Though the authors state in the Introduction that, “We believe such [online] systems have the potential to improve faculty productivity and lower instructional costs without sacrificing educational quality,” online education continues to face staunch critics.  Fundamentally, the report notes that the onslaught of online education in the higher education landscape has the potential to completely transform our concept of and basic approach to educating the nation’s college students.  The concept of online education is so foreign to many that there is some resistance based solely on it being “different.”  The authors conducted interviews with a variety of institutions utilizing online education in a variety of ways.  Not surprisingly, considering the relatively recent arrival of online education on the higher educational scene, institutions are still working to figure out how best to utilize new technologies to reduce instructional costs, improve student learning outcomes, and maximize faculty effectiveness.

Online education is becoming such a disruptive force (to use Clayton Christensen’s terminology) in education that the authors state, “Online learning is taking place at just about every college and university in the nation.”  In their interviews with administrators and faculty at institutions implementing online education in some way, there were some common themes uncovered discussing the rationale for the introduction of online education.  Many institutions, for example, see online offerings as a revenue generator.  Online education has the ability to reach non-traditional students (adult learners who are not able to attend class in a physical, more traditional setting) as well as students who would otherwise not enroll with the university due to geographic location.  While there are significant startup costs associated with implementing an online environment, many schools anticipate eventually recouping that initial investment through decreased use of facility space, increased enrollments thanks to the online offerings, and more effective use of faculty time.  Interestingly, some universities have seen cost savings as well as increased revenue yet the authors point out, “Very few institutions are using either the savings from online education or the net incremental revenue to reduce the price of education to students.”

Schools are also beginning to utilize online education as a means of improving student retention and persistence.  Practically speaking, the current economic crisis that has led to reductions in faculty size and reduction in course offerings, has effectively barred many students from getting into the classes they want and need to graduate.  By moving courses to an online environment, more can be offered overall and fewer students will be blocked from registering for core courses.  In this way, students will be more likely to continue their educations unabated.  In addition, some schools believe that online education has the potential to dramatically improve our understanding and execution of practices to improve student learning outcomes.  Some institutions have implemented online education as a means of testing this theory.  The authors acknowledge that “the belief that students in online courses may learn the material better than their traditional-format counterparts did not appear to be widely held.  This may be partly due to the scarcity of convincing evidence, produced by rigorous evaluations, about the effectiveness of hybrid or online learning compared with that of traditional modes of teaching.”  (The Department of Education released a meta-analysis in 2009 that found that “on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”)  

While there are many reasons stated by university administrators for implementing online platforms, there are many perceived barriers, some of which have been stated in the discussion above regarding the rationales for implementation.  As is the case with all disruptive technologies, a small group of early adopters carries the burden of proving the value to others.  For many faculty members interviewed for the report, online education is seen as the end of their value as instructors.  The authors note that fears over diminished faculty ranks in the face of online education was a common theme in their conversations.  While online learning does lend itself to a certain level of “automation,” the faculty must still remain engaged in order to make the course as effective as possible.  Additionally, for those faculty who are willing to venture into the world of online teaching and learning, the authors recommend that institutions create some type of incentive or compensation program.  The initial work required on the part of the faculty member teaching in an online environment is substantial enough that universities should consider breaking down this particular barrier by offering some type of incentive or additional compensation structure for innovative faculty members willing to pursue the online platform. 

For many faculty members, control or ownership over the course is paramount to all other concerns.  The report notes that some faculty members have questions about the implications for intellectual property standards in the online environment.  Others note that they take great pride and care in crafting their courses and many are unfamiliar with the concepts associated with instructional design – they teach the way they were taught and are comfortable in that setting.  In response to these stated challenges and perceived obstacles, the authors have provided a series of remedies including to “make faculty pioneers heroes” by embracing those willing to venture into the online environment and pave the way for others to follow.  Other strategies include establishing centers within the institution separate from the traditional to experiment with online learning and continuously developing a mechanism for mining data that will assist in providing answers to the questions of student learning outcomes, persistence, and retention in the online setting. 

Though there are some perceived barriers to the adoption of online learning systems in American higher education, there is significant evidence that students are migrating toward the online environment.  Babson Survey Research Group, in conjunction with The Sloan Consortium, Inside Higher Ed, and Pearson, noted in its recent report titled, “Going the Distance: Online Education in the United States, 2011” that in the Fall of 2010, more than 6.1 million students took at least one online class.  That represents a 10.1 percent increase over online enrollments in Fall 2009.  In his book The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from the Inside Out, Clayton Christensen notes that the cost of operating an online university is half that of operating a traditional one, largely because of a lack of facilities needed for students.  (To see more about Christensen’s theories in The Innovative University, see my blog article posted last August.)  This translates into an opportunity for students to receive an education for significantly less cost than they could at an average traditional university.  Considering the ambitious goals of the Obama Administration to bring America back to its preeminent position in terms of college graduates, an alternative to traditional higher education is necessary.  At this point online education seems to be a viable alternative and the number of students registering for online courses at traditional universities and the number enrolling at fully online institutions like APUS is a testament to this – despite any perceived barriers.

Today I had the honor of hosting the ribbon cutting event for American Public University System’s (APUS) latest addition to its Charles Town campus, a 1,660 panel solar array.  The array is the largest solar project in the state of West Virginia and will produce approximately 480,000 kWh of energy.  The energy produced will provide between 40 and 50 percent of the energy needed to power the 105,000-square-foot green Finance Center which is under construction adjacent to the array and being built to US Green Building Council’s LEED Gold standards.  The array features 15 universal electric car charging stations and doubles as covered parking for the university’s staff and guests.  The array was fully constructed with American-made components and will produce enough electricity to power 30 average size homes annually.  To equate this to vehicles and commuting, the amount of electricity generated by the array would enable the average gas-powered vehicle to travel 1.9 million miles, the equivalent of 120 commuters driving 15,000 miles each year. 

I was joined at our ribbon cutting event by several notable dignitaries including West Virginia Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito.  Vice Mayor of Charles Town, Don Clendening and Mayor of neighboring Ranson, David Hamill were also on hand to commemorate this event.  Congresswoman Capito, Vice Mayor Clendening, and Mayor Hamill have all expressed and demonstrated their own commitments to sustainability and sustainable development so it was especially fitting to have them in attendance.  We were able to demonstrate the universal electric car charging stations thanks to three local car dealerships (Apple Valley Chevrolet in Martinsburg, Younger Auto Group in Frederick and Hagerstown, and Renn Kirby Mitsubishi in Frederick) that showcased their own electric vehicles during the event.  The APUS Sustainability Committee also hosted an information booth to share information with visitors about the university’s comprehensive sustainability initiatives. 

Today’s event and the comprehensive sustainability program at APUS not only represent our own commitment to sustainability but also illustrate the American spirit of ingenuity and innovation in general.  It was as much about providing renewable energy for our university as it was about making a commitment to our local and extended communities that we will continue to work to promote a more sustainable future for us all.  In 2007 when I signed the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) as a charter signatory, I did so because I believe higher education has a unique opportunity to shape the future of the nation in addressing the issues associated with climate change. 

With access to some of the best and brightest minds, higher education would be remiss if it did not use that opportunity to address one of the nation’s – the world’s – most pressing problems.  The hallowed halls of the university can, in the most traditional sense, be seen as places for the exchange of theory and ideas.  Higher education has a unique opportunity, however, to lead by example and turn those theories and ideas into action.

One of the most visible sustainability efforts that we have undertaken relates to buildings.  As part of our commitment to the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), we have pledged to build all new construction to at least US Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED Silver standards.  Our new 45,000-square-foot Academic Center, built on a brownfields site, is currently in the LEED certification process and we hope to achieve a Gold designation.  There are many green features in that building which we completed and occupied in late 2010.  The HVAC system is highly efficient and operates through multiple zones, for example.  In addition, the building is outfitted with energy efficient windows which are covered with sunshades to assist in further regulating indoor temperatures.  Occupancy sensor lighting fixtures and ENERGY STAR appliances can be seen throughout the building.  All materials used in construction and all furniture originated within 500 miles of the building site, decreasing the carbon emissions associated with materials transportation.  Perhaps, the crowning achievement of the Academic Center is 99 solar panels situated on the roof which supply approximately 7 percent of the building’s total energy needs.

On the other end of the building “spectrum,” however, are APUS’ comprehensive adaptive reuse practices.  Rather than utilize existing green space to construct new buildings, we decided to invest in the historic downtown Charles Town community by purchasing and renovating existing structures for our office spaces.  At least 5 of our buildings have great historical significance and we took measures to restore as much of the historic value as possible to those buildings while updating them to create greater energy efficiency (most have energy efficient windows and HVAC systems, low flow toilets, motion sensor lighting, etc.). 

Etter Hall (our main administration building), for example, was built in the early 1800s as the home and office of physician Charles Taylor Richardson.  The building became the area’s first hospital in the early 1900s, a capacity it served for several decades.  By 1950, however, the community had outgrown that hospital and the building became a nursing home.  APUS purchased the building in 2003.  Though we updated many aspects of the building (including the elements previously listed), the elevator car is the original (and, was one of the first in this area, quite a novelty) with upgraded electrical controls and doors.  The wooden floors in Etter Hall are also original to the building. 

Aside from our buildings, APUS has undertaken several other initiatives to minimize the school’s environmental impact.  Our computers, printers, and servers are ENERGY STAR rated as are many of our buildings’ appliances.  Our printers are set to default to print on both sides of the page for multiple page documents.  We have recently expanded our recycling program to make it more comprehensive.  Using The Big Green Box Program, we are now recycling batteries and other electronics.  Though you may take up to a year to fill The Big Green Box before sending it back to be recycled, APUS filled its first box in only 5 weeks, sending nearly 40 pounds of batteries to be recycled.  Earlier this year, APUS introduced a carpooling program to its staff in order to address carbon emissions associated with employee commuting.  The program has seen early success and I suspect that it will continue to be successful, especially given the rising cost of gasoline.  Coupled with our carpooling program is a telecommuting policy that allows many staff employees to work from home at least one day a week; others telecommute every day.  Thanks to several paper reduction initiatives we have seen a 25 percent reduction in paper usage even in the face of tremendous employee growth. 

Thanks to APUS’ online format, our carbon footprint is comparatively lower than many other schools’, particularly since our faculty and students may teach and study from their home, office, or another convenient place.  However, while we do not have to contend with the emission challenges associated with student commuting, the maintenance and operation of dormitories, dining halls, sports facilities, etc., we will continue to work toward reducing our environmental impact even further.  Though Earth Day is a noble effort to call global attention to the state of our environment, at APUS the commitment to sustainability is alive and well throughout the year. 

Next week I will share an article about APUS’ latest green building project, a 1,660 panel solar array that doubles as a covered parking structure.  The array, the largest in the state of West Virginia, will provide approximately 50% of the power necessary for a green building that is currently under construction adjacent to the school’s green Academic Center. 

In September 1962 Rachel Carson published her groundbreaking work, Silent Spring, documenting the negative impact of pesticides on the environment, specifically on birds.  The book received nationwide acclaim and landed on the New York Times best-seller list where it stayed for 31 weeks.  In 1962, the New York Times wrote of Carson and Silent Spring, “’She tries to scare the living daylights out of us and, in large measure, succeeds.’” The editors of Discover Magazine recently included Silent Spring among its list of the 25 greatest science books of all time.  Prior to Carson’s book, environmentalism and sustainability were lofty ideals that had very little concrete application and brought even less sense of collective urgency.  As a result of Carson’s book, however, tangible actions were taken (the banning of the harmful pesticide DDT).  Carson proved to us all that even the voice of one individual can make a difference and with her voice, given to us through her work, Silent Spring, the modern environmental movement was born. 

Through various fits and starts, the American environmental movement has continued to gain momentum.  The passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1970 was a promising step in the right direction and represented the world’s first national policy on the environment.  The NEPA met with resistance in the United States, however, but sparked a larger movement and environmentalism as a discipline and practice began to spread across the globe.  National efforts to address environmental problems including climate change became more commonplace and the United Nations established its Environment Programme in 1972 as a result of the UN Conference on the Human Environment.  In recent years, despite international criticism regarding the United States’ stance on several international environmental treaties (most notably the Kyoto Protocol) Americans are beginning to see sustainability featured more prominently in their daily lives.  Addressing what is arguably the world’s most pressing collective issue will take more than a conscious recycling effort.  We must realize that negative changes to the environment impact every aspect of our lives and must be addressed in a holistic and comprehensive fashion.  One sector of American life is taking sustainability very seriously – American higher education is leading the march toward promoting sustainability. 

As colleges and universities began to consider the impact of their own operations on the environment, they also began to disseminate information about sustainability to their students, either formally or informally.  In 2006, as a result of planning sessions among a group of college and university presidents and a representatives from a variety of environmental organizations (including Second Nature and ecoAmerica) held at the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) conference at Arizona State University, 12 devoted college and university presidents outlined what would later become known as the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC).  By March 2007, 152 college and university presidents (I was one of them) signed the precedent-setting commitment aimed at providing a framework for addressing sustainability in higher education.  Today, nearly 700 institutions of higher education have signed the commitment.  Each of them has committed to reducing their environmental impact and working toward eventually achieving complete carbon neutrality by a date of their individual choosing based on their specific circumstances (based on our location in West Virginia and the limited fuel mix available to us at this point, APUS has chosen 2050).  While the goal is ambitious, I am convinced that if there is any collective group capable of addressing such a pressing issue, it is higher education. 

Colleges and universities have served as the nursery for nurturing social movements in America for decades.  As with the civil rights movement and the women’s rights movement, the growing movement to address our collective issue of global environmental change is being fostered on college and university campuses across the country.  It makes sense that these settings would nurture such movements – college campuses are packed with great minds eager to learn and understand, eager to make a difference in the world.  Though the ACUPCC provides a logical and effective framework for implementing sustainability into operations and curricula, many schools who have not signed that specific commitment are taking the issue of environmental change very seriously, as well. 

As students graduate from colleges and universities that recognize the critical nature of and are working to address the issues of global changes in the environment, they will enter the workplace more prepared than any previous generation to tackle these issues on an even grander scale.  As with other social movements whose sparks were ignited on college campuses and eventually spilled into our larger society, so too will be the path of the sustainability movement.  Colleges and universities are realizing that it is no longer enough to discuss lofty ideals in a theoretical setting.  We all must take collective action to address the world’s most pressing problems.  I applaud those schools that are working to address the issues related to environmental change and feel confident that this is just the first wave of a movement that will continue to grow.

According to a March 20 report from the BLS, for those veterans serving active-duty since 2001 (known as the Gulf War-era II veterans) the unemployment rate was 12.1 percent in 2011.  The jobless rate for all veterans was 8.3 percent, comparable to that of the US population as a whole.   The BLS report points out that 26 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans reported a service related disability in August 2011 while only 14 percent of all veterans reported the same.  There can be little doubt from these statistics that America’s bravest men and women, those who were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for the nation’s safety, have come home to a bleak employment situation. 

Unemployment among veterans has been a persistent problem.  In a 1972 report of the National Advisory Council on Vocational Education, Chairman Lawrence Davenport encouraged “an all-out national effort” to address the “crisis” of unemployment among returning Vietnam veterans (during a time of otherwise relatively high general unemployment).  In another era of high unemployment, America’s veterans are returning home to face seemingly insurmountable obstacles in finding meaningful employment.  It is encouraging, however, to see that some organizations are taking this collective responsibility as their own and working to make a difference in the lives of our military men and women and their families. 

On March 21, Aon and Wounded Warrior Project hosted their 4th Annual Salute to America’s Wounded Warriors at the Sheraton National Hotel in Arlington, Virginia.  Approximately 45 wounded veterans had the opportunity to meet with recruiters from more than 60 companies with open positions and a commitment to supporting the nation’s veterans.  In addition to the veterans in attendance, a handful of military spouses also participated.  Without question, military spouses and families make a tremendous sacrifice as well as their loved one in uniform and we should support their achievement as well.  While I was not at this event, I asked several American Public University System (APUS) recruiters and staff to participate.  They reported back that they were impressed by the high quality of the candidates they met. 

The recruiters who were in attendance tell me that during his opening remarks (prior to the actual meetings between potential employers and participants), Aon Director of Human Resources, Dave Dahler, announced that one veteran had already been offered a position with Morgan Stanley.  Once the meetings started, recruiters moved around the room, stopping at veterans’ tables to discuss potential opportunities (a sort of “reverse career fair”).  Recruiters jockeyed for position in line at many of the veterans’ tables and it was clear that both groups saw tremendous mutual benefit in the event. 

Those who attended the event related some of the opening remarks of Aon Board Member, retired four-star general of the US Air Force, and 15th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Richard Myers.  General Myers quoted George Washington who said (paraphrasing) during the Revolutionary War that we must take care of our veterans in order to ensure that they continue to fight for the nation.   Washington’s remarks ring as true today as they did in the days of the nation’s founding.  He also recounted the treatment of veterans returning home from the nation’s foreign wars.  He explained the experiences of Vietnam veterans returning from war to an economy nearly as stagnant as the current one.  Though both groups of veterans are returning from war, from risking their lives, to an unwelcoming economic situation, today’s veterans have a benefit over those who served three decades ago.  Today’s veterans are returning home to a nation that while perhaps divided over the political reasons associated with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are collectively proud of their men and women in uniform and eager to assist their transition to civilian life. 

Events like the one that Aon and Wounded Warrior Project hosted in Arlington are evidence that despite the unfortunate economic situation, many corporations and organizations are throwing their efforts behind supporting our returning veterans and “wounded warriors.”  I would like to applaud Aon as well as the Wounded Warrior Project for their commitment to America’s veterans.  I would also like to thank the companies who participated alongside APUS to provide employment opportunities to those who are arguably our nation’s most deserving. 

(To see some photos from the event, visit Callie Hardman’s photography blog.)

In research that I conducted initially for my doctoral dissertation and then later in a paper with my colleagues Phil Ice and Angela Gibson, I identified several factors as significant variables leading to student disenrollment from an online program.  These variables include no transfer credit received, student’s last grade of F, student’s last grade of W, and low number of courses completed by the student in a 12-month period.

Over the past year and a half, my colleagues and I have continued to examine the student disenrollment patterns at the American Public University System (APUS) and have discussed those patterns with colleagues at a number of other institutions offering online programs.  More and more, I have come to believe that the persistence of students who complete three or more undergraduate courses at APUS and the tendency of students who complete fewer than three courses at APUS to eventually disenroll are much more correlated to adult student behaviors previously identified by researchers using data from traditional institutions.

During the past decade, a major increase in enrollments has occurred  with the number of adults attending online programs versus face-to-face programs.  The reasons are obvious:  working adults are able to attend online programs from any location at any time.  Those with jobs that frequently take them out of town no longer have to juggle schedules to meet the requirement of taking a face-to-face class, but can log in from another city or country; the only requirement is a computer and an internet connection.  Additionally, adult students with a family can come home from work and log in to their classroom after dinner and after the children go to bed.  Those adults whose jobs require them to work non-traditional evening or night shifts can log in during times that suit them and not worry about losing sleep to attend face-to-face courses at a local college or university.

One of the earlier studies regarding persistence rates of adult students was published by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).  In this study, researchers Laura Horn and Mark Premo identified seven risk factors that were associated with the likelihood that a student would not graduate from college.  These risk factors were:  being independent, attending college part-time, working full-time while enrolled, having dependents, being a single parent, delaying entry to college, and not having a traditional high school diploma.  Working adults attempting to complete an associates’ or bachelor’s degree are likely to have at least three of these risk factors and those with children may have five or six.

Other studies of persistence relating to adult students provide explanations and characteristics of transfer students.  Noting that my own research indicated that students who had transferred credits were  more likely to graduate than those who did not transfer credit, I reviewed some of the literature about transfer students and student attendance patterns.  Wright and de los Santos wrote about this phenomenon in “Maricopa’s Swirling Students: Earning One-Third of Arizona State’s Bachelor’s Degrees” in 1990.  Later, director of Indiana University’s National Survey of Student Engagement, Alex McCormick, wrote a research article titled “Swirling and Double-Dipping: New Patterns of Student Attendance and Their Implications for Higher Education,” outlining the various patterns of student attendance and their implications.  In his article, McCormick attributes the likelihood of students to attend multiple institutions to the standardization of credits and the ability to transfer credits from one institution to another rather easily.  McCormick outlines eight different patterns of attendance for swirling students.  These are: 
• Trial enrollment – Students experimenting with another institution before formally transferring
• Special program enrollment – Students completing most of their coursework at their home institution but completing a special program (e.g., semester abroad) elsewhere
• Supplemental enrollment – Students enrolling at another institution for one or more terms to supplement or accelerate their program (examples include summer programs or taking a course at another institution because it’s unavailable at the home institution)
• Rebounding enrollment – Students alternating enrollment at two or more institutions
• Concurrent enrollment – Students taking courses at two institutions simultaneously
• Consolidated enrollment – Students who satisfy their home institution’s residency requirements but a substantial number of their credits come from at least two other institutions
• Serial transfer – Students who make one or more intermediate transfers sequentially in order to complete a degree
• Independent enrollment – Students pursue work unrelated to their degree program and no credits are transferred

McCormick notes that several longitudinal studies exist and while they provide descriptions of attendance patterns, they fail to provide explanations for those patterns.  He cites Clifford Adelman’s 1999 study that examined the longitudinal data of the 1982 high school graduates’ cohort and identified that students who attended multiple institutions accounted for approximately 60 percent of all students who began at four year institutions.  Approximately 37 percent of all students from the 1982 cohort attended two institutions and 22 percent attended three institutions.  Confirming some of the classifications outlined by McCormick was Adelman’s finding that three in five of the 1982 graduates who attended two institutions returned to their first college, as did half of the 1982 graduates who attended three colleges.  It’s important to note that Adelman’s longitudinal study over 16 years examined college attendance data over a much longer period than the NCES data required to be reported by institutions participating in the Federal Student Aid program.

The studies mentioned by McCormick and Adelman are excellent starting points for discussions about why more research is necessary to determine the explanations of student swirling.  Is it possible that adult students might attend even more institutions today because the availability and popularity of online courses and programs has increased substantially over the past decade?  The Sloan Consortium’s most recent publication, Going the Distance:  Online Education in the United States 2011, has identified that nearly one third of all college students completed at least one online course in 2010-2011.  At the recent Council of College and Military Educators (CCME) Conference, the Department of Defense reported that 75 percent of all military tuition assistance payments were for students attending online programs.  While the military may be more mobile than most working professionals, the data otherwise supports the increasing trend of adult students enrolled in online courses/programs.  As noted earlier, the risk factors for college completion are compounded for working adult students and may lead to explanations of some institutions’ student transfers.

More and more, I am convinced that the United States needs a national database that tracks the progress of college students as they attend multiple institutions.  The Predictive Analytics Reporting (PAR) Framework funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and managed by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) Cooperative for Education Technologies has a database with 640,000 student records from students attending online programs at six different institutions.  That’s approximately 10 percent of the students who took online courses last year according to the Sloan survey mentioned earlier.  The National Student Clearinghouse provides data as it is contributed by participating institutions, but institutions are not required to belong to the consortium and only recently has the Clearinghouse been able to accept student data from institutions with non-traditional financial aid enrollment periods.  In addition, that data does not aggregate by institutional profile in a more granular format (adult serving, commuter college, online, etc.). 

During the last reauthorization of the Higher Education Opportunity Act in 2008, Congress inserted a provision prohibiting the Department of Education from creating such a database.  To quote McCormick, “if educators, policymakers, and researchers are to assess institutional impact, they will need better information about [an] institution’s attendance profile, if not detailed information about the source of credits at the student level.”  As Adelman and others have identified, there are multiple types of institutional profiles as well as profiles of students who attend those institutions.  Before a policymaker or pundit makes a disparaging remark about student persistence rates at a particular institution or group of institutions, they need to have data far beyond that related to first-time, full-time students that has been the baseline for institutional reporting to the Integrated Post-secondary Education Data System (IPEDS).  Institutions and researchers should collaborate to provide more insights to explanations for adult student drop out beyond “life happens.”  More research on adult student swirling needs to be conducted, particularly for those students attending online programs or institutions.

Aerial view of the planned 9/11 memorial on the site of the World Trade Center. (photo from 9/11 Memorial website)

It has been a decade since the unprecedented terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.  Despite the time that has passed, our memories of that day remain fresh and raw.  More than 3,000 lives were lost in the attacks at New York City and the Pentagon as terrorist hijackers flew two planes into the World Trade Center and one into the Pentagon.  More than 400 firefighters, police officers, and other first responders lost their lives responding to the tragedies in New York and Washington.  Thanks to the brave actions of the passengers of United Flight 93, countless more lives were saved.  All 45 people aboard that flight were killed as a brave few attacked the hijackers, forcing the plane down in a field in rural Pennsylvania.  Had the hijackers completed their mission with an attack from Flight 93 on any strategic location in Washington, the total death toll would have been higher.

Less than a month later, the US military mobilized to Afghanistan to rout out the Taliban regime which had provided safe harbor to the terrorist mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden.  Within a few years of entering Afghanistan, the US military also began mobilizing to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. 

Approximately three-quarters of APUS’ student body have served as active military personnel and have been directly involved in these missions.  Some of them made the ultimate sacrifice in these two theaters of action.  To date, more than 6,000 American military personnel have lost their lives in Iraq or Afghanistan since those wars began.  Each of us owes a tremendous debt of gratitude to the first responders who risked their lives to assist those trapped in the rubble in New York City and at the Pentagon, to our men and women in uniform, and to the many people who work diligently to identify and avert future attacks.  I encourage everyone to take a moment to reflect on the lives lost on that fateful September day and to commemorate and honor those who have continued to risk their lives to protect our nation and its citizens. 

Two months to the day after the attacks, President Bush said, “’Time is passing.  Yet, for the United States of America, there will be no forgetting September the 11th.  We will remember every rescuer who died in honor.  We will remember every family that lives in grief.  We will remember the fire and ash, the last phone calls, the funerals of the children.’”  These words are as accurate today as they were ten years ago.  Even as we near completion of an official memorial to victims in New York, celebrate the toppling of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the capture and execution of Saddam Hussein, and the death of Osama bin Laden earlier this year at the hands of US special forces, we will always remember that day, the tragedy it brought to our entire nation, and those who have given their lives since to ensure that the freedoms on which this nation was established remain intact for future generations. 

In honor of this weekend, Story Corps preserves some of the voices of those affected by 9/11.

The event was an opportunity to share ideas for promoting sustainability within higher education and within the communities in which college campuses are situated.  The audience included members of the Jefferson County Commission, representatives of the Jefferson County Planning Commission, the Mayor and other officials from Ranson, WV, the President of Shepherd University, Dr. Suzanne Shipley, and other higher ed representatives from APUS and West Virginia University (WVU), and various representatives of the building and development industry.

Rather than provide a few introductory remarks, I chose to provide the audience with a history of the acquisition, renovation, and construction of the buildings comprising APUS’ Charles Town, WV campus as well as some of the other green initiatives implemented by the Sustainability Committee since 2007 (click here to see my presentation).  I explained that our pathway to green construction occurred over time as we could see the demonstrated benefit to the community, our employees, and our energy consumption.

Our first outside speaker was Mr. Ed McMahon who is a Senior Resident Fellow at the Urban Land Institute (ULI) in Washington, DC. In that role, he oversees ULI’s worldwide research and educational efforts related to environmentally sound development policies and practices.  He is considered an expert on the topics of sustainable development, land conservation, urban design, and historic preservation.  In beginning his presentation, Mr. McMahon stated that Sustainability is “about our children.”  According to Mr. McMahon, in order to preserve the environmental well-being of our planet for the benefit of our children, a systematic behavior change is required.  He noted that “Even though the number of people per household has decreased from 3.57 to 2.62 over the last 50 years, the amount of land that each individual home consumes has increased by nearly 60 percent.”  The same trend is seen in commercial space as well.  Though the behavior change that is required to reverse this trend of consumption can be daunting, Mr. McMahon presented several positive examples of environmentally sound development.  One example was the Solara housing project in California which is equipped with solar panels on each unit, reducing energy consumption in the community by 95 percent.  Walkable neighborhoods with close public transportation have also had a significant impact on the success of projects.  Whereas city centers and towns migrated from mixed use to commercial use over the past 100 years, Mr. McMahon noted that successful developments are going back to the mixed use profile in style in the first part of the 20th century.  He also noted for the developers in the audience that top tenants are demanding green buildings and that “no one wants to be known as the last person to build a non-green building.”  Mr. McMahon’s presentation provided some thought-provoking ideas and provided some feasible options for this type of environmentally-friendlier and sustainable development.

Attendees at the Summit also had the benefit of hearing from Dr. Clement Solomon, Director of the Office of Sustainability at West Virginia University.  WVU has a comprehensive and successful sustainability program and Dr. Solomon has made tremendous strides toward incorporating sustainability into all aspects of the university, from operations to academics and from athletics to   community engagement.  Dr. Solomon discussed the various strategies that he and his team have employed to effectively engage the key stakeholders (students, faculty, staff, alumni, community leaders, etc.) involved in making any sustainability initiative successful.  During Dr. Solomon’s presentation, he highlighted the need for prioritizing efforts and encouraged the audience to identify and “pick” low-hanging fruit, the initiatives that are low-cost and relatively easy to execute.  Dr. Solomon provided some very interesting statistics about sustainability (and its execution within higher education) but the one that struck me as most relevant for higher education was that “64% of students say knowing a school’s commitment to the environment would influence their decision to attend that school.”  That is a compelling reason for more traditional, land-based institutions of higher education to pay close attention to the “triple bottom line” (“people, planet, profit”) as they move forward.

To wrap up the day, Mr. Noah Mehrkam, Founder and Partner of Arcland Property Company, presented the ways in which colleges and universities can begin the process of undertaking environmentally sound development projects.  The key points in Mr. Mehrkam’s presentation included the need to identify the key stakeholders in any sustainable development project.  For colleges and universities, “relevant stakeholders” include the obvious groups (students, faculty, staff, alumni) but also the less obvious groups including local community members, local governments, and even local businesses.  In fact, Mr. Mehrkam noted that in many communities, sustainability is driven by a highly engaged local business.  According to him, socially-conscious businesses can bring focus to “developing the urban core” of a community in order to provide for a more environmentally friendly community plan.  Mr. Mehrkam was instrumental to the development of APUS’ first green building, a 45,000-square-foot Academic Center that is currently in the LEED certification process (we have applied for LEED Gold). 

Overall, the Sustainability Summit was a great success.  The outside speakers were top-notch and spoke directly to many of the key functions of the various audience members.  During breaks and over lunch, audience members mingled and these relevant “stakeholders” were able to share ideas with one another, network, and confirm their common goal of creating a more sustainable community within Jefferson County.  I want to thank Beth Gray and the Sustainability Committee members at APUS who organized this first Summit. 

Since APUS courses are offered wholly online with no time for face-to-face instruction, we developed a number of math instructional videos using Camtasia tablet software and embedded them in our classrooms to supplement the instructional materials.  Later, we decided to make our math videos available to everyone on our American Public University iTunesU site  and our APUS Youtube channel.  Comments to the individual videos, primarily in the form of thank you’s, demonstrate the usefulness and the need for technology like this.  More recently, we partnered with McDonogh School to establish a website, www.campusmath.com, to offer primarily math videos to the public for an elementary school through high school curriculum.  While I can’t speak on behalf of McDonogh School, I think that both of our institutions are aligned with the belief that math skills need to be improved and providing access to these videos to teachers, students, and parents may contribute to improved skills without providing the teachers and professors inside of a physical or electronic classroom.

The article about the Khan Academy in Wired mentions a teacher at Santa Rita Elementary in California who uses the videos from the Khan Academy to replace some of her lectures and then spends more time in class working on problem sets.  Teachers using the Khan Academy videos and problem sets have access to a dashboard that lets them see exactly where the student is stuck on a particular concept or problem.  Increasing the amount of time spent in class solving problem sets provides the teacher with more one-on-one time with the students who need assistance.  Contributing Editor Clive Thompson mentions the 1984 Benjamin Bloom metastudy that measured the effectiveness of one-on-one tutoring versus general classroom instruction (two standard deviations more effective for one-on-one instruction).  Obviously, schools cannot afford to teach everyone one-on-one but technology is capable of assisting teachers and students to improve learning outcomes.  What prompted Khan to record his videos was the discovery that viewing videos over and over again in private is less embarrassing for the student than admitting in a one-on-one session that they still don’t understand the material.  Judging from the comments posted by students on our Youtube videos, Khan’s discovery is on track.

Based on the increasing frequency of its use in the classroom, technology continues to advance at a pace faster than the implementation capabilities of many of America’s K-12 schools, colleges, and universities.  At the same time, there are a number of educational innovators who are willing to experiment.  As Clayton Christensen points out in Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns, technology will ultimately provide educators with the ability to teach students with multiple learning modalities the intended lessons without impeding the highly talented individuals from learning more.  It is my hope that few institutions and regulators impede the innovation process.  (To read my review of Christensen’s Disrupting Class, see my August 2008 blog article.)

In an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, I read about the eduMOOC 2011 being hosted by the University of Illinois at Springfield, but at the time of Professor Couros’ keynote address, the course had not started.  However, Couros stimulated my interest in MOOCs by inviting all 900 conference participants to register for a MOOC at his university entitled EC&I 831: Social Media and Education.  According to Couros, the MOOC is free unless you want to take it for academic credit AND the course is dependent upon having the non-credit-seeking students attend.  I attempted to register immediately for Couros’ course, but registrations are closed until August.

Meanwhile, I conducted a little research on MOOCs.  Probably some of the best information can be obtained from YouTube videos assembled by Dave Cormier and his associates at the University of Prince Edward Island.  In “What is a MOOC?,” Cormier argues that a MOOC is a response to a world with information overload.  It is a course with facilitators, materials, and participants.  It is “an event in which people who care about a topic get together to talk about it.”  Participants make connections between ideas, materials, and the facilitators and participants.  The course is part of a way of building learning by creating networks that enable the participants to increase their lifelong learning.  Cormier’s “Success in a MOOC” video provides five key points for participants in a MOOC to keep in mind.  My favorite is the last one, focus.  Given that the idea of the MOOC, according to Cormier, is to facilitate a learning network in a world with information overload, it seems that participating in a MOOC with as many as 3,000 participants might contribute to that overload without a specific focus by the participant.

While I have not yet participated in a MOOC, the concept and the possibilities stimulate many ideas.  Formal online learning has enabled universities like APUS to bring together faculty with theoretical and practical experience and students who either have an interest in a field of study or practical experience in that field or profession.  Distance is not an issue.  MOOCs seize on the advantages of technology, the internet, and social media.  For a MOOC to be successful, the facilitators want as many knowledgeable people as possible to facilitate and participate.   My guess is that Alec Couros invites every participant at every conference he attends to sign up for EC&I 831.  While the conversion rate isn’t as important as it might be if you paid for advertising, the level of enthusiasm for the participants will undoubtedly be high given the topic and the currency of the material.

I can see the possibilities for MOOCs to expand beyond higher education to include associations, clubs, corporations, municipalities, etc.  If the concept is to provide an “event” to discuss a topic in which people get together and talk in an instructional way, the opportunities abound for learning, networking, and collaboration with people with the same interests.  As I mentioned earlier, I intend to enroll in EC&I 831 but I might take a peek at the eduMOOC 2011 course as well.  It appears that enrollment is still open even though the course has begun.  Let me know if you have experience with a MOOC as a facilitator or as a participant.