MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410117147 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v19i2.9710

The Future of Higher Education: A Call for Radical Pedagogical Innovation in Post-Pandemic Times

2025· article· en· W4410117147 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Awu Isaac Oben, Hui Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHigher educationSociologyBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineVirologyEconomicsEconomic growthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted higher education globally, revealing both traditional pedagogies' strengths and weaknesses. As institutions turned to online learning, significant gaps in accessibility, digital literacy, and adaptability became apparent. This paper argues for a radical transformation of pedagogical innovation in post-pandemic higher education, advocating for a shift towards more flexible, inclusive, and student-centred learning models to bring the sustainable change we all want. It highlights key strategies, such as hybrid models, personalized learning, active and experiential learning, and rethinking assessment methods. These innovations, supported by digital tools, can better address diverse student needs and prepare learners for a rapidly evolving workforce. Nevertheless, institutional resistance to change, addressing the digital divide, and ensuring scalability remain potential barriers and challenges that must be overcome to achieve it. This paper, therefore, calls for collective and coordinated efforts by higher education institutions, stakeholders and policymakers to drive the required systemic change in higher education. By embracing these innovations, universities can build a more flexible, resilient, equitable, and future-ready education system that moves beyond the limitations of traditional pedagogies. The pandemic offers a unique opportunity to rethink the foundations of higher education and prioritize pedagogical practices that promote critical thinking, adaptability, and lifelong learning in an uncertain world.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.022
Scholarly communication0.0200.030
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0150.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Teaching and LearningSame topicEducational Innovations and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207