美国网络高等教育“极化”现象解读———基于斯隆联盟2013 年度报告的分析

Polarization Phenomenon of Online Higher Education in the United States

2014 年1 月，斯隆联盟发布2013 年度美国网络高等教育调研报告。该报告分为网络高等教育和MOOCs 两部分。通过分析，笔者发现，美国网络高等教育呈现“ 一热一冷”的“ 极化”现象。2013 年三分之一的美国在校生选择了网络教育课程，为历年最高，且网络教育的覆盖率与学校规模呈正相关。通过梳理斯隆联盟发布的2003 至2013 年度美国网络高等教育调研报告发现，11 年间美国网络高等教育的“ 热冶趋势表现在发展规模持续扩大、战略地位上升、教学质量不断提升。这主要得益于美国完善的教育制度保障和教学认证评估机制，也得益于政府、高校、企业间良性的合作。与之形成对比的是，近两年MOOCs 在美国高校遇冷，主要原因在于MOOCs 不符合美国高等教育的发展目标，且缺少可持续发展的运作模式。对中国而言，MOOCs 的初期发展需要政府支持，长远看需要选择恰当的运作模式。否则，MOOCs 会沦为一个教育概念而非良性的教学实践。

In January of 2014， the Sloan Consortium released 2013's annual research report titled， Grade Change:Tracking Online Education in the United States. This is the 11th research report from the Sloan Consortium on onlinehigher education. The report sets a new record of sampling， with a total of 2，831 college and universities participatingin the study (compared to 994 in 2003)， accounting for 59. 9% of the total institutions of higher education in the U-nited States， and reflects the importance of this Consortium.The report consists of two parts: online higher education and MOOCs. It reveals two contrary trends in America'sonline higher education. The survey shows that one -third of American students choose online education courses in2013， reaching the highest level in 11 years. The report also shows a positive correlation between the increases in on-line students and the size of the university. 82. 5% of colleges and universities implemented online higher education courses or programmes in 2013， which is a decrease from 86. 6% in 2012. The number of students is increased， butthe coverage of online higher education decreased. This is an issue worthy of study. The paper therefore analyzes elevenreports from the Sloan Consortium and summarizes the development of online higher education for the past decade.From 2003 to 2013， online higher education in the United States continues to expand. The strategic positioning of on-line education and the quality of teaching have also improved.The fast growth in enrollment during recent years can be attributed to: (i) The lower threshold comparing to tra-ditional higher education promotes students爷enrollment; (ii) Recent economic downturn presents greater tuition pres-sure for students， while online programmes or courses are relatively inexpensive; (iii) Online education appeals to theincreasing pool of students over 30 years old who need a higher level online education and (iv) obtain a broader de-velopment prospects; ( v) Federal restriction on financial aid for online students have been lifted in 2006， givingstudents of online education access to federal loans; and ( vi) In information society， the use of online learning hasbecome a way of life for younger generations. Universities are placing more and more emphasis on the strategic role ofonline higher education. The government is also playing an important role in regulation and accreditation， which re-sults in high quality of online programmes and courses.However， in 2013， MOOCs， which used to be seen as a revolution in the education sector， are in the “ cold冶zone. In 2013's annual report， American colleges and universities are reported to have many cautions when adoptingMOOCs.Although MOOCs and online higher education look similar， the two types of online education have significantdifferences. MOOCs typically differ from regular online courses in that the participants are not registered students.They are designed for unlimited participation and open access via the web， with no tuition charges. There is typicallyno credit given for completion of the MOOCs. From the perspective of the government and many universities，MOOCsdon't meet the development goals of higher education in the United States.Therefore， MOOCs are not part of America爷s higher education system， and they can not obtain government sup-port， from policy to funding. Most universities worry about the quality of the MOOCs. The report finds that universitiesoffering masters爷and doctoral degrees prefer MOOCs， because of their teaching models. However， a great majority ofAmerican Universities focus on bachelor degrees， which are not suitable for MOOCs.From the corporate point of view: MOOCs lacks a model of sustainable development. Compared to the U. S.higher education market， there are potentially high demands for MOOCs， but there has not formed a profit model.The development of MOOCs depends on the market demand， social recognition and profit model. The paper pro-poses three possible models: public service model， public not-for-profit model， and market-oriented model. Govern-ment， universities， enterprises need to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of these three models in order to findthe best fit.