Tech & Learning Announces Winners of Best for Back to School 2026 — from techlearning.com by TL Editors
This annual award celebrates the products that offer schools versatility, value, and solutions to specific problems to support innovative, effective teaching and learning.

The 2026-27 school year is off and running, and it’s already shaping up to be another pivotal year for education. While AI remains a massive topic, the biggest headline this fall is the screentime debate, hands down. Communities nationwide—including the country’s two largest school districts—are advocating for strict limitations and outright bans to reclaim screen-free classrooms.

Yet, if there’s one constant in education, it’s resilience. We adapt, we evolve, and we keep going because at the heart of it all, we want what’s best for our students. Instead of a setback, this heightened scrutiny around screentime and AI has forced the edtech community to be better. It demands that the tools we bring into the classroom are safe and built to inspire active creation rather than passive consumption.
.

 

Will smart glasses make it too risky to speak up in class? — from timeshighereducation.com by Georgia Luckhurst & Kieran Phelan
AI-powered glasses may boost learning but they also pose obvious threats to privacy, academic integrity and the sanctity of the seminar room as a safe space to explore ideas. Are universities doing enough to head off the risks, asks Georgia Luckhurst – while Kieran Phelan suggests they are not

Smart glasses can superimpose information on to a viewer’s field of vision, and they can access apps and communicate with your phone. Some are hands-free while some require touch, and some also respond to voice automation. Most controversially, they can take pictures and record footage, potentially without anyone else knowing that it is happening. And they are becoming ever more common.

But, for academia, the biggest issue associated with smart glasses may be a decline in intellectual risk-taking and freedom of expression, Murray said.


How useful are smart glasses in improving accessibility in higher education? — from timeshighereducation.com by Helen Nicholson-Benn
Smart glasses have the potential to support learning for disabled students, but this technology also comes with significant privacy concerns. Helen Nicholson-Benn looks at how to balance functional benefits with data security and safeguarding

Consider how different models of smart glasses might be used to improve accessibility in higher education. A deaf student might use XRai’s ar2 captioning glasses during a lecture to view live captions in their eyeline, allowing them to follow the content without looking down at a separate screen. A visually impaired student might use Envision’s Ally Solos glasses to generate a description of images on printed material or read text during a class. The glasses provide a hands-free option rather than scanning the materials with their smartphone.

These examples are hypothetical, and smart glasses are far from an everyday teaching tool, but that may be about to change. Smart glasses available today are far more capable than their predecessors, particularly boosted by developments in artificial intelligence (AI) technology.


Which brings up the topic of how to handle these technologies in the classroom:

Are device-free classrooms the way forward? — from timeshighereducation.com by Georgia Luckhurst
US universities embrace laptop and phone bans, but professor suggests policies may be more about political positioning than pedagogy

Growing numbers of US universities are making some of their courses “device free”, drawing mixed enthusiasm from edtech experts.

In the latest move the University of Chicago is introducing a no-laptops and no-phones policy on three of its 15 required undergraduate modules, aiming to “reduce distractions and encourage face-to-face discussions”. Exceptions remain, including for students with disabilities.
…
Device-free policies appear in other countries, experts suggested, despite the trend picking up pace in the US.

 

OpenAI’s chief scientist says no lab should keep scaling at maximum speed — from thenextweb.com by Ana Maria Constantin
OpenAI put out two posts on Sunday. Its research organisation now uses 3.1 agent-workdays for every human one, and its chief scientist says no lab has solved alignment well enough to keep scaling at full speed. The case for an OpenAI slowdown arrived with the numbers against it.

Chief scientist Jakub Pachocki wrote the second post, an essay called An Alien Mind. It closes on a line that reads oddly from the man who runs research at the company shipping fastest.

“Currently I believe that no lab has solved alignment and monitoring to a sufficient degree to continue responsibly scaling at maximum speed for much longer,” he wrote.

…
He is not gentle about the stakes either. “This is a time that calls for extreme caution. I am concerned no one is prepared for the consequences of a continued rapid rise in machine intelligence,” Pachocki wrote.

 

AI Adoption in the Workplace Accelerates, but Trust Gap Remains — from campustechnology.com by Sean Parker

Key Takeaways

  • AI adoption is accelerating across the workplace, with 62% of U.S. workers now using generative AI for professional purposes.
  • Employee concerns about AI’s impact on jobs remain high, even among workers actively using technology.
  • Companies are adopting AI faster than they are creating clear guidelines, raising questions around trust, leadership and workplace readiness.

A new Pulse of the Workforce Special Topic Report published by Idealis and CivicScience found that while AI adoption is accelerating across the U.S. workforce, confidence is not growing at the same pace. The report points to a central tension: AI is becoming common at work before many organizations have built the policies, training, and leadership practices employees need to use it with confidence.

 

Employees from the world’s biggest AI companies want the US to be ready to slow AI development — from cnn.com by Hadas Gold

Top staffers from the biggest AI and technology companies urged the US government to slow the pace of artificial intelligence development so that safety and security measures can catch up in an open letter.

The US government should support an international effort to develop tools that can “deliberately pace the frontier of automated AI development,” according to the letter.

More than 1,000 employees from frontier AI companies signed the letter, including the chief scientist of OpenAI, one of the ChatGPT developer’s original cofounders, some of Anthropic’s cofoundersand vice presidents at Meta, Google and others.

The letter comes on the heels of major advancements and burgeoning threats from rapidly developing AI systems. OpenAI disclosed last week that two of its test models escaped a lab environment, bypassed its systems to gain access to the open internet and hacked a different company’s internal system.

 

Digital Accessibility Lawsuits in 2026: Five Trends Companies Should Know — from blog.usablenet.com

Here are five findings companies should understand, along with practical steps for reducing risk.

1. Digital accessibility lawsuits are on pace to reach 6,000
2. Where a company sells matters more than where it is headquartered
3. E-commerce remains the primary target
…and more

 

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

 

“Teachers ban it. Employers demand it.”

 


Also relevant/see:


The Shifting Career Ladder — from nafez.substack.com by Nafez Dakkak
AI is changing how work works and quietly removing the pathways through which young people learn to become experts.

AI is reshaping how people build skills, enter professions, and move along the career ladder and through the labour market.

In this conversation, I sit down with Matt Sigelmen founder of LightCast and now the President of Burning Glass Institute. Matt has dedicated his career to understanding the labor market and helping society improve the connections within in it.

Matt and I explore why people and opportunities are often only “a few skills apart,” why entry-level work may be losing its traditional role as the first rung of expertise, and why schools, universities, and employers now need to rethink the pathways that turn potential into mastery.

Educators need to be deeply aligned with what these changes are, and they need to shift the AI discourse from “how” questions to “what” questions. What do we need to teach? What do we need to keep in the curriculum?

 

A Comprehensive Report on Teens, Tweens, and AI — from commonsensemedia.org

To find out what that actually looks like day-to-day, we surveyed more than a thousand 9- to 17-year-olds across the country. We asked them how they use AI, how often, and for what.

The Common Sense Media Census: AI Use by Tweens and Teens (2026) is the first in a series we’ll repeat every year to learn how this generation’s relationship with AI evolves over time.

A few things stood out:

  • Kids are using AI for many things. It’s not just a homework helper anymore. For some kids, AI has become a confidant, even though our research is clear that AI companionship is not safe for anyone under 18.
  • Guardrails are thin to nonexistent. Schools are talking about rules more than safety. Three-quarters of kids say their school has discussed what they can and cannot use AI for, but just over half have been taught how to use AI safely.
  • Just like we saw with smartphones and social media, the conversation is once again lagging behind the technology. Nearly half of kids have never had a conversation with their parents about AI safety.
 

Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Entry-Level Work: A Framework for Safeguarding and Reinventing Early Career Pathways — from the World Economic Forum (weforum.org) and PwC

Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping how organizations hire, develop and advance talent, and this is most visible at entry-level. Globally, more than one in three young workers are employed in occupations with medium to high exposure to AI-driven task change. How these roles evolve will have significant implications for organizational performance, workforce participation and economic mobility.

 

The Current State of Play: AI in Higher Education and the Road Ahead — from er.educause.edu by Tanya Gamby, David Kil, Rachel Koblic, Paul LeBlanc, Mihnea Moldoveanu and George Siemens

The conventional explanation for this strategic vacuum points to the speed of technological change; it is moving too fast for institutions built for deliberation. That is true. . . and incomplete. The deeper issue is cultural. In fairness to higher education, many industries are struggling to keep up with the pace of AI advances. Higher education, however, moves even more slowly and is not built for the kind of transformational speed now underway. Getting institutional stakeholders to engage, rethink the work, and move faster may be the central challenge facing presidents and chancellors today, and that’s saying a lot in such volatile times.

From DSC:
I highlighted this paragraph because it hits upon the key item involved here — culture. “The deeper issue is cultural.” I think that’s a very true statement.

Part of the culture and setup of many institutions includes giving faculty members full rein of their classes and their departments. Faculty members have a great deal of leeway and power in how they do things. So trying to get X faculty members to get on board — including the Department Chairs — is not an easy task. 

Another part of culture involves being willing — or not — to change in the first place. Some institutions are like Google and are used to making changes and being more innovative. But those institutions are not the norm, at least in my experience. And this doesn’t even address another topic the article mentioned — the pace of these changes. As the authors point out, most institutions of traditional higher education are not equipped to deal with the current pace of change (nor are most of our other types of institutions and our corporations as well). 

I’m going to end this posting with another brief excerpt from the article:

Institutions rooted in human relationships, committed to truth-seeking, and oriented toward the full development of persons play a central role. AI cannot manufacture the experience of mattering to another human being. It cannot model intellectual courage or ethical discernment. It cannot build the kind of community in which students discover who they are and what they believe.

These are not small things. They are, in fact, the things most worth doing. At their best, colleges and universities are not only preparing better workers but shaping individuals and strengthening society.

 

The Tyranny of College Admissions: Why It’s So Challenging to Have Real Change in K-12 Education — from gettingsmart.com by Jon Alfuth

Key Points

  • College admissions policy shapes K-12 practice. If colleges continue to privilege course sequences, seat time, and grades, high schools will remain constrained in how far they can move toward competency-based learning.
  • States and institutions already offer models for change. Wisconsin, Colorado, Indiana, and pilots like CUNY and Michigan Ross show that admissions can incorporate portfolios, demonstrations of learning, and durable skills.

If we could instead orient K-12 education around skill development and application rather than Carnegie Units and grades, we could create a new paradigm for where, when and how students demonstrate college and career readiness. Competency-based education moves schools and systems towards this desirable future that balances knowledge with skills. 

Despite tremendous evidence of its potential, efforts to accelerate this shift have been stymied by the tyranny of college admissions requirements and processes. Parents, teachers, administrators and policymakers end up in a quandary. Anyone attempting to shift away from this traditional course sequence is criticized as trying to lock kids out of higher education and we snap back to the way things have always been done. 

 

American Microschools 2026 Sector Analysis — from microschoolingcenter.org

The National Microschooling Center just published its latest report, the American Microschools 2026 Sector Analysis, it’s most ambitious yet.

This report comprises the most thorough research published to date on microschools in America, examining 1,000 microschools located in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Most are currently operating, with prelaunch microschools as well as those which have closed their doors also included.
…
This 2026 edition of the annual American Microschools Sector Analysis series by the National Microschooling Center includes questions on a number of new topics, including ways microschools are impacted by different regulatory and policy stipulations, specifics of educational, business and operational aspects within the microschooling sector. Other questions revisit topics examined in previous studies, to illuminate trends over time and effects of growth and evolution on the ways microschools operate.

 

Former foster youth face very low odds of college or workforce success. Some people are trying to change that — from hechingerreport.org by Olivia Sanchez
College-based programs connect students with each other and with basic needs resources

The Guardian Scholars Program at Sacramento State is one of hundreds around the country designed to help students who are former foster youth stay enrolled, thrive academically and graduate with plans to build stable careers. It offers a window into policies that work — from scholarships to housing help to social connections for emotional support — at a time when the federal government has begun focusing renewed attention on these students and holding out the promise of more investment in them.

Former foster youth — a term that includes anyone who has spent time in the child welfare system, typically due to abuse or neglect — have some of the worst college graduation rates of any demographic group. An estimated 8 to 11 percent of former foster youth go on to earn any college degree, compared to 49 percent of adults overall, according to one analysis. They also typically have lower rates of employment and lower earnings than their peers with similar levels of education. 

 

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. 

 
© 2025 | Daniel Christian