Trouvé via le fascicule Les « C » en tant qu’étudiants (p.10), le sommaire de gestion d’un white paper de l’Université York sur sa stratégie en formation à distance, daté du 17 août 2010. On y apprend notamment que…
« Little published research is available on the costs of online or blended learning. This is appears to be because universities want to offer online courses for competitive reasons provided their costs are not unreasonable and they attract a sufficient number of students. What research there is suggests that e-learning can be cost-effective, although initial startup costs can be higher than traditional lectures and it may take several years for costs to average out. »
Considérant que les étudiants en ligne obtiennent de meilleurs résultats que les étudiants en présentiel et que les étudiants en mode hybride obtiennent de meilleurs résultats que les étudiants « seulement » en ligne [NDLR: Il serait intéressant de voir leurs sources. On croit en effet que l’efficacité du mode hybride repose d’abord sur une scénarisation pédagogique efficace.], le e-learning Working Group de York propose de mettre de l’avant le blended learning comme stratégie institutionnelle de formation à distance :
«…The literature suggests that students can learn better in blended courses than in either fully online or face-to-face courses and, at the same time, blended courses can meet the White Paper’s other goals of increasing student access and engagement. Additionally, no other Canadian institution has chosen a strategy to specialize in blended learning. Thus, York could grow to become a national leader and significant international player in blended learning—a path that the Group recommends. Such a strategy would not negate development of fully online courses as they should continue to be developed in key areas for strategic reasons; however, the Working Group advocates a strong and focused effort at growing the number of course and program offerings in the blended format.
For modeling purposes, the Working Group chose to estimate the revenue and costs associated with an ambitious plan to increase the number of online courses at the rate of 100 courses per year for five years with each course having an enrolment of 100 students. Although redesigning 500 courses would be a very significant undertaking, this would result in only approximately 12% of all York courses being offered in a partial or a fully online format in five years.»
L’autre aspect intéressant du sommaire, c’est que le groupe de travail met clairement sur la table les deux postes budgétaires les plus importants d’un tel réenlignement, tout en les chiffrant : l’infrastructure et le soutien technique (« During the first year, these costs would amount to just over $1.3 million and would rise to $2.1 million at the end of the fifth year. Important to note, however, is that these costs could begin to be recouped by the third year and fully recouped by the fifth year with an ACF of $60 per student per course. »), de même que la formation du personnel enseignant et le développement de cours (« Although substantial (approximately $687, 500 in year one), this is an area that the Working Group feels York has chronically underfunded and that investment is required. »). Pour avoir une base de comparaison, il est utile de savoir que York compte 1415 professeurs à temps plein (« Full-time Faculty ») et 1033 « chargés de cours » (contract Faculty and Teaching Assistant).
Notons enfin qu’on ne connait pas la réponse interne à la proposition du groupe de travail.
Source : Office of the Vice-President Academic & Provost, E-learning Executive Summary, Provostial White Paper, York University, 17 août 2010.
