2026 Q2 Review: Online learning developments in UK higher education
UK higher education is fully into its employability era. Looking at the wider landscape, one thing that has struck me this quarter is the combination of developments and signalling from higher education about its utility for work and careers, and, relatedly, the embedding of employability initiatives into the university experience.
The most eye-catching announcement came from the University of Manchester, which said that it will offer work placements to all undergraduates. This is also the same University of Manchester that said that, in 10 years, half of its students will be online.
When you put these two things together, there is something very New Year’s resolution-y about it all, which is probably a useful byword for university strategies in general. These are noble aims and eye-catching announcements, but they also feel a bit like the university equivalent of resolving to stop looking at your phone before bed, start batch-cooking on Sundays, run two half marathons, learn Italian and get properly into Pilates.
While trying to ensure that degrees support students’ future career aspirations is clearly an important aim, I worry that UK HE is at risk of employability theatre, developing initiatives that are either impractical or sound good but deliver little. The extent to which some of these are genuinely market-oriented and impactful developments, rather than desperate external signalling initiatives from a sector increasingly being asked to prove to the Question Time audience that it is not just reading philosophy in an expensive building, is debatable.
Online learning in general tends not to suffer from the same types of challenges, as it continues, through degrees in particular, largely to support those who have already entered the world of work and are looking to study to help them get on in one way or another. In that respect, if universities really want to signal that they are supporting people with career-focused study motivations, they could do a lot worse than seek to develop more flexible and accessible forms of study, such as online learning…and maybe talk about it once in a while.
So, having managed to get this far into an introduction about the UK higher education sector without delving into some of the more depressing sector-wide news, I think it is time to dive into some of the last quarter’s most notable online learning developments.
The Canvas hack and the impact on UK higher education
I have to start on a negative note because, undoubtedly, one of the top stories in edtech and higher education this last quarter was the hack of Canvas, the virtual learning environment (VLE) from Instructure that is used by many UK universities. This resulted in both a data breach and disruption to services at one of the worst possible times in the academic calendar.
While there was prominent and regular reporting in the US, see-sawing from articles titled ‘Kill Canvas. Now.’ to ‘No, Colleges Can’t Just Quit Canvas’, no major UK HE news outlet published a single story from a UK angle, which, well... um... I’ll just leave that there.
Speaking to people across the sector, the disruption caused by the hack was far from ideal, to say the least, although there was a certain degree of sympathy for Instructure as, ultimately, a victim of cybercrime. Clearly, all of these systems are vulnerable to attack, but the incident raises questions about whether aspects of Canvas’s architecture and account infrastructure enabled the threat to spread across institutions. Whether products such as Blackboard, Brightspace and Moodle are more secure is for others to judge, but their differing architectures may mean that they are not exposed to precisely the same type of cross-institutional incident.
Instructure has faced criticism, some of which has focused on its communication. A lack of transparency and timeliness has been a core concern, and CEO Steve Daly has apologised for the company’s communication. I do wonder whether this points to something deeper about the company and its instincts when it comes to communication. Certainly, at times, its approach to communication in general can feel as though it is trying too hard to be polished, with smatterings of rehearsed informality and forays into the vernacular of brand purpose and values that, to be brutally honest, tend to give UK audiences, more than most, the ick.
The company will now have to repair some of the reputational damage and regain trust, but I actually do not think this is going to have a colossally negative impact on it. It will sharpen the focus on cybersecurity across the VLE landscape, for sure, and is likely to act as the final straw for any universities that were already unhappy with Canvas, but I do not anticipate a mass exodus.
One thing the company has in its favour is the longer time horizon for VLE changes. VLEs are deeply embedded systems within institutions, so switching is a major decision rather than an immediate reaction. Even if there were a widespread and significant desire to move away from Canvas, this would play out over years, not months.
Edtech consolidation continues with Inspera’s Graide acquisition
Before I move on, one other piece of edtech news from the last quarter was the announcement that Norwegian digital assessment company Inspera had acquired UK edtech company Graide. For those unfamiliar with Graide, it is an AI-powered marking and feedback tool whose core value proposition seems to be that it helps markers by using AI to identify similarities across students’ answers and recommend feedback based on comparable work. It simultaneously aims to increase marking efficiency and support more detailed feedback. In that way, it fits the classic AI product paradigm, we create an efficiency that frees you up to do more. In my view, it is a simple, naive equation driving too much of AI implementation.
This acquisition follows in the footsteps of Studiosity acquiring Norvalid in late 2025, and I expect more of these classic consolidations, in which a larger company acquires a specialist, particularly an AI start-up, to extend its offer and strengthen its position in the market.
A lack of OPM partnership announcements, but deals in the pipeline
This has been a slightly quieter period in terms of new online programme management (OPM) company partnerships, with no new partnerships ‘officially’ announced in the last quarter. Some may point to this as a sign of a slowdown, but there are a number of instances in which negotiations over new partnerships are at an advanced stage, as well as partnerships that have been established but not formally announced. I therefore would not rush to make such a judgement and would anticipate greater transparency in the latter half of the year.
A new chapter for edX under fresh leadership
In wider online education company news, it was announced that Anant Agarwal, one of the founders and former CEO of edX, was leaving the company, or ‘transitioning’ to a new role, if you prefer. During the same period, Adrian Norman was appointed as the new Executive Director of edX and, taken together, these developments clearly represent the beginning of a new chapter for the company. They are also further evidence of how the latest incarnation of the company’s owner, US OPM 2U, is trying to move things on.
In recent years, edX has seen its main US competitor and fellow breakout MOOC platform Coursera pull significantly ahead, while its own recent past has been clouded by negativity. This is due in large part to 2U’s disastrous acquisition of the company for a whopping £800 million, or, as Dhawal Shah put it rather beautifully, ‘the unprofitable 2U bought edX, an unprofitable non-profit’. Just as an aside, one can only hope that someone, somewhere, will finally fill the gap and write something about the perils of corporate hubris and mergers and acquisitions, so that these kinds of things do not ever happen again.
As new leadership takes over and a new era begins for edX, it will be interesting to observe whether there will be any significant changes and what kind of strategy might take hold. One cannot help but feel that some of the online course platforms that sprang up in the mid-2010s really need significant attention, reinvigoration and reimagining.
Growing online short course activity
On a somewhat related note, I’ve been keeping an increasingly close eye on shorter courses and sub-degree course activity. Clearly, there is much greater interest in this type of provision in UK HE, driven by a range of factors. There are not insignificant levels of activity in this area and, as in other areas, varying levels of maturity.
In the last quarter, both King’s College London and the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School publicly celebrated online enrolment milestones across their short-course portfolios. In Oxford Saïd’s case, it reported achieving over 100,000 enrolments on online short courses launched in 2025 and delivered on edX (22,714) and Coursera (79,315). The enrolment split underscores the point I made earlier about the relative fortunes of the two companies. The last quarter also saw King’s College London report that it had reached over 10,000 online course enrolments on edX since 2025.
There are a few things to reflect on here. Firstly, it is always useful to have enrolment announcements for this type of provision because we have so little public information about how many people are taking these courses. However, what we really lack beyond enrolment-based PR is an understanding of how these courses relate to a wider set of success factors, not least something that can answer the question of whether this provision is income-generating or loss-making. This is especially pertinent for a sector that does not always have robust systems of financial accountability for individual courses because of widespread cross-subsidisation. This is important for anyone looking to short courses as an income-generating activity.
One further reflection reinforces a point I’ve made several times before. These are not just two regular universities making their way in the online short-course world. They are two of the UK’s most prestigious universities, with global reputations and standing. This is something that cannot be divorced from any evaluation of the scale of their enrolments over these timescales, or from the fact that the distribution channel essentially provided by the likes of edX and Coursera is not an option in the same way for all UK university brands.
Lifelong learning and microcredentials on the agenda
Continuing the focus on Russell Group universities, this quarter also saw the University of Manchester launch an online microcredential titled ‘Core Issues in Digital Trust and Security’, which will form part of a suite on Digital Trust and Security. Q2 also saw the official launch of Imperial Lifelong Learning, one of the more striking developments under the banner of shorter forms of provision.
This is one of several emerging and newer entities being formed within universities that aim to take forward types of provision carrying a variety of different labels, from CPD and microcredentials to executive education and short courses. There is no doubt that lifelong learning is the area of provision with the biggest buzz around it in UK higher education right now, and both these announcements and the lifelong learning-focused appointments being made within universities reinforce that.
Online short courses diversify beyond the biggest university brands
Looking beyond the usual suspects, there were also a couple of further developments in the online short-course landscape worth mentioning. The first came from the University of Buckingham, which launched a suite of courses it has branded ‘microcourses’. Helpfully, this gives us yet another product category title to add to what is already a long list. These are short online CPD courses from its Faculty of Education, aimed at teachers and reasonably priced at £75 per course.
Another development was the launch of an online short course from Ravensbourne University London aimed at existing or aspiring business leaders. This is again a different type of course, costing £395 and, interestingly, centred on live online sessions delivered across two evenings a week. This is notable because the online short-course market can at times feel rather dominated by self-paced, asynchronous-only courses.
All of these developments, spanning a £1,500 online microcredential, a live online evening-based course and reasonably priced microcourses, highlight the sheer variety of products within this landscape and the range of approaches being taken by universities. The most consistent theme is increased focus and activity, but within that, strategies, types of provision, target audiences, distribution channels, pricing and learner experiences can, and do, vary widely.
Some online degree portfolios continue to expand
Focusing now on online degree provision, there were a number of notable launches in the last quarter. Firstly, University of the Arts London (UAL) continued to grow its portfolio of online master’s degrees, having made a significant strategic investment in online learning. It announced the launch of an MA Creative Leadership, growing its portfolio to six online master’s degrees.
This was not the only leadership programme launched in the past quarter, as the University of Glasgow launched an MSc Educational Leadership and Management. Both programmes occupy common ground for online master’s degrees in that they combine management and leadership with specific specialist disciplines to support the career aspirations of those working in these areas.
There were also two online degrees launched that swell the numbers in areas where there are already numerous online titles. Firstly, the University of Exeter launched an online MBA, adding another Russell Group player to an already competitive course market.
Secondly, the less well-known Walbrook Institute London, formerly the London Institute of Banking & Finance, launched an MA Education. Although MBAs tend to receive more attention and are far better known, there are also a large number of MA Education degrees offered online, and this number seems to be increasing rather than decreasing.
One other reflection on this specific launch is that it provides an example of a private provider growing a suite of online master’s degrees that increasingly resembles a typical OPM portfolio. The private influence on the online master’s degree market cannot be understated, and private providers such as Walbrook and OPMs continue to be important drivers in this market.
Sal Khan enters the online degree market
Before I wrap things up, I should also mention that Sal Khan, of Khan Academy fame, announced that he would be launching an online degree. This degree will be in the incredibly niche and underserved area of AI, and it will be cheap affordable at $10k. I include it here simply to flag to UK universities that they might want to think about launching degrees in AI, because it is frankly criminal how few have been launched in the past couple of years.
The degree will be in applied AI and clearly seeks to help people use AI more effectively. This comes from a chap who launched a chatbot accompanied by rhetoric about AI driving the most positive transformation education had ever seen, which became (his words, not mine) a “non-event” and something students didn’t use. I can’t help but think there’s a business opportunity here for a kind of anti-MasterClass, the portfolio practically builds itself. Applied AI with Sal Khan, Digital Wellbeing from Mark Zuckerberg and Diplomacy and Long-Term Planning from Liz Truss, all “affordably” priced, of course.
Reflections on this quarter’s developments
This quarter has seen continued growth in online course portfolios across a number of institutions, but this growth has been spread across a variety of course types. While new online degrees continue to be launched, and there is still significant scope for many more UK universities to offer them, there is also interesting and varied activity in the online short-course market. The prominence and attention given to lifelong learning is undoubtedly a tailwind here, as is the need for institutions to seek alternative revenue streams.
Although this market has been explored by several of the ‘bigger-brand’ universities, which have reported favourably on their enrolment performance in the last quarter, it is no longer limited to these institutions. It has been interesting to see more home-grown moves into this market, involving different types of courses and delivery models, and I would expect to see more of this over the year. The key challenge, however, is a persistent one, which is to build a portfolio that is financially viable and sustainable, and that delivers for students, rather than simply creating a suite of courses whose financial accountability is buried in a system built on cross-subsidisation.
