Online learning: What’s next for higher education, skills training?

Keith Shaw: Five years after the COVID pandemic caused many educational systems to rush into online learning, we're now back in a world where most learning is done in physical environments.

But is there still momentum for online learning, remote education, and using new digital tools—especially in the era of artificial intelligence?

We're going to talk about these issues and more with a university expert to find out what's new, and whether employees looking to upskill can take advantage of these new tools. Hi, everybody. Welcome to Today in Tech. I'm Keith Shaw. Joining me on the show today is Dr.

Evan Kropp. He is the Executive Director of Distance Education for the University of Florida's College of Journalism and Communications. Welcome to the show, Evan.

Evan Kropp: Thank you. That's not even the whole title.

Keith: So is it like the school has a sponsored name on it too, like the "Joe Smith University of..."

Evan: No, yeah, we don’t have a name. If anybody wants to, you know, put their name on the building, I’m sure the dean would be happy to do that. Keith: All right.

So for the sake of this discussion—we talked before the show—there was some confusion about the terms: online learning, digital learning, that kind of stuff. I want to cover the full range of different tools.

Online learning, from my perspective, implies that a person is attending a class in a remote location—not necessarily far away, but not physically on campus. Evan: Yep. Keith: Digital learning implies technology-driven tools and innovations that help students learn regardless of their location.

So, you could be on campus and still use digital tools. Evan: Right. Keith: Are there other definitions you see in university settings? Or even in high school and elementary school? Evan: Certainly.

One phrase we use is “distance education.” A lot of people aren’t happy with that term because it feels old—it dates back to the days of correspondence courses. These days, we tend to use "online education." We generally classify our offerings into three categories: online, on-campus, and hybrid.

Keith: OK, and do you get involved in the digital tools side as well? Evan: Yeah, absolutely.

Evan: Digital tools are used in more than one way—actually, in two major areas. The first is on-campus. Digital tools in a physical classroom setting are a real thing. It’s not just about bringing your iPad or laptop to take notes. There are tools that make classes more interactive.

For example, “clickers” have been around for a while. Instead of buying clickers, now many tools allow students to use their smartphones. So, students come to class with their phones, and they can participate in polls.

A professor might ask a question during a lecture, and students respond on their phones. The results show up in real time, and the professor can discuss them. Those same tools are used in online classes as well.

Obviously, a physical clicker doesn’t work in that environment, but an online poll does. We also use discussion boards and a full suite of tools that enable us to teach online effectively.

Keith: Were a lot of these tools developed after the pandemic, or were they already around before?

Evan: Many of the tools we use were already in place before the pandemic. The pandemic definitely increased demand and visibility. All of a sudden, people realized they needed these tools. Some edtech providers were caught off guard—they saw an influx of customers and had to scramble.

It’s not just “here’s a tool, go use it.” It’s about implementation. How do you train faculty? How do you onboard students? That’s a big lift. You couldn’t just flip a switch and go, “Okay, now we’re teaching online.” Keith: But that’s what a lot of people did, right?

Evan: Yeah, that’s what people claimed they did. But the online learning community pushed back. What actually happened was that most on-campus programs shifted to what we now call “emergency remote teaching.” Keith: Oh, okay.

So we’re distinguishing between structured online learning and the temporary stopgap methods used during the pandemic? Evan: Exactly. Emergency remote teaching was created quickly to help students finish their semesters. It wasn’t a long-term solution.

It allowed continuity, but it didn’t offer the depth or quality we associate with true online learning. Now, we’re trying to move people away from that emergency model and introduce them to thoughtfully designed online learning experiences.

Keith: That leads into my next question. After that big spike during the pandemic, it feels like—especially at the high school and elementary levels—online learning has mostly disappeared. They rushed to bring kids back in person.

But in higher ed, have you seen a continuation or even growth in online learning? Did schools that started with emergency remote teaching evolve into more structured programs? Evan: Definitely.

There’s been an upswing in schools trying to enter the online space. Schools that weren’t offering online options pre-pandemic started thinking, “Hey, let’s keep this going. Let’s build it out.” There wasn’t a spike and total drop-off.

In higher ed, we saw a spike, then a slight decline, but overall online enrollments remain higher than pre-pandemic. For instance, in my college at UF, we have about 2,500 students across undergraduate and graduate programs—48% of them are now online. That’s a significant shift. Keith: Wow.

Evan: The challenge now is managing both models. Schools are used to managing on-campus students: they’ve got faculty, systems, and processes in place. When you add an online component, it brings a whole new set of challenges—how do you implement, staff, and support it?

Keith: That sounds a lot like what companies experienced during the remote work boom. Everyone went home, and now there are return-to-office mandates, hybrid models, and so on. Are you seeing similar hybrid models in higher ed?

Like, a professor saying, “Let’s meet in person for some sessions and do others online”?

Evan: It’s not strictly either/or. And it shouldn’t be. We should embrace all learning models and methods to best serve students. Some students may have had a great experience with online learning during the pandemic and want to stick with it. Others may hate it.

It depends on the individual’s learning style. We tell students: don’t choose online or on-campus based on convenience alone. Choose based on how you learn best. Some people thrive online—they’re self-motivated, schedule-oriented, and can work independently. Others need the structure of in-person classes.

Keith: Right—like the kid who won’t wake up unless class starts at 8 a.m. and someone’s taking attendance. Evan: Exactly. That student may struggle in an online environment. Hybrid models exist, but they’re different from both fully online and fully in-person. Personally, we’ve only dipped our toes into hybrid learning.

I believe you have to do one model well before branching out. The goal is to offer what helps students succeed—and that might mean multiple pathways.

Keith: And I’m glad you helped redefine what we experienced during the pandemic—not as true online learning, but as emergency remote teaching. Because, from my experience with our kids in high school, it was awful.

I felt like I was retaking eighth and sixth grade because I was helping them with everything. It just felt like every class was: watch a PowerPoint, watch a video, take a quiz. Then the next day: another PowerPoint, another video, another quiz. And this was across five different subjects.

So, how is true online learning different from that? It’s not just watching videos and taking quizzes, right? I see that same pattern in corporate security training too—watch a video, take a quiz, and you’re “trained.”

Evan: What we saw during the pandemic was faculty—many of whom had never bought into online education—being forced to move online. Some of them were open to it, but lacked time or support. So they took what they knew—in-person teaching—and just replicated it online.

Lecture in class became lecture on Zoom. PowerPoint in class became PowerPoint upload. That’s not online learning. That’s just putting the in-person model online. We don’t consider that true online education.

Keith: So what are the defining features of modern online learning that truly benefit students?

Evan: The most important aspect is course design. Creating a high-quality online course takes much more intentional design than in-person courses. Often in face-to-face learning, faculty are experts in their field and are just handed a class and told to teach.

They might wing it a little: “This week we’ll cover this topic, next week that topic,” and then adjust as they go. But how many of those faculty members ever took a class on teaching? Or on course design? Usually none.

That’s where we bring in course developers, instructional designers, and instructional technologists—professionals who understand learning theory and educational technology. They work alongside faculty to build engaging, efficient, and accessible courses. No wasted time, no filler stories in a 45-minute lecture. We compress, condense, and deliver material in effective ways.

And accessibility is key. Online courses can—and should—be designed to meet the needs of all students, including those with visual or hearing impairments.

Keith: Is there still a clear difference between the types of students who choose on-campus programs and those who choose online? I’ve noticed that online learning marketing often targets working adults—single parents, people with full-time jobs. Are we starting to see more traditional college-aged students in online programs?

Or is it still mostly non-traditional learners?

Evan: Realistically, online learners are still primarily non-traditional students. They might be 18–22 years old but not following the traditional path of enrolling right after high school and living on campus.

Many are working adults, parents, or people with other responsibilities who want to finish a degree on their own schedule. That said, we are seeing an increase in traditional students choosing online programs—either for flexibility or because they’ve discovered they learn better that way.

There are also the 40 million adults in the U.S. who have some college credit but never completed a degree. That’s a huge group. And schools like Southern New Hampshire, Arizona State, Purdue Global, and Western Governors are going after that population hard with scalable online programs. Keith: Wow.

That’s a massive audience. Evan: It is. With 40 million potential learners compared to the 14 million or so traditional college students, the online space is where the growth is. And that’s driving a lot of innovation and investment in the space.

Keith: That’s also appealing to someone who’s been working five to ten years in a particular field and feels like, “This isn’t what I want to do anymore.” They might not want to pursue a master’s degree but are looking for a career pivot.

So is that something universities are focusing on? Offering programs that appeal to these kinds of returning students? Evan: Absolutely.

At the University of Florida, we’re based in Gainesville—if you want to live in Florida and be as far away from the beach as possible, come here. Lots of trees. Beautiful trees, yes.

But seriously, we have graduates who’ve completed their bachelor’s degrees and are now living in places like Tampa, Orlando, or Miami. It doesn’t make sense for them to drive back to Gainesville for a master’s program. That’s where online education really extends our reach.

Some people choose online for really practical reasons. I’ve spoken to students who say, “I’m 29, I could never sit in a class with 19-year-olds.” I always laugh because the average age in my online programs is 30.

Others might stay in Gainesville after graduating but want to keep their options open. So instead of enrolling in an on-campus grad program, they choose the online option. If they get a job offer somewhere else, they can just move—and not miss a beat in their education.

Keith: Are you also seeing some of the demographic shifts we’ve been hearing about? Like the projected drop in 18-year-olds starting next year in the U.S.? That could force more schools to get competitive—especially the smaller ones that are struggling with enrollment.

Can online education help them attract students they wouldn’t have reached otherwise?

Evan: It’s true—there’s been a significant increase in school closures and consolidations. But I don’t think online education alone will save struggling institutions. Those schools typically rely on the traditional 18–22-year-old demographic, and that’s not the primary group we see enrolling in online programs.

So while online learning offers opportunities, it’s not a magic bullet for institutions facing deep structural challenges.

Keith: I guess I was hoping UF could swoop in and save everybody. But yeah, you’re the University of Florida—you’re probably not hurting for applicants.

Evan: No, we’re doing okay. I believe we had nearly 100,000 applications last year for about 20,000 undergraduate spots. Keith: Wow!

OK, shifting gears a bit—we’ve also seen the rise of generative AI tools like ChatGPT in the last few years. Whenever I talk to academics, I have to ask—has the initial fear around AI subsided? Are faculty and students starting to embrace it more?

I still see headlines like “Using ChatGPT is cheating.” There was even a story about students suing for tuition refunds because a professor used AI. Also—tools like Grammarly, Duolingo—those are AI-powered too, right? Evan: Exactly.

Grammarly is AI-based. Should we ban it? No. Foreign language departments actually encourage students to use Duolingo to practice. So, we can’t just write off all AI tools. The real challenge is: AI is still scary to a lot of people. Faculty are being told they need to upskill.

Administrators are being asked, “Should we integrate AI into every major?” Do we offer standalone AI classes? Or do we weave it into every course across the curriculum? The key is understanding how AI is actually being used in the workforce.

Faculty need to engage with their alumni and advisory boards to learn how professionals are applying these tools. Only then can we effectively teach students how to use them. The knee-jerk “no AI” response is outdated.

Keith: I remember when laptops started showing up in classrooms. At first it was “no computers allowed!” Evan: Right? Could you imagine a “no computers” policy today? Ridiculous. Back then, it was “Are you cheating? Are you recording me?

Are you typing instead of handwriting?” Then came the internet: “Are you looking up answers or just scrolling Instagram?” It’s the same cycle of discomfort with new tech. But honestly, the biggest use of AI I’ve seen in higher ed so far is in course development.

Evan: Where I’ve seen the most use of AI in higher education is behind the scenes—in course development and digital tools used to build online classes. For example, in our online courses, we usually design one content module per week. Each module has an introduction: “Welcome to Week 3.

You’re going to learn about X. Here’s how it connects to what you’ve already learned.” We want to clearly outline what students will be reading or watching, the order they should go through the materials, and what they should be looking for.

Now, we can use AI to help with that. If an instructor writes a brief intro, AI can expand on it, clarify it, make it more accessible and readable, and ensure that expectations are clear for students.

So that’s a great use of the technology—making content better, faster, and more student-friendly. Where we still need work is in the classroom—guiding students on how to use AI responsibly. Like you, my son was a college freshman this year.

I told him: “Don’t shy away from AI, but don’t let it do the work for you either. Write your paper first, then use AI to improve it. If you’re stuck, ask AI to help you move forward.” Yes, some students will cheat.

But if we trust them and teach them how to use AI as a tool—not a crutch—we’ll be better off.

Keith: Right—and what goes viral? Not the thoughtful uses, but the dramatic ones. We had your colleague Dustin on the show talking about virality. It’s always the videos where the student’s shouting, “I’m not cheating!” and the professor is yelling back.

There was one on Instagram where the professor said, “But I gave you the syllabus!” and the student said, “We just put it in ChatGPT and got a paper out of it.”

Evan: I’ll give you a real-world example. We teach public relations, and part of that is writing press releases.

One faculty member came to me and said, “My students are just using AI to write the press release.” So I asked her, “Well, do you think when they’re out in the real world, they’ll use tools like AI?” She said, “Yeah, probably.” So I said, “Then why not teach them how to use it properly?” Here’s the compromise we came up with: Step one: Students write a press release completely on their own.

No AI. Step two: The following week, they take their draft, put it into AI, and work on improving it using prompts. Step three: They submit the improved version and write a short reflection on the process. What was easier? What was more difficult?

Did the AI give you incorrect or biased information? Did it cite sources properly? That way, they learn the mechanics of writing, but also learn how to use AI as a tool—just like they will in the workplace.

Keith: That’s a great approach. I imagine in journalism classes, the concern is even more intense. Accuracy is everything in journalism. If students use AI for research, how do they know the information is reliable? You have to check the source, right?

That was the same issue we had with Google searches. Sometimes the top result would be some anonymous blog post. But if it’s The Wall Street Journal, I trust that someone edited it.

Evan: That’s the challenge with AI—you don’t always know what sources it’s pulling from. It reminds me of when people used to say, “Don’t use Wikipedia. It’s not reliable. Anyone can edit it.” My view was: use Wikipedia, just don’t cite it.

If you’re exploring a topic or want a summary, it’s a great place to start. You just don’t base your entire paper on it. Same with AI. It’s a jumping-off point, not the final product.

Keith: So, for people already in the workforce who want to upskill—what’s your advice? Should they go back to school, or are there tools they can use right now to level up? Evan: Absolutely.

There are tons of options. At UF and at many other institutions, we offer basic AI courses to help people get familiar with the tools. There are also a lot of great online platforms teaching things like prompt engineering and AI literacy.

I keep seeing that image pop up on social media: “30 Days to Become an AI Expert.” Every day is a different mini-lesson. I haven’t tried it yet, but I’m tempted. The point is, not every industry is integrating AI at the same pace.

Even if there isn’t a journalism-specific AI course out there, you can still take general AI training and apply those lessons to your field.

Keith: That’s exactly what I do. I’ll go into ChatGPT and say, “Hey, can you do this for me?” Sometimes the response is brilliant. Other times—not so much. For example, one tool I tried said it could generate AI thumbnail images for my videos. I tried it...

and it was awful. Just two pictures with a terrible font slapped on. Evan: Same here. I’ve tried some design tools and had no luck—which is probably for the best, because I’m a terrible designer. But AI is like any new tech—it brings change, and change causes anxiety.

People need to take it one step at a time: Learn what the tool does. Get familiar with it. Then ask: “How might I use this in my work or my learning?”

Evan: One thing I’ve been experimenting with recently is using ChatGPT instead of Google Search. We’re so used to typing things into Google, but I’ve found that when I remember to use ChatGPT instead, I often get better answers—more personalized, conversational, and context-aware.

For example, I was trying to figure out how to do something on LinkedIn. I searched their help pages—no luck. Googled it—still no good.

Then I asked ChatGPT, “Is this possible on LinkedIn?” and it said, “No, and here’s why.” It gave me an explanation in plain language, not generic help desk jargon. Then I asked a few follow-up questions, and within 10 minutes, I had all the answers I needed.

That’s the kind of discovery we want our students to make. But if we scare them away from tech, they’ll never get to experience those “aha” moments.

Keith: And I imagine that’s exactly what Google and LinkedIn are terrified of—that users will skip their platforms and go straight to ChatGPT. I’m surprised you didn’t say YouTube though. That’s usually my go-to for figuring stuff out.

Evan: I save YouTube for DIY projects, but you’re right. There’s probably a video for everything. The difference is that ChatGPT speaks your language and adapts to what you’re really trying to do—without ads (at least for now).

But yes, if OpenAI starts inserting ads into responses, that could change things.

Keith: Let’s talk about other digital learning tools or methods—like AR, VR, and gamification. Every time a new headset launches, someone claims it’s going to “revolutionize education.” Like, “You’ll visit Ancient Greece in VR!” But is that just marketing glitter? Are those technologies actually useful for teaching?

Evan: I do follow those trends, and I personally love gamification. A lot of people dismiss it—say it’s for kids. But I disagree. I use Duolingo and I’m on a 256-day streak. I’m a grown-up academic, and I’m hooked.

I probably learned more Spanish on Duolingo in the past year than I did during years of formal classes. The gaming elements—points, streaks, leveling up—they keep me engaged. We should absolutely bring more of that into education.

Keith: Yeah, I remember when companies tried to adopt gamification years ago—turning corporate training into something fun, like a video game. But it never really took off. Why? Evan: Because it’s hard. All of these innovations—gamification, AR, VR—they take time, money, and commitment.

About 10 years ago, we had a university directive to explore VR/AR. We found most people using it for things like virtual campus tours, not academics.

We even pitched the idea of a virtual graduation ceremony—students would wear VR headsets and see the stadium, their names announced on the big screen, the whole immersive experience. That would’ve been perfect during the pandemic... but we didn’t move fast enough.

I’ve seen some great use cases in medical schools—like virtual anatomy tables, where you can explore 3D models and remove layers. That’s meaningful. But overall, I don’t think AR/VR is going to transform online learning in the next 10 years.

Not until the cost comes down and more people are familiar with it.

Keith: Yeah, I’ve seen VR being used to train future surgeons—practicing before they move on to cadavers or live patients. That makes sense. But in journalism? A holographic press conference simulator? Probably not. Evan: Exactly. It’s cool, but not essential. It’s like icing—not the cake.

Keith: I want to end on this: College isn’t just about academics. It’s also about social growth—learning to live with a roommate, managing laundry, making friends. Do you think about how to bring those social elements into the online learning experience?

And please don’t say “Zoom party”—those were the worst part of the pandemic.

Evan: Unfortunately, yeah, Zoom parties were kind of the default. But I agree—those can’t replicate the real college experience. That’s something I’m personally trying to solve through research: how do we increase engagement in online programs in a meaningful way?

We may not be able to duplicate the in-person social experience, but we can do better than just screen-based interaction. Right now, my biggest fear is the online student who logs in, watches a video, does the quiz, logs out—no connection, no community. That’s not good enough.

We’ve been trying things like giving students access to industry events. If I go to a journalism conference, I’ll get a few extra passes and invite online students to attend. Then I’ll guide them: “Go meet that person. Watch that panel. Introduce yourself.” They love it.

We also want to build smaller, more targeted communities—not giant online hubs, but spaces where students can find others with similar interests or majors, just like on campus. That’s where deeper engagement happens.

Keith: Do you think that kind of engagement will come from better tech platforms? Or does it have to be a non-digital effort?

Evan: It could be both. Next week, I’m sending a survey to our online students about potentially hosting an in-person event. We’re asking: Would you attend something on campus? Or would a regional meetup be better? Should it be a quick evening event or a weekend retreat?

We’re also thinking about bringing career services along to provide value—resume tips, one-on-one meetings, networking. Now, some online programs require in-person components. Personally, I’m not a fan of that—it defeats the purpose of flexibility. But if we offer something optional that’s valuable, students might come.

We’ll see what the response is. If people want it, we’ll build it. But either way, our goal is to help students feel like they’re part of a community, not just clicking through slides alone. Keith: Yeah.

If we can get students off the laptop and into real connections—whether physical or virtual—that could really enhance the online college experience. Evan: Absolutely. We’ve already expanded study abroad programs to include online students.

For example, we’ve taken students to NBA and NFL games in Europe, professional soccer events, and even built a journalism-specific study abroad track. We’re also launching a new sports communication program with similar opportunities. Letting online and on-campus students participate together in study abroad is a great equalizer.

Too many schools treat online students differently. But when we bring them together, everyone benefits.

Keith: That’s awesome. Evan Kropp, thank you again for being on the show. It’s kind of ironic we’ve been talking about distance learning and you actually came into the studio—but I really appreciate you being here. Evan: Thanks for having me. I really appreciate it.

Keith: That’s going to do it for this week’s show. Be sure to like the video, subscribe to the channel, and drop your thoughts in the comments if you’re watching on YouTube. Join us every week for new episodes of Today in Tech. I’m Keith Shaw. Thanks for watching.