IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/ijhe11/v11y2022i5p51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Should the Future of Learning Look Like? Looking Back, Looking Forward

Author

Listed:
  • Donald Ipperciel

Abstract

This paper explores a possible and desirable future of technology-enhanced teaching and learning in higher education. It takes a normative lens that defines what ‘ought to be,’ based on considerations grounded in the philosophy of education. In other words, its aim is more prescriptive than predictive. It will suggest we embrace technology only to the extent that it brings us closer to realizing the pedagogical ideals of educability, personalization, and active, experiential learning. This paper examines how these principles prove helpful in prioritizing the technologies worthy of being adopted and how technology can contribute in a meaningful way on all three fronts. In addition to the principles of pedagogical innovation, practical considerations for realizing the future state will be identified. In this context, it is argued that the envisioned future of technology-enhanced teaching and learning in higher education can come to fruition only when education becomes collaborative and course creation builds incrementally on previous educational iterations, made possible through institutional support and collaborative design.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald Ipperciel, 2022. "What Should the Future of Learning Look Like? Looking Back, Looking Forward," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 11(5), pages 1-51, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:51
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/download/21520/13939
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/view/21520
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andre Nickow & Philip Oreopoulos & Vincent Quan, 2020. "The Impressive Effects of Tutoring on PreK-12 Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence," NBER Working Papers 27476, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bonesrønning, Hans & Finseraas, Henning & Hardoy, Ines & Iversen, Jon Marius Vaag & Nyhus, Ole Henning & Opheim, Vibeke & Salvanes, Kari Vea & Sandsør, Astrid Marie Jorde & Schøne, Pål, 2022. "Small-group instruction to improve student performance in mathematics in early grades: Results from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    2. Haelermans, Carla & Jacobs, Madelon & van Vugt, Lynn & Aarts, Bas & Abbink, Henry & Smeets, Chayenne & van der Velden, Rolf & van Wetten, Sanne, 2021. "A full year COVID-19 crisis with interrupted learning and two school closures: The effects on learning growth and inequality in primary education," ROA Research Memorandum 009, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    3. Carlana, Michela & La Ferrara, Eliana, 2021. "Apart but Connected: Online Tutoring and Student Outcomes during the COVID-19 Pandemic," CEPR Discussion Papers 15761, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Hashibul Hassan & Asad Islam & Abu Siddique & Liang Choon Wang, 2021. "Telementoring and homeschooling during school closures: A randomized experiment in rural Bangladesh," Munich Papers in Political Economy 13, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    5. Katharina Werner & Ludger Woessmann, 2021. "The Legacy of Covid-19 in Education," CESifo Working Paper Series 9358, CESifo.
    6. Jo Blanden & Matthias Doepke & Jan Stuhler, 2022. "Education inequality," CEP Discussion Papers dp1849, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    7. Cortes, Kalena E. & Kortecamp, Karen & Loeb, Susanna & Robinson, Carly D., 2024. "A Scalable Approach to High-Impact Tutoring for Young Readers: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial," IZA Discussion Papers 16712, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Boruchowicz, Cynthia & Parker, Susan W. & Robbins, Lindsay, 2022. "Time use of youth during a pandemic: Evidence from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    9. de Ree, Joppe & Maggioni, Mario A. & Paulle, Bowen & Rossignoli, Domenico & Ruijs, Nienke & Walentek, Dawid, 2023. "Closing the income-achievement gap? Experimental evidence from high-dosage tutoring in Dutch primary education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    10. Falch, Ranveig, 2022. "How do people trade off resources between quick and slow learners?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    11. Hardt, David & Nagler, Markus & Rincke, Johannes, 2022. "Can peer mentoring improve online teaching effectiveness? An RCT during the COVID-19 pandemic," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Noam Angrist & Peter Bergman & Moitshepi Matsheng, 2022. "Experimental evidence on learning using low-tech when school is out," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 941-950, July.
    13. Hardt, David & Nagler, Markus & Rincke, Johannes, 2023. "Tutoring in (online) higher education: Experimental evidence," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    14. Dan Goldhaber & Thomas J. Kane & Andrew McEachin & Emily Morton & Tyler Patterson & Douglas O. Staiger, 2022. "The Consequences of Remote and Hybrid Instruction During the Pandemic," NBER Working Papers 30010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Harry Anthony Patrinos, 2022. "Learning loss and learning recovery," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 49(2), pages 183-188, June.
    16. Lucas Gortazar & Claudia Hupkau & Antonio Roldan, 2023. "Online tutoring works: experimental evidence from a program with vulnerable children," CEP Discussion Papers dp1908, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.