Virtual learning - pluses and minuses

During the height of the COVID19 pandemic, rapid movement to virtual learning was the only choice most institutions could make to continue instruction. Some educators have lauded the quick move to online learning and the effectiveness of this pedagogy, considering the limitations. Few would argue with this point of view. The primary outlier on the adoption of virtual learning are the elites (Ivy League), which have avoided virtual leaning as a strategy to protect their brands and because they can afford to stand apart from the trend.

Inside Higher Education's compilation related to online learning is a resource that educators will want to consult. The focus on quality is central to determining how the future of online and hybrid learning will unfold.

As higher education institutions moved back to in-person learning, some retained an online option or blended learning involving both. Even with the enthusiasm for in-person learning, data indicated that many more U.S.A. students take on-line courses than previously thought. As the Delta variant spread, some institutions again moved back to more online learning. One of the areas most impacted by the pandemic-induced online rush is internships, which some institutions sought to replace with other types of experiences. Another area heavily impacted by the pandemic was international exchange, which moved to virtual strategies for linked classrooms and non-curriculum student collaboration and dialogues. Evaluating what worked and didn't work was essential as institutions moved to their preferred model for the 2021-22 academic year. Others urge advanced planning for the "Exponential Age" of 2030 when technology is likely to outpace the innovation of higher education learning environments.

Faculty are striving to improve the virtual environment and straight-forward models can help move toward more effective learning. The model in Faculty Focus included; connection, consistency, content, community, and compassion. Faculty are navigating their own challenges as virtual teaching and presence appears to be taking deeper root on campus. "No return to 'normal'" declared that successful institutions will demonstrate "responsiveness to student needs, accessibility, connectedness to society and to the workplace." A fascinating application of the choices we make in returning to gyms predicted a future for residential education that will be seamless, social, and personalized with a focus on active and experiential learning.

The Brookings Institution looked at several research studies to determine the pluses and minuses of virtual approaches. The report asserts, "Virtually all of these studies found that online instruction resulted in lower student performance relative to in-person instruction." "Lower performance" includes different criteria such as grade achieved in the course, persistence in individual courses, and progress towards fulfilling degree requirements. The fact that Ivy League institutions have been slow to adopt online courses and degrees is telling. Their reluctance may reflect risk aversion or perhaps an assumption of the superiority of their pedagogy coupled with maintaining prestige.

Understanding the ways student learning declined during the pandemic and resetting from here forward was examined by two learning experts, Jankowski and Williams. Perhaps the most unfortunate part of the decline of learning in virtual instruction is that first-year students struggled as well as learners of diverse cultural and socio-economic backgrounds.

The Brookings Institution summary is important because it comes from a non-vested interest perspective - only committed to determining the most effective practice but not supporting any specific institution or approach to higher education. The summary also includes multiple countries which is key if educators are to look at the broadest possible view.