Thanks for all the insightful comments.  My only concern with Rory's caution, that it shouldn't cost money, is to bear in mind the full cost of the students who:

1. Fail to complete their course (both cost to them individually and to us as an unsatisfied customer (bearing in mind the extent to which people enrol in courses through word of mouth endorsement).

2. Second the cost in them not becoming return customers. We do play an important role as a service industry,  filling in the gaps for other schools, but our course/degree completion ration is probably the worst in the country. We know that students who complete one course successfully are much likely to start and complete a second and third course.

Now, the research question to address is 'does the higher level of engagement envisioned by these enhancements to the independent study model, really result in increased pass rates and re-enrolment. I suspect it does, but we don't yet have anywhere near enough data on this to calculate ROI or even personal value of course/program success as compared to non completion or failure. But we do know that our non completion rate is way higher than paced courses - online or on campus.

Terry

In regard to Rory's comment, it is inferred that I think we need paced with more tutor interaction. That might help, but I am thinking that just having a schedule is important. Studies could usefully be done on that aspect I think. My technician is taking the prototype MIT electronics course and is very sensitive to deadlines. You do not get credit for the course but he sure likes getting 100% and would hate to get 0% by turning in something late. Similarly for me, that income tax that is three weeks overdue is really bugging me...

Like many of you, I have talked about all these issues once or twice in my career, then went off and tried to build something. But today it seems very important to be wise about our politics and the next steps.

Compiling a list of principles and actions we agree upon would be good. Some low hanging ones, some more ambitious.

Not a list of complaints, rtaher positive changes in practice that may or may not require some changes in our systems or our work culture to accomodate them.

Developing supportive and compelling discussion papers on each chnage practice will be necessary.

Identifying the political route, such as identifying the committees of GFC and elsewhere to bring these to,

and the best strategies for winning votes that force changes seems fundamental.

Creating linkages amongst ourselves, seeking our GFC representtaives to educate and lobby,

working on our collective identity, and a campaign slogan might help.

Dear all,

I'm sorry for providing you with a link that did not work. You may however find links to the paper and presentation Torstein Rekkedal presents this week at the top of his homepage at http://infoportal.nki.no/en/web/torstein

All the best from Morten

- Morten Flate Paulsen