My designs for a different kind of university looks at mission, vision, future students, customer service, emerging technologies, emerging pedagogies, dynamic curriculum, transdisciplinary inquiry, academic levels, administration, infrastructure, collaboration, resistance to change and costs.

1. Thoughts for
Re-engineering
Higher Education
Simon Priest
simonpriest.com

2. Consider: who will solve the big problems of our future?
We are going to need graduates who are highly CREATIVE with bright ideas!

3. TODAY’S LEARNERS may well have to solve the big problems of our future
Are we doing enough to prepare them for what comes next in their futures?
100 years ago!

4. So what would a “University of
the Future” look like, if we were
doing enough to prepare them
I deliberately employ the word
RE - ENGINEERING: since our
current approach is industrial
or institutionalized education
LIST OF TOPICS
• Start with WHY: one mission
• Our Emerging Customers
• Emerging Technologies
• Emerging Pedagogies
• Dynamic Curriculum
• Trans~disciplinary
• Academic Levels
• Administration
• Infrastructure
• Collaborate
• Change
• Costs
Here is a List of Topics related
to re-engineering Higher
Education – we will
look at each
Others may follow or stay the same
Begin by compartmentalizing Uni2.0
We only need a few to get the ball rolling
C O S T
Q
U
ALITY
AC
C
ESS
Transparency & Accountability
RigorousStandards
ConsumerDemand
Conflicting Multiple Missions
I
ron

5. WHY? = prepare learners to
solve future problems and
progress toward innovation
(at most) AND ready them to
make informed choices, but
not inhibit solutions (at least)
This deliberately omits all the
missions of other universities
that conflict in the iron triangle
HOW? = transform the way
learners feel, think, behave,
resist change (in view of not
yet conceived perspectives)
WHAT? = process of global
collaboration though trans-
disciplinary crowd-sourcing
WHEN & WHERE? = bricks to clicks, truly
ubiquitous, 24 / 7 / 365 (also M-F / 9-5)
WHO? = fanatical educators using unique
alternatives to traditional learning methods
Start with WHY?
First, one mission

6. Our Emerging Customers
…and meet the next generation: iGen or Gen Wired!
Seniors (GI) (B) Boomers Busters (X) Millennials (Y) Wireds (Z)

7. • MILLENNIALS born 1981 ~ 2000 (age now is 15 - 34 years)
• (aka Gen Y) grew up with social media and “smart” phones
• communicate by text message, while living in social media
• search for information on YouTube / Vimeo (not Google)
• impacted by dotcoms, terrorism, debt, diversity/inclusivity
• confident, tenacious, tolerant, engaged, green-oriented
• To obtain meaningful work, education was a large expense
NOW
NEXT • iGen / Gen Wired born 2001 ~ 2016 (age now is 0 - 14 years)
• (aka Gen Z) WILL: grow up with augmented & virtual reality
• communicate by “catching others” in holographic space
• search for information on Facebook / oSM (not YouTube)
• (be) impacted by environmental disasters & global conflict
• (be) entrepreneurial, collaborative, sustainability-focused
• To attain certain lifestyles, learning will be lifelong/ongoing
BOTH: Tech Savvy

8. 10 Emerging Technologies
Applied to Higher Education

9. 10 Emerging Tech Now Next
Printing Output 3D & Bio-printing 4D (just add water, etc.)
Display Output Flat Screen & 3D Monitors Holographic & Flexible
Interface Brain-Computer (BC Interface) Headsets & Implants (BCI)
Shared Storage Cloud (many large systems network) Fog (multiple small devices network)
Protection Biometrics (fingerprint & retina) DNA & Behaviometrics (gait)
Device / Tech Tablets & Smart Phones Augmented & Virtual Reality
Data Devices Magnetic (HDD) & Optic (CD) 3D (Multilayer, Holographic & Atomic)
Robotics as Tools (for Assembly & Surgery) Cooperation (AI & Machine Learning)
Collaboration Video / Web Conferencing Crowdsource / Makerspace
Learning Mode Online & eLearning Adaptive & Transdisciplinary

10. 2016 PREDICTIONS for the future
Students will create self-assembling/repairing dynamic materials with 4D printing
Students will use holographic displays that they can see, manipulate, touch & feel
Students will have ubiquitous access to information; memory testing will be archaic
HigherEd will use the Cloud for academic analytics & the Fog for learning analytics
Students will be expected to identify themselves biometrically during compulsories
Universities and Faculty will match new pedagogies to suit emerging technologies
Students will carry with them & access their profession’s entire body of knowledge
Students will bring their robot learning buddy or tutor to the learning environment
Students will solve problems by collaborating in global co-creative crowdsourcing
Student TEAMs will solve big world problems by being adaptive & transdisciplinary

11. Emerging Pedagogies
The “Flipped” Classroom

12. The Educational
STAIRCASE
The PRESENTER:
Transmitting Pedagogies
The FACILITATOR:
Transacting Pedagogies
The CONDUCTOR:
Transforming Pedagogies
The MENTOR:
Transmuting Pedagogies
5 STEPS to
Learning
4 Instructional
Models or RISERS
Simon Priest © 2005
No pedagogies are better;
they are all just different
Excite
them
–
Help
them
becom
e
com
petent–
Letthem
innovate

13. PRESENTER
“Sage on the Stage”
•Faculty Directed Approach
•Convergent Thinking
•Product Oriented
•Standardized Curricula
•Lecturing & Demonstrating
•Presenting Metaphors
FACILITATOR
“Guide on the Side”
•Learner-Centred Approach
•Divergent Thinking
•Process Oriented
•Flexible Curricula
•Discussing & Moderating
•Questioning (esp. WHY?)
CONDUCTOR
“Catalyst in the Mist”
•Self-directed Approach
•Critical Thinking
•Change Oriented
•Custom Tailored Curricula
•Advising & Encouraging
•Nurturing Compassion
MENTOR
“Friend at the Bend”
•Inquiry-Discovery Approach
•Creative Thinking
•Imagination Oriented
•Non-existent Curricula
•Partnering & Participating
•Cultivating Curiosity
TransmittingTransacting
TransformingTransmuting
Teaching“toolkits”willcontainallfourpedagogies

14. 4 Styles the PRESENTER the FACILITATOR the CONDUCTOR the MENTOR
Pedagogy Transmitting (one-way) Transacting (two-way) Transforming (change) Transmuting (invent)
Tagline “Sage on the Stage” “Guide on the Side” “Catalyst in the Mist” “Friend at the Bend”
Intent Understand Information Apply Knowledge Generalize Wisdom Systematize Innovation
Taxonomy Knowledge & Comprehension Application & Analysis Synthesis & Evaluation Review & Improvement
Settings Repetitive Familiar Unfamiliar Risky & Uncharted Territory
Thinking Convergent Divergent Critical Creative
Outcome Product & Correct Answer Process & Experiential Democracy & Social Justice Imagination
Approach Faculty-directed Learner-centered (LC) Self- directed & LC Inquiry-discovery (alliance)
Faculty Role Lecture & demonstrate lesson Discuss & moderate reflection Advise & encourage practice Join & participate as partner
Typical
Teaching
Techniques
(examples)
Lecture, demonstration,
tutorial/seminar, expert panel
debate, peer presentation, real world
case studies, poster board display,
guest authority, library /internet
search, competition, oral drill, audio
listening, video watching, reading &
workbook
Cooperative learning, peer
instruction, peer-assessment, one-
on-one debate, mock/real
presentation, gamification, creating
test items, hands-on simulation,
problem solving, questions &
discussion (with funneling, framing,
filters & frontloading)
Field trips, labs, study abroad,
fieldwork/clinical placements,
internships/apprenticeships,
team-based / open capstone
project, volunteering,
collaborative service learning,
other experiential learning &
addressing change resistance
Imagination, logical reasoning,
inspired brainstorming, Scientific
Method, storytelling, self-
teaching, reversal, attribute
listing, forced relationships,
conceiving, improvising,
experience-based judgment, &
open-ended play
Questions Confirmatory (well-known) Reflective (problem-focus) Dynamic (solution-focus) Exploratory (uncertainty)
Emphasis Offering metaphors Questioning why Nurturing compassion Cultivating curiosity
Curriculum Standardized Flexible Custom tailored Non-existent / open
Process Data-based lessons Problem-based training Project-based change Evidence-based research
Research Use Consume findings Re-interpret findings Critique findings Produce & disseminate
Plan & Prepare Lessons & objectives Dialogues & experiences Support & resources Opportunities & dreams
L Maturity (exp.
engagement)
Dependent
(passive bystander)
Interdependent
(insightful observer)
Independent
(active participant)
Meta-Cognitive - Automath
(dynamic inventor)
Learner (L)
Incentive
Extrinsic: grades and, since subject
matter is ready, learner must
be prepared to learn now
Social: use just-in-time & on-
demand learning in order to
socially or personally benefit
Altruistic: making a difference in
society, bringing revolution
& championing change
Intrinsic: impact status quo,
invent new, innovate
better, imagine / think
differently
L Competence Unconscious Incompetence Conscious Incompetence Conscious Competence Unconscious Competence
L Experience Share life examples Reinforce & challenge Refine & redefine Determine what is lacking
L Consumes Textbooks, scholarly articles Video captured lectures Interview/observation data Research outcomes/proposals
L Produces Essay (well-cited), journaling Reflective blog, presentation Final artifact: report/resolution Original research/product
Means of
Assessment
Objective: skill performance, test,
quiz, other examination, (well-cited)
essay, journaling
Subjective: contemplation by many
methods, portfolio,
peer presentation, blog,
Descriptive: project impact,
presentation, work experience,
final artifact, report, resolution
Productive: market success,
customer feedback, final
publication / presentation
Group Size Large (1,000 or more) Medium (about 100) Small (10 or less) Individuals (1)

15. Dynamic Curriculum
4 Levels (TRANS~Disciplinary Competencies)
“Changing a college curriculum
is like moving a graveyard –
you never know how many
friends the dead have until
you try to shift them”
Woodrow Wilson
American President
past HE administrator

16. 4 Levels (TRANS~Disciplinary Competencies)
FIRST LEVEL: Standardized curriculum (established by panel of experts
from profession, faculty, staff, students & other stakeholders), centered on
data-based lessons and convergent thinking toward a single right answer –
where universally applicable METASKILLS would be learned and students
could take a series of survey courses (via MOOCs) to focus their interests
SECOND LEVEL: Flexible and adaptive curriculum focused on problem-
based training and divergent thinking to find multiple contradictory answers
THIRD LEVEL: Custom tailored curriculum concentrating on project-based
change and critical thinking aimed at transforming society and community
FOURTH LEVEL: Open curriculum oriented in the direction of evidence-
based research and creative thinking leading to imagine, invent or innovate
Once learners have completed the TRANSDISCIPLINARY
competencies for each level, they move on to the next –
NO: time limits, grades, class periods, or static content –
Lower level curricula & tech are updated yearly (at least)!

17. TRANS~disciplinary
Today: Higher Ed. is organized in multidisciplinary silos
with increasing interdisciplinary mixing of isolated clans
FUTURE: problems identified by study across disciplines;
many solutions acquired through transdisciplinary inquiry
by fusing together seemingly unrelated knowledge bases

18. Transdisciplinary Inquiry
Four ways of dealing with complexity & diversity
To discover, understand
and integrate knowledge of
COMPLEXITY & DIVERSITY
Identify and answer global
questions that address
COMPLEXITY & DIVERSITY
ENCYCLOPEDIC
COMPREHENSION
Compile bodies of
knowledge in and
among disciplines
UNIVERSAL
COMPREHENSION
Synergize treasury
of knowledge with
outside disciplines
CONTINGENCY
PLANNING
Identify theoretical
solution, anticipate
outcomes & risk
PROBLEM
SOLVING
Create, execute &
evaluate practical
real-life solutions
4 PURPOSESInterdisciplinary Transdisciplinary
Applied Applied
BasicBasic

19. Academic Levels (priority emphasis)
Individuals progress at their own paces

20. 4 + 2 Levels (Graduate School = 5 & 6)
1. THE FIRST LEVEL highlights the importance of memorizing a bedrock of
facts and the relationships among them (those that must come from
memory faster than those that can be obtained via ubiquitous access)
2. THE SECOND LEVEL accentuates the significance of applying new
knowledge to familiar situations (those learned in first level) and include
problem solving and decision making about well known issues
3. THE THIRD LEVEL places prominence on generalizing wisdom to the real
world in unfamiliar situations (not learned about in second level) such as
laboratories, field trips, apprenticeships, capstones, service learning, etc.
4. THE FOURTH LEVEL pays attention to using shared collective wisdom to
invent a better theory, model, practice, product, process, system, etc.
5. GRADUATE SCHOOL: pays attention to the mastery of trans~disciplinary
teaching (fifth level) & conducting original data-based inquiry that leads
to making a difference in the world (sixth level) for any topics of interest
NO absolutes (above can be adapted to suit individuals)

21. FIRST LEVEL (Presenter: sage on the stage)
Gives priority to memorizing a bedrock of facts and the relationships among
them (that must come from memory faster than ubiquitous access)
Since this repeats the understanding of previous researchers, scholars and
authors, the trend is toward faculty-directed broadcast of certain information
FACULTY present lectures and demonstrations:
tutorial, seminar, expert panel debate, case
study, poster board, guest authority, library /
Internet search, oral drill, audio, video, reading,
writing, etc.
They ask confirmatory questions, plan lessons,
prepare learning objectives, offer metaphors,
and assess objectively: test, exam, quiz, skill
performance, essay, journal, etc.
STUDENTS are dependent on learning, passive
bystanders, unconsciously incompetent,
consuming textbooks and producing the above

22. SECOND LEVEL (Facilitator: guide on the side)
Highlights the significance of applying new knowledge to familiar situations
(those learned in first level) including problem solving & decision making
Since knowledge is applied to real world problems, with solutions evaluated
by the learners, the inclination is toward learner-centered instruction
STUDENTS are interdependent with other learners, insightful observers,
consciously incompetent, consuming video and producing the above
FACULTY facilitate discussions and moderate
reflection: cooperative learning, peer instruction,
peer-assessment, one-on-one debate, mock/real
presentation, gamification, creating test items,
hands-on simulation, etc.
They ask reflective questions, plan dialogues,
prepare experiences, ask why, and assess
subjectively: contemplation, peer presentation,
reflective blog, portfolio, etc.

23. THIRD LEVEL (Conductor: catalyst in the mist)
Places prominence on generalizing wisdom to the real world in unfamiliar
situations (not learned about in second level) that are highly experiential
Since this instruction is project-based, with the intent to bring change, the
tendency is to more self-directed learning with faculty in the coaching role
FACULTY give advice and encourage practice: field trips, labs, volunteering,
fieldwork / clinical placements, internships / apprenticeships, team-based /
open capstone project, collaborative service learning, study abroad, etc.
They ask dynamic (solution-focused) questions, plan
resources, prepare support, nurture compassion,
conduct passengers through resistance to change,
and assess descriptively: project impact,
presentation, work experience, final artifact, report,
resolution, transformation, etc.
STUDENTS are independent from faculty, active
participants, consciously competent, consuming
interview/observation data and producing the above

24. FOURTH LEVEL (Mentor: friend at the bend)
Accentuates the importance of using collective wisdom to invent better
ways of doing things by creating or improving theory, product and practice
Since this involves evidence-based research, with practical applications,
faculty and students are partners in the inquiry-discovery process
FACULTY/STUDENT ALLIANCE explores risky and uncharted new territory
by producing and disseminating new research or innovating a new method
STUDENTS are self-learners, dynamic inventors, unconsciously competent,
consuming research outcomes/proposals and producing the above
FACULTY join and participate with the learner:
logical reasoning, inspired brainstorming, self-
teaching, Scientific Method, attribute listing, forced
relationships, conceiving, improvising, experience-
based judgment, open-ended play, imagination,
etc. They ask exploratory questions, plan dreams,
prepare opportunities, cultivate curiosity, and
assess productively: market success, customer
feedback, publication, presentation, etc.

25. Administration (KISS: keep it small & simple)
Instead of departments, faculty organized by issue/concern:
climate change, sustainability, crime, conflict, water, energy, science & tech, etc.
Academics
& Students
Fiscal &
Operations
Leader
Information
Technology
External
Relations
15+ BIG
Problems
(arranged by
groups trying
to solve one)
Fac. Enhancement
Teaching/Research
Global Affairs, etc.
----
Student Affairs
Health / Counsel
Career Services
Service Learning
Outreach &
Lifelong Learning
Online Library
Makerspace, etc.
Scholarships / FA
Finance / Budget
Purchase / Payroll
Fixed Assets: gear
Human Resources
Special Events
Facility Planning
Campus Safety
Physical Plant
Space, etc.
----
Enrollment
Registration
Recruitment
Retention, etc.
Board of
Monitors
----
Legal
Moral
Ombuds
Mediation
Strategic
Plan, etc.
Ent. Backbone
Info. Systems
Digital Records
Network Security
Data Protection
Applications
Emerging Tech
User Experience
Online Platform
Website, etc.
----
eBookstore
Biometrics
Advancement
& Development
Alumni / Community
Commercialization
Communication
Marketing, etc.
----
Ongoing Evaluation
Institution Efficacy
Academic Quality
Collaboration, etc.
C O S T
Q
U
ALITY
AC
C
ESS

26. Administrative Questions
• Who controls the credential; what constitutes a degree?
• Will businesses & universities continue to hire by degrees?
• What should issues be addressed by a “Bill of Rights and
Responsibilities” for students, faculty, staff, and others?
• Separate from regularly updated content (lifecycle), how do
we ensure curricula remain modern; should they be given
“best before dates” informing consumers about currency?
• When are students learners & when are they customers?
SOME PREDICTIONS
• FutureU will hire faculty for their innovative talents and expertise (not a PhD)
• Collaborative Alliances will form among FutureU and Businesses & Industries
• FutureU access will be international: both enrollment & collaborative resources
• Students will need to become multiculturally aware to interact internationally
• Technology & other infrastructure will play an ever expanding role in FutureU!

27. Infrastructure (more than just INFOstructure – IT)
SUSTAINABLE: Roads, Paths, Power, Gas, Air, Water, Wastes, Phone, Internet,
Buildings (with their space and facility allocations), Temperature, Lighting, etc.
Technology, teaching & learning needs apply equally across
Classroom and eLearning (F2F, Tech-Enabled, Blended & Fully Online)

28. Infrastructure Questions
• Are information technology resources adequate for all
activities (teaching, research, administration, etc.)?
• Is space (offices, labs, class, etc.) sufficient on campus?
• Are IT and space resources scalable as enrollment grows?
• Brick & mortar campus: are student residences necessary?
• Most campus buildings remain empty (nights / weekends /
seasonally), so how many structures are actually needed?
• Can we stagger facility-dependent learning events, so that
resources are better shared over the 24 / 7 / 365 model?
SOME PREDICTIONS
• NO rows!; makerspaces arranged to encourage co-creation
• Residences, if built, will house entrepreneurial makerspace
• Common content and open source docs will surpass texts
• Adaptable e-books may be bundled with the price of tuition
• Less text reading & more video watching; Library is online!

29. Collaborate (everything built on both these philosophies)
TOGETHER Sharing Working Unequal load Goal Setting Producing
Cooperation Information & Resources Independently Acknowledged Personal (+group) Individual Results
Coordination ↑ ↑ + Help (conditionally) As a group Accepted as okay Group (+personal) Combined Results
Collaboration
& Consensus
Everything ↑ ↑
(unconditionally)
As a Team
(cohesive)
Embraced (talent
applied to passion)
Reciprocal (where
a feeling is mutual)
Co-creation of
New Results
Cooperate
Consensus
Coordinate
Collaborate
Co-creative
Collectives
CO - LABOR
work together to
achieve the same
synergistic result
With a director or coach,
collaboration can lead to
CO-CREATIVE innovations
from within the “collective”
CO - OPER
function together
to achieve similar
personal results
Without needing a director or
coach, cooperation can lead
to DISRUPTIVE innovations
from within the “connective”
Disruptive
Connectives
Current State = Competition

30. Collaborate/Cooperate Questions
• Governance: what is the best model for governing FutureU?
• Research: how do collaboration and cooperation influence
inquiry; what outcomes do we get from either and/or both?
• Teaching: If cooperation is practiced at the second level
and collaboration is practiced at the third level, which is
best utilized in the fourth level for invention & innovation?
• Learning: should students practice collaboration before
cooperation; if reversed, what would happen at fourth
level?
SOME PREDICTIONS
• Collaboration & cooperation are forms of social learning; most learning is social
• Social learning will be naturally built into classroom, online & blended settings
• Idea generation with discursive modification will become common in eLearning
• Solutions to problems will be crowd-sourced in online & makerspace settings
• Cooperation will be used for disruptive & collaboration for co-creative changes!

31. Change (or resistance to change)
Change is relatively IMPOSSIBLE in Higher Education – so
better to start anew – begin with only one Future University

32. Change Questions
• How can we best manage change & resistance to change?
• What is the best way to leverage changing technologies for
learning online and in classroom with technology support?
SOME PREDICTIONS
• Rapidly emerging technologies will more quickly (than before) make previously
learned content obsolete – (some say) half of all learned content will be archaic
by graduation – therefore, concentrate on enhancing the processes of learning
• Processes will become dynamic, blended, mobile, adaptive, and time flexible
• Portfolios will replace transcripts: potential for practical, not thanks for theories
• Students will be able to make contributions to the changes that impact them
• University employees will be architects of their own transformation and this will
eventually be achieved through open and transparent collaborative processes
• Resistance to change will be inevitable and we will have a strategy to address it!

33. Resistance to Change
This model suggests a stepwise approach to addressing resistance to change
It can be used with any resistant individual and in all collaborative processes

34. Costs (or novel funding solutions to the problem of EDUflation)
Four charts highlighting tuition increases (Canada, USA & European Union)

35. Costs Questions (last, but not least)
• How do we make North American HE free (like in Europe)?
• If we can’t make it free, how do we greatly diminish costs?
• Could graduates give a year of national service in payment?
• Why not simply raise taxes or ask others for donations?
SOME PREDICTIONS
• FutureU will have FREE tuition with all learners on scholarships – Funding will
come from a mandatory minor share in every invention and innovation created
• Alumni will return many times to learn & coach during mid-career & retirement
• Consumer habits will shift toward buying single courses with a certificate to
retool their skills; FutureU will need to respond by offering ongoing education
• The belief that eLearning will save money is a fallacy – low quality eLearning is
cheap, but can cost Higher Ed in the long run – invest in high quality eLearning
• Alternatives to tenure will be necessary to keep faculty current & active; options
may include renewable contracts (with Pro. Dev. plan), probationary periods &
scholarly bonuses, where scholarship is more broadly defined than it is today
• As job security is addressed, salary will be based on performance & production!

36. What would look like?
1. MISSION: graduate learners ready to solve/support future big solutions
2. VISION: global transformation through transdisciplinary collaboration

37. What would look like?
3. Knows the needs of customers and how each/every student learns best
4. Embraces disruptive technology and is current on emerging technology

38. What would look like?
5. Fanatical educators use unique alternatives to traditional learning ways
6. Multiple method experts: Presenter, Facilitator, Conductor, Mentor, etc.

39. What would look like?
7. Dynamic undergraduate curriculum is organized into 4 competency-based
transdisciplinary levels (+2 graduate levels) – transition to next after full mastery

40. What would look like?
8. Transdisciplinary avoids multi- or interdisciplinary silos and allows for
fusing of entrepreneurial information into treasure chests of knowledge

41. What would look like?
9. Academic levels transition along the 4 dynamic curricula sequence and
the teaching & learning paradigm also shifts with this transition…

42. What would look like?
10. TEACHING shifts from Presenting (lecture & demo) through Facilitating
(discuss & reflect) and Conducting (advise & encourage) to Mentoring (join & participate)

43. What would look like?
11. LEARNING shifts from faculty-directed through learner-centered & self-
directed to partnered alliances in the joint inquiry-discovery process

44. What would look like?
12. Administration: flat & lean with new approaches to structure, customer
service, globalization, multiculturalism, costs, tenure, collaboration, etc.

45. What would look like?
13. While infrastructure often means IT, many other elements compose this
at FutureU – if residences, then makerspaces – if library, then online

46. What would look like?
14. Doing work that is transdisciplinary, technologically networked,
globally collaborative, and intellectually agile, leads to planetary
sustainability, stable economics, and innovative ecosystems

47. What would look like?
15. Re-engineering Higher Education is a difficult transformation to make –
Imposed revolution leads to resistance – so all stakeholders should be
engaged in collaborative processes as architects of their future change
all it takes is
ONE to start

48. What would look like?
16. HigherEd is expensive and will continue to get more so; need to find
alternative funding sources: national service, commercialization, etc.

49. The BIG Problems are here!
Where is the cadre of next generation learners who are ready to solve them?
2015 Report
4 problems on both lists!

50. RECOMMENDATIONS
Discussion?
S t a t u s Q u o
F u t u r eFutureU is possible
in any HE institution
that is truly willing
to compartmentalize
a 2.0 version of itself
Isyourhouseinorder?