Glenda Morgan is a seasoned analyst in online education and ed-tech strategy, and a co-host of the Online Education Across the Atlantic podcast. We tapped into her prodigious expertise on key shifts in the field, from learning management systems (LMS) and online program management (OPM) to generative AI and beyond.
Tell us a bit about your career path. How did you end up in education, and more specifically, an expert in online education?
I actually “backed into” online education. I started out wanting to be an academic. I still remember walking onto the University of Cape Town campus as a fresher and thinking, “I never want to leave.” I taught politics and sociology at UNISA and Rhodes in South Africa, then came to the U.S. for a PhD. It was the early Internet era, and I fell in love with technology. I realized I had a window of opportunity to work at the intersection of tech and teaching/learning.
That led me to the University of Wisconsin System working in academic technology, then a few other higher-ed roles, and eventually to Gartner in 2014 on the education team, where I had a front-row seat to how institutions scale online learning, make platform decisions, and (sometimes) get it gloriously right.
Why education? Because I love teaching and I love learning. When teaching works, it feels a bit like magic. And research puts me in a flow state. I can’t imagine doing anything else. The “expert” part comes from years of translating messy realities into practical strategies for campuses and constantly learning in public.
What have been some of the most significant changes in the industry since your involvement?
That is a tough question to answer right now, given where I live [Salt Lake City] and all that is happening in higher education, but I will have a crack at answering this.
One of the big changes I have seen is the shift away from higher education as a public good to more of a personal and private good. Alongside that is the growth in emphasis by students but also regulatory bodies and universities themselves on career outcomes and the ability to get a job. This has both upsides and downsides.
Obviously, the growing salience of technology in teaching and learning is a big change, as is the growth in acceptance (even if it’s not universal).
Another one is the incredible change in accessibility of knowledge that came about first from the Internet and now through generative AI. This has fundamentally changed how education functions. Again, there are downsides too but the shift is massive.
Also, increasing state and government intervention in higher education and related to that, the decreasing trust of the public in higher education which I think is very sad and something that higher education really needs to act on.
I could go on for a while on this issue, but those are my top changes.
Online education continues to grow and evolve. What are some of the industry’s biggest challenges at the moment? And how do you think both institutions and vendors can overcome them?
Wow—that’s a giant question. I’ll keep it to three big, current headaches.
1. Student success online (the big one)
Yes, there’s some self-selection in online, but we still see stubborn gaps in completion, momentum, and belonging. The fix isn’t one silver bullet; it’s likely more sustained attention to the issue and addressing several things simultaneously. I’m writing more on this in On Student Success. Folks should subscribe if this is something that interests them.
2. The marketing money pit
We spend eye-watering sums to rent attention from companies like Google and Meta (at least in the U.S.). The quality of leads varies, and the incentive structure often pushes volume over fit.
3. Scaling without flattening quality (and cost)
We haven’t cracked affordable, at-scale online for diverse contexts (especially low-bandwidth and non-traditional learners). There will always be small programs, and they definitely have a place. But to address demand (especially in parts of the developing world) and also cost we need to understand how to deliver online programs inexpensively at scale. I don’t think that problem has been solved yet, though there are some promising practices out there.
Those are my top three. If we make progress there—better student support, saner marketing, and quality at scale—the rest gets a lot easier.
In your opinion, what are the most important factors that higher ed institutions need to take into account when creating valuable and impactful online programs?
I could write not just a book but a book series on this one, but here’s the short version. If you want online programs that are actually valuable and impactful, start with purpose. Know exactly why you’re doing it. Then set a strategy you can steer by. It’s fine to begin with some ad-hoc, organic growth, but to get into that value/impact zone you need a clear direction and a way to prioritize.
Don’t just copy what peers are doing. Ask: What sets us apart? What’s special about our programs, and where do we truly create real value for learners and partners?
And make this an ongoing practice, not a one-and-done. Do regular portfolio reviews and build in user feedback and journey mapping so you can see what needs to evolve. Do it every year, so you’re continually tuning the mix, sunsetting what’s not working, and doubling down on what is.
We can’t not talk about AI in higher ed. What are your views on how AI has and will shape higher education?
My views are evolving, as the tech changes and as we see what actually works (and what doesn’t) in higher ed.
The biggest impact so far? AI is exposing some long-standing fault lines in higher ed, especially around assessment, the nature of knowledge, and our pedagogy.
I’m especially focused on two areas right now. First, AI as a tutor. There’s a lot of noise, from “everyone gets Socrates” to “it’s useless.” The truth is somewhere in the middle. AI can scaffold, nudge, and personalize in ways we’ve never scaled before, but it needs good guardrails, solid prompts, and integration with human teaching, not a bolt-on chatbot. We also need to deal with the fact that tools like AI tutors tend to be used by the stronger students rather than the weaker ones who might benefit more.
Second, AI is changing the nature of work, especially entry-level roles. Automation is reshuffling what “starter” jobs look like, which means upstream effects for how we prepare students. We need to go beyond vague “AI literacy” and get specific for how teaching and curricula need to change to deal with that reality.
AI is a catalyst. It’s revealing where higher ed is brittle, and it’s opening real opportunities if we pair the tools with thoughtful pedagogy, credible assessment, and a sharper focus on the skills graduates actually need.
As OES, we pride ourselves on the quality of the online courses that we produce. Are there any institutions, programs or courses that you’ve heard really stand out in terms of the quality of their online offering? What can other institutions and vendors learn from them?
This is a question I get often and I am about to start a series in both newsletters covering exactly this, uncovering the pockets of excellence in online learning and student success, or at least bringing them to our readers. And the series is premised on a few things which I believe to be true.
1. The big and well-known examples are great, but they are only part of the story and are often not that helpful for most institutions because of their scale and the kinds of resources they are able to bring to bear on online growth.
2. I tend to see best practices in specific areas or practices rather than institutions as a whole. For example, I see a best practice in recruitment or retention rather than an entire online initiative.
3. It is tempting for universities to emulate the best practices they see at other successful institutions but best practices don’t always translate over. Often it’s less a best practice than a best system and unless you have a very similar context the best practice won’t work.
With ADA Title II about to become enforced in the next couple of years, many institutions are scrambling to get their digital assets in order. How important do you think accessibility is or will become in online education?
I think accessibility for people with disabilities is critical and hopefully new rules will increase institutional adherence to it. It is not only the right thing to do but accessible design tends to be better for everyone and to help future-proof content at least a little. That being said, one thing I have learned is that you really need to enact legislation at the state level to give the legislation teeth. I learned this from working across a variety of states. Where there was enacting legislation, adherence to accessibility was more thorough and far-reaching.
What role do community colleges play in the online education space? Or perhaps a better way to phrase this would be: What role will online education play in the community college space?
Community colleges educate the largest share of Americans and are an important route into higher education for many, especially students from low-income groups. In some states, for example California and Texas, many community colleges have built a strong online learning presence. I typically write a newsletter post every year, tracking this growth. Plus, there are some good individual level reports for campuses, and resources such as the RP Group report on the California community colleges that came out this year. I believe the community college system itself also does a report.
Online learning is an important tool for access and in that sense it is especially important in community colleges given their role in providing access. The fact that so many of their students work, have family commitments, live a distance from campus and have transportation challenges makes online learning really important in this part of the sector.
The usual concerns about retention and graduation rates for online learning apply even more so to community colleges given that many students come to community colleges somewhat underprepared. The growth of online learning in community colleges creates some interesting challenges given its student body and their need often for extra support and the extent to which community colleges are particularly cash-strapped.
One final thought: Because they are open access, community colleges are struggling a bit with student loan fraud–where people apply for loans through the college in the name of a student but then disappear. It is a problem that is way easier with online learning and so has ballooned.
Higher ed carries an enormous but frequently conservative legacy. In your experience, how have some of the most successful institutions achieved faculty/cultural buy-in to online education?
Some places have achieved this by essentially creating organizational carve-outs, i.e., special units separated from the rest of the institution in which they are freer to make changes quickly. I have mixed feelings about using this approach for online learning.
Others have done it simply through force of leadership.
Other places have done it because faculty have taken the initiative and built something and their status carries a lot of weight.
But the most consistent thing I see with institutions that have been successful is that they don’t try to rush things but build slowly and incrementally and commit to action. I think you see this with UCF, and Oregon State and also in student success with Georgia State.
We have given you a magic wand. Wave it over the online education industry. What has changed?
The public no longer has a negative view of higher education but sees it in a positive light as a force for good and a valuable undertaking. The bad perception of higher education in many countries is a huge issue.
