The Future of Virtual Education: An Interview with Michael Horn

Michael Horn is a Senior Partner at Entangled Solutions, the co-founder of the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation, and a long-standing member of the Davis Akilah Global Innovation Council. Davis’ Chief Academic Officer Tony Guzman interviewed Michael as part of the Council’s online retreat on April 21, 2020, discussing the future of virtual education.

Michael: For this section of the retreat, Tony and I wanted to have a conversation about the implications of Davis and Akilah moving into an online-only world. Tony, I’ll let you start us off.

Tony: Sounds good, thank you. We’ve been using blended learning at the Akilah Institute for the past few trimesters. As we start to prepare for online learning this upcoming academic year, we’re asking: what is the difference, really, between blended and online learning?

Michael: It’s a great question, one that also concerns folks in the brick and mortar education world. First, I’d like to clarify the definitions: I think of online learning as a modality that can be used at both a distance and in blended environments. The distinction is not between online and blended learning, but between virtual and blended learning, because we still use online learning within a blended model. With that in mind, there are major differences between a full-time virtual and blended experience. In a blended model, students physically come together, creating a community with their peers and instructors. In a virtual model, students are often on their own, trying to carve out time to individually learn.

Even within virtual models there is deep variety, as students can learn asynchronously or synchronously. Asynchronous environments let students learn when it’s most convenient for them, offering tremendous flexibility and tailored learning experiences. Synchronous learning, on the other hand, expects students to learn at the same pace by logging on at a specific time. Research shows that synchronous environments often create more community and have higher completion rates because it compels students to check-in on a regular basis. This mode runs the risk, however, of serving fewer students due to rigid meeting times, constraints, and accessibility.

There is no best model for the practice; it’s based on what is right for the learner’s needs, where they are in their learning journey, and what progress means to them.

Tony: How can virtual learning be adapted for communities in low-bandwidth contexts?

Michael: Historically, we’ve seen virtual schools provide the equipment to learners — for example, paying for internet, or providing a server and a tablet. In the evening, or once every few days, learners can go to that server set up in the community, link up their device so it syncs to the cloud, and submit their assignments while downloading the next one. There’s less synchronicity in these environments. It’s also harder to complete video lessons, so we see more texts or files that can be easily delivered.

We’re also seeing the rise of mobile learning platforms. These are tailor-built, short-form micro-courses for phones that students can hop onto and complete five minutes of learning. The best platforms are active, asking students to read a sentence or two, answer a question, and immediately receive feedback. They also work on a variety of phone types, which dramatically increases affordability. We’re seeing significantly more of these mobile platforms being born. How does that resonate with what you’re seeing with Davis and Akilah students?

Tony: Schools and higher education institutions have been closed in Rwanda since mid-March due to the pandemic. We’ve been teaching our students virtually and are looking to provide students in need with internet access and modems this trimester. We’ve also been using solar-based devices.

Michael: Yes, I’ve been seeing solar-paneled devices more frequently. The solar panel collects a charge during the day while students are at school or virtually learning. At night, the devices are connected to the solar panel’s battery so that each of the devices’ batteries can be charged and they’ll be ready for the next day.

Tony: Yes that’s right! Now, I’d like to circle back to how the Davis and Akilah model can translate to a virtual environment.

Michael: This is interesting; when we were building the Davis and Akilah blended learning model, we were actually inspired by Western Governors University, a fully online, competency-based university. The major difference is that Western Governors is designed to be solitary; Davis and Akilah’s model is constructed to encourage social interactions and students working together. This will look different online, but I don’t think it’s insurmountable. We can create synchronized touchpoints, even for five minutes, to create a rhythm of social interaction during the day.

Tony: Another distinction is that Western Governors has many self-paced courses with prior learning assessments, which may lend itself better to a master’s degree than a diploma. How do you see that progressing?

Michael: Yes, that’s a great question. We built the Davis and Akilah model so that, over time, there would be cohorts of learners, and learners could move at different paces within that cohort. Some learners will accelerate and complete coursework faster, which would allow instructors to focus on learners that need more support. The point is to create community opportunities online that allow students to build their collaborative muscles as they prepare for the workforce.

Davis and Akilah’s model wasn’t fully competency-based out the gate; we built it with the idea that we could move more into this model with time. As we build out digital resources and the academic faculty feel more comfortable, we’ll need to figure out how to blend in the social experience as well. If done right, I think it has the potential to create a more robust learning environment because of the social support, community, and synchronized elements.

Tony: What are some of the best practices, especially related to academic and professional outcomes, that exist within an online environment?

Michael: You know, it’s dangerous to go too much into best practices because of over-generalizing. But I do think students should have clear check-ins at specific times, whether as a group or with a faculty member. Synchronicity creates stickiness; this builds culture and accountability, which boosts engagement and completion rates.

I would also say that active learning experiences are important — avoid the long lectures and videos. The more students can be creating the better, because it puts them in the driver’s seat. Let students even create deadlines to be accountable for their work output.

Third, be clear about the learning outcomes and transparent about the effort required. When students enroll in a virtual experience, let them look into a window of what the work will look like. Show students the amount of self-discipline they will need, while showing them how the institution will help them build those muscles.

Tony: That leads us nicely into soft skills. When virtually interacting, how can we facilitate soft skills development?

Michael: It depends on the soft skills, but this is where creating team-based projects to remotely simulate current work environments is key. This includes soft skills like critical thinking, the ability to show up on time and create a personalized schedule, setting expectations. This is what it means to be a worker in the economy.

Additionally, we’re starting to see more schools partnering with platforms that source online projects from external companies, creating micro-internships. Students can then apply their soft skills in real-time in a work environment. With that information, faculty can specifically coach the students in their skills progression to make the implicit, explicit in an online environment.

***

Learn more about our unique academic model: https://www.daviscollege.com/academics