Disruption in HE #2

Some of the world's most successful companies: Amazon, Netflix, PayPal, Easyjet and AirBnB, to name but a few, have disrupted their respective industries by unbundling the packaged product on offer from larger incumbents and initially competing on the basis of one part of the package.

Disruptors can have an easier time where incumbent and monolithic companies fail to recognise the mood music of the market and rely on their hard-won legacy.  It's not that these innovators and disruptors are producing new goods and services - before Amazon there were shops, before Netflix, the cinema, before PayPal, banks...

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY

Readers of this blog will know, already, that I am really talking about Universities.

The thing is that others, and not always Universities, are providing learning and even getting paid for it.  They are disruptors because they focus on one aspect of the University experience - rather than trying to replicate the whole thing, the campus, the gowns, the qualifications...Instead, they focus on timely, self-paced, flexible and accessible learning.  The disruptors undercut prices (not difficult), use teaching staff in a gig economy way, enable delivery in areas and use technologies that traditional Universities do not.

Wake up and smell the virtual coffee?

Brexit busting Universities

Following Coventry and Lancaster Universities' decision to establish branch campuses (campi?)  in Poland and Germany respectively, other universities are seriously considering the move that could secure continued EU access, attractive visa arrangements for international students and added revenues for Ryanair.

Photo by Andrew Palmer on Unsplash

From my extensive knowledge of European destinations and my hallowed status as a multi- badge winning contributor on Tripadvisor I'd like to share some suggestions for institutions to help them select appropriate EU locations for their new campuses.

EU locations should, of course, have key features that underline the rationale for the initiative:

• Ease of access for flying faculty and administrators.  This rules a lot of locations out where the closest U.K. airport to their campus has been abandoned by everyone but Flybe and DHL.
• Availability of English speaking locals to serve as tutors, support staff but definitely not faculty - else issues might affect things like AACSB accreditation where cash cow business courses are offered.
• Long distances from good institutions in the host country.
• Willingness of some local students to forget that their county offers them free higher education.
• Proximity to either beaches or ski slopes to host meaningful conferences and seminars that are bound to attract scholars from around the globe.

Helpful?

No such thing as a Free MOOC

Massive Open On-Line Courses (MOOCs) offered by some of the world's most prestigious Universities (and some of the others too) hold out the possibility of mass education and reaching those that traditional education provision has not yet reached.

The Openness of MOOCs makes them FREE - so the study is free as long as you do not pay for the certificate of completion at the end of the course (NOT an award, you understand).  And yet, the mode of delivery - the internet, still makes MOOCs inaccessible for many.

Cable.co.uk published a downloadable spreadsheet of 2018 broadband prices at:
https://www.cable.co.uk/broadband/deals/worldwide-price-comparison/

The data shows that around 80% of nations pay over $15 per MB.  This includes Niger at $263 and Somalia at $250.  Afghanistan pays $35and the UAE $16.50.
A combination of geography, economic priorities and diplomatic exclusion from submarine cable access are responsible for the high costs.
Amongst the cheapest are Singapore ($0.03) and Ukraine ($0.04) with China and India at $0.42 and $0.60 respectively.  Once again, geography and economic priorities help to explain costs.

So for MOOCs in many parts of the world, especially the developing, landlocked, disputed and friendless parts, access is anything but FREE.

Want students to research? Send them to China!

During a recent trip to Shanghai the significance of  having the not so ubiquitous Google blocked made me think about student research techniques over the years. I'm certainly no Luddite, you understand, but for all my embracing of Technology Enhanced Learning I can see the downside.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

As a Bradford undergraduate in 1975 I recall an excellent foundation module in research methods for business studies.  Out of a class of 50 only two students attended, me and one other (a mature student who had been a journalist and so knew the value of good research). The key reason for the low turnout was that the module was not assessed, providing formative feedback only.

Great! That meant individual attention from Prof. Gerry and Dr. Roger, the tutors! Take that suckers!

Anyway.  Back to the research.  Back to a manual trawl through the library card index system, the microfilm and dusty tome copies of journals and then selecting a small number of published papers for purchase as the library did not subscribe to all relevant journals.  I recall that the search took weeks, the discussion to authorise the purchase a further period and then the arrival of the printed paper after another couple of weeks.  Touchingly, the paper came with a handwritten note from the author (an Oxford academic) wishing me well with the project I was designing.

My project took all term, the report received feedback and I had learned new skills.  The report proudly carried two key references of quality. What endured from that episode was not the outcome of the research itself  but the process of research. It required me to engage my mind at an early stage, to focus and to organise my time carefully in order that I did not spend my entire life in the literature search phase.

Today, many colleagues anticipate that students with access to Google will be able to garner literary resources far more swiftly.  But speed comes with a cost. Did they stop to think and focus BEFORE opening their laptop? Did they actually read the paper or rely on Google Scholar's algorithms to judge its relevance?