human-computer interaction (HCI)

This $10K AI School Promises to Future-Proof Your Career [Urwin]

On 05/12/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, accessibility / UDL, Alternatives, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, collaboration, colleges, communications, communities of practice, community colleges, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, cost of getting a degree, dangers of the status quo, Daniel S. Christian, digital learning, education, education reform, education technology, emerging technologies, entrepreneurship, experimentation, faculty/staff, Google, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, K-12 related, learning agents, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, Learning from the Living [Class] Room, learning spaces, Microsoft, pace of change, platforms, productivity / tips and tricks, real-world assignments, reinvent, skills, staying relevant, student-related, teaching online, United States, universities, vendors, by Daniel Christian

This $10K AI School Promises to Future-Proof Your Career — from builtin.com by Matthew Urwin
Khan Academy, TED and ETS are starting a new program to equip students and professionals with the skills to thrive in an increasingly AI-driven economy. Here’s what you need to know.

Summary: The Khan TED Institute is a higher-education program that will teach students and workers how to use AI through interactive learning. The program’s AI-centric curriculum is an unproven approach, though, casting doubt on whether it will actually improve learning outcomes and career prospects.

Higher education might be on the verge of a radical overhaul to bring it up to speed in the age of artificial intelligence. At the TED2026 conference, Khan Academy, TED and ETS announced that they’re partnering to establish the Khan TED Institute — a new program that reorients the college curriculum around AI. By joining forces, the education technology trio aims to develop an alternative to traditional universities that better tracks student progress, teaches more relevant skills and provides a more personalized learning experience.

Accessibility is another major tenet of the Khan TED Institute. Its virtual nature allows anyone with an internet connection to participate in the program and makes it easier for students to move at their preferred pace. And because its curriculum prioritizes competency over course credits, advanced learners can complete the program in a shorter period. Time isn’t the only thing students can save on, either: The Institute promises a bachelor’s degree for less than $10,000, offering a much more affordable alternative to the typical four-year degree.

From DSC:
Faculty senates don’t do well with this pace of change. But to their credit, few organizations can begin to deal with this pace of change.

Let AI Interview You — from wondertools.substack.com by Jeremy Caplan & Jay Dixit
A smarter way to get past the blank page

There’s nothing wrong with using AI to get answers to your questions. But there’s another mode of interacting with AI that many people never consider — one I find much more useful for my creative process.

Here’s what I do instead: I flip the script and let the AI ask the questions. Instead of prompting AI, I get the AI to prompt me.

6 Reasons Universities Are Building Media Labs Now — from edtechmagazine.com by Brad Grimes
Digital production centers help institutions close the gap between academic training and professional practice.

Higher education is undergoing a significant transformation in how it prepares the next generation of media professionals. Across the country, universities are investing in state-of-the-art media labs — facilities built not around traditional classroom instruction, but around the tools, workflows and collaborative environments that define today’s professional production landscape. These spaces represent a fundamental rethinking of what it means to train students for careers in film, animation, gaming and digital storytelling.

Dr. Hardman’s post on LinkedIn
and/or
See Dr. Hardman’s post on substack.com entitled:

The Illusion AI Productivity Gains
Why your AI tools aren’t delivering the ROI you were promised — and what to do about it

The TalentLMS 2026 Annual L&D Benchmark Report — from talentlms.com
From year-over-year training benchmarks to learner–leader gaps, see the data that defines the new era of learning. To turn insight into action, the report lays out 10 evidence-backed interventions to hardwire development. Plus, lift the lid on Learning Debt: What it is and how to spot it.

Executive summary
The skills economy is being rewritten in real time. AI is reshaping what people need to know, do, and deliver, faster than organizational structures can adapt. The result is a workplace caught between acceleration and inertia. Companies are racing to reskill for an AI-driven future while relying on structures built for yesterday’s world.

This TalentLMS 2026 L&D Benchmark Report captures that inflection point. Based on data collected through 2025, and compared with earlier findings from 2022 to 2024, it explores how learning is evolving and what’s holding it back.

Our research integrates two vantage points: HR leaders overseeing learning initiatives and employees receiving formal training. Together, they offer a dual perspective on how learning is managed and how it’s experienced.

The analysis also draws on insights from external research and leading L&D practitioners, anchoring the report in both evidence and practice.

Combined, the findings point to a structural fault line: Learning is expanding in scope but contracting in space. Organizations are multiplying programs, tools, and ambitions, yet the conditions for learning — time, focus, and cognitive bandwidth — keep shrinking.

The data from this report underscores this critical conflict: According to half of the surveyed employees and learning leaders, high workloads leave little room for training, even when it’s needed.

Employees work inside a permanent sprint, where attention is fragmented and reflection is sidelined. The space for learning is collapsing under the weight of doing. Sixty-five percent of employees say performance expectations have risen this year, yet lack of time remains the biggest barrier to learning.

The numbers confirm what employees and learning leaders both feel: Technology can advance overnight. But people and cultures can’t.

Why Sal Khan’s AI revolution hasn’t happened yet, according to Sal Khan — from chalkbeat.org by Matt Barnum

Three years ago, as Khan Academy founder Sal Khan rolled out an AI-powered tutoring chatbot, he predicted a revolution in learning.

So far, the revolution hasn’t happened, he acknowledges.

“For a lot of students, it was a non-event,” Khan told me recently about his eponymous chatbot, Khanmigo. “They just didn’t use it much.”

Khan gives this analogy: Imagine he walked into a class, sat in the back of the room, and waited for students to seek out help. “Some will; most won’t,” he said. That’s been the experience with AI tutoring, he said. It doesn’t necessarily make students motivated to learn or fill in gaps in knowledge needed to ask questions.

“AI is going to help,” said Khan of this reimagined Khan Academy. “But I think our biggest lever is really investing in the human systems.”

AI for Judges? AAA CEO Bridget McCormack & Learned Hand CEO Shlomo Klapper #LegalAI #legaltech [Abramowitz]

On 04/27/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, Access to Justice (A2J), Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, human-computer interaction (HCI), innovation, intelligent systems, law schools, Legal operations, legal reform, legal technologies, legislatures / government / legal, Michigan, platforms, society, tools, United States, vendors, by Daniel Christian

Recording at LegalWeek in New York, Zach sits down with Shlomo Klapper (founder of Learned Hand) and Bridget McCormack, former Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court and now CEO of the American Arbitration Association, to challenge one of the biggest double standards in legal AI: “AI for me, but not for thee.” Lawyers are now widely using AI like #Harvey and #Legora — and now more than ever #claude — but the moment it touches judges or arbitrators, support drops off.

That hesitation comes as courts are under real strain, with judges handling thousands of cases a year and only minutes to decide each one, and no realistic way to keep up. Shlomo describes Learned Hand’s “AI law clerk,” built to support judicial research, analysis, and drafting, while Bridget brings the perspective of someone who has both made decisions on the bench and has pioneered the American Arbitration Association’s AI Arbitrator, a first of its kind. The conversation moves beyond AI as an assistant and into a harder shift: AI as part of decision-making itself, and whether the system can continue to function without it.

Also see:

Are Judges the Next To Adopt AI? Is That a Good Thing? — from legallydisrupted.com by Zach Abramowitz
Episode 46 of Legally Disrupted Has the Two Best Experts on the Topic

This brings us to an admitted, glaring double standard between lawyers and judges. Lawyers are totally fine with lawyers using AI, but those same lawyers become apoplectic at the thought of judges or arbitrators using AI. It is very much “AI for me, but not for thee.” A survey last year from White & Case and Queen Mary University of London School of Law showed that nearly 90% of lawyers were deeply supportive of AI for their own research and analytics, but that support drops to just 23% when it comes to a judge or arbitrator using it to make a decision.
…
Yet, despite that hullabaloo, there is a massive need for alternative forms of intelligence in our courts. Right now, the system is drowning. We have state court trial judges disposing of 2,500 cases a year, meaning they have barely half an hour to spend on a single case. We are simply not going to lawyer our way out of this 50-year backlog. If we just use humans, we have a massive demand for intelligence but a severely limited supply. AI could step in to give these judges the capacity they desperately need for the courts to actually function.

The “Cognitive Offloading” Paradox [Hardman]

On 04/19/2026, in Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, Asia, colleges, community colleges, digital learning, education technology, emerging technologies, Europe, higher education, human-computer interaction (HCI), learning, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, learning theories, student-related, teaching & learning, UK, United States, by Daniel Christian

The “Cognitive Offloading” Paradox — from drphilippahardman.substack.com by Dr. Philippa Hardman
New research shows that offloading learning tasks to AI can improve – rather than erode – human thinking and learning

The Rise of the “Offloading Paradox”
In March 2026, the International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education published a study that went beyond the question “does offloading hurt?” and asked a harder one: when students form genuine partnerships with AI — treating it as an intellectual collaborator rather than a passive tool — what actually happens to the way they think and learn? Specifically, do two cognitive responses — critical evaluation of AI outputs (what the researchers call cognitive vigilance) and strategic delegation to AI (cognitive offloading) — compete with each other, or can they coexist?

Based on previous research, Wang and Zhang hypothesised that cognitive offloading would hurt transformative learning. They expected the familiar story: delegation reduces cognitive struggle, struggle is where learning happens, therefore delegation undermines learning.

The study — 912 students across China, Europe, and the United States, using a three-wave time-lagged survey design that measured partnership orientation first, cognitive strategies two weeks later, and learning outcomes two weeks after that — found something more interesting than a simple reversal.

Also see:

Dr. Ian Kelleher’s introduction to his paper here on LinkedIn

The quest to build a better AI tutor [Barshay]

On 04/06/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, digital learning, education, education technology, emerging technologies, engagement / engaging students, future, game-changing environment, generational differences, homeschooling/homeschoolers, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, K-12 related, learning, learning agents, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, Learning from the Living [Class] Room, learning theories, online learning, participation, personalized/customized learning, research, student-related, teachers, technologies for your home, United States, universities, by Daniel Christian

The quest to build a better AI tutor — from hechingerreport.org by Jill Barshay
Researchers make progress with an older ed tech idea: personalized practice

One promising idea has less to do with how an AI tutor explains concepts and more with what it asks students to practice next.

A team at the University of Pennsylvania, which included some AI skeptics, recently tested this approach in a study of close to 800 Taiwanese high school students learning Python programming. All the students used the same AI tutor, which was designed not to give away answers.

But there was one key difference. Half the students were randomly assigned to a fixed sequence of practice problems, progressing from easy to hard. The other half received a personalized sequence with the AI tutor continuously adjusting the difficulty of each problem based on how the student was performing and interacting with the chatbot.

The idea is based on what educators call the “zone of proximal development.” When problems are too easy, students get bored. When they’re too hard, students get frustrated. The goal is to keep students in a sweet spot: challenged, but not overwhelmed.

The researchers found that students in the personalized group did better on a final exam than students in the fixed problem group. The difference was characterized as the equivalent of 6 to 9 months of additional schooling, an eye-catching claim for an after-school online course that lasted only five months.
…
To address this, Chung’s team combined a large language model with a separate machine-learning algorithm that analyzes how students interact with the online course platform — how they answer the practice questions, how many times they revise or edit their coding, and the quality of their conversations with the chatbot — and uses that information to decide which problem to serve up next.

Legal AI Access at 83%, But Trust Issues Remain [artificiallawyer.com]

On 03/24/2026, in Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, emerging technologies, human-computer interaction (HCI), innovation, intelligent systems, law schools, Legal operations, legal reform, legal technologies, legislatures / government / legal, United States, vendors, by Daniel Christian

Legal AI Access at 83%, But Trust Issues Remain — from artificiallawyer.com

A new survey of over 200 inhouse and law firm leaders provides solid evidence that while AI tools are now ‘standard’ across our sector, that trust in AI outputs fundamentally drives usage, along with ROI – and vice versa.

The data, from ALSP Factor, shows that 83% had ‘broad AI access’, which is up from 61% in 2025, and in itself is a very positive development that tells us legal AI is now becoming ubiquitous for commercial lawyers, with around 54% using such tools ‘often’.

Is the eLearning authoring tool dead? [Milloway & Slade]

On 03/24/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, adult learning, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, communities of practice, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, instructional design, Learning Experience Design, platforms, productivity / tips and tricks, programming, tools, trends, vendors, by Daniel Christian

Is the eLearning authoring tool dead? — from linkedin.com by Melissa Milloway & Tim Slade

…which links to the video below:

Are we not shooting ourselves in the foot with AI and recent college graduates? [Christian]

On 03/24/2026, in 21st century, adjunct faculty, apprenticeships, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, business, career development, change, changing business models, colleges, community colleges, corporate / business world, dangers of the status quo, Daniel S. Christian, emerging technologies, experimentation, faculty/staff, game-changing environment, higher education, human-computer interaction (HCI), intelligent systems, internships, learning ecosystem, liberal arts, marketplaces, parents/guardians, productivity / tips and tricks, reinvent, skills, society, sociology, strategy, student-related, teaching & learning, technologies for your home, tools, trends, United States, universities, vendors, vocational / trades, workplace, youth, by Daniel Christian

From DSC:
The types of postings/articles (such as the one below) make me ask, are we not shooting ourselves in the foot with AI and recent college graduates? If the bottom rungs continue to disappear, internships and apprenticeships can only go so far. There aren’t enough of them — especially valuable ones. So as this article points out, there will be threats to the long-term health of our talent pipelines unless we can take steps to thwart those impacts — and to do so fairly soon.

To me…vocational training and jobs are looking better all the time — i.e., plumbers, carpenters, electricians, mechanics, and more.

Can New Graduates Compete With AI? — from builtin.combyRichard Johnson
The increasing adoption of AI automation is compressing early-career jobs. How should new graduates get a foothold in the economy now?

Summary: AI is hollowing out entry-level roles by automating routine tasks, eliminating a rung on the career ladder. New graduates face intense competition and a rising skill floor. While firms gain short-term productivity, they risk a long-term talent shortage by eliminating junior training grounds.

Conversations about AI have covered all grounds: hype, fear and slop. But while some roll their eyes at yet another automation headline, soon?to?be graduates are watching the labor market with a very different level of urgency. They’re entering a world where the old paradox of needing experience to get experience is colliding with a new reality: AI is absorbing the standardized, routine tasks that once defined entry?level work. The result isn’t just a shift in job descriptions or skill-requirements, but rather a structural reshaping of the career pipeline.

Entry-level workers face an outsized disruption to their long-term career trajectories. They have the least buffer to adapt given their lack of relevant job market experience and heightened financial pressure to secure a job quickly with the student-debt repayment periods for recent graduates looming.

Momentum early in one’s career matters, and the first job on a resume shapes future compensation bands and opportunities. It also serves as a signal for perceived specialization or, at minimum, interest. Losing that foothold has compounding effects to one’s career ladder.

Also relevant/see:

New Anthropic Institute to Study Risks and Economic Effects of Advanced AI — from campustechnology.com by John K. Waters

Key Takeaways

Anthropic has launched the Anthropic Institute, a new research effort focused on the biggest societal challenges posed by more powerful AI systems.
The institute will study how advanced AI could affect the economy, the legal system, public safety, and broader social outcomes.
Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark will lead the institute in a new role as the company’s head of public benefit.
The new unit brings together Anthropic’s existing red-teaming, societal impacts, and economic research work, while adding new hires and new research areas.

“Agentic AI isn’t coming for training programs. It’s coming for the trainers who can’t adapt.” [Martin] + other items re: AI in our learning ecosystems

On 03/23/2026, in Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, ethics, experimentation, future, game-changing environment, human-computer interaction (HCI), innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, learner profiles, learning, learning agents, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, Learning from the Living [Class] Room, morals/values, platforms, productivity / tips and tricks, tools, training / L&D, UK, universities, vendors, workplace, by Daniel Christian

Here is Chris Martin’s posting on LinkedIn.com:

Here is Dominik Mate Kovacs’ posting on LinkedIn.com:

The AI ‘hivemind’: Why so many student essays sound alike — from hechingerreport.org by Jill Barshay
A study of more than 70 large language models found similar answers to brainstorming and creative writing prompts

The answers were frequently indistinguishable across different models by different companies that have different architectures and use different training data. The metaphors, imagery, word choices, sentence structures — even punctuation — often converged. Jiang’s team called this phenomenon “inter-model homogeneity” and quantified the overlaps and similarities. To drive the point home, Jiang titled her paper, the “Artificial Hivemind.” The study won a best paper award at the annual conference on Neural Information Processing Systems in December 2025, one of the premier gatherings for AI research.

AI Has No Moral Compass. Do You? — from michelleweise.substack.com by Michelle Weise & Dana Walsh
Why the Age of AI Demands We Take Character Formation Seriously

Here’s something to chew on:

Anthropic, the company behind Claude — a chatbot used by 30 million users per month — has exactly one person (whom we know of) working on AI ethics. One. A young Scottish philosopher is doing the vital work of training a large language model to discern right from wrong.

I don’t say this to shame Anthropic. In fact, Anthropic appears to be the only company (that we know of) being explicit about the moral foundations and reasoning of its chatbot. Hundreds of millions of users worldwide are leveraging tools from other LLMs that do not appear to have an explicit moral compass being cultivated from within.

I raise this because this is yet another example of where we are: extraordinary technical power advancing without an equally strong moral infrastructure to support it.

Why do we keep producing people who are skilled but not wise?

Learning Ecosystems

6 Reasons Universities Are Building Media Labs Now [Grimes]

Categories

Tags