Let’s look at this briefly. When it became obvious that the Internet was moving into the mainstream, it would have been pretty difficult to imagine a world ten years hence in which the three items that did come to pass did not. In other words, given the ubiquitous adoption of the Internet it would have been difficult to imagine a world in which more technology related to the Internet was not added to classrooms and campuses, that institutions would not want to have something like a CMS to utilize the Internet for simple but better communication in support of instruction, or for providers of distance learning to create an incrementally better product with a ubiquitous distribution technology that eliminates distance. All three largely were clear productivity improvements on things that were happening already in higher education. They all expanded the availability of something valuable to nonusers. Smart classrooms have made it much easier for the growing number of faculty who use computers, publishing tools, or the Internet to expand that aspect into the classroom. CMSs have enabled a standard and relatively easy way for institutions to simplify distribution of electronic materials without having to build custom web sites for all courses using a variety of tools. Distance learning platforms have greatly improved access for learners – many of whom were nonconsumers of higher education previously.

To consider one counter-example, the idea that students would rush on mass to use new digital content products to study does not pass any of the three screens. The vast majority of students, excepting those involved in research, know what content they are expected to master and it is already fully specified and highly accessible and convenient in traditional forms. While not cheap (textbooks are expensive) there were no online alternatives offered that radically changed the economic equation (or productivity) for the student.