UK

“Using AI to create the practice opportunities online students need” [Miller Perkins] + other items re: AI in our learning ecosystems

On 08/19/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, adjunct faculty, adult learning, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, assessment, business, career development, colleges, communications, communities of practice, community colleges, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, digital learning, education, education technology, emerging technologies, Emotion, engineering, experimentation, faculty/staff, game-changing environment, higher education, homeschooling/homeschoolers, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, IT in HE, K-12 related, leadership, learning, learning agents, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, learning spaces, liberal arts, mathematics, online learning, personalized/customized learning, productivity / tips and tricks, professional development, student-related, teachers, teaching & learning, technologies for your home, tools, training / L&D, UK, United States, universities, vendors, workplace, youth, by Daniel Christian

Using AI to create the practice opportunities online students need— from timeshighereducation.com by Kathy Miller Perkins
For disciplines that depend on interpersonal skills such as communication, leadership, negotiation and mediation, AI can provide elusive experiential learning, particularly in asynchronous environments

What if AI’s greatest educational value lies not in generating answers but in generating experiences?

The result surprised me. Students did not simply interact with the AI, they meaningfully engaged with it. Many reported that the experience felt valuable precisely because the simulated conversation partner pushed back. Unlike classmates who sometimes hesitate to challenge one another, the AI consistently maintained its position. Students had to work harder, listen more carefully and apply the communication strategies they had spent weeks learning. And, importantly, they practised.

Here’s how to show students what responsible AI use looks like — from timeshighereducation.com by Andrew Firr and Alex Fenton
Well-designed assessments can highlight generative AI’s limitations, where it can provide support and what responsible practice looks like. Andrew Firr and Alex Fenton offer strategies

We have been exploring ways to offer this in our Level 7 module for MSc engineering management students, many of whom come from the Global South. Assessment is built around a practical design problem: students examine how a real campus process operates, where delays occur, evidence they observe and how a feasible redesign might improve the system – in a 3,000-word essay.

They can use AI for planning and providing clarity, but not for generating the evidence on which the analysis rests. Invented observations, measurements, screenshots or unverifiable citations are prohibited. The assessment design reinforces this through a case study, diagram, fact-checking exercise and a short AI use statement.

Requiring an AI use statement encourages students to reflect on their processes. We ask which tool they used, how they used it, how they checked the output and which parts of the work depended on their own evidence and judgement. It reminds them that evidence must be theirs and that citations must be manually verified.

Slow math: Kids may learn more when AI makes them review mistakes — from hechingerreport.org by Jill Barshay and Kristin Fasiang
A randomized experiment involved more than 6,000 Tennessee middle school students learning fractions

In an experiment involving more than 6,000 middle schoolers in Tennessee, students learned slightly more math when an AI tutor walked them through their mistakes and then required them to demonstrate the same skill correctly three times in a row before moving on.
…
The winning combination wasn’t the addition of AI tutoring alone, but AI tutoring plus repetition, with the idea that students needed to stick with the skill to demonstrate some level of mastery. The students who practiced math with this AI-enhanced “mastery learning” approach scored about 3 percentage points higher than students receiving conventional computerized instruction. The advantage was small.

I Built a Team of AI Bots That Write Feedback Better than Me. Here’s How. — from drphilippahardman.substack.com by Dr Philippa Hardman
Aka, how to make learners love AI-assisted feedback, rather than loathe it.

This wasn’t hidden from the cohort. For reasons I’ll come to below, I always tell my cohorts at the very start that an AI assistant will be helping me draft their feedback. The aim wasn’t to remove me from the process, but to find out whether AI could help me to deliver feedback at a volume and quality that I simply couldn’t maintain without AI.

Spoiler: the experiment worked — but not for the reason I expected. In this post, I’ll share exactly what I built, tell you how to build a version for your course and reveal the three conditions that decide whether learners trust AI-assisted feedback or quietly stop reading it.

TL;DR: the spec for my feedback assistant is long not because the model needs persuading, but because it’s where my judgement lives. Every rule in it is a decision AI would otherwise make by itself, with limited expertise. A spec doesn’t make the model smarter — it makes expertise and judgement legible enough for the model to follow.

Of the five stages of AI grief, some managers are stuck in denial— from timeshighereducation.com by Shadi Mohamed
Acceptance is not surrender. It is about getting beyond a policing obsession and rethinking what assessment aims to measure, says Shadi Mohamed

In that moment of institutional blindness, it struck me: universities are not merely struggling with a technological adoption curve. They are grieving the demise of the modern university’s economic and institutional logic.

To understand the scale of this threat posed by AI, consider what the internet did to journalism. Newspapers thrived by bundling together classified advertising with quick news hits, sports scores and opinion columns, using that reliable revenue to fund the expensive social necessity of investigative reporting. The rise of internet advertising did not kill journalism outright but it shattered the bundle, leaving the expensive core product without its historical financial engine.

Universities operate on a similar logic, bundling content delivery, assessment, credentialling, research and professional formation. But generative AI is now commodifying the most visible parts of that package. When AI can deliver personalised explanations instantly and generate the essays and reports we use to measure student capability, the traditional degree loses its role in the labour market as a proxy for understanding. If the bundle breaks, the economic model that funds our deeper purposes is in peril.

Bring playfulness into teaching for collaboration and creativity — from timeshighereducation.com by Isabel Taurel
In learning, playfulness is often overlooked. Yet it could be key to embedding the soft, ‘human’ skills students will need for the future. Isabel Taurel shows how

The same is true in higher education. Students who are able to rediscover a playful mindset leave the classroom with something far more valuable than a good grade. They develop confidence, are more willing to contribute unusual ideas and learn how to adapt when the unexpected happens. These are precisely the qualities employers increasingly tell us they need.

Yet the creative and cultural industries demonstrate their growing value. Success increasingly depends on collaboration, adaptability and creative confidence, all qualities that are fostered through arts-based learning and increasingly sought in every kind of workplace.

Playfulness isn’t a distraction from serious learning. It’s one of the most powerful ways we have of preparing students for a future in which the most valuable skills may be the most deeply human ones: listening, presence, responsiveness, imagination and a capacity to create meaning together.

What China’s Calligraphy Lessons Can Teach Us About AI — from linkedin.com by Rebecca Winthrop

He recalled visiting a primary school classroom in China several years ago where students were practicing calligraphy—the centuries-old art of writing Chinese characters with brush and ink. While the scene appeared entirely traditional, there was something innovative happening beneath the surface. Embedded in students’ desks was an AI system capable of providing immediate feedback on their brushwork, noting misplaced strokes and suggesting corrections.

The image is striking. Students were learning in much the same way generations before them had learned—brush in hand, immersed in a deeply human and cultural practice. Yet AI was quietly enhancing the experience by providing immediate, personalized feedback that would have been difficult for any teacher to provide to her whole class.

That example captures something important for me. The most promising uses of AI may not be the applications that place technology front and center, but those that support learners to do what they have always done: connect with educators, practice with concentration, and learn and grow.

AI Can Build Your Course, but Can it Design the Learning? — from drphilippahardman.substack.com by Dr. Philippa Hardman
Aka, the current state of AI’s instructional design ability & what it means for L&D

So these models have learned design artefacts in extraordinary volume and design method barely at all. They know what e-learning looks like. They have very little access to why any of it looks that way and whether it actually works or not.

That produces a completely consistent behaviour: ask an LLM for an e-learning module and it generates the statistical centre of every e-learning module it has ever seen. What AI produces isn’t the output of a design process. It’s the output of a sampling process — the statistical centre of every e-learning module it has ever seen.
…
So the honest conclusion isn’t that AI can design learning; it’s that AI executes design well when someone who already knows what to ask for is doing the asking and the checking.

This finding gives us a clearer division of labour than we’ve had before and with it a clearer picture of what the AI-enhanced workflow might look like:

The Pedagogy of Trading Places: Lessons from an Unexpected Role Reversal with AI — from facultyfocus.com by Sherrie Myers Bartell, PhD

These disruptions matter. They remind us that teaching is not a static identity but a dynamic posture. They show us that our pedagogical selves are not fixed; they are responsive to context, energy, and attention. They reveal that the qualities we value most in our teaching—curiosity, metaphor, play, and expansiveness—are not automatic. They require care and cultivation.

The AI didn’t “teach” me in the traditional sense. But it did something pedagogically adjacent: it surprised me back into myself.

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.

What a disco ball teaches us about learning and leadership [Flannery]

On 06/19/2026, in Bias | Diversity Equity & Inclusion (DE&I), colleges, community colleges, education, higher education, ideas, instructional design, K-12 related, leadership, learning, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, liberal arts, neurodivergent/special needs, student-related, teaching & learning, UK, universities, by Daniel Christian

What a disco ball teaches us about learning and leadership — from timeshighereducation.com by Lauren Flannery
By acknowledging that perspectives are evolving and relational, educators and leaders can encourage contribution and connection without sacrificing what makes people distinct

It also shows us that difference does not always need to be resolved. In teaching, learning and leadership, the aim is not to create uniformity but to create conditions in which different people can contribute, connect and shine without losing what makes them distinct.

In classrooms, inclusion is sometimes approached as ensuring access to the same knowledge, resources and opportunities for all students. The beach ball helps here: it encourages us to explore multiple perspectives. But the disco ball pushes us further to explore how learning environments can support students to bring their experiences, identities and knowledge into the room – not to smooth them out but to draw from them.

Designing for multiple perspectives also means recognising that expressing an opinion is not only about confidence; it is also about conditions. People are more likely to speak when they feel their contribution will be heard without being dismissed, appropriated or flattened. Creating those conditions may involve discussing uncertainty, welcoming challenge, slowing down decision-making or making space for quieter forms of participation. The aim is not to make everyone agree, but to allow different reflections to interact in ways that generate richer understanding.

Two years ago, AI broke assessment. Now, it’s helping us to reinvent it. — from linkedin.com by Dr. Philippa Hardman

Also from Dr. Hardman, see:

A new study shows AI helped deliver 1.5 years of maths progress in 8 weeks — here’s how. — from linkedin.com by Dr. Philippa Hardman

…a new study shows AI helped deliver 1.5 years of maths progress in 8 weeks — here’s how.

Google DeepMind just shared the results of a randomised trial involving 1,763 students. Half used Gemini’s “Guided Learning” to learn maths; half didn’t.

The result: the group working with AI gained the equivalent of 1.2 to 1.7 years of extra progress compared to those who didn’t.

It’s tempting to read this as “Gemini’s Guided Learning mode works!” But the key point here is that Gemini didn’t work alone….

Look closer, and what made the difference wasn’t just the tech — it was a great teacher making expert use of it.

Important insights from this PwC global jobs report — from linkedin.com by Ross Dawson & PwC

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.

Global AI Diffusion — Q1 2026 Trends and Insights [Microsoft]

On 05/21/2026, in 21st century, Africa, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, Asia, Australia, Canada, emerging technologies, Europe, game-changing environment, global / globalization, human-computer interaction (HCI), India, innovation, Microsoft, platforms, trends, UK, United States, by Daniel Christian

Global AI Diffusion Q1 2026 Trends and Insights — from Microsoft

.

A New Era of Security: Frontier AI Defense — from paloaltonetworks.com by Sam Rubin

For the last several months, we have had early, unbounded access to the latest frontier AI models. What we’ve seen from that vantage point has made it clear that the window for organizations to get ahead of what’s coming is shorter than most leaders realize.

We have moved past the era of incremental AI improvements into a threat landscape shift. Our testing has revealed a step-change in capability that demonstrates an intuitive understanding of software vulnerabilities. This is more than faster code generation, it is a shift from AI as an assistant to AI as an autonomous agent capable of discovering and chaining flaws at a scale that most defenders aren’t prepared for.

These capabilities will not stay confined to controlled environments for long. When Mythos first launched, we predicted a six-month window before attackers gained access. We now believe that timeline has accelerated significantly.

When anyone can build a course, the real job is deciding which ones shouldn’t exist [Hardman]

On 05/11/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, business, communities of practice, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, training / L&D, trends, UK, by Daniel Christian

When anyone can build a course, the real job is deciding which ones shouldn’t exist — from drphilippahardman.substack.com by Dr. Philippa Hardman
Why deciding is the only L&D skill AI can’t replace.

The biggest AI risk that L&D faces isn’t that it gets left behind: it’s that we build more — and flood the organisation with meh-quality content nobody needed in the first place.

In this post, I’ll make the case that:

The L&D job has just split in two — and most of us are still working on the wrong half.
There’s a new operating model coming for the role, and it’s already running inside a lot of the companies you’ve heard of.
The smartest critique of everything I’m about to argue comes from Ethan Mollick — and I think he’s half right.

The question we’ve been asking for the last two years — “how do I get faster at building?” — was the wrong one.

The real question is: can I look at fifteen AI-generated learning assets and decide which three are worth scaling — and put my name to that decision?

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 “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

Learning Ecosystems

Bring playfulness into teaching for collaboration and creativity [Taurel]

Categories

Tags