strategy

Instructional Design Trends: What’s Shaping The Future Of Learning? [Pappas] + “The Future Of Personalized Learning And The Leaders Being Trained To Deliver It” [Ayers]

On 07/06/2026, in analytics, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, educational games / serious games, elearning, emerging technologies, engagement / engaging students, future, game-changing environment, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, immersion, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, leadership, organizational change, personalized/customized learning, skills, strategy, traditional / tradition, training / L&D, trends, user experience (UX), by Daniel Christian

Instructional Design Trends: What’s Shaping The Future Of Learning? — from elearningindustry.com by Christopher Pappas

Table of contents

1. Why Instructional Design Is Entering A New Era
2. The State Of Instructional Design Today
3. Top Instructional Design Trends Shaping 2026
4. The Future Of Instructional Design And Technology

Also from elearningindustry.com, see:

The Future Of Personalized Learning And The Leaders Being Trained To Deliver It — by Ryan Ayers

Table of contents

1. Personalized Learning For Future Leaders
2. Where Personalized Learning Is Heading
3. What Implementing Personalized Learning At Scale Actually Requires
4. The Educational Leaders Being Trained To Deliver This Future
5. Conclusion

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.

The Current State of Play: AI in Higher Education and the Road Ahead [Gamby, Kil, Koblic, LeBlanc, Moldoveanu & Siemens]

On 06/29/2026, in 21st century, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, business side of he, career development, change, colleges, community colleges, corporate / business world, culture, emerging technologies, ethics, expectations, experimentation, faculty/staff, game-changing environment, generational differences, higher education, ideas, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, IT in HE, leadership, learning, learning agents, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, liberal arts, morals/values, organizational change, pace of change, parents/guardians, personalized/customized learning, policy, reinvent, relationships, skills, society, strategy, student-related, teaching & learning, trends, United States, universities, vision/possibilities, by Daniel Christian

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 Evolving L&D Roles in 2026 Exploring who you might become next — from liftedlnd.substack.com by Lifted L&D

1. The Learning Experience Architect
This is really the evolution of the instructional designer. The difference is that the focus is no longer on building individual courses. Instead, the focus shifts towards designing capability ecosystems.

In modern learning platforms, learning is dynamic and increasingly personalised. AI engines infer skill levels, recommend resources, generate practice scenarios and adapt content based on how people engage. The role of the Learning Experience Architect is to orchestrate that environment so it genuinely supports capability development.
…

Across all of these emerging roles, three themes keep appearing.

The first is data fluency. …
The second is systems thinking. …
The third is human judgement.

Also relevant/see:

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.

And here’s the link to Robert’s posting on LinkedIn.

How Constructivism Learning Theory Shapes Modern Instructional Design And L&D Strategy — from elearningindustry.com by Christopher Pappas
.

Also see:

Microlearning Trends And Strategies In 2026 — from elearningindustry.com by Christopher Pappas

What Michigan schools reveal about reversing chronic absenteeism | Time-intensive home visits show promise [Barshay]

On 06/01/2026, in education, education reform, K-12 related, leadership, learning ecosystem, Michigan, parents/guardians, participation, research, society, strategy, student-related, teachers, United States, youth, by Daniel Christian

What Michigan schools reveal about reversing chronic absenteeism — from hechingerreport.org by Jill Barshay
Time-intensive home visits show promise

Absenteeism is a huge and seemingly intractable problem for the nation’s public schools. And Michigan has one of the worst attendance rates in the country.
…
Yet a new study released in May offers hope. Researchers found that some Michigan schools appear to be substantially better than others at getting students to show up, and identified one intervention — frequent home visits to families whose children are absent from class — that was used more often by schools making a difference.

The findings are a reminder that “best practices” recommendations often overstate what researchers actually know. Schools can make a meaningful difference in attendance, but identifying genuinely successful schools is hard, isolating why they succeed is even harder, and simple solutions rarely hold up under scrutiny.

What AI-Enabled Education Actually Looks Like When It’s Working for Workforce Students — from gettingsmart.com by Stephen Griffin

Key Points

Institutions can use AI to make skills, pathways, and job outcomes visible to students and employers in ways traditional transcripts cannot.
Academic affairs, workforce development, career services, and employers need a shared definition of readiness and competency before tools can deliver meaningful value.

The second is portable competency records. Learning and employment records — AI-enabled documentation of what a student knows and can do, expressed in language employers recognize — are the infrastructure that makes credentials legible across the education-to-employment continuum. When a student can show an employer not just “completed Supply Chain Management 101” but “demonstrated proficiency in inventory optimization, route planning, and logistics software at the industry-recognized level,” the credential stops being abstract. It becomes evidence. Building these records requires investment in tools, yes — but more importantly, it requires faculty, workforce development staff, and employer partners to agree on what competency actually looks like before the technology is ever purchased.

Inside the latest global research on school cellphone bans — from hechingerreport.org by Jill Barshay
First wave of studies raises questions about other digital distractions and cellphones at home

But the first wave of rigorous research on those policies — including two major U.S. studies — does not point neatly in one direction. Some studies have found modest academic gains from cellphone restrictions. Others have found little to no effect on test scores, even when student phone use dropped sharply. Some studies suggest benefits for low-achieving students, others for girls, and still others for boys. In some places, attendance or student well-being improved. In others, they didn’t.

The scientific process can be messy. Cultural differences may explain why the bans are more effective in some places than others. But almost any education reform will get different results in different places, even within a single country. And the current confusion may also stem from how difficult it is to study cellphone bans in the real world.

Ideally, researchers would randomly assign some students to surrender their phones while others kept them, and then measure the effect on academic performance — the equivalent of a clinical trial for an education policy. But those experiments are difficult to enforce in schools, and so far only one study, conducted among college students in India, has attempted a randomized controlled trial. It produced a notably strong improvement in course grades for lower achieving students.

Instead, most studies rely on rougher real world comparisons that capture only partial effects of cellphone restrictions.

Why universities must become flexible lifelong partners, not one-time providers [Sivarajah]

On 05/28/2026, in adjunct faculty, apprenticeships, business, career development, change, changing business models, colleges, community colleges, corporate / business world, credentialing, curriculum, Daniel S. Christian, Europe, faculty/staff, future of higher education, game-changing environment, generational differences, higher education, ideas, innovation, internships, leadership, learning ecosystem, lifelong learning, MBA, new business models, organizational change, pace of change, participation, pathways, professional development, skills, strategy, student-related, teaching & learning, technology (general), UK, United States, universities, vision/possibilities, workplace, by Daniel Christian

Why universities must become flexible lifelong partners, not one-time providers — from timeshighereducation.com by Sankar Sivarajah
As careers become increasingly non-linear and shaped by rapid change, universities must evolve beyond traditional degree provision, says Sankar Sivarajah. Here, he outlines strategies

From programmes to learning ecosystems
These pressures point towards a broader redefinition of higher education. Rather than viewing education as a one-time experience culminating in a degree, universities increasingly need to see themselves as partners in professional development across an entire career.

This means moving from a model centred on programmes to one focused on learning ecosystems that allow individuals to enter, leave and re-engage with higher education as their needs evolve.

Business schools may be particularly well placed to lead this shift because of their close engagement with employers and their long tradition of educating professionals at different stages of their careers.

But success will depend on more than introducing new modules or certificates. Universities must confront a fundamental question. Are the systems, structures and cultures that define higher education capable of supporting genuinely flexible learning?

The sector has already embraced the language of lifelong learning – the next step is ensuring that universities themselves are built to deliver it.

From DSC:
Long-time readers of this blog have seen this graphic of mine posted over the last 12+ years:
.

.

Also relevant/see:

What if the undergraduate journey were a four-year internship? — from timeshighereducation.com by Michelle Seref
Treating work placements and co-curricular programmes as optional or supplementary misses deeper questions about whether traditional degrees prepare students for careers. Michelle Seref explains

Attending workshops or polishing a résumé in their final semester does not make students career-ready. They need to practise how to work – how to collaborate, navigate ambiguity, manage projects and apply knowledge in context – throughout their academic experience. The reality is that career readiness is not a co-curricular programme; it is an essential part of an integrated curriculum.

To be clear, employers do not expect classrooms to become training centres. What they are asking for – implicitly and explicitly – is graduates who can function in complex environments from day one. That means graduates who can work in teams, communicate professionally with stakeholders, adapt when plans change, apply theory to real constraints and learn continuously on the job.

These capabilities do not develop through passive learning. But experiential learning is often misunderstood as a single, high-impact activity: an internship, a capstone project or study abroad. In reality, its power comes from repetition and progression. One experience introduces exposure. A sequence of experiences builds competence.

We are proposing a paradigm shift: repositioning the undergraduate journey as a four-year professional internship rather than a continuation of the K-12 classroom environment.

.
From DSC:
The problem with this innovative idea is that faculty often are not out in the “real world.” The best chance higher ed has to deliver on this idea is via the adjunct faculty members out there. Often, they are the ones practicing what they are teaching. They are constantly pulse-checking — and actively involved with — their industries and have more up-to-date, practical knowledge.

But this is a problem for traditional institutions of higher education, which have treated their adjunct faculty members poorly through the years. Adjunct faculty members hardly make minimum wage, have no benefits, no retirement plans, etc. — plus they have little to no say in faculty senates.

Organizational change would be a requirement.

Putting college on the fast track — from hechingerreport.org by Jon Marcus
As students grow impatient, colleges try three-year bachelor’s degrees

Some colleges and the accreditors and states that oversee them are adding and approving three-year bachelor’s degrees that require fewer credits than the traditional four-year kind.

Institutions facing enrollment declines hope the new three-year degrees will attract students unwilling to spend the usual amount of time and money that it takes to graduate. States need those graduates to fill jobs.

Nearly 60 universities and colleges are planning, considering or have already launched reduced-credit, three-year bachelor’s degrees in some disciplines. They’re calling them “applied” or “career-focused” bachelor’s degrees.

While earning bachelor’s degrees with fewer credits may appeal to some students, the idea is so new that there’s a key unanswered question: whether employers, graduate schools and licensing agencies will accept them.

From DSC:
Given the often high price of obtaining a degree these days…whether it’s a 4-year program or a 3-year program, the key is whether a student can get a good job coming out of that program. I think the required time doesn’t help as much as making the necessary changes to offer more responsive curricula, relevant programs, and real-world learning experiences (including apprenticeships and internships). I appreciate the experiment to lower the overall costs, but like so many other “innovations,” it’s playing at the fringes. It’s really the same old, same old — just on a shorter time frame.

At current prices, families are FORCED to consider employment prospects. They are demanding a ROI, because they have to.

I was at a meeting earlier this year with other parents and family members who were interested in a particular program at a Michigan-based university. One set of parents really wanted to know if their student would be getting a good job coming out of the program. They didn’t want to take a second mortgage out if the investment wasn’t going to pay off.

Also see:

Here is the link to Chris Mayer’s posting on LinkedIn.

The Most Obvious Fix in Education — from michelleweise.substack.com by Michelle Weise
The No-Brainer Nobody’s Doing

We know what better learning looks like. We have known for a while.

Real problems. Real roles. Built-in conflict. Conditions that simulate the messiness of actual work. Reflection that asks not just what did you do but who are you becoming? These are not radical ideas. They are not untested theories. The research is clear, employers are asking for exactly this, and students consistently report that the closest they got to real work was the most valuable part of their education.

So why aren’t universities doing more of it?

That is the question worth sitting with — because the gap between what we know and what we do is not a knowledge problem. It is a design problem, an incentive problem, and if we’re being candid, a courage problem.

Because in the meantime, learners are paying the price. They graduate credentialed but untested. They enter labor markets that want proof of performance and experience, not transcripts. They lack the networks, the exposure, and the scar tissue that comes from navigating real work.

Also relevant, see:

The Apprenticeship (R)Evolution — from insidehighered.com by Sara Weissman and Colleen Flaherty
Once synonymous with hard hats and tool belts, apprenticeships are branching into health care, artificial intelligence, business services, advanced manufacturing and more.

Such programs also challenge stereotypes about apprenticeships—namely that they’re only in construction, an earn-and-learn catchall for traditionally apprenticeable occupations such as bricklayer, plumber, carpenter and electrician. In integrating robotics, automation, machining and logistics, the manufacturing development program is a bridge to understanding how apprenticeships are evolving to support some of the nation’s fastest-growing industries. These include advanced manufacturing, but also health care, information technology and other business services.

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.

Across the divide: reimagining faculty-staff collaboration in higher education — from timeshighereducation.com by Saskia van de Gevel
Academic units do best when they harness different viewpoints – from field scientists and curriculum designers to extension professionals – to drive innovation and relevance. Saskia van de Gevel offers proactive advice

Universities are not sustained by individual leaders or isolated units. They are sustained by teams of people who bring different kinds of expertise to a shared mission. When faculty and professional staff collaborate as genuine partners – aligned around outcomes, clear about roles and committed to mutual respect – institutions become more resilient, innovative and effective.

Also from timeshighereducation.com, see:

The five levels of learning designer support — from timeshighereducation.com by Daniel Searson
Learning designers and academics may have different expectations when it comes to collaborating on course design. Here’s how a five-point scale can help
Harness the power of your university librarian in the age of information chaos — from timeshighereducation.com by Ben Meunier
Find out how to tap the mine of knowledge your university library has, for trustworthy research sources, data expertise and information literacy advice
How employability teams can strengthen academic programmes — from timeshighereducation.com by Hanene Duprat
Working like recruitment partners, rather than just career advisers, can help align teaching with industry needs, writes Hanene Duprat
Excerpts:

Again, we don’t send them 200 CVs. We might send 20, but they’re meticulously shortlisted. The employer saves time, the student feels they are being taken seriously and trust builds quickly on both sides.

And because we work closely with employers, we learn something universities often struggle to find out early enough: what the market is asking for now.

What academics need to know: we can’t do this without you
If I could say one thing to academic colleagues anywhere, it’s that employability can’t sit next to the curriculum. It has to live with it.

The benefits of engaging third space practitioners in curriculum development — from timeshighereducation.com by Steve Briggs
Third space practitioners are often overlooked in the curriculum development process, to everyone’s detriment. Here’s a look at the viewpoints they can offer and how to engage them better
Teaching deaf, deafblind and hard-of-hearing students: practical steps that benefit everyone — from timeshighereducation.com by Annelies Kusters
When educators design communication to work across multiple modes from the outset, classrooms become more accessible – and more effective – for everyone, says Annelies Kusters

Learning Ecosystems

Instructional Design Trends: What’s Shaping The Future Of Learning? [Pappas] + “The Future Of Personalized Learning And The Leaders Being Trained To Deliver It” [Ayers]

Two items re: experiments within higher ed as well as offering alternative college models

Across the divide: reimagining faculty-staff collaboration in higher education [van de Gevel]; plus several other items from timeshighereducation.com

Categories

Tags