Definition of the Problem

[Gary Miller]

I thought it might be helpful to the group to repost Sue's original message that started this discussion.  It is below.  Note the scope and time frame of the discussions at the federal level.

Gary

Sue's note:

All,

 While this inquiry is not meant to unleash a philosophical or pedagogical debate on learning assessment, it is meant to identify possibilities that address Dept of Ed's quest to force a definition of credit hour and exceptions to or expansions of the definition.  I do hope that brilliant minds might be able to collaborate on a means to define credit hour equivalencies in a manner that advances the focus on learning rather than seat time. The Dept of Ed's request may be a bureaucratic check-a-box, but it is one that we will all have to address in one way or perhaps another. 

  Exerpts from a recent Chronicle article:

Chronicle
January 3, 2010
Beyond the Credit Hour: Old Standards Don't Fit New Models  By Goldie Blumenstyk
(Exerpts)

...Another group that has been thinking a lot about the credit hour is the National Center for Academic Transformation, a consulting organization that encourages colleges to use distance education and other forms of information technology to develop and deliver courses more effectively and inexpensively. "The concept of a credit hour based on seat time is a relic," says Carol A. Twigg, the group's president. "But you have to have some kind of a currency that can be traded."

The challenge, says Ms Twigg, is to find a way to measure the course content "whether it's delivered at a distance or in an accelerated format."

"We've got hundreds of years of understanding of what a credit hour represents, whether you're going to class or not going to class," says Ms. Twigg. "The fact that it's called 'hour' is a problem."

New Definitions

Meanwhile, the Education Department may itself take that step. Last month, during negotiations with 16 representatives of colleges and associations over new rules to govern federal student aid, the department proposed its own credit-hour definition, based on the Carnegie Unit (one credit would equal one hour of class time or direct faculty instruction and two hours of out-of-class work per week for approximately 15 weeks; in cases where there was no formal class, the college, with the accord of its accreditor, could establish equivalents). It's uncertain if this proposal will be adopted. Negotiators are expected to vote on the credit-hour definition, along with other proposed rules, in late January....


Any great ideas or institutional definitions?


Sue

------------------

Gary E. Miller

421 Balmoral Way

State College, PA 16801

Blog:  http://garyemiller.blogspot.com/

Phone: 814-237-9203

Cell: 814-883-3442

Skype: garyemiller

[Tom Abeles]

Hi Gary

First, Carol Twigg points out that the "credit-hour" is a relic does not, in any way support the need to keep using the antique.  The fact that the term "hour" in credit-hour is in the name does not rationalize keeping the term with "hour" lopped off. The idea of a "common currency" is also questionable. When Harvard was asked to submit to the regional accrediting agencies for their approval, it said that the agencies were free to visit the campus but that Harvard would not go through the standard drill. 

In mathematics, in the area of "group theory" one can reduce a large matrix to a one dimensional representation in order to achieve simplification and ease of manipulation. Many years ago we used observation which then was reduced to mathematical representations and thence to simulations until the models became the reality. 

The credit or credit-hour is such a reductive representation that students, faculty and even institutions cast a blind eye because having to face the facts would throw the system in disarray.

There is a wonderful book called The Spacechild's Mother Goose. In it is a poem which goes something like this: This is the theory that Jack built. This is the flaw that lay in the theory that Jack built. This is the constant K hiding the flaw....This is the mummery-jummery justifying the K...this is........   At any rate, the theory finally collapses in the end.

The credit or credit-hour discussion is on-going because most realize that it is seriously flawed. Some seek another "fix" to avoid collapse while others seek an alternative theory, one more congruent with reality.

The suggestion to start this discussion was, in my opinion, not to try to find a "fix" to the false measure but to seriously engage with alternatives. Since this is a group which can have a number of questions or subjects under discussion. It is possible to have parallel issues. I would suggest that those who want to take the "blue pill" and try to maintain the credit/credit-hour create a topic in this group and those who have swallowed the red pill and gone down the rabbit hole continue the current thread.

tom