Sections

Services

Information

UK United Kingdom

The campus is dead: long live the campus?

With technology changing the landscape of higher education, The Conversation this week is running a series “Re-imagining the Campus” on the future of campus learning. Here, Jason Lodge ponders the future…

Technology has now reached a point where it is conceivable that an education experience on the internet can be comparable to one on a university campus. shutterstock

With technology changing the landscape of higher education, The Conversation this week is running a series “Re-imagining the Campus” on the future of campus learning. Here, Jason Lodge ponders the future of the campus in an age of online learning.


Much hype and discussion has surrounded the evolution of online higher education over the last few years. Technology has now reached a point where it is conceivable that an education experience on the internet can be comparable to one on a university campus. However, just because it is conceivable does not necessarily make it so.

The learning that occurs differs markedly across disciplines and domains of knowledge. For example, it is relatively easy to comprehend how basic level accounting could be effectively learnt in a virtual environment.

It is not so simple when considering advanced surgical techniques. It would be a brave soul who would trust a surgeon trained using wikis, instructional videos and virtual classrooms.

While these might be extreme examples, there is undoubtedly a large market for flexible delivery of university education, and many universities now offer online degree programs. This is true even for the many institutions not traditionally associated with “distance learning”.

Implications for learning

The growth in the online delivery of programs raises several questions when considering the implications for learning. The first of these is about the quality of these programs compared to the programs offered on campus.

While arguments about quality often get sidetracked about the relative benefits or shortcomings of particular technologies for delivering an educational experience online, the real issue is educational design.

In general, a quality educational experience is not limited to a particular time and space. The trick is to design the best possible learning experience using the tools available, whether they are virtual or physical. The foundation for this is provided by the evidence of effective online and in-class teaching techniques.

Attempting to compare or equate one with the other or to “just add technology” to a course designed to be delivered on campus makes no sense. The best ways to engage students in a classroom do not neatly translate to the virtual world and vice versa.

Each delivery mode requires careful consideration of the possibilities provided by it alone, not in terms of how it simulates the other.

Coming to campus

The second question is then about the value of coming to campus. If a quality learning experience can be delivered online, why would students make the effort and take the time to travel to campus at all?

In the same way that the online experience provides flexibility and a learning environment that can fit with students' busy lives, coming to campus provides real but different advantages.

The issue with the delivery of on-campus programs is that universities are just coming to terms with what the internet means for engaging students in learning in classrooms. This has come about because of the increased competition created by the proliferation of flexible learning options and the increased availability of information online. If students are going to come to campus, their time is not best spent having someone talk at them for hours on end.

The inefficiencies of the traditional transmission model of education are most obvious when considering the significant drop in lecture attendance observed by many lecturers. The “flipped classroom” approach, where students engage with content in their own time and use class time for activity-based learning, has emerged as a response to falling lecture attendance.

This is an example of the ways in which educational design can be used to enhance the on-campus experience.

Coming to campus provides real but different advantages for students. AAP/Paul Miller

Benefits of a campus experience

While “flipping” classes is a start, the tangible benefits of being on campus continue to be what they have always been in a number of ways. Coming to campus provides an opportunity to be immersed in an intellectual culture. It allows exposure to legitimate expertise in a disciplinary area and the ability to test out new knowledge with peers.

With students having increasingly busy lives, it is not always possible for them to come to campus or have the kind of intellectual life that was traditionally associated with university campuses. That is the reality of the modern university student but is only just becoming the reality of the modern university campus.

Virtual communities can provide an alternative to the on-campus experience but, as yet, there is little evidence to suggest that virtual engagement with peers and with content matter experts can provide the same benefits as being immersed in the intellectual culture on campus.

It is folly to even attempt to make the comparison because virtual campuses provide different opportunities for students. Regardless, there is also the issue of exactly how much exposure undergraduate students in particular had with their lecturers.

The challenge for universities is to come to terms with this new reality. Online and on-campus modes of study are not equal and should never be considered so. Each has its benefits; each has its drawbacks.

Good educational design and good policy recognises the unique potential of each delivery mode and allows teachers and education designers to take maximum advantage of the benefits of each. The best possible learning experiences will not occur so long as we try to make quality online and on-campus learning look and feel the same. They don’t, and it is unlikely they ever will.


Read other articles in this series here.

Join the conversation

8 Comments sorted by

  1. Andrew Simpson

    Honorary Fellow, Department of Ancient History at Macquarie University

    How the campus experience is changing for students (and staff) is interesting.

    In Europe over the last couple of years there has been a resurgence in the idea of the university museum. Some universities are putting resources towards embedding object-based learning strategies across their curriculum. Others are developing collection-based research training as part of their higher degree programs. There are plenty of other examples of creative new uses for material collections in higher education.

    It is an interesting analog response to the digital tsunami that is currently reconfiguring all knowledge-based organisations.

    report
  2. Jane Somebody

    Underemployed

    Tutes and lab sessions will continue, but I can see that the days of on-campus lectures are numbered: broadband internet + time-deprived students who must work part-time to support themselves + need to maximise use of campus resources (including selling or leasing out buildings/land).

    report
  3. Cris Edmonds-Wathen

    Lecturer

    In Iain M. Banks' science fiction novels of the Culture, with unimaginably intelligent sentient machines, and advanced technologies for remote communication, Universities still exist as physical places where people can come together to study in person. I find this interesting as part of his utopianistic (?) vision.

    Although being "talked at" is far from the only effective mode of face to face teaching, it is nevertheless not without value. Consider this quote from Halliday talking about the differences…

    Read more
    1. Jane Somebody

      Underemployed

      In reply to Cris Edmonds-Wathen

      Won't they still be spoken lectures, just taped and maybe with additional material added such as the slideshows often used in lectures? (So they will still have a large auditory component.) Like any change, there are positives and negatives but I have so say that my memory of lectures (back in the 1980s-early 90s) were of lecturers droning on and on. It was only in tutes that we got some interaction and brain buzz.

      report
    2. Nick Osbaldiston

      Lecturer in Sociology at Federation University Australia

      In reply to Cris Edmonds-Wathen

      I think it's important to recognise that there's intrinsic value in the old style lecture - the transmission of knowledge. But no lecture I have ever given or even been to was one-way communication. Lecturers tend to interact already with their classes. The concern I have for purely online courses is that the interaction in a lecture situation where questions can arise on the spur of the moment which enhance the learning not just of the student but also their peers is lost.

      Also what do we value…

      Read more
    3. Andy Cameron

      Care giver

      In reply to Nick Osbaldiston

      I would seriously question the utility of allowing in-lecture questions. It makes the mass salves to the dumb and the brilliant. This is particularly problematic in the Australian system, where lectures are filled with the very dumb alongside the very clever.

      report
  4. Andy Cameron

    Care giver

    I think there is a world of difference in campus life on the university in your photo (USyd) compared to the Dawkins universities.

    report
  5. Elizabeth Keogh

    Lecturer in Family Law at Australian National University

    I am grateful to Jason Lodge for his recognition that it is educational design that influences the quality of education, rather than the medium through which it is taught. I do take issue though with his suggestion that there are limits to what can be taught online (his example being advanced surgical techniques). There may be limits, but I would caution Lodge, and others, to be very cautious in proclaiming those boundaries.

    I imagine that most people would put the development of emotional…

    Read more