Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 74–95 | Cite as

The deconstructed campus

  • James G. MazouéEmail author


Four converging trends are undermining land-based campuses as the preeminent source of knowledge acquisition and certification. The emergence of the learning sciences, the wikification of knowledge, the unbundling of faculty roles, and the migration of learning online are driving fundamental institutional change toward location-independent alternatives. Conventional assumptions about the necessity for, and superiority of, location-dependent teaching and learning at colleges and universities are losing their plausibility as learning is transformed by more effective alternatives offering more precise and scientifically grounded optimizations embedded in Web-based course architectures. The combination of precision education, open courseware, the greater specialization of teaching roles, and the expansion of Web-enabled learning are all implicated in a process leading toward the decentralization of institutional practices supporting land-based learning. These trends are not only disruptive but are serving to displace post-secondary institutions in their traditional role as the primary providers of knowledge and academic credentials.


Adaptive assessment Learning science Precision education Monolithic instruction Online learning Open educational resources 


  1. Adelman, C., Ewell, P., Gaston, P., & Schneider, C. G. (2011). Degree qualifications profile. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  2. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the distance: Online education in the United States, 2011. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.Google Scholar
  3. Almanac of Higher Education. (2009). Opinions and attitudes of full-time faculty members. Chronicle of Higher Education. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  4. Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Aoun, J. (2011). Learning today: The lasting value of place. Chronicle of Higher Education. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  6. Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011a). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011b). Limited learning on college campuses. Society, 48(3), 203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6), 12–25.Google Scholar
  9. Bok, D. (2007). Our underachieving colleges. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  11. Christensen, C. M. (2009). How to manage the disruption of higher education. Forum for the Future of Higher Education, 25–30. Accessed August 12, 2011.
  12. Christensen, C. M., & Eyring, H. J. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  13. Christensen, C., Grossman, J. H., & Hwang, J. (2009). The innovator’s prescription. New York, NY: Mc-Graw Hill.Google Scholar
  14. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  15. Chronicle Research Services. (2009). The college of 2020: Students. The Chronicle of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  16. Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science, 332(6031), 862–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dreyfus, H. (2001). On the Internet. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Eyring, H. J., & Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 8. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  20. Freitas, R. A. (2010). The future of nanomedicine. The Futurist, 21–22.Google Scholar
  21. Halpern, D., & Hakel, M. (2003). Applying the science of learning to the university and beyond. Change, 36–41.Google Scholar
  22. Hess, J. A., & Smythe, M. J. (2001). Is teacher immediacy actually related to student cognitive learning? Communication Studies, 52(1), 197–219.Google Scholar
  23. Kamenetz, A. (2010). DIY U: Edupunks, edupreneurs, and the coming transformation of higher education. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. Kamenetz, A. (2011). The edupunks guide to a DIY credential. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Accessed August 12, 2011.
  25. Keeton, M. T. (2004). Best online instructional practices: Report of phase I of an ongoing study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 75–100.Google Scholar
  26. Lovett, M., Meyer, O., & Thille, C. (2008). The open learning initiative: Measuring the effectiveness of the OLI statistics course in accelerating student learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1–16. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  27. Massy, W. F., & Zemsky, R. (1995). Using information technology to enhance academic productivity. Educom. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  28. National Education Technology Plan 2010. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  29. National Survey of Student Engagement. (2009). Annual Results. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  30. National Survey of Student Engagement. (2010). Major differences: Examining student engagement by field of studyannual results. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.Google Scholar
  31. Newcombe, N. (2002). Biology is to medicine as psychology is to education: True or false? New Directions for Teaching and Learning. Spring (89), 9–18.Google Scholar
  32. Open Learning Initiative. (2011). About the OLI initiative. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  33. Oppenheimer, T. (2003). The flickering mind: The false promise of technology in the classroom and how learning can be saved. Westminster, MD: Random House.Google Scholar
  34. Pace, D. (2004). The amateur in the operating room: History and the scholarship of teaching and learning. The American Historical Review 109 (4), 1171–1192. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  35. Plato, M. (1892). The dialogues of Plato. 3rd ed., vol. 2 (trans: Jowett, B.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Plato Learning. (2010). The research base of Plato® online courses. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  37. Project Tomorrow & Blackboard K-12. (2010). Learning in the 21st Century: Taking it mobile! Accessed June 23, 2011.
  38. Rudy, W. (1984). The universities of Europe, 1100–1914: A history. Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses.Google Scholar
  39. Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, P. (2010). Harnessing America’s wasted talent. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Somade, D. (2011). Technology: A change in class. The Diamondback Online. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  42. Stephens, D. (2011). College is a waste of time. CNN. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  43. Stokes, P. (2011). What online learning can teach us about higher education. In B. Wildavsky, A. Kelly, & K. Carey (Eds.), Reinventing higher education: The promise of innovation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  44. Strauss, H. (2002). The right train at the right station, EDUCAUSE Review, 30–36.Google Scholar
  45. Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Thille, C., & Smith, J. (2009). Learning unbound: Disrupting the Baumol/Bowen effect in higher education. Forum for the Future of Higher Education, 31–38. Accessed August 12, 2011.
  47. Twigg, C. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 28–38.Google Scholar
  48. U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. Accessed June 22, 2011.
  49. Wiggins, G. (2010). Feedback: How learning occurs. Accessed August 24, 2011.
  50. Young, J. R. (2009). When computers leave classrooms, so does boredom. Chronicle of Higher Education. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  51. Young, J. R. (2011). Actually going to class, for a specific course? How 20th-century. Chronicle of Higher Education. Accessed June 23, 2011.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wayne State UniversityDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations