The future of university education

Citation

Warren, C. (2013), "The future of university education", Property Management, Vol. 31 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/pm.2013.11331baa.001

The future of university education

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Property Management, Volume 31, Issue 2.

In this editorial I would like to share some thoughts on recent developments in higher education. Over the past year there have been a number of publications that challenge the notion of what university education will be in the near future and pose the question: if universities’ core business is the dissemination of knowledge, where will that knowledge reside in the future and how will we use it to educate the next generation? Back in 2010 Bill Gates is reported as saying that, in five years time, the web will provide a smorgasbord of educational choice in which you will be able to find the world's best lectures (UNSW, 2011). The rapid development of massive open online courses (MOOCs) is bringing this prediction to reality. Already leading educational institutions such as Harvard, MIT, Berkley, Stamford, to name but a few, have well-developed MOOCs offering courses in a range of subject areas. These courses are free and place no obligation on the student to complete, but also offer no assessment or certification upon completion. While most university courses have had an online content offering for many years, the development of free open access courses has enabled students from around the world to access courses from elite universities. Many other universities are now trying to play “catch up” and develop their own MOOC presence. The real question is, should they? Will there be a demand for that many MOOCs? The business model that supports the free delivery of education online is based on an expectation that MOOCs will raise the institutions international profile and attract fee paying students to enter the degree courses on which the MOOC is based. This approach seems to be working well for the current online programs, but will it work for large numbers of universities? I think the answer will lie in specialisation, with universities offering MOOCs and the associated degree programs in the areas in which they have an international reputation for excellence.

There is no denying that the advancement of technology has led to significant changes in the way we deliver educational programs. Many e-learning experts are predicting that the traditional university is a thing of the past and that the generation Y and millennials (born between 1970 and 2000) are digital natives, computer savvy, demand online education from a range of sources and lack the desire to attend traditional university education. They prefer to learn via social media and online virtual classrooms. Ernst & Young (2012), in their report University of the Future; a thousand year old industry on the cusp of profound change, predicts that; “Over the next 10-15 years the current public university model in Australia will prove unviable in all but a few cases”. The report cites the key drivers of change as increasing democratisation of knowledge via online sources, together with increasingly contestable markets in which global universities compete with private institutions which exploit profitable market niches. It concludes that the future looks rather bleak for many universities as they will struggle to compete in an online world while saddled with their large legacy of substantial campus infrastructure. A small number of universities will become teaching only institutions and the remainder that do survive will focus their attention on research niche markets to become world leading. Personally I agree that the way we teach will continue to evolve as we embrace new technologies, but I do not agree that the traditional model of the university will disappear, it is not long ago that we were told technology would make the city centre office market a thing of the past as we all work from home via the net. Although many of us enjoy the freedom and positive aspects of being able to work from home, we quickly learned to value the benefits associated with a central business location from which to interact and conduct our business. In a similar way, the need for students and academics to interact face to face and collaborate in research and learning will outweigh the commercial and technological advantages of online delivery. That is not to say that changes will not be embraced, but I think the best aspects from both models will be taken resulting in the assured future of established universities.

As our institutions compete for more and more students to meet the rising goal of higher education for the majority, the use of technology will assist us in delivering a more student-centred and blended learning approach to teaching. One issue with this rising tide of student-centred teaching is the perceived quality of the educational outcomes. As academics, we are increasingly required to seek feedback from students with respect to their satisfaction with the program of teaching. This is seen as a key deliverable in a crowded market in which we are all endeavouring to satisfy the customer. I am not convinced, however, that the notion of the student as the customer, rather than the future employer as the customer, is necessarily a helpful one. Questionnaires are administered almost to the point of student questionnaire fatigue and course content and delivery altered to address any negative feedback received. A recent BBC (2012) Point of View paper by Professor Mary Beard at Cambridge sparked an interesting debate on this subject. In the paper she questions the validity of the student satisfaction survey and, indeed, whether satisfaction is the objective of a good education; “[…] dissatisfaction and discomfort have their own, important role to play in a good university education. We’re aiming to push our students to think differently, to move out of their intellectual comfort zone, to read and discuss texts that are almost too hard for them to manage. It is and it's meant to be destabilizing”. The real measure, therefore, is not the level of immediate satisfaction felt by the student, but the one felt several years down the track when they reflect on their university experience and how it has added to their life and career. Although we need to adapt to a changing market and the changing nature of our students, we should not lose sight of the objective of a university education which is to educate and not just to provide a paper certificate. To remain competitive universities need to demonstrate that graduates value the education they receive and are satisfied with it long after they graduate. Equally employers should be satisfied with the graduates they take on and reflect the perceived value of the education within remuneration and career opportunities offered.

The papers for this issue

Five research papers contribute to this second issue of Property Management for 2013. The first paper comes from a team at the University of Glamorgan, the leading author being Prof Peter Jones. The paper, “Data centres in the UK: property and planning issues”, provides a thorough review of the rapidly expanding market for large data centres and how the changing geographical spread of such centres is presenting the planning system with some challenges.

Paper 2 comes from the University of Aberdeen where Anthony Owusu-Ansah presents a paper; “Construction of property price indices: temporal aggregation and accuracy of various index methods”. This paper examines five separate property price models using hedonic pricing methods to predict price movements. The statistical approach demonstrates some of the constraints which the hedonic method of price prediction faces and an alternative method is provided. The mean squared error method, based on an out-of-sample technique, is used to evaluate the accuracy of alternative index construction methods.

Paper 3 is a paper from Bhair Dar University in Ethiopia and is written by Dr Alemu. The paper, entitled “Expropriation, valuation and compensation practice in Ethiopia: the case of Bahir Dar city and surrounding”, presents a fascinating insight into this operation of the compensation process for land repossessed by the local government operating within Ethiopia. It highlights the lack of a standard approach to compensation valuation which leads to inequitable results for those dispossessed of their land. The paper broadens our understanding of the law of compensation and the difficulties faced in regions where less well-developed systems of compensation exist.

Paper 4 is a second paper originating from Africa. It comes from the estate management department of Obafemi Awolowo University in Nigeria. The research addresses a problem experienced in many regions of the world by different ethnic groups within a single society. “Ethnic bias in tenant selection in metropolitan Ibadan private rental housing market” explores the effect of bias by residential managing agents against certain ethnicities within the city. The resulting lack of available rental accommodation poses a significant issue for government in attempting to protect the rights of all citizens.

The final paper is by Terrence Lam from Anglia Ruskin University and Henry Man of Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Their paper explores the land use system in Hong Kong and is entitled “Economic and management perspectives on control of illegal land uses in the leasehold system”. It reports on the problem of illegal changes to the permitted use of land and buildings, and highlights the problems associated with illegal business uses within leasehold residential property. This is an interesting paper from both a government and property management perspective, as it presents many regulatory issues in maintaining premises that are safe for residential use.

Once again the range of papers presented in this issue show the diversity of research being undertaken in the management of property and the issues that present themselves in different countries. I hope that you enjoy this issue of Property Management and find the research presentations stimulating. I would welcome any comments on this editorial, or any of the papers presented.

Clive WarrenProperty Management Editor in Chief