A New AI Career Ladder — from ssir.org (Stanford Social Innovation Review) by Bruno V. Manno; via Matt Tower The changing nature of jobs means workers need new education and training infrastructure to match.
AI has cannibalized the routine, low-risk work tasks that used to teach newcomers how to operate in complex organizations. Without those task rungs, the climb up the opportunity ladder into better employment options becomes steeper—and for many, impossible. This is not a temporary glitch. AI is reorganizing work, reshaping what knowledge and skills matter, and redefining how people are expected to acquire them.
The consequences ripple from individual career starts to the broader American promise of economic and social mobility, which includes both financial wealth and social wealth that comes from the networks and relationships we build. Yet the same technology that complicates the first job can help us reinvent how experience is earned, validated, and scaled. If we use AI to widen—not narrow—access to education, training, and proof of knowledge and skill, we can build a stronger career ladder to the middle class and beyond. A key part of doing this is a redesign of education, training, and hiring infrastructure.
…
What’s needed is a redesigned model that treats work as a primary venue for learning, validates capability with evidence, and helps people keep climbing after their first job. Here are ten design principles for a reinvented education and training infrastructure for the AI era.
Create hybrid institutions that erase boundaries. …
Make work-based learning the default, not the exception. …
Create skill adjacencies to speed transitions. …
Place performance-based hiring at the core. …
Ongoing supports and post-placement mobility. …
Portable, machine-readable credentials with proof attached. …
Net tuition rises at colleges, but costs are far below their peaks — from highereddive.com by Ben Unglesbee The prices students and their families paid after aid at four-year public colleges and private nonprofits ticked up in 2025-26, per College Board estimates.
Dive Brief:
The average tuition and fees paid by students and their families after aid rose slightly for the 2025-26 academic year but remain well below historic peaks, according to the latest higher education pricing study from the College Board.
At public four-year colleges, net tuition and fees for first-time, full-time students increased just 1.3% to $2,300 from last year, when adjusted for inflation, according to the College Board’s estimates. That figure is down 48.3% from the peak in 2012-2013.
At private nonprofits, net tuition and fees for first-time, full-time students rose 3.7% annually to $16,910 in the 2025-26 year, when adjusted for inflation. By comparison, that’s down 14.6% from the peak for private colleges in 2006-07.
The Class of 2025 faced a particularly tough job market, searching for jobs earlier, submitting more applications — averaging 10 applications to the Class of 2024’s six — and receiving fewer offers on average, a National Association of Colleges and Employers study said in a recent report, in partnership with Indeed.
Graduates were more likely to accept those offers, however, even amid uncertainty; 86.7% of those offered a job had accepted in 2025, compared to 81.2% of 2024 graduates.
“Compared to earlier classes, they were more likely to say they were unsure about their plans, and more were planning to enter the military, suggesting they were unsure about private-sector employment,” NACE said in an Oct. 30 announcement regarding the report.
An addendum from DSC: While we’re talking the workplace, careers, jobs, and such involving higher education, also see:
On the show today I talk with Leslie Cramblet Alvarez and Chris Hakala, authors of the new book Understanding Educational Developers: Tales from the Center from Routledge Press. The book blends scholarship and personal narratives to explore the career trajectories of the professionals who work at CTLs (Centers for Teaching & Learning). How do academics move into these careers? And what can these careers look like over time?
Leslie Cramblet Alvarez is assistant vice provost and director of the Office of Teaching and Learning at the University of Denver. Chris Hakala is director for the Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship and professor of psychology at Springfield College.
I wanted to talk with Chris and Leslie about what they discovered while writing their book. I also wanted to know what advice they had for navigating educational development careers here in the U.S. in 2025, with higher education under attack from the federal government, a looming demographic cliff affecting enrollment and tuition, and a budget situation that for more institutions is not rosy. Leslie and Chris offer advice for faculty considering a move into a faculty development role, as well as for those of us current working at CTLs trying to plan our careers.
The Other Regulatory Time Bomb — from onedtech.philhillaa.com by Phil Hill Higher ed in the US is not prepared for what’s about to hit in April for new accessibility rules
Most higher-ed leaders have at least heard that new federal accessibility rules are coming in 2026 under Title II of the ADA, but it is apparent from conversations at the WCET and Educause annual conferences that very few understand what that actually means for digital learning and broad institutional risk. The rule isn’t some abstract compliance update: it requires every public institution to ensure that all web and media content meets WCAG 2.1 AA, including the use of audio descriptions for prerecorded video. Accessible PDF documents and video captions alone will no longer be enough. Yet on most campuses, the conversation has been understood only as a buzzword, delegated to accessibility coordinators and media specialists who lack the budget or authority to make systemic changes.
And no, relying on faculty to add audio descriptions en masse is not going to happen.
The result is a looming institutional risk that few presidents, CFOs, or CIOs have even quantified.
It begins with a basic reversal of mindset: Stop treating AI as a threat to be policed. Start treating it as the accelerant that finally forces us to build the education we should have created decades ago.
A serious institutional response would demand — at minimum — six structural commitments:
Make high-intensity human learning the norm. …
Put active learning at the center, not the margins. …
Replace content transmission with a focus on process. …
Mainstream high-impact practices — stop hoarding them for honors students. …
Redesign assessment to make learning undeniable. …
And above all: Instructional design can no longer be a private hobby.
How to Integrate AI Developmentally into Your Courses
Lower-Level Courses: Focus on building foundational skills, which includes guided instruction on how to use AI responsibly. This moves the strategy beyond mere prohibition.
Mid-Level Courses: Use AI as a scaffold where faculty provide specific guidelines on when and how to use the tool, preparing students for greater independence.
Upper-Level/Graduate Courses: Empower students to evaluate AI’s role in their learning. This enables them to become self-regulated learners who make informed decisions about their tools.
Balanced Approach: Make decisions about AI use based on the content being learned and students’ developmental needs.
Now that you have a framework for how to conceptualize including AI into your courses here are a few ideas on scaffolding AI to allow students to practice using technology and develop cognitive skills.
What was encouraging, though, is that students aren’t just passively accepting this new reality. They are actively asking for help. Almost half want their teachers to help them figure out what AI-generated content is trustworthy, and over half want clearer guidelines on when it’s appropriate to use AI in their work. This isn’t a story about students trying to cheat the system; it’s a story about a generation grappling with a powerful new technology and looking to their educators for guidance. It echoes a sentiment I heard at the recent AI Pioneers’ Conference – the issue of AI in education is fundamentally pedagogical and ethical, not just technological.
My take is this: in all of the anxiety lies a crucial and long-overdue opportunity to deliver better learning experiences. Precisely because Atlas perceives the same context in the same moment as you, it can transform learning into a process aligned with core neuro-scientific principles—including active retrieval, guided attention, adaptive feedback and context-dependent memory formation.
Perhaps in Atlas we have a browser that for the first time isn’t just a portal to information, but one which can become a co-participant in active cognitive engagement—enabling iterative practice, reflective thinking, and real-time scaffolding as you move through challenges and ideas online.
With this in mind, I put together 10 use cases for Atlas for you to try for yourself.
…
6. Retrieval Practice
What: Pulling information from memory drives retention better than re-reading. Why: Practice testing delivers medium-to-large effects (Adesope et al., 2017). Try: Open a document with your previous notes. Ask Atlas for a mixed activity set: “Quiz me on the Krebs cycle—give me a near-miss, high-stretch MCQ, then a fill-in-the-blank, then ask me to explain it to a teen.” Atlas uses its browser memory to generate targeted questions from your actual study materials, supporting spaced, varied retrieval.
From DSC: A quick comment. I appreciate these ideas and approaches from Katarzyna and Rita. I do think that someone is going to want to be sure that the AI models/platforms/tools are given up-to-date information and updated instructions — i.e., any new procedures, steps to take, etc. Perhaps I’m missing the boat here, but an internal AI platform is going to need to have access to up-to-date information and instructions.
On Wednesday [October 29th, 2025], I’m launching the Beta version of an Education Accountability Website (”EDU Accountability Lab”). It analyzes federal student aid, institutional outcomes, and accountability metrics across 6,000+ colleges and universities in the US.
Our Mission The EDU Accountability Lab delivers independent, data-driven analysis of higher education with a focus on accountability, affordability, and outcomes. Our audience includes policymakers, researchers, and taxpayers who seek greater transparency and effectiveness in postsecondary education. We take no advocacy position on specific institutions, programs, metrics, or policies. Our goal is to provide clear and well-documented methods that support policy discussions, strengthen institutional accountability, and improve public understanding of the value of higher education.
But right now, there’s one area demanding urgent attention.
Starting July 1, 2026, every degree program at every institution receiving federal student aid must prove its graduates earn more than people without that credential—or lose Title IV eligibility.
This isn’t about institutions passing or failing. It’s about programs. Every Bachelor’sin Psychology. Every Master’s in Education. Every Associate in Nursing. Each one assessed separately. Each one facing the same pass-or-fail tests.
Leadership capacity must expand. Presidents and leaders are now expected to be fundraisers, policy navigators, cultural change agents, and data-informed strategists. Leadership can no longer be about a single individual—it must be a team sport. AACC is charged with helping you and your teams build these capacities through leadership academies, peer learning communities, and practical toolkits.
The strength of our network is our greatest asset. No college faces its challenges alone, because within our membership there are leaders who have already innovated, stumbled, and succeeded. Resilient by Design urges AACC to serve as the connector and amplifier of this collective wisdom, developing playbooks and scaling proven practices in areas from guided pathways to artificial intelligence to workforce partnerships.
Innovation in models and tools is urgent. Budgets must be strategic, business models must be reimagined, and ROI must be proven—not only to funders and policymakers, but to the students and communities we serve. Community colleges must claim their role as engines of economic vitality and social mobility, advancing both immediate workforce needs and long-term wealth-building for students.
Policy engagement must be deepened. Federal advocacy remains essential, but the daily realities of our institutions are shaped by state and regional policy. AACC will increasingly support members with state-level resources, legislative templates, and partnerships that equip you to advocate effectively in your unique contexts.
Employer engagement must become transformational. Students deserve not just degrees, but careers. The report challenges us to create career-connected colleges where employers co-design curricula, offer meaningful work-based learning, and help ensure graduates are not just prepared for today’s jobs but resilient for tomorrow’s.
In that spirit, in this post I examine a report from Virginia’s Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) on Virginia’s Community Colleges and the changing higher-education landscape. The report offers a rich view of how several major issues are evolving at the institutional level over time, an instructive case study in big changes and their implications.
Its empirical depth also prompts broader questions we should ask across higher education.
What does the shift toward career education and short-term training mean for institutional costs and funding?
How do we deliver effective student supports as enrollment moves online?
As demand shifts away from on-campus learning, do physical campuses need to get smaller?
Are we seeing a generalizable movement from academic programs to CTE to short-term options? If so, what does that imply for how community colleges are staffed and funded?
As online learning becomes a larger, permanent share of enrollment, do student services need a true bimodal redesign, built to serve both online and on-campus students effectively? Evidence suggests this urgent question is not being addressed, especially in cash-strapped community colleges.
As online learning grows, what happens to physical campuses? Improving space utilization likely means downsizing, which carries other implications. Campuses are community anchors, even for online students—so finding the right balance deserves serious debate.
Most polled Americans, 70%, disagreed that the federal government should control “admissions, faculty hiring, and curriculum at U.S. colleges and universities to ensure they do not teach inappropriate material,” according to a survey released Wednesday by the Public Religion Research Institute.
The majority of Americans across political parties — 84% of Democrats, 75% of independents and 58% of Republicans — disagreed with federal control over these elements of college operations.
The poll’s results come as the Trump administration seeks to exert control over college workings, including in its recent offer of priority for federal research funding in exchange for making sweeping policy changes aligned with the government’s priorities.
No matter whether you are a student or a teacher, sometimes it can be difficult to find motivation to start or complete a task. Instead, you may spend hours procrastinating with other activities and that opens an unhelpful cycle of stress and unhappiness. Stressful environments which are common in educational settings can increase the likelihood of maladaptive procrastination (1) and hamper motivation. This digest offers four resources on ways to think about and boost (self-)motivation.
From DSC: Stephen has some solid reflections and asks some excellent questions in this posting, including:
The question is: how do we optimize an AI to support learning? Will one model be enough? Or do we need different models for different learners in different scenarios?
A More Human University: The Role of AI in Learning — from er.educause.edu by Robert Placido Far from heralding the collapse of higher education, artificial intelligence offers a transformative opportunity to scale meaningful, individualized learning experiences across diverse classrooms.
The narrative surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education is often grim. We hear dire predictions of an “impending collapse,” fueled by fears of rampant cheating, the erosion of critical thinking, and the obsolescence of the human educator.Footnote1 This dystopian view, however, is a failure of imagination. It mistakes the death rattle of an outdated pedagogical model for the death of learning itself. The truth is far more hopeful: AI is not an asteroid coming for higher education. It is a catalyst that can finally empower us to solve our oldest, most intractable problem: the inability to scale deep, engaged, and truly personalized learning.
Increasing the rate of scientific progress is a core part of Anthropic’s public benefit mission.
We are focused on building the tools to allow researchers to make new discoveries – and eventually, to allow AI models to make these discoveries autonomously.
Until recently, scientists typically used Claude for individual tasks, like writing code for statistical analysis or summarizing papers. Pharmaceutical companies and others in industry also use it for tasks across the rest of their business, like sales, to fund new research. Now, our goal is to make Claude capable of supporting the entire process, from early discovery through to translation and commercialization.
To do this, we’re rolling out several improvements that aim to make Claude a better partner for those who work in the life sciences, including researchers, clinical coordinators, and regulatory affairs managers.
AI as an access tool for neurodiverse and international staff— from timeshighereducation.com by Vanessa Mar-Molinero Used transparently and ethically, GenAI can level the playing field and lower the cognitive load of repetitive tasks for admin staff, student support and teachers
Where AI helps without cutting academic corners When framed as accessibility and quality enhancement, AI can support staff to complete standard tasks with less friction. However, while it supports clarity, consistency and inclusion, generative AI (GenAI) does not replace disciplinary expertise, ethical judgement or the teacher–student relationship. These are ways it can be put to effective use:
The Sleep of Liberal Arts Produces AI — from aiedusimplified.substack.com by Lance Eaton, Ph.D. A keynote at the AI and the Liberal Arts Symposium Conference
This past weekend, I had the honor to be the keynote speaker at a really fantstistic conferece, AI and the Liberal Arts Symposium at Connecticut College. I had shared a bit about this before with my interview with Lori Looney. It was an incredible conference, thoughtfully composed with a lot of things to chew on and think about.
It was also an entirely brand new talk in a slightly different context from many of my other talks and workshops. It was something I had to build entirely from the ground up. It reminded me in some ways of last year’s “What If GenAI Is a Nothingburger”.
It was a real challenge and one I’ve been working on and off for months, trying to figure out the right balance. It’s a work I feel proud of because of the balancing act I try to navigate. So, as always, it’s here for others to read and engage with. And, of course, here is the slide deck as well (with CC license).
Experience AI: A new architecture of learning
Experience AI represents a new architecture for learning — one that prioritizes continuity, agency and deep personalization. It fuses three dimensions into a new category of co-intelligent systems:
Agentic AI that evolves with the learner, not just serves them
Persona-based AI that adapts to individual goals, identities and motivations
Multimodal AI that engages across text, voice, video, simulation and interaction
Experience AI brings learning into context. It powers personalized, problem-based journeys where students explore ideas, reflect on progress and co-create meaning — with both human and machine collaborators.
While over 80% of respondents in the 2025 AI in Education Report have already used AI for school, we believe there are significant opportunities to design AI that can better serve each of their needs and broaden access to the latest innovation.1
That’s why today [10/15/25], we’re announcing AI-powered experiences built for teaching and learning at no additional cost, new integrations in Microsoft 365 apps and Learning Management Systems, and an academic offering for Microsoft 365 Copilot.
Introducing AI-powered teaching and learning Empowering educators with Teach
We’re introducing Teach to help streamline class prep and adapt AI to support educators’ teaching expertise with intuitive and customizable features. In one place, educators can easily access AI-powered teaching tools to create lesson plans, draft materials like quizzes and rubrics, and quickly make modifications to language, reading level, length, difficulty, alignment to relevant standards, and more.
When it comes to innovation in higher education, most bets are being placed on technology platforms and AI. But the innovation students, faculty and industry need most can be found in a much more human dimension: co-teaching. And specifically, a certain kind of co-teaching – between industry experts and educators.
While higher education has largely embraced the value of interdisciplinary teaching across different majors or fields of study, it has yet to embrace the value of co-teaching between industry and academia. Examples of co-teaching through industry-education collaborations are rare and underutilized across today’s higher ed landscape. But they may be the most valuable and relevant way to prepare students for success. And leveraging these collaborations can help institutions struggling to satisfy unfulfilled student demand for immersive work experiences such as internships.
From DSC: It’s along these lines that I think that ADJUNCT faculty members should be highly sought after and paid much better — as the up-to-date knowledge and experience they bring into the classroom is very valuable. They should have equal say in terms of curriculum/programs and in the way a college or university is run.
Combining two strategies—spacing and retrieval practice—is key to success in learning, says Shana Carpenter.
On a somewhat related note (i.e., for Instructional Designers, teachers, faculty members, T&L staff members), also see:
Fresh Approaches to Instructional Design — from edutopia.org by Sara Furnival An educator with 20-plus years of experience on crafting creative and energizing lessons.
