Content uploaded by Paul Bacsich
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Paul Bacsich on Apr 19, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
O1.A2 – BUSINESS MODELS FOR
OPENING UP EDUCATION
Sustainability of MOOCs, OER and related online
education approaches in higher education in
Europe
Paul D. BACSICH
Sero Consulting Ltd, for D-TRANSFORM
Business Models for Opening Up Education
Contents
Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................ 3
1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Introduction, scope and definitions .......................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Higher Education .............................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Open Education ................................................................................................................................ 7
2.3 MOOCs – Massive Open Online Courses – a short history ............................................................... 8
2.4 Distance online learning ................................................................................................................. 11
2.5 Business models .............................................................................................................................. 11
3. Business models for online learning ........................................................................................................ 13
3.1 History of business models for online learning .............................................................................. 13
3.2 Current situation ............................................................................................................................. 13
3.3 The Paradigmatic Business Model: for paid-for online courses ..................................................... 14
3.4 The Paradigmatic Business Model: adapting it for free online courses .......................................... 15
3.5 The Paradigmatic Business Model: adapting it for free resources ................................................. 18
4. Adapting the paradigms to the European context .................................................................................. 19
4.1 OER ................................................................................................................................................. 19
4.2 MOOCs ............................................................................................................................................ 20
4.3 Distance (usually online) learning ................................................................................................... 22
5. Four countries, four (or five) paths ......................................................................................................... 27
5.1 United Kingdom: England and Scotland ......................................................................................... 27
5.2 Spain ............................................................................................................................................... 32
5.3 France ............................................................................................................................................. 34
5.4 Italy ................................................................................................................................................. 36
6. Extending this to the rest of Europe ........................................................................................................ 39
6.1 Ireland (Republic of Ireland) ........................................................................................................... 39
6.2 Francophone Community of Belgium ............................................................................................. 41
6.3 Hungary ........................................................................................................................................... 43
6.4 Other European countries .............................................................................................................. 45
7. Lessons and caveats mainly from beyond Europe................................................................................... 48
7.1 Transversal themes ......................................................................................................................... 48
7.2 Recent pivots in strategy of MOOC suppliers (mainly from US) ..................................................... 53
8. Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 63
8.1 The context in which business models must operate ..................................................................... 63
8.2 Business models .............................................................................................................................. 64
8.3 Methodological conclusions ........................................................................................................... 66
9. References ............................................................................................................................................... 67
A. Annex – what is a MOOC? ....................................................................................................................... 72
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 3 31 March 2016
Foreword
This report does not aim to provide a historical review with a full set of references. That is a
worthwhile exercise, but is not the purpose of this report. Nor is it supposed to be a triumphalist
description of the “war between Distance Online Learning and MOOCs” along the lines of the “Battle
for Open” (Weller, 2014), culminating with a view of “who won”. Nor is it an up to date inventory on
“who runs MOOCs” across Europe. (That would have been a massive amount of work.)
Rather it is designed to provide guidance for senior managers in higher education institutions,
mainly in four Member States of the EU – France, Italy, Spain and UK – when they come to consider
whether to deploy MOOCs and related approaches, and how to justify such decisions. Just because
of the relative numbers, there will be a focus on public sector institutions, but it should be noted
that especially Spain but also UK and Italy have a significant number of private sector institutions.
In order to give the work the widest possible relevance to Europe, a few other European countries
are looked at also and guidelines given so that readers can create their own country entries.
The report looks in detail at business models for US-based MOOC aggregators such as Udacity and
Coursera as well as the European aggregators, but with the focus on lessons that can be adapted for
the European scene, which differs in several ways from the US, including on accreditation issues.
The report has tried to be up to date with MOOC developments until the end of March 2016. Many
interesting developments have only fully come to light in the first three months of this year.
Guiding metaphor
We have used a guiding metaphor of “roads”, suggesting that a business model is not a static entity
but a journey along a choice of roads towards various possibilities, as Thomas the Rhymer is said to
have seen in a famous poem bearing his name1 which is still taught in schools in Scotland.2 In the
poem the Queen of Elfland3 explains to Thomas in the Scottish dialect of English of the time:
“O see not ye yon narrow road,
So thick beset wi thorns and briers?
That is the path of righteousness,
Tho after it but few enquires.
“And see not ye that braid braid4 road,
That lies across yon lillie leven5
That is the path of wickedness,
Tho some call it the road to heaven.
“And see not ye that bonnie road,
Which winds about the fernie brae?6
That is the road to fair Elfland,
Where you and I this night maun gae.7
It is a useful informal exercise to try to map the business models we discuss here into one or more of
the three roads. But it goes far too far beyond our scope to speculate on which famous woman in
the e-learning sector is best suited to the role of Queen of Elfland and which male Rector of a
Scottish University might be most susceptible to her influence.
1 Three key verses from “Thomas Rymer and the Queen of Elfland”, traditional ballad, composed circa 1400, Scotland –
http://www.bartleby.com/40/15.html
2 http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandsstories/thomastherhymer/thomasstory/index.asp
3 = Álfheimr in Old Norse mythology, the Land of Faerie, etc
4 = broad
5 = lee, ground which has been left fallow for some time and is covered mainly by natural grass
6 = hillside
7 = must go
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 4 31 March 2016
1. Executive Summary
For more details see Chapter 8, Conclusions.
The context in which business models must operate
Below are our conclusions based on specific work for this report but drawing on years of study for
EU and agencies on OER, MOOCs and online learning.
OER
1. Most Member States have some activity in OER in HE.
2. Few Member States have an ongoing policy to foster and fund OER in HE.
3. At European level, OER seems to be getting less attention than Open Access and MOOCs.
4. OER material forms on the whole a very small fraction of the amount of content a typical
student is required to consume – even in open universities.
MOOCs
5. Many Member States still have little activity in MOOCs, but three have substantial activity.
6. Few Member States have policies/funding to foster MOOCs. Yet MOOC activity is often
greater than can be justified by the university mission and viability of MOOC business
models.
7. At European level, it is hard to discern the priority that MOOCs have in specific policy terms.
There is some EU funding for MOOC implementation, but less than 10 well-known projects.
8. The total number of learning hours delivered by MOOCs in a country is a tiny fraction of
overall learning hours and usually a small fraction of the learning hours delivered by DOL.
DOL (Distance Online Learning)
9. Only a minority of Member States have substantial broadly-based activity in DOL – these
include UK, France, Spain and Sweden. A few others have an effective open university or
other specialised DOL provider or small group of DOL-active campus HEIs.
10. Apart from France, no Member State has a clear policy to foster DOL. Indeed in some
Member States, HE policy is a clear inhibitor to DOL.
11. At European level, there have been several reports on open, distance and lifelong learning
but little sign of the reports influencing Member State or institutional behaviours.
12. Even in countries where DOL is active the total number of learning hours delivered by DOL in
a country is a small fraction of that from face-to-face.
Fees
13. The structure of fees, grants and loans is very different between Member States and
sometimes (as in UK) within Member States. Fees also vary between Bachelor and Master
courses, EU and international students, full-time and distance students, and public versus
private institutions. This means that business models need to be grounded in a Member
State context, and linked to the type of institution, provision and student being considered.
Other issues
14. Several of our conclusions are tentative. There is an ongoing lack of systematic, funded, and
organised research covering the scale of OER, MOOC and DOL activity in Europe.
15. Systems to deliver MOOCs are increasingly similar to those used to deliver VLEs, so much so
that the same analytic tools can be used to compare them.
16. Despite promising research and much hyperbole, there are no established techniques to
substantially reduce teaching costs via use of ICT for typical university students.
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 5 31 March 2016
Business models
DOL
1. In a few Member States, there is a viable business model for DOL.
2. The model can be made to work even better when the State allows student loans.
3. Some restrictions on student numbers in theory are not so onerous in reality.
4. There are few developments to flex the business model, beyond monthly payment schemes.
5. Venture capitalists are most interested in this model but it is not as easy in Europe as the US.
6. In a number of countries where higher education is free (for full-time students) it is possible
to charge fees to part-time distance learning students, but fees are too low to allow viability.
MOOCs
7. The two main MOOC business models are freemium, where everything that really makes the
course valuable to learners is paid for by them; and loss-leader, where the institution
recovers its costs through increased income on other activities fostered by the MOOCs.
8. Over the years since MOOCs started, the freemium model has been under great pressure.
9. The loss-leader model is most fully developed within the UK.
10. There is a niche loss-leader route, impact, in the UK at least.
11. There is a third business model – civic role – of interest to these institutions expected to
have a social mission to the community or the world, and well-funded.
12. A fourth model – hovering – suggests focus on MOOCs while awaiting the return of better
market conditions or increased government support of DOL.
13. Research into online learning may be another business model in a few institutions.
14. Zero courses (courses with zero ECTS points, e.g. for teaching generic skills) may be justified.
15. MOOC aggregators have an additional model, third party – selling student data.
16. The business models for MOOCs become considerably more feasible if institutions extend
“HE” to include elements of vocational and professional training.
17. The business models for MOOCs become more feasible if a provider offers a certificate
which has an ECTS transfer value but which is not itself for an accredited institution/course.
OER
18. In Europe, there is as yet no viable business model for OER in HE.
Methodological conclusions
European institutions interested in substantial innovation in this area and wishing to learn from the
US should:
1. Take great care in drawing overall conclusions for European practice from experience in the
US; and take especial care with experience from California and in particular Silicon Valley.
2. Focus on current developments in the US, not on the long and winding road to the current
approach to MOOCs.
3. Accept that there are US practices worthy of attention in Europe: close integration of the
vocational education sector (ISCED 4) with the HE sector (ISCED 5-8); the importance given
to vocational skills (such as programming); and systematised easy credit transfer.
4. Bear in mind the greater financial resources and strategic flexibility of many US institutions.
5. Check funding sources for any development before making assumptions on sustainability.
6. Accept that business models work better in the US because fees are higher and there are no
admission quotas on student numbers.
7. Understand that population and immigration dynamics are completely different from
Europe and there are massive skill shortages especially in some US states.
8. Accept that employment laws are very different and employment is much less secure.
9. Remember that overheating of some US sectors (such as IT) are different drivers from EU.
10. Realise that US institutions are not interested in fee-charging online provision beyond US
except to specialised communities. Europe still has a window of opportunity.
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 6 31 March 2016
2. Introduction, scope and definitions
This report does not aim to provide a historical review with a full set of references. That is a
worthwhile exercise, but is not the purpose of this report. Nor is it supposed to be a triumphalist
description of the “war between DOL8 and MOOCs” along the lines of the “Battle for Open” (Weller,
2014), culminating with a view of “who won”. Nor is it an up to date inventory on “who runs
MOOCs” across Europe.
It is designed to provide guidance for senior managers in higher education institutions, specifically in
four Member States of the EU – France, Italy, Spain and UK – when they come to consider whether
to deploy MOOCs and related approaches and how to justify such decisions. Just because of the
relative numbers, there will be a focus on public sector institutions, but it should be noted that
especially Spain but also UK and Italy have a significant number of private sector institutions.
The report looks in detail at business models for US-based MOOC aggregators such as Udacity and
Coursera as well as the European aggregators, but with the focus on lessons that can be adapted for
the European scene, which differs in several ways from the US, including on accreditation issues.
The report has tried to be up to date with MOOC developments until the end of March 2016. Many
interesting developments have only fully come to light in the first three months of this year.
The report has eight Chapters followed by References.
Chapter 1 is the Executive Summary and Chapter 2 is this one.
Chapter 3 describes theoretical Europe-wide business models for modes of online learning.
Chapter 4 looks at the general European context and Chapter 5 at the four key countries, one of
which (the UK as usual) has two quite different fee regimes, in England and Scotland. Chapter 6
extends this analysis to the rest of Europe with brief entries first on Belgium (Francophone
Community), Ireland and Hungary.
Chapter 7 looks beyond Europe. For reasons of space and relevance it looks mainly at the US but also
at Canada. (We know there are interesting developments also in Australia and other countries.)
In Chapter 8 we draw some conclusions.
Some definitional issues with MOOCs and the systems that deliver them are analysed in an Annex,
mainly of interest to technically- or pedagogically-aware readers.
Production issues
In order to make the report comprehensible to a wide European audience, some minor deviations
from standard UK scholarly practice have been introduced.
1. Scholarly apparatus abbreviations are usually spelt in full – such as “page 8” not “p. 8”; and
phrases like “ibid.” are not used.
2. Larger numbers have no embedded commas, thus “6500” not “6,500”
3. All amounts in currencies other than euros have equivalent amounts in euros inserted after,
thus: £100 [€110]. Given the instability of sterling-euro exchange rates in the light of current
events, a conservative conversion factor of £1=€1.1 has been used.
4. A certain amount of invisible mending of quotations into English English has been
undertaken, but all quotations from US English are left in US English spellings (but
punctuation such as “—” is changed).
5. Web sites and articles referenced only once or twice for evidential reasons are handled by
footnotes; only articles of vital interest or referenced repeatedly get into the Key
References.
8 DOL = Distance Online Learning (accredited)
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 7 31 March 2016
2.1 Higher Education
The higher education sector across Europe is very diverse. By Higher Education we mean provision of
programmes in ISCED levels 5 through 8, thus including short-cycle courses (ISCED 5) as well as
undergraduate (Bachelors), postgraduate (Masters) and doctoral (PhD) qualifications (ISCED 6, 7 and
8 respectively).9 ISCED stands for “International Standard Classification of Education”. It is a vital
reference source for our analyses: and the definitive text is published by UNESCO (2012).
There are many institutions other than those called universities delivering higher education. They are
variously called polytechnics, universities of applied sciences, university colleges, fachhochschule,
hogskolan, etc. They are often not permitted to offer Masters and Doctoral qualifications. They
usually do not do much research.
In most Member States there are private institutions offering higher education.10 They are often
private foundations (non-profit, charity, church-oriented etc.) but may be for-profit (commercial).
They may be large and prestigious (as for example in US and Brazil) but are usually small and less
prestigious (so far). Only a few Member States (e.g. Denmark) or regions within Member States (e.g.
Wales) have no private HE institutions.
Usually private universities cannot receive funds directly from government for teaching, but in some
countries (as in England – and in the US) students studying at them can draw down student loans.
A common error in EU analyses is to equate the interests of “universities” with those of state-funded
public institutions with a research mission as well as a teaching mission.
Non-higher but post-secondary education
The area of ISCED 4 provision is notoriously hard to describe. It does not even have an agreed name:
the phrase “further education” is used mostly only in the UK, and “VET” suggests that only
vocational courses can be at ISCED 4. Furthermore the boundary between ISCED 4 and 5 is different
in different countries, even within Europe and more so across the world. Finally in several countries
or regions (e.g. US, Scotland) most ISCED 4 providers also offer Higher Education. In some countries
some higher education providers (e.g. University of Derby within the UK) offer ISCED 4 courses also.
The matter is made more complicated by the fact that some providers offer both ISCED 3 (school)
and ISCED 4 courses, as in much of the UK.
At the European level there are interface issues between the ECTS system for HE and the ECVET
system for VET11 – and ECVET is at a much earlier stage of development than ECTS.
On the whole this area is in a disorganised and under-funded state, at least in terms of public sector
provision. However, there are many active private sector providers, especially focussed on IT and
management training. There are several online providers in European countries.
For more on MOOCs and OER in non-higher adult education see the ADOERUP report (Bacsich,
2015).
2.2 Open Education
The phrase Open Education has no precise meaning and attempts to give it one tend to restrict it to
use of Open Educational Resources, which is felt to be too restrictive – and in particular excludes
MOOCs.
A more useful phrase, dating from 2013 position papers from the European Commission, is Opening
Up Education.12 This has a focus on Open Educational Resources, but that is not its only focus: the
“process” aspect of the phrase is beneficial.
9 http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Documents/isced-2011-en.pdf
10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_university#Europe
11 ECTS = European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System; ECVET = European credit system for vocational education
and training
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 8 31 March 2016
We tend to think of Opening Up Education as a continuum, or a road with stops along the way,
which offerings may move along (or back), somewhat as follows:
1. Open Resources for Learning
2. Open Courses (i.e. anyone can access)
3. Free online courses (i.e. anyone can register) – large (MOOCs) or small (SPOCs)
4. Low-cost online courses (e.g. at OER universitas, where there is a fee to get credits even
though the resources are free)
5. Online courses whose costs or fees are similar to those presented on campus.
Many commentators would add more levels, including above, below and between these five levels.
We shall concentrate on levels 3, 4 and 5.
2.3 MOOCs – Massive Open Online Courses – a short history
To keep this history short it is minimally referenced. Readers should consult relevant web sites and
the Wikipedia entries for the various entities listed which are not footnoted.
It is generally accepted that the first free open online course called a MOOC dates from 2008.13 It
was developed by Stephen Downes and George Siemens who gave it the title “Connectivism and
Connective Knowledge”. (Not for the first time in e-learning, the course had a somewhat self-
referential title.) This is not the place to discuss whether the pedagogy of “connectivism” that the
creators developed was truly new or “merely” a development of the earlier (and by 2008 largely
forgotten) movement of “constructivism” – the Annex goes into more detail. However new or not it
was, the MOOC movement soon gained considerable influence among pedagogues interested in
online learning.
A massive impetus to the movement came from the creation by Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig at
Stanford University of the MOOC “Introduction to Artificial Intelligence”. This was the first truly
Massive course with over 160,000 students, in over 190 countries (though of course with massive
bias towards US, UK etc).14
At that point the venture capital industry got interested. Although they were already investing in
online learning15 in the US and indeed there were several long-existing providers of online higher
education in the US,16 there was “something about MOOCs” that caught the attention of many
academics and commentators not previously interested in or even aware of online learning. Most
likely it was the large numbers, but there was also a climate of “disruptive innovation” at the time17
which was impatient with old innovations even if online – including the by then well-established
mode of accredited online distance learning. For a modern take on this for the university sector the
book College Disrupted by Ryan Craig (2015) is informative and enlivened by many anecdotes.
Thus Thrun set up Udacity in 2012 and at much the same time his fellow Stanford professors Andrew
Ng and Daphne Koller set up Coursera – both with venture capital funding.
Europe was watching: in late 2012 the UK Open University announced FutureLearn and in Germany,
iversity (which already existed) reinvented itself as a MOOC platform.
By the end of 2013 the first EU-funded projects studying MOOCs were under way, such as
eMundus,18 and some other projects like POERUP had pivoted their missions to include MOOCs
12 http://openeducationeuropa.eu/en/initiative
13 http://moocnewsandreviews.com/a-short-history-of-moocs-and-distance-learning/
14 http://www.thegoodmooc.com/2013/05/a-review-of-stanford-ai-class.html
15 Bridgepoint Education bought Ashford University (which had online courses) in 2005; University Ventures was set up in
2011
16 such as Apollo, Capella, DeVry etc
17 associated with the work of Clayton Christensen – http://www.claytonchristensen.com/key-concepts/
18 http://www.menon.org/projects/emundus/
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 9 31 March 2016
within their scope as MOOCs took over much of the former interest in OER. Soon after, a series of
EU-funded MOOC implementation projects started, such as EMMA.19
The analytic projects eMundus and POERUP started cataloguing the institutions developing MOOCs20
and the Open Education Europa portal set up its MOOC aggregator to document all MOOCs offered
by European institutions as well as the institutions themselves.21 We shall in particular use the Open
Education Europa portal in our country analyses. There are also a set of less official MOOC lists.22
For a useful overview of MOOCs circa end 2014, with six anonymised case studies, readers are
advised to consult the book To MOOC or Not to MOOC by Sarah Porter (2015).
The current situation with MOOCs raises three important questions.
1 – Are MOOCs an “important” development?
Yes, strategically – but not in percentage terms of the total amount of education delivered. A
calculation in ADOERUP (Bacsich, 2015) worked out that:
The MOOC provider iversity, along with FutureLearn a leading MOOC provider in Europe,
lists on its web site (iversity, 2015) 53 MOOCs. These MOOCs vary in study time, but most
require no more than 40 hours of study time, which we shall conservatively estimate as 2
credits in the ECTS scheme. In contrast the University of Leicester (2015) lists 58 online
courses on its distance learning web page either at full Masters level (90 credits) or at
Postgraduate Diploma (60 credits). Ignoring the dissertation element (30 credits) of the full
masters implies that each of these 58 online courses has 60 credits of taught material, in
other words 30 times the study time of one iversity MOOC. Turning it around, all the
MOOCs in iversity amount to no more than two Masters courses at one university (the
University of Leicester). Given that at least 20 UK universities are large providers of online
Masters, the total study time offering of MOOCs is still a very small percentage of total
online learning. It will take longer before OER and MOOCs are seen as more than just a
‘blip’.
2 – Are MOOCs “courses”?
In theory, every educational offering from any educational institution, public or private, has to
conform to the ISCED hierarchy.
Thus if a MOOC is a university-level course it should be classified somewhere between ISCED 5 and
ISCED 8. All such courses are subject to quality control from a relevant national agency for quality in
HE and are usually also regulated by the relevant ministry in terms of fees, student numbers, etc –
even if there is no fee. (In some countries there is no fee for university courses.)
Very few MOOC providers claim that their course is appropriate for school-level learning – thus the
courses cannot be at ISCED levels 1, 2, or 3 – and level 0 is for pre-school only.
Thus most MOOC courses must be at level 4 – a level used for “post-secondary non-tertiary
education”. In more detail this is defined by ISCED as:23
Post-secondary non-tertiary education provides learning experiences building on secondary
education, preparing for labour market entry as well as tertiary education. It aims at the
individual acquisition of knowledge, skills and competencies lower than the level of
complexity characteristic of tertiary education. Programmes at ISCED level 4, or post-
secondary non-tertiary education, are typically designed to provide individuals who
19 http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/project/emma-0
20 for a snapshot see http://poerup.referata.com/wiki/MOOC
21 http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/find/courses
22 such as https://www.mooc-list.com
23 http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Documents/isced-2011-en.pdf paragraph 185 (page 43)
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 10 31 March 2016
completed ISCED level 3 with nontertiary qualifications required for progression to tertiary
education or for employment when their ISCED level 3 qualification does not grant such
access. For example, graduates from general ISCED level 3 programmes may choose to
complete a non-tertiary vocational qualification; or graduates from vocational ISCED level 3
programmes may choose to increase their level of qualifications or specialise further. The
content of ISCED level 4 programmes is not sufficiently complex to be regarded as tertiary
education, although it is clearly post-secondary.
This seems to us, especially the parts in bold, to describe many MOOC offerings quite well.
However, there is a major snag. In most countries level 4 qualifications are also regulated, and often
in a way more focussed on learning outcomes and with less adaptation to the special issues raised by
online learning. Thus even if a university is permitted by its government or its charter to offer such
programmes, it does not seem to absolve it from regulation. Moreover, as soon as a university
develops a system of badges to provide an accreditation route, it makes the offering much more like
an accredited course and so even more susceptible to regulation. (We return to this in Chapter 7.)
Thus it is not clear what exemption from regulation the universities are relying on. To us this implies
that as the MOOC programmes scale up, governments and regulators will get interested, especially if
there is a delivery failure, complaints from students, evidence that universities are using government
funds for reasons outside their charter, or a complaint from the private sector, such as publishers,
that universities are using government funds to take away business from them. (There have already
been legal cases in Europe on this aspect, involving at least one open university.)
Concerns about future regulation of MOOCs by quality agencies may be one of the justifications why
there is interest from MOOC providers in adapting existing higher education quality processes for
MOOCs,24 just as was done a few years ago for OER.25
However, it is interesting that higher education quality agencies across Europe, even the few that do
or did pay attention to quality of online learning,26 do not focus on the quality of online content,
regarding that as one of many factors that contribute to the overall quality of a course and best
judged within specific institutional contexts.27
3 – Can MOOCs be delivered by a VLE just like online courses?
In a nutshell, yes. The Annex to this Report discusses the issue in detail. In the last few years the
functionality of MOOCs has developed considerably, so much so that the leading ones (such as edX)
compare quite well with the leading VLEs such as Blackboard, Canvas and Moodle.
In reverse, both Blackboard and Canvas also have modes whereby they can deliver MOOCs – and in
particular the Canvas Network is very active.28 The Network’s 2015 Progress Report recorded that:29
We gained 54 new partners in 2014, increasing our total number of partners to
117...
We offered 164 courses in 2014, which is 130 percent more than the number
offered in 2013.
Enrollments for 2014 totaled 214997, which is 113 percent more than 2013.
24 see in particular the Erasmus+ project MOOQ: Massive Online Open Education Quality – https://www.ou.nl/web/welten-
research/mooq
25 in particular OPAL – http://www.open.ac.uk/iet/main/research-innovation/research-projects/open-educational-quality-
initiative-opal
26 such as QAA in the UK –
27 see the summary report http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Outcomes-institutional-audit-Second-series-
Institutions-support-e-learning.pdf – dated 2008
28 https://www.canvas.net
29 https://www.canvaslms.com/downloads/CN_Progress_report_2015.pdf
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 11 31 March 2016
2.4 Distance online learning
In contrast with MOOCs, distance learning is much less fashionable, despite (or because of) its much
longer history.
There were some earlier examples but the first university-level distance learning programme was
probably the University of London External Programme, founded in 1858.30 Other advanced
countries such as Australia and the US developed university-level programmes in the 1900s but
perhaps the next conceptual shift was the development of the “Open Universities” from the 1960s
onward, starting with the UK Open University in 1969, followed soon after by Athabasca University
in Canada, and then spreading across Europe to Netherlands (OUNL), Spain (UNED and UOC) and
Germany (FernU) – and more recently to Greece and Cyprus.
By the late 1990s distance education was found in many US and UK universities and because of this
the first moves to regulate its quality had begun, with the influential Quality on the Line report in the
US31 and similar moves in the UK. Moreover, though originally based on printed material and
correspondence tuition (using post), distance learning had developed a substantial online tinge in
many institutions and the online element grew steadily in the next two decades. Thus by 2010, in
most institutions distance education is predominantly online, both for interaction and for content,
though textbooks are still often found, and welcomed by some students.
One issue in Europe is that, just as with OER and MOOCs, the amount of distance learning varies
substantially between European countries. We shall return to this issue in our country sections.
2.5 Business models
One would expect that the Financial Times would give a good definition of “business model” – and it
does (our emphasis in bold):32
This describes the method or means by which a company tries to capture value from its
business. A business model may be based on many different aspects of a company, such as
how it makes, distributes, prices or advertises its products.
The business model concentrates on value creation. It describes a company’s or
organisation’s core strategy to generate economic value, normally in the form of revenue.
The model provides the basic template for a business to compete in the market place, it
provides a template on how the firm is going to make money, and how the firm will work
with internal players (firm’s employees and managers) and external players (stakeholders
such as customers, suppliers, and investors).
The business model indicates how the firm will convert inputs (capital, raw materials and
labour) into outputs (total value of goods produced) and make a return that is greater than
the opportunity cost of capital and delivers a return to its investors. This means that a
business model’s success is reflected in its ability to create returns that are greater than the
(opportunity) cost of capital, invested by its shareholders and bondholders.
Business models are an essential part of strategy – they provide the fundamental link
between product markets, within the industry, and the markets for the factors of
production such as labour and capital.
Any resilient business model must be able to create and sustain returns for its investors over
time, otherwise, it is likely to go out of business or fashion.
The article goes on to describe three business models, two good, one bad, all of which are relevant
to MOOCs and universities. See the table on the next page.
30 http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/our-global-reputation/our-history
31 http://www.ihep.org/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/pubs/qualityontheline.pdf
32 http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=business-model
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 12 31 March 2016
Financial Times example
MOOC/university example
The ‘razors and blades’ model used by
companies such as Gillette, in which a basic
product (the razor) is sold cheaply, but an
essential add-on or consumable (the blade) is
sold at a high price once the customer has
been lured in.
University login is free and
content is cheap (or even free)
Accreditation of each module is
expensive
Another example is a mobile phone company
may sell handsets (the bait) at a reduced
price while signing up customers to buy calls
over the period of a contract (the hook).
Free laptop for each student
But have to sign up and pay for a
3-year degree
Also General Motors, for many years, had an
unsustainable business model as its returns
did not match or exceed its cost of capital.
Profitability was focused on the financing of
cars, i.e. providing financing to its automotive
customers, such as loans to buy the cars,
through its finance subsidiary GMAC, rather
than by designing and manufacturing sought
after cars that are also cost competitive.
Is this what is happening to the
US Higher Education system?
Fees are high and getting higher
Cost of student loans to cover
these fees is unsustainable for
students and government
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 13 31 March 2016
3. Business models for online learning
3.1 History of business models for online learning
Although it is little known now, the work on business models for online learning goes back to at least
the late 1990s, when the Business of Borderless Education report was released33 and the first “e-
universities” were being developed in English-speaking countries (most of them ignoring that the
Open University of Catalonia was already active).
In many working papers (mostly confidential to government or lost in the mists of time)34 the topics
of massification, step-change, unbundling, quality etc were rehearsed. Few of the topics discussed
today are new – except for free and open courses.
3.2 Current situation
In many ways progress in online learning since 2000 has been slow in Europe, until recently:
1. Most of the e-universities failed, both single providers and consortia, casting a shadow over
many related developments: see the companion D-TRANSFORM35 policies report (Rivera-
Velez and Thibault, 2016) for more on this.
2. The era of building new open universities in Europe came to an almost complete halt, with
very occasional exceptions such as the Open University of Cyprus.36
3. Most research-led institutions did not get involved with distance learning, leaving it to the
“polytechnic” entities within the higher education sector in each country.
4. Most open universities made very slow progress towards becoming full e-universities
(delivering 100% pure distance e-learning, with no hard-copy material), and it appears that
this change process is still not quite complete – with some institutions deciding, for good
reasons, that it should not be completed just yet, given their demographics (older and
poorer students in less advanced countries).
5. US distance teaching universities, even the largest, showed little interest in seeking to find
and support European students – despite fears of this for 20 years, “Le Défi Américain” as
envisaged by Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber never happened in online learning.37
6. The much-feared rush of capital into private online providers, either replacing or partnering
with conventional universities, did not happen – not in Europe, not even in the UK, not to
any great extent.
7. However, there are a small number of small innovative online providers of higher
education38 and some venture capital investments in European private universities that
operate wholly or partly online.39
It was not until the MOOC explosion, first in Canada and US, later in Europe and rest of the world,
that things began to change. This has also affected paid-for accredited online courses.
33 summary report archived at http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/15163/1/The%20business%20of%20borderless%20education%20-
%20summary.pdf
34 see for example the 15-year-old report Responses to consultation on the proposed e-University business model, HEFCE,
2000, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100202100434/http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2000/00_43.htm
35 http://www.dtransform.eu
36 http://www.ouc.ac.cy/web/guest/home
37 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1533605/Jean-Jacques-Servan-Schreiber.html
38 examples include:
1. Campus NOOA in Norway, the Nordic Open Online Academy – http://campus.nooa.info/?lang=en
2. Open College of the Arts, England – http://www.oca.ac.uk
3. Interactive Design Institute, Scotland – http://idesigni.co.uk
39 such as:
1. University of Law, UK – http://www.globaluniversitysystems.com/our-institutions
2. University of Nicosia, Cyprus – http://universityventures.com/current_investments.php
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 14 31 March 2016
In particular in a few EU countries, most notably UK and Spain, there has been rapid growth – even if
in many other countries including Germany and Denmark, things are much more static.
3.3 The Paradigmatic Business Model: for paid-for online courses
The analysis from now on does not depend on specific research papers on MOOCs. It is based on
general considerations evident to developers of online learning courses over many years, with
analyses funded by the European Union and JISC over the last 20 years, associated with the names of
Curran, Rumble, Laurillard and Bacsich.
Laurillard (2011) brings together several of the threads. JISC recently provided a useful summary of
cost modelling approaches40 based on work last updated in Bacsich (2008). Other references are in
the Additional Reading in Chapter 9.
For paid-for online courses there is an paradigmatic business model – which is clearest at
postgraduate level for international (i.e. non-EU) students in the many EU countries where
“commercial” fees can be levied on international students (UK, Ireland, Netherlands, Denmark,
Sweden etc).41
In reality there are few practical limits on the fees that can be charged and in theory there are
virtually no limits on the number of students that can be enrolled, since the costs of teaching each
extra student is more than covered out of the fee. For an online course the set-up costs can be quite
low, relative to campus-based courses, and so a large-enrolment course can be very cost-effective.
This is the exact same model which drove the growth of the early open universities, though in those
days many of them were very adept at extracting the fees from government rather than from the
students.
For postgraduate students from within the EU there are greater limitations on fee levels, but still in
UK and several other countries the fees can be high. In England, the student loan scheme for
undergraduate students is now being extended to a postgraduate and doctoral loan scheme, which
unusually will apply all across the UK and is available to part-time (including distance learning)
students.42
For undergraduate EU students the business model is usually more challenging: there may only be a
low fee that can be charged, which will not cover the costs, or even a zero fee – and there is usually
a government quota on the number of students that can be enrolled, rather than the government
giving the university extra funds for every single extra student enrolled.
Worse, there are some countries where concerns about inflow of students from neighbouring
countries have given rise to restrictions on the percentage of “foreign” students that can be
enrolled. Although such restrictions are in theory contrary to EU law, in practice various “temporary”
restrictions have been imposed, at least for certain subjects (typically medicine): such as in
Francophone Belgium in respect of French students, and Austria in terms of German students.43
When courses cannot charge fees, an already complicated situation becomes even less viable. Either
institutions have to charge fees for services associated with the course, or find another justification
for the costs of putting on the course.
Reflecting on this and adding a few other points leads to the following summary:
40 https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/costing-technologies-and-services/experiences-of-cost-modelling
41 for more details see http://www.mastersportal.eu/articles/405/tuition-fees-at-universities-in-europe-overview-and-
comparison.html
42 https://www.prospects.ac.uk/postgraduate-study/funding-postgraduate-study/postgraduate-loans
43 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1388_en.htm
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 15 31 March 2016
Business Models for DOL (Distance Online Learning)
1. In a few Member States there is a viable business model for DOL on a large scale. WHEN fees
can be close to44 the economic level AND there are no restrictions on student numbers, then
each new student is worth having.
2. The business model can be made to work even better when the State allows students to
draw down a loan for study (UK/England and US, both also for approved private providers).
3. If there are restrictions on student numbers in theory, it may turn out in practice that due to
local factors an HEI may be under its quota (perhaps because it was set in more prosperous
times); or that the HEI can lobby its government to have its quota increased; or that in
reality there is no quota for part-time or DOL students because the government wants
(discreetly) to encourage them.45
4. Interestingly (unlike for MOOCs), there are very few developments to flex the business
model, beyond various monthly payment schemes.
5. Despite appearances,46 venture capitalists are most interested in this model, either setting
up new private providers, or partnering with existing public providers. This does not mean
that it is easy to make money from such arrangements, especially in Europe – though a few
providers such as Laureate or RDI (part of Capella)47 have done useful amounts of business in
Europe.
6. In a number of countries where higher education is free (for full-time students) it is still
possible to charge fees (usually low fees) to part-time distance learning students (Ireland,
France etc). However the fees are not usually high enough to provide a viable business
model – unless simplifications are made in the mode of provision – which could lead down
the road of using MOOCs.
3.4 The Paradigmatic Business Model: adapting it for free online courses
For simplicity we shall regard free online courses as the same as MOOCs, at this stage. The content
in them may be openly licensed (open MOOCs) or it may not (closed MOOCs). We shall also regard
MOOCs as including SPOCs, so that the course may not be open enrolment but restricted to students
at a particular university or employees at a particular company (undergoing professional
development).
Although it is later in this report (Chapter 4) that we get into details, it is an undeniable fact that only
a minority of countries in Europe have substantial activity in MOOCs and even in those countries it is
only a minority of universities who are active in MOOCs. Thus business models for MOOCs
considered so far in Europe are either not compelling or not well known. The second is less likely
because universities are well networked in most countries and the European Commission has put a
lot of energy into funding MOOC consortia and commissioning/disseminating optimistic reports. In
our view this makes our report very timely – perhaps greater clarity on relevant business models is
needed.
Essentially, since a MOOC is free (thus earns no income) then the development and support costs of
running it must be absorbed by the university. This might be for several reasons:
1. A number of universities have or would wish to have a civic role mission and so running
MOOCs can replace other techniques already delivering such missions, such as evening
classes or cultural events. This might even apply internationally.
2. MOOCs are an active area of research – and one has to accept that fashion plays a role in
research funders’ and staff’s priorities. (Research in online distance learning has never been
a popular research topic outside the open universities.)
44 or even above
45 this was more common in pre-recession times
46 Coursera and Udacity in particular
47 now for sale by Capella
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 16 31 March 2016
3. The University might wish to develop paid-for online courses and regards MOOCs as an easy
way into that, avoiding issues of quality control, selling and possible regulatory issues – thus
hovering until it decides whether to go ahead with paid-for online courses.48
4. The University sees MOOCs as a way of enhancing its brand or publicising its research.
(Publicising research is a compelling strategy in the UK because the level of government
funding of UK HE research depends to some extent on its “impact”.)
5. There are some special situations where the University is forced to put on zero courses,
courses for which it is not directly reimbursed (by government or students) because they
have no ECTS value, being outside the formal curriculum. These include mathematics
courses to bridge the increasing gap in several countries between what is taught at school
and what is expected at university. (Statistics is a similar challenge in some institutions.)
Related issues arise with foreign languages, at least in some countries, as student
enthusiasm in schools for them declines. The other growth area is generic skills such as
digital literacy and employability where it takes time and work to map them into each
specific ECTS curriculum (where many feel they should reside), yet changes in digital study
skills needs and employment levels may occur more rapidly than curricula can.
There is nothing wrong with such justifications but in most European universities in most countries
funds for such developments are very limited – thus any such approach is likely to generate just a
few MOOCs.
To get beyond that scale requires a more powerful and scalable business model. There are two main
choices, not necessarily exclusive:
Use MOOCs as a loss leader – that is, a marketing tool for paid-for online courses (or even
paid-for residential courses).
Add paid-for parts to the core free MOOC offering – the typical internet start-up freemium
approach. And if that does not work, reduce the scope of the free part, as several providers
have been doing recently (see Chapter 7).
It is not commonly realised that at “market rate” fee levels, the loss leader business model for
MOOCs can be very effective. While there are many caveats,49 a recent study50 estimated the typical
cost of a FutureLearn MOOC at around £30000 – call it €40000 to allow a small margin. A very cheap
UK MSc has a fee of €10000 – and many MSc programmes are running under capacity, implying that
teaching a few extra students has a marginal cost of zero, in the way UK universities do their
calculations. Thus if one FutureLearn MOOC convinces 4 more students to register for the MSc, the
costs are covered – and if 10 more, then the university makes a very useful surplus.
The freemium approach has similarities with the way that some distance learning providers started,
such as the University of London External Programme. Initially (in 1858) this offered examinations
only and left the students free to study as they wish – leading to the development of several colleges
and later universities to satisfy the students’ teaching needs.51 Other distance providers, though not
the UK OU, started their offerings with no tutoring at all, except for feedback on assignments.
An interesting conceptual – and regulatory – challenge is that if one bulks up a MOOC with paid-for
additions to create a fully-taught fully-assessed fully-accreditable course, is it an accredited HE
course or not? In particular does it sit within the ECTS framework and within the purview of the
national quality regulators? (More of this in Chapter 7.)
48 as any helicopter pilot knows, hovering is expensive – see e.g.
http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/disclosure_2014/july_2014/2014070000470.pdf
49 UK and European universities are on the whole not very skilled in costing their teaching and e-learning services,
compared e.g. with US or Australia
50 Moocs: fluctuating rates in online investment, THE, 23 April 2015 –
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/moocs-fluctuating-rates-in-online-investment/2019816.article
51 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_London_International_Programmes and see the footnotes also
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 17 31 March 2016
The role of MOOC aggregators will also be discussed later (in Chapter 7) – at this stage all we say is
that they need to make money too, and not only by charging their member universities. A natural
way, enshrined in internet start-up tradition, is to sell data to third parties such as employers.
We can summarise all this as follows.
Business Models for MOOCs
1. The two main MOOC business models are (a) freemium, where everything that really makes
the course valuable to learners, such as exams, accreditation as an HE module, career advice
etc. is paid for; and (b) loss-leader, where the institution recovers its costs through increased
income on other activities.
2. Over the years since MOOCs started, the freemium model has been under pressure, with
most recently Coursera52 decommitting most fully from it.
3. The loss-leader model is perhaps most fully developed within FutureLearn. In its purest UK
form, this expects that students enjoying a FutureLearn MOOC will be motivated to come to
the campus of the host university to study a Masters53 – alternatively to stay at home and
study one of over 800 fully online Masters degrees from UK HEIs.54 In countries where
Masters degrees command high fees, especially for non-EU students, even a low conversion
factor generates a viable business plan.
4. There is a secondary loss-leader route. In countries with an intrusive metrics-based research
assessment exercise (UK), impact55 of research is a key measure: high impact contributes to
high research ranking, which in turn leads to higher pay-outs from the government when the
next research assessment exercise (called REF in UK) takes place.
5. There is another business model – civic role – of interest in these institutions expected to
have a social mission to the community or the world, and lucky enough to be in a country
where universities are still relatively well-funded (such as England).56 Several UK elite
institutions were originally set up with a strong focus on adult education and not all of this
mission has dissipated. Thus a small amount of MOOC activity can be justified on this basis.
But such a model cannot scale, unless other business models come into play. And across
Europe, adult education is very badly funded.57
6. There is some evidence of a fourth model – hovering. In countries (such as UK) where in
theory there is a vibrant model for DOL at postgraduate level, but in reality market
conditions are leading to reducing overall numbers and increased contestation,58 teams can
be refocused on MOOCs, maintaining competence levels and piloting innovative potentially
cost-reducing techniques, awaiting the return of better market conditions or increased
government support of DOL.
7. Research may be another business model in a few institutions.
8. Zero courses are useful in certain circumstances and can even be shared between
institutions.
9. MOOC aggregators have another model, third party – selling student data to employers or
advertisers, but so far such models seem rather marginal in their effect. One should not
discount such models (since many social network companies started in this way) but the
route to viability via this route is likely to take years.
52 Coursera, blog, 19 January 2016, https://blog.coursera.org/post/137649201147
53 or even a PhD
54 http://www.distancelearningportal.com/search/?q=ci-30|lv-master|mh-online&order=relevance
55 think of this as valorisation in the EU R&D context
56 Tuition fees give England universities surplus worth £1.8bn –
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/03/tuition-fees-england-universities-surplus-balance
57 “A series of reports over the last few years have made it clear that the EU has considerable catching up to do in order to
match the level of education of other advanced economies” – ADOERUP (Bacsich, 2015) page 11
58 http://www.hefce.ac.uk/analysis/postgraduate/
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 18 31 March 2016
3.5 The Paradigmatic Business Model: adapting it for free resources
Business Models for OER
In Europe, there is not yet a viable business model for OER in HE – the North American Open
Textbook model, which has begun to work in the US and Canada, has not got started in EU at HE
level and is of limited relevance even in schools, as demonstrated by Pepler et al (2015).59
A few large institutions claim that they can justify the activity because of the increased exposure
they get and thus it is an aid to marketing paid-for courses, or building brand or reputation.
However, quantitative information is scanty.
The OER universitas is not really a counter-example: it would more properly be classified as a MOOC
consortium, since it is focussed on delivering free online courses.
Globally it is influential, but it has few members in Europe.60 It has spent some years building
towards an operation at scale without making any breakthrough in numbers.61 Interestingly Brown
et al (2015, page 109) comment that “a number of questions remain about its regulatory status,
ability to accredit programmes, and long-term sustainability in the face of more established MOOC
initiatives”.
59 note that there are a few school-based OER textbook initiatives such as in Poland – https://re-publica.de/session/oer-
textbooks-polish-schools-year-later
60 UK OU, UHI and USW in UK, IT Sligo (a small institution) in Ireland and UOC in Spain – http://oeru.org/oeru-partners/
61 in particular most OER universitas courses are rather short, looking typical of many MOOC offerings –
http://oeru.org/courses/
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 19 31 March 2016
4. Adapting the paradigms to the European context
The population of Europe (in a wide sense, including Russia, Turkey and the Caucasian states) is
estimated at around 740 million.62 The population of the European Union is 503 million63 –
considerably more than the US at 320 million. Within the countries of interest to us – EU and some
others (mostly Erasmus+ Programme countries) – this breaks down as follows.
Austria
8.6
Malta
0.4
Belgium
11.1
Netherlands
16.8
Bulgaria
7.1
Poland
38.2
Croatia
4.3
Portugal
10.6
Cyprus
0.8
Romania
21.6
Czech Republic
10.8
Slovakia
5.6
Denmark
5.7
Slovenia
2.1
Estonia
1.3
Spain
47.2
Finland
5.5
Sweden
9.7
France
65.0
UK
63.8
Germany
82.6
Iceland
0.3
Greece
11.1
Norway
5.1
Hungary
9.9
Switzerland
8.2
Ireland
4.7
Montenegro
0.6
Italy
61.1
Russia
142.1
Latvia
2.0
Serbia
9.4
Lithuania
3.0
Turkey
75.0
Luxembourg
0.5
Ukraine
42.5
Where appropriate we shall normalise future entity numbers on a “per million population” basis.
4.1 OER
As many analytic projects have reported, OER is not very prevalent across Europe. In June 2014, the
EU-funded project POERUP (Policies for OER Uptake) reported that there were 118 OER initiatives
across Europe in its curated database,64 although it was aware of at least the same number again
that had not been fully analysed. Most were in higher education: they could be found mainly in UK,
Netherlands, France and Spain, with smaller clusters in Italy, Poland, Finland and Russia. Much of
central and eastern Europe had very little visible OER activity.
Activity since then is spreading across more countries as documented in ADOERUP (Bacsich, 2015),
but even by mid 2014 many of the projects curated, especially in the UK, had ceased activity.
Since 2014 there has been no systematic, funded, public Europe-wide programme to keep an
information base of OER projects up to date. However, from time to time other projects (such as
ADOERUP and OERup!) carry out or fund country-specific studies on OER. In addition the Hewlett-
funded OER World Map65 project is encouraging country champions on a volunteer basis to
62 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Europe
63 http://europa.eu/about-eu/facts-figures/living/index_en.htm
64 http://poerup.referata.com/wiki/Europe
65 https://oerworldmap.org/
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 20 31 March 2016
document their country’s projects, such as for Germany recently.66 As the report on Germany
demonstrates, the volunteer-supported Open Education Working Group (of which the author is
Coordinator) of the Open Knowledge Foundation encourages country experts to publish “open
education” country studies and notable projects on its blog.67
Nevertheless it is still the case that many countries in Europe have very low levels of institutionally-
or nationally-funded OER projects in higher education. Furthermore at least two countries (UK and
Netherlands) have reduced to a minimum their funding for OER developments in HE.
As a consequence of this, there is renewed interest in many EU member states in grassroots OER
initiatives in universities requiring only low levels of funding (e.g. from within the institution) or via
enthusiasts’ efforts. There are only a few institutions, typically open universities – and the UK Open
University in particular68 – where effort continues on a substantial scale.69
Even in the open universities there is no public information on how the activity is funded70 – but in
several (not all) there is substantial use of EU funding – not sustainable in the longer term. None of
this indicates that there are viable business models lurking invisible to view.
4.2 MOOCs
As POERUP and related projects had to take into account, there was a “pivot” from OER to MOOCs in
Europe around 2013 – and in contrast to OER, the number of MOOC initiatives has been growing
fast. Open Education Europa reported71 241 MOOCs starting (and finishing) in 2013, rising to 674 in
2014 and 866 in 2015 – two years in which the European MOOC consortia FutureLearn and iversity
were growing fast and many EU-funded MOOC associations were active.
In addition, a recent survey of institutions (Jansen and Schuwer, 2015) conducted in late 2014
suggested that “71.7% of the institutions has a MOOC or is planning to develop one” (page 3), having
risen from 58% in a similar survey a year earlier. (On the other hand the survey had only 67
respondents, about 2% of all European HEIs, with most Member States returning 3 or less replies.)
Intriguingly, in the first three months of 2016, Open Education Europa reported that only 18 MOOCs
are recorded as starting soon. Even if (as is likely) some of this seems to be due to lack of reporting it
would not be surprising if the pivot from MOOCs (in universities) evident in the US last summer72
was not by now working through to Europe – though part of the reason may be due to the Lifelong
Learning Programme winding down and Erasmus+ not being a seamless replacement, not for MOOC
activity anyway.
There is a caveat that the typical MOOC represents around 1 ECTS (if it were to be accredited)
compared with 60-120 ECTS in a typical Masters – and of course many of the MOOCs are repeated
every few months. Thus compared with Masters programmes this is much less material than many
think.
66 http://education.okfn.org/mapping-oer-analysis-of-the-current-state-of-open-educational-resources-oer-in-germany/
67 http://education.okfn.org/blog/
68 OpenLearn – http://www.open.edu/openlearn/
69 The Open University Annual Report 2014/2015 notes on page 8: “Over 600,000 people were inspired by our programmes
and visited OpenLearn to explore subjects in greater depth” –
http://www.open.ac.uk/about/main/sites/www.open.ac.uk.about.main/files/files/Annual%20Report%202014%2015.pdf
70 and more than one open university has had to live with only a small surplus or even a deficit –
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/open-universitys-numbers-dive-28-as-pool-of-part-timers-dries-
up/2018593.article – leading to “a deficit of £16.9 million in 2013/14” (page 26 of
https://www.open.ac.uk/about/main/sites/www.open.ac.uk.about.main/files/files/ecms/web-content/about-annual-
report-2013-14.pdf)
71 http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/find/moocs? – then enter the search parameters
72 for example, in conversations at the FutureLearning 2020 Summit at Stanford in 2015 –
http://www.futurelearninglab.org/may-2015-summit/ – picking up on articles from late 2014 such as “Will MOOCs be
flukes?” – http://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/moocs-failure-solutions
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 21 31 March 2016
The MOOC consortia are key to long-term sustainability. EU funding can help consortia to build up
experience and work towards a sustainability plan, but cannot itself form a sustainability strategy. So
the following table is interesting.
Note how few Member States have any consortial MOOC activity at all. The table does under-
represent national consortia but with the exception of France and Netherlands this is not likely to
make a difference to the numbers and no difference to country coverage. The box below explains
the headings in the main table.
Legend
Country EU Member State; EEA/Switzerland; other European (key ones only) – 36 total
Pop (m) Population in millions to nearest 0.1 million, from 2015 statistics where feasible
#HEPs Estimated number of all Higher Education Providers, public and private, based on a
norm of 4 per million population used in previous analytic projects
C’rsera Coursera full institutional members which are higher education institutions
F’Learn Futurelearn full institutional members which are higher education institutions
Iversity iversity full institutional members which are higher education institutions
OEC Open Education Consortium full institutional members which are higher education
institutions and are direct members not members via educational consortia
OER u OER universitas full institutional members (OER u programmes are open MOOCs)
Country
Pop (m)
#HEPs
C’rsera
F’Learn
Iversity
OEC
OER u
Austria
8.6
34
Belgium
11.1
44
1
Bulgaria
7.1
28
Croatia
4.3
17
Cyprus
0.8
3
Czech Republic
10.8
43
Denmark
5.7
23
3
1
Estonia
1.3
5
Finland
5.5
22
1
France
65.0
260
9
1
2
Germany
82.6
330
2
12
Greece
11.1
44
Hungary
9.9
40
Ireland
4.7
19
1
1
Italy
61.1
244
2
5
2
Latvia
2.0
8
Lithuania
3.0
12
Luxembourg
0.5
2
Malta
0.4
2
Netherlands
16.8
67
4
3
1
4
Poland
38.2
153
1
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 22 31 March 2016
Country
Pop (m)
#HEPs
C’rsera
F’Learn
Iversity
OEC
OER u
Portugal
10.6
42
Romania
21.6
86
Slovakia
5.6
22
Slovenia
2.1
8
Spain
47.2
189
5
2
1
20
1
Sweden
9.7
39
1
1
1
UK
63.8
255
3
30
2
2
3
Iceland
0.3
1
Norway
5.1
20
2
Switzerland
8.2
33
4
1
1
1
Montenegro
0.6
2
Russia
142.1
568
6
4
1
Serbia
9.4
38
Turkey
75.0
300
1
3
Ukraine
42.5
170
Putting it simply, MOOCs with senior institutional support (usually necessary to join a consortium)
have very little traction in most EU countries, being of relevance to only a small minority of
institutions, with the exception of UK, France, Germany and Spain.
4.3 Distance (usually online) learning
4.3.1 Overview
Distance learning at HE level is widespread in the UK (found in almost every large university) and
also found to a substantial extent in Spain, France and Sweden. To a smaller extent it is found
wherever there is an open university (Germany, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus) or other dedicated
distance learning provider (such as Danube University Krems,73 Austria). In some small countries
such as Cyprus, Lithuania, Ireland, and especially Cyprus, activity from providers is high as a ratio to
the population.
The most recent comprehensive detailed report on institutions which are providers of distance
learning was the Re.ViCa Handbook and associated wiki: the Handbook was published in late 2009
but the wiki was updated to some extent during 2010-11.74 Usefully, once an institution starts
distance learning it rarely stops it – thus apart from occasional mergers and very occasional closures
these institutions listed in 2009 (now 7 years ago – which seems a long time to many young
researchers) are still active.
The Distance Learning Portal,75 part of the StudyPortals service, has a focus on programmes not
institutions but each programme cites the institution offering it and this enables the reader, with
work, to extract the list of institutions. Such a task, while useful for later work in D-TRANSFORM, is
beyond the scope of this Report – here we focus on programmes.
73 http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/en/
74 Handbook – http://revica.europace.org/Handbook.php
wiki – http://www.virtualschoolsandcolleges.eu/index.php/Main_Page
75 http://www.distancelearningportal.com
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 23 31 March 2016
Country
Pop (m)
#HEPs
#programmes
# per million pop
Austria
8.6
34
35
4.0
Belgium
11.1
44
12
1.0
Bulgaria
7.1
28
9
1.2
Croatia
4.3
17
1
0.2
Cyprus
0.8
3
65
81.2
Czech Republic
10.8
43
2
0.1
Denmark
5.7
23
16
2.8
Estonia
1.3
5
2
1.5
Finland
5.5
22
22
4.0
France
65.0
260
108
1.6
Germany
82.6
330
211
2.5
Greece
11.1
44
55
4.9
Hungary
9.9
40
3
0.3
Ireland
4.7
19
72
15.3
Italy
61.1
244
120
1.9
Latvia
2.0
8
7
3.5
Lithuania
3.0
12
43
14.3
Luxembourg
0.5
2
1
2.0
Malta
0.4
2
2
5.0
Netherlands
16.8
67
136
8.0
Poland
38.2
153
18
0.4
Portugal
10.6
42
15
1.4
Romania
21.6
86
1
0.0
Slovakia
5.6
22
2
0.3
Slovenia
2.1
8
1
0.4
Spain
47.2
189
200
4.2
Sweden
9.7
39
45
4.6
UK
63.8
255
2266
35.5
Iceland
0.3
1
0
0.0
Norway
5.1
20
11
2.1
Switzerland
8.2
33
42
5.1
Montenegro
0.6
2
0
0.0
Russia
142.1
568
16
0.1
Serbia
9.4
38
2
0.2
Turkey
75.0
300
1
0.0
Ukraine
42.5
170
0
0.0
in contrast
United States
318.9
3951
12.3
Australia
23.1
1758
76.1
New Zealand
4.5
101
22.4
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 24 31 March 2016
4.3.2 Helicopter tour
UK
The United Kingdom has its own open university which until recently was the only purely distance
learning provider; it is now joined by Arden University, a private university. The majority of UK public
universities deliver some distance learning, except for the small (usually newer) institutions. A
particular feature of the UK is the public-private partnership model between a public HE provider
and a private company, such as the University of Liverpool with Laureate Systems, or the University
of Essex with Kaplan76 – and several more – often targeting students outside the UK more than those
inside. See section 5.1 for more details.
StudyPortals records 2194 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
Spain
Spain has two public open universities (UNED and UOC)77 and also the private Madrid Open
University (UDIMA).78 Several other universities deliver distance learning. See section 5.2 for more
details.
StudyPortals records 201 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
France
France has a long tradition of distance learning, though best known for the CNED79 operating at
ISCED 3 and 4 level. See section 5.3 for more details.
StudyPortals records 109 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
Italy
Italy set up some years ago a network of telematic universities – private universities specialised in e-
learning. The best known is the International Telematic University UNINETTUNO.80 See section 5.4
for more details.
StudyPortals records 121 DL programmes offered at higher education level – several of these come
from public universities.
Hungary
Hungary is not very active in distance learning.
StudyPortals records 3 DL programmes offered at higher education level – including one from a
traditional public university.
Ireland
Ireland some years ago set up the National Distance Education Centre, now part of the National
Institute for Digital Learning at Dublin City University.81 Hibernia College82 is a private provider of
distance learning, active in the area of teacher training. Several other public HE institutions and
private providers offer some distance learning.
StudyPortals records 72 DL programmes offered at higher education level, a high number for a small
country.
76 http://info.university-liverpool-online.com and http://online.essex.ac.uk
77 UNED – http://portal.uned.es; UOC – http://www.uoc.edu/portal/en/
78 http://www.udima.es
79 http://www.cned.fr
80 http://www.uninettunouniversity.net/en/universita.aspx
81 http://dcu.ie/nidl/index.shtml
82 http://hiberniacollege.com
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 25 31 March 2016
German-speaking nations
In Germany the German Open University (FernUniversität in Hagen)83 is the main public provider of
HE distance learning, but over a limited range of subjects. The German government is aware that
there is inadequate provision of DOL: a study, OPULL, has recently been completed.84 StudyPortals
records 211 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
In Austria there is little provision of DOL. Danube University Krems85 is a regional university with a
specific mission for distance learning. A new commercial provider WWEDU was trying to make
headway86 but then closed.87 StudyPortals records 35 DL programmes offered at higher education
level, a high number for a small country.
Switzerland
Switzerland had an active Swiss Virtual Campus88 programme until 2008 and several universities
offer distance learning.
StudyPortals records 42 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
Scandinavia
Sweden has had a complicated history in distance learning. The elite universities on the whole do not
offer much distance learning – however, Uppsala University has a significant DL offering due, but
only in part, to its incorporation of Gotland University College, who were very active in distance
learning.89 Several university colleges are very active, including Dalarna University.90 StudyPortals
records 45 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
Norway is less well served but as a rich country it supports its face to face students well. Thus
StudyPortals records just 11 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
Denmark has little interest in distance learning. StudyPortals records 16 DL programmes offered at
higher education level
Finland had a consortial Finnish Virtual University model which seems to have faded away – energies
recently have been going into mergers of Finnish universities. StudyPortals records 22 DL
programmes offered at higher education level.
Baltic States
The Baltic States have their own traditions and suppliers of distance education, despite their small
populations. Of the three, Lithuania is by far the most active: StudyPortals records 43 DL
programmes offered at higher education level.
Portugal
Portugal has its own open university, Universidade Aberta,91 which was a traditional print-based
provider but then went through an innovation phase into digital learning. A few other universities
offer some distance learning.
StudyPortals records just 15 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
83 https://www.fernuni-hagen.de/english/
84 http://www.leuphana.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Forschungseinrichtungen/ipm/opull/Kathi_EduLearn_Paper.pdf.
85 http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/en/
86 http://campus.wwedu.com/intro_en
87 http://www.nachrichten.at/nachrichten/wirtschaft/wirtschaftsraumooe/WWEDU-Insolvenz-26-Mitarbeiter-und-150-
Glaeubiger-betroffen;art467,1450001
88 http://www.virtualcampus.ch
89 http://www.uu.se/en/admissions/freestanding-courses/
90 http://www.du.se/en/Study-at-DU/Courses-A-O/Distance-Web-Based-Courses/
91 http://www.uab.pt/web/guest/home
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 26 31 March 2016
Greek-speaking lands
Greece has the Hellenic Open University.92 There is an active set of private HE providers but there
are issues with accreditation. StudyPortals records 55 DL programmes at higher education level.
Cyprus has an open university, a public provider.93 The private University of Nicosia (UNIC) is also
known in distance learning circles.94 StudyPortals records 65 DL programmes offered at higher
education level – very high for such a small country.
Eastern EU
The South Eastern EU (Romania, Bulgaria etc) do not feature on StudyPortals.95
Poland is seen by analysts as a potential growth area for online learning. There is some distance
learning provision and a tradition of innovation including in OER. StudyPortals records 18 DL
programmes offered at higher education level.
Others
Malta has a hegemonic university well embedded into government and despite some studies on
becoming a “distance learning hub for the Mediterranean”, there is little activity.
Rest of Europe outside the EU and EEA
The European countries outside the EU/EEA do not support many DOL providers, with the notable
exception of the large states of Russia and Ukraine.
Russia has a long tradition of distance learning. Perhaps the best-known university in Russia with
DOL capability is MESI96– the Moscow State University for Economics, Statistics and Informatics – a
member of EADTU. StudyPortals records 16 DL programmes offered at higher education level – this
is a massive underestimate given the long history of distance learning in the country.97
Ukraine also had a tradition of distance learning from Soviet times but little is heard recently and no
programmes are listed on StudyPortals. The Re.ViCa page on Ukraine, finalised in 2010, describes
several universities active in DL98 and another portal site lists 36 DL programmes.99
The non-EU Yugosphere countries and Albania are too poor or still emerging from conflict situations,
with the exception of Croatia where there are potential students but a lack of internal DL providers.
Surprisingly the Caucasus states (normally assigned by analysts to Europe as well as to Asia), even
Georgia, has less developed DL provision than might be expected.
Most interesting are the European microstates. It is impossible to consider them individually, but no
state is too small but that it has to consider the issue of higher education for its children. Those who
love minutiae may wish to note that Andorra has a public university including a centre for distance
studies and also a private institution offering DL.100
The UK Crown Dependencies are in general underprovided for higher education. The UK Open
University is active in the Isle of Man and some north-western UK universities (e.g. Chester,
Liverpool John Moores) have links with the Isle. The UK Open University also is active in the Channel
Islands and there are some local developments.
92 http://www.eap.gr/en/
93 http://www.ouc.ac.cy/web/guest/home
94 http://www.unic.ac.cy/distance-learning/about-distance-learning
95 but Bulgaria has 2 courses listed on the distancelearningstudy.eu portal
96 http://eng.mesi.ru/about/
97 http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1165/2216
98 http://www.virtualschoolsandcolleges.eu/index.php/Ukraine
99 http://www.distancelearningstudy.eu/s/3319/74616-Distance-learning-study-in-English.htm?pa=144
100 https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universitat_Oberta_de_la_Salle_-_Andorra
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 27 31 March 2016
5. Four countries, four (or five) paths
This Chapter provides country-specific detail on the four main partner countries of UK, Spain, France
and Italy. UK does not have a unitary fees regime so we consider England and Scotland separately.
The next chapter (Chapter 6) looks at three other relevant countries (Ireland, Francophone Belgium
and Hungary) and establishes a recipe for providing reports on further European countries. This is
designed to help those in university management to plan their business models for OER, MOOCs and
accredited distance learning – thus looking ahead to the D-TRANSFORM Leadership Workshops.
In view of length restrictions, for our information on fees we focus mainly public sector institutions.
This is because fee levels for these are more uniform within countries and also better documented,
in particular by Eurydice (2015) and the various “Study in Country” sites.
Each country is described where feasible within a structured rubric.
5.1 United Kingdom: England and Scotland
The UK four home nations have to be treated separately. For reasons of space and effort, and with
apologies to Wales and Northern Ireland, we look only at England (large country, high fees) and
contrast it with Scotland (small country, free fees – for full-time students).
Wales has several universities active in distance learning and MOOCs including Aberystwyth
University, Cardiff University and the University of South Wales.101 In Northern Ireland, Ulster
University is active in distance learning and Queen’s University Belfast is a member of FutureLearn.
5.1.1 England
Language issues
English is the official language. There is no recognised minority language in England.
Universities
The Universities UK organisation has over 100 members.102 There are around 200+ FE colleges
offering some HE.103 There are an increasing number of private HE providers becoming visible. In fact
there have for some years been a large number (600 or more) of “alternative providers” (all
private),104 including some long-established online providers like the Open College of the Arts.105
Several private providers and most alternative providers do not accredit their own degrees – instead
accreditation is handled by established universities including the UK Open University.106
Most English universities now have a strong focus on digital skills and wider employability skills – at
several institutions covering self-employment, social enterprises and start-ups. MOOCs are one of
the ways, but not the main one, by which such skills are inculcated.
The postgraduate full-time market for UK students has not been healthy for some time, but the
continuing inflow of foreign students to some extent makes up for UK market weakness. The new
postgraduate loans scheme will help, more so now that it is not restricted to students under 30.
The Research Excellence Framework (UK-wide) in its latest incarnation continues the long UK
tradition of reviewing universities’ research performance and linking the review to funding. Few
would disagree that this has for some time caused a skewing effect in academic priorities. Few other
countries have a similar exercise of such severity. All universities are subject to REF.
101 a partner of UNIC in UNICAF – https://www.unicaf.org
102 http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/aboutus/members/Pages/default.aspx – and note that a few more established private
providers are also members, such as Regent’s University London
103 http://www.hefce.ac.uk/reg/register/search/Overview
104 almost none outside England apart from the Interactive Design Institute in Edinburgh
105 http://www.oca.ac.uk
106 the schemes are not simple to describe – see http://www.hefce.ac.uk/reg/gateways/Partnerships/
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 28 31 March 2016
Distance learning
Almost all large UK HE providers offer some distance learning, though mostly at Masters level apart
from the UK OU. The UK OU is still an unchallenged hegemonic provider in the undergraduate
degree distance learning market.107 However, there are a few long-established niche providers at
undergraduate level of which the best known is the University of Derby Online (UDOL).108 Some
private providers of face-to-face education also operate in the undergraduate distance sector, such
as the University of Law109 and the London School of Business and Finance.110
While the full-time undergraduate UK/EU market and the international market remain buoyant,111
the same is not the case for the part-time and DL market. The UK OU has made very public its
significant decline in numbers.112
In the distance HND and Foundation Degree market (ISCED 5 short-cycle), there are several
providers including a few “HE in FE” providers and private institutions. There are also a number of
online FE providers who so far have not bridged over from FE to HE (even HND), and some have even
withdrawn from HE back to FE,113 for reasons not clear.
The postgraduate part-time market is not healthy, and international (non-EU) students cannot come
to study part-time in the UK for visa reasons. The subset of the market delivering distance learning
has no such restrictions and appears an area of growth to many universities even though the overall
envelope is in fact not growing. Other than specialised or small institutions there are now only a
handful of Universities UK114 members not delivering some postgraduate distance learning. On the
other hand, there are only a dozen or so such universities with more than 1000 DL students and only
University of London International with more than 10000.115
Contrary to gloomy predictions over 20 years of “tanks on the lawn”,116 the expected “invasion” of
US-based or US-funded providers into England (or indeed the UK) has been rather limited. Other
than RDI/Capella,117 such providers118 partner with one or at most two UK HEIs and then steadily try
to grow their market from that base. Several large US players such as Academic Partnerships119 or
University Ventures120 have nil visible direct exposure in the UK market. The large publishers, with
the exception of Pearson and also Wiley,121 have shown little interest and Pearson has been cautious
about moving online in strength in UK. The one exception to this rule is Global University Systems122
which has been steadily growing and consolidating its stable of private providers, including the
London School of Business and Finance and the University of Law, who do offer online programmes.
107 potentially this might change in time with the approval of Arden University, built out of the RDI/Capella operation
108 UDOL – http://www.derby.ac.uk/online/home-page
109 http://www.law.ac.uk/postgraduate/i-gdl/ for their online course
110 http://www.lsbf.org.uk/study-online
111 though there are longer-term health warnings on overseas students from British Council etc, and not only because of
visa issues
112 several other European OUs have had similar or in one case worse declines
113 such as ICS – https://www.icslearn.co.uk/courses/business-and-management/
114 http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk – the association of almost all UK universities
115 ignoring the Oxford Brookes/ACCA collaboration on accounting qualifications which used to heavily distort the HESA DL
figures
116 I first heard the phrase “tanks on the lawn” in connection with the Mulberry Lawn on the Milton Keynes campus of the
UK OU from John Daniel the then VC circa 1995
117 now called Arden University
118 Kaplan with Essex, Laureate with Liverpool and Roehampton, Wiley with Birmingham, UNIC with USW, Keypath with
Coventry, RDI/Capella with several in the past
119 http://academicpartnerships.com
120 http://universityventures.com – see also https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/university-ventures#/entity
121 http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/latest/2014/10/wiley-online-learning-20-10-14.aspx
122 http://thepienews.com/news/global-university-systems-to-restructure/
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 29 31 March 2016
MOOCs
The FutureLearn consortium of MOOC providers is very strong in the UK. Yet the division between
those universities in FutureLearn and those not in is now not clear. Some very high-ranking
universities are not in FutureLearn; no low-ranking university is in FutureLearn, yet in the middle
there can be universities of similar rank and style, one in and one not. This makes it very unclear for
outsiders to determine what is the added value of FutureLearn to a UK university. By and large in
England (and indeed the UK), universities not in FutureLearn are not active in MOOCs – yet there is
no clear technical or business reason for this especially since the two main commercial VLE
platforms, Canvas and Blackboard, have modes to deliver MOOCs.
Some English universities are in other MOOC consortia, but only a very few.
OER
After substantial funding of OER in HE for some years,123 there is now minimal central funding, much
less activity, a smaller less vibrant OER community, and a pivot to MOOCs.
However, showing that good things can come from surprising sources, much of the current activity
in Open Access and to some extent OER and MOOCs could be traced back to REF pressures, in
particular on impact metrics.
Fees and funding
Fees are very high by EU standards, but there is a loan scheme.
The fee tabulation for public institutions in England looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
high
high
Non-EU students
very high
very high
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium
high
Non-EU students
high
high
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
high
high
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
All students have to pay fees – some may get loans and a few get grants.
For full details see Eurydice (2015), page 45, on The United Kingdom – England. In terms of fees this
notes:
1st cycle full-time – fees are set by institutions and capped at GBP 9000 [€9900]124 for
institutions with an approved access plan (to safeguard fair access for low income and
other under-represented groups) and GBP 6000 [€6600] for institutions without an
access plan. The average fee for 2014/15 was GBP 8601 [€9461] before fee waivers
(discounts offered by institutions) and GBP 8448 [€9293] after fee waivers. Students are
not required to pay up front and can apply for a loan to cover the full fee. Repayments
123 https://www.jisc.ac.uk/rd/projects/open-education
124 we use a long-term conservative exchange rate of £1 = €1.1
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 30 31 March 2016
are income-contingent and are set at 9% of earnings above the threshold of GBP 21000
[€23100]; interest rates are Retail Price Index plus 3%.
1st cycle part-time – fees are set by institutions and capped at GBP 6750 [€7425].
Students studying a course of at least 25% intensity are not required to pay up front and
can apply for a loan to cover the full fee. Repayments as for full-time students.
2nd cycle – fees are unregulated and vary widely. The ‘most common’ shown (GBP 4052
[€4457]) represents an indicative fee level for research students in 2014/15 set by
Research Councils UK.
For 1st and 2nd cycle international students fees are unregulated.
Our view is that the student loans system has settled down into general acceptance among those
providers offering mainly full-time provision, with far less acceptance and far more deleterious
effects among part-time and DL providers.
Online learning
It has been argued that there was a period in England after 2010 when there was “uncontrolled”
growth in student loans especially at HND level (short-cycle HE, ISCED 5) and a growing belief of the
“lack of quality” in the private HE system. Yet perusal of recent quality reports shows that even small
private online providers, such as OCA and IDI, as well as large providers such as College of Law (now
University of Law), can get glowing reports from QAA.125 In addition private providers such as UNIC
(Cyprus-based, operating in partnership with USW) are taking care to get their quality procedures
approved by supranational teams of evaluators such as from EADTU.126 The companion report by
Rivera-Velez and Thibault (2016) summarises the policy framework.
5.1.2 Scotland
Language issues
English is the only official language.
However, the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 established a language development body, Bòrd
na Gàidhlig, “with a view to securing the status of the Gaelic language as an official language of
Scotland”. Yet, Scottish Gaelic is not an official language of the EU or the UK – although classed as an
Indigenous language under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, which the UK
government has ratified.
There are several providers (Dundee, UHI) offering distance courses to teach Gaelic; and Sabhal Mòr
Ostaig (a college of UHI) offers Gaelic-medium distance learning in Gaelic culture, heritage and
arts.127
Universities
There are 19 higher education providers in Scotland, including three specialised HE providers and
the Open University in Scotland: these 19 form the members of Universities Scotland.128 Scotland
has been preserved from the HE mergers that have affected most other UK home nations. In
addition to HE providers, most FE colleges offer some HE courses, sometimes under validation
arrangements, sometimes not.
Scotland runs a “pure” continental-style funding regime,129 where fees for full-time undergraduate
higher education are free.130 However, postgraduate higher education courses do charge fees,
125 for more on such reports see the SEQUENT Showcases report – http://www.sequent-
network.eu/images/Guidelines/Sequent_Showcases.pdf
126 SEQUENT Showcases report, pp. 9-10
127 http://www.smo.uhi.ac.uk/en/cursaichean/cursaichean-air-astar/
128 http://www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/
129 many EU countries now have fees, but often set at “low” levels, i.e. under €2000 per year
130 full details of the current situation are in http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00485542.pdf
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 31 31 March 2016
though students are usually eligible for a modest loan.131 In addition, part-time undergraduate
courses (including DOL) do charge fees, though eligible learners (those on modest incomes) can get a
Part-Time Fee Grant.132
Distance learning
Distance learning is offered by all Scottish universities with many of the ancient universities
(Edinburgh, Aberdeen) as active as old but less ancient (such as Dundee) and more recently founded
institutions (Heriot-Watt, Robert Gordon etc), but the rest are all active at a more modest level
(hundreds not thousands of students).
The Scottish college sector has had two rounds of consolidation into a smaller set of regional and
metropolitan colleges. As usual, this has caused a decline of distance learning in this sector.
While UK OU in Scotland has a dominant position in undergraduate distance learning it is just one of
many providers in postgraduate distance learning. Interestingly and contrary to popular belief there
are two private providers in Scotland,133 the Interactive Design Institute and ICS Learn, though the
latter is not currently active in HE provision.
MOOCs
UHI is an active member of the OER universitas and the universities of Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh
and Strathclyde are active in FutureLearn.
OER
Scotland was later to the “OER conversation” than some home nations of the UK but now there is an
active Open Scotland lobby group and the project Opening Educational Practices in Scotland is led by
the OU and involves UHI, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Strathclyde universities.134 In addition UHI is an
active member of the OER University.
Fees and funding
The fee tabulation for public institutions in Scotland looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
free*
high
Non-EU students
very high
very high
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium
high
Non-EU students
high
high
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
high
high
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
For full details see Eurydice (2015), page 48, on The United Kingdom – Scotland. In terms of fees this
notes (the situation is complicated so read carefully – and note our italics):
131 only up to £3400 (£1700 if studying part-time) – see last URL
132 page 26 of last URL: the rules are complicated
133 other than theological colleges
134 https://oepscotland.org
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 32 31 March 2016
* For the first cycle, the Scottish Government pays the tuition fees for full-time Scottish
and EU students (with the exception of those from England, Wales and Northern
Ireland). For 2014/15, fees are set at GBP 1820 [€2002].
Fees for part-time students are unregulated but are usually a proportion of the full-time
equivalent fee.
Scottish (and non-UK EU) students do not pay tuition fees to study at Scottish
universities, but must pay full fees to study at universities in other parts of the UK.
Students from England, Wales and Northern Ireland are required to pay fees to study at
universities in Scotland. Fees are charged to students from the rest of the UK at a level
of up to a maximum of GBP 9000 [€9900], in line with the maximum fee charged in the
rest of the UK. The GBP 9000 [€9900] cap on fees for students from the rest of the UK is
set by the sector as part of a voluntary agreement.
Fees for international (non-EU) students are unregulated and set by the higher
education institutions.
The fee and support system has been developed for students in the first cycle. In the
second cycle, fees are unregulated, differing by field of study and by mode of attendance
(i.e. full- or part-time).
Online learning
Unlike England and Wales there has not been any strategic investment in e-learning from the
funding council in the last 7 years, until very recently, focussed on OER via the Open Educational
Practices in Scotland consortium led by the UK OU in Scotland.135 The companion report by Rivera-
Velez and Thibault (2016) summarises the policy framework.
5.2 Spain
In terms of education, Spain is neither a unitary state like France nor a federation of distinctly
different states like the UK, nor even a federal country of states with very similar education policies
and funding regimes like Germany. It is divided into 17 components called autonomous
communities, who are largely in charge of education including universities. Policies in fees and
grants vary slightly between these.
Language issues
The Spanish language is the official language in every autonomous community, but six autonomous
communities have also other official languages, in particular Catalan and Basque.
Universities
There are 76 universities in Spain. Of these 24 are private, including 7 affiliated with the Catholic
Church.
Distance learning
Spain has two public open universities (UNED and UOC) and also the private Madrid Open University
(UDIMA). Several other universities deliver distance learning.
StudyPortals records 201 DL programmes offered at higher education level.
MOOCs
Spain has 5 members of Coursera, 2 of FutureLearn and 1 of iversity. Many other universities offer
MOOCs.
OER
Spain is also active in OER.
135 http://www.open.ac.uk/iet/main/research-innovation/research-projects/opening-educational-practices-scotland-oeps
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 33 31 March 2016
Fees and funding
The fee tabulation for public institutions in Spain looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
low
medium
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
low
medium
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
For full details see Eurydice (2015), page 25, on Spain. In terms of fees this states, but rather
vaguely:
The amount of fees is determined by the kind of studies, the number of ECTS taken and
the number of exams failed in each subject. In addition, amounts differ between regions
as each one has a different fee range. There is no difference in fees between full and
part-time students.
For international students (from outside the European Union) who do not have resident
status in Spain, the fees can be increased, depending on the region.
Exemptions from fees are possible and based on need criteria. In addition, large families
and disabled persons have very significant discounts, and may even be exempt.
The situation with grants is also very complicated. In summary, they are needs-based not merit-
based. Highlights are that:
All students who receive grants are also exempt from paying fees.
Students can receive different grant components depending on their family income, grades
and other circumstances. The minimum grant is EUR 60 plus a waiver from tuition fees. The
maximum grant in 2014/15 was EUR 6840.49.
The approximate 29% of students receiving grants include, apart from those of the general
call, those who are partially exempt of paying fees for large family, and collaboration
scholars.
No loans, no tax relief for parents and no family allowances.
MastersPortal provides some additional information especially on private universities and second
cycle courses:136
The tuition fee for studying at a public university in Spain is approx. 1000 EUR per year.
Students have to pay registration and tuition fees at public universities in Spain. The total
amount paid varies depending on the course and its credit worth. Enrolment fees for
bachelors degrees (180 credits or 60 credits per year) at public universities in Spain vary
between 500 EUR and 1120 EUR per academic year.
136 http://www.mastersportal.eu/articles/357/tuition-fees-and-living-costs-for-studying-in-spain.html
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 34 31 March 2016
At private universities the registration fee for bachelors degree studies varies between 5000
EUR and 12000 EUR per academic year, depending on the degree, the institution, and the
students academic performance. The fees at private universities are established by the
university itself.
The fees for official masters and doctoral degrees at public and private universities are
regulated by the government. A master program is usually worth 90-120 credits, except a
Master of Science which is worth 240 credits, also 60 credits per year. As an example, a
masters course comprising 60 ECTS credits may cost between 960 EUR and 1800 EUR.
This unusually seems to favour bachelors courses over masters in the business models even at
private universities.
Information is scanty but the indications are that in general international students pay fees which
are the same as or only a little higher than EU students.
Online learning
There are no policies to facilitate online learning. The companion report by Rivera-Velez and Thibault
(2016) summarises the policy framework.
5.3 France
Language issues
The official language is French.
Universities
The public university system in France is in process of reorganisation. There are also other types of
higher education institution including the grandes écoles and the private universities both secular
and religious.
Distance learning
France has a long tradition of distance learning, though best known for the CNED operating at ISCED
3 and 4 levels.
StudyPortals records 109 DL programmes offered at higher education level (ISCED 5-8).
In France distance learning is regarded as an aspect of continuing education. The POERUP report on
France137 summarises the situation well:
Continuing education is the type of training geared toward those who have left basic
education. It is aimed at salaried workers, the unemployed, and all adults wanting training
or a diploma. The most well-known field is continuing professional development.
Funds for continuing education in France come from companies (40%), from the state (22%),
(Pôle emploi among other agencies), from the regions (14.4%), from the government for its
own agents (19%), and from households (4%).
Continuing education can be provided by companies (when they have in-house training
departments), by government agencies (GRETA, AFPA, Universities, CNAM, etc.), or by
private institutions. In 2012, there were 48,000 training institutions, public and private, in
France.138
MOOCs
France is particularly active in the area of MOOCs. In addition to national initiatives, 9 universities
are members of Coursera and 1 of FutureLearn.
137 by Florence Ducreau and Catherine Claus Demangeon, University of Lorraine – http://poerup.referata.com/wiki/France
138 http://www.education.gouv.fr/cid217/la-formation-tout-au-long-de-la-vie.html
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 35 31 March 2016
OER
OER is also active.
Fees and funding
Wikipedia usefully summarises the situation as follows:139
Since higher education is funded by the state, the fees are very low; the tuition varies from
€150 to €700 depending on the university and the different levels of education. (licence,
master, doctorate). One can therefore get a master’s degree (in 5 years) for about €750 –
€3500. The tuition in public engineering schools is comparable to universities, albeit a little
higher (around €700). However it can reach €7000 a year for private engineering schools,
and some business schools, which are all private or partially private, charge up to €15000 a
year.
Thus the fee tabulation for public institutions in France looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
very low
very low
Non-EU students
very low
very low
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
low
low
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
very low
very low
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
For fuller details see Eurydice (2015), page 26, on France. In terms of fees this states:
The amount of fees per year fixed by the Ministry of Higher Education and Research is
EUR 184 in the first cycle (L1, L2, L3) and EUR 256 in the second cycle (M1, M2). In
addition fees of EUR 215 per year, irrespective of the cycle of studies, are charged to all
students aged 20-28. These fees are related to the social security system. A number of
universities have decided to add associated costs related to specific services (e.g. for
diplomas related to continuing learning and training). In some public universities,
depending on the type of studies and the qualifications acquired, the fees can reach
more than EUR 2000 per year.
Fees in the grandes écoles and engineering schools vary, but the most common amount
is EUR 600 per year – not including fees related to social security and partnerships with
universities. Tuition fees in some institutions reach up to EUR 10000 per year, depending
on family income. However, there are also grandes écoles which not only deliver
education without charging fees, but may even pay some students (such students are
prospective civil servants and receive a wage from the State), e.g. in école polytechnique
and écoles normales supérieures.
Students who receive a grant (34.7% of the student population in 2014/15) are
exempted from fees.
Non-EU students pay the same fees as those from within the EU.
139 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France#Education
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 36 31 March 2016
There is some devil in the detail. MastersPortal notes:140
Grants are awarded on the basis of financial need to students that are less than 28 years of
age. The amount awarded for the need-based grant depends on the assessment of social
criteria, and varies between 1606 and 4600 EUR per year. The merit-based grant ranges
from 1800 to 6102 EUR. At the same time, those eligible for a grant receive exemption or
reduction in health cover.
Loans are also available with a maximum amount of 15000 EUR, but less than 0.1 % of
university students take out such a loan.
Parents are eligible for tax relief if students are financially dependent on them and are less
than 25 years old. The amount of tax relief is proportional to the amount of taxable income
of the household.
Family allowances are paid for two or more dependent children that are under 20 years old.
The minimum amount is 127 EUR per month and increases with the number of eligible
children. An additional amount of 63 EUR per month is paid for every child that is aged 16-
20 years.
There are signs that the universities are being given greater discretion to impose their own
charges, as the government struggles to find a way to fund higher education, and the
universities are granted greater autonomy. Some universities have been granted new powers
over their budget, and it is likely this will lead to an increase in fees.
Online learning
The companion report by Rivera-Velez and Thibault (2016) summarises the policy framework.
5.4 Italy
Italy is divided into 20 regions, five having a special autonomous status that enables them to enact
legislation on some of their local matters.
Language issues
Italian is the official language. However, French is a second official language in the Valle d’Aosta,
German the same in South Tyrol, Slovene in the provinces of Trieste, Gorizia and Udine, and there
are additional local situations with other minority languages.
Universities
Higher education provision in Italy comes mainly from the public universities, but there are also
private universities (including the telematic universities specialised in e-learning) and prestigious
graduate schools such as the Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. The University of Bologna and the
University of Padua are commonly accepted as the oldest public universities in Europe.
Distance learning
Around 12 universities and one consortium deliver distance learning.
StudyPortals records 122 DL programmes offered at higher education level. Interestingly 65 of these
are online short courses, leading to some interesting synergies with MOOCs. Most of the rest are
online Masters (34) but with 10 Bachelors programmes.
MOOCs
Italy has 2 members of Coursera (including Sapienza University of Rome) and 5 of iversity. Overall,
MOOC offerings are not plentiful in Italy. The MOOC monitor lists, in addition of course to
140 http://www.mastersportal.eu/articles/355/tuition-fees-and-living-costs-in-france.html
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 37 31 March 2016
Politecnico di Milano, the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Università di Bologna and Università
di Napoli Federico II as delivering MOOCs in the Italian language.
OER
OER is not very much evident in higher education, but there are several initiatives in schools.
Fees and funding
The fee tabulation for public institutions in Italy looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
low
low
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
low
low
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
For fuller details see Eurydice (2015), page 28, on Italy. In terms of fees this states:
Higher education institutions (HEIs) define the fees at the beginning of the academic
year and they differentiate them according to the students’ socio-economic background,
field of studies, cycle, study status – full-time or part-time – and year of registration.
Furthermore, HEIs are obliged to exempt students benefiting from student support, and
they can also exempt some students on the basis of merit. The overall amount of fees at
the end of financial year should not be higher than 20% of public funding. The Ministry
responsible for higher education sets the amount of the minimum fee for enrolment. For
the academic year 2015/16, it is EUR 199.58.
The fee amounts shown in the diagram are calculated on the basis of the most recent
statistical data available (2013-2014). International students pay the same fees as
national students.
Educations.com notes that there are some additional aspects:141
Private universities in Italy are much more expensive.
Admission to “master universitari” and other specialized degree courses in Italy also have
much higher tuition fees.
Doctoral students who receive university grants do not pay tuition fees, but non-grant
holders are required to pay the tuition fees of their particular university.
Finally there are some planned reforms to bring Italy more into line with other countries which may
change the parameters for business models:142
141 http://www.educations.com/study-guides/europe/study-in-italy/tuition-fees-6662
142 Eurydice (2015) page 28, bottom of page
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 38 31 March 2016
The inter-ministerial decree 9 December 2014, n. 893 between the Ministry of
Education, University and Research and the Ministry of Economy introduced the
‘standard cost for student’. The aim is that students attending the same type of courses
have the same allocation of resources by the state. Funding allocation should in future
take account of the differences between the degree programmes, the number of regular
students, and the average cost of university professors, as well as the regional economy
and the financial situation of families. New parameters are valid for the period 2014-16,
but have not yet been implemented.
Online learning
The companion report by Rivera-Velez and Thibault (2016) summarises the policy framework. There
is little policy relevant to online learning.
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 39 31 March 2016
6. Extending this to the rest of Europe
The focus of this report is on UK, Spain, France and Italy – so this Chapter on other European
countries is brief. We focus on three relevant countries and then make some general points.
The countries are:
1. Ireland – a small English-speaking country adjacent to the UK (sharing a land border)
2. Francophone community of Belgium – a French-speaking country adjacent to France
3. Hungary – the fifth partner country of the D-TRANSFORM consortium.
6.1 Ireland (Republic of Ireland)
Language issues
English is the main language.
Irish Gaelic is spoken as a first language by a very small minority of Irish people, and as a second
language by a rather larger group: it enjoys constitutional status as the national and first official
language of the Republic of Ireland – and so is an official language of the European Union. At
university level, there are some requirements in a few universities for students and lecturers to have
some fluency in Irish Gaelic but the situation is complicated and sensitive.
Universities
There are 21 public HE providers. In more detail, Ireland, like many continental EU countries, has a
binary divide in its HE provision. There are 7 public universities (the members of the Irish Universities
Association). There are also 13 public Institutes of Technology (comprising Institutes of Technology
Ireland) and one institution, Dublin Institute of Technology, set up under special legislation.
Distance learning
The traditional distance learning provider in the Republic, the National Distance Learning Centre
(abbreviated to OSCAIL in Irish Gaelic), was set up as an autonomous unit with Faculty status on the
campus of Dublin City University in 1982. It has “provided adults all over Ireland with flexible access
to third level education since 1982. Thousands of students have graduated with Dublin City
University degrees through Oscail in that time”.143 It is the Irish member of EADTU.
After initial success OSCAIL suffered from problems and after some government discussions it was
re-embedded into DCU as the Open Education Unit, now part of the wider National Institute for
Digital Learning.144
There is distance learning available from some other HE institutions (UCD, Limerick, Galway, IT Sligo,
etc.) but mostly at the level of cottage industry. In all there are 72 DL courses offered.145
There are also private providers of distance learning, of which the best known is Hibernia College;
but there are several others including the Institute of Public Administration.
Hibernia College is a long-established commercial HE provider. It has had great success in recent
years developing online teacher training and delivering this in the UK via a consortium of new
universities.146 There is an old (2009) but good case study of Hibernia College.147
The UK Open University operates in the Republic of Ireland via a pan-Ireland subsidiary with a head
office in Dublin.
143 http://www.eadtu.eu/national-distance-education-centre-oscail-ireland.html
144 http://dcu.ie/nidl/index.shtml
145 http://www.distancelearningportal.com/countries/14/ireland.html
146 http://iteach.hiberniacollege.com/AboutiTeach/iTeachnbspPartnership/tabid/338/Default.aspx
147 http://www.virtualcampuses.eu/index.php/Hibernia_College_-_case_study
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 40 31 March 2016
MOOCs
Trinity College Dublin is active in FutureLearn and IT Sligo has joined OER universitas.
OER
The Republic of Ireland has little activity in OER.
Fees and funding
The Republic of Ireland runs a variant of the “pure” continental-style funding regime. Most EU
undergraduate students attending publicly funded HE courses do not have to pay tuition fees – fees
are paid by the Department of Education and Skills.
However, EU postgraduate higher education courses do charge fees, though there is a means-tested
fee contribution.
Part-time and distance learning courses have to charge fees since there is no funding council support
– and there are no loans available. There seem no plans to change this – in fact plans formulated two
years ago were withdrawn.
Fees for international students can be high.
The fee tabulation for public institutions in Ireland looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium*
high
Non-EU students
high
very high
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium
high
Non-EU students
high
very high
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium
high
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
* part usually paid by government, under complicated rules that are not applicable to all EU students
For full details see Eurydice (2015), page 23, on Ireland. This states:
For the first cycle, full-time EU students are exempt from full tuition fees if they are first-
time undergraduates, hold inter alia EU/EEA/Swiss nationality in their own right, and
have been ordinarily resident in an EU/EEA/Swiss state for at least three of the five years
preceding their entry to an approved third level course. However, these students
nevertheless pay a ‘student contribution’ of EUR 3000 per academic year. Full-time EU
students who do not meet the terms of the ‘free fees’ scheme must pay a consolidated
fee covering both tuition fee and student contribution – the average EU consolidated fee
is EUR 6000.
For the second cycle, the majority of students pay tuition fees that are set by higher
education institutions, and that may reach EUR 30000 per year.
Part-time fees are generally half of full tuition fees for full-time programmes.
In both cycles, international student fees are generally two to three times higher than
those of full EU fees and are set by the higher education institutions.
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 41 31 March 2016
Ireland is the first of the countries we are studying which offers needs-based and merit-based grants
(though only to needs-based students!), but no loans, though there is tax relief – and no support for
distance students (unless, unusually, full-time):148
Need-based grants are provided to full-time students by the Department of Education &
Skills. Their amounts range from EUR 305 to 5915 per academic year, depending on
means, family size and distance from institutions.
Students who qualify for grants also have the student contribution or tuition fees paid
on their behalf.
The same department provides bursaries with a value of EUR 2000 per academic year.
The bursaries require qualification under both merit and need-based criteria.
Students need to satisfy specific conditions of residence, means, nationality and
previous academic attainment to be eligible for grants. Students have to be enrolled full-
time.
Tax relief is available for the expenses paid for tuition fees at a recognised higher
education institution.
No loans or family allowances.
Online learning
Until recently there had for many years not been any strategic investment in e-learning from the
government However in 2014 the National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning149
was set up and has disbursed several million euro on technology-enabled pedagogic development,
leading to a revitalisation of online learning in the sector (both universities and Institutes).
6.2 Francophone Community of Belgium
We use this name to avoid certain controversies.150 The “country” comprises Wallonia (the Walloon
Region) and French speakers in the Brussels Capital Region, comprising around 4.5 million people. It
is sometimes called the Federation Wallonia-Brussels.
Language issues
The language of the Community is French, by definition.
Universities
Full-time higher education is provided by 42 institutions divided into three types: 6 universities, 20
university colleges and 16 arts colleges.151 All are members of the Academy for Research and Higher
Education (ARES).
Distance learning
The reports on distance learning in Francophone Belgium are some years out of date but do not
indicate much activity. There are 4 programmes offered by Distance Learning – 4 Masters degrees,
three from THIERRY Graduate School of Leadership (in Barvaux) and one from the Catholic University
of Louvain. Older reports cite the University of Liege as active. No Bachelors degrees are cited.152
MOOCs
MOOC List cites just one Francophone MOOC starting in the January-June 2016 period.
OER
There is no information on OER.
148 Eurydice (2015) page 23, bottom of page
149 http://www.teachingandlearning.ie
150 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Community_of_Belgium
151 http://www.studyinbelgium.be/en/content/higher-education-wallonia-brussels-0
152 http://www.distancelearningportal.com/countries/4/belgium.html
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 42 31 March 2016
Fees and funding
The fee tabulation for public institutions in the Francophone Community of Belgium looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
medium
medium
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
medium
medium
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
low
low
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
For full details see Eurydice (2015), page 9, on Belgium – French Community. This states:
Fee limits are set by the government of the French Community of Belgium. Fee levels
depend on the student’s financial situation. For the academic year 2015/16, the
maximum fee is EUR 836, the intermediate fee is EUR 374 (for students not receiving a
grant but considered as lower income) and there are no fees for those students
receiving a grant.
There are some differences in fees between universities and non-university higher
education institutions. Until 2017 non-university higher education institutions can
charge complementary registration and administrative fees in addition to registration
fees, but the total amount cannot exceed EUR 836/year. Those complementary
registration and administrative fees range from EUR 0 (for grant holders) to EUR 179
depending on the type of programme and the financial situation of students; they apply
to all students. These fees will continuously decrease until 2017 when they will cease to
exist.
Students from outside the EU have to pay additional specific fees. For programmes
organised by university colleges and arts colleges, the additional specific fees (droits
d’inscription spécifiques) are fixed by law: EUR 992 for professional-oriented
programmes and EUR 1 487 for academic-oriented programmes in the 1st cycle; EUR
1984 for programmes of 2nd cycle. For programmes organised by universities, the law
stipulates that the maximum amount should not exceed 5 times the registration fees. In
practice, universities (through the Interuniversity Council) adopted harmonised
amounts. Those amounts differ depending on the country of origin of the students. The
complementary registration and administrative fees mentioned in the previous bullet
remain applicable to non-EU students.
There are needs-based grants but no merit-based grants.
Intra-EU complications
There are complications caused by “excessive” flows of students from France to study in the French
Community of Belgium. A summary of Case C-73/08 of the European Court of Justice states:
The French community, which provided well regarded higher education courses attractive to
students from France, saw a significant increase in the number of students from other
member States, in particular France, enrolling in its institutions of higher education, in
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 43 31 March 2016
particular in nine medical or paramedical courses. The French Community considered that
too many students from France were attending classes in Belgium and adopted the decree
of June 16 2006. That decree obliged universities and schools of higher education to limit
the number of students not considered as resident in Belgium who may register for the first
time in one of the over-subscribed nine medical or paramedical courses. The decree limits
the total number of non-resident students, for each university and for each course, to 30%
of all enrolments in the preceding academic year. Once that percentage has been reached,
the non-resident students are selected, with a view to their registration, by drawing lots.153
In summary the “Court held that a member State could restrict the number of students from other
member States enrolling in certain medical and paramedical courses if such a restriction was
justified in order to protect public health. In so doing the Court seems to back-track a bit on its
previous case law on the free movement of students.”
The restriction remains in place but as usual with Court judgements there are still many issues
unresolved, which the summary article explores.
Online learning
There appear to be no policies supporting online learning.
6.3 Hungary
Hungary is a unitary state in education terms, thus meaning that any business model developed for
Hungary should apply to any public university in the country. Equally usefully, the organisation of the
education system shows similarities with several other Central European countries. Moreover there
are 5 Hungarian-language universities outside Hungary, in Romania, Slovakia and Ukraine.
Language issues
Hungarian is the official language of Hungary.
Universities
The Hungarian higher education system has a binary divide – in other words it is a dual system,
divided into colleges (that usually provide only bachelor’s degrees) and universities (that usually
provide master’s degrees also).
The Hungarian Rectors Conference154 includes over 60 higher education institutions. In particular
there are 22 state universities and 8 private (non-state) universities.
Distance learning
There are 3 DL programmes listed.155 Two are MSc programmes from the International Business
School in Budapest and one is a BA Business Administration and Management from the University of
Szeged. The latter is a prestigious research institution founded in Szeged in 1921 but with a history
going back to 1872 (as the University of Koloszvar) and even further back.156
MOOCs
There appear to be no MOOCs originating from Hungary.157
OER
There is little OER activity in higher education. In particular no Hungarian university is a member of
the Open Education Consortium.
153 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/arrets/08c073_en.pdf
154 http://www.mrk.hu and http://www.mrk.hu/en/members/
155 http://www.distancelearningportal.com/countries/12/hungary.html
156 https://www.u-szeged.hu/about-us/facts-and-figures2/brief-history-160219
157 http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/european_scoreboard_moocs and https://www.mooc-list.com/countries
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 44 31 March 2016
Fees and funding
The fee tabulation for public institutions in Hungary looks as follows:
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
free* or medium
medium
Non-EU students
medium
medium
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium
medium
Non-EU students
medium
medium
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
medium
medium
Non-EU students
N/A
N/A
* if state-funded.
For full details see Eurydice (2015), page 33, on Hungary. In addition to reminding readers that just
“37% of students paid fees (Oct. 2014)”, it states:
There are two basic types of financial statuses for students: state-funded and self-
financed.
Higher education institutions (HEIs) stipulate the amount of fees per semester for each
programme based on costs and in accordance with a government decree providing a
minimum and a maximum fee for the different levels and fields of study.
Fees are charged to self-financing students. State-funded places are awarded through a
centralised admissions procedure to students on the basis of their academic performance
with preferment to disadvantaged students and students with disabilities. In 2014, 63 %
of places were state-funded.
The fees range from HUF 230000 [€734] to 1600000 [€5107] in the 1st cycle and from
HUF 450000 [€1436] to 1900000 [€6064] in the 2nd cycle. The fees are between
HUF 300000 [€958] and 2700000 [€8618] in undivided158 master programmes.
The situation with grants and loans is can be summarised as follows:159
The minimum of the grant specified by the law for the disadvantaged, for students with
one living parent and those under legal guardianship until the age of 18 is HUF 119000
[€380] /academic year. The minimum of the grant specified by the law for the disabled,
multiple disadvantaged, orphans, students supporting dependents or those from a large
family is HUF 238000 [€760] /academic year.
In addition to the regular need-based grant ..., there is a scholarship scheme jointly
financed by municipalities and higher education institutions (Bursa Hungarica
scholarship)....
Only state-funded students can receive a merit-based grant. In order to receive a merit-
based grant, students have to obtain a certain number of credits or a minimum mark
stipulated by the HEI.... A maximum of 50 % of students at state-funded places are
awarded a merit-based grant, and the minimum amount of the grant is HUF 59500
[€190] /academic year....
158 that is, all-through combined Bachelor and Master
159 Eurydice (2014) page 33, bottom of page
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 45 31 March 2016
A government-subsidised loan (Student Loan 1) is available for both state-funded and
fee-paying students (max. HUF 50000/month for a period of 10 months/year)....
Students below 40 years of age are eligible....
A second type of student loan (Student Loan 2) has been available for fee-paying
students since the academic year 2012/13. It is a government subsidised loan with
interest rates lower than for Student Loan 1 (above). It can only be spent on tuition fees
and can cover the whole of the tuition fee. Fee paying students can take out both types
of loans to cover both study costs and living costs.
No tax benefits for parents or family allowances.
The situation for international students is that in most cases they will have to pay fees, but only at
the level of “self-financed” students as described above.160
Online learning
There is no specific government policy support for distance learning or online learning.
6.4 Other European countries
For analysing a particular country we recommend a specific template.
1. Language issues
2. Universities
3. Distance learning
4. MOOCs
5. OER
6. Fees and funding
7. Online learning policies
Details follow on how to complete the template. The study on Hungary was done “from scratch” as a
pilot using this template, rather than by updating earlier material from other projects.
Language issues
This is usually straightforward but it has to be remembered that many countries have more than one
official national language and there are often recognised minority languages also which often have
an effect on the universities in the country – such as in Spain or to some extent in Ireland.
Universities
We recommend as far as possible gaining information from lists of institutions provided by ministries
or other official bodies, including rectors’ associations.161 It is important to bear in mind that many
European countries now have some private universities: both non-profit foundations (perhaps
religious, perhaps not) and also for-profit companies. It is also increasingly the case that providers of
ISCED 4 education may also provide some university-level courses (ISCED 5 and higher). Wikipedia
can be helpful, especially to find the leading and oldest institutions in a country, but is rarely up to
date, especially for less-known countries.
The various “Study in Country” portals, such as STUDYinEUROPE.eu, are also very helpful.162
Distance learning
There is a gap in information provision: in particular there are no recent authoritative studies at a
detailed level on which higher education institutions in Europe deliver distance learning. However, in
our experience it is rare for institutions to stop delivering distance learning, so that even older lists
160 http://www.studyineurope.eu/study-in-hungary/tuition-fees
161 The European University Association has useful lists of institutions – http://www.eua.be/about/members-
directory?orderBy=country
162 http://www.studyineurope.eu
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 46 31 March 2016
are useful. The last authoritative study in this domain was the Re.ViCa project (Review of Virtual
Campuses) during 2007-09, funded under KA3 of the Lifelong Learning Programme.163 All
publications are still available, including the comprehensive Handbook.164 Equally usefully the wiki
database of the institutions delivering distance learning is being maintained as long as is useful,
thanks to the good offices of KU Leuven.165
At the level of courses, rather than institutions, things are in good shape, thanks to StudyPortals BV
and support from the European Commission.166
MOOCs
A baseline figure for each country can be found from POERUP. There is more up to date information
from other country reports prepared from time to time for DG EAC, IPTS and national agencies. In
addition the MOOC aggregator167 on the Open Education Europa web site has lists of MOOCs and
institutions delivering them, across Europe. More informally, the MOOC List168 tries to keep up with
MOOCs globally.
OER
A baseline figure for each country can be found from POERUP. There is more up to date information
from other country reports prepared from time to time for DG EAC, IPTS and national agencies. In
particular, the ADOERUP report (Bacsich, 2015) has an Annex with reports on United Kingdom,
France, Spain, and Hungary, drawn on for this report, but also Sweden, Latvia, Germany, and
Romania.
Fees and funding
The template we use is shown below.
Full-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
Non-EU students
Distance
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
Non-EU students
Part-time face-to-face
Bachelors
Masters
EU students
Non-EU students
N /A
N/A
Detailed information on fees can be found in the country pages of the Eurydice (2015) report
National Student Fee and Support Systems in European Higher Education 2015/16. However, the
country reports are often not informative on part-time and distance students, and on international
students, so usually have to be supplemented by use of the various “Study in Country” sites,
especially those (often American in their focus) oriented to non-EU students.
163 http://revica.europace.org/index.php
164 http://revica.europace.org/Re.ViCa%20Online%20Handbook.pdf
165 http://www.virtualschoolsandcolleges.eu/index.php/Programmes
166 http://www.studyportals.com
167 http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/find/moocs
168 https://www.mooc-list.com
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 47 31 March 2016
It would easy to add an extra column for Doctoral studies but we felt it was not justifiable since the
number of open education offerings in that level is very small and general documentation on
doctoral fees is much less available.
As was stated earlier we did not provide tables for private institutions. This is because on the whole,
fee levels for these are less uniform within countries and good information would require analysis of
individual web sites. However, it should be noted that in some countries there are fee uniformities
even for private providers: for example in England private providers must charge fees of at most
£6000 (€6600) if they wish their EU students to be eligible for student loans, and most do that; but
some do charge more than £6000, and can in fact charge more than £9000 (€9900, the public sector
limit) under certain circumstances.169
Online learning policies
There is no current list of policies relevant to online learning in the various European countries.
Earlier information can be found from the country pages for Re.ViCa and POERUP and more up to
date information from other reports prepared from time to time for DG EAC, IPTS and national
agencies.
The companion report by Rivera-Velez and Thibault (2016) summarises the policy framework but
only on UK, Spain, France and Italy.
169 http://www.practitioners.slc.co.uk/products/tuition-fees.aspx
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 48 31 March 2016
7. Lessons and caveats mainly from beyond Europe
This Chapter (of around 15 pages) looks in detail at lessons for Europe (in particular the Erasmus+
Programme countries) from beyond Europe, and also draws some caveats. There is a focus on North
America (US and Canada), not surprisingly given the countries where these developments have been
most active. It also includes some recent updates on key European developments in the last three
months.
7.1 Transversal themes
Market focus
In the “internet years” by which we tend to judge the rapidity of internet developments, based on
“dog years”,170 the paradigmatic MOOC providers Coursera and Udacity (founded around 4 years
ago) are around 30 internet years old. Thus in that light it is not surprising that both have undergone
significant changes in approach during that period, as has happened with other internet firms.
Indeed this happened with some of the open universities 40 years ago: the UK OU was originally
called the “University of the Air” but even when the first courses launched, broadcast TV usage took
up only a small fraction of study time and relentlessly declined as the institution matured.
Thus Europeans should analyse what Coursera and Udacity are doing now, not what they tried and
failed at when they started.
In summary, this implies that institutions should look at an increased focus on paid-for services from
students and an increased focus on services to employers not students, within a context of moves to
various kinds of accreditation, be it vocational or academic.
But some would argue that this looks like a long and winding road towards low-cost accredited
distance education courses. Why not jump straight to the end point? This is what was argued by two
US commentators in A Financially Viable MOOC Business Model as long ago as February 2013, in the
heyday of “disruptive innovation”, or talk about it, anyway.171 If one is interested in that direction,
there are separate developments which venture funders are investing in, repeatedly: a good
example is UniversityNow, a low-cost online HE provider based in California.172
The wealth of institutions
The two US commentators also observed that “the institutions producing MOOCs (MIT, Stanford,
Harvard, and others) have relatively healthy balance sheets, sizeable endowments, and minimal
competition”.173 While there were budget cuts on higher education in many US states during the
2010-12 depths of the last recession,174 the situation in the last two years appears to have stabilised,
with only the occasional blip,175 usually in some long-troubled state – and in any case these cuts
directly affect only the public universities.176 There are separate issues in the for-profit sector (see
below) and a number of small private universities are on the edge of closure,177 but there are strong
forces (especially state politicians and alumni) preventing the much-heralded shake-out of the
“bottom-feeders” in the US higher education system178 – there are 5300 HE institutions in the US.
170 conventionally, 1 human year = 7 dog years, but a more sophisticated calculation uses a higher multiplier of 10.5 for the
first 2 years, then reduces to 4 from then on – http://www.onlineconversion.com/dogyears.htm
171 by Ramin Sedehi and Damian Saccocio, University Business, Feb 2013 –
http://www.universitybusiness.com/MOOCBusinessModel
172 http://unow.com
173 see A Financially Viable MOOC Business Model
174 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-l-caret/reversing-the-trend-of-sl_b_3880870.html
175 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-conversation-us/what-berkeleys-budget-cut_b_9349412.html
176 http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/are-public-universities-going-to-disappear/411685/
177 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-virginia-sweetbriar-idUSKCN0PC2SR20150702
178 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/06/22/loyal-alumni-make-it-extremely-difficult-to-
close-a-college-just-ask-sweet-briar/?tid=a_inl
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 49 31 March 2016
One cannot make a simplistic comparison between the wealth of the US HE system and the poverty
of the European one: again the picture is patchy. A few countries, such as France, have made
considerable recent investments in their HE systems; others, like the UK at least in England, have
managed their funding problems by moving the burden from the state to the students, finessing it
via a loan system and, for students in richer families, additional support from parents. It is not then
necessarily a coincidence that these two countries are among the leaders in MOOCs.
These two countries are not the only exceptions: an EU report in March 2013 concluded that
although in eight Member States, investment in education fell, in others it rose – a bit.179 In detail:
Cuts of more than 5% were imposed in Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania and Portugal, while
Estonia, Poland, Spain and the UK (Scotland) saw decreases of 1 to 5%. However, five
Member States increased education spending by more than 1%: Austria, Denmark,
Luxembourg, Malta and Sweden, as well as the German speaking area of Belgium.
Interestingly Germany and Netherland did not provide data to the study – but it is well known that
there were substantial HE budget cuts in 2012 in the Netherlands180 including cuts to activities at
OUNL.
Again, and relevantly, while it is certainly the case that universities in England feel relatively wealthy
at this time, thanks to the recent rise in tuition fees,181 and thus are likely to have more money for
“adventures”, this situation is not expected to continue. While not every university accepts the
gloomy forecast of a “‘worst-case’ £4.4bn budget deficit” made by the Funding Council in November
2015,182 a combination of factors, rather than further large targeted government cuts, are making
universities in England anxious – and anxious universities tend to become more risk-averse.
Nor should it be assumed that all Member State government budget cuts targeted on universities
have worked through; Finland183 and Denmark184 are dealing with these issues now.
The quality constraints
It is a commonplace in some circles to contrast the European dirigiste approach to quality,
accreditation and regulation of universities with the free and easy approach of the US to such
matters. Again, the picture is much more nuanced.
First, both Europe and North America (along with Australasia) are nowadays185 mercifully free of the
restrictions on distance education imposed by some governments in Latin America and Asia – better-
known examples including Brazil over many years,186 the Middle East (one of the reasons why the
Arab OU offered a study-centre-based blended programme) and India.187 In addition, there are often
specific distance learning quality regulations in many Asian countries.188
179 http://ec.europa.eu/education/news/2013/20130321_en.htm
180 http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20121102134738222
181 Tuition fees give England universities surplus worth £1.8bn –
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/03/tuition-fees-england-universities-surplus-balance
182 https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/hefce-chief-warns-of-worst-case-budget-deficit-for-universities
183 http://monitor.icef.com/2015/06/finnish-universities-facing-big-budget-cuts-fees-for-non-eu-students-back-on-the-
table/
184 http://cphpost.dk/news/danish-government-to-cut-billions-from-education.html
185 some might be alarmed to read that in the US in 2007 there were restrictions –
http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Career_Education_(CECO)/Restrictions_Distance_Education_Programs
186 see http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/65/133 written in 2002 – but apparently easing by 2012 –
http://edutechdebate.org/open-and-distance-learning/open-educational-resources-and-distance-learning-in-brazil/
187 http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/varsities-upset-over-ugc-notice-on-distance-education-
programmes/article7532564.ece
188 Quality Assurance in Distance Education and E-learning: Challenges and Solutions from Asia –
http://www.sagepub.in/books/Book240611?subject=C00&imprint=%22SAGE%20India%22&sortBy=defaultPubDate%20de
sc&fs=1
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 50 31 March 2016
That is not to say that there are no reputational issues in Europe with distance learning (there are,
especially in some Member States) or no financial distortions – several fee/loan/grant schemes
discriminate against part-time face-to-face and distance learning students.
United States
The structure of US quality/accreditation is not that different from that in Europe. The US is divided
into six geographic regions (groups of US states), in which operate seven Regional Accreditation
Commissions.189 An overview document describes a process familiar to a European audience:190
Accreditation is a self-regulatory, peer review process based on rigorous standards. Colleges
and universities are judged based on self-evaluations analyzing how well they meet these
standards, in light of their mission. Following a review by a team of peers, accrediting
commissions determine the accreditation status of the institution and use a variety of
means to ensure follow-up as appropriate and further evaluation in the case of substantive
change on the part of the institution.
The New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Commission on Institutions of Higher
Education (NEASC) is one such body.191 Its current nine Standards, to come into force in July 2016,
have a familiar feel, focussing on the broad areas of:
1. Mission and Purposes
2. Planning and Evaluation
3. Organization and Governance
4. The Academic Program
5. Students
6. Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship
7. Institutional Resources
8. Educational Effectiveness
9. Integrity, Transparency, and Public Disclosure.
This might all seem a comforting routine without any teeth, and it is fair to say that many US
institutions, especially the more prestigious ones, have not had much difficulty in retaining
accreditation, though the effort involved can be substantial. There have also been criticisms of a
“too cosy” relationship of Commissions with universities, even with for-profit ones like Corinthian
Colleges.192 But less well known is that several private for-profit universities have had substantial
problems with accreditation and the Regional Accreditation Commissions demonstrated that they
have real power. This is in part because students at an unaccredited institution cannot access the
student loan scheme and so standing behind the Commissions is the US Department of Education –
interestingly with no jurisdiction in the individual states but with crucial jurisdiction over the federal
student loan scheme.
Perhaps the best known example to analysts is Altius Education but several more could also be given
if space had permitted. Altius Education was an innovative software company which developed a
“next generation” Learning Management System and student support model.193 They partnered with
a traditional small private university, Tiffin University,194 to set up Ivy Bridge College, a new online HE
provider. However, the Higher Learning Commission refused to accredit it and forced the shut-down
189 https://cihe.neasc.org/about-accreditation/regional-accrediting-commissions
190 https://cihe.neasc.org/about-accreditation/us-regional-accreditation-overview
191 https://cihe.neasc.org
192 How For-Profit Colleges Stay In Business Despite Terrible Track Record –
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/19/for-profit-college-accreditation_n_3937079.html
193 https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/NG1221.pdf
194 http://www.tiffin.edu
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 51 31 March 2016
of Ivy Bridge College, with the transfer of its students to other institutions, and the downsizing of
Altius.195 Soon afterwards the remaining Altius assets were sold to Datamark, an enrolment
marketing company.196
It does not seem to be the case that any of the MOOC providers have yet fallen foul of the Regional
Accrediting Commissions, but by keeping clear, so far, of formal academic accreditation and of
student loans, they do not come “under the spotlight”. Difficulties are likely in the near future: a
recent paper on quality of MOOCs established that several MOOCs did not score well against the
well-respected Quality Matters criteria.197
On the whole, this kind of pressure from regulatory bodies on online providers is not one that we
see in Europe, though there have been a number of episodes of quality concerns regarding private
institutions, such as in Portugal.198 Often (as in Portugal) these predated the development of
effective ENQA-accredited national quality agencies; in this light it is interesting that the issue seems
topical currently in Macedonia199 – the article cited is also a good overview of the situation in other
European countries.
There have been similar quality issues with private universities in non-European countries, such as
Malaysia a few years ago.200
Canada
By European standards, or even by the standards of the US, Canada still has a very “light touch”
system of quality assurance. To begin with, Canada’s approach to federalism means that there is
almost no role in education for the national government, so much so that, in contrast to almost
every other country in the world there is no national Minister of Education: instead there is a Council
of Ministers of Education from the provinces that provide guidance.201 However, this, coupled with
the fact that some provinces are very small, means that progress on most issues is very slow.
Over 10 years ago, as private for-profit institutions began to be active, the issues around a lack of a
clear Canadian approach to accreditation and quality were flagged by the President of an innovative
university college in an influential report,202 reflecting on international credibility of Canadian higher
education in the light of international competition for students and emerging problems with a few
less well behaved institutions. In 2007 the Council of Ministers of Education issued a Ministerial
Statement on Quality Assurance of Degree Education in Canada which set up a federal framework,
following an accepted pattern elsewhere, but naturally left specifics to the provinces.203
Later some of the larger provinces updated their own quality procedures, usually instantiating them
in agencies of a type not unfamiliar to a European audience, such as the Campus Alberta Quality
Council204 or the Degree Quality Assessment Board in British Columbia.205 And from time to time
195 http://www.xconomy.com/san-francisco/2013/09/10/altius-education-changes-course-accreditation-battles/
196 http://www.helixeducation.com/news/datamark-acquires-technology-assets-and-support-infrastructure-from-altius-
education/
197 In Search of Quality: Using Quality Matters to Analyze the Quality of Massive, Open, Online Courses (MOOCs), 2015 –
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2348/3411
198 The rise and fall of the private sector in Portuguese higher education, 2000 –
http://www.csd.uoc.gr/~tziritas/16/Portugal.pdf
199 COMPETITION BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES: INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES AND CASE OF
MACEDONIA, 2013 –
http://www.wjeis.org/FileUpload/ds217232/File/26_a_abdulla_azizi__zemri_elezi__arben_mazreku.pdf
200 Malaysia: Many private colleges have quality issues –
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20111112205637185
201 http://www.cmec.ca/en/
202 Degree Accreditation in Canada, by Dave Marshall, President of Mount Royal College, 2004 –
http://www.mtroyal.ca/cs/groups/public/documents/pdf/degreeaccredincanada.pdf
203 http://www.cicic.ca/docs/cmec/QA-Statement-2007.en.pdf
204 http://www.caqc.gov.ab.ca/about-the-council.aspx
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 52 31 March 2016
some institutions have been closed206 by provincial governments, such as in British Columbia, or
merged into or with other institutions.207 Thus the “gradualist” appearance of Canadian higher
education is not quite the reality.
Regulation of vocational education
Europe is different from the US again in that most European countries have a quality and regulatory
framework for vocational education (ISCED 4) – and to complicate matters, with a few exceptions it
is run by different agencies with different rules from those for higher education, which are on the
whole even less sympathetic to online learning. Thus classifying MOOCs “officially” as ISCED 4
probably would increase the regulatory problems in Europe, not reduce them. The ADOERUP report
goes into the sensitive area of progress, or lack of it, in regulation of VET in Europe.
The remit of a university
In the US and Canada, universities (with rare exceptions) act as if they are self-accrediting and
plenipotentiary: in other words, they do what they want to do – and it is only rarely (very rarely if
they are prestigious) that there are any complaints. Compared with European countries, the voice of
students is muted. It was particularly interesting that despite the high fees students pay to attend
Harvard and MIT, students took some years to become concerned that so much money was being
spent on developments of no clear use to them – though MIT eventually realised the problem as
they pivoted in 2014 to a stronger internal on-campus justification of their open courses.
In Europe, in many countries universities have not yet escaped from tight control by ministries.
There are still some countries such as France where university academic staff are in fact civil
servants.208 In some other countries such as Finland, the move to legal incorporation of universities
was not popular with academic staff, no doubt in part (but not totally) because it took place shortly
before major mergers of institutions.209
Especially in the eastern countries of the EU, government control of universities is still strong –
though all across Europe there are moves to greater university autonomy. Still, in almost all EU
countries, the fee levels and the numbers of students on programmes are closely controlled. For the
public sector universities, with some rare exceptions such as England, the majority of their funding
comes from the state. To us this seems to make it hard for universities to decide to undertake major
activity in new directions, such as MOOCs. As the ADOERUP report put it, “The Humboldtian idea of
the ‘union of teaching and research’ (Anderson, 2010)210 would not seem to leave room in its pure
form for a social mission to the world.” (Bacsich, 2014, page 36). Furthermore the sentence before
that quote notes, “Since many European PSE [post-secondary education] providers are now short of
funds (EUA, 2011),211 it would be a foolhardy institution that spent money on activities that were not
deemed ‘necessary’.”
Nevertheless, there are still elements of scale and flexibility in university budgets that schools and
post-secondary VET providers (ISCED 4) envy – so that pilots are possible. But this provides a barrier
205 http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/degree-authorization/
206 http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/degree-authorization/students/institutions-closed-lansbridge.htm
207 TechBC and BCOU – see https://www.sfu.ca/aq/issues/november2002/features/sfu-surrey.html and
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/thompson-rivers-university-open-learning/ respectively
208
http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/France.aspx
209 Frozen ambitions (Finland moves to merge its smaller universities), April 2012 –
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/04/19/finland-moves-merge-smaller-universities
210 The ‘Idea of a University’ today, by Professor Robert Anderson, History & Policy, 2010 –
http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/the-idea-of-a-university-today
211 Impact of the economic crisis on European universities, January 2011, European University Association,
http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Newsletter/Economic_monitoringJanuary2011final.sflb.ashx
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 53 31 March 2016
to scaling up – as soon as expenditure (or income or risk) reaches a certain level,212 senior
management will get nervous if the developed is not “authorised” – and there will be no “second
stage ignition”.213
The Foundations
The other key difference between Europe and the US is the role of the charitable foundations. It is
unlikely that the OER movement would have reached any sizable scale without the pioneering
efforts of the Hewlett Foundation (whose full name is The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation).
Since 2001 it “has made grants in excess of $40 million to support institutions and organizations that
develop and provide online access to open educational content”, including to MIT
(OpenCourseWare), Carnegie Mellon and around 50 other initiatives.214 Hewlett is one of a number
of US foundations who collectively provide substantial support to education initiatives. While Europe
has some foundations with interest in education, of which the Bertelsmann Foundation215 is best
known internationally, few have a focus on online and open higher education.
Of course both US and Europe have federal216 and transnational support schemes respectively, and
there are some national support schemes in Member States but the specific focus and mission of US
foundations was crucial.
In this context we should also mention the Educational Quality through Innovative Partnerships
programme (EQUIP)217 funded by the US Department of Education. This is merely the last of a series
of major programmes relevant to open and online education funded by this massive Department,
which often seem ignored by European commentators.
7.2 Recent pivots in strategy of MOOC suppliers (mainly from US)
Background in distance learning and MOOC acceptance
A very useful background document for US developments is the latest (and final) report (Allen and
Seaman, 2016) in the series of 13 annual surveys of online education in the United States carried out
by the Babson Survey Research Group. Intriguingly the justification for making this report the last
one is itself interesting: “When more than one-quarter of higher education students [in the US] are
taking a course online, distance education is clearly mainstream.” (page 3)
Europe still has some way to go....
The report, released in February 2016, makes the following key points on numbers of students in
distance education, which we have reordered to suit our purposes.
Background: This report series measures the trend of distance education enrollments
continually increasing at rates far in excess of those of overall higher education.
The evidence: Distance education enrollments continue to grow, even in the face of
declining overall higher education enrollments.
212 considerations from Activity Based Costing theory place this at around 1% of total budget; experience in the UK puts this
at around 1000 students – for more on this see
https://www.academia.edu/13123422/Organisational_Change_in_UK_education_induced_by_ICT_-_First_Report
213 https://ictenhancedlearningandteaching.wordpress.com/2012/04/11/analytic-or-operational-necessity-towards-the-
multiversity/
214 http://www.hewlett.org/uploads/files/OpenEducationalResourceInitiative.pdf
215 https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/home/
216 such as FIPSE (Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education) run by the US Department of Education –
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/fipse/index.html
217 http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-department-education-launches-educational-quality-through-
innovative-partnerships-equip-experiment-provide-low-income-students-access-new-models-education-and-training
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 54 31 March 2016
The total of 5.8 million fall [autumn] 2014 distance education students is composed
of 2.85 million taking all of their courses at a distance and 2.97 million taking some,
but not all, courses at a distance.
The observed growth rate from 2013 to 2014 of the number of students taking at
least one distance course was 3.9%, up from the 3.7% rate for the previous year.
Public institutions command the largest portion of distance education students,
with 72.7% of undergraduate and 38.7% of graduate-level distance students.
For the second year in a row the rate of growth in distance enrollments was very
uneven; Private not-for-profit institutions grew by 11.3% while private for-profit
institutions saw their distance enrollments drop by 2.8%.
The number of students not taking any distance education courses continues to
drop, down 434,236 from 2012 to 2013 and a further 390,815 from 2013 to 2014.
Their results on MOOCs confirm informal conversations and some earlier reports (such as Jansen
and Schuwer, 2015) – stating (page 6) that (with our italics but their bold):
Background: Reports from the last three years noted that only a small number of
institutions either had or were planning a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC).
The evidence: The results for 2015 are very similar to previous years — a small segment of
higher education institutions are experimenting with or planning MOOCs. Most institutions
have decided against a MOOC, or remain undecided.
The percent of higher education institutions that currently have a MOOC increased
from 2.6% in 2012 to 5.0% in 2013, to 8.0% in 2014, and now stands at 11.3%.
Many institutions (27.8%) report they are still undecided about MOOCs, while the
single largest group (58.7%) say they have no plans for a MOOC.
European readers should not go away with the impression that all is well in the US world of online
learning. In particular, “The proportion of academic leaders who report that online learning is critical
to their institution’s long-term strategy has shown the largest-ever one-year decline”. Furthermore,
“Only 29.1% of chief academic officers believe their faculty accept the value and legitimacy of online
education. This rate is lower than the rate recorded in 2004.”
The whole report is just 58 pages and the core of the report just 39. We commend it in full to all our
readers interested in the latest US developments.
Recent pivots from MOOC aggregators
We have found a small number of opinion articles very useful in compiling this section on pivots. We
particularly want to recommend Chafkin (2013), Cook (2016), Craig (2016), Morrison (2016), Shah
(2016), Straumsheim (2016), and Szpiro (2016). There is much more in each article than we have
been able to draw on in this section.
Elements of an online module
This section will make more sense if prefaced by a short summary of the key components of an
online module and their impact on the total human cost of provision for the provider. The taxonomy
is based on traditional practice in online education in US and UK since the mid 1990s but it is typical
of most online offerings, though some offerings leave out a few components. It does make an
assumption that the course runs as a cohort to a timescale (as most MOOCs do) rather than
individual learners starting when they wish and taking as long as they wish.
1. Content – usually a one-off purchase or development cost (in an ideal world free)
2. Student-student collaboration (usually by asynchronous forums)
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 55 31 March 2016
3. Tutoring/mentoring of students individually or in groups: typically costed by assigning one
tutor per n students, where n = 20 in some institutions
4. Automated formative assessment (quizzes, ideally with hints and feedback) during the
module
5. Automated summative assessment (i.e. marks go towards module grades) during the
module or at end of module
6. Student-graded summative assessment during the module
7. Tutor-graded summative assessment, with feedback during the module, but no feedback at
end of module (final exam, term paper, or dissertation)
8. Professional or industry certification of final grades
9. Academic certification of final grades with mapping into credits (ECTS in Europe).
It is clear that with all these features present the cost of the course is mainly proportional to the
number of students on it as this determines the number of human beings (tutors) needed to service
the course. A small element should be added to cover the costs of computing and storage, and any
licenses for software used, but this is much less than the human tutor cost.
It should also be clear that doing without tutors saves the provider a lot of money if there are a lot of
students on the course. Hence the obsessional interest in Artificial Intelligence.
It might not be quite so clear that professional/industry or academic certification adds a significant
one-off cost – but there are additional quality and recognition procedures that must be undertaken.
Again, further additional effort is required once a loan scheme and/or financial aid scheme is
introduced, as Coursera has now.
Udacity
Less than a year after 2012, the so-called Year of the MOOC,218 the pivots began. First off the mark
was Udacity in late 2013. Faced with low completion rates and rapidly using up most of its initial
venture funding of $20 million,219 Udacity announced that it would “offer technical training courses
from corporate partners such as Google, Salesforce.com, Autodesk, and Nvidia”. This was reported
on many blogs including the Open Education Europa portal,220 based on US sources including the
“long read” by Chafkin (2013). Crucially, “While the courses will offer accreditation, they will not be
free”.
There were critics from the purist end of the MOOC movement. One Canadian expert said:221
This is not a failure of open education, learning at scale, online learning, or MOOCs. Thrun
tied his fate too early to VC funding. As a result, Udacity is now driven by revenue pursuits,
not innovation. He promised us a bright future of open learning. He delivered to us
something along the lines of a 1990′s corporate elearning program.
Udacity had certainly over-promised222 – but the need for revenue, so disparaged by a Canadian
critic perhaps overly confident of the continuing dominance of public funding for universities as in
his country, is not just a US need. We shall see that by 2016 that the last sentence was seen by all
the MOOC aggregators as indicating a key road to follow (even if not the only one).
218 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-
pace.html?_r=0
219 https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/udacity#/entity
220 http://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/news/faced-low-completion-rates-moocs-udacity-shifts-focus-corporate-
training, 27 November 2013
221 The Failure of Udacity, by George Siemens. Elearnspace blog, 15 November 2013 –
http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2013/11/15/the-failure-of-udacity/
222 One venture funder commented to me “Poor Sebastian – he’s burnt $18 million and turned himself into a training
company”. But then it turned out that being a training company was a smart idea.
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 56 31 March 2016
For Udacity it worked. They generated sufficient investor confidence to raise $140 million in two
further rounds,223 including from companies like Bertelsmann (the European publisher), cautious by
nature, but well used to investments in online learning, by then including Synergis Education,
HotChalk and WizIQ.224 This, especially their new rhetoric of “nanodegrees” (industry-relevant
training certificates)225 generated talk about Udacity being the “first MOOC unicorn”.226
It is easy to understand why many mainstream people in the MOOC community, including at some
of the other aggregators, felt that Udacity had “gone off-piste”, “turned to the dark side”,227 or in the
words of our poem, rushed down “the braid braid road” of “wickedness”, which “some [like venture
funders] call the road to heaven”.
So perhaps that view, and an increasing deafness to the barrage of hype which was very much
Udacity’s ongoing marketing style, meant that the pivot did not receive much attention – not
publicly, at least. That was certainly the view I got when in Stanford in summer 2015 at the Future
Learning 2020 Summit.228 People accepted that there was now a big role for MOOCs in corporate
training and a number of paradigmatic presentations were given, including on the Microsoft MOOC
involving INSEAD,229 but most still felt strongly that there were university purposes and strong social
mission reasons (NGOs etc) for the deployment of MOOCs within the “free” paradigm (even if most
had sold out on “open” some time before).
Coursera
Coursera had been taking a different tack, following a sensible road that in fact several open
universities had already taken in moving from a modules approach to programmes – and in fact
following the lead of edX which started the pattern in September 2013 with Xseries.230 In January
2014 Coursera announced 10 “Specializations”, grouping courses together into programmes allowing
students to develop mastery in specific fields.231 Various useful partnerships were announced in
2014 and two further funding rounds in 2015232 so perhaps at the time Coursera did not feel under
strong financial pressure. Indeed in January 2015 Coursera had stated in an interview that “Verified
Certificates for both courses and specializations [are] the primary revenue source for us. This has
worked out really well because the number of course completers who are opting to earn a Verified
Certificate has climbed steadily from less than 10% to roughly 20% or 25%”.233
But new years bring new challenges and in January 2016 Coursera confirmed234 an earlier warning235
that with immediate effect in 2016 fees would introduced for “certain courses”. Actually it stated
“Most courses that are part of Specializations will begin offering this new experience this week”),
but only “if you’d like to submit required graded assignments and earn a Course Certificate”.
223 https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/udacity#/entity
224 https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bertelsmann/investments
225 https://www.udacity.com/nanodegree
226 http://fortune.com/2015/11/11/udacity-funding/
227 skiing and Star Wars phrases respectively
228 https://www.class-central.com/report/future-learning-2020-summit-2015/
229 as above – see the text on Microsoft
230 http://news.mit.edu/2013/mitx-introduces-xseries-course-sequence-certificates-on-edx
231 Coursera Specializations: Focused Programs in Popular Fields, Coursera blog, 20 January 2014 –
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/moocs-making-progress-hype-died/
http://coursera.tumblr.com/post/137649201147/an-update-on-enrollment-and-grading-options-on
http://coursera.tumblr.com/post/73994272513/coursera-specializations-focused-programs-in
232 August and October – https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/coursera/funding-rounds
233 The Hype is Dead, but MOOCs Are Marching On, Wharton blog, 5 January 2015 –
234 An update on enrollment and grading options on Coursera, Coursera blog, 19 January 2016 –
https://blog.coursera.org/post/131756940057/courseras-financial-aid-what-it-is-and-who-is
235 Verified Certificates ensure academic integrity, Coursera blog, 7 November 2015 –
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 57 31 March 2016
Wisely, it coupled this announcement with a link to its financial aid package, which it had updated
and clarified a few months earlier.236
Already in December 2015 edX had discontinued Certificates for all its learners.237 So by early 2016
all three main US MOOC providers had effectively discontinued free certificates.
Coursera is looked up to as the “commercial but ethical and pedagogically-aware” MOOC provider
and so the change to making students pay for graded assignments “wasn’t well received; with a
number of commentators complaining about the change on Coursera’s blog; the feedback loop of
assignments is an important part of what makes a MOOC different from OpenCourseWare”.238
One commentator, who had a developed a “no-pay MBA” approach239 round MOOCs wrote an
impassioned letter Dear Coursera, your new revenue model isn’t working for us.240 In it he makes
some useful suggestions as to how Coursera could earn money instead of charging for assessment.
These include:
Paid-for mentoring241
Paid-for assignments graded by experts (not computers or other students)
Industry connections and job placement.
The last is interesting because Coursera is already working with LinkedIn but we suspect the writer
was thinking about something more directed that what Coursera currently does.242 The first two are
interesting because almost any online or distance university would recognise these two roles as key
aspects of the role of “tutor”.
If Coursera adopted these changes it would bring it even closer to the university model, since in
many countries of Europe career advice and job placement are seen as vital services for universities
to provide for their students, given the current high levels of youth unemployment in many Member
States.
We suspect that Coursera will consider these suggestions and add them to the list of paid services it
offers, rather than draw back from its current decisions.
Carl Straumsheim (2016) has written a thoughtful article “The limits of open” on these issues, which
we commend to readers. In it he quotes the education writer Audrey Watters, who called the shift
“significant,” but also “inevitable”. He goes on to say about her:
In an email, she pointed out that Coursera has needed to develop a business model that
satisfies its investors -- “although I’m not fully convinced that this move will be it,” she
added.
Watters also said it is “striking” how strongly MOOC providers have believed their
certificates would become recognized credentials, either for educational or work-related
purposes.
We think it is interesting that Audrey Watters feels that there is at least one further pivot to come,
for Coursera at least.
In our poem, the Queen may clearly see the “road to fair Elfland” but how many others can?
236 Coursera’s Financial Aid: What it is and who is benefiting, Coursera blog, 23 October 2015 –
https://blog.coursera.org/post/102036391812/verified-certificates-ensure-academic-integrity
237 http://blog.edx.org/news-about-edx-certificates?track=blog
238 https://www.class-central.com/report/coursera-paywall-edx-discontinues-free-certificates/
239 https://www.nopaymba.com
240 22 March 2016 – https://www.nopaymba.com/open-letter-coursera/
241 https://www.class-central.com/report/coursera-mentor-guided-courses/
242 http://coursera.tumblr.com/post/66959529107/add-coursera-accomplishments-to-your-linkedin
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 58 31 March 2016
Debbie Morrison (2016) in her must-read article on MOOC business models in 2016 provides a
detailed analysis of Coursera’s announcements. She takes the view that Coursera still has more than
one revenue-generating strategy and takes a comparative approach to Coursera, edX, Udacity and
iversity (see below for iversity). Her key insight is:
Offering free, high-quality content on feature-rich digital platforms is not free for the MOOC
provider or the partnering institutions. Even though free appeared to be the end-goal of
MOOCs at the time of their launch in 2012. But free is not sustainable. The concept of
MOOCs is shifting to where the demand is – fee-based certificate courses and programs in
skill-specific areas, and corporate learning.
Our view is that it is an insoluble problem of capitalism that companies need funds and paying
customers. Which does leave thinkers with the eternal dilemma: when the public sector institutions
won’t innovate and companies can’t innovate and governments have run out of money, what is
society to do?
University income from MOOC aggregators
Public information is fragmentary and seems to be only from US institutions.
“Johns Hopkins University made at least $3.5 million in less than a year from the sale of
verified certificates for its Data Science Specialization”243
“HarvardX has more than three million enrollments on edX — the most enrollments out of
all universities on edX. Yet its revenue to date from id-verified certificates amount to only
$435,000. More than 80% of the HarvardX courses offer verified certificates.”244
Accreditation in the US
There are an increasing number of universities in the US offering “MOOC-based degrees”, either at
undergraduate or postgraduate level (Bachelor or Masters). MOOCs University, which “partners
with accredited higher education institutions worldwide to create ‘MOOCs to Academic Certification
and Degree’ pathways opportunities for the serious MOOC learner”,245 lists the following:246
1. Arizona State University & edX MOOC Platform: Global Freshman Academy247
2. Georgia Tech College of Computing, in collaboration with AT&T and Udacity: Online Masters
of Science in Computer Science248
3. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, in partnership with Coursera: Online MBA
(iMBA)249
4. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Online Masters of Computer Science in Data
Science (MCS-DS)250
5. The Texas State University System: MOOCs-based “Freshman Year for Free” Program251
There are undoubtedly more – in particular the “Freshman Year for Free” Program is designed by a
collaborative of universities, the Modern States Education Alliance.252
Common principles are that the programmes are accredited and that the cost of each programme is
a fraction of the cost of an apparently similar non-MOOC offering.
243 https://www.class-central.com/report/mooc-business-model/
244 https://www.class-central.com/report/coursera-paywall-edx-discontinues-free-certificates/
245 http://www.moocsuniversity.org/moocs-university-press.html
246 http://www.moocsuniversity.org/mooc-based-degrees.html
247 https://www.edx.org/gfa
248 http://www.omscs.gatech.edu
249 https://www.coursera.org/university-programs/imba/
250 https://cs.illinois.edu/news/mooc-based-ms-data-science
251 https://www.texastribune.org/2015/09/10/free-freshman-year-texas-state-will-try-it-out/
252 http://modernstates.org
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 59 31 March 2016
There are also an increasing number of vocational certificates being offered by Udacity, Coursera,
edX etc. Finally there are the beginnings of moves to have credit values (in US terms – ECTS in
European terms) assigned to some of these.
Ryan Craig (2016) argues253 that “degree exceptionalism will abate and degrees – starting with
master’s, but continuing with bachelor’s – will be one credential among many”, which he calls
“microdegrees”. Moreover:
They’ll be on a leveling playing field with a plethora of novel credentials offered in blended
and online modalities by colleges, universities, new postsecondary providers, bootcamps,
not-for-profit organizations, museums, libraries, enterprises and solo practitioners seeking
to disintermediate all of the above.
From his own experience with for-profit higher education in the US he is well aware of the role of
quality assurance in the accreditation of programmes and institutions. He suggests that the “current
patchwork of regional and national accreditation could expand or evolve to encompass
microdegrees.” Interestingly he records that “early microdegree providers seem to prefer to steer
clear of the entire accreditation/Title IV ecosystem”. (Note to non-US readers: Title IV is the US
student loan system.254 Some low-cost providers, such as UniversityNow,255 do steer clear of it since
the administrative burden on providers is considerable. It actually affects non-US universities256 too.)
However, opting out of Title IV is permissible – opting out of accreditation and quality is not.
Daniel Szpiro (2016) in a suspiciously similarly timed intervention, argues for a continuing role for
the accredited public providers and suggests an increased role for them in non-degree provision. He
argues that they have five advantages (the first four are summarised from much longer descriptions
by him), noting our italics:
1. MOOC aggregators (Coursera etc) are not universities: on the whole the subject knowledge
comes from staff at universities.
2. Most techno-pedagogic expertise in this domain also comes from staff at universities.
3. They are not competitors to face-to-face provision in traditional universities.
4. Even for non-degree and non-credit courses, traditional universities still enjoy a competitive
advantage with respect to recognition and credibility.
5. “Successful traditional universities and colleges have an existing tuition base from on-ground
courses that provides a financial foundation upon which to experiment and build
technology-facilitated offerings. In contrast, while they have received significant coverage in
the press, service providers like Udacity, Udemy, and Coursera are still struggling to finesse a
sustainable business model from the MOOC origins.”
As readers can see, most of the points are contestable and parameters also differ between
countries. In many European countries, elite universities show little interest in non-degree provision
or even in a wide range of vocational degrees (beyond the usual suspects of nursing, accountancy
etc) or short-cycle (ISCED 5) programmes. This would make a fascinating debate at a workshop.
However, on recognition he makes a telling point, often forgotten by enthusiasts for badges:
For a non-academic organization to offer a credential like a certificate of completion is
simple but potentially meaningless. We typically pay respect to credentials that are earned
through some form of assessment and verification. It is not clear that a “microcredential” or
“nanodegree” offered by a service provider will carry any more weight on a resume than a
list of books you read on your summer vacation without any form of credible assessment to
verify any learning that took place.
253 in an article dated 31 March 2016, the final day on which we took input for this Report
254 https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/about/data-center/student/title-iv
255 https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/10/08/universitynows-unique-approach-accreditation-and-federal-
financial-aid
256 http://www.ed.ac.uk/student-funding/financial-support/student-loans/usa/policy
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 60 31 March 2016
However, his criticism also points to a way that non-traditional providers can fix the problem –
effective assessment. And so we get back to recent Coursera decisions.
Finally he points out that accreditation has legal aspects.
On a related note, I can imagine a legal challenge for any non-accredited, non-academic
organization claiming it will grant a “nanodegree” for the completion of a course. Clearly
that organization would face a legal challenge if it were to claim it granted a “degree” so the
prefix “nano” does not change that.
As we showed earlier there are a number of US situations where institutions have been closed
because government or accrediting bodies were not satisfied with their procedures. It may be that in
the US once a university is accredited it can run any programme it wishes in any way it wishes. But in
those countries where programmes are accredited as well as institutions, a badly-delivered
programme could be a reputational or quality disaster for the whole institution.
Meanwhile in Europe
FutureLearn
Judged by current US MOOC commercial practice in early 2016, the business model in FutureLearn
might be thought by some as somewhat behind the curve. FutureLearn is a clear success in terms of
numbers (they quote over 3 million learners, including over 25% without degrees).257 In late 2015
the UK Open University put a further substantial sum into its funding258 – but a careful perusal of
public UKOU documents by an expert analyst with Funding Council experience concluded that it was
likely that their original business plan milestones had not all been achieved.259 In recent months
there have been indications260 of an expected pivot (to some degree) towards corporate and
professional training but no large-scale announcement had been made (at the time of finalising this
report).261
Iversity
Interestingly iversity is mentioned by several US analysts in the same breath as Udacity, etc –
whereas FutureLearn is not (nor are any EU projects, however successful). One has to assume that
this is because iversity is venture-funded whereas FutureLearn is a subsidiary company of the Open
University who so far have provided all of its funding – and although some commentators would not
approve, venture-funded MOOCs get most of the attention. In addition, and no doubt partly because
of the visibility and transparency needed to attract venture funding, more is known about iversity.
The company started as a VLE provider in 2008 but in 2012 had an ultra-pivot into a MOOC
aggregator. It now has 26 university partners, mainly in Germany but with groups in Italy and Russia,
a couple in the UK and single institutions in a few other European countries.262 Most courses are in
English or in German. In October 2015 it reached 1 million enrolments.263 The original business
model was to offer free courses but to earn revenue by the sale of Certificates.
257 https://about.futurelearn.com/press-releases/futurelearn-has-3-million-learners/, 1 February 2016
258 “Fast-track growth for social learning as OU builds on success of FutureLearn”, 12 November 2015 –
http://www3.open.ac.uk/media/fullstory.aspx?id=29550
259 In “A brief note on FutureLearn finance”, David Kernohan observes: “Of the milestones in their business model (that are
linked to capital allocation), we can intuit that they have failed to meet most of the final third. The announcement of this
new £13m of capital before the remainder of the initial allocation suggests that FutureLearn have not and will not meet
those final milestones, so a new business plan was required.” (http://followersoftheapocalyp.se/a-brief-note-on-
futurelearn-finance/, 12 November 2015)
260 “We’ll be developing greater support for learning in workplaces and in schools, and growing our range of professional
courses in areas such as healthcare, to address the huge demand for skills.”
(https://about.futurelearn.com/blog/welcoming-3-million-people-to-futurelearn/, 10 February 2016)
261 Added in proof: see https://www.futurelearn.com/workplace-learning
262 https://iversity.org/en/higher-education
263 https://iversity.org/en/pages/one-million-enrollments
Business models for opening up education
Paul Bacsich, Sero Consulting Ltd 61 31 March 2016
In June 2015 iversity made its own pivot towards professional development in companies, iversity
PRO, described264 as “a for-pay offering that complements the MOOC line. With its PRO line, iversity
is developing a large-scale portfolio of courses teaching business skills that every professional
needs.”
One of the launch PRO courses – Visual Thinking for Business265 – was developed with WHU (Otto
Beisheim School of Management), a private university in Germany.266 Interestingly several other
private universities in Germany are in iversity – along with University of Buckingham (UK) and
Madrid Open University (UDIMA) in Spain – but before readers jump to conclusions it should be
noted that several prestigious public universities and entrepreneurial but lower-rank public
universities are also members of iversity.
By March 2016 the iversity PRO had developed an “iversity for Business” direction with several
prestigious clients.267
It is reported that iversity has received $7.3 million in equity funding over 5 rounds with the last
round being in October 2015.268 This is a very small amount compared not only with the US MOOC
aggregators but also smaller than FutureLearn. Yet iversity has 26 partners and is well regarded,
being seen in some circles as more “European” than FutureLearn.
It is tempting to draw the conclusion that the business model for iversity is working well. One reason
may be the care that has gone into integration into the ECTS system. This was first announced269 as
long ago as September 2013 with two institutions:
Good news for all MOOC students on iversity: From now on, participants can obtain ECTS
credits in two of our courses – and more will follow. If you’re enrolled and pass the exam at
the end of the course, the professors will issue a certificate that your home university will
recognize – all over Europe!
Welcome to our first two ECTS-certified MOOCs:
In mid-October 2013, Prof. Marc Opresnik, from Lübeck University of Applied Sciences (FH
Lübeck), will launch his course “Fundamentals of Marketing”.
Prof. Oliver Vornberger, an e-learning and computer science expert at the University of
Osnabrück, will be giving a lecture on “Algorithms and Data Structures” in the summer term
2014.
There is a comprehensive set of FAQs on ECTS matters.270 However, many details seem not be
public, and as usual with credit transfer, much is left to the discretion of the institution considering
the credits that the student wishes to bring in from the provider.
The Eurydice (2013) summary report on Recognition of Prior Non-Formal and Informal Learning in
Higher Education has a useful map (Figure 3) describing the state of play in European countries, but
from our own experience the colouring, especially of the green countries, could be regarded as
optimistic.
264 https://iversity.org/en/pages/one-million-enrollments again
265 https://iversity.org/en/courses/visual-thinking-for-business-make-your-point
266 but highly ranked, with multiple business school accreditations and a joint Executive MBA programme with the
prestigious Kellogg Business School in the US – for more see https://www.whu.edu/en/
267 https://iversity.org/en/pages/iversity-digital-transformation-curriculum
268 https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/iversity#/entity and linked pages – details are sketchy compared with US
entities – but see https://iversity.org/en/pages/financing-round-in-the-millions for details of the funds that have invested
269 ECTS credits for MOOCs on iversity, iversity blog, 18 September 2013 – https://iversity.org/blog/ects-credits-moocs-
iversity/ – and further details at https://iversity.org/en/pages/moocs-for-credit
270