20 Individuals and 14 Programs Honored Across 5 Regions

In so very many ways, we in higher education have fallen behind business, industry, governments, and society as a whole. We are offering programs and products that may have been relevant 50 or a hundred years ago but are not in touch with the society of the fourth industrial revolution. Learners currently are given few forward-thinking, innovative, engaging, and relevant opportunities.

It is rare in these days that a new university starts with the opportunity to break the mold of centuries gone by. One of the positive examples is provided by Minerva University, which is recognized as one of the most innovative universities in the world. The Minerva approach is described by the university as: “… fully active and engaging to improve student learning and retention. Developed from research in the science of learning, students gain foundational skills and transferable knowledge and are continuously provided data-informed feedback through our Forum platform.” Many other innovative practices are described at the website and on their blog.

Imagine for a moment, that we are creating a university anew in 2022. What would we change; what would we retain; how would it differ from what students, faculty and staff currently experience? Within some broad topical areas, here are starting points for the discussion.

Learners

In 2022, we must balance the needs across the life of our learners. The majority of advanced (higher) learners are no longer in their twenties; rather they span the dual credit teenagers in high school through those already in the workforce and even those in senior years.

Lifelong learning has arrived in part because of the unrelenting growth of technologies. These include AI, immersive tech, and other types of ubiquitous access that have afforded changes in the workplace. The median tenure with an employer in the U.S. is just over four years; so, employees are constantly upskilling and re-tooling for new jobs. The changes demand professional development throughout our learner lifetimes. All indications are that these changes will continue to come – not just in a linear fashion, but in the exponential increase that we are coming to expect of high tech. The workplace of the 2030s will have less in common with the workplace at the start of the century.

Higher education as a field will serve widely varying ages, locations and goals of a population base that is nearly as large as the world population itself. Delivery modes will vary widely as well. Face-to-face modes will be available at a premium because of the increased costs due to supporting the physical campus. Online synchronous and asynchronous modes will be selected by the learners themselves to meet the specific preferences and needs. Three-dimensional immersive environments such as VR, AR and XR will enable many pedagogical approaches and engagements among learners and experts.

Learning will be personalized. That is, there will be far fewer large group synchronous classes and far more individualized or small group learning sessions, customized to the individual needs of the learners, rather than designed to cover the wide disparity of previous knowledge and desired outcomes among twenty, thirty or fifty learners in today’s classrooms.

Technology

Networking technologies are rapidly changing, affording low latency, high bandwidth solutions that can support learners almost everywhere. The integrated networks that mesh wireless, cable and satellite afford us a worldwide reach that is both robust and affordable. New 3-D technologies are capable of creating virtual environments that approach reality itself.

Artificial intelligence in the form of 24-hour mentors, research assistants, and creativity stimulators will be available to all learners to aid in completing projects and enhancing the quality of learners’ work – just as they are for professionals in the workforce today. This broad access to the power of constantly improving, ever-more-sophisticated technology can be used to enable all learners to reach their full potential. Learning will be tied directly to learner-chosen desired outcomes.

Pedagogy

The methods and practices of teaching in our new university will emphasize engagement, immersion and active learning. Authentic assessment will be the most prevalent approach to guiding success. There will be no memorization for the sake of merely regurgitating facts. The emphasis will be on cultivating creative and critical thinking. Too often today we assess learning by how pleasant the experience is, rather than assessing retention as well as how authentically relevant and meaningfully those experiences and outcomes will apply to real-life situations.

Much of the learning will be asynchronous and self-paced with periodic group projects and engagements. These will be designed to best accommodate learner schedules while leveraging the value of group experiences where appropriate to enhance the personalized sessions.

Disciplines

The traditional disciplines will diffuse into cross-discipline studies enhanced with relevant skills such as communication, persuasion, and leadership that will cultivate diversity, inclusion and sharing of values. In many cases, disciplines will be explored in stackable credentials where various stages of mastery can best be recognized. Linkages of the knowledge and skills in fields of study will be reinforced by internships, apprenticeships, and other modes of application of knowledge and skills in the workplace. This engagement will ensure that learning remains closely tied to the evolving state of the field of the discipline.

Stakeholders

Today, we have rather rigidly demarcated roles for faculty, students, and employers. Faculty are expected to have all the knowledge; students are expected to be open vessels for learning; and employers are expected to be the consumer of services from the filled vessels of the learners. These roles need to merge. Faculty need to share the mantle of expert with students who bring experiences and knowledge to the classroom. Students need to share the teaching of both faculty and peer learners. Employers need to become engaged in teaching both faculty and students about the changes that are sweeping their field, as well as the vision for the future. To best succeed in this rapidly changing environment we need deep and open collaboration without rank or deference.

Research

University sponsored research will be chosen to supplement and enhance curricula and areas of institutional emphasis. In many cases this will mesh well with individual faculty member interests and expertise, but where it does not, the institutional priority will prevail so that students are given the best opportunities to engage in the research process. As with the prior areas, the emphasis will be on student-centeredness.

Time to Begin

Do these characteristics describe your university today? Are there pockets of the institution that are forward-thinking in their intentions and practices? How can we leverage their leadership to bring other parts of the university forward into greater collaboration and innovation in meeting the needs of learners and the wider society?

This article was originally published in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning blog. 

More than half of college employees say they are likely to leave their jobs in the next year as reported in a new survey by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources, CUPA-HR. The most common reasons listed for seeking new employment were the prospect of higher pay, an opportunity to work remotely, and more flexible work hours. 

The CUPA-HR survey reported deep interest in “moving on” from positions in higher ed. Of the more than 3,800 higher education employees across nearly 950 institutions surveyed in May, most were White and women, with about half in supervisory positions. In total, 57.2% of survey participants said they were likely to leave their job in the next 12 months. Almost 70% of potential job-seekers said they wanted to find work at another institution. About half wanted to work with a nonprofit organization outside higher ed, and only 42% sought to remain at their current college. 

Education, as a broad field, appeared in the middle of all fields in “the great resignation.” While education figures may not be far out of line with the rest of the workforce, higher education has historically enjoyed greater institutional loyalty than other fields. Overall, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in the fall of 2020 that the median tenure (the point at which half of all workers had more tenure and half had less tenure) of all U.S. workers was 4.1 years. 

As someone who was employed for half a century on two campuses of universities within the state university system of Illinois, I was given pause to consider what may be gained by retaining employees in an institution. Admittedly, my half century at Illinois public universities may bias my view, but it also gives me some personal insight into the question.

First, here are some of the values I have seen that have been gained by turnover:

• New employees bring new perspectives and new ideas to the workplace
• New employees may bring new enthusiasm to the jobs that need to be done
• New employees may come in at lower salaries, creating fiscal savings
• New employees may stimulate their workgroup to reorganize and rethink needs and outcomes

Here, though, are some of the losses created by turnover:

• Continuing employees command institutional history that can be beneficial in many ways
• Continuing employees can deepen and extend the pre-existing university culture
• Continuing employees maintain established connections and trusted relationships with stakeholders both within and outside the university
• Continuing employees can help units to avoid repeating mistakes of the past

We must recognize that career paths are not always on a single track. I began as an instructor in the College of Communications on the Urbana campus of the University of Illinois and rose through the faculty ranks on the Springfield campus to full professor and professor emeritus. However, along the way, I served in various director and executive director positions; acquired and led many grant initiatives; and eventually served as associate vice chancellor of online learning. So, while my status and spheres of responsibility changed, I was still at the table to share experience, insight, and informed perspectives.

In the CUPA-HR study, more than 40% seeking to change positions did not want to stay at the same institution. Perhaps that is due to work climate, advancement/compensation opportunities in general, and/or benefits. These are all factors that need to be addressed by better institutional and departmental leadership. The quality of leadership may overcome many of the deficits, injuries and mis-directions that can befall a unit or university. Patrick Flesner writes in Inc:

Founders seem to believe the no. 1 reason for startup failure was running out of cash. In my experience as a growth capital investor, running out of cash is not a reason for failure, but a consequence of failure. It is the consequence of the founders’ failure to develop strong leadership skills, transition from founder to leader, and build a strong leadership team. If you want to lead your business from initial traction to sustainable high growth, you should start developing your leadership skills now. 

Gautam Tambay, CEO and co-founder of Springboard, a rapidly growing workforce development company focused on digital economy skills, writes, “Today, nearly half of American workers have some form of an alternative credential. Among those who don’t, nearly half have considered earning one. So the question now becomes: How do employers take advantage of the growing alternative credentials movement?” 

Increasingly, many universities are engaged in developing and offering alternative credentials aimed at those in the workforce seeking to enter a new field or move up the ladder into leadership positions. We, in higher ed, should be first in line to take advantage of these programs to upgrade knowledge, skills and abilities for our own employees. Perhaps with new credentials, our employees will be prepared to take on a new position at a higher salary with new challenges and team members. In short, we may be able to retain the institutional history, culture, and connections of employees while at the same time giving them the changes they are seeking.

Who is cultivating internal development, certification, and credentialing within your institution? Should this be part of your annual personnel evaluation process?  Is someone regularly meeting each employee at every level to consider professional development to meet their professional goals?

This article was originally published in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning blog.