Podcasts about opms

We're pleased to have with us this week Phil Hill, a seasoned expert in educational technology and market analysis who writes regularly for his On EdTech newsletter. Phil shares his extensive experience in consulting and analyzing market trends, particularly in the context of the current financial challenges facing higher education and EdTech companies. Phil shares relevant insights about global higher ed from his podcast, Online Education Across the Atlantic. They also discuss the recent bankruptcies and acquisitions in the sector, the ongoing enrollment crisis, and the potential for future innovation and investment in education technology.Guest Name: Phil Hill - Blogger, Speaker, and Market Analyst at Phil Hill & AssociatesGuest Social: LinkedInGuest Bio: Phil Hill has been a market analyst and consultant in EdTech for over two decades. He is most notably recognized for publishing the On EdTech blog and newsletter, which began in 2019 after he decided to separate from the e-Literate brand and blaze his own trail. Revered for his honest and upfront take on market trends for online / hybrid education, OPMs, and learning platforms, Phil provides thoughtful and practical advice to his clients. His unique graphics and visuals have been widely used and shared in the education space. Phil is also a husband, father, and grandfather. He enjoys being outdoors, spending time with his Australian Shepard, craft beer, and live music. - - - -Connect With Our Host:Dustin Ramsdellhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/dustinramsdell/https://twitter.com/HigherEd_GeekAbout The Enrollify Podcast Network:The Higher Ed Geek is a part of the Enrollify Podcast Network. If you like this podcast, chances are you'll like other Enrollify shows too! Some of our favorites include Generation AI and I Wanna Work There. Enrollify is made possible by Element451 — the next-generation AI student engagement platform helping institutions create meaningful and personalized interactions with students. Learn more at element451.com.Element451 is hosting the AI Engage Summit on Oct 29 and 30Register now for this free, virtual event.The future of higher ed is being redefined by the transformative power of AI. The AI Engage Summit brings together higher ed leaders, innovators, and many of your favorite Enrollify creators to explore AI's impact on student engagement, enrollment marketing, and institutional success. Experience firsthand how AI is improving content personalization at scale, impacting strategic decision-making, and intuitively automating the mundane tasks that consume our time. The schedule is packed with real examples and case studies, so you leave knowing how to harness AI to drive meaningful change at your institution. Whether you're looking to enhance student outcomes, optimize enrollment marketing, or simply stay ahead of the curve, the AI Engage Summit is your gateway to the next level of higher education innovation. Registration is free, save your spot today.

Phil Hill, publisher of the On EdTech newsletter at Phil Hill Associates and EdTech expert, joins Dr. Drumm McNaughton to discuss the current state of educational technology, focusing on the recent bankruptcy of 2U, a major Online Program Management (OPM) provider and its implications for higher education. Hill shares insights on regulatory changes, the evolving OPM market, and strategies for university leaders to navigate these challenges. Key Discussion Points EdTech Landscape and Regulatory Changes: Shift in government approach from supporting innovation to increased skepticism towards EdTech vendors. New regulations targeting online education, including virtual campus requirements and mandatory attendance tracking. Potential overhaul of state authorization reciprocity agreements (SARA) and its impact on cross-state online program offerings. 2U Bankruptcy and OPM Market Implications: Analysis of 2U's bankruptcy filing, including debt reduction and ownership transfer. Implications for higher education institutions partnering with OPMs, including risk management and reputational concerns. The need for institutions to reassess OPM partnerships and consider alternative models for online program delivery. Cybersecurity in Higher Education: Increasing cybersecurity threats in the education sector. Shift towards comprehensive solutions from larger vendors for better accountability and insurance coverage. Elevation of cybersecurity to a board-level concern, especially for institutions with large endowments. Future of Online Education: Continued importance of online and hybrid education for institutional growth and student access. Need for innovation in program delivery while ensuring regulatory compliance. Focus on student outcomes and employability to demonstrate the value of online programs. Strategic Adaptation for Higher Education Institutions: Importance of comprehensive risk management strategies covering OPM partnerships, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. Need for ongoing monitoring of student outcomes and program performance. Emphasis on leveraging existing technologies effectively across institutions. Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards Implement comprehensive risk management strategies that encompass OPM partnerships, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. Focus on demonstrating strong student outcomes and program effectiveness in online education. Engage actively in regulatory discussions and advocate for institutional interests during negotiated rulemaking and public comment periods. Final Thoughts The episode concludes with a call for higher education leaders to stay informed about the evolving EdTech landscape and take proactive steps to manage risks and opportunities. Despite the challenges, online and hybrid education remain critical areas for institutional growth and student access in an increasingly digital and competitive environment.   Read the transcript on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/the-state-of-edtech-opms-2u-bankruptcy-implications/ #EdTech #HigherEducation #OPMs #2UBankruptcy About Our Podcast Guest Phil Hill, publisher of Phil on EdTech Blog and partner at MindWires LLC. Phil has been a market analyst and consultant in EdTech for over two decades. He is most notably recognized for writing his blog, On EdTech. Phill Hill on LinkedIn →   About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton's approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

EAB's Val Fox and Jennie Bailey take a fresh look at the relationship between universities and OPMs, companies that partner with schools to help them develop and market online programs. The two offer tips on how to exit a relationship with an OPM that is no longer generating sufficient value. They also outline steps schools should follow to help them transition to a more effective growth strategy.

Happy Summer! This June, five coding bootcamps announced cohorts that will be fully or partially funded through grants (read: FREE to you)! A coding bootcamp landed a one-million dollar fundraise in Tennessee, and two interesting partnerships with coding bootcamps were announced. We're rounding up the latest about diversity in tech initiatives, and how higher ed is adapting to current demands with microcredentials and revised programs through OPMs. Plus, learn more about the 5 coding bootcamps we added to the Course Report listings this June. https://bit.ly/3xwPday

In this season 7 wrap-up episode of Future U., Jeff and Michael go to a rapid-fire format and break down six topics in higher education: recent enrollment trends, the state of online education and OPMs, the ongoing FAFSA issues, campus protests related to the Israel-Hamas conflict, the increasing focus on value in higher education, and recent developments in compensating college athletes. This episode is made possible with support from Ascendium Education Group and the Gates Foundation.Relevant LinksThe Great MisalignmentKey Moments(00:00) Enrollment Challenges and the Future of Higher Education(07:06) The Growth of Online Education and Challenges in the OPM Market(09:23) The Long-Term Impact of FAFSA on Enrollment and Financial Aid(10:48) Campus Protests: A Continuing Issue in Higher Education(13:07) Blending High School and College: Creating Value in Education(16:02) The NCAA Settlement and the Future of College Athletics Season 8 Planning Surveyhttps://bit.ly/3Xtcfd0Connect with Michael Horn:Sign Up for the The Future of Education NewsletterWebsiteLinkedInX (Twitter)ThreadsConnect with Jeff Selingo:Sign Up for the Next NewsletterWebsiteX (Twitter)ThreadsLinkedInConnect with Future U:TwitterYouTubeThreadsInstagramFacebookLinkedInSubmit a question and if we answer it on air we'll send you Future U. swag!Sign up for Future U. emails to get special updates and behind-the-scenes content.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed podcast, listeners will gain an insightful overview of how technology is reshaping the EdTech arena and the potential risks of the current state of OPMs.   Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses contemporary EdTech trends and predictions with Phil Hill, publisher of Phil on EdTech Blog and partner at MindWires LLC. They explore topics ranging from the recent changes in the OPM market due to enrollment, regulations, and cost of money, the potential transformations brought about by generative AI in higher education, to how universities can navigate the existential changes impacting them.   Key Discussion Points EdTech Trends and Predictions:  The recent shifts in the Online Program Management (OPM) market influenced by enrollment trends, regulations, and financial aspects. The growing importance of technology in education, breaking down traditional departmental silos, and leveraging technology to create specialized programs catering to specific student needs.   Significant Changes in the OPM Market: Challenges facing major OPM providers like 2U, Pearson, Wiley, and Academic Partnerships, including financial crises and market exits. The impact of these challenges on higher education institutions, particularly those heavily reliant on OPMs for their online offerings.   Risk Management and Planning: The essential role of enterprise risk management in navigating the current upheavals in higher education. The need for institutions to develop internal capabilities to manage tasks traditionally outsourced to OPMs.   Role of AI in Education: The transformative potential of generative AI in education, moving beyond current models to potentially revolutionize content creation and delivery. Challenges related to accreditation and quality assurance with the rise of personalized and dynamically generated educational content.   Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards:  Embrace Existential Change: Recognize the current challenges as opportunities to innovate and reach new student groups. Humility in the Face of Generative AI: Acknowledge the transformative impact of AI and be prepared for continuous learning and adaptation. Breaking Down Silos: Foster collaboration both within and outside institutions to develop comprehensive solutions to emerging challenges.   Final Thoughts This episode offers a rich and comprehensive overview of the current state and future prospects of EdTech. The insights shared by Phil Hill are invaluable for higher education leaders seeking to navigate the rapidly changing landscape. Understanding the trends, challenges, and opportunities discussed will be imperative for institutions aiming to stay ahead and mitigate risk in a technology-driven educational environment.   Read the transcript and show summary on our website →    About Our Podcast Guest Phil Hill, publisher of Phil on EdTech Blog and partner at MindWires LLC.   About the Host  Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services, visit his firm's website: https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader's Social Media Links  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #EdTech #OPMs #HigherEducation #GenerativeAI #StateofHigherEd

Rebecca Williams, narrates her blog written for the Dementia Researcher website. Experience the magic of neuroscience this holiday season with Rebecca's blog. In a heartwarming tale set against the backdrop of Christmas morning, discover the fascinating world of Magnetoencephalography, or MEG, as it unveils the secrets of the brain's inner workings. Join the journey as Rebecca takes you through the challenges and wonders of neuroscience, where magnetic fields, superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs), and optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs) are the stars of the show. While Santa may not be delivering a million-pound MEG scanner down the chimney, OPMs offer a promising future, bringing us one step closer to understanding the brain's mysteries with their portability and sensitivity. This holiday season, unwrap the gift of knowledge and explore the exciting possibilities of neuroimaging. MEGry Christmas to all, and to all a good night! Find the original text, and narration here on our website. https://www.dementiaresearcher.nihr.ac.uk/blog-megry-christmas-to-all/ -- Rebecca Williams is PhD student at the University of Cambridge. Though originally from ‘up North' in a small town called Leigh, she did her undergraduate and masters at the University of Oxford before defecting to Cambridge for her doctorate researching Frontotemporal dementia and Apathy. She now spends her days collecting data from wonderful volunteers, and coding. Outside work, she plays board games, and is very crafty. @beccasue99 -- Enjoy listening? We're always looking for new bloggers, drop us a line. http://www.dementiaresearcher.nihr.ac.uk This podcast is brought to you in association with Alzheimer's Association, Alzheimer's Research UK, Alzheimer's Society and Race Against Dementia, who we thank for their ongoing support.

Sam & Lucas discuss the logistics of using OPMs to buy real estate. They break down the process, pros, and cons. ⁠www.fasterfreedom.com/resources

Is your institution ready for all of the changes impacting online teaching and learning?  In this new IngenioUs Mini episode, we speak with Bay Path University Senior Director of Learning Design and Educational Technology, Dave Allen about the upcoming Leading Edge Thinking webinar he is facilitating on July 19 from 12 - 1:15 pm (EST). Joined by a panel of leading e-learning thinkers and leaders, topics to be addressed include: What are the key forces shaping the future of online learning and why should this matter to your institution? How is the online learner experience changing and what can we expect going forward? What do campus leaders need to know so that online learners will be well supported? Are OPMs still a viable option?  What do you need to know about the changing business model for OPMs? How might your campus best organize to support online learning in the future?   Why are micro-credentials and alternate pathways an increasingly important strategy for colleges and universities? What opportunities and future trends might your campus leverage to broaden appeal and build enrollment? All registrants will receive a link to the webinar recording following the event.  Listen in for a brief overview of this free webinar and register here. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/chelip/message

As institutions look to grow and diversify programs and revenue ahead of the projected enrollment cliff, online education has become even more critical to the enrollment arsenal. But for many campuses, scaling online education efficiently - and quickly - can be a substantial undertaking with significant cost and resource implications. One solution? Work with an online program management (OPM) company. In this episode, The NAGAP Report co-host Marcus Hanscom sits down with Ray Lutzky, Vice President of University Partnerships at Academic Partnerships, an OPM, to demystify OPM companies and challenge the misconceptions surrounding their role in graduate education. Join us as we examine the complexities, benefits, and challenges associated with partnering with OPM companies, shedding light on the decision-making process for institutions seeking to enhance their online offerings.

Happy Summer! This June, we saw a big fundraise for a European bootcamp, and two large OPMs reacting to the latest guidance from the Department of Education. With skills-based hiring gaining momentum, there was more news about workforce development programs (read: free technical training for you!). Plus, we'll let you know about the 9 new coding bootcamps that we added to the Course Report directory in June. https://www.coursereport.com/blog/june-2023-coding-bootcamp-news

EAB's Carla Hickman joins David Kuehl to trace the evolution of online program managers and offer advice to today's university leaders on how to partner with OPMs to boost online enrollment. Carla and David explore the current regulatory environment as well as different contract models that minimize upfront costs without sacrificing long-term revenue growth potential. The two also urge listeners to build accurate financial models to help you forecast when your OPM partnership should begin generating net profits.

The role of Online Program Managers (OPMs) in the recruitment of students for online university programs has been a controversial issue, and one that is still up for debate. Michael and Jeff delve into OPMs, as well the federal government's guidance on third party services, like OPMs, over the last few administrations.Relevant LinksWhat's the OPM Episode?The Credential Cluster

The Department of Education's forthcoming guidance on third-party servicers and online program managers (OPMs) is shining a spotlight on contracts created to expand online academic offerings. Why did these relationships grow dramatically during the pandemic, and why are they needed now? Kelly Otter, dean of the School of Continuing Studies at Georgetown University, joins the podcast to explain. Jon, Sarah, and Mushtaq get into the Supreme Court hearing that could determine the fate of President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness initiative and other happenings in Washington. Tweet suggestions, links, and questions to @ACEducation or podcast@acenet.edu.  Here are some of the links and references from this week's show: Introduction:  On Student Loan Forgiveness, Conservative Justices Skeptical of Biden Plan The Washington Post (sub. req.) | Feb. 28, 2023 Plan B To Cancel Student Loan Debt? The White House Won't Go There Even as Pressure Mounts USA Today (sub. req.) | March 4, 2023 Fact Sheet: The President's Budget: Extending Medicare Solvency by 25 Years or More, Strengthening Medicare, and Lowering Health Care Costs The White House | March 7, 2023 House Republicans Introduce ‘Parents Bill of Rights' Aimed at Oversight in Education CNN | March 2, 2023 House Panel To Consider GOP Bill Banning Transgender Women, Girls From Team Sports The Hill | March 6, 2023 Conversation with Kelly Otter: USC Pushed a $115,000 Online Degree. Graduates Got Low Salaries, Huge Debts. The Wall Street Journal (sub. req.) | Nov. 9, 2021 GAO Takes Moderate Stance on Online Program Providers Inside Higher Ed | May 6, 2022 Request for Extension on Third-Party Servicers Comment Deadline ACE | Feb. 23, 2023 Competing Models Among OPM Providers Inside Higher Ed | Oct. 25, 2017

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2022.12.21.521184v1?rss=1 Authors: Rier, L., Michelmann, S., Ritz, H., Shah, V., Hill, R. M., Osborne, J., Doyle, C., Holmes, N., Bowtell, R., Brookes, M. J., Norman, K. A., Hasson, U., Cohen, J. D., Boto, E. Abstract: Magnetoencephalography with optically pumped magnetometers (OPM-MEG) offers a new way to record electrophysiological brain function, with significant advantages over conventional MEG including adaptability to head shape/size, free movement during scanning, better spatial resolution, increased signal, and no reliance on cryogenics. However, OPM-MEG remains in its infancy, with significant questions to be answered regarding optimal system design and robustness. Here, we present an open-source dataset acquired using a newly constructed OPM-MEG system with a triaxial sensor design averaging 168 channels. Using OPM-optimised magnetic shielding and active background-field control, we measure the test-retest reliability of the human connectome. We employ amplitude envelope correlation to measure whole-brain functional connectivity in 10 individuals whilst they watch a 600 s move clip. Our results show high repeatability between experimental runs at the group level, with a correlation coefficient of 0.81 in the theta, 0.93 in alpha and 0.94 in beta frequency ranges. At the individual subject level, we found marked differences between individuals, but high within-subject robustness (correlations of 0.56 {+/-} 0.25, 0.72 {+/-} 0.15 and 0.78 {+/-} 0.13 in theta, alpha and beta respectively). These results compare well to previously reported findings using conventional MEG; they show that OPM-MEG is a viable way to characterise whole brain connectivity and add significant weight to a growing argument that OPMs can overtake cryogenic sensors as the fundamental building block of MEG systems. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info Podcast created by Paper Player, LLC

You don't want to use a cookie cutter approach when it comes to recruiting students, but you also don't have the resources to craft messages for individuals. This is where technology comes in. Ray Lutzky of Academic Partnerships shares his thoughts on OPMs and new and emerging technology in the higher ed space. Connect with Ray: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lutzky/ Welcome to the Higher Ed Demand Gen Podcast. We offer you the opportunity to listen to higher education marketing leaders share knowledge about learnings, strategies, and tactics that are relevant now. See what you can learn today by listening to one of our episodes. Concept3D helps Higher Ed Leaders create location-driven interactive mapping and virtual tour experiences that engage your students, showcase your university, and effectively tell your story.

Welcome Back! Thank you so much for joining us! This episode we discuss the most recent slew of wrongful death lawsuits filed. The big case being out of Georgia where lawyers have filed numerous charges against over a dozen defendants, including the AKA and Mac Haddow, OPMS and their numerous companies and managers, along with distributors and two separate stores that sold the deceased, Ethan Pope, kratom. These cases are complex. Some charges seem to have merit while others simply don't. They all share the same frightening theme of providing no scientific supporting data and for the most part seemingly excuse all personal responsibility. Rather we're now seeing “FDA said” permeate from sloppy media reporting into court rooms. These cases have the potential to destroy untold number of lives of kratom companies, consumers, sellers and their extended families. On Twitter, daily, I've been inviting any member of KDA onto the podcast to talk. I really would like to better understand their side and rational regarding their intended goal of scheduling kratom. We know prohibition has never and will never work, and only exasperates the problems they claim to be fixing. We know that drug laws are victimless “crimes” only enforceable by means of violence and deadly force against peaceful people who've harmed nobody. How will destroying the lives of millions of consumers and extended family members, innocent children and elderly going to help anything? If you are in KDA please get in touch. I simply want to talk and try to find middle ground to keep consumers safe. If your goal is to keep people safe then we should be working together to reach our intended goals. If you would like to be involved in the local donations in any manner, or if you would like to be a guest or sponsor of the show please contact us at kratomguyshow@gmail.com or call/ text (617) 917-5242 Enjoy the show! This episode is sponsored by: Your Leaf Your Life ‘See the difference, smell the difference and feel the difference, because it's your leaf and your life' https://yourleafyourlife.com Use the link above or coupon code kratomguyshow to save 10% off your first purchase AND help to support the show! https://bit.ly/YLYL-KratomGuy Music by: Lion Heights Track: “Dread Step” https://lionheights.com Sources: https://www.carlsonattorneys.com/news-and-update/kratom-death-lawsuit https://www.facebook.com/profile/1277874888/search/?q=kratom https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8504575/ https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/grapefruit-juice-and-some-drugs-dont-mix https://www.scribd.com/document/602892950/2022-10-20-Amended-Complaint-Pope-v-Kratom#fullscreen&from_embed https://www.drugs.com/interactions-check.php?drug_list=679-0,1303-0&types%5B%5D=major&types%5B%5D=minor&types%5B%5D=moderate&types%5B%5D=food&types%5B%5D=therapeutic_duplication&professional=1 https://www.wfirm.com/practice-areas/kratom-personal-injury-and-false-advertising-claims/#_ftn4 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-022-06244-z? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A5zpb1tkUnlQaVRChOJdU6WhJmva5Mi0DJJZGVD8gqM/edit --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/kratom-guy-show/message

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Phil Hill, a top expert on educational technology and online project management, to discuss the current—disrupted—state of the industry and the answers college and university presidents must come up with to survive the existential questions facing institutions today. Podcast Highlights Unlike their predecessor MOOCs, OPMs are here to stay. Now mainstream throughout higher education, OPMs are disrupting business as usual in several areas, including accreditation and regulation, institutional governance and marketing, and risk management. Case studies like 2U and Zovia can provide higher ed leaders with valuable lessons for navigating the OPM waters. To survive—much less, to thrive—as the OPM competition continues to soar, institutions need to take a hard look at their core competencies and strengths that could make them stand out and attract students. To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-opm-marketplace-transformation/ #HigherEdTransformation #HigherEdOPM #HigherEducation Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Higher Education Board Governance expert. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm's website, https://changinghighered.com/. The Change Leader's Social Media Links LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com  

Welcome to Season 2 of This Week in Edtech!Guest: Matthew Tower, Principal @ Workshop Venture PartnersSubscribe to Matt's weekly newsletter @ https://matthewtower.substack.com/Topics This Week:Byju'sLayoffs, debt, litigation!?Bearish OPMsPhil Hill: ”The brutal spring and summer for OPMs & MOOCs”Zovio sells OPM business to University of Arizona Global Campus2U Layoffs + tuition share agreementsFunding LandscapeHolonIQ – Global Edtech Funding 2022 H1MetaverseCollege in the metaverse is here. Is higher ed ready?Time Magazine cover + Meta ads Classdojo raises $125MMCrypto & Web3Pearson plans to sell its textbooks as NFTsDAOs - the new LLCs?Also check out our weekly newsletter @ https://edtechinsiders.substack.com/

It's Thursday and you know what that means... The affiliate marketing podcast is dropping another amazing episode for all you wonderful listeners. This week we have Chief Executive at Moonpull, Steven Brown. Steve Brown founded and runs Moonpull, the affiliate sector specialist that is tracking affiliate tracking for networks, publishers, OPMs and advertisers to keep affiliate marketing working.  Steven has been an affiliate industry leader since 2000 when he led the team that founded buy.at - the technically innovative network - that introduced many concepts to affiliate marketing that are now taken for granted.  He has worked with a number of leading publishers in the UK, with his contribution to UK affiliate marketing being recognised with the presentation of the 'Industry Ambassador' award at the 'Performance Marketing Awards' in 2016.Listen to find out more about: The struggles that some affiliate managers used to go through compared to today's generationSteven gives an in-depth description about Moonpull Steven discusses why he is going to the ELEVATE event and the value of the event[01:00] - Steven discusses his long-standing experience within the affiliate industry [07:00] - What does MoonPull actually do? Listen here to find out [14:30] - Lee-Ann discusses the importance of understanding your conversion rate [28:00] - Listen to hear Steven's perspective on what he would have liked to have seen progress more in the affiliate industry Rate, Review & Subscribe on Apple Podcasts“I love AffiliateINSIDER's Affiliate Marketing Podcast.”

In this episode Bill looks at the history of the business models in higher education in America and contrasts the pros and cons of not-for-profit vs. for profit, as well as hybrids like OPMs. EdUp Insights with Bill Pepicello is part of the EdUp Experience Podcast Network!

In this episode Claire is joined by Ryan O'Hare,  CEO Asia-Pacific for Keypath Education, to discuss how online education is changing and how online program managers (OPMs) like KeyPath help traditional education institutions expand their offerings and attract new students.------------------------------------------The ‘What now? What next?' podcast recognises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as Australia's traditional custodians. In the spirit of reconciliation we are proud to recommend John Briggs Consulting as a leader in Reconciliation and Indigenous engagement. To find out more go to www.johnbriggs.net.au

This fast-paced show drops listeners into a compelling conversation about higher education. In Your Element asks innovative leaders about the challenges, wins, and future of everything from meeting enrollment numbers to equity in education.On this episode of In Your Element, Eric Stoller has a wide-ranging conversation with Josh Moody, education reporter for US News and World Report. Tune into this episode to learn:What prediction about how Covid would affect colleges was the most off?How the rise of OPMs has impacted higher education.What will become of tests like the SAT and ACT in a test-optional future?The lessons four year institutions can learn from the community college model in a post-pandemic job market.What technological changes institutions must implement in order to cater to today's student.Learn more about this episode in our show notes.

Is it possible to start a business with little to no money? In today's show, Spencer and Kim talked about OPMs. They shared what are the different deals on how OPM works. Spencer and Kim also discussed the different sources of capital and where you can get the funding to start your own business. Best-selling author Kim Butler and Spencer Shaw show you how to take more control of your finances. Tune in to The Prosperity Podcast to learn more about Prosperity Thinkers thinking and strategies today! Do you have a question you would like answered on the show? Please send it to us at hello@prosperitythinkers.com and we may answer it in an upcoming episode. Links and Resources from this Episode For resources and additional information of this episode go to https://prosperitythinkers.com/podcasts/  Show Notes What is OPM? - 0:31 Why Spencer thought about OPM. - 2:10 Different deals on how OPM works. 4:22 Depending on who your OPM is, they care about the mind more about the money. - 5:09 Another aspect of money. - 9:09 Different OPMs and where can source capital. - 10:14 One of the most unique ideas recently. - 12:45 Special Listener Gift Free eBook: Financial Planning Has Failed Kim Butler's groundbreaking eBook/ audiobook explains why typical financial advice may be sabotaging your wealth... and what to do instead! Review and Subscribe If you like what you hear please leave a review by clicking here Subscribe on your favorite podcast player to get the latest episodes. iTunes Stitcher RSS

Podcast Summary Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Cynthia Jackson-Hammond, CEO of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, about accreditation's role as higher education institutions continue to institute change in response to economic and societal turbulence. Podcast Highlights CHEA is a non-governmental organization that is focused on academic quality, quality assurance, transparency to the public, and ensuring that institutions and their programs are following their mission. Even with the rise in OPMs, colleges and universities are ultimately responsible for providing guidance in the curriculum design, which is part of the university's role of self-regulating of its programs. Diversity, equity, and inclusion continue to be important in higher education, but accreditors are looking for evidence of DEI, such as faculty inclusion, retraining of faculty in teaching methods, or campus enrollment practices. To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/prepare-for-changes-in-higher-ed-accreditation/ Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.  The Change Leader's Social Media Links Website: https://changinghighered.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Podcast Summary Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Mike Goldstein, managing director and co-creator of the Center for Higher Education Transformation at Tyton Partners, about how the pandemic has accelerated change in higher education and some of the trends that are emerging. Podcast Highlights Higher education is experienced a burst of rapid acceleration that is in line with the evolutionary theory describing punctuated equilibrium. These types of acceleration are caused by a cataclysmic event, which in this case is the COVID-19 pandemic. Many institutions that were forced to adopt online learning because of the pandemic are now looking to create a hybrid model that merges the best of online and in-person instruction. This acceleration also may change the way that higher education uses outsourcing. In some cases, institutions are starting to build internal capacity in relation to OPMs. In other instances, institutions are considering outsourcing core academic functions. To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.  The Change Leader's Social Media Links: Website: https://changinghighered.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Sponsor: Perdia Education

If you like what Bill Held has to say check out the full episode here. Follow the Mass Construction Show here: Linkedin Instagram Twitter Facebook Intro music by Sound Revolution --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/joekelly/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/joekelly/support

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2020.09.25.313502v1?rss=1 Authors: Boto, E., Hill, R. M., Rea, M., Holmes, N., Seedat, Z. A., Leggett, J., Shah, V., Osborne, J., Bowtell, R., Brookes, M. J. Abstract: Optically-pumped magnetometers (OPMs) offer the potential for a step change in magnetoencephalography (MEG) enabling wearable systems that: provide improved data quality; accommodate any subject group; allow data capture during movement and offer a reduction in costs. However, OPM-MEG is still a nascent technology and, to realise its potential, it must be shown to facilitate key neuroscientific measurements, such as the characterisation of human brain networks. Networks, and the connectivities that underlie them, have become a core area of neuroscientific investigation, and their importance is underscored by many demonstrations of their perturbation in brain disorders. Consequently, a demonstration of network measurements via OPM-MEG would be a significant step forward. Here, we aimed to show that a wearable 50-channel OPM-MEG system enables characterisation of the electrophysiological connectome. To this end, we characterise connectivity in the resting state and during a simple visuo-motor task, using both OPM-MEG and a state-of-the-art 275-channel cryogenic MEG device. Our results show that connectome matrices from OPM and cryogenic systems exhibit an extremely high degree of similarity, with correlation values >70 %. This value is not measurably different to the correlation observed between connectomes measured in different subject groups, on a single scanner. In addition, similar differences in connectivity between individuals (scanned multiple times) were observed in cryogenic and OPM-MEG data, again demonstrating the fidelity of OPM-MEG data. This demonstration shows that a nascent OPM-MEG system offers results similar to a cryogenic device, even despite having ~5 times fewer sensors. This adds weight to the argument that OPMs will ultimately supersede cryogenic sensors for MEG measurement. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2020.07.30.228882v1?rss=1 Authors: Broser, P., Middelmann, T., Sometti, D., Braun, C. Abstract: Aim: To track the magnetic field generated by the propagating muscle action potential (MAP). Method: In this prospective, proof of principle study, the magnetic activity of the intrinsic foot muscle after electric stimulation of the tibial nerve was measured using optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs). A classical biophysical electric dipole model of the propagating MAP was implemented to model the source of the data. Results: The signal profile generated by the activity of the intrinsic foot muscles was measured by four OPM devices. Three devices were located above the same muscle to compare the direction and the strength of the magnetic signal while propagating along the muscle. Interpretation: OPM devices allow for a new, non-invasive way to study MAP patterns. Since magnetic fields are less altered by the tissue surrounding the dipole source compared to electric activity, a precise analysis of the spatial characteristics and temporal dynamics of the MAP is possible. The classic electric dipole model explains major but not all aspects of the magnetic field. The field has longitudinal components generated by intrinsic structures of the muscle fibre. By understanding these magnetic components, new methods could be developed to analyse the muscular signal transduction pathway in greater detail. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info

Warren Kennard joins Mike this week to explore the current state of affairs in educational technology. Warren has been working in educational technology for the past 20 years and is the Founder of ConnectEd and the Managing Director of the Cahoot Academy. After defining the distinctions between small private online courses (SPOCs) and massive open online courses (MOOCs), we dig into the importance of delivering people-mediated programs especially as the waves of automation and artificial intelligence can be dehumanizing. Warren draws from his experiences at Get Smarter, the Cahoot Academy, and ConnectEd to round out a more human-centered understanding of what's emerging in the growing field of educational technology.

Should enrollment management teams operate like OPMs? Why does every college press release sound the same? Is there a correlation between “joyful” copy on a landing page and an increase in new leads? Find out the answers to these questions and more on this week's episode of Fanatical Fridays with Mickey Baines. Our goal each week is to discuss the traits, strategies, and tactics that separate the best enrollment marketing teams from the rest of the pack. Subscribe to the Enrollify Podcast to receive notifications every time a new episode of Fanatical Fridays is published!

Assessment Ed 026 – Grant Aldrich Episode Summary This program focused on the future of online program management (OPM). When online education began to emerge, many higher education institutions didn’t have the wherewithal and talent to ramp up online programs so many companies started offering OPM services in program conception and creation. Over time, OPMs have expanded to include student recruitment, student retention and support. These additional services provided by an external company can actually be beneficial to colleges and universities because most higher education institutions don’t do these things very well. However, the role of OPMs in higher education continues to spark controversy. For instance, the most recent negotiated rulemaking process at the federal level saw a push by OPMs and some for-profits to allow outside entities to develop and provide 100% of the curriculum, thus bypassing university faculty. However, that proposal did not pass. A shifting model Today, higher education institutions see OPMs as a necessary evil because the institutions don’t have in-house knowledge to offer these services. There is a growing sentiment that the price to hire an OPM is too high since these companies take a significant percentage of the tuition as part of their services. The contracts also are very lengthy and institutions face an increasingly competitive recruitment environment to find students to enroll in these programs. The combination of those issues are causing a sea-change in the market in which more services are becoming available and those services are becoming commoditized. However, there currently is a gap in the market for an OPM that operates with a focus on the student’s best interest. While OPMs need to continue to serve universities and colleges ultimately it should be up to the students to decide the best academic fit. New opportunities Aldrich believes that a very dramatic shift will happen soon in how the OPM market is structured. This shift would be from a university-centric model to a student-centric model, which could require OPM providers to take a lower share of tuition rates. This model could include many facets, such as: Offering free classes to students, thus eliminating the barrier of tuition. Meeting the needs of non-traditional students who have jobs and families that they must juggle. Creating an environment of support to enhance retention and other student needs. Having a better understanding of students’ capacity, due to quality assessments built into the OPM. Developing a better recruitment pipeline for universities and colleges. When marketing to meet enrollment numbers, many higher education institutions will bring in students who aren’t ready for college or are not a great fit for that institution. Because of the incentive structure in which an agency is trying to fill as many seats as possible, it’s not in the institution’s best interest to look at student fit. That’s a paradigm that needs to shift with online adult students. As higher education enrollment dramatically evolves from primarily service the traditional student who is enrolling directly after graduating high school to the adult learner, institutions will need to rethink their tactics, recruiting pipeline and advertising messages. Furthermore many of the working adults in this current higher education demographic are choosing higher education alternatives in greater numbers. Their decision is being based on factors outside of cost so institutions need to start reflecting on what’s behind these choices. A student-centric approach The student-centric approach gives institutions a new paradigm to solve this issue. For example, Aldrich’s company, OnlineDegree.com, is designed as a bridge to higher education to help students successfully begin their degree program, thus encouraging student preparation, confidence, motivation and persistence. This approach also could help institutions recruit students at a lower cost.  To achieve this approach, Aldrich and his team have created a platform that offering a credit-bearing immersion program. A student can take foundational college-level courses and the company has worked out articulation agreements with a variety of institutions to earn credit for courses. OnlineDegree.com is completely free for the student. Aldrich said the first part of the equation to create this approach is looking at the needs of working adults; they are cost-sensitive and busy with children and jobs. Enrolling in college and taking classes often can be a very scary and time-consuming endeavor; often these adults don’t know if they have the mental, emotional and physical capacity to do so. Gaining traction This novel approach, which is the next generation of OPM, tears down the barriers and helps students see if higher education is right for them. Students can evaluate their time-management skills to see if they have the acumen they have to be successful in a self-paced format. This approach also prepares them to enroll in an institution. This approach has been working very well. In the first 30 days, over 1,000 students pre-enrolled without the company doing any marketing. Since then, there has been immense interest as the company gets traction in publications in Forbes and other publications. This indicates the company is figuring out how to remove the barriers for adults. Institutions including large state universities, private universities and private non-profit institutions also are working with Aldrich’s company. In addition, the company is seeing good outcomes for students getting the support they need and helping them find good placements. This approach also helps higher education institutions solve many of the problems they face.  For example, Aldrich’s company is a bundled service provider that provides student recruitment, retention and support for students that use that platform. So all the barriers for institutions to work with Aldrich’s company have been removed. By creating a platform built specifically to serve the student, the OPM also offers surprising benefits for the university. For instance, if the OPM provides really good coaching, students can determine the best pathway related to the program that they want to pursue. Additionally, a strong assessment system helps the OPM better understand the student’s academic capacity. This enables the OPM to help both the student and the higher education to determine whether they would be a good “fit” as the student continues his/her academic journey. Thus, a useful and well-targeted recruitment pipeline opens up between the OPM and the institution. In addition, there’s no lengthy contract, no exclusivity, and the economics are far better than a traditional OPM provider. Changing the market Aldrich also foresees another shift in which institutions won’t work with one OPM company but instead develop relationships with many companies like his. That’s because there will be better economics by not avoiding exclusivity. The combination of offering a degree at no cost to the student along with student advisement is the way forward, Aldrich believes. Community colleges are limited resource-wise in being able to provide this type of support to students. Traditional institutions also don’t offer the flexibility schedule-wise as well the support needed for non-traditional students who need to work or care for family. This approach also should benefit faculty, who don’t want to teach these introductory general education courses. These faculty would rather work with more advanced students who have a passion for the subject matter. The work that Aldrich’s company and others do allows these courses to be offered at a far lower cost. Initially, there has been some concern about whether institutions would push back. However, this student-centric approach is making the pie larger because this program is available. This is a much greater value for institutions. Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders Aldrich offered three recommendation for higher education leaders who are considering an OPM model: Take an introspective and analytical approach to see if the institution should tackle this type of program internally or whether external help is needed. If contracting with a company, make sure that the institution can work with OPM providers who are coming from a student-centered approach. Embrace the student-centered programs who focus on non-traditional students.    Bullet Points Many higher education institutions didn’t have the internal resources to be able to offer online education. They have increasingly turned companies that offer OPM services in program conception and creation. Over time, OPMs have expanded to include student recruitment, student retention and support. A very dramatic shift will happen soon in how the OPM market is structured. This shift would be from a university-centric model to a student-centric model. This could include free tuition, strong student services and a recruitment pathway to universities. These next generation of OPMs also can be enticing to the growing number of adult learners, who need flexibility, low costs and additional academic support. A student-centric OPM model can help students successfully begin their degree program by helping them develop time-management and study skills, confidence, motivation and persistence. In this new paradigm, higher education institutions won’t work with only one OPM company but instead develop relationships with many companies. This approach also should benefit faculty, who don’t want to teach introductory general education courses and would rather focus on upper-level students who are focused on the subject area. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview: https://www.onlinedegree.com/ Guests Social Media Links: Grant Aldrich LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/grant-aldrich-56721b31/ The Change Leader’s Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Website: https://thechangeleader.com

Big news is announced this month with Awin investing an equity stake in Australia’s leading affiliate network, Commission Factory. Kevin takes the opportunity to speak to Commission Factory’s CEO and co-founder Zane McIntyre about what the investment means as well as about some of the local nuances of the Australian market. From Australia to the US. Earlier this summer Rob interviewed Tricia Meyer, Executive Director at the local trade body the Performance Marketing Association, about their inaugural study of the US affiliate market at Affiliate Summit East in New York. The publication represents the very first time the industry has been formally assessed out there and provided clear evidence that the channel is in healthy shape. We feature an excerpt from that on-stage interview in this month’s episode. And finally, Rob speaks to Greg Hoffman, CEO and co-founder of the OPM (Outsourced Programme Management) agency Apogee about the state of the US affiliate industry and his views on its likely prospects for the future. OPMs like Greg’s play an instrumental role in the US affiliate market and Greg discusses why that’s the case and what he’s learnt from his extensive time working in the industry.

The latest Neg Reg (negotiated rulemaking) process examined the fundamental rules that guide higher education institutions’ interactions with the Department of Education with regards to student aid and related programs.  The Department has used access to student aid to bring a lot of aspects of higher education under federal supervision. The process, which ended in April 2019, focused on accreditation and innovation and will have wide-ranging implications on multiple areas that potentially affect student outcomes. This Neg Reg represents a critical shift, one that bears watching, because of the competing tensions among federal oversight, institutions and accreditors, and the higher ed marketplace which is shifting toward a more dynamic, more open, learner-centered postsecondary system. This also will result in increased partnerships, including public-private partnerships. Looking at Accreditation When Higher Education Act was passed in the 1960s, Congress set up a three-legged stool to manage the process: (1) Congress would provide the money; (s) states would approve the institution; and (3) the institution would need to be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of Education. While this initially sound s straight-forward, what emerged was a very extensive list of rules, especially when applied to the accreditors’ role in ensuring institutional quality so that they could participate in the federal loan programs. Over the years, the accreditors have become in many ways subordinate to the Department in terms of how they go about doing their business. The recent Neg Reg process focused on accreditation and innovation. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos and other Department officials argued that the rules should be changed to encourage innovation and competition among accreditation agencies, and this process led to major changes that could have profound implications for higher education institutions. Surprisingly, the Neg Reg ended in consensus (agreement) among the various stakeholders / negotiating parties, e.g., colleges, accreditors, consumer groups, states.  This is a critical conclusion, because when consensus is reached, the law requires that the rule that will be followed is based on the consensus – the Secretary does not have the discretion to change what was agreed upon. This finding of consensus means that higher education is at an interesting inflection point in the relationship between the federal and accrediting agencies. Now, with having consensus, the accrediting agencies are setting policies, vs having them handed down by the Department.  Previous examples where consensus was not reached include Title IX and Borrower Defense to Repayment, instances where negotiations proved to be contentious. Encouraging Innovation Many of the provisions that reached consensus (approval) are groundbreaking in many respects, including the strong emphasis on new programmatic approaches, which sends a strong message to accreditors. Instead of being penalized for thinking about the box, the new rules encourage finding faster, cheaper and better delivery of education. In the early stages of discussions leading up to the Neg Reg session, Department of Education leaders floated some very aggressive ideas but made it clear that these ideas were opening positions to enable negotiators to think outside the box so as to find ways to make the accreditation process innovative. For example, department officials set a target and encouraged negotiations to reach that target. This was different than in previous Neg Reg efforts. For instance, the Department proposed that an accredited institution that participates in federal student aid could contract out a program to an entity that is not accredited, with the approval of its accrediting agency. The process led to a decision to let the accrediting agency do a staff review of these types of proposals. This has two major effects – it simplifies the process and reduces the time from proposal to approval from months to a few weeks. That is a dramatic change; to date, innovation has been inhibited by the significant review time it takes for accreditation to consider this type of request and make a decision, as well as the expense of going through the review process. Additionally, this will open up more opportunities for relationships between academic institutions and non-accredited providers who provide a wide variety of academic services. This decision also makes it clear that rather than being exception, the relationship between higher ed institutions and OPMs / alternative providers should be considered “favored.” In many cases, these are more efficient, less expensive and substantially better ways of providing educational services than what are currently available in the institution. This type of innovation isn’t necessarily bad for higher education. When MOOCs first appeared and changed the marketplace, the assumption was that these would radically change higher education. That death was greatly exaggerated, but it has created a substantial industry of companies that are using private capital to create quality educational experiences. This regulatory change will make it easier for institutions to pick and choose and make these products part of their educational program. One note with this – the Department had proposed eliminating the 50% outsourcing limit, but the negotiators retained this limit for outsourcing courses if. Innovations in Courses These changes could make a difference in the scope and quality of courses. While a faculty-developed course relies on the developer’s expertise, it may not be as broad as it could be. Outside resources could help make course content more current than the faculty’s knowledge. Furthermore, it also lets faculty, department heads, program directors and deans be more creative about seeing what is available in the broader universe of educational services. The existing rule said that if a course was not created at the institution, it couldn’t be used; however, the new rules are encouraging faculty to realize that there is an enormous amount of services in the marketplace. This new reg gives institutional leaders and faculty the chance to identify and use the best services possible. For example, StraighterLine, an educational program provider, focuses on lower-division undergraduate courses that make up core curriculum. These lower-division courses are a very expensive enterprise for a school to provide and more often than not, these courses have little innovation. StraighterLine provides innovative approaches to these courses, enabling adult learners to fulfill their general education requirements without going to the institution, allowing the institution to focus on their own programs that are innovative. This is a very critical development. This new regulation also gives an institution the opportunity to pick and choose specific and complex programs that are outside of the institution’s core capability but still important to what they are doing. For example, Trilogy Education Services is collaborating with Harvard and other institutions to provide coding programs that many schools don’t necessarily want to provide or don’t have the capacity to provide on their own. If Competency-based Education vs. Credit-Hour Education The Neg Reg process made it very clear that the Department wants to move away from the credit hour as the benchmark for post secondary education. The credit hour was created in the 1920s for determining the hours of work by elementary and secondary teachers back when the first union agreements were being negotiated, and rightly or wrongly, was brought into use in higher education in 1965 through the Higher Education Act. The Neg Reg process is one among many that are encouraging discussions about alternate ways of measuring student outcomes. This would change the process from measuring “time in seat” to “what the student actually learned.” This is the idea behind competency-based education – what is the outcome of the education / what is the student learn. Many institutions are moving rapidly in this direction, including Western Governors and Southern New Hampshire. This change also will require more emphasis on assessment to measure what competency the student has gained vs. what they know. This is the difference between memory and mastery. The credit hour measures memory whereas competency learning and direct assessment measure mastery, i.e., skill vs. what a student can do with that knowledge. In terms of Bloom’s, credit hour measures the lower levels whereas competency and direct assessment measure the higher levels. Defining Faculty Interaction Substantive interaction with faculty was another important piece that came out of the Neg Reg. This was based on Western Governors University’s academic teams, which didn’t include traditional faculty. The Department’s Inspector General had ruled that faculty members need to be part of this interaction with students. However, Western Governors argued that the federal government was determining who made up faculty; instead, this decision should be left up to the university in collaboration with accreditors. In fact, the accreditor felt that the team approach to learning did include faculty because subject-matter experts were involved and helped guide students through the course process. There was significant support for Western Governor’s approach, which will result in a very radical change by opening up innovative learning environments by stating that online education doesn’t need to replicate a traditional classroom. Instead, online learning should be allowed to create a learning environment and that people who are involved in the faculty-side of the ledger add to the learning process (vs. them actually being a faculty member). By leaving the defining of faculty up to the institution and their accreditors, this will be beneficial for student/learners. Changes for States Some people involved in the Neg Reg process expressed concern that the current administration has loosened regulations which will result in institutions that are bad actors will continue to get a free ride or less rules being imposed on them. However, some states are stepping in to fill what they see is the regulatory void as the federal government continues to deregulate and not enforce current regulations. What we are seeing is that the states are stepping in to fill the regulatory void, and that is totally appropriate – the only role that the federal government should have is the handing out of federal financial aid. In California, there is a reactive set of laws that have been proposed that will be restrictive on institutional innovation. This may result in a tug-of-war between states and the federal government. While state attorneys general were left out of the Neg Reg process, the state education higher ed officials were in attendance. This allowed states’ voices to be heard. The Department has been compelled by the courts to put into effect the state authorization rule created by the Obama administration and suspended by the Trump administration. States have moved from focusing on authorizing institutions individually for distance learning because of state-authorization reciprocity agreements (NC-SARA) but now are focused on professional licensure. A new regulation that is similar but different would go into effect July 1, 2020. Three Tips for Higher Education Leaders Three pieces of advice for higher education leaders: Follow what is happening in Neg Reg and implementation closely. These rule changes go to the heart of the core academic functions. Presidents, provosts, deans, and programs chairs need to be aware of these changes. Be aware of how accreditation agencies are responding to these changes. Higher education is currently in a dynamic state. Leaders need to aware of how to accommodate new learners, new learning opportunities, new markets and new demands created by those markets, particularly from employers. The rules are changing in favor of those opportunities and institutions need to learn how to take advantage of them. Bullet Points Neg Reg is a critical shift to the higher ed landscape. First of all, it was adopted through consensus. In addition, it focuses on innovation, defining student learning and recasting the definition of faculty. The new rules encourage finding faster, cheaper and better delivery of education. For instance, accreditors can now do a staff review when considering an institution’s request to use an outside entity to provide academic coursework support. The new rules will encourage institutions to create agreements with preferred external partners for areas such as undergraduate core courses so they can concentrate their time and financial resources on innovative areas in a college or department. These discussions continue to encourage institutions and accreditors to measure competencies instead of class hours. This will require more focus on meaningful assessments. The Neg Reg also begins to redefine a faculty member. This is necessary based on online education, which in some cases uses a team to guide students. These team members are subject experts, even if they are not the faculty-of-record for the class. Some states are concerned about the implications of Neg Reg. They also are looking at different areas such as professional licensure in relation to holding institutions accountable. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview: DoE Neg Reg Background: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2018/index.html Neg Reg Outcomes: https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/reports/negotiated-rulemaking-2019/ Guests Social Media Links: Mike Goldstein Bio: https://www.cooley.com/people/mike-goldstein Mike Goldstein LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelbgoldstein/ Cooley LLP: https://www.cooley.com/  Cooley’s Higher Ed Newsletter: https://ed.cooley.com/2019/04/17/surprise-accreditation-and-innovation-neg-reg-reaches-consensus/ The Change Leader’s Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

In addition to enjoying the holidays, December is a good time to pause and take stock of the past year. This also is an opportune time to get out the crystal ball to contemplate what might happen in 2019. 2018: The Year in Review There were a number of very nice gifts under the tree this year, but also a lot of lumps of coal. In 2018, we saw four big themes: marketplace dynamics; Washington follies; higher ed governance failures (which includes higher ed’s version of #MeToo); and the Harvard admissions lawsuit. Marketplace Dynamics: The Maturing and Decline of Higher Ed Markets In our previous blog and podcast on M&A activity in higher ed, we discussed the product life cycle and where higher ed stands in relation to this concept.  To briefly recap, the product life cycle (PLC) is a marketing tool that is applied to products, but also is relevant when examining market segments or industries. The PLC is made up of four stages: The introduction stage, which is characterized by the organization building brand awareness; The growth stage, which is characterized by strong growth as the organization builds brand preference and increases market share; The maturity stage, which is characterized by diminishing growth as “competition” increases and competitors offer similar “products.” This results in the implementation of multiple marketing strategies, such as cutting prices, rethinking positioning and branding, and market consolidation; and The decline stage, which is characterized by a decline in sales (which may be potentially significant). In many cases, the product (or organization) goes out of business or, as a last result, finds a buyer (leading to a merger or acquisition). Higher ed finds itself straddling the stages of maturity and decline, which is characterized by decreasing enrollment, lack of differentiation in the higher ed marketplace, and an increase in market consolidation and/or college closings. Which brings us to now. Breaking Down the Numbers.  Over the last few years (2016-2018), more than 100 colleges haves closed. Many can be directly attributed to the decertification of ACICS by the Obama administration. However, the more relevant reason for many of these closures is the lifecycle and current operating environment of higher education.  Over the past few years, 65 for-profits closed and seven merged with other institutions. Some of those mergers were huge (Purdue acquiring Kaplan, Strayer acquiring Capella, National University System acquiring Northcentral). In addition, 14 nonprofit universities closed and five merged while 36 public institutions merged or consolidated. This merger and acquisition activity makes perfect sense given that higher education is in the maturing to declining portions of the lifecycle. Transfer Students and Reducing Costs. We’ve also seen community colleges assume more of a role in reducing the costs of higher ed, as well as in degree completion.  State (and other) colleges are beginning to put more emphasis on attracting transfer students.  For example, Gov. Jerry Brown (D-Cal) is withholding $50 million from the University of California system until the system increases the acceptance and enrollment of transfer students while also meeting auditor requests to fix accounting issues. Brown’s decision was based on his commitment to a 2-to-1 ratio of freshmen to transfer students. However, several system’s institutions reported a ratio closer to 4-to-1. Privates are also emphasizing outreach to transfer students due to the costs to both the institution and the students.  Some privates are renting space at community college, thus giving students an easily available and direct track to a four-year degree.   This makes a lot of sense, especially given the current high cost of private education (e.g., one California private is charging $55,000 a year for undergraduate programs, amounts we see at Ivy League schools).  Thus, students find more affordable options by first attending a community college and then transferring to a public or private institution. This approach reduces the amount of student loans needed to complete a degree. This type of approach is especially important with students who start college without a clear idea of what they want to study or their pathway to earning their degree and end up dropping out due to cost.  This accounts for why we are seeing so many post-traditional students in higher education; they initially started college without understanding what they wanted to study and now are returning to complete their degrees. Having this community college low-cost option that transfers coursework to four-year colleges and university makes good sense because it minimizes the student’s time to completion and cost. College Closures and Rejuvenation. We continue to see higher education closures. While higher education leaders may point to the resurrection of Sweet Briar, those types of reemergence are few and far between.    Sweet Briar was an interesting case. Although the school had a substantial endowment (unlike most schools), those funds were legally earmarked for specific things and could not be used for operating funds.  This is an interesting (and possibly unique) situation and will make a great case study for future grad students who want to study the process of bringing a school back from the dead. Department of Education and Washington The second theme for 2018 is all about Washington, D.C. Frankly, there are so many things, it’s hard to know where to start. ACICS. ACICS is (in)famous for its accreditation of Corinthian and ITT, both of which folded, leaving 100s of 1000s of students stranded. Not surprisingly, ACICS was decertified by the Obama administration in 2016. At its height, ACICS accredited 200+ universities, but in the time between 2016 (when ACICS lost its accreditation) and now, most of the institutions accredited by ACICS have moved to other accrediting bodies.    However, the Trump Administration has other ideas on accreditation. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos reinstated ACICS’ accreditation authority this year in a process that had many missteps. However, the most egregious was that the department’s senior official who made the case for ACICS’ reinstatement is a former lobbyist who worked with for-profit universities, a clear conflict of interest. In her justification for reinstatement, the former lobbyist, Diane Auer Jones, said the Department of Education determined that ACICS was in compliance on 19 of the 21 applicable criteria. Equally as important, she stated that ACICS was likely in compliance with these criteria when President Obama’s Education Secretary John King, Jr. removed ACICS’ accreditation certification. According to the Education Department, ACICS is still “out of compliance” with federal standards in the remaining two areas but has been given another 12 months to come back into compliance.  The carnage from ACICS’ original accreditation still continues. Just this month, the Education Corporation of America (ECA), which was once accredited by ACICS and oversaw Virginia College, shuttered its doors, leaving 20,000 students up a creek without a paddle. In fairness to ACICS, they removed Virginia College’s accreditation, but only after the college attempted to get accreditation from another accreditor and failed miserably. Gainful Employment and Borrower Defense. Changes in gainful employment and borrower defense also emerged in 2018. In relation to the former, the Education Department missed the filing deadline for the gainful employment rule so these changes cannot come into play until mid-2020. Furthermore, the Social Security Administration -- which provides the earnings data needed to calculate gainful employment -- decided not to renew the information-sharing agreement that expired in May. Because of this, the Education Department will not have the data they need to calculate earnings data. So, in essence, gainful employment is dead for now. Borrower defense is another area on which Washington gets raspberries. Regulations put in place by the Obama administration protected students whose colleges (e.g., Corinthian and ITT) closed, leaving them with degrees that were considered worthless. However, the Ed Department under Secretary DeVos rejected the vast majority of the claims. It took Congressional pressure to turn the process around, and although the process has gotten better, it still not where it needs to be. I think we can expect to see some new regulations coming out of Washington over the next year in this area. Title IX and Sexual Abuse. The Education Department put out their draft ruling on new Title IX guidance in November and, overall, colleges are not happy. The revisions make major changes to the standard that, in many cases, are as clear as mud and/or will discourage victims from coming forward. New Title IX Guidance. The first of the changes narrows the definition of sexual assault. The old standard was “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” and the new standard is “unwelcome sexual conduct; or unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to the recipient’s education program or activity.” The Ed Department justified this by saying it is in line with the Supreme Court guidance, but survivors’ advocates have come out forcefully and said that this new definition will put survivors’ education at risk. The second major change is the standard by which sexual assault is adjudicated. Previously, the standard was that the assault was “likely to have happened.” However, the new guidance provides for a higher standard, i.e., “preponderance of evidence,” the same standard that is used in civil suits. This is lower than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the standard which is used in criminal trials, but it still creates a higher burden on the victim to prove that the incident happened. In its guidance, the Ed Dept stated that institutions can use either standard, but this potentially opens the institution up to lawsuits, e.g., institutions may face a lawsuit by the accused if they use the lower standard or the victim if the institution uses the higher standard. The third major change has to do with holding universities responsible. Under the previous guidance, universities and colleges could be held responsible if they “knew about or reasonably should have known” about an incident. However, under the new guidelines, the institution must have “actual knowledge” of the incident in order to be held responsible; this requires the victim to make a formal complaint through official channels. Telling a professor or resident adviser isn’t sufficient – it must be reported to someone who can do something about it, such as a school official who is involved in enforcement. Additionally, schools can only be held responsible for incidents that happen on school property or at school-sponsored events, not at private, off-campus residences. Thus, if a fraternity house is located off-campus and an assault takes place there (as was the allegation in the Judge Kavanaugh – Christine Blasey Ford incident), the institution cannot be held liable, even if they have knowledge that these events have taken place in the past. Lastly, the accused will have the chance to cross-examine the victim under the new guidance, and many feel this will discourage victims from coming forward and reporting incidents. Whenever you get into sexual assault or similar types of accusations, the resolution process must be more than he said/she said. However, that is what it could come down to because of the cross-examination requirement. Many victims’ advocates and lawyers are concerned that we will revert to a previous time when a woman who accused a man of sexual assault would ultimately be the one on trial because of her dress or behaviors or whatever. MSU and Sexual Assault / Harassment in Education. A subset of this area brings to light the #MeToo movement in higher ed, especially in the aftermath of the Supreme Court hearings with Justice Kavanaugh.  It took a tremendous amount of courage for Christine Blasey Ford to bring up what happened to her after so many years and in such a public venue. Sadly, look at what ultimately happened – the good ol’ boys network derailed the investigation before it was able to go through to a conclusion. We also are seeing the fallout from the Michigan State sexual assault case. MSU’s former president has been brought up on felony charges for lying to the police, and the institution’s undergraduate applications have fallen by almost 8.5 percent in the wake of the scandal. Not only is this situation tarnishing MSU’s reputation, it is hitting them in the pocketbook. And maybe that's what has to happen for people to change. Higher Ed Governance Failures and the Role of the Board We are seeing a failure in the governance process in many higher ed schools. Three cases fall into this area at the following institutions: Penn State, Michigan State, and the University of Maryland. We must ask ourselves in all these situations, “Where were the Board of Directors/Regents/Trustees?” In the Penn State scandal, some Regents were brought up on criminal charges. We haven't seen that yet in the Michigan State scandal, but I believe we will.  MSU’s interim president has not done a great job in reaching out to the victims – it has been pretty nasty in many respects, but one must ask where are their Board of Regents? Same with the University of Maryland football coach after the player died – the board directed the university president to retain the football coach, but the president refused (rightly so). From all appearances, the majority of boards and Regents do not understand what their role is. Regents at state schools generally are political appointees, and it is considered to be a feather in one’s cap to be appointed to a Board of Regents/Trustees for a state university.  However, just because one is a political appointee to a board doesn’t remove their fiduciary duties as a board member.  More training needs to be done to ensure Regents understand their duties as well as how governance has changed over the years. This also goes for boards of private universities. The vast majority of these types of higher ed boards are made up of “friends of the president” or other large donors. This is especially egregious with many Christian colleges, whose boards are made up of religious affiliates or ecumenical personnel who have no experience sitting on the board of a multimillion-dollar organization and/or an understanding of higher ed. Fallout from the Harvard Admissions Lawsuit The Harvard lawsuit, in which a group of Asian Americans sued the university over its admissions policies, ultimately will impact a majority of higher ed institutions. Even though Harvard says that they are following the guidance from the Supreme Court, they get sued. Same with UCLA – they have been sued as well. Although a ruling is still forthcoming on the Harvard case, I think there will be ripple effects and we haven’t seen the end of this. Predictions for 2019 While much of the crystal ball’s foretelling for 2019 is cloudy, there are some clear indications of what lies in the future. An Acceleration of Consolidation and Closures First, we will see an acceleration of consolidations and closures in higher ed. For example, just in the last couple weeks, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch ratings both have declared a negative outlook for the higher ed sector for 2019. This is huge. We have a marketplace that is saturated. In these types of markets, smarter institutions focus on economies of scale (mergers), as well as positioning and differentiation (why is my university and/or degree different)? Carnegie Mellon and MIT have done this very well. This is one way to combat saturation, but not a lot of schools understand marketing positioning and differentiation. Consolidation (mergers) occurs for one of three reasons. Acquisition of a new technology; Market expansion and/or growth; or Eliminate competition and/or create market efficiencies. Consolidation will continue to accelerate. One need not look any further than what is happening with Pennsylvania’s 21 state universities. These institutions are vying for a smaller number of students graduating from high school, so are closing multiple campuses and realigning programs to eliminate duplication. This impacts the towns in which they are located since they are the major employers, and any change they make in consolidating degrees and/or reorganizing the system affects jobs, creating a ripple effect. Closures will also increase, but we think there will be far more consolidation rather than outright closings. The trend will continue toward the mega universities -- the merger of Strayer and Capella or Purdue and Kaplan -- or more shared services between universities. We will start to see far more of this with the privates as they struggle to survive. The biggest challenge is going to be for the smaller universities that don’t have strong endowments. What are they going to do? Most of these universities rely solely on tuition and/or state and federal funding to keep their doors open. They have limited research dollars coming in as compared to the Tier 1/R1 institutions. Right now, the closure rate is below 1%, but it will accelerate. The one wildcard in this is a potential recession, which could result in people going back to school to gain new skills and earn a different degree. Maybe that will help universities. The other trend that we have not talked about is how many people are disparaging higher ed, saying a college degree is not worth the money that you pay for it. This is going to hurt higher ed and its ability to bring in more students. This too may lead to more mergers and closures. Changing the Higher Ed Business Model The business model for higher ed must change. We don’t see rapid transformational change in the next year. However, there will be many changes in the next five years that people will realize was part of a changing higher ed landscape as they look in the rearview mirror. Neg Reg 2019 and its Implications.  The upcoming negotiated rulemaking process by the Ed Department focusing on accreditation and innovation could be very impactful, especially with its focus on credit hours and online education. Credit Hours. Moving away from credit hours as a measure of learning could be one of those breakthrough transformations that could spur the changing of higher ed’s business model. Once the Ed Department makes these changes, we will begin to see more institutions using CBE and giving credit for previous learning and life experiences. If you take a look at the three colleges that have done very well using these models (Western Governors who is the poster child for CBE, Capella, and Southern New Hampshire), they have seen tremendous growth while reducing the cost to students. This is a win-win and I think we’ll see more of this.  Online Education.  Although online education is an area that is beginning to get saturated because of for-profits, we will see far more privates and state schools moving into this area, as well as continued consolidations with online providers (OPMs), such as Learning House. Because so many OPMs exist, some of the smaller colleges will be able to expand into this area at a reasonably low-cost investment, and more for-profits will be acquisition targets. We will start seeing institutions embrace the opportunity to share online courses. This too will require changes from the Neg Reg process with respect to accreditation, but once these types of changes come out, we will start seeing sharing of courses and services as we have not seen in the education industry. Negotiations with Faculty. We will begin to see higher ed leaders toughen their stance with faculty. Market saturation with institutions and programs has resulted in price discounting, sometimes at a rate of more than 60%. This is not sustainable. According to Inside Higher Ed’s 2018 Annual Survey of Chief Business Officers (CFOs), 48% of respondents strongly agree or agree that their college tuition discount rate is unsustainable. This is up from 34% in 2017. Furthermore, two-thirds of CFOs at the privates say the same thing. This is huge. Institutions must start cutting programs that are not “profitable,” but in doing this, they must deal with faculty. Unfortunately, faculty look at programmatic cuts through the lens of job security instead of what graduates need to be attractive in the job market.  When faculty start to do this, there will be security and jobs for nearly all.  Faculty Promotion and Tenure. We will start seeing changes in how faculty are promoted and assessed.  Currently, faculty are promoted and assessed by their publication records. Going forward, we’ll see less reliance on citations and publications and more on teaching. Additionally, faculty hiring and tenure will change. We will start seeing a review of tenured faculty every 5 to 10 years, instead of having a job for life. I don’t see tenure going away anytime soon – it is too institutionalized – but employment for life will become a thing of the past in five years. Knowing Who Your Customers Are and What They Need. Many higher ed leaders have locked themselves in the ivory tower for too long, and it's time they understood what students need to be taught and what industry needs to be successful. Texas A&M is another really good example of this. They talk with stakeholder groups on a regular basis, including just completing a values survey. The institutional leaders currently are engaging in what they call Aggie 2030 to understand the future of higher education as a whole and where Texas A&M is going. This is the type of strategic planning that universities need to be doing with their alumni, stakeholders and the people who hire their graduates. Student Enrollment and Impact on Marketing Research and Spending. Another trend involves students making enrollment decisions based on their own proximity to a college. This is important for universities to realize and understand. Unless you are a R1 or major university, your students are more than likely going to come from a limited geographical pool. This has implications as to how and where you spend marketing dollars, but unfortunately, many institutions are wasting marketing dollars. As much as institutions would like to draw from a larger geographical area, institutions must put a greater emphasis on doing market research to understand where their students live and then spend the marketing dollars to get more students from that area. As the saying goes, fish where the fish are, because it's a waste of money otherwise. Harvard Lawsuit and Admissions. The Harvard lawsuit has the potential going all the way to the Supreme Court, and who knows how that will be decided with the current makeup of the Court. Cost Containment. We also will start to see far more cost containment as institutions no longer have the same level of disposable income. I think we will also start seeing the salaries of chief executives start to come down, especially as transparency hits the budgeting process. Higher Ed Funding. Cities and states will begin to fund college for students. The City of Chicago recently announced a new program where students will receive scholarships to cover costs of associate degrees that will be set up through DePaul University. And in another example, Starbucks is funding college for their people. We will start to see more of this as an employee benefit, but also as a way for businesses to invest in and retain quality employees. International Students. International students attending U.S. universities will continue to be an issue so long as the Trump administration continues to mess with immigration. This will continue to impact U.S. institutions as international students pay full tuition and universities use those funds to keep their bottom lines in the green. This is especially true with Chinese students.  Because of trade wars and increased emphasis on background checks, we will see fewer Chinese students enrolling in the nation’s higher education institutions. HBCUs.  I think the other one to look at HBCUs. I think there could be some really good things to come out of the HBCUs over the next few years. I've no idea what it is, but the crystal ball says to keep an eye on them.    Wrapping Up So long as the Trump administration is in office, we will continue to see turbulence coming out of the Department of Education and the rest of the government.  One thing is for sure: it will not be boring! Merry Christmas / happy Hanukkah, and wishing all the very best for 2019. Bullet Points Looking Back – The Highlights from 2018 Higher ed finds itself in the maturity to declining stages as characterized by declining enrollments, lack of differentiation in the higher ed marketplace, and an increase in market consolidation (M&A activity) and/or college closings. Over the last few years, 2016-2018, more than 100 colleges haves closed. Many can be directly attributed to ACICS being decertified by the Obama administration, but more relevant is where education is in the lifecycle and current operating environment.  State (and other) colleges are beginning to put more of an emphasis on attracting transfer students.  Privates are also getting into this space due to costs to both them and their students.  Some privates are co-locating at community colleges, renting space from them, and this gives their students a direct track to a four-year degree.    ACICS was decertified by the Obama administration in 2016, but Secretary DeVos reinstated its accreditation authority this year. There were many missteps with this whole process, but the most egregious of these was because of a conflict of interest (or appearance thereof) of the department senior official who made the case for ACICS’ reinstatement. Gainful employment is essentially dead for two reasons: The Education Department missed the filing deadline for the gainful employment rule so the changes that they want to make to gainful employment cannot come into play until mid-2020. Because of an inter-agency dispute over data sharing, the Ed Dept cannot get the data it needs to calculate gainful employment, thus essentially killing gainful employment. The Ed Department in November put out their draft ruling on new Title IX guidance. Overall, colleges and victims’ advocates are not happy with the changes. There are four major changes: The narrowing of the definition of sexual assault. Suggesting a higher standard for adjudication be used, i.e., “preponderance of evidence,” the same standard that is used in civil suits. Lessening the culpability of institutions and narrowing the reporting requirements. Giving the accused the right to cross-examine the victim. There is a failure in the governance process in many higher ed schools as exemplified by the Michigan State University sexual abuse scandal, and the death of a University of Maryland football player and the retaining of the football coach. More training needs to be done to ensure Regents understand their duties, and how governance has changed over the years. Looking Forward – Predictions for 2019 We will see an acceleration of mergers, consolidations and closures in higher ed. The 2019 Neg Reg process will begin a transformation of higher ed and its business model. Online education will continue its growth over the next 2-3 years. Much of this will be spurred by consolidation and strategic alliances with online providers. We will begin to see faculty promotion and tenure processes changing as a result of the need for universities to cull programs that are not financially viable. Market research will increasingly take root in higher ed, as institutions need to make smarter use of their marketing dollars by determining where their true prospective students are. Cost containment will continue to accelerate in higher ed, especially in privates where discounting has been the norm. This will find its way to the C suite and we will start to see a reduction of presidential salaries, especially at privates. We will start seeing more “interesting” ways for education to be funded. Part of this will come out of the Neg Reg process, but more city, state, and private entities will invest in their residents’ and employees’ futures. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview: Product Lifecycle: http://www.quickmba.com/marketing/product/lifecycle/ National University System: https://nu.edu Department of Education: https://www.ed.gov/ Neg Reg 2019 Process: www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2018/index.html Your Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com