An educational system, including online education, contains four common components, including teachers, students, professionals, and the required environment facilitating the modes of study for online, offline, or hybrid. The online mode, however, needs high technological investment, including network, hardware, software, and specific online education tools. In addition, the skills and competencies of most university professional staff, academic faculty, and students need to be upskilled using pre-designed short training workshops and continuous personnel development. In the context of SCU, most of these requirements have already taken place or are in progress to successfully implement the new model. However, there are a few elements of the model that require more attention to ensure the successful rollout of the model. The first element is the curriculum design and the transformation of the content into the new format. As the mode of content delivery is changing to more active learning, a dedicated team of experts from computer interaction, user experience, graphics, and multimedia and gaming could help with this transformation. The second element is the platform for online delivery. The current technologies, including Blackboard and H5P, may help in the short term, however, the technological update is an urgent issue to be considered in the medium and long term plans. A comparison of the available platforms used at different educational institutions should be performed and some components that help active learning should be included in the current SCU platform. The integrity of all the applications used in the University should also be considered as an urgent matter for discussion. The third element is the hardware and networking infrastructure needed to run these systems and applications. This is a critical investment for the University for mid and long term plans to be able to successfully and sustainably deliver in the new model.
Brook, H., & Michell, D. (2012). Learners, learning, learned: class, higher education, and autobiographical essays from working-class academics, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34(6), 587-599. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2012.716021
Day, B. W., Lovato, S., Tull, C., & Ross-Gordon, J. (2011). Faculty Perceptions of Adult Learners in College Classrooms. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(2), 77-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2011.568813
Salisbury, L., Laincz, J., & Smith, J. J. (2015). Undergraduate Ownership of Small Mobile Devices: Engagement and Use in an Academic Environment. Science & Technology Libraries, 34(1), 91-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2014.999397
Shah, U., Khan, S. H., & Reynolds, M. (2020). Insights into variation in teachers’ pedagogical relationship with ICT: a phenomenographic exploration in the Pakistani higher education context. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 29(5), 541-555. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1810751