Open RRU
An intrapreneurial venture to take Royal Roads University into open education:
Posted in: Uncategorized
-
David Vogt
Posted in: Uncategorized
Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
ETEC 522 – May 2012
Ventures in Learning Technology
-
Before you publish your posting, please make sure that you select a category (eg. Introductions) as well as assign some meaningful tags (keywords).
- c
- compose new post
- j
- next post/next comment
- k
- previous post/previous comment
- r
- reply
- o
- show/hide comments
- t
- go to top
- l
- go to login
- h
- show/hide help
- esc
- cancel
Dennis Pratt 8:08 pm on May 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Open RRU- The Way of the Future!
Yes, I would invest in this venture, even though there may not be much monetary investment involved. The venture is made to increase enrolment, staff satisfaction and create an open learning environment.
CEO and Team
The narrator gave a solid background about the campus and the university’s philosophy to learning. The narrator showed that the university is striving to lead the way in education through open course learning. The presentation was fairly professional with some minor editing needs but suited the need for the pitch.
Venture Concept
This venture plans to use open courseware to attract students and staff to the university through access to knowledge. They show how the students would benefit from open courseware and increase the standard of learning. It looks like they have thought through the details of moving from private to open courseware.
Marketability
Open courseware is the way of the future and I agree that marketing to students would b easier and more effective. Faculty could also be happy to see what others are teaching or what course they would be stepping into as they begin a career at Royal Roads University. They provide a website to go to for further information about the university, their programs and the open courses they provide.
Venture Plan
Having students enroll for classes and then get the credit for completing those classes creates a learning society as mentioned in the video. This brings money into the university through enrollment and word-of-mouth can increase that.
I see open courseware as need and know that most teacher are more than willing to share their creations with others as long as the others continue to improve upon them and share with even more people. I don’t know many teachers that are in education merely to get rich.
Dennis
Claire Burgoyne 9:17 pm on May 27, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Hi Dennis,
I was almost convinced by this pitch too but upon close analysis I found the venture plan to be at best lacking. From the pitch alone I was not certain whether Royal Roads has existing online courses and if so is the plan to make some of these public or is there a plan to create separate courses or units. In either case a plan for next steps and time frame isn’t presented.
dmcinnes 4:15 pm on June 2, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Response to Royal Roads Open Courseware pitch
I would invest in this venture. As Dennis stated earlier, I don’t believe there would be a large monetary investment involved, but the ‘value proposition’ has been clearly defined in the pitch.
To break it down by the facets of the pitch:
1. Pain Point- I believe that the pitch clearly demonstrates a gap in terms of increased student enrollment, faculty recruitment and increased marketing.
2. Solution- the pitch clearly explains how the gap, or problem can be resolved with a shift to Open Courseware, by allowing prospective students, and faculty members, to actually try coursework to evaluate whether or not they wish to enroll. It also showcases their level of quality education to enhance Royal Roads reputation while further penetrating their market presence.
3. Differentiation- Though the concept of open courseware isn’t unique, the comparison to following a lead by MIT, one of the most progressive and well-respected learning institutions in the world, shows a distinction between Royal Roads and most other universities.
4. Marketing- the concept of open courseware entails marketing within itself, and the pitch emphasized the pride RRU already has established in their content and their eagerness to showcase it more broadly.
5. Championship- RRU feels their work speaks for itself, and it is a matter of making that more freely available to people.
6. Competition- Despite RRU openly discussing that MIT was the groundbreaking institution to offer open courseware, they don’t envision them as competition. In fact, they clearly discuss the irony of a business model that offers its services for free and counter that it is a win-win situation for them and that they would be joining the ranks of MIT as a front-runner in this concept.
7. The Ask and the Return- two areas of the pitch that lack any content. Because of the uniqueness of this pitch, in terms of monetary investment, rather than just persuading EVAs to shift their paradigm of post-secondary education delivery, this may not be that important. The pitch does, however discuss the altruistic benefits of an open courseware university, and perhaps that is return enough.
Denise 9:47 pm on May 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
No I would not invest in this venture. I would like to, as the team have a credible concept and I personally can see altruistic and practical reasons for considering the venture. However there are significant aspects missing from the pitch.
Following the pitch criteria:
Pain point
I found it difficult to identify the market gap/problem the team were focusing on. Options that occurred to me included – The Uni is falling behind current education delivery? It needs more students? It needs more expert staff? The Uni needs to enhance its reputation?
Solution
Providing open education can improve:
Learner recruitment – no evidence of this given (just evidence that MIT’s online offerings increased)
Faculty recruitment – again no evidence given from other Unis who have done this
Enhance reputation –a likely assumption, but no evidence
Altruistic requirement to advance education – a good motivation but this cannot be a sole solution
Differentiation
It was not clear why people would use the Uni’s open courses over any others (see also competition)
Marketing – there was no focus on how the market would be reached, except possibly by joining the consortium.
Championship
The venture’s leaders and team seemed keen, but there was no evidence of the competency of the tam or the Uni to successfully achieve this venture.
Competition
MIT was mentioned as a success story, but only in terms of open course delivery and in no other way. In fact MIT and all the other Unis in the consortium could provide stiff competition. Or is the Consortium a way to create partners and leverage? This wasn’t developed.
The Ask
There was no next step or plan for the next 1-5 years. There was no indication provided of the finances or resources required.
The Return
I could see some possible returns in recruitment, reputation etc, but there is no evidence of likely financial returns and in fact there may be significant costs for the Uni.
So in summary in rating the four primary areas that as an EVA I would consider:
CEO and team (1)
Enthusiasm was conveyed. I would have liked to see more of the presenters themselves. As mentioned above, I was not sure who the team was or even whether the Uni already had the team expertise to achieve this venture, not the material resources required.
Venture concept (3)
Though not original the venture was in line with current education innovative delivery. It is feasible as other Unis have done this, but it was not clear how this Uni could achieve it.
Marketability (1)
There was no evidence of the market size or share and no innovative advantages to capture the market were clearly articulated.
Venture Plan (1)
There was no definition of success, articulation of a path or process and the length of time this process would take. Indeed at one point the presenters have encouraged me to “take the risk” which is not what I want to hear. I want a risk mediated by likely success if the plan is followed.
I would be keen to provide money and also expertise in the development but as an EVA, at this stage, I see more risk than success.
Denise
Claire Burgoyne 4:22 pm on May 27, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
No, I would not invest in this venture. Royal Roads has carefully crafted a presentation that provides a concise overview of the benefits to investing in open education. The question “What’s in it for me?” is answered with the explanation that open-courseware allows prospective students and faculty to experience the innovative programs Royal Roads offers. Wether I’m an administrator at the institution or an outside investor I am assured that open education is an effective marketing tool that will lead to increased enrollment bringing more dollars to this University. However, a venture plan is not included with the presentation preventing me from supporting this venture at this time.
CEO & Team:
The presenter displays both confidence and enthusiasm for this venture. The presentation is of a high calibre assuring me that her spoken message that Royal Roads offers innovative, technologically advanced courses is authentic. The pitch demonstrates the existence of a strong team with creative solutions.
Venture Concept:
While the venture is a modeled after existing ventures the concept is cutting edge with proven popularity amongst learners. In providing an overview of open education, beginning with the introduction of MIT open courses in 2001 and later to the development of an open-courseware consortium of over 200 institutions, the presentation addresses not only the success others have had with open education but where the opportunity lies for Royal Roads to break into this market.
Marketability
Providing open-courseware provides opportunity for Royal Roads to showcase work aiding in the task of marketing courses. Without the inclusion of open-courseware the university looses an advantage in recruiting students. This venture doesn’t have a primary goal of providing courses to compete directly with other open-courseware. The principle goal is to provide a glimpse into programs and Royal Roads while a secondary goal is to contribute to the growth of a learning society.
Venture Plan
What’s not clear in this pitch is a plan outlining when Royal Roads intends to begin providing open-courseware. The pitch indicates that the university has a clear picture of successful open-courseware ventures but it does not provide a plan as to when and how it will launch it’s own venture.
With an overview to answer questions regarding the venture plan this pitch will be complete and worthy of a second review.