5 Things Not to Cut from Your DL Budget

I recently read Fred Miller's Educause article, 10 Ways to Cut Your IT Budget. While I have long argued that distance learning is not really an IT function, there were a couple of cuts that he suggested that I would apply to distance learning. First of all, he said to wait another year before getting new computers. This is a no-brainer but probably gets overlooked and can save gobs of money. Another tip was to negotiate prices with vendors. Just a couple of years ago, this would have probably not worked, but now everybody knows that frugality is expected and cool.
Now, what would I NOT cut from a DL budget?

1. Personnel. No way, no how. As the economy helps to drive increasing DL enrollments, the entire system will fall apart without the support staff. It is quite likely that increased staffing would even provide an overall payoff in terms of even more enrollments.
2. Communication systems. This includes advanced telephones, live helpdesk systems, etc. We have to be more efficient in supporting faculty and learners than ever before and premiere communication is money well spent.
3. Course management systems. I suppose that some folks are thinking this is the best time to start looking at lower-cost home-grown systems and stop writing the mongo checks to you-know-who. Not me. The transition costs would be enormous in the short-run, and it's the short-run (hopefully) where we are all having our money woes.
4. Some travel. Clearly, I'm cutting back on the number of trips and having a lot of meetings by phone or online technologies. But I would not cut out all travel because I know that much of it really provides cost-benefit. At our annual DLA Conference, for instance, I learn more in three days from my colleagues about marketing, faculty development, student support, etc. than I normally do in six months. DL is a notoriously busy field, and we absolutely have to invest a little money and immersive time for learning. I have to pick and choose these opportunities carefully. A conference with a registration fee of over $400 is less likely to happen this year.
5. Marketing. This is probably one of the most important times for marketing online programs since the early 2000s.

My DLA Forecast for 2009

As we say goodbye to an unforgettable year, here's what I think is in store for 2009, at least in the world of online learning:

• A greater emphasis on the financial benefits of distance learning. Higher ed administrators who were previously lukewarm about DL will work on number crunching to see exactly how online learning lowers the instructional cost per student.



• Organizational structures will continue to evolve with DL departments increasingly aligned with academics rather than IT groups.



• eLearning will make its formal entrance into the mainstream with its appearance on the mission statements of more and more traditional institutions.



• Dramatically increased use of social networking tools (like Facebook) in online learning - for both instruction and support. Facebook will "age" a bit as more and more faculty and over 30 folks hop on for DL purposes and then get a little addicted themselves.



• Less one-on-one support for faculty as resources get further stretched (more courses but little or no new staff). The bad news is we'll see more group training sessions, but the savvy administrators will develop better, easy-to-use (and locate) online tutorials as well as mentoring programs.



• Big emphasis on green. Although gas prices are lower, the Summer of '08 is not forgotten. Online learning provides the obvious answer here. We'll slowly see more telecommuting of DL faculty and staff as well. Lots and lots and lots more online meetings.



• More streamlined approaches to quality, evaluation, and retention. More software entries such as that offered by Starfish Retention Solutions that will help us become accountable in a systematic way.



• Increased development and marketing of online courses and programs to the Hispanic community as well as those who support this population, such as teachers and healthcare providers.

Should DL Pay for the Lights?

There are some clear costs associated with distance and online programs; administrative staff, faculty, course development and redevelopment, and technology are examples. However, in a model in which DL is a self-supporting cost center, hidden institutional costs should be considered. These include office space for administrative staff and utilities. Even though DL may bring much difficult-to-quantify benefit to an institution through increased enrollments and savings in classroom space, a true cost model will include some overhead for the institution. Such costs should perhaps not be assessed until the program is meeting its other costs, but should be considered in long-term planning.

Financial Incentives for Online Instructors?

I have argued for years that online teaching should be motivated by intrinsic rewards, rather than extrinsic ones. There are so many, many documented advantages of teaching online, including the flexibility to conduct class in your underwear in the middle of the night if you so choose. And I've actually known quite a few instructors whose long, monotone lectures in the classroom mercilessly bored their students - but when they entered the online class, they were far more interesting and focused. I often re-tell the old story of the old man who was bothered by the noise of boys playing basketball outside his apartment window. He finally approached offered to pay them 50 cents each for every day they showed up to play. While they were initially thrilled with the notion, after several days their numbers dwindled until none of them showed up. Their play had become work. With this in mind, I do believe that online instructors need resources to enable them to do their jobs well - technical support, instructional design support, and teaching assistants (for large online courses). They also need some sort of release time or stipend for the initial development of any course. But teaching online should not command any significantly different pay structure than face-to-face teaching.