HC Global

Briefly(!) Yes - well finding a definition of what a study hour actually meant led us through plenty of paperwork but little knowledge. In fact there really isn't one. Its a kind of academic 'hippo in the corner' where it has become accepted practice embedded throughout academic/course infrastructure. Mmmmmm.....

Well - we weren't happy. There are all kinds of problems with this definition. Though accepting that it provides a solution to some things it clearly doesn't for others and ends up being a straight-jacket to innovative course design. This debate has recently come up in the States (where else? see academic debate and blog reference).

Let me explain.

Essentially, learning programmes have base teaching components like self-study amd class-room instruction. Then there's potential dscussion/debate. On-line study can be really broken down into existing forms (which is why the e-learning debate kicked in and then disappeared saving on a lot of stress for a lot of people). There's obviously assignments (though measured in word-output equating to time??!!).

Then, there's case-study based learning (which is different but related to case-based learning). It's at the heart of our learning and in a number of other professions. But we had a problem.

10 hours doing active case study critical evaluation and ensuing learning (in groups) in no way equates to doing 10 hours of self-study reading. It also makes a big difference in learning as to whether you have a class of 60 versus a class of 6. In fact there are many different comparisons that just can't be answered by a universal study hour as the base unit.

So having looked high and low from the various institutions for more reference, we realised that the 'learning' experience comes a very poor second to research. It's just the way it is. (Clue: it has something to do with funding). We can't change that......yet.

We also took reference from our own previous course design work with clients, evaluating the particular activities that seemed to maximise practical learning and knowledge. We classified them. We then ranked them. Then we weighted them.

But we needed an equation. Simple but effective to illustrate the difference in course programme design and one that broke down the 'study hour' into a more insightful component based unit. And more workable.

We've talked to a few people on this and some have joked its the 'Higgins formula'. Yeh - well maybe - but the important point is the equation:

CUt = Lf * Ts *Tl

where CUt is the base credit unit
Lf is the wieghted learning factor
Ts is the equivalent distributed student time
Tl is the actual/estimated time of learning activity.

Now I'm not going in to further detail here, but you have a new way of evaluating a course programme's effectiveness (allowing for using the requiured standard of available research and facilitation/teaching which are further components).

One of the by-products of this equation we found was its explanation of normal phenomena. For example, why students have less inclination to turn up for class? Why course programmes don't just have self study as the only component (as it would be the cheapest)? The rationale for a blended learning mix? Why Oxbridge, for example, favours the 1-to-1 tuition model in certain subject sets?

It also asks some VERY VERY BIG QUESTIONS, particularly on pricing. We believe that the HCMI maximises practical knowledge and learning in the time given, as well as providing an enriched learning experience (judging from first reactions). It is also why we are accrediting it ourselves (and the HCM Institute). It's not because we want to be that different.

On the contrary, we would prefer to assimilate with the current status quo. It certainly would save us a lot of hassle. But, alas, the current status quo just doesn't provide what we need. In fact, there are some big implications in all of this. Whether Academia is doing anything on this is a question for them?

But my blog on Tuesday (a message to Mr Cawthra) shows the kind of stuff we have to put up with.

I do hope that this may start an interesting debate that helps students, faculty, innovators like ourselves and society in general to optimise on the learning experience/cost equation. But make no mistake, you heard it here first...........