innovation

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.

AI’s getting expensive for us these days

On 06/23/2026, in Adobe, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, business side of he, change, changing business models, cloud-based computing / apps / other cloud-related, colleges, communities of practice, community colleges, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, cost of getting a degree, Daniel S. Christian, education technology, emerging technologies, experimentation, faculty/staff, funding / grants, game-changing environment, graphics, higher education, human-computer interaction (HCI), innovation, intelligent systems, IT in HE, learning ecosystem, liberal arts, library / librarians, new business models, Open AI, platforms, student-related, teaching & learning, technologies for your home, tools, trends, United States, universities, by Daniel Christian

From DSC:
I used to be able to bring up Firefly on the web and use it “free” of charge — I didn’t have to go purchase tokens or credits. (I was actually paying for the Adobe Creative Cloud Pro suite of tools…so it wasn’t really free.)

But the other day I was trying to figure out what the latest pricing is at Adobe with that suite of tools and the use of credits for AI-based features. They say Adobe Creative Cloud Pro users get 4000 credits a month. Well, I have that suite and I’m still getting prompted to purchase credits. Firefly for individuals runs from $9.99 (2,000 credits/month) to $139.91 per month (50,000 credits per month). Not inexpensive, right? Below are other items along these lines.

The Era of Affordable AI Is Over. What Comes Next? — from builtin.com by Ameya Kanitkar
AI providers are shifting to usage-based billing for their services. AI fluency is more important now than ever to make the most of your tools to avoid unnecessary spending.

Summary: The era of cheap, flat-rate AI is ending as providers shift to usage-based billing. Every prompt now carries a direct cost, turning casual use into major budget risks, as seen when Uber depleted its 2026 AI budget in four months. Leaders must now track real-time value and token efficiency.

For a brief window, companies had access to the most transformative technology in a generation at the cost of a streaming subscription. Tools like ChatGPT put AI within reach of anyone with a browser and time for experimentation, while GitHub Copilot came in at just $10 a month, with token costs remaining relatively low. In the beginning, experimentation felt cost-effective, easy and relatively low-risk.

But that era is ending, and the bill is coming due faster than a lot of enterprise leaders anticipated.

The Fable of AI in Education — from downes.ca by Stephen Downes
Marc Watkins, Rhetorica, Jun 17, 2026

Tokenomics will be a hot topic of discussion on university campuses because, as Marc Watkins notes in this article, there is no realistic path forward to providing all students with access to advanced AI.

From this posting on LinkedIn.com from Dr. Nick Jackson:

And now there is a third layer emerging. Institutions are waking up to a systems-level question they are likely not remotely prepared for. Who pays for AI? How are budgets managed when there are unclear token consumption pricing models? How is AI procured? Who decides what tools get used and by whom and who gets access and at what level?

.

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.

Three items re: AI in our LE’s (involving corporate training, higher ed, and K-12)

On 06/10/2026, in 24x7x365 access, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, attention, colleges, communities of practice, community colleges, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, education, education reform, education technology, emerging technologies, engagement / engaging students, experimentation, faculty/staff, game-changing environment, generational differences, higher education, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, K-12 related, learning, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, liberal arts, student-related, teachers, teaching & learning, training / L&D, United States, universities, youth, by Daniel Christian

Rethinking Learning Design in Elementary Schools — from edcircuit.com
Why K–5 leaders must redesign—not just adopt—technology to restore attention, deepen thinking, and align AI with how children actually learn

Rethinking learning design in elementary schools is critical as screen time and AI reshape attention, thinking, and student engagement.

Designing for Thinking, Not Just Doing
At its core, learning design must shift from task completion to thinking development.

This requires creating environments where students:

Spend time processing ideas
Work through confusion without immediate answers
Build persistence through challenge

It also requires clarity around the role of technology.

Technology should:

Extend thinking
Provide meaningful feedback
Support exploration

It should not:

Replace effort
Short-circuit reasoning
Eliminate productive struggle

The goal is not to reduce technology use.

It is to ensure that students remain the ones doing the thinking.

Should We Integrate AI into Our Teaching?: Evidence-Based Guidelines for Deciding When AI Belongs — from Faculty Focus by Norman Eng, EdD

Four Questions for Deciding Whether to Use AI

Question 1: Will this AI tool help students use, recall, and demonstrate understanding of core disciplinary content?
Question 2: Will this AI tool require students to apply their learning to a new context?
Question 3: Will this AI tool support—not replace—independent, evidence-based reasoning?
Question 4: Will this AI integration preserve meaningful human interaction?

Christian: Could this be a part of our future learning ecosystems?

On 06/09/2026, in 21st century, 24x7x365 access, adult learning, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, career development, cloud-based computing / apps / other cloud-related, CMS/LMS, communities of practice, content development, aggregation, repositories, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, Daniel S. Christian, digital learning, education technology, emerging technologies, engagement / engaging students, experimentation, faculty/staff, future, future of higher education, game-changing environment, global / globalization, heutagogy, higher education, homeschooling/homeschoolers, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, informal learning, 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 hubs & pods & microschooling, learning preferences, learning spaces, liberal arts, library / librarians, lifelong learning, love of learning, microlearning, more voice more choice more control, online learning, online media, passions, personalized/customized learning, platforms, professional development, skills, social media, streams of content, student-related, teachers, teaching & learning, technologies for your home, training / L&D, United States, user experience (UX), vendors, vision/possibilities, by Daniel Christian

From DSC:
Could this be a part of our future learning ecosystems? Education as a personalized content feed.

Coursera wants users to learn through shorter, faster content — from digitaltrends.com by Moinak Pal
Coursera wants online learning to feel more like TikTok
.

Online learning platform Coursera is taking a page straight out of TikTok’s playbook. The company has launched a new AI-powered feed designed to serve short-form educational content in a scrollable, personalized format, signaling a major shift in how digital learning platforms may try to keep users engaged.

The feature introduces bite-sized video lessons, clips, and explainers curated through artificial intelligence based on a user’s interests, learning habits, career goals, and previous course activity. Instead of committing to hour-long lectures or full certification programs upfront, users can now discover short educational snippets designed to make learning feel more casual, accessible, and addictive.

Users scroll through a feed of short educational videos and AI-curated learning moments covering topics ranging from coding and business to AI, productivity, data science, and personal development.

Pinpoint, Explained | A guide to Google’s free tool, now open to all [Caplan]

On 06/05/2026, in adjunct faculty, Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, colleges, communities of practice, community colleges, content development, aggregation, repositories, data related items, digital audio, digital learning, digital video, education, education technology, faculty/staff, Google, higher education, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, IT in HE, journalism, K-12 related, languages and translation, learning, learning agents, learning ecosystem, liberal arts, library / librarians, research, teaching & learning, tools, United States, universities, vendors, by Daniel Christian

Pinpoint, Explained — from wondertools.substack.com by Jeremy Caplan
A guide to Google’s free tool, now open to all

.Jeremy prompted ChatGPT to generate illustrations in his post.

.

Learn about Pinpoint— from support.google.com

Pinpoint is an AI-powered research platform designed to help journalists and academics analyze large collections of documents. With Pinpoint, you can:

Analyze massive collections: Easily search, filter, transcribe and organize thousands of documents, including PDFs, images, and audio files.
Leverage generative AI: Use Gemini’s capabilities to answer research questions together with supporting evidence found in your documents.
Foster collaborative research: share your work with colleagues and tackle large scale projects as a team. You can also publicly share – supporting community-driven research.

For assistance with Pinpoint, please consult our Community Forum or you can contact our support team.

Addendum:

AI Budgets in Education Show No Sign of Decline — from campustechnology.com by Rhea Kelly

Key Takeaways

Education AI budgets are holding steady or increasing: Wasabi found that 98% of education organizations expect AI infrastructure budgets to increase or remain steady, with 46% planning increases.
Storage costs are the top AI implementation challenge: Half of education respondents cited data storage issues, including storage and access costs, as the No. 1 challenge for AI projects.
Cloud security and ROI remain pressure points: Only 47% feel confident keeping data unaltered and operational after a cyberattack, 44% lost access to public cloud data after an attack, and 37% of AI projects currently show positive ROI.

Cleveland Institute of Art’s Interactive Media Lab Redefines What an Art School Can Be — from edtechmagazine.com

The landscape for specialized colleges and universities such as art schools is shifting as higher education continues to evolve to fit emerging job markets and student interest.

Founded in 1882, Cleveland Institute of Art continuously challenges itself to stay modern and relevant. Years ago, the school’s leadership had the vision to partner with the city to revitalize an area due for reinvigoration.

The result was the Interactive Media Lab, which brings together the university, the city and private industry into a satellite campus that gives students and the community a space to create media, art and experiences with the most up-to-date tools available.

Also see:

GenAI practice blossoms through the open exchange of insights — from timeshighereducation.com by Samuel Doherty, who is the education and innovation coordinator at the University of Newcastle in Australia
How a structured GenAI professional development series, built around practice, peer voices and multiple entry points, fosters open exchange among colleagues, universities and industry

Connect internal practice to sector-wide thinking
Whatever is happening within any single institution is only part of the picture. Effective GenAI practice grows through open exchange of insights among colleagues, universities, professional bodies and industry, and a development programme that is entirely inward-looking risks missing both useful knowledge and important shifts in expectation.

Our AI sector voices sessions aim to bring external contributors into the programme: researchers, practitioners and sector representatives working at the intersection of GenAI and higher education. The aim is to situate institutional practice within the wider conversation and to signal to staff that the institution is genuinely engaged with that conversation, not just managing it internally.

In the Australian context, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (Teqsa) people pillar positions staff as drivers, enablers, users and innovators of GenAI practice, and identifies a lack of information or understanding as one of the primary barriers to ethical and effective engagement. That framing is useful regardless of regulatory context: institutions that treat their people as active participants in shaping practice, rather than recipients of policy, are likely to develop more durable capability.

Regular, lightweight communications, a weekly community of practice update and a monthly all-staff digest can maintain momentum between sessions without adding significantly to anyone’s workload.

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.

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.

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.

Three items re: AI in our learning ecosystems

On 05/26/2026, in adjunct faculty, business, career development, colleges, community colleges, corporate / business world, corporate universities / corporate training, digital learning, education technology, emerging technologies, experimentation, faculty/staff, future of higher education, game-changing environment, higher education, human-computer interaction (HCI), ideas, innovation, instructional design, intelligent systems, intelligent tutoring, law schools, learner profiles, learning, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, Learning from the Living [Class] Room, liberal arts, policy, productivity / tips and tricks, student-related, teaching & learning, training / L&D, United States, universities, vision/possibilities, workplace, by Daniel Christian

I Was a University AI Czar. I’m Not Equipped to Teach in the Age of AI. — from jgellers.substack.com by Josh Gellers, PhD

The reason that I claim I am not well-suited to thrive as an instructor in the age of AI is because both AI Enthusiasts and AI Resisters put a lot of thought and energy into completely redesigning their classes in response to AI. This is the one takeaway that I don’t think the Exhausted Majority has fully accepted yet—to excel as a teacher in this AI era, you need to totally revise how you teach and how you assess what students learn in your classes.

I can say this much—whatever solution our industry comes up with, it’s likely to emerge from teaching and learning centers. Contrary to what Paul Schofield wrote in the Chronicle of Higher Education, pedagogy experts are the best hope we have to equip today’s faculty with the tools required to succeed in this uncertain educational environment. As I always tell my students, “I was trained for 7 years to become a researcher and 2 days to become a teacher.” The idea that only disciplinary experts know how to teach and have nothing to learn from so-called “nonscholars” is so laughable that one has to wonder whether an AI agent jokingly wrote that sad opinion piece to troll the whole academe.

Also from Dr. Gellers, see:

The Worst AI Policy in Higher Ed
How Berkeley Law Boalt-ed From Expertise in Favor of Abstinence

Last week, one of the top law schools in the United States, the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, released its final policy on artificial intelligence, effective summer 2026. In the span of a breezy 1.5 pages, the school outlined the challenge AI poses to legal education and how it plans to address this problem. Despite these intentions, this AI policy is, in my estimation, the worst AI policy in higher education I have seen.

From AI Tutors to AI Study Mates— from drphilippahardman.substack.com by Dr Philippa Hardman
New research reveals how AI can enable real learning — not just productivity gains

.

The point isn’t that AI is inherently bad for learning — it’s that the meta-analyses showing that LLMs improve assignment and performance scores are measuring the wrong thing. They’re measuring performance with the AI present, not learning that persists once it’s gone.

.
From DSC:
Notice that when an AI-based learning system can remember what you’ve worked on and how you are doing — where you are struggling or doing well — it can have a positive impact on your longer-term learning. That, to me, is where long-term based learner profiles come in.

Later in the article, Dr. Hardman points out that “if we want to deliver AI tooling which supports substantive learning, we need to intentionally create a new category of AI tool for ‘learning at work’ which prioritises learning and development over productivity.” While I agree with that, I do wonder if businesses will care, so long as the work gets done and gets done well. But this calls into mind the word “experience” — something that traditionally has been hard fought to get in the corporate world. But the corporate realm often doesn’t like to pay for experience (beyond key AI-based jobs) when they perceive it’s getting too expensive. Ask all those 50 and over who had or have a target on their backs.

.

Learning Ecosystems

Cleveland Institute of Art’s Interactive Media Lab Redefines What an Art School Can Be [edtechmagazine.com]

Categories

Tags