policy

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 [microschoolingcenter.org]

On 06/14/2026, in Alternatives, education, education reform, homeschooling/homeschoolers, K-12 related, learning ecosystem, Learning Experience Design, Learning from the Living [Class] Room, learning hubs & pods & microschooling, legislatures / government / legal, parents/guardians, policy, student-related, teachers, trends, United States, youth, by Daniel Christian

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 [Sanchez]

On 06/04/2026, in colleges, community colleges, Emotion, funding / grants, higher education, learning ecosystem, policy, student-related, United States, universities, youth, by Daniel Christian

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.

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.

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.

.

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.

Which Jobs Are Most at Risk From AI? New Anthropic Data Offers Clues. — from builtin.com by Matthew Urwin
Anthropic set out in its latest study to predict how artificial intelligence could impact the labor market. Instead, its findings raise more questions than answers for tech workers as the U.S. government refuses to regulate the AI industry.

Summary:
In its latest labor market study, Anthropic found that artificial intelligence poses the greatest threat to software jobs, women and younger professionals. As the Trump administration takes a hands-off approach to AI, tech workers may be left to grapple with these findings on their own.

Matthew links to:

Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence — from anthropic.com

Key findings

We introduce a new measure of AI displacement risk, observed exposure, that combines theoretical LLM capability and real-world usage data, weighting automated (rather than augmentative) and work-related uses more heavily
AI is far from reaching its theoretical capability: actual coverage remains a fraction of what’s feasible
Occupations with higher observed exposure are projected by the BLS to grow less through 2034
Workers in the most exposed professions are more likely to be older, female, more educated, and higher-paid
We find no systematic increase in unemployment for highly exposed workers since late 2022, though we find suggestive evidence that hiring of younger workers has slowed in exposed occupations

AI and the Law: What Educators Need to Know About Responsible Use in a Rapidly Changing Landscape — from rdene915.com by Dr. Rachelle Dené Poth, JD

As both an attorney and educator who has spent more than eight years researching, teaching, presenting, and writing about AI, I have worked with schools across K–12 and higher education that are navigating these exact questions. The legal implications of AI are not barriers to innovation, but I consider them to serve as guardrails that assist schools with adopting technology responsibly. The key is protecting students, educators, and institutions and staying informed. Understanding the legal landscape and any potential legal implications as a result of the use of AI in classrooms helps schools move forward with confidence rather than hesitation.

Sections of Rachelle’s posting include:

Why AI and the Law Matter in Education
Key Laws That Shape AI Use in Schools
Data Privacy and Vendor Responsibility
Transparency Builds Trust With Students and Families
Accessibility, Equity, and Emerging Legal Considerations
Teaching Digital Citizenship With AI Literacy
Supporting Schools and Organizations Through AI and Legal Guidance
Moving Forward With Confidence

Law Firm AI Adoption: So Many Choices — from abovethelaw.com by Stephen Embry
Firms need to recognize reality, define what their legal professionals need, and then determine how to adopt and govern the use of AI tools.

It’s tough to be a law firm managing partner in the age of AI. So many choices, so little time. It’s like the proverbial kid in the candy store who has so many choices that they either can’t pick out anything or reach for too much. We see evidence of the first option in 8am’s recent outstanding Legal Industry Report, authored by Niki Black.

8am’s Legal Industry Report
One thing that stood out in the report was the discrepancy between use of AI by individual legal professionals and what firms are doing when it comes to AI adoption and guidance. Almost 75% of those who responded said they were using general purpose AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude for work purposes. That’s pretty significant.

Legalweek: It’s time to re-engineer how legal work is delivered — from legaltechnology.com by Caroline Hill

AI for good
While focusing on the risks of AI going wrong, it is only fair to mention the conversations I had around using AI for good. Two in particular stand out.

The first is the news from Everlaw that its Everlaw for Good Program has, over the past year, supported more than 675 active cases across 235 organisations, and expanded its support to a growing network of non-profit organisations.

The program extends Everlaw’s technology to organisations working to advance access to justice. In a recent survey by Everlaw, 88% of legal aid professionals said they are optimistic about AI’s potential to help narrow the justice gap.

“Mission-driven organizations are increasingly handling complex investigations and litigation with limited resources,” said Joanne Sprague, head of Everlaw for Good. “Expanding access to powerful, easy-to-use technology helps level the playing field so these teams can uncover critical evidence, take on more complex matters, and yield stronger results for the communities they serve.”

LawNext on Location: Visiting Everlaw’s Headquarters For A Conversation with AJ Shankar, Founder and CEO — from lawnext.com by Bob Ambrogi

The bulk of our conversation focuses on generative AI, and how Everlaw has approached it differently than much of the market. Rather than bolting on a chatbot, AJ says, Everlaw embedded AI deliberately throughout the platform — document summarization, coding suggestions, deposition analysis, fact extraction — always grounding responses in the actual documents at hand and citing sources so users can verify the work. The December launch of Deep Dive, which lets litigators pose a question and get a synthesized, cited answer drawn from an entire document corpus in about a minute, is the feature AJ calls a “new era” for discovery — one he genuinely believes represents a categorical shift.

2026 Survey of College and University Presidents — from insidehighered.com, Liaison, & Jenzabar
Download and explore exclusive insights from the 2026 Survey of College and University Presidents to see how these campus leaders are responding to financial volatility, political interference, rapid advances in AI, and where they believe the biggest risks and opportunities lie as they look toward 2030.

In this year’s survey, presidents share perspectives on:

How presidents assess the second Trump administration’s impact on higher education
Which emerging or evolving educational models they plan to add or expand in the coming years
How effective they believe higher education has been in shaping national conversations arout AI
The issues presidents expect will have the greatest impact on higher education by 2030

U.S. Department of Labor Defines 5 Key Areas of AI Literacy — from campustechnology.com by Rhea Kelly

Key Takeaways

Department of Labor releases AI Literacy Framework: The framework defines AI literacy as competencies for using and evaluating AI responsibly, with a primary focus on generative AI in the workplace.
Framework outlines five core AI literacy areas: These include understanding AI principles, exploring real-world uses, directing AI effectively, evaluating AI outputs, and using AI responsibly.
Guidance for workforce and education systems: The framework also provides training principles and recommendations for workers, employers, education providers, and government agencies to expand AI education and training.

The Campus AI Crisis — by Jeffrey Selingo; via Ryan Craig
Young graduates can’t find jobs. Colleges know they have to do something. But what?

Only now are colleges realizing that the implications of AI are much greater and are already outrunning their institutional ability to respond. As schools struggle to update their curricula and classroom policies, they also confront a deeper problem: the suddenly enormous gap between what they say a degree is for and what the labor market now demands. In that mismatch, students are left to absorb the risk. Alina McMahon and millions of other Gen-Zers like her are caught in a muddled in-between moment: colleges only just beginning to think about how to adapt and redefine their mission in the post-AI world, and a job market that’s changing much, much faster.

“Colleges and universities face an existential issue before them,” said Ryan Craig, author of Apprentice Nation and managing director of a firm that invests in new educational models. “They need to figure out how to integrate relevant, in-field, and hopefully paid work experience for every student, and hopefully multiple experiences before they graduate.”

Major Changes Reshape Law Schools Nationwide in 2026 [Fatima]

On 01/12/2026, in accreditation, assessment, career development, change, corporate / business world, curriculum, faculty/staff, health, higher education, law schools, leadership, policy, real-world assignments, skills, strategy, United States, universities, by Daniel Christian

Major Changes Reshape Law Schools Nationwide in 2026 — from jdjournal.com by Ma Fatima

Law schools across the United States are entering one of the most transformative periods in recent memory. In 2026, legal education is being reshaped by leadership turnover, shifting accreditation standards, changes to student loan policies, and the introduction of a redesigned bar exam. Together, these developments are forcing law schools to rethink how they educate students and prepare future lawyers for a rapidly evolving legal profession.

Also from jdjournal.com, see:

Healthcare Industry Legal Careers: High-Growth Roles and Paths — from jdjournal.com by Ma Fatima
The healthcare industry is rapidly emerging as one of the most promising and resilient sectors for legal professionals, driven by expanding regulations, technological innovation, and an increasingly complex healthcare delivery system. As hospitals, life sciences companies, insurers, and digital health platforms navigate constant regulatory change, demand for experienced legal talent continues to rise.

Disrupting the first reported AI-orchestrated cyber espionage campaign [Anthropic]

On 11/17/2025, in Artificial Intelligence/Agents/LLMs/and Related, Asia, dangers of the status quo, Europe, game-changing environment, global / globalization, IT in HE, platforms, policy, political science, society, the downsides of how people use tech, UK, United States, vendors, by Daniel Christian

Disrupting the first reported AI-orchestrated cyber espionage campaign — from Anthropic

Executive summary
We have developed sophisticated safety and security measures to prevent the misuse of our AI models. While these measures are generally effective, cybercriminals and other malicious actors continually attempt to find ways around them. This report details a recent threat campaign we identified and disrupted, along with the steps we’ve taken to detect and counter this type of abuse. This represents the work of Threat Intelligence: a dedicated team at Anthropic that investigates real world cases of misuse and works within our Safeguards organization to improve our defenses against such cases.

In mid-September 2025, we detected a highly sophisticated cyber espionage operation conducted by a Chinese state-sponsored group we’ve designated GTG-1002 that represents a fundamental shift in how advanced threat actors use AI. Our investigation revealed a well-resourced, professionally coordinated operation involving multiple simultaneous targeted intrusions. The operation targeted roughly 30 entities and our investigation validated a handful of successful intrusions.

This campaign demonstrated unprecedented integration and autonomy of AI throughout the attack lifecycle, with the threat actor manipulating Claude Code to support reconnaissance, vulnerability discovery, exploitation, lateral movement, credential harvesting, data analysis, and exfiltration operations largely autonomously. The human operator tasked instances of Claude Code to operate in groups as autonomous penetration testing orchestrators and agents, with the threat actor able to leverage AI to execute 80-90% of tactical operations independently at physically impossible request rates.

From DSC:
The above item was from The Rundown AI, who wrote the following:

The Rundown: Anthropic thwarted what it believes is the first AI-driven cyber espionage campaign, after attackers were able to manipulate Claude Code to infiltrate dozens of organizations, with the model executing 80-90% of the attack autonomously.

The details:

The September 2025 operation targeted roughly 30 tech firms, financial institutions, chemical manufacturers, and government agencies.
The threat was assessed with ‘high confidence’ to be a Chinese state-sponsored group, using AI’s agentic abilities to an “unprecedented degree.”
Attackers tricked Claude by splitting malicious tasks into smaller, innocent-looking requests, claiming to be security researchers pushing authorized tests.
The attacks mark a major step up from Anthropic’s “vibe hacking” findings in June, now requiring minimal human oversight beyond strategic approval.

Why it matters: Anthropic calls this the “first documented case of a large-scale cyberattack executed without substantial human intervention”, and AI’s agentic abilities are creating threats that move and scale faster than ever. While AI capabilities can also help prevent them, security for organizations worldwide likely needs a major overhaul.

Also see:

Disrupting the first reported AI-orchestrated cyber espionage campaign — from anthropic.com via The AI Valley

We recently argued that an inflection point had been reached in cybersecurity: a point at which AI models had become genuinely useful for cybersecurity operations, both for good and for ill. This was based on systematic evaluations showing cyber capabilities doubling in six months; we’d also been tracking real-world cyberattacks, observing how malicious actors were using AI capabilities. While we predicted these capabilities would continue to evolve, what has stood out to us is how quickly they have done so at scale.

Chinese Hackers Used AI to Run a Massive Cyberattack on Autopilot (And It Actually Worked) — from theneurondaily.com

Why this matters: The barrier to launching sophisticated cyberattacks just dropped dramatically. What used to require entire teams of experienced hackers can now be done by less-skilled groups with the right AI setup.

This is a fundamental shift. Over the next 6-12 months, expect security teams everywhere to start deploying AI for defense—automation, threat detection, vulnerability scanning at a more elevated level. The companies that don’t adapt will be sitting ducks to get overwhelmed by similar tricks.

If your company handles sensitive data, now’s the time to ask your IT team what AI-powered defenses you have in place. Because if the attackers are using AI agents, you’d better believe your defenders need them too…

Learning Ecosystems

Major Changes Reshape Law Schools Nationwide in 2026 [Fatima]

Categories

Tags