Speculations on the post-pandemic university campus – a global inquiry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose The pandemic-induced global shift to remote learning calls for rethinking the foundations of design for higher education. This watershed moment in global health and human interaction has accelerated changes in higher education that were long emergent and amplified specific deficiencies and strengths in pedagogical models, causing institutions to reevaluate current structures and operations of learning and campus life as they question their vision and purpose. Since physical space has largely been taken out of the equation of university life, it is evident that fresh design research related to this new normal is required. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative research study speculates on new possibilities for the future of campus, based upon insights and inferences gained from one-on-one interviews with faculty and students in multiple countries about their personal experiences with the sudden shift to the virtual classroom. The longer the mode of physical distancing stretched through Spring 2020, these phone and web-enabled dialogues – first with faculty (teachers) and then with students (learners) – lead to a deeper, more nuanced understanding of how the notion of the campus for higher education was itself morphing in ways expected and unexpected. Findings At the heart of this study lies the question – Has COVID-19 killed the campus? This study suggests that it has not. However, campuses are now on a path of uneven evolution, and risk shedding the good with the extraneous without eyes-wide-open rethinking and responsive planning. This two-part qualitative analysis details the experiments and strategies followed by educators and students as the pandemic changed their ways of teaching and learning. It then speculates out-of-the-norm possibilities which campuses could explore as they navigate the uncertainty of future terms and address paradigm shifts questioning what defines a post-secondary education. Research limitations/implications This paper draws inferences from discussions limited to the first 100 days of the pandemic. This on-the-ground aspect as the pandemic continues is its strength and its limitation. As Fall 2020 progresses across global campuses, new ideas and perspectives are already reinforcing or upending some of this paper's speculations. This researcher is already engaged in new, currently-ongoing research, following up with interviewees from Spring 2020, as well as bringing in new voices to delve deeper into the possibilities discussed in this paper. This follow-up research is shaping new thinking which is not reflected in this paper. Originality/value Design practitioners have long-shaped campuses on the belief that the built “environment is the third teacher” and that architecture fosters learning and shapes collective experience. Educators recognize that a multiplicity of formal and informal interactions occur frequently and naturally across campus, supporting cognitive and social development, collegiality and well-being. Even today's digital-native-students perceive the inherent value of real interpersonal engagement for meaningful experiences. This research study offers new planning and design perspectives as institutional responses to the pandemic continue to evolve, to discover how design can support what lies at the core of the campus experience.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,019 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,031 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,019 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».