How a studio-based format transforms online teaching — from timeshighereducation.com by multiple authors from Cranfield University in England
Online teaching works best when teaching, facilitation and technical delivery are treated as complementary professional roles. Read guidance on studio-based delivery

Our experience of studio-based delivery suggests the need for a different approach. In this model, teaching is delivered as a live, facilitated learning experience in which academics focus on teaching and interaction, while facilitators and production staff manage interaction, session flow and technology.

Responsibilities are intentionally divided to enable more effective online pedagogy: academics concentrate on explaining concepts, facilitating discussion and responding to students while production staff manage the technical environment, transition between activities, recordings, multimedia integration, chat moderation, breakout rooms and troubleshooting, enabling a more engaging and authentic learning experience.

The most transferable lesson is that online teaching works best when teaching, facilitation and technical delivery are treated as complementary professional roles and when it is underpinned by pedagogical design. 

 

Escaping The Backrooms Of Workforce Development — by Ryan Craig

Which makes sense. Because far too many find themselves in a liminal space, neither in school nor a career. Needing to make a living in an era of digital transformation and AI, they’re having a horrific time finding their way into and around work. So it’s not just education and training wonks who think workforce is the defining issue of our time. The success of Backrooms demonstrates Gen Z thinks so, too.

It’s happening everywhere. Young people around the world are angry at how hard it’s become to launch careers. This summer an entire protest movement arose in India – the world’s largest Gen Z population – around entrance exams for medical school, one of the few remaining sure bets. In the UK, youth unemployment is over 16%; it’s 15% across the EU and over 25% in Sweden. Back home, nearly 400,000 young Americans stopped looking for work in June alone. So it’s urgent that we identify what actually works to help young people get good first jobs.

The answer lies between apprenticeship perfection and train-and-pray scale. We desperately need a scalable training-first model that’s as proximate as possible to employment opportunities, employers, and actual employment. That can only mean work-based learning: real work experience completed during or connected with a training, certificate, or degree program. Work-based learning can take many forms: rotationsclinicsco-opsinternshipsshort projects. It can be integrated into coursework or independent. But what all forms require are bona fide employers, which regulate scale. Such programs can enroll only as many as can fit within the constraint of available work-based learning opportunities.


Also see:


Also see:

Is Your College A Zombie? — from forbes.com by Ann Kirschner; via Ryan Craig

I want to be careful here, because this is not an argument that universities are doing nothing. They are doing an enormous amount. New programs, AI task forces, employability frameworks, microcredentials, and shifts in how they enable lifelong learning.

Activity is not the problem; what has not changed is the machinery that decides what counts. Too many institutions move in herds rather than forging an independent path. When one college launches a new program, say, data science and AI, fifty will follow without asking whether their version serves their students or simply checks a competitive box.

Meanwhile, 88% of American professionals believe colleges and universities should be the ones providing AI training, and nearly half say their employers have offered no AI resources whatsoever.¹

 
 

Student Voices: Technology as a Future Learning Partner — from campustechnology.com by Mary Grush
A Q&A with Eli Blouin and Mark Frydenberg

Key Takeaways

  • With advanced technologies, we’re moving from accessing learning resources to participating in technology learning partnerships.
  • Technology learning partners participate in the learning process by asking questions and giving feedback, not just information search results.
  • Tomorrow’s technology learning partners will understand the whole learner — including knowledge gaps and personal learning style.
  • Student experiences with AI and other technologies today will inform the next generation of human/machine learning partners.

Grush: What do you think may be among the most meaningful changes in, say, the next five years? 

Blouin: When I think of what will improve in the next five years — and I truly believe it’s where we’re ultimately heading — I think it will be the technology learning partner’s ability to gain a full picture of the learner. The technology will be able to take absurd amounts of context — and data — and understand the learner as a whole: where their gaps are, what they need to learn, how they learn, and how to create content tailored to a particular student. In an instant it would be able to assess, to test knowledge, and know the student as a whole person. That would be an ideal learning partner.

 

Steward Stories: How Heart of Oregon Corps Turns Service into Careers — from gettingsmart.com by Karen Pittman and Merita Irby

Our “Steward Stories” series captures lessons learned from interviews with leaders of mature, purpose-built ecosystem intermediaries. An ecosystem steward is a boundary-spanning leader who goes beyond traditional out-of-school time (OST) system building to weave together the diverse people, places, and possibilities that shape a young person’s daily life. Rather than managing a single isolated network, stewards collaborate across K-12 schools, youth development programs, and workforce systems to build vibrant, equitable learning ecosystems. They drive systemic change from practice to policy by creating purpose-built intermediaries, developing scalable cross-system training tools, and championing “Future Features” of learning. These core priorities include promoting learner agency, institutionalizing “unwalled” schools that connect community resources to formal education, broadening the definition of educators to include informal mentors, and normalizing pathways for students to receive school credit or credentials for out-of-school learning.

 The starting points, paths, and targets set by these stewards are as varied as the conditions and opportunities present within their communities. But they share similarities in vision and approach. Learn More Here.

Learning ecosystems may be found anywhere, but it takes careful stewardship to help them thrive.
— Shift, Remake Learning

 

Agilities — from agilities.org by the DeBruce Foundation; via Paul Fain
Help students build confidence and prepare for bright careers!
.


Also from Paul Fain, see:


Unlocking Opportunity: Progress on Moving More Students Toward Good Jobs — from highered.aspeninstitute.org

Released in partnership with the Community College Research Center (CCRC), Unlocking Opportunity: Progress on Moving More Students Toward Good Jobs highlights early outcomes from the first 10 colleges in the Unlocking Opportunity network. The report demonstrates that community colleges can rapidly increase enrollment in high-value workforce and transfer pathways while reducing enrollment in or improving programs with weaker labor market and bachelor’s degree outcomes.
.

 

Reconnecting Professional Learning — from elemenous.substack.com by Lucy Gray
Reflections from My Wednesday ISTE Panel

At ISTE this year, I facilitated a Wednesday morning panel on professional learning. The session I organized was titled, The Future of Professional Learning: Connecting Educators Across Borders. I was joined by fellow Apple Distinguished Educators Tami Brewster, Bethany LaDue Nugent, Marcus Borders, Jason Krug and global educator Julie Meltzer. Our focus: How do we move professional development away from isolated, one-time experiences and toward something more connected, meaningful, and human?

The panel was grounded in a few simple but powerful ideas: professional learning should nurture, guide, and empower. It should be relevant, contextual, reflective, and sustained. It should recognize educators as capable professionals, not as people who are broken and need to be fixed. Too often, professional development is still designed around deficit thinking. Too often, teachers’ needs are not the starting point, and sessions become dry, one-directional experiences where information is delivered at them rather than built through conversation and collaboration, with little choice, little personalization, and little connection to the realities of their classrooms. Our panel served as a call to action to re-think professional learning.

We explored six different approaches to professional learning, and while each model was distinct, a clear through line emerged: relationships matter most.

  1. Virtual Conferences at Scale — Lucy Gray — Actionable Innovations Events / GLOW
  2. Micro-Mentorship — Tami Brewster
  3. Networked, Values-Driven PD — Julie Meltzer — Institute for Humane Education
  4. AI-Personalized PD Pathways — Marcus Borders
  5. Share Stories with Voice — Bethany LaDue Nugent
  6. Speak Your Crazy — Jason Krug

  • Our Padlet – Share resources and introduce yourself
  • Our Slides – Meet our panelists and learn about our work
  • Our Google NotebookLM – This notebook contains dozens of resources related to research and best practices in educator professional learning
  • The Connected PD App – This is an app I’m building in Base 44 to help people plan great professional learning experiences

Also from Lucy Gray, see the following for some nice tips and resources:

 

Higher Education Can’t Wait for the Future to Arrive (Lev Gonick, Arizona State University) — from humanistxyz.substack.com by Allison Dulin Salisbury
“The biggest risk we face as a sector is assuming we can wait out AI.”

We have an opportunity right now to reorient the university around student experience—not as an aspiration, but as a necessity. I’m calling this shift TechEd, which I explore in detail in my LinkedIn series The TechEd Revolution.

AI poses a fundamental shift in how technology might empower students to own their discovery and educational journey, and to drastically reduce the friction that makes college so unappealing to so many.

To that end, we need to urgently redesign systems and opportunities around skills and competencies. That work should be far more advanced than it currently is. And one of the hardest challenges is rethinking how we operate as a workforce in academia. 

 

Will learning curated by employers replace degrees? — from universityworldnews.com by Louise Nicol

If universities do not future-proof their offer through deeper and more credible partnerships with employers and industry, what exactly prevents employers from educating and training people themselves?

This is why the future of higher education depends on far deeper and more operational partnerships with industry. Not symbolic advisory boards or occasional guest lectures but genuine co-design of curricula, shared ownership of applied projects and clear accountability for graduate capability.

Universities that integrate live industry problems, cross-faculty collaboration and work-based learning into the core of their programmes make themselves harder to replace. Those that acknowledge the existence of external learning platforms and deliberately build them into a broader educational journey strengthen rather than weaken their position.

The real risk for universities is not replacement but marginalisation. Employers will not abandon universities out of hostility or ideology. They will do so pragmatically if universities fail to add distinctive value beyond what employers can now deliver themselves.

 

If AI Eats the Entry-Level Job, Where Do Young People Learn to Work? (Ryan Craig, Achieve Partners) — from humanistxyz.substack.com by Allison Dulin Salisbury; via Ryan Craig
“The public should not be subsidizing colleges whose students lack relevant, paid, in-field work experience.”

That is the trap at the center of this conversation: everyone wants to hire someone with three years of experience, and almost no one wants to provide those three years.

And Ryan’s policy prescription is unusually concrete: pay employers to hire and train apprentices, following the countries that have scaled apprenticeship far faster than the U.S.; require colleges receiving federal student aid to provide relevant, paid, in-field work experience; and build a market of intermediaries that can make the whole thing operational.

Ryan’s view is that higher education remains critically important. But college without meaningful work experience may become a much worse bet, especially for students who cannot afford to guess wrong.

 
 

Cleveland Institute of Art’s Interactive Media Lab Redefines What an Art School Can Be — from edtechmagazine.com

The landscape for specialized colleges and universities such as art schools is shifting as higher education continues to evolve to fit emerging job markets and student interest.

Founded in 1882, Cleveland Institute of Art continuously challenges itself to stay modern and relevant. Years ago, the school’s leadership had the vision to partner with the city to revitalize an area due for reinvigoration.

The result was the Interactive Media Lab, which brings together the university, the city and private industry into a satellite campus that gives students and the community a space to create media, art and experiences with the most up-to-date tools available.


Also see:

 

GenAI practice blossoms through the open exchange of insights — from timeshighereducation.com by Samuel Doherty, who is the education and innovation coordinator at the University of Newcastle in Australia
How a structured GenAI professional development series, built around practice, peer voices and multiple entry points, fosters open exchange among colleagues, universities and industry

Connect internal practice to sector-wide thinking
Whatever is happening within any single institution is only part of the picture. Effective GenAI practice grows through open exchange of insights among colleagues, universities, professional bodies and industry, and a development programme that is entirely inward-looking risks missing both useful knowledge and important shifts in expectation.

Our AI sector voices sessions aim to bring external contributors into the programme: researchers, practitioners and sector representatives working at the intersection of GenAI and higher education. The aim is to situate institutional practice within the wider conversation and to signal to staff that the institution is genuinely engaged with that conversation, not just managing it internally.

In the Australian context, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (Teqsa) people pillar positions staff as drivers, enablers, users and innovators of GenAI practice, and identifies a lack of information or understanding as one of the primary barriers to ethical and effective engagement. That framing is useful regardless of regulatory context: institutions that treat their people as active participants in shaping practice, rather than recipients of policy, are likely to develop more durable capability.

Regular, lightweight communications, a weekly community of practice update and a monthly all-staff digest can maintain momentum between sessions without adding significantly to anyone’s workload. 

 

Workplace Readiness: Can Higher Education Develop AI-Ready Students? — from learningguild.com by Eddie Lin and Roshan Bharwaney

For higher education to remain relevant, curricula must evolve. Here are some overarching recommendations for directions in higher education to bridge the skills gaps between universities and workplaces:

  • AI ethics and safety: Prepare students to navigate issues of fairness, bias, privacy, and societal impact.
  • Tackling complex questions: Emphasize open-ended challenges that blend structured and unstructured skills and reduce reliance on standardized tests and repetitive drills.
  • Critical thinking: Develop new assessments for judgment, creativity, and metacognition—essential to supervise AI outputs.
  • Human-AI synergy: Embed AI fluency across all disciplines, encouraging students to find the niches where human value is maximized.
  • Industry connection: Maintain close industry partnerships and collaborations including open innovation opportunities and collective intelligence approaches (Bharwaney & Sleeva, 2024).

Experiential learning and communities of practice are central to this vision. Internships, simulations, and cross-disciplinary projects can help students practice human-AI collaboration, resilience, and decision-making in environments that mirror the workplace’s ambiguity and complexity.

Universities that condemn the use of AI by students risk isolating themselves from the realities of today’s workplace, where interns and new hires are expected to be or quickly become adept at using AI for routine tasks and complex projects. 

 

Connecting the Tangled Systems of Reentry Training and Employment — from workshift.com by Matthew Arrojas; via Paul Fain

After release, formerly incarcerated people must navigate a maze of government systems, workforce programs, and parole requirements. They are rarely prepared to do this, and as a result, nearly half (45%) report no earnings within the first year of their release, according to research from the Brookings Institution.

The Big Idea: Reducing those barriers has become an increasing focus for a number of philanthropies and colleges. It’s also a growing labor market imperative.

There’s also an incentive for many states to help this population of potential workers land jobs. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, formerly incarcerated individuals who are unable to maintain employment experience a recidivism rate of 52% over three years, while those who are employed for one year post-release experienced a recidivism rate of just 16%. 

 
© 2025 | Daniel Christian