The closure of the Harlow Campus marks the end of a truly one-of-a-kind study abroad program—one that fostered deep connections and shared experiences among students. But here’s where it gets emotional: for many, this wasn’t just a campus; it was a transformative journey where students traveled, learned, and grew together in ways no other program could replicate. Now, it’s gone, leaving educators and students alike grappling with the loss.
AMUN business professor Tom Cooper, who has witnessed the impact of this program firsthand, describes it as an experience that stood apart from anything else in international education. His students didn’t just study abroad—they did it as part of a tight-knit group, creating a ‘cohort effect’ that amplified their learning and bonding. Cooper laments, ‘Sadness is the only word that fits.’ This wasn’t just about academics; it was about building a community that traveled, explored, and faced challenges together.
The decision to close the campus, confirmed earlier this week, had been looming for months. University President Janet Morrison has suggested that the savings from shutting down Harlow will be reinvested into other international opportunities for students. And this is the part most people miss: while that sounds promising, these opportunities often benefit only a handful of students—one or two at a time. The ‘cohort effect’ that made Harlow so special has been lost, and with it, a unique model of group study abroad.
But here’s where it gets controversial: Is sacrificing a program that benefits an entire group of students for smaller, individual opportunities truly a step forward? Or are we losing something irreplaceable in the process? Cooper argues that while individual opportunities have their place, they can’t replicate the shared experiences and collective growth that Harlow offered. ‘That experience has been diminished,’ he says, leaving us to wonder: What does this mean for the future of study abroad programs?
As we reflect on the closure of Harlow Campus, it’s hard not to ask: Are we prioritizing efficiency over community? And if so, what are we giving up in the process? Let’s hear your thoughts—do you think the trade-off is worth it? Share your perspective in the comments below.
