For the last 6 weeks I’ve been a part of the fun experiment that is P2PU. I’ve been a student on a course and given the founders helpful (I hope) information about how in my day job we support students at a local level. There’s a rash of similar systems springing up, feeding on the bloom of quality open educational resources (OERs) and various governments’ decisions to either cut H.E funding or fund open initiatives like P2PU. It looks like some are very much better than others, and I think most will be short lived. But I’m convinced that good ones will keep appearing and that they’ll be the death of a freemium approach in H.E, before it’s even really happened. Or to be more precise, that freemium models will be consumed only at their free levels, and profit only from advertising revenue. Even accreditation fees will be too thin to matter.
The first presentation of P2PU courses is probably best thought of as an Alpha-test, a proof of concept. There were always going to be major teething troubles and unless they look to be inherent in the model, I’ll ignore them here. With that in mind, I can summarise what P2PU does well, and at what cost.
First the model. If you can find good course leaders –and they don’t need to be subject experts– the model is excellent. Course leaders need the skill to plan attractive areas of learning, at an appropriate level, to an attainable but challenging timetable. Then they need to be able to take control of online discussion. On my particular course the level was good; I’d call the level ‘basic undergraduate’. But the amount of planned content was over-ambitious; we could have studied half the one-week blocks, for two weeks each. This could be rectified by the class though, in discussion with the leader[1]. So this is a model for people who are already confident self-directed learners, remembering that as the study is unacredited, the level and the choice of topics matters more than the amount of content covered.
It may be because I’m an MA student, with the nightmare of the MHRA Style Guide squatting over everything I write, but I found the freedom to escape scholarly conventions really shiny. This was a relaxed scholarly atmosphere. The course leader (again) can explain the need for sources to be made explicit, but it’s good not to have to set them out in a way that punishes you for missing a comma. So this isn’t a system that promotes the finesse of scholarly work.
One of the things I enjoyed most about P2PU was the freedom to experiment with educational approaches. Our course leader wanted to try a Problem Based Learning approach and that’s what we’ve stuck to, with tweaks and variations. It worked for us and if it hadn’t, we’d have tried something else. The model is good for those capable of meta-learning about their learning.
This sort of learning depends on free content. And with the advent of OERs, there’s never going to be a shortage of learning materials. On the week we studied game theory I found I could watch an entire Yale course on the topic. It was tens of hours and quickly got to a level far beyond what I needed. But it met my immediate need and whet my appetite for maths. Students need the information literacy to find their way around the OERs, but they’ll never find their ‘textbooks’ thin, or uninteresting.
The P2PU student I’ve profiled so far already engages in active, reflective self-learning and has an interest in playing with that process. The model may not be for novice self-educators, even if it’s for subject novices.
If the system has a problem, it’s delivery of the peer group sessions. My class used traditional synchronous chat, but it was really clunky. None of the free, accessible alternatives seem to be quite the ticket. Elluminate, which we use at work, looked ideal but is expensive[2]. As I write Google’s Wave is breaking, and that type of system may be the answer, along with voip voice solutions. I’ve no doubt this will get sorted out though, by each course in its own way.
In summary: this type of learning works, and it’s at legitimate H.E level. Course leaders don’t need to be subject experts and there’ll be no shortage of people wanting to share their passions for free. Among those there’ll always be a subset –course leaders and students– with the skills to make this sort of system work. So there’s a quandary for established H.E: will those same people pay anything at all to support the non-free sections of any ‘freemium’ approach they might offer? Let me answer that this way: I’ll be happy to buy and wear a P2PU t-shirt, but that’s because I’m proud of what our group put in to our learning. The only people wearing those shirts for ‘freemium’ providers will be the teams that create and run them.
—————
[1] We didn’t mess with the structure of this first course in this experimental stage – we all want to see how this works as-planned at this point.
[2] This came as a shock, because I thought it was free, and kept pushing the idea of using it. Oops!
Posted by michaelpenman