION
Many debates surrounding current issues in online education echo those that developed at
its beginning, particularly those relating to retention and the rigor of online course content.
In addition, as online learning expands, there are growing concerns about the legality of
institutions delivering programs to students in certain states.
OVERALL ONLINE STUDENT RETENTION AND COURSE CONTENT ISSUES
For-credit online education providers have consistently struggled with improving student
retention rates. While for-profit institutions are often singled out when discussing this
issue,152 all types of institutions have struggled with student attrition. This is perhaps put
most succinctly by a recent editorial summarizing recent research into online education, it
notes that:153
First, student attrition rates — around 90 percent for some huge online courses —
appear to be a problem even in small-scale online courses when compared with
traditional face-to-face classes. Second, courses delivered solely online may be fine
for highly skilled, highly motivated people, but they are inappropriate for struggling
students who make up a significant portion of college enrollment and who need
close contact with instructors to succeed.
151
Davidson, C. “Size Isn’t Everything.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. December 10, 2012.
http://chronicle.com/article/Size-Isnt-Everything/136153/
152
For one example, see Straford, M. “Senate Report Paints a Damning Portrait of For-Profit Higher Education.” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. July 30, 2012. http://chronicle.com/article/A-Damning-Portrait-of/133253/
153
“The Trouble With Online College.” Editorial. The New York Times. February 18, 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/opinion/the-trouble-with-online-college.html?_r=0
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
38
Hanover Research | January 2014
Students in online courses, buffeted by a variety of distractions, often struggle to fully
engage in learning material.154 This is especially true for those underserved students who
could specifically benefit from the access of online education. A recent study of community
college students indicates that “males, Black students, and students with lower levels of
academic preparation experienced significantly stronger negative coefficients for online
learning compared with their counterparts, in terms of both course persistence and course
grade.” The study further concludes that “the continued expansion of online learning could
strengthen, rather than ameliorate, educational inequity.”155
Concerns about student attrition often are part of larger discussions of the overall quality of
online education. While, as noted in Section I, there is growing belief that online education
can offer the same quality of learning experience as face-to-face education, research into
this remains inconclusive. One recent research survey concludes that there is “little, if any,
evidence to suggest that online or hybrid learning, on average, is more or less effective than
face-to-face learning.”156
STATE AUTHORIZATION AND ACCREDITATION ISSUES
Institutions operating online outside of their home state are required to gain authorization
from states in which they have students enrolled in a course or degree program.157 And
many institutions struggle to, or do not, seek authorization to operate in some states. A
survey by the Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications (WCET) indicates
that only about two-thirds of institutions have applied to at least one state (outside of their
own) for authorization of online programs. Furthermore, many institutions are deciding not
to apply in states such as Minnesota, Massachusetts, Arizona, Maryland, and Alabama
because of difficulties posed by state regulations.158 The survey further suggests that
institutions are being forced to dedicate significant time and institutional resources to
ensure they comply with state authorization standards, rather than investing in resources
that might improve educational quality.159 Figure 4.1 provides a better view of the general
state of the progress of institutions in receiving state authorization.
154
Samuels, B. Op. cit.
Xu, D., Jaggars, S. “Adaptability to Online Learning: Differences Across Types of Students and Academic Subject
Areas.” Working Paper No. 54. Community College Research Center. Columbia University. February 2013, p. 23.
http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments/adaptability-to-online-learning.pdf
156
Lack, K. “Current Status of Research on Online Learning in Postsecondary Education.” ITHAKA. March 21, 2013, p.
10. http://www.sr.ithaka.org/research-publications/current-status-research-online-learning-postsecondaryeducation
157
“Distance Learning Providers Still Shy of State Authorization.” Inside Higher Ed. March 21, 2013.
http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2013/03/21/distance-learning-providers-still-shy-state-authorization
158
What are Institutions Doing (or Not Doing) About State Authorization – Revisited. UPCEA, WCET, and Sloan-C.
March 2013. http://wcet.wiche.edu/wcet/docs/state-approval/UPCEA/2013UPCEA-WCETSloanCStateAuthorizationReport_FULL.pdf
159
Ibid.
155
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
39
Hanover Research | January 2014
Figure 4.1: Institution’s Progress in Applying for Authorization Outside Home State, 2012
5%
Applied to one or more states
9%
Initial steps, no formal contact
or application to any states
15%
52%
Applied/received approval from
all states of interest
Contacted States, no
applications
18%
No action taken
Source: What are Institutions Doing (or Not Doing) About State Authorization - Revisited
160
160
Ibid.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
40
Hanover Research | January 2014
PROJECT EVALUATION FORM
Hanover Research is committed to providing a work product that meets or exceeds partner
expectations. In keeping with that goal, we would like to hear your opinions regarding our
reports. Feedback is critically important and serves as the strongest mechanism by which we
tailor our research to your organization. When you have had a chance to evaluate this
report, please take a moment to fill out the following questionnaire.
http://www.hanoverresearch.com/evaluation/index.php
CAVEAT
The publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this brief. The publisher
and authors make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or
completeness of the contents of this brief and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of
fitness for a particular purpose. There are no warranties which extend beyond the
descriptions contained in this paragraph. No warranty may be created or extended by
representatives of Hanover Research or its marketing materials. The accuracy and
completeness of the information provided herein and the opinions stated herein are not
guaranteed or warranted to produce any particular results, and the advice and strategies
contained herein may not be suitable for every partner. Neither the publisher nor the
authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but
not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Moreover, Hanover
Research is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services.
Partners requiring such services are advised to consult an appropriate professional.
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
41
Hanover Research | January 2014
1750 H Street NW, 2nd Floor
Washington, DC 20006
P 202.756.2971 F 866.808.6585
www.hanoverresearch.com
© 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice
42