The contemporary landscape of higher education has been irrevocably transformed by the rise of online universities, a phenomenon accelerated by technological advancement and further catalyzed by the global pandemic, which forced a mass migration to digital learning platforms. While this shift has democratized access to education, breaking down geographical and temporal barriers for non-traditional students, working adults, and those in remote locations, it has also given rise to a profound and troubling question: has the pursuit of knowledge been reduced to a transactional experience, akin to shopping in an online store? The core of this issue lies in the commodification of education, where the university is increasingly perceived as a service provider, the student as a consumer, and the degree as a purchased product, a dynamic that threatens the very essence of learning as a transformative, critical, and community-oriented endeavor.
The “online store” analogy manifests in several distinct ways; the interface and marketing strategies of many for-profit and non-profit online institutions often feature glossy, user-friendly portals with dropdown menus for majors, prominently displayed tuition costs, and promotional offers like “no-cost textbooks” or “accelerated degrees,” mirroring the aesthetics and tactics of e-commerce platforms like Amazon. This consumerist framework is reinforced by a business model that often prioritizes enrollment numbers and retention metrics over pedagogical depth, leading to a system where students “add courses to cart” and progress through standardized, often impersonal, curricula with the primary goal of credential acquisition rather than intellectual cultivation.
The problem, therefore, is not the digital medium itself, but its frequent implementation under a neoliberal logic that frames education as a private good for economic advancement rather than a public good for societal and personal development, a shift critically noted by scholars like Henry Giroux, who argues that under such a model, “critical pedagogy is replaced by credentialization, and the university is transformed into a credential factory” (Giroux, 2014, p. 17). This commodification creates a cascade of interconnected problems, including a high prevalence of academic isolation and attrition, as the lack of meaningful, spontaneous interaction with peers and instructors—the kind that occurs in hallways, during office hours, and in collaborative study groups on a physical campus—fosters a sense of anonymity and disconnection, making it easier for students to disengage. Furthermore, the pedagogical approach in many mass-market online courses can devolve into what educational theorist John Daniel termed “the McDonaldization of education,” characterized by efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control, where complex subjects are broken down into bite- sized, automated modules with multiple-choice quizzes that prioritize rote memorization over critical thinking, analysis, and creative synthesis (Daniel, 1996).
This standardized model fails to accommodate diverse learning styles and does little to build the essential “soft skills” of collaboration, negotiation, and verbal persuasion that are honed through dynamic, real- time discourse. The credibility of degrees earned through such impersonal systems can also suffer from a persistent, though often unfair, perception of inferiority compared to traditional degrees, a stigma fueled by the well-publicized practices of predatory, for-profit online institutions that have prioritized profit over educational outcomes, leading to investigations by bodies like the U.S. Senate’s Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which in a 2012 report highlighted the “poor student outcomes and questionable practices” prevalent in the sector (United States Senate, 2012). This perception, combined with the isolating experience, can devalue the degree in the eyes of both the holder and potential employers, creating a cycle of skepticism that undermines the legitimate achievements of diligent online students.
Solving this multifaceted crisis requires a fundamental re-imagination of the online learning paradigm, moving it decisively away from the “online store” model and toward a vision of a “digital campus” that intentionally recreates the community, rigor, and mentorship inherent in the best of traditional education. The solution begins with a pedagogical shift from content delivery to community building, leveraging technology not merely as a distribution channel but as a platform for connection. This involves designing courses around principles of collaborative learning, such as scaffolded group projects that utilize cloud-based tools like Google Workspace or Microsoft Teams, and mandatory, synchronous video discussions in small seminars facilitated by platforms like Zoom or Gather, which are designed to mimic more organic social interactions.
Instructors must be trained and incentivized to transition from being distant content moderators to being active “community facilitators” who provide frequent, personalized feedback, host virtual office hours, and proactively foster intellectual discourse among students, a role emphasized by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer in their Community of Inquiry framework, which identifies “teaching presence” as a critical element for successful online learning (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000).
To combat the isolation and high dropout rates, institutions must invest in robust student support services that are seamlessly integrated into the digital experience, including proactive academic advising, readily accessible mental health resources via telehealth, and the creation of virtual student unions and interest-based clubs that use platforms like Discord or Slack to foster informal, peer-to-peer interaction, thereby building a genuine sense of belonging and institutional
identity.
Pedagogically, the over-reliance on automated assessment must be replaced with authentic assessment methods that mirror real-world tasks, such as portfolio-based evaluations, video presentations, peer reviews, and complex problem-solving scenarios, which not only more accurately measure learning but also develop crucial professional skills. Furthermore, the credibility and value of online degrees can be solidified through greater transparency and a focus on demonstrable competencies; institutions should partner with industry leaders to create curriculum that is directly aligned with workforce needs and should champion micro-credentialing and digital badges that validate specific, verifiable skills alongside the traditional degree, providing a more nuanced and trustworthy record of a graduate’s capabilities. This approach is supported by the work of organizations like the Competency-Based Education Network (C-BEN), which advocates for models that focus on “mastery of skills and knowledge rather than seat time” (Competency-Based Education Network, 2021).
Ultimately, the transformation must be systemic, requiring accreditation bodies to update their standards to prioritize and reward evidence of student engagement, community development, and career-relevant competency acquisition over mere logistical compliance. By intentionally designing for human connection, prioritizing mentorship over moderation, and assessing for authentic mastery rather than rote completion, online universities can shed their transactional skin and evolve into vibrant, rigorous, and respected digital ecosystems. The goal is not to replicate the brick-and-mortar experience pixel-for- pixel, but to harness the unique affordances of digital technology—its scalability, flexibility, and capacity for rich multimedia—to create a new and equally valid form of higher learning that fulfills the enduring promise of a university education: not to simply sell a credential, but to cultivate a mind and build a community of lifelong learners.
Dr. Rohit Kumar Pal
Senior Academician
Pedagog.ac
References:
Competency-Based Education Network (C-BEN). (2021). What is Competency-Based
Education? Retrieved from [https://www.cbenetwork.org/competency-based-education/]
(https://www.cbenetwork.org/competency-based-education/)
Daniel, J. S. (1996). Mega-Universities and Knowledge Media: Technology Strategies for
Higher Education. Kogan PagDaniel, J. S. (1996). Mega-Universities and Knowledge Media: Technology Strategies for
Higher Education. Kogan Page.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based
Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher
Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
Giroux, H. A. (2014). Neoliberalism’s War on Higher Education. Haymarket Books.
United States Senate, Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. (2012). For Profit
Higher Education: The Failure to Safeguard the Federal Investment and Ensure Student
Success. 112th Congress, 2nd Session.