New Media and the Transformation of Higher Education

Presentation to the School of Humanities and Cultural Industries, Bath Spa University, Bath, UK

14 October 2013

Terry FlewProfessor of Media and Communication

Creative Industries FacultyQueensland University of Technology

Brisbane, Australia

‘The Deathstar Scenario’‘Higher education is in deep crisis … Already we are beginning to deliver more lectures and classes off-campus via satellite or two-way video at a fraction of the cost. The college won’t survive as a residential institution’.Peter Drucker, 1997

‘On the Web for free you’ll be able to find the best lectures in the world … College, except for the parties, needs to be less place-based’. Bill Gates, 2010

Drivers of Change in Higher Education

1. Globalisation2. Knowledge economy3. Dispersal of knowledge

through the Internet4. Worldwide demand for

higher education5. Government policies to

manage costs/growth/differentiation

6. Changing student demographics/

expectations7. Relationship to industry8. Cost pressures9. Rise of new for-profit

providers10. Global ranking systems

Major source/destination countries for higher education students (‘000)

Source countries (‘000) Destination countries (‘000)

1 China (568) United States (684)

2 India (211) United Kingdom (390)

3 South Korea (127) Australia (271)

4 Germany (105) France (259)

5 Turkey (72) Germany (200)

6 France (68) Japan (141)

7 Russia (62) Russia (129)

8 Malaysia (58) Canada (95)

9 United States (55) China (71)

10 Morocco (54) South Africa (60)

Source: UNESCO 2012.

Aspects of globalisation/’disembedding’ of HEIs

1. Growing reliance on international enrolments as sources of institutional funding

2. Cross-border teaching programs3. International sources of research

funding/collaborative research projects4. Cross-border accreditation of programs (e.g.

AACSB, EQUIS for MBAs)

Paradoxical implications of the Internet for knowledge

1. Abundance2. Linking3. Permission-free publication4. Publicness of knowledge creation5. Visible contestation over knowledge claims‘The old Enlightenment ideal [of knowledge] was far more plausible when what we saw of the nattering world came through filters that hid the vast, disagreeable bulk of disagreement’ (David Weinberger, Too Big to Know, 2012, p. 174).

Elite to Mass to Universal Higher Education Elite (0-15%) Mass (15-50%) Universal (50% +)

Attitudes to access Privilege of birth or talent Right for those with appropriate qualifications Obligation for middle and upper classes

Functions of higher

education

Shaping mind and character; preparation for

elite roles

Transmission of skills; preparation for wider

range of professional and technical roles

Adaptation of ‘whole population’ to rapid

social and technological change

Curriculum and forms of

instruction

Highly structured; based around academic

conceptions of knowledge

More modular, flexible and semi-structured

sequence of courses

Boundaries and sequences break down, as do

distinctions between types of ‘learning’

Student ‘career’ Undertaken after secondary school as

uninterrupted period of life

More deferred entry and mature-age entry Softening of boundaries between formal

education, work and other aspects of life

Institutional characteristics Homogeneous with high and common

standards; many students on-campus; campus

separate from wider society

More diverse standards; mixed residential or

commuting; campus more integrated into the

community

Great diversity with no common standards;

many students rarely or never on campus;

boundaries weak or non-existent

Locus of power, decision-

making and academic

administration

Collegiate; elite group with shared values and

assumptions; ‘academic amateurs’ selected as

administrators by peers

Rise of the full-time ‘academic-administrator’;

growth in professional bureaucracies

Full-time academic managers drawing on

business management techniques;

appointments from ‘outside academe’

Access and selection Meritocratic based primarily on school

performance

Meritocratic based on multiple criteria; equity

provisions for under-represented groups

Open access with targeted support for under-

represented groups

Positional Goods and Status Hierarchies

• ‘Elite universities are partly beyond economics. They need resources, but resources are the means to more fundamental ends: the education of future leaders, research, institutional social position and historical power’.

Simon Marginson, ‘The Impossibility of Capitalist Markets in Higher Education’, Journal of Education Policy 28(3), 2013, p. 364.

‘Public good’ aspects of universities, and their paradoxes

‘Public Good’ aspect ‘Private good’ element

Support for the education of individuals boosts overall stock of human capital through a more knowledgeable population

Individuals capture the benefits of higher education in higher average incomes over time

Research leads to the generation of new knowledge and breakthrough innovations that would be under-supplied in absence of public support

Success in attracting research funding boosts the status and research capacity of elite universities

Universities as scholarly institutions contribute to a vibrant public sphere

Creation of status hierarchies as elite researchers are highly sought after by competing universities

Evolution of Open and Distance Education (ODE)

‘Baumol’s Disease’ in higher education

• Difficulties in technology:labour substitution• Use of student:staff ratios as a proxy for quality of

teaching• Institutional rigidities• Pressure to ‘buy the best’ researchers• Increased expenditure on student support services• Mismatch between institutional incentives and

expectations of both students and other stakeholders (e.g. governments)

William Bowen, Higher Education in the Digital Age, 2013.

Weighted global university ranking criteria

Times Higher Education QS Top Universities ARWU (Shanghai Jiao Tong)

Teaching (30%) Academic peer review (40%) Education: Alumni winning Nobel Prizes

and Fields Medals (10%)

Research: volume, income and reputation

(30%)

Global employer review (10%) Faculty: Staff winning Nobel Prizes and

Fields Medals (20%)

Citations: research influence (30%) Faculty/student ratio (20%) Highly cited researchers in 21 categories

(20%)

Industry income – innovation (2.5%) Citations per faculty (20%) Research – papers in Nature and Science

(20%)

International outlook – students, staff

and research (7.5%)

International faculty ratio (5%) Papers cited in Science/Social Science

Citation (20%)

  International student ratio (5%) Per capita academic performance (10%)

Source: Barber et. al., An Avalanche Is Coming, IPPR, 2013, p. 21.

‘Five P’s’ framework for evaluating changes in higher education

• Practical issues• Personal issues• Pedagogical issues• Policy issues• Philosophical issues

Myths of Internet-based higher education

1. The Internet will kill off university campuses– Assumption that ‘on-campus experience’ is

exclusively about access to course content– ‘Eds and Meds’ urban development strategies

2. Online education is cheaper than face-to-face– Considerable fixed costs involved in developing

online content– Costs of bandwidth, revamping content, reskilling

staff etc.

Benefits and costs of online course delivery (Lei and Gupta)

  Benefits of online delivery Costs of online delivery

InstitutionsAbility to reach a wider range of students

Greater flexibility in class scheduling

Enabling low-cost access to wider range of resources

Reduced costs of communicating with students

Costs of acquiring appropriate software and computer hardware

Need to train faculty and students on how to use new programs

Need for upgrades, and issues of incompatible technology

FacultyGreater flexibility in how and when courses are delivered

New modes of communication and interaction with students

Ability to use freely available online resources as additional

learning materials

Ability to engage learning instructors and develop course

delivery teams

 

Challenges of ensuring all students are engaged and motivated

Challenges of learning new technologies and programs

Work overload with student emails, questions etc.

Difficulty in separating teaching/non-teaching times with 24/7

student access online

 

StudentsFlexibility in how, when and where to participate in courses

Ability to undertake self-paced learning

Some student cohorts may prefer absence of formal classes

and need to travel

Need to have appropriate ICT infrastructure (computer, software,

broadband access)

Requires higher levels of self-motivation and time management

Lack of face-to-face peer interaction may be a problem for some

learners