Higher Ed | Barry Dahl dot com

April 2026
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30

ITC Lifetime Achievement Award

Posted on March 19, 2026 by barrydahl

I recently had the honor—one I don’t take lightly—of accepting the 2026 Lifetime Achievement Award from the Instructional Technology Council (ITC) at their annual eLearning conference, held March 13–15 at Austin Community College.

After a gracious introduction by Carol Spalding, President of Rowan-Cabarrus Community College, I was treated to a short tribute video featuring messages from many dear friends, including some of the people I value most in the world. Most of those connections were forged over years of attending ITC conferences and, truth be told, just about any other excuse we could find to gather. Here is that video.

After that video played and after I regained my composure a bit, I was given ten minutes to make my remarks—just enough time to attempt the impossible: compressing fifty years of higher education into something coherent. Several drafts later (and a few merciful deletions), I landed on a trilogy of stories that felt both manageable and meaningful. The recording below was captured and shared by my friend Reed Dickson of Pima Community College. Thanks Reed!

Suffice it to say, this moment stands as a true highlight of my career. My sincere thanks to Matt Evins of Austin Community College for the herculean effort of hosting such a well-run conference. And not for naught—it was a refreshing change to be on a college campus (especially one ingeniously repurposed from a former shopping mall) rather than in the usual conference hotels with their famously questionable carpeting.

Moments like this remind me that whatever I’ve accomplished has been built alongside an extraordinary community of colleagues and friends. For that, I’m deeply grateful, and still very much enjoying the journey.

I was also happy to see several people post to a Padlet for the occasion. You can click the image to visit the site and add your own if you like.

Screenshot of Padlet with the first post highlighted, saying "Usually right but not always popular — **I love the title of the very first post: He’s not very popular!!**

Three other Lifetime Achievement Award winners were in attendance so we were able to grab a photo.

**L-R: Barry Dahl, Mickey Slimp, Fred Lokken, Pam Quinn**

Transcript of acceptance speech below:

Hello everyone. Such a pleasure to join you one more time.

As I get started, I’d like to recognize the support I’ve received from Readspeaker, one of my absolute favorite vendors in the EdTech space. I’ve worked with them for several years now through various events. We’ve given away a few Hawaiian shirts this morning, but I have a couple more to rehome before I fly out this afternoon. I’m hoping not to take these back with me to Florida.

I have a few stories for you today. Let’s start at the beginning…of my time in higher education. After high school my plan was to be an attorney. Not a high-faluting, high hourly rate attorney, but more of a public defender or an attorney for people who couldn’t afford an attorney. The working title of the TV show was Better Call Bear! While waiting for acceptance to Law School, I decided to get an undergrad degree, not because I wanted to, but you know, because you have to.

My best friend from high school (that’s Cheyenne East High, go T-Birds!) convinced me that an Accounting undergrad would be great preparation for law school. I had no interest in that whatsoever, but that’s never stopped me before, so off I went.

I finished the accounting degree and started law school the next fall. I hated it. Lots of reasons that I won’t go into right now, but I decided to quit, halfway through my first semester. “Hated it,” is probably an understatement. So there I sit…with a really big question.

What comes next? I had no plan B, except that having an accounting degree in hand is a de facto plan B even if I didn’t plan it that way, per se. And I know right now you’re wondering if I studied Latin. No, I did not.

So, I got a job working for a CPA firm in Phoenix. Hated it. Absolutely hated it. Strike 2. So I start looking for Plan C. At this point, I could either string tennis racquets for a living, or I could go back to school and start the Masters program at ASU. They gave me a stipend to be an Accounting Lab Assistant. At the end of that first semester, something mystical happened.

This would have been December 1981. There were no cell phones or email or any other communication devices that we take for granted today. It wasn’t easy to get a hold of somebody unless they were within running distance of their landline.

Classes were over and I was ready to drive the 957 miles from ASU to Cheyenne, Wyoming for Christmas Break. I loaded up the bright blue MGB and was ready to head out. For some reason that I’ve never been able to explain, I decided to stop at the Business Building on the way out of Tempe. Check a grade maybe? Wish a prof a Merry Christmas? Nope, that does not sound like me. I don’t know why.

But I clearly remember walking through the doorway of the accounting department, and the secretary almost squealed…”there you are!” And I’m like, ummmmmm, yep, here I am. She says “Dr. Joe has been trying to get in touch with you.” Dr. Joe Fritzemeyer was the head of the accounting department and his doorway is about 3 feet away. So I stick my head in his door and all of the sudden we’re best friends. He says he’s been getting great feedback about my labs sessions. And I say…well of course you are (you know, on the inside…).

He says, “how would you like to teach two sections of Management Accounting next semester?” And I say…ummmmmm, what? Do you mean teach real classes with real students starting about 3 weeks from now? Yep, that’s what he meant.

If I hadn’t walked into that office, they wouldn’t have been able to get in touch with me, and someone else would have been teaching those classes. So, all of this was unplanned. I didn’t consider a career in the classroom until it was offered to me. And then I did it. And I loved it. And I realized that I had found my place.

I have more stories. Sorry.

So I taught three more semesters while I finished my masters degrees and then another year of full-time adjunct work at ASU. Then I spent two years at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton. I took a short Pitt Stop at Pitt, which is Pittsburgh University. BTW, that was strike 3 because I entered the PhD program at Pitt. Hated it! Quit at the end of one semester. I just don’t do things I don’t like. So, three strikes and you’re out, right?

Wrong. Accounting degrees, will travel. So I started teaching at the University of Minnesota Duluth. Spent another 6 years teaching there. And then I took a break from academia.

Since I had been a kid, I wanted to own a tropical fish store. So I did it. The Tropics was almost exactly what I wanted it to be. Not a pet store, a fish store. I loved it. But one day a very cute young lady came into the store, and about two years later we were married. That’s her right there. 9 more months and 5 days later, our first child was born.

Even though Rita held down two jobs, the prospects weren’t great for growing our family on the paltry fish store revenue. Due to an illness of a faculty member at Lake Superior College, I had the chance to go back into the classroom, with a decent paycheck and great benefits, and so during the winter quarter of 1995, I started teaching at the local community college.

I had taught for 11 years in very large or fairly large universities. My first quarter at the community college was a stark awakening. Everything seemed so strange. Where were the stuffy old profs who wouldn’t give the adjuncts the time of day? Where were the students who came to tell you that they were going to miss the next two weeks of class to go on a Transatlantic Cruise?

I felt like a fish out of water. But before long, I started to learn about who my students were. About how much a difference I could make in their lives. So many of the university students I had taught were the proverbial children born with silver spoons in their mouths. This group was different. I was given the privilege of teaching some very hard-working students. Also, many of my fellow faculty members were the most decent people I ever met in academia. I had finally found my people.

This is a trilogy of sorts, here’s part three

I started teaching online courses in 1999. Maybe ‘98. Hard to say for sure. At the beginning of one of those summers I attended a statewide faculty union meeting in the Twin Cities. The main topic was this thing called online learning. There was a great deal of angst, a great deal of FUD, and a certain amount of inevitability in the air. For every person who was optimistic, there were 20 pessimists. Approximately.

But still, I jumped in with both feet. I found that I had a decent-enough skill level in both creating online courses and teaching them. As per usual, as soon as I started to hit my stride as an online faculty member, the powers that be decided to rip me out of the classroom and put me into the meeting room. Well, sort of. Actually, I applied for a newly created Dean position in 2001 that would make me the responsible person for growing online offerings at the college.

Life was exciting during those early days when online ed was growing rapidly. Making magic on a tight budget. Finding new ways to teach subjects that really hadn’t changed much in decades. Fighting off the naysayers with a big ugly stick. And there were lots of naysayers. Even though my college embraced online programs more than most schools, the naysayers were loud and proud. But we persevered.

We started creating some unique offerings and programs, including several award winners such as our Physical Education distance education classes, and our Online Student Mentor program. I also remember when I started to receive thank you notes from students who received a scholarship that was earmarked for online-only students, something I created at the college a couple years before my departure. But even better were the thank you notes from students who I usually had never met. They were writing to thank us for giving them an online opportunity to pursue their higher education. Without online courses, these students would never have been able to earn a degree or a promotion at work. You might take that for granted today, but I did not take it for granted 15-20 years ago.

So, to recap, I didn’t know that I was going to work in higher education, but then I found my PLACE. I didn’t know that I was eventually going to work at a community college, but then I found my PEOPLE. I didn’t know that I was going to be an online educator at the community college level, but then I found my PASSION.

Turns out that finding those three things gives you a decent chance of standing in front of a group of like-minded people accepting some sort of an award.

8 minutes, 5 seconds

Speaking of like-minded people, there are many past winners of this award that I’d like to acknowledge.

This award goes way, way back; but I only go back with the ITC to about 2004. I still remember the 2008 conference I attended in St. Pete Beach, where this award was given to Pam Quinn, who is still a high achiever some 18 years later.

A few years later John Sneed was honored by the ITC.

In 2012, one of the most fascinating people I’ve ever met won this award. That would be Jim Piquet.

Up next in 2014 was Michael Catchpole from British Columbia. You heard me do my imitation of Michael yesterday during the Grand Debate.

Someone who was a very good friend of mine, and still is even though we never get to see each other any more, Ronda Edwards was honored in 2020.

Next up was Mickey Slimp who still has lots of energy and always some good stories to tell.

In 2024 we honored Loraine Schmidt, one of my all-time favorite colleagues from our years together on the ITC Board.

Last year it was Fred Lokken who is sort of the ITC Energizer Bunny. Still on the Board. Still working. Still wonking politically, if you know what I mean.

It’s a group that I am deeply honored to be joining. Groucho Marx apparently once said “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.” It’s safe to say that Groucho never met the ITC group.

Thank you very much. I feel blessed and honored to accept this award.

Filed under: Conference, Higher Ed, Online learning | Leave a comment »

Why You Should Join the ITC

Posted on September 3, 2025 by barrydahl

IF you work at a community college or other type of 2-year school, and
IF your job is related to online education in any way,
THEN you and your organization should be members of the Instructional Technology Council.

The ITC is an affiliated council of the AACC, the American Association of Community Colleges. They are THE organization with the closest ties to online education at two-year schools.

Many of my regular readers are already members of the ITC, because that’s where you and I met. I attended my first ITC eLearning conference in February 2004 in San Diego. Now, more than 21 years later, I’m still a huge advocate for the ITC. I hear that the 2026 conference will be in Austin, Texas in February. If there’s any way that I can make it to Austin to see dozens of good friends, I’ll be there.

There is no other online education organization that is devoted to professional development of community college educators. This is THE ONE! If you work at a 2-year school and you support one of the organizations that primarily focuses on 4-year schools and grad schools, then you are doing this wrong. Very wrong. Sorry, not sorry.

Annual membership dues are only $520 for public institutions that primarily offer a two-year associate’s degree or diploma. With that institutional membership you can have an unlimited number of employees with access to ITC services such as webinars, podcasts, Tuesday Talks, member pricing for the annual conference and much more. When I was on the Board I argued unsuccessfully that the dues were too cheap. Being the lowest cost provider in a space is not often the best place to be, but 15 years later their dues are still very low. You’d pay much more for a membership to any other organization and that org would NOT be focused on two-year schools.

After that first conference in 2004, it took me a while to return. I was a presenter at the 2007 ITC conference in Albuquerque. Those were the heydays of Web 2.0 tools, and my presentation was a hit, if memory serves. That exposure led to me being elected to the Board of Directors with my first term starting in summer 2007. I attended my first board meeting that June in Annapolis.

7 ITC Board members with a few family members on a boat in Annapolis harbor — **Part of the ITC Board of Directors in Annapolis, June 2007**

One year later at the conference in St. Pete Beach, they asked me to do the opening keynote. I was honored to be chosen for my first time on the main stage. I forget who the other keynote speakers were, except for Myk Garn who I met at the conference. We’ve been friends and collaborators ever since.

Barry Dahl on stage for 2008 keynote at ITC e-Learning — **St. Pete Beach Opening Keynote**

Barry Dahl and Myk Garn reunited at D2L Fusion in 2022 — **St. Pete Beach Opening Keynote**

My presentation that year was my first offering of something that became a standard for me at other venues: “eLearning Mythbusters.” At that time clickers were all the rage, so I used them to get a couple hundred audience members engaged in deciding (kinda) whether many of the things that people were saying about eLearning were truths or myths. It was fun and led to great conversations.

one of the slides with clicker results from Mythbusters keynote. The question was whether it is a myth or reality that online faculty work harder than on-campus faculty. 60% said that was a reality, with 40% choosing myth.

One of the things that I brought to the board was an awareness of a younger crop of movers and shakers in EdTech. Starting with the 2008 conference we started bringing in more cutting edge speakers, younger speakers, think more like new school than old school. For example, here’s the list of keynoters for three of the four years I was on the board:

Bryan Alexander 2009
Brian Lamb 2009
Jim Groom 2010
Jared Stein 2010
Nancy White 2010
Alan Levine 2011
Maria Anderson 2011
Cole Camplese 2011
David Wiley 2011

Bryan Alexander during his keynote — **Bryan Alexander Keynote**

Brian Lamb taking a photo with his phone during his keynote — **Bryan Alexander Keynote**

I was also honored to serve as a faculty member for the ITC Leadership Academy. The highlight of this experience was the 2010 Academy held in Portland, Maine. A great group of students/leaders and a faculty made up of most of my favorite board members. The ITC Leadership Academy is still going strong today and I still recommend it unequivocally for any young and inspiring eLearning leaders in the two-year schools.

I also had the pleasure of being on the debate stage twice for the ITC Grand Debate at the conference. In Portland in 2009, I gave the con argument for the debate topic, Resolved: Second Life will be the Second Coming for Higher Education (actually it was: Virtual Worlds are the Second Life for Online Education). Second Life was all the rage, but it also seemed so fake and unnecessary (to me anyway). You can read more about it in this old post on this site. My favorite line from the debate was and still is: “Does FERPA apply to a furry?”

The second time at the Grand Debate was in 2017 in St. Pete Beach. My opponent was a delightful faculty member from St. Petersburg College and we went toe-to-toe on the topic of whether online faculty could be (or should be allowed to be?) online-only, in other words, whether it was appropriate for faculty to work remotely from the campus. Having managed several faculty members who had been doing exactly this for several years, I was happy to take the Pro side of the debate.

Resolved: online faculty should be rooted and engaged in the traditional campus experience.

The debate moderator was my friend and ITC Board Member Michael Catchpole, which was also the case in 2009. Michael was an excellent moderator and a fixture at ITC conference debates for so many years. Inside Higher Ed wrote a piece about the Debate prior to it occurring. A highlight (in my mind) was when Michael read my bio during the introductions. The Orange Menace had just been inaugurated about a month earlier, so my intro had a definite Trump angle. It included thing such as “Barry is really, really, really, really, really smart, or at least that’s what people are saying!” and “One of his latest campus projects is to build a wall around the administration offices, and have the faculty union pay for it!” Good times, much less fashy than we find ourselves here in 2025.

I absolutely won the debate based on audience vote, but my opponent was so awesome that Michael declared it a draw (she was just stuck with the weaker position). I couldn’t argue with him and probably would have done the same thing in his shoes. Of course my position was proven as superior just a couple years later when COVID required everyone to teach remotely. The argument in the debate was that they couldn’t effectively do their jobs as faculty members. Everyone knew that was bullshit, they just didn’t want them to do this job remotely.

Fast forward to ITC eLearning 2022 in Las Vegas where I had the honor being the keynote speaker. My presentation title was “Is Online Education Dead? Or Just Dying?” You can learn much more about this session in two posts on this site: part one and part two. After starting the session reading my own obituary, we continued to examine what’s dead and what’s dying about online education and EdTech more generally. Lots of fun material to work with in this arena, IMO.

Movie poster of Barry Dahl with the D2L Moose: Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust. Is Online Education Dead?

Other eLearning conference highlights include:

2012 Long Beach: some of my best friends and I did a Digital Story Slam breakout session, with each presenter using a different digital technique/tool for their story. Co-presenters included Michael Amick, Kari Frisch, Audrey Williams, Kyle Mackie, Howard Beattie, and Matt Evins. It was a blast.

Part of the panel of presenters for the Digital Story Slam in Long Beach — **Howard Beattie telling his digital story in 2012 in Long Beach**

2010 Fort Worth: the most fun was a dinner with a bunch of friends and the “Persian Jokes” that were told by our new friend who was originally from Iran. The conference was great, but that evening spent with so many smart people was very memorable.
2008 in St. Pete Beach I held a beach party for members from my North Central district, along with other friends and Board members. The best part of ITC is getting to know all the great people.

2004 in San Diego north county: Quality Matters was just finishing their first year of their FIPSE grant and they held a half-day workshop where they shared version one of their course quality rubric. I took that back to Lake Superior College where we adopted a similar project and process that met our needs for peer review of online courses. That process is till in place today, called POET (Program for Online Excellence in Teaching.) That program alone has been worth much more than all the dues paid over the years to ITC.

Okay, okay, I know this is another long one, but I could go on and on about the ITC. Supporting this organization is important to the future of online education in two-years schools. It’s Barry Approved!

Filed under: Conference, Higher Ed, Online learning | Tagged: education, higher-education, learning, news, teaching | Leave a comment »

40 Years in 5 Minutes – My Career in a Nutshell

Posted on November 22, 2022 by barrydahl

This 5-Minute Flare was created for the D2L Fusion conference in 2021.

A 5-minute Flare is similar to a Pecha Kucha presentation or maybe an Ignite presentation. There are 15 slides, each timed to automatically advance every 20 seconds, for a total of 5 minutes. So yes, I was talking fast.

YouTube embedded video of Barry’s 5-minute Flare from 2021.

Topics include:

How I got a start teaching in Higher Ed
18 Years with D2L, half customer and half employee
Teaching tennis – with a reference to Leave it to Beaver
Online learning conversations tend to repeat themselves
What’s best? Online, On-ground, Hybrid?
Why do students take online courses?
The words we use matter
Definitions: student, interaction, best
Students or Customers?
You can’t interact with an inanimate object.
Best practices are almost never best.
Grading or Ungrading?
Steve Jobs was wrong, very wrong.
About the moose – both real ones and plushy ones.
Closing thoughts by Michael Scott

Filed under: Higher Ed, Online learning, Personal | 1 Comment »

Investing Instead of Spending Your College Money

Posted on August 30, 2013 by barrydahl

The onslaught of press about the value (or lack thereof) of a college education continues unabated. Here’s just a sampling of some of the articles about the cost of and/or value of going to college:

Washington Post (8/27/13) The Tuition is Too Damn High, Part II: Why college is still worth it
Cathy Davidson (8/24/13): Why Does College Cost So Much–And Why Do So Many Pundits Get It Wrong?
Notre Dame Magazine (Summer 2013): Is College Worth It?
My own post: ROI on Tuition Paid – Another Bunch of Hooey (also More ROI Hooey)
Also mine: Series about the $10,000 bachelor degree (10+ posts altogether)

There’s many more to choose from, but you get the idea. So let’s say that you have a hypothetical child that is about ready to enter college. She’s a slightly above-average student, but not a star student. She has more personality than you can shake a stick at, but not the greatest amount of ambition to change the world. She’s uncertain about where she wants to go in life (you know, the career thing), and so she’s having a hard time figuring out where she should go to college and what she should major in. The idea of going away to an exotic land with fabulous dorms and climbing walls (sorry, but everyone has to throw that into the equation) is something that she is very interested in. Her parents are not made of money, but they have done some saving for college expenses, just not the kind of money that can afford the out-of-state or private school climbing walls.

The parents are able to pay $5,000 per semester for 4 years, or a total of $40,000. A four-year degree in 4 years is the exception rather than the norm, but that’s the way they’re figuring the finances for now. Pell money will be scarce because their family income is just a little bit too high. Burdening the young lady with mountains of debt doesn’t seem like a good idea to any of them. State grant money is very uncertain, and so are scholarships (remember, she’s a slightly above-average student without severe financial need).

Although the young lady doesn’t like this idea, she can live at home and attend the local state university in her home town. The cost of tuition per year is about $8,000 and books and supplies will run about another $2,000 – thus, the $10,000 per year that her parents have available would work in this scenario without incurring debt. Living outside of the home, whether in the same town or not adds a significant amount of cost, so let’s assume that the parents are going to strong arm her into living at home, at least for the first couple of years (actually, all 4 years, but they keep that to themselves).

Here’s the $64,000 question (OK, the $40,000 question):

Should they pay for her college, or just invest the money for her retirement?

What if she doesn’t go to college? Maybe on her own she could take a few classes here or there and over time build towards a college degree (or get herself a free, shiny MOOC degree!). Or maybe she gets a job with an employer who is willing to subsidize her higher education (increasingly rare, but they’re still out there). Or maybe she avoids much of the ladder-climbing rat race and works at jobs that don’t require a college degree, makes enough money to live off of, and basically coasts to the finish line where there’s a pot-o-money waiting for her. Or, any one of the hundreds of other ways that this could play out.

Assume Mom and Dad invest $5,000 in her name every six months for four years – the same $40,000 that they would have paid for her college costs. Investing in a mutual fund that mirrors the S&P 500 tends to be a good gamble over the long run. The long-run here would be a 44-year investment, the first 4 years of which find her parents paying into her “not college” fund, and the next forty years of compounding. The no-longer-young lady would be 62 years old when she is able to get her hands on the investment spoils. Historically, the S&P 500 returns an average annual rate of approximately 10% over 30 years or more. Of course, past results are not necessarily indicative – blah, blah, blah. So, let’s look at a range of outcomes from 7% to 12%.

7% annualized rate of return: = $701,441*
8% annualized rate of return: = $1,040,908
9% annualized rate of return: = $1,539,394
10% annualized rate of return: = $2,268,974
11% annualized rate of return: = $3,333,329
12% annualized rate of return: = $4,881,136

* The $40,000 investment (8 annuity payments of $5K each, every 6 months for 8 periods), then 40 years of growth at 7% without additional payments.

Caveats:

These numbers are pre-inflation. In other words, at the 8% return, it’s not the same as having a million dollars today, but whatever a million dollars will be worth 44 years from now.
Any mutual fund will have annual expenses and admin fees to pay. Several analysts seem to suggest that 1/2 of 1% (annually) is a good estimate for a long-term mutual fund with minimal activity.
Income taxes can always be a thorny issue. The $10,000 annual contribution by the parents should be tax-free since the gifting limit is $13,000 per child, per year. Taxes on investment income will need to be paid at some point. The first $5,000 each year should go into a Roth IRA, which is the Roth contribution limit per year, and also assumes that the young lady will have earned income of at least $5,000 each year during those first four years. Another advantage of a Roth IRA is that there are no taxes on the earnings (or the original contributions) when withdrawals are made by the retiree – although there will be taxes on the amounts in the non-Roth accounts (if they aren’t converted to Roth at some point). The parents need to be able to contribute an additional $5K per year on her behalf in a tax-friendly way. There are options to consider, but even a regular investment account during those first four years will not earn a large amount of taxable income (taxed at her supposedly lower tax rates). Then, starting in year 5 she begins converting the investment account into the Roth IRA account until that transfer is completed.
Taking inflation, expenses, and taxes into consideration – you could probably take 25-30% off the accumulated amounts above to see what might happen in today’s dollars.
Of course this could go horribly wrong and she would hate you for ruining her life.

Additional thoughts:

Expect another post (one of these days) that goes into more depth on this point, but I absolutely do NOT buy the argument that the only way that a person can become properly socialized is to go to college – you know, all the learning that happens outside of the classrooms. Life experience can be gained in many ways – college does not have a corner on that market.
Compare this with the analyses about how much more someone will make with a college education than without one. There’s many studies out there, but this one gets to the point in easy to understand terms: The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings (PDF, U.S. Census, 2002). They estimate that a holder of a bachelor’s degree will make $900,000 more than the holder of a high school diploma over their entire working life. YMMV. Compare that number with the amounts that the not-college investment will grow to, and the bachelor’s degree is not such a no-brainer. A more recent analyses (2011) by the Census Bureau indicates that a white female with a bachelor’s degree will earn about $845,000 more during her life than a white female with a high school diploma (for full-time, year-round workers). The one thing we don’t have data on is what that white female (with B.S) will have in a retirement account at the end of her career. It had better be substantial or my argument above still holds.
I realize that there’s a difference in the unemployment rate for diploma holders compared to degree holders – but some people (those with lots of personality and a good work ethic) will fare better in finding and keeping those local jobs than others.

Conclusion:

I’m not an anti-college guy, I’m a pro-college guy. I spent 17 years as a college faculty member and 10 years as a college administrator. Most of my friends work in education. I still work with educators in my current job. I think college is GREAT!
I also think that college is not for everybody. It’s crucial for the professions, it’s helpful in STEM fields, it’s a seal of approval for many jobs and career aspirations. But, it’s not the only way to get ahead. Why not spend 40 years at jobs you enjoy that pay you enough money to get by, then retire with a million dollar nest egg. Then build your own climbing wall.
If the young lady really wants to go to college, and if she has a plan for how to start AND finish that adventure, and if she is willing to do it in a manner that doesn’t break the parent’s backs or burden her with debt (add in a few more ifs just for good measure); then she should probably go to college.
One question I have is this: how many young people would look at these two options below and choose option B?
- A) Go to the college of your choice and spend $10,000 per year of your parent’s money (for 4 years) – incurring debt for all other costs that you cannot pay with their contribution.
- B) Find a job you enjoy without a college degree, and let your college money grow to a million dollars or more for your retirement.

Any hypothetical kids out there want to choose option B? Hypothetically?

(Graphic courtesy of geralt at Pixabay)

Filed under: Higher Ed | 4 Comments »

How to Game the ObamaEd System

Posted on August 23, 2013 by barrydahl

I taught Cost Accounting for many years. I always had fun (okay, fun here is measured in the range of possibilities related to teaching accounting) covering the subject called Return on Investment (ROI), especially when it applied to selecting new products to add to your Product Mix with the goal of Maximizing ROI. The problem with trying to maximize ROI is that you are trying to maximize a percentage, and you can’t put percentages (as opposed to dollars) into the bank and pay your bills with it. The interesting part of the story (again, relatively speaking) is when managers make suboptimal decisions. A suboptimal decision is one that is in the manager’s (or his/her division’s) best interests, but not in the best interest of the company as a whole.

Yesterday, President Obama unveiled the first glance at his plan to give higher education an extreme makeover. Light on details, the plan does cover lots of ground, much of which would definitely upset some of the apple carts in higher ed. Trying to get a jump on the Tea Party – let me dub his plan “ObamaEd,” although I’m also quite partial to Obama.edu. ObamaEd is probably DOA in Congress, if for no other reason than the fact that he proposed it. Therefore, the two factions of the GOP will oppose it, even though it feels much more like a GOP-colored proposal than one from the other side of the aisle.

ObamaEd is an attempt to hold colleges and universities more accountable for the federal dollars that flow into their coffers. Fair enough, I guess, but as soon as you start changing things like funding formulas, people start trying to find a way to game the system. Here’s one of the more significant proposals in ObamaEd.

New College Ratings before 2015. Before the 2015 school year, the Department of Education will develop a new ratings system to help students compare the value offered by colleges and encourage colleges to improve. These ratings will compare colleges with similar missions and identify colleges that do the most to help students from disadvantaged backgrounds as well as colleges that are improving their performance. The results will be published on the College Scorecard. The Department will develop these ratings through public hearings around the country to gather the input of students and parents, state leaders, college presidents, and others with ideas on how to publish excellent ratings that put a fundamental premium on measuring value and ensure that access for those with economic or other disadvantages are encouraged, not discouraged. The ratings will be based upon such measures as:

Access, such as percentage of students receiving Pell grants;

Affordability, such as average tuition, scholarships, and loan debt; and

Outcomes, such as graduation and transfer rates, graduate earnings, and advanced degrees of college graduates. (emphasis mine)

Let’s just focus on the idea of basing the college ratings on the earnings of the graduates from each college. Not sure how big a role this will play, but let’s guess for now that it could be a significant factor. How do colleges game ObamaEd to their benefit? It’s really pretty simple. Start by cutting the programs with lowest rates of earnings for their grads. The earnings for the graduates of institution will be based on the average of all the different programs lumped together (or so it would appear at this time). Let’s take an example from the great state of Tennessee. Using some of the data from a recent report by CollegeMeasures.org, here are a few of the programs at the University of Tennessee-Martin. I’m leaving out some of the detail, but the data below should illustrate my point.

Earnings of graduates at UT-Martin (pages 8-11):

Health Professions = $58,592 (highest)
Engineering = $52,976
whole bunch of stuff in between helps make the UT-M average = $37,140
Philosophy and Religious Studies = $27,094
Psychology = $26,205
History = $25,248 (lowest)

You don’t have to be a cost accountant (although it helps) to figure out that if you eliminate the History program, your average earnings for grads at the institution goes up. Think of the $37,140 as being a weighted-average (which means that it is weighted by the number of grads in each major) of the earnings of the grads from all the programs. Get rid of the lowest-earnings program and your average goes up, and your federal rating goes up. The poor Psychology program is next. If it worked for History, it’ll work for them, too.

In fact, mathematically it will work for every program below the average. Just to add more intrigue, as you eliminate the lower programs, the average continues to go up, so that some programs that started out above the average, are now below the average and are now on the possible chopping block. If you carried it to the logical (okay, that’s a matter of opinion) conclusion, you’d cut everything except the Health Programs (uh oh, that’s another grouping of programs where some are better than others) and UT-M would now have grads that earn an average of $58,592 their first year out of college.

Would this be a suboptimal decision? Sure sounds like it. Would this actually happen? Probably yes, if we’re talking about cutting some of the lowest programs to bring up the average. Probably not if we’re talking about cutting everything except the highest performer.

However, you do need to be careful what you ask for.

(NOTE: in the maximizing ROI dilemma, the manager drops the least profitable product line, even if it is above the minimum level required by the company. Then drops the second least profitable line, etc., each time raising the overall ROI in the division. This makes his percentage go up, but hurts the company overall. Works the same way here with average graduate earnings.)

Filed under: Higher Ed | Tagged: Obama, ObamaEd, ROI | 5 Comments »

I Say Bull ____ !!

Posted on June 10, 2013 by barrydahl

I haven’t been posting here much lately, but there are so many things that I want to say about what I’m seeing in this increasingly insane world, that I feel compelled to start writing some of it here – if nothing else for my own sanity (what’s left of it).

Have you noticed the explosion of infographics on the web lately? Are you still breathing? If so, then you’ve noticed. You can find lots of very positive (glowing, in fact) web articles about how to use infographics as link bait. That is the number one purpose for an infographic, to drive traffic to somebody’s website. I get several emails each week asking me to embed/share some infographic on my site. The emails are slowing down now since I don’t respond (positively) very often, and also because if I choose to respond it is usually to tell them how wrong they are.

Are you familiar with the Telephone game? Also called Grapevine, the Operator Game, or this culturally insensitive name. You’ve probably played this game from time-to-time, either as a planned activity or just accidentally. This is where you whisper something in the ear of the person next to you, they whisper it to the next person, etc. etc. until you get to the end of the line and a very different phrase (often, anyway) comes out of the mouth of the last person. That’s analogous to what I see happening more and more with the crazy explosion of infographics on the Internet. They take information (often, anyway) from a source and twist it around until you cannot recognize it any more.

Here’s a recent, classic example from one of the several SEO trolls (see Infographics as link bait) that are trying to make money out of being a middleman in the higher education (usually online learning) market. I won’t link to them because that could be a good thing for them if I drove eyeballs to their site. Instead, I’ll share a few snippets from their recent infographic on the Evolution of Online Schooling.

1950, really? Seems odd since Henry Ford (THE Henry Ford) died in 1947, at least if you can believe Wikipedia. Could it be that they were talking about his grandson Henry Ford II (not HF III, which is weird)? Actually, it turns out that they are talking about the Ford Foundation. But when you invoke the ghost of “Henry Ford,” you should be talking about the real deal.

Seriously? This has something to do with international education? Someone please enlighten me. One of their sources mentions CAPA, but doesn’t say anything about “ushering in international online learning.” Another source mentions CAPA, but also says nothing about what the infographic claims. There’s a reason why this doesn’t make any sense. Turns out that there is a CAPA International Education organization, founded in 1972. The only problem is that it has nothing to do with the CAPA online learning program (now called LON-CAPA) developed in 1992. And yet thousands (just guessing) of people will look at this and think they’ve learned something.

This one leaves me speechless. The first MOOC was in 1994? That’s pretty good considering that the term was coined in 2008 (see page 12). And if you’re going to proclaim something as the first thing that “sort of sounds like what we today call a MOOC,” then you can find lots of things that came earlier than this. This just shows an incredible lack of knowledge.

The little snippet above (Today) is where the Telephone Game comes into play. Into the first ear, USA Today whispers that “four big universities, operating mostly online, have quickly become the largest education schools in the USA.” Then into the second ear, Techcrunch whisper/shouts that “online education degrees now dwarf traditional universities.” At which time the owner of the third ear (that of the infographic people) ends the game by saying “Twice as many students earn online degrees as traditional degrees.” My first reaction to which is shown below:

To recap:

USA Today uses the headline “Online Education Degrees Skyrocket” in an article about how the four institutions awarding the most degrees in the field of education are online schools. They further state that those four online institutions granted 6% of the total bachelor’s degrees in education (“one in 16”) and 9% of the total graduate degrees in education (“one in 9”). They fail to say (because they probably can’t find the data) what percentage of the total education degrees were awarded by all the online schools, or even what percentage of graduates earned their degrees online.
Techcrunch cites the USA Today article in an article with the headline of “Online Education Degrees Now Dwarf Traditional Universities.” First of all, I’m not even sure that I can make sense of that statement: Degrees dwarf universities? Whatever. They quickly veer off on some mental gymnastics regarding the quality of online degrees.
The infographic people cite the Techcrunch article (and all other citations have nothing to do with the number of graduates) in coming up with their incredibly inaccurate claim about how many students earn their degrees online.
I smh and call Bull!!

Not all infographics are this poor, but more and more of them are. Guess there’s a lot of pressure when you have to churn one of these out each and every day, lest your page views go down. Oy.

Filed under: Higher Ed, Online learning | Tagged: infographics | Comments Off on I Say Bull ____ !!

One Mind Opines about 20 Million Minds

Posted on January 9, 2013 by barrydahl

On Jan 8, 2013, an organization called Twenty Million Minds Foundation held a one-day conference/ symposium/ discussion/ thingy called “re:boot California Higher Education.” Check out Audrey Watters’ Storify about the whole day.

There were several things that struck me about the conversation throughout the day. I’ll pick five of the things that were said during the day and give my own point or counterpoint.

#1: Has online learning growth been faculty-driven?

Bob Samuels of AFT questions instruction as a cost driver in higher ed as well as faculty "driving" a move to online ed. #20mmreboot

— Jim Julius (@jjulius) January 8, 2013

Bob Samuels is the President of the University Council (California-based) of the American Federation of Teachers. You can also read his reflections on the day’s events. I have no bone to pick with Dr. Samuels, and I agree with him that the idea that the growth to online learning has NOT been faculty-driven. He says “this is all about reducing costs and making money.” Let me clarify that I partially agree with him but that I disagree with him in total. I agree with him that at the research universities – this move to online has NOT been faculty-driven. The research universities have, for the most part, been brought into the online arms race kicking and screaming. Let’s face it. The online learning growth over the past 15 tears has mainly been fueled by community colleges that want to increase access to education while growing their enrollments and by the for-profit providers who want to increase their profits by growing enrollments. Neither of those two things are especially important on the campuses of our major research universities.

Where I disagree with Dr. Samuels is when it comes to community colleges. In my experience in Minnesota, and in many other places where I’ve travelled to connect and share with people involved with e-learning; a great deal of the growth in online learning has been faculty-driven. I know a large number of faculty members who have embraced the advantages of online learning while putting up with the disadvantages of such, without any coercion from the dreaded college administrators. The point of this is something that was brought up several times during the day; namely that we cannot paint with such a broad brush to think that there is one problem here and that there will be one solution. Higher education is NOT a single industry. Community Colleges and R1 universities are as different as night and day.

I think the following tweet sums it up nicely:

“There’s a tremendous need for this type of course but it’s not for the research university.” Bob Samuels on online courses #20mmreboot

— Megan Murray (@HigherEdWriter) January 8, 2013

Regarding Dr. Samuel’s other point that online ed is “all about reducing costs,” I would have to agree that it seems to be coming down to that during the past year or so. For 15 years of online learning growth, I was never involved in serious conversations about how this would dramatically reduce the cost of providing higher education opportunities. The main focus was increased access to education and flexibility to meet modern lifestyles and schedules. But now, just lately, cost reduction seems to be the major focus. I suppose we can blame the governors who seem to think that a bachelor’s degree should cost no more than $10,000, or maybe we should blame some of the for-profits who (for a while) were making huge profits (and therefore had low costs relative to revenues generated) before they started getting slapped around by Senator Harkin and the like. Whatever the many causes of this shift in the conversation, this is not a good shift. If we focus on online education as being the way to reduce costs, we will certainly lose our way as a global leader in the education market.

#2: Will the best MOOC win?

"will there be only one choice for PSYC 101?" Same question was asked in 1998 as we were starting to grow online leanring. #20mmreboot

— Barry Dahl (@barrydahl) January 8, 2013

I believe the question was asked by Lillian Taiz, President of the California Faculty Association (apologies if it was someone else). Her question related to the MOOC craze, and whether the logical extension (my words, not hers) of all of this would be a single course by a single provider for each needed course title. Thus, will there eventually only be one (presumably the best) Intro to Psychology course, taught by the best instructor in the world, and all the students in the world will learn from the feet of this 21st century reincarnation of Socrates.

I’ve been thinking about this question a lot lately, ever since the MOOC craze kicked in. As you can see in the embedded tweet, I remember this same question being asked about 15 years ago. I was a faculty member in Minnesota and attended a state-wide Community College faculty meeting at Normandale CC in Bloomington, MN. There were many big fears about this unknown thing called online learning, and one of the biggest fears was that it would put everyone out of a job. “Why would they take my accounting course when they can take that course from Harvard or Yale or whoever has the best course and instructor?” Some of us thought that those concerns were overblown, but there definitely seemed to be more people who believed it would happen to them than those who didn’t believe it.

During the ensuing 15 years, there was nary a glimpse of anything close to that happening, and for lots of reasons that I won’t go into at this time. Suffice it to say that anyone who wanted to teach online was able to do so and have full or nearly full classes to teach – at least in my experience. And now all of the sudden, the MOOC thing seems to be turning that on its head. If I taught a course on Artificial Intelligence and saw that Thrun and Norvig attracted 160,000 students to their MOOC of the same flavor when first offered at Stanford, I might be just a little bit nervous about my job security. My advice is to not progress beyond the stage of being a “little bit nervous.”

In the end, will the best MOOC win and everyone else die? NO – not even close.

#3: Is Bigger Always Better?

Koller: Andrew Ng would have to teach his Stanford course for 250 years to reach as many as he did in his #MOOC. #20mmreboot

— Jeff Selingo (@jselingo) January 8, 2013

This one gets a lot of play. Just remember that there’s always more than one side to consider. Sure, Ng would need 250 years to “reach” as many as he did in the MOOC. The difference between “reaching” and teaching is something that definitely needs to be part of this discussion. The educational opportunity provided to the 100,000 students in the MOOC is very different from the 400 students on campus. The quote above that talks about 250 years is based on some media reports of the AI MOOC enrolling 100,000 students. Other reports say it was as much as 160,000 students – which would take 400 years of the small (400 is NOT small) classes to match.

But he also would need about 3,000 years to see as many of his students fail (not succeed or complete) his course as he did in the MOOC. BTW, 3,000 years is just a wild guess – but I feel pretty confident about it.

Okay, I’m running out of time here. Three is less than five. I’ll get around to a second post in the near future with a few more items from re:boot.

Filed under: Conference, Higher Ed, MOOC, Twitter | Comments Off on One Mind Opines about 20 Million Minds

2012 – That’s a Wrap

Posted on January 2, 2013 by barrydahl

Here’s a look back at some of the things that immediately come to mind as I ponder about what was in 2012 and also take a look ahead at what might be in 2013.

2012 Flashback: As most of the people who would be reading this already know, I started a new job with Desire2Learn back in May, 2012. It’s been just over 7 months now, and I’m still very glad that I made the move to a corporate position after 27 years on the inside of higher ed.

2013 Flashforward: The company (D2L) is doing great. They treat employees exceptionally well, and the future is definitely very bright. I certainly hope that I continue to fit into their plans. 2013 Resolution: do my best to not screw up the great job that dropped into my lap. You can view some of my work at the Desire2Learn Community.

Public Domain photo by Gary Kramer, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Sad memory of 2012: There are many to choose from, but I’ll go with this one: Minnesotans and Wisconsinites engaged in wolf hunts, with a majority of the wolf “trophies” being taken by leg traps. This previously endangered species was brought back from the edge of extinction so that they can be killed by humans, apparently. Next up? I think we’re seeing a few too many bald eagles around these days – better shoot ’em!

Happy memory of 2012: I developed a passion for growing vegetables, both indoors and out. Right now while it’s below zero (F) outside, I have tomatoes that are ripening in my little indoor greenhouse. I have both hydroponics and soil-based plants growing in what was formerly my tropical fish room. 2013 Resolution: Continue learning more about hydroponics gardening and successfully grow some of the exotic seeds that I am finding online.

2012 Flashback: As a result of taking the job at D2L, I am no longer pursuing any new business with Excellence in e-Education. In fact, the website is being deleted early in January, 2013, so I won’t even bother linking to it. I have saved all webinar recordings from 2011-12 here at barrydahl.com and will continue to make them available as long as possible. I enjoyed the time I spent being self-employed and we were getting by financially; but “getting by” and “putting three kids through college” are two very different things.

2013 Flashforward: I expect to have a slightly higher blogging profile at this site during 2013. Eliminating the Excellence site helps take one thing off my plate. 2013 Resolution: engage in more long posts and less 140-character posts when the long post is more appropriate.

2012 Flashback: A definite highlight of my year was a trip to Australia in September for the first annual Desire2Learn Asia-Pac Teaching and Learning Conference. This was my first trip to Australia and I was able to make the most of it by adding on a few personal days both before and after the conference in Melbourne. Spent two days driving the Great Ocean Road, went to a Footy game in Melbourne, spent two days in Hobart, Tasmania and visited the fine folks at UTAS, and then wrapped up with two days in Sidney.

2013 Flashforward: I’ll probably be travelling quite a bit in 2013 as well, but it’s unlikely that I’ll have the opportunity to go anywhere as exotic as Australia. Still, I generally enjoy travelling and plan to make the most of several trips by mixing in some personal days along with the work days. Currently looking forward to work-related travels to Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba, Illinois, Georgia, Florida, Michigan, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Colorado, California, South Carolina, and probably a few others that I don’t know about just yet.

What end-of-the-year list would be complete without those words/phrases that you would like to see banned? Here’s my list:

Spot on (Ick. Incredibly pretentious. Just say “on the nosey!”)
At the end of the day (Can anyone sum up anything without using this phrase? What about the end of the week, the month, the season, or whatever?)
No problem (this one’s for me – I’m going to try real hard to say “You’re welcome” after receiving thanks rather than this very stupid phrase.)
Prolly (me again, gotta stop that.)
All the rest of these were cute for about a day, but that was it:
- chillaxin’
- bromance
- pwned
- just sayin’
- word
- anything-izzle

This next one is more for me personally, since I’m more likely to accomplish something that I write down and/or declare to the world.

2012 Flashback: After returning from Australia, I took a chance on chiropractic care for the first time in my life. I was having periodic (and worsening) issues with my lower back and finally agreed to have it looked at. The x-rays showed that I have a deteriorating disc at the bottom of my spine, between L5 and S1, in particular. I have a couple of family members who are chiropractors, but still wasn’t sure that this would be the path to improvement. Turns out that it was exactly what I needed. It’s not as if the disc is miraculously growing back (it won’t), but I certainly am living with less pain these days.

2013 Flashforward: Between periodic adjustments, regular stretching, and use of my new inversion table; I plan to stand straighter and be less whiny. 2013 Resolution: I plan to visit the Y at least 100 times in 2013 for stretching and exercise, and to use the inversion table at least 100 times on other days. I’m a numbers person and highly competitive, so having a goal and a calendar taped to my mirror just might be the ticket. In case you haven’t heard this next little tidbit, let me assure you that getting old is indeed a pain in the backside.

Here’s my favorite video from 2012:

My top five (most viewed) posts on this site during 2012:

Invite a Monkey to your Picnik (early review of photo editing site PicMonkey)
ITC09 Grand Debate – a Real Con Job (3 year old post still gets lots of hits)
Public Speaking as an Online Class
Brainstorming a Learner Flexibility Rubric
Fun Facts about the UAE

My personal favorite post from 2012: Replacement Teachers Coming Soon to Wisconsin

Hoping 2013 turns out to be lucky, not yucky, for all of us. As Gomer Pyle would say, “Best of luck to you and yours!”

Filed under: Desire2Learn, Higher Ed, Personal | Comments Off on 2012 – That’s a Wrap

Regional Accreditation for Online Programs

Posted on December 12, 2012 by barrydahl

This is a repost from my old business site: Excellence in e-Education (xlents.com). That site is being shut down and I am preserving those items that I don’t want to have disappear. Originally posted April 16, 2012.

Recently I saw a discussion thread suggesting that there should be national standards for the delivery of online programs, rather than each of the regional accrediting bodies dealing with the issue. On one hand this may make some sense since online learning doesn’t conform to arbitrary regional boundaries, such as those drawn around the six regions.

However, higher ed has a long history of regional accreditation agencies being the authoritative bodies for higher ed accreditation without a single national body (I’m sure you already knew that). There are national accrediting bodies, but they are not as highly respected as the regional bodies. In fact, any school that touts its national accreditation instead of regional accreditation is typically considered second-tier (not by themselves, just by others) because they haven’t been able to attain regional accreditation. Of course the national accrediting bodies will argue strenuously against that point of view. You can easily find those arguments on their websites.

I do find it interesting that online learning is one area where there has been a purposeful confluence of thinking by the regional bodies. Through C-RAC (Council of Regional Accrediting Commissions), they developed the Interregional Guidelines for the Evaluation of Distance Education (Online Learning). The new Guidelines have been endorsed by all regional accrediting organizations in the U.S.

Here is that doc: Guidelines for the Evaluation of Distance Education Programs (PDF)

Filed under: e-Quality, Higher Ed, Online learning | 1 Comment »

Live in Minnesota? No Coursera For You!

Posted on September 28, 2012 by barrydahl

From the “You Can’t Make This Crap Up” category:

Laura Gibbs (via Steve Krauss) shared a tidbit about the Coursera Terms of Service, as shown below:

Notice for Minnesota Users

Coursera has been informed by the Minnesota Office of Higher Education that under Minnesota Statutes (136A.61 to 136A.71), a university cannot offer online courses to Minnesota residents unless the university has received authorization from the State of Minnesota to do so. If you are a resident of Minnesota, you agree that either (1) you will not take courses on Coursera, or (2) for each class that you take, the majority of work you do for the class will be done from outside the State of Minnesota. 😉

I don’t know about you, but I think that’s hilarious. Minnesota OHE went out of their way to contact Coursera to tell them to keep their cotton-pickin’ hands of those Minnesota residents, or so I’m guessing. This, without a doubt, stems from the ongoing melodrama surrounding state authorization for online education – see WCET summary.

Interesting that the Minnesota OHE apparently reached out to Coursera to inform them of the state statute. Also interesting that Coursera seems to have no interest in paying the fee that the MOHE would require to make this “legal.” Gotta wonder if they have done the same with Udacity, EdX, and the Siemens/Downes/etc Connectivism MOOCs such as the EdFuture MOOC ready to get started on October 8. I’m guessing they haven’t.

Here’s the beginning of the statute:

136A.61 POLICY.

The legislature has found and hereby declares that the availability of legitimate courses and programs leading to academic degrees offered by responsible private not-for-profit and for-profit institutions of postsecondary education and the existence of legitimate private colleges and universities are in the best interests of the people of this state. The legislature has found and declares that the state can provide assistance and protection for persons choosing private institutions and programs, by establishing policies and procedures to assure the authenticity and legitimacy of private postsecondary education institutions and programs. The legislature has also found and declares that this same policy applies to any private and public postsecondary educational institution located in another state or country which offers or makes available to a Minnesota resident any course, program or educational activity which does not require the leaving of the state for its completion.

This looks like a business opportunity. I live in Wisconsin, but only five minutes away from the Minnesota border. People living in Duluth cannot take these courses unless a majority of the work they do for the class will be done from outside the State of Minnesota. My plan would be to open up a coffee shop in Superior with cheap coffee and free wifi so that all Coursera students can gather together to do their homework. Of course, cheating will be strictly prohibited!!

Filed under: Higher Ed, MOOC | 4 Comments »

Barry Dahl dot com

Recent Posts

Tags (Categories)

Archives

Pages