Trying to articulate in terms that I understand better what I
think is the real challenge for universities, I used the notion
of 'unbundling'. A long time ago, universities offered a full
package and had almost a monopoly as a provider of that
package. Nowadays, many, if not all, of the parts of that
package are also offered by alternative providers:
- professors used to author content:
many still do, but there is such an abundance of high quality
content (OER and other) that I don't understand why we would
still focus on this as a core aspect;
- professors used to deliver content,
for instance by lecturing: many still do, but the
effectiveness of doing this is very questionable, there are
many alternatives now and delivery of content is challenged
by the flipped classroom and other alternative models;
- universities used to support
students in the learning process: well, some did and some
still do, but spontaneous or organised communities of
learning are moving on-line;
- professors used to create exams in
order to validate that students had learned: well, this is
certainly still the norm, but I have argued before that exams
were intended as a means and have now become a goal for
students which actually impedes learning and, in any case,
automated or peer grading, as well as learning analytics
provide rather attractive alternatives that scale much
better;
- universities had the monopoly of
accreditation through diplomas: again, this is still largely
the case, but also under pressure through the use of badges
and alliances between alternative providers of learning and
corporations.
All in all, through this process of unbundling, the
authority of the university as a learning institution is
challenged at a deep level. Being the optimist that I am, I
think this is A Good Thing: either the universities can make
clear what value they add by bundling these different services
or they will become less and less relevant, as specialised
providers of only one or other service will be more
effective.