Category: Views

IBL News | New York

Analytics can solve some of higher education’s biggest problems.

To reaffirm this idea, and given that progress has faltered, three important associations joined forces and made a collective call-to-action for colleges and universities.

Data and analytics are institutional strategic asset; using analytics to make better decisions will result in improved student recruiting, student outcomes and completion rates, cost management and campus operations, according to these organizations.

Educause, the Association for Institutional Research (AIR), and the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) – who collectively serve 2,500 institutions and represent over 80% of post-secondary students in the U.S. – released a statement last month recommending six guiding principles:

• Go big—make an institutional commitment to analytics.
• Analytics is a team sport—build your dream team.
• Prepare for some detours on the road to success.
• Invest what you can—you can’t afford not to.
• Analytics has a real impact on real people—avoid the pitfalls.
• Tick-tock, tick-tock—the time to act is now.

“For a while now, our progress on institution-wide analytics initiatives has not hit its stride,” said John O’Brien, President and CEO of EDUCAUSE. “We hope this statement encourages a sense of urgency and fosters a deeper understanding of the benefits of data analytics for institutions of all kinds.”

The associations created a website to further support colleges and universities in their implementation processes.

 

Mikel Amigot  | San Francisco

 

Organizers of the Open Core Summit – which took part this month at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco – announced the COSS (Commercial Open-Source Software) Platform.

The goal of this initiative is to help commercial open-source organizations develop viable business models. “We want to educate, grow, fund and connect leaders of COSS companies,” as explained to IBL News by Joseph Jacks, founder of OSS Capital, a venture-capital firm who put together the Open Core Summit.

Today open-source licenses like Apache 2.0 have no requirements to compensate those who craft software. Consequently, many software companies have been struggling for years.

To solve it, open-source code cobblers such as Elastic, Confluent, InfluxData, MongoDB, Neo4J, and Redis Labs, among many others, are experimenting with improved business models and alternative software licenses.

“Announcing the COSS Platform” via @asynchio and @BrucePerens at @OpenCoreSummit

Providing COSS media, community, accelerator, and fund support pic.twitter.com/pF4lJ2tjNT

— Daniel Bryant (@danielbryantuk) September 19, 2019

Ok I have to admit that I love this approach. Big idea by JJ @asynchio and Bruce @BrucePerens #OpenCoreSummit @theCUBE is an open media model and many of our practices and technology that we built are based upon open source principles https://t.co/FrP4UGrY2F

— John Furrier (@furrier) September 20, 2019

COSSI ($100M+ minimum revenue COSS company index) just hit 50,000 employees, only a quarter of which work at @RedHat. 50,000+ people are employed full-time at the top COSS companies. ? https://t.co/KC5qW6rbq7

— Joseph Jacks (@asynchio) July 22, 2019

Commercial open-source software is often developed as a substitute for costly proprietary software.

“In addition, COSS companies are fundamentally more capital efficient at running on and innovating with far less capital,” OSS Capital Founding Portfolio Partner Heather Meeker recently wrote.

Despite the ups and downs, open-source has become a standard for software development and fast-paced innovation. Its collaboration and knowledge sharing model has transformed software’s development and delivery over the last two decades.

Open-source is getting increasingly popular, with 30 million developers exchanging code and ideas and collaborating on GitHub.

From the business perspective, companies like Red Hat and Canonical are proof that an open-source model can turn a profit. Other examples of companies which follow the model of “commercial support” include Docker, GitLab, and Databricks.

In this new environment, the open-source services industry is set to exceed $17B in 2019, and expected to reach $33B by 2011, according to CB Insights.

An indication of the growth can be found on Canonical/Ubuntu‘s plans to march into an IPO and recent acquisitions (Red Hat by IBM for $34B, and GitHub by Microsoft for $7.5B), alongside large public market valuations like those of MongoDB ($7.9B) and Elastic ($7.3B).

Mikel Amigot | IBL News

Automattic, the company behind WordPress.com, WooCommerce, the Jetpack plugin and soon Tumblr, announced on Thursday that it closed a $300 million funding round in Series D from Salesforce Ventures. The investment puts Automattic’s valuation at $3 billion post-funding.

Today WordPress powers more than 34% of all sites on the web, claims Automattic CEO and WordPress co-founder Matt Mullenweg [in the picture].

The company will have close to 1,200 employees when the Tumblr acquisition closes. In August, Automattic purchased Tumblr from Verizon for $3 million, a fraction of what it was worth when Yahoo bought it for $1.1 billion in 2013. Tumblr is seen as complementary to WordPress.com; therefore, no major changes are planned.

The freemium business model with an open-source philosophy at its core has been working very well for Automattic Inc.

WordPress, as a free open-source software platform, is owned by a non-profit group called The WordPress Foundation, while the popular domain WordPress.com is privately held.

Automattic makes most of its money by selling subscriptions to software services related to the WordPress platform, like WooCommerce, an open-source e-commerce plugin for WordPress; Jetpack, a customization and security plugin for WordPress; and enterprise WordPress for businesses, such as WordPress.com VIP. It also gets revenues by selling advertising against some of the free blogs that users create on WordPress.com.

Mikel Amigot | New York

2U, the most visible company in the OPM (Online Program Management) industry, announced on September 11 what it called “an unprecedented new Framework for Transparency”, which “will offer students, universities, and policymakers data on outcomes, quality, institutional independence, and more for the degree and non-degree offerings.”

“2U becomes the first OPM to openly call for, and embrace, greater transparency,” the Lanham, Maryland-based company said in a statement.

“We call upon other OPMs across the industry to join us in committing to greater transparency,” 2U Co-Founder and CEO Christopher “Chip” Paucek added.

The new framework is grounded in six pillars: University Oversight & Accountability; Marketplace Openness; Access; Affordability; Quality; and Outcomes.

Facing growing scrutiny, 2U’s move isn’t as big as it looks, given that the company is publicly traded (NASDAQ: TWOU) and needs to recover investors’ confidence after losing over half of its market value in the last seven weeks.

Secondly, the controversial company needs to self-regulate, getting ahead of potential regulatory changes.

In addition, it would be an attempt to put pressure on competitors such as Pearson, Wiley, Academic Partnerships, Noodle and Bisk to do the same.

“Paucek believes that releasing more information about the company and its operations will help prove just how ‘excellent’ it is,” wrote Doug Lederman in Inside Higher Ed.

A Public Database of Online Program Contracts

In relation to the OPM industry, the Century Foundation published a report yesterday titled “Dear Colleges: Take Control of Your Online Courses.” It elaborated on the relationships between 79 public colleges and OPM companies and included a database of scores of contracts outlining the terms of the arrangements.

“Our hope is that this action-focused report will assist schools and those who care about them to jumpstart a paradigm shift in how online education in the United States is done,” the Foundation said.

• EdSurge: Layoffs, Deferred Tuition and More Transparency Among 2U Changes Since Stock Fall
• Education Dive: A look inside public universities’ OPM contracts

IBL News | New York

MIT announced on September 10 that it appointed a transitional executive committee of faculty and senior staff to lead the MIT Media Lab, after the resignation of its director Joi Ito over his financial ties to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

Meanwhile, an independent investigation by law firm Goodwin Procter, announced by MIT’s President Rafael Reif on Saturday, is still ongoing. [Update: Email from President Reif to the MIT Community]

Pattie Maes, professor of media arts and sciences at MIT, will serve as chair of the committee, managing the future lab governance model and search for new director.

Four more members, along with their areas of responsibility, will be:

• Deb Roy, professor of media arts and sciences: executive director of operations and communications;
• Tod Machover, professor and head of the Program in Media Arts and Sciences: community engagement and culture change;
• Maria Zuber, MIT’s vice president for research: policies, practices, and culture of research; and
• Ramona Allen, the School of Architecture and Planning’s assistant dean for human resources and, as of Oct. 1, MIT’s vice president of human resources: administrative organization.

“These have been exceptionally difficult times for the Media Lab, and I want to thank the members of the community for their dedication to the lab and for their commitment to real change,” said Hashim Sarkis, dean of the School of Architecture and Planning.

A Whistleblower Revealed the Ties of MIT to Epstein

In an internal meeting at the lab, on September 4, Ito admitted to having taken $525,000 from Epstein for the Media Lab and an additional $1.2 million for his private ventures.

According to an article at MIT Technology Review, emails provided to the New Yorker and the New York Times by whistleblower Signe Swenson, a former development associate at the Media Lab, showed Ito, along along with Peter Cohen, a former development official at the lab, acknowledging that Epstein’s money needed to remain anonymous.

The hidden ties with Epstein –who died in jail on August 10– were so widely known at the Media Lab that staff in Ito’s office began to call him “he who must not be named” or “Voldemort,” according to the New Yorker. Questions also remain about how the donations evaded detection by MIT.

The lack of transparency around the close relationships between academic institutions and an elite network of donors is a constant in the higher education industry, according to observers.

MIT and Harvard Professors and Thinkers Supported Joi Ito

Epstein had a reputation for cultivating relationships with scientists. He also funded many scientific projects, including some at MIT and Harvard University. He was linked to deceased MIT professor and AI pioneer Marvin Minsky, who was recently accused of having sex with one of Epstein’s underage victims.

Now Epstein’s support has become a source of public shame for the Media Lab. Mainly, because documents showed that the MIT Media Lab – an elite group within MIT –, was aware of Epstein’s status as a convicted sex offender. Additionally, Epstein’s directed contributions to the lab far exceeded the amounts M.I.T. has publicly admitted.

Another angle of the controversy refers to the group of prominent professors and thinkers involved with MIT and Harvard who signed a letter in support of MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito in mid-August. The letter sought to gather support for Ito, who apologized for accepting funds from the now-deceased sexual criminal.

This list includes as signers Harvard Law professor and Creative Commons founder Lawrence Lessig, Whole Earth Catalog founder Stewart Brand, Media Lab co-founder Nicholas Negroponte, Harvard law professor and EFF board member Jonathan Zittrain, and synthetic biology pioneer George Church. 

 

MIT is calling for an independent investigation following explosive allegations that two MIT Media Lab officials made efforts to make sure Jeffrey Epstein’s name was not associated with donations he made or helped solicithttps://t.co/kXFp6uP1ye pic.twitter.com/fBW8SVlljm

— New Day (@NewDay) September 9, 2019

“There were so many anonymized secret references to Epstein and his contacts at the lab that they started to refer to him as ‘Voldemort,’ or ‘He who must not be named,’” said @RonanFarrow. Hear him on how the @medialab hid donations from Jeffrey Epstein: https://t.co/lHpuOUaFcM

— WGBH News (@wgbhnews) September 10, 2019

IBL News | New York 

Joi Ito, the director of Media Lab and professor at MIT, resigned Saturday over his ties to convicted pedophile and accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

“After giving the matter a great deal of thought over the past several days and weeks, I think that it is best that I resign as director of the media lab and as a professor and employee of the Institute, effective immediately,” Ito wrote in an internal e-mail.

In a message to the M.I.T. community, Rafael Reif, the president of M.I.T., wrote, “Because the accusations in the story are extremely serious, they demand an immediate, thorough and independent investigation.” Rafael Reif announced that M.I.T.’s general counsel would engage an outside law firm to oversee that investigation.

“The acceptance of the Epstein gifts involved a mistake of judgment,” stated Reif.

According to a New Yorker investigation, the prestigious MIT Media Lab received at least $7.5 million from Jeffrey Epstein and Ito would allegedly ask that the donations were counted as anonymous. “New documents show that the M.I.T. Media Lab was aware of Epstein’s status as a convicted sex offender and that Epstein directed contributions to the lab far exceeding the amounts M.I.T. has publicly admitted,” explained The New Yorker.

Emails reveal donations cover-up

Joi Ito [in the picture below] resigned just hours after The New Yorker published emails showing how he had attempted to conceal donations from Epstein.

The embattled director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Media Lab had previously apologized for accepting money from Epstein for the lab and for his own personal ventures.

The newly disclosed emails show he didn’t just make the wrong call in accepting the money, as he explained to lab members as recently as Wednesday: he also ordered that Epstein’s donations be listed as “anonymous” going back years, as Epstein had been disqualified as a donor following his 2008 conviction for soliciting sex from a minor. Epstein was facing additional charges before his death on a prison cell this summer.

“Top MIT officials knew of Epstein’s ties to Media Lab, e-mails show,” titled yesterday The Boston Globe.

Professor at Harvard, too

The New York Times reported that Ito also left the boards of the MacArthur Foundation, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and The New York Times Company, as well as a visiting professorship at Harvard University.

One of Ito’s emails reportedly says that Epstein directed a $2 million gift to the lab from the Bill Gates, but the Gates Foundation has denied any business connection to Epstein.

Brown University announced that it has placed its director of development for computer science and former MIT Media Lab director of development and strategy, Peter Cohen on administrative leave, The Providence Journal reported.

Peter Cohen forwarded a request from Epstein to another colleague at MIT with the note: “Jeffrey money needs to be anonymous. Thanks.”

“Like its parent university, the famed research center became far too comfortable selling its prestige. Even to Jeffrey Epstein,” writes Justin Peters in an article on Slate titled “The Moral Rot the MIT Media Lab”.

“Jeffrey Epstein used MIT to launder his image. It’s a lesson for the #MeToo era,” writes Vox. “Revelations about the sex offender’s connections to the MIT Media Lab are a reminder of the power of enablers.”