A new report by HEPI and Taylor & Francis explores the potential of AI to advance translational research and accelerate the journey from scientific discovery to real-world application.
Using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Advance Translational Research (HEPI Policy Note 67), authored by Rose Stephenson, Director of Policy and Strategy at HEPI, and Lan Murdock, Senior Corporate Communications Manager at Taylor & Francis, draws on discussions at a roundtable of higher education leaders, researchers, AI innovators and funders, as well as a range of research case studies, to evaluate the future role of AI in translational research.
The report finds that AI has the potential to strengthen the UK’s translational research system, but that realising these benefits will require careful implementation, appropriate governance and sustained investment.
Search behavior in higher education is changing fast. With Google’s Search Generative Experience (SGE), prospective students and parents are no longer just scanning lists of links; they’re receiving direct, AI-generated answers at the top of the page. These summaries pull from multiple sources to deliver concise, conversational responses to complex questions about programs, costs, outcomes, and campus life.
For schools, the implication is clear: your content must be structured, authoritative, and context-rich to be surfaced by AI. If it isn’t, your institution may be invisible, regardless of how strong your traditional SEO once was.
This article explores Google SGE in education, explains what Google SGE means for higher education marketing, and how schools can adapt. We’ll cover why AI search matters, how generative AI changes content discovery, and the practical steps institutions can take, from content optimization to local SEO and reputation management, to remain visible in this new search landscape.
Need help refining your school search optimization strategy?
Discover how our specialized services can help you connect with and enroll more students.
What Is Google’s AI Search (SGE) and Why Does It Matter for Schools?
Google’s Search Generative Experience, now commonly surfaced as AI Overviews, represents a major shift in how search results are delivered. Instead of presenting users with a list of links, Google increasingly provides synthesized, AI-generated answers that pull information from multiple sources and present it as a concise, conversational summary.
Google SGE in education functions like an advanced featured snippet. For example, when a parent searches “best engineering programs in Ontario,” Google’s AI may generate a short comparison of several institutions, highlighting locations, strengths, and differentiators without requiring the user to click through to individual websites. This fundamentally changes how prospective students and families discover schools.
For institutions, the stakes are high. AI Overviews often answer questions about programs, admissions, outcomes, and comparisons directly in the search results. If your school is not referenced in that response, you may miss visibility at an important early decision-making moment. Visibility in AI-generated answers is quickly becoming as important as first-page rankings once were in traditional SEO.
There is also an opportunity. Early third-party studies suggest that Google’s AI Overviews may cite content beyond the top organic rankings, particularly when pages clearly and directly answer a user’s question. Well-structured, authoritative content that clearly answers a specific question can be surfaced even if it does not rank first in classic search. This creates room for smaller or lesser-known institutions to compete based on content quality and relevance rather than brand dominance alone.
SGE also changes user behavior. Search becomes conversational, with follow-up questions that refine intent and narrow comparisons. Schools must be prepared to show up for detailed, context-driven queries, supported by accurate content and complete institutional data across Google platforms.
Google’s AI search prioritizes clarity, authority, and usefulness. Schools that adapt to this shift gain visibility at critical moments. Those who do not risk being bypassed entirely.
How Can My School Improve Its Visibility in AI-Powered Search?
Achieving visibility in AI-driven search results requires a blend of traditional SEO best practices and newer approaches often referred to as Generative Engine Optimization. This means maintaining a strong SEO foundation so Google understands and trusts your site, while also optimizing your content and digital presence for how AI retrieves, synthesizes, and presents information.
Below are the key strategies schools should focus on to improve their chances of being featured in AI-powered search results.
1. Maintain a Strong SEO Foundation
First and foremost, SEO is not dead. It is the foundation on which AI search visibility is built. Google’s AI Overviews continue to rely on reliable, well-structured, and authoritative content, often drawing from pages that already follow SEO best practices.
Google has made it clear that content aligned with its established guidelines, including experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness, performs well in AI-driven results. Schools should continue to invest in core SEO fundamentals, including the following.
Keyword Optimization and Metadata Use clear, relevant keywords in page titles, headings, and meta descriptions so both traditional search algorithms and AI systems can quickly understand your content. A program page titled “MBA Program in Data Analytics | XYZ University” clearly communicates relevance and improves discoverability.
Logical Site Structure Organize your site navigation and URLs logically so search engines can easily crawl and contextualize content. A clean hierarchy helps AI retrieve specific details such as tuition, admissions requirements, or program outcomes by following your site’s structure.
Mobile-Friendly, Fast-Loading Pages Most prospective students search on mobile devices. Google prioritizes mobile usability and fast load times regardless of AI. A strong user experience encourages engagement and signals content quality to Google’s systems.
Example: University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UA Little Rock): Launched a redesigned website in 2025 that prioritized technical SEO fundamentals. The web team conducted a full content audit to streamline site architecture, consolidating and rewriting content for clarity and removing outdated information to improve crawlability and usability. This resulted in a leaner, more crawlable site aligned with best practices.
Quality Content and User Engagement Continue publishing in-depth, high-quality content. This attracts backlinks, increases time on site, and positions your pages as authoritative sources that AI systems are more likely to reference.
Think of traditional SEO as the bedrock. If your site is not technically sound and rich in valuable content, AI-focused tactics will not compensate. A strong foundation amplifies everything that follows.
2. Create High-Quality, AI-Friendly Content (Answer the Questions)
With the basics in place, the next step is tailoring content for conversational, answer-focused search behavior. AI-powered search excels at interpreting natural-language questions, especially longer and more specific queries.
To improve visibility, your content should directly address the questions prospective students and parents are asking, using clear structure and plain language.
Incorporate Long-Tail, Question-Based Keywords Shift part of your keyword strategy toward detailed, conversational queries. Instead of focusing only on broad terms like “MBA Canada,” develop content around questions such as “best MBA programs in Canada for working professionals” or “how to get a scholarship for an MBA.” AI systems are more likely to surface content that closely matches how users phrase their questions.
Use Q&A and FAQ Formats Question-and-answer formats are particularly effective for AI extraction. Admissions, financial aid, and program pages benefit from clearly labeled questions followed by concise, factual answers. This structure improves usability for readers and makes it easier for AI to identify relevant information.
Example: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign: Incorporates “Answer Engine Optimization (AEO)” into its content guidelines for web writers. The University’s brand training recommends structuring content in a Q&A format: start with a question in a heading (e.g. *“How do I apply to Illinois?”), Immediately answer it in a brief, concise paragraph before expanding with additional detail. This approach, coupled with applying FAQ schema markup, is designed to make Illinois’s content the direct answer in featured snippets or AI summary boxes. By focusing on full questions and concise answers, Illinois ensures its high-value content is AI-friendly and voice-search ready.
Emphasize Authoritative, In-Depth Content AI systems favor content that demonstrates expertise and depth. Schools can leverage faculty insight, research, and real-world outcomes to establish authority. Long-form guides, career pathway articles, and program explainers grounded in institutional expertise are strong candidates for AI-generated answers.
Structured Headings and Clear Writing Organize content using descriptive headings and subheadings. Avoid burying key information in long paragraphs. Specific headings aligned with search intent help AI match your content to relevant queries. Lists and step-by-step explanations are especially useful, as AI often presents answers in list form.
Evergreen Content and Regular Updates Keep content current. Evergreen content still requires periodic updates to remain accurate and competitive. AI systems favor up-to-date information, particularly for admissions policies, program offerings, and career outcomes.
By focusing on high-quality, question-oriented content, schools make it easier for AI to identify, trust, and reuse their information.
3. Leverage Local SEO and Google Business Profiles
For institutions with physical campuses, local SEO is a critical component of AI visibility. Many education-related searches carry local intent, and Google’s AI frequently integrates local data into its answers.
Claim and Optimize Your Google Business Profile Ensure your Google Business Profile is claimed, complete, and accurate. Fill out all fields, including locations, contact information, categories, and descriptions. This data is often pulled directly into AI-generated results.
Example: University of Minnesota: Manages a centralized Google Business Profile (GBP) for its campuses to maximize local search visibility. The University’s marketing team keeps each campus’s GBP listing complete and up-to-date with addresses, hours, phone numbers, and descriptive text. They also utilize GBP features like posts and photos to highlight campus events and attributes. Following Google’s best practices, Minnesota fills out “as much location information as possible,” keeps listings current (e.g., holiday hours), and uses relevant keywords in descriptions and local posts to improve local search ranking. This ensures the University’s locations appear prominently on Google Search/Maps for relevant queries.
Keep Photos and Media Up to Date AI-generated listings frequently include logos and photos. Upload high-quality, current images of your campus, facilities, and branding. Visuals influence perception and can strengthen your presence in AI results.
Incorporate Local Keywords on Your Site Mention your city, region, and community naturally within site content. Blog posts, news updates, and program pages that reference local partnerships or opportunities help AI associate your institution with specific locations.
Maintain Consistent Local Citations Ensure your institution’s name, address, and phone number are consistent across directories, education portals, and social platforms. Consistency reinforces credibility for AI systems aggregating information.
Use Google Business Features Strategically Google Posts, Q&A sections, and program listings provide additional structured data that AI can reference. Schools that actively manage these features offer clearer signals to Google’s systems.
Strong local SEO increases the likelihood that your institution appears in AI-generated responses to geographically relevant searches.
4. Embrace Online Reviews and Social Proof
Why are online reviews important for AI search results? Online reviews provide fresh, user-generated content that signals credibility and relevance to AI systems. Positive, detailed reviews can help your institution appear in AI-generated answers by reinforcing trust, boosting visibility, and enriching the data AI uses to evaluate and summarize schools in search results.
Online reviews now influence both human decision-making and AI-generated search results. Google’s AI Overviews often incorporate ratings and review themes directly into responses.
Maintain Strong Ratings In competitive searches, AI systems tend to highlight institutions with strong review profiles, as ratings and review sentiment are commonly incorporated into AI-generated summaries. Strong ratings are increasingly a prerequisite for visibility, not just a reputation metric.
Monitor Review Content AI systems analyze recurring themes within reviews. Frequently mentioned strengths or concerns can appear in AI-generated summaries. Active monitoring helps ensure accuracy and context.
Encourage Positive Reviews Develop a structured approach to requesting reviews from satisfied students, alumni, and parents. Reviews that mention specific programs, facilities, or experiences provide richer signals for AI.
Example: Midwestern Career College: Encourages its community to engage on Google’s review platform for each campus location. On its official website, MCC provides step-by-step instructions for students to leave a Google review – from clicking the campus’s Google My Business link to hitting the “Write a review” button. This call-to-action shows MCC actively seeks public feedback. By driving satisfied students to post reviews, the college strengthens its online reputation and local search rankings. The steady flow of positive Google reviews serves as social proof to prospective students scanning the web for authentic feedback.
Diversify Review Sources While Google reviews are most influential, other education-focused platforms and social feedback also contribute to the broader information ecosystem AI systems draw from.
Showcase Testimonials on Your Site Highlight authentic testimonials and success stories on your website. When properly structured, these can reinforce credibility for both users and AI-driven search systems.
Online reviews have become direct inputs into how AI describes institutions. Active review management strengthens both reputation and search visibility.
AI-powered search rewards clarity, authority, and usefulness. Schools that invest in strong SEO foundations, question-driven content, local optimization, and reputation management are far more likely to appear when prospective students turn to AI for answers.
In an AI-first search environment, visibility belongs to institutions that make it easy for both people and machines to understand their value.
5. Optimize Visual and Multimedia Content
AI search results are no longer limited to text. They increasingly include images and videos to help users evaluate options more quickly. A search about campus life may trigger a photo carousel, while a branded university query could surface a campus tour video alongside the AI-generated answer. If your visual assets are weak, outdated, or poorly optimized, you risk losing attention even when your institution is referenced.
To compete effectively, schools must treat multimedia as a core part of search optimization, not a design afterthought.
Image Optimization Images should be handled with the same rigor as written content. Start by using descriptive file names that clearly indicate what the image represents. Replace default camera names with specific, readable names such as school-name-library.jpg or university-science-lab.jpg.
Alt text is equally important. It should accurately describe the image in plain language and, where appropriate, align with the page topic. For example, an image of a new facility might use alt text such as “State-of-the-art science lab at [School Name].” Avoid keyword stuffing or vague descriptions.
Page performance matters. Large, uncompressed images slow load times, which negatively affects SEO and user experience. Since AI systems often surface images closely tied to page content, it is also important to place your strongest visuals on pages where the surrounding text is directly relevant. If a user asks what your campus looks like, Google can only surface your images if they are indexable, contextualized, and optimized.
Example: Fort Lewis College: Ensures that images and videos on its site are optimized for both user experience and search visibility. Fort Lewis’s Web Style Guide instructs editors to compress and properly size images for fast loading, and to always include descriptive alt text for accessibility and SEO. For multimedia content, the college provides captions or transcripts for videos, knowing that search engines (and users) can’t index what isn’t in text form. By adding text transcripts to videos and alt tags to images (with relevant keywords where appropriate), Fort Lewis makes its visual content discoverable by AI and voice search tools while also improving page load times.
Infographics and Charts Custom graphics can strengthen authority, especially when they communicate outcomes, rankings, or program pathways. When using infographics or charts, include them on relevant pages with concise captions that explain what the visual shows. Captions help users and clarify context for search systems.
Do not place critical information exclusively inside images. If a chart highlights graduate employment rates or admissions statistics, repeat the key points in HTML text. This improves accessibility and ensures AI systems can accurately interpret and reference the information.
Video Content (YouTube and Beyond) Video is often the first impression prospective students have of an institution. Google regularly surfaces YouTube videos in search results, including AI-enhanced answers. A query like “tour of [School Name] campus” may show a playable video immediately, making video optimization essential.
Focus on video content that addresses high-intent questions, such as campus tours, residence life walkthroughs, student testimonials, program overviews, and admissions explainers. Titles and descriptions should be clear, descriptive, and aligned with how users search. For example, “Campus Tour | [School Name] | Student Life and Facilities” is more effective than a generic welcome video title.
On your website, embed key videos on relevant pages and include a transcript or written summary. Video alone provides limited context for AI. Supporting text gives search systems content they can analyze and reference. Engagement signals also matter. Videos with strong watch time and interaction are more likely to surface in search results.
Schema for Videos and Images Use schema markup where appropriate, particularly VideoObject schema for important videos. Structured data helps search engines understand what a video contains, its duration, and its purpose. While schema does not guarantee AI inclusion, it improves clarity and future-proofs your content as search becomes more structured.
Example: Michigan Technological University: Integrates video SEO into its content strategy to capitalize on the popularity of video content. Michigan Tech advises its departments to treat video content like web text content for optimization: use keyword-rich titles and descriptions on YouTube, and crucially, attach accurate transcripts or captions to each video. Providing a transcript allows Google and other AI-driven search engines to “understand” the video’s content.
Michigan Tech emphasizes the importance of captions and transcripts so search engines can understand video content. More broadly, platforms like Google and YouTube use metadata such as titles, descriptions, and timestamps to better interpret video relevance in search results.These practices ensure the university’s lectures, tutorials, and marketing videos are accessible to search engines and can surface in voice or AI search responses.
Speakable Content and Voice Search As AI search integrates more closely with voice assistants, content clarity becomes even more important. While Speakable schema is not widely used in education yet, schools should focus on writing concise, well-structured answers to common questions. Clear summaries on admissions, tuition, and programs prepare your content for both visual and voice-based search experiences.
Multimedia optimization improves both visibility and perception. Strong images and videos help schools appear in AI results and stand out once they do.
6. Use Structured Data and Clean Site Architecture
Structured data and clean site architecture significantly improve how accessible your content is to AI systems. Generative AI for colleges relies on context, and schema markup provides that context explicitly. A logical site structure ensures important information is easy to find and understand.
Education-Specific Schema Schools should implement schema types relevant to higher education. EducationalOrganization schema supports institutional information. Course schema describes programs and credentials. FAQPage schema is ideal for admissions and financial aid questions, while Event schema works well for open houses and webinars. When the schema aligns with visible page content, it increases Google’s confidence in surfacing that information.
Example: University of Minnesota: Embraces structured data to enhance how its content appears in AI-powered results. In October 2025, U of M’s marketing tech team rolled out new schema features across its Drupal web platform to better label content for search engines. Their official guide explains “that’s the power of structured data” – snippets of code that help search engines and AI understand page details like program offerings, alumni, FAQs, etc., leading to rich search results. Minnesota’s web environment includes a Schema.org metatag module, and they continually update it (e.g., adding support for alternate organization names and parent organizations in 2025) so that university webpages can output a comprehensive JSON-LD schema. This clean, machine-readable markup boosts the visibility of U of M content in rich results and AI summaries.
FAQ and Q&A Schema The FAQPage schema is especially valuable for AI-powered search. It clearly signals which text answers specific questions. If a prospective student asks about tuition or application deadlines, schema-marked answers increase the likelihood that AI systems pull accurate snippets directly from your site.
Clean URLs and Logical Hierarchy Your site structure should be intuitive and reflected in URLs. Paths like /academics/programs/computer-science help both users and crawlers understand content relationships. Important pages should not be buried or scattered across PDFs without internal links. AI systems are more likely to surface well-organized pages than fragmented information.
Internal Linking Use internal links to connect related content using descriptive anchor text. Admissions pages should link to financial aid details. Program pages should link to career outcomes or internship information. Internal linking helps AI systems follow context across your site and identify authoritative pages.
Technical Hygiene Keep sitemaps updated, fix broken links, and ensure key pages are indexed. Avoid blocking important content with noindex tags or robots.txt. Do not rely solely on PDFs or images to communicate essential information. Always provide HTML text summaries for critical details.
Data Accuracy and Consistency Structured data must match on-page content exactly. Inconsistent tuition figures, dates, or requirements can confuse AI systems and undermine trust. Centralizing frequently updated information reduces errors and improves reliability.
Clean structure and accurate schema make your site easier for AI to understand and more likely to be referenced correctly.
7. Stay Current and Adapt
The final requirement for AI-era visibility is continuous adaptation. AI-powered search is evolving quickly, and static strategies will fall behind.
Monitor Performance Track impressions, click-through rates, and query patterns. Declining clicks may indicate users are getting answers directly from AI results. Identify affected pages and strengthen their value or clarity.
Use AI Evaluation Tools Emerging tools can highlight gaps, such as missing schema or slow performance. While imperfect, they can help prioritize improvements.
Keep Content Updated Refresh pages when programs, policies, or deadlines change. Update older content with current data and examples. AI systems favor recent, accurate information, especially for admissions and cost-related queries.
Watch Industry Trends Follow credible SEO and higher education marketing sources to understand how AI search is evolving. Use early signals to adjust content strategy before visibility declines.
Example: University of Utah: Stays on the cutting edge by rapidly adapting to emerging search technologies and educating its staff. In late 2025, Utah’s Web Support & Usability team hosted a campus Web Editor Summit focused on the latest SEO and AI trends. They urged content editors to adjust strategies for AI-driven search, for example, by optimizing site content even if certain pages are blocked from traditional indexing (since AI models might analyze them regardless). Utah is even preparing for the next wave of AI by securing an enterprise ChatGPT license to integrate advanced AI into its services. By proactively training web editors on tools like custom GPTs and emphasizing new ranking factors, the University of Utah shows a commitment to continuous learning and quick adaptation in the AI era.
Balance Optimization With Human Experience AI visibility is only the first step. When users click through, your site must guide them clearly toward next actions. Strong user experience, clear calls to action, and authentic messaging remain essential.
Schools that combine technical discipline with ongoing refinement will remain visible as search continues to evolve. Continuous improvement is the most reliable long-term strategy in an AI-driven search environment.
Preparing Your School for AI-Driven Search
AI-powered search is fundamentally changing how prospective students discover, evaluate, and compare institutions. Visibility is no longer determined solely by blue-link rankings but by how clearly and credibly a school’s information can be understood and reused by AI systems. To remain competitive, schools must move beyond isolated SEO tactics and adopt a more holistic approach to search visibility.
This means maintaining strong technical SEO foundations, publishing content that directly answers real student questions, and ensuring visual, video, and structured data assets are optimized and accessible. Clean site architecture, accurate information, and consistent updates all play a role in whether an institution is surfaced or overlooked in AI-generated results. Just as important is a commitment to ongoing adaptation. AI search will continue to evolve, and schools that monitor performance, refine content, and prioritize the student experience will be best positioned to earn trust, attention, and engagement.
Need help refining your school search optimization strategy?
Discover how our specialized services can help you connect with and enroll more students.
FAQs
Question:What is Google’s AI Search (SGE) and why does it matter for schools?
Answer: Google’s Search Generative Experience, now commonly surfaced as AI Overviews, represents a major shift in how search results are delivered. Instead of presenting users with a list of links, Google increasingly provides synthesized, AI-generated answers that pull information from multiple sources and present it as a concise, conversational summary.
Question: How can my school improve its visibility in AI-powered search?
Answer: Achieving visibility in AI-driven search results requires a blend of traditional SEO best practices and newer approaches often referred to as Generative Engine Optimization. This means maintaining a strong SEO foundation so Google understands and trusts your site, while also optimizing your content and digital presence for how AI retrieves, synthesizes, and presents information.
Question: Why are online reviews important for AI search results?
Answer: Online reviews provide fresh, user-generated content that signals credibility and relevance to AI systems. Positive, detailed reviews can help your institution appear in AI-generated answers by reinforcing trust, boosting visibility, and enriching the data AI uses to evaluate and summarize schools in search results.
This blog was kindly authored by Dr Robert Abrahart, Lead Camapigner at ForThe100.
There was a time – as recently as the late 1970s and early 1980s – when seatbelt laws were among the most contested public safety measures Parliament had considered. The opposition was not marginal or ill-informed; it was a principled, vocal defence of personal autonomy. Critics argued that compulsory seatbelts would infantilise adults, erode individual responsibility, and mark an unacceptable expansion of state power into private decision-making. They warned that safety would become a matter of compliance rather than judgment. Some even claimed seatbelts would actively increase the risk of death by trapping passengers in burning or submerged vehicles.
These were not trivial objections. They were arguments about life, death, and unintended harm, made sincerely and taken seriously at the time. Yet, what ultimately changed matters was not public persuasion but legal expectation. Parliament did more than express a preference for safety; it made safety the default condition rather than a matter of individual discretion. The law did not eliminate judgment; it clarified where responsibility lay and what reasonable behaviour required. Today, compulsory seatbelts are a normal condition of everyday life, barely noticed as a restriction.
The significance of this history lies in the pattern it reveals: where serious harm persists and safety depends on optional guidance rather than enforceable duty, law is the mechanism that resets expectations and enables culture to change in practice rather than aspiration. Higher education now occupies the same space seatbelts once did: persistent harm, diffuse responsibility, and reliance on voluntary frameworks that have failed to deliver structural change. This matters in 2026 as Parliament once again prepares to debate whether higher education providers should owe a statutory duty of care toward their students.
Law as the driver of culture change
In student safety debates, we are repeatedly told that universities need ‘culture change’, not law. A statutory duty, opponents argue, would be heavy-handed or liable to produce unintended consequences. But this misunderstands how culture change actually happens in complex institutions. Seatbelts did not become routine through voluntary pledges or best-practice frameworks. They became routine because the law reset the baseline of what responsible behaviour looked like.
The same dynamic applies to health and safety law, safeguarding duties, and duties of candour. These laws do not micromanage behaviour; they set a ‘floor’ of responsibility below which organisations should not fall. In higher education, the proliferation of policies and reporting requirements has equipped institutions to act, but it has not resolved the fundamental question of who is responsible when foreseeable harm occurs. A statutory duty of care would not replace existing regulation; it would give it legal clarity and purpose. It would not require universities to prevent all harm, but to act reasonably and proportionately where serious risk is foreseeable.
The persistent evidence of systemic failure
Student suicide is the clearest and most consistently documented indicator of what happens when responsibility for foreseeable risk remains unclear. According to the Office for National Statistics, approximately 160 students die by suicide each year in England and Wales – a figure that has remained broadly stable despite sustained policy attention, sector-led initiatives, and widespread recognition of a growing student mental health crisis. This sits alongside rising rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation, intensified by academic pressure, social isolation, and post-pandemic stress, particularly among first-year and international students.
More detailed evidence paints a picture of persistent systemic failure. In a recent review – the largest of its kind to date – 73 higher education providers in England disclosed 107 suspected suicide deaths and 62 incidents of non-fatal self-harm during the 2023 / 2024 academic year.
Coroners’ reports and death reviews provide further insight into why these tragedies persist. Coroners have repeatedly highlighted:
Delays or inadequacies in referrals: Academic and support staff failed to act on red flags, leading to delays in internal referrals to wellbeing teams. Where external clinical help was sought, students expressing suicidal ideation or serious distress were often not seen in time or were discharged back to the university without adequate follow-up or safety planning.
Systemic shortcomings: Criticisms include poor communication when students disengage, fragmented responsibilities between academic and wellbeing services, and inconsistent data recording.
Failed interventions: In multiple cases, coroners found that more proactive care might have prevented the death.
These data show that despite frameworks and sector-led initiatives, the same issues recur year after year because discretionary approaches have not yielded structural change.
Deconstructing the ‘unintended consequences’ argument
Concerns about unintended consequences – that institutions would act more defensively or that relationships of trust would be undermined – are often raised in good faith. Critics argue that a statutory duty would encourage universities to prioritise legal protection over student welfare, leading staff to become reluctant to engage beyond basic signposting for fear of legal repercussions.
The difficulty with this argument is that these are not speculative risks of reform; they are features of the current, voluntary system. In the absence of a clear statutory duty, universities already operate through dense layers of policy designed first to demonstrate legal compliance and only secondarily to secure student welfare.
Moreover, the current environment already produces the very outcomes critics fear:
Defensive Reliance on Process: Decision-making is routinely mediated through risk assessments and documentation intended to manage liability rather than responsibility.
Fragmentation of Responsibility: Currently, responsibility is siloed: the NHS manages clinical risk while the university manages administrative policy. Because no overarching authority exists to oversee how these organisations interact, their actions can sometimes become misaligned. One may be attempting to treat the student while the other inadvertently exacerbates the crisis through rigid academic processes. This creates a dangerous vacuum: the harm is foreseeable, but because it spans both systems, no one is legally responsible for the student’s total safety.
Procedural Rigidity: For students, this can manifest as delay where urgency is required, or in the prioritisation of inflexible administrative processes where humane judgment would make the difference.
Retrospective Responses: Institutional responses are often focused on post-hoc explanation and reputational management rather than timely intervention.
Likewise, many specific examples cited – such as the inappropriate use of fitness-to-study processes as risk-management tools or intrusive searches of student accommodation – are already visible in practice. These are not behaviours introduced by legal duty; they are the result of uncertainty about responsibility, managed through internal policy rather than external accountability. This is not the side-effect of law; it is the product of its absence.
The high cost of inaction
Doing nothing is not a neutral choice. It is an active choice to preserve existing structures and behaviours known to produce harm. The underlying assumption has been that institutions are best protected by minimising formal duties. In practice, this has not removed risk; it has merely displaced responsibility.
Inaction does not avoid unintended consequences; it locks them in. If the absence of a statutory duty has not prevented fragmentation of responsibility or reliance on policy and procedure in place of action, continuing without one will not resolve these systemic deficiencies. With 160 deaths a year and no sustained improvement, the system is not self-correcting.
When critics warn that a statutory duty might make problems worse, they rarely explain how clearer legal responsibility would increase harm. What they are really proposing is that we accept known, ongoing harm because change carries uncertainty. But in public policy, uncertainty must be weighed against the certainty of continued harm. A statutory duty of care would not eliminate tragedy, but it would drive systemic reform by delivering the legal clarity required for both anticipatory action and effective real-time responses.
Design, clarity, and the role of Parliament
A statutory duty of care is not an all-encompassing solution. Its purpose is more modest: to remove ambiguity and set a common baseline of expectation. Properly designed, it would define who owes what to whom, in what circumstances, and with what degree of proportionality. It would make explicit the balance between care and autonomy that is currently left to informal judgment and uneven practice. Clarifying responsibility does not remove autonomy; it protects it by ensuring intervention is justified, proportionate, and accountable.
Many ‘unintended consequences’ are, in reality, design questions. Concerns about over-intervention are not reasons to avoid legislation; they are reasons to draft it carefully. Parliament is exactly the forum where competing interests are weighed and safeguards are built in.
Before seatbelt legislation, road deaths were unacceptably high and resistant to voluntary change. Parliament did not act because things were worsening, but because they were not improving. The lesson is that law often creates the conditions in which culture can change at all. With serious harms in higher education remaining stubbornly persistent, the real risk lies in continuing to tolerate ambiguity, diffuse responsibility, and weakened accountability – and mislabelling that as caution.
On Tuesday, 13 January, MPs will hold a debate on the potential merits of a statutory duty of care for universities.
This guide is designed for college professors and educators seeking effective ways to help students connect and participate. It covers 20+ practical icebreakers for college students and provides a free downloadable list with additional activities, ensuring you have the tools to foster a welcoming classroom environment. Even better, these icebreaker activities can easily be assigned in the Top Hat app. Icebreakers for college students encourage new students to have conversations, get to know you and each other and build a sense of community and trust. Icebreaker activities help students relax and connect with one another during orientation, creating a sense of community and trust in a classroom setting. Used early on, icebreakers can help students feel comfortable in your classroom or team meeting. They’re ideal for the first day of school, but can be used throughout the semester and serve as a precursor for teamwork and collaborative learning. Virtual icebreakers—facilitated via social media, discussion boards or in virtual team meetings—have also gained new meaning in helping group members warm up to one another.
A classroom icebreaker for college students can be as simple as asking learners to introduce themselves to the class or to the students sitting next to them, but games and activities offer a chance to interact with a greater number of classmates and build camaraderie. According to a guide1 from Nottingham Trent University, for classroom icebreaker games “there ought to be a fun aspect to the activities in order to provide participants with some shared history that they can discuss later and, where possible, a relevance to the taught course/university experience.”
It’s no doubt that icebreaker activities like scavenger hunts or Pictionary are overdone. Campus-based icebreakers, such as orientation activities or exploring campus landmarks, can also help students get familiar with their new environment. Keep in mind that some classroom icebreakers for college students could be awkward or uncomfortable, such as publicly sharing personal information. The key is to get students talking to each other, having conversations and making connections—without social risk. This could mean facilitating small group activities versus requiring students to share personal information in front of the whole class. As an educator, help your students get to know one another in a safe and effective way. Recognizing the importance of icebreakers in fostering inclusion and community can set a positive tone for the semester. Icebreakers encourage people to participate, help students find commonalities with their peers, and build rapport within the group.
Download The Ultimate List of Icebreakers for the College Classroom and begin assigning to your students using Top Hat (get the list here).
Introduction to classroom icebreakers
Classroom icebreakers are a powerful way for college professors to set a positive tone at the beginning of a course. These activities help college students introduce themselves, share fun facts, and discover what they have in common with fellow students. Whether you’re teaching a small group or a larger group, icebreakers can be tailored to fit your classroom’s unique needs and the goals of your course material. By encouraging students to interact and get to know one another, icebreakers help build a sense of community and belonging right from the start. When students feel comfortable and connected, they’re more likely to participate, collaborate, and engage with the material and each other throughout the semester. Incorporating icebreakers into your teaching toolkit is a simple yet effective way to foster a welcoming classroom environment where everyone feels included.
Benefits of icebreakers
Encouraging participation
Fun icebreakers offer a range of benefits for both students and teachers, especially for first year students who may be new to the college experience. Icebreaker activities help students feel more at ease in the classroom, making it easier for them to participate in class discussions and share their ideas. Icebreakers can create a relaxed atmosphere that encourages participation among students.
Supporting academic success
Icebreakers can also introduce students to key course concepts in a fun and engaging way, setting a positive tone for the rest of the semester. When students feel supported and included, they’re more likely to take academic risks, ask questions, and explore new ideas. Ultimately, using icebreakers helps create a classroom environment where everyone feels welcome, valued, and ready to learn.
With these benefits in mind, let’s explore how to plan and implement effective icebreakers in your classroom.
Planning icebreakers
Setting goals
When planning icebreakers for your class, it’s important to start with your goals in mind. Think about what you want your students to gain from the activity—whether it’s helping students get to know each other, encouraging participation, or introducing a new topic.
Considering group size
Consider the size of your class: some icebreakers work best in small groups, while others are ideal for larger groups. Choose activities that are interactive and fun, such as “Two Truths and a Lie” (a fun way to help students get to know each other), “Human Bingo” (students find classmates who match traits on a bingo card), or “The Human Knot” (a physical activity where participants untangle themselves without letting go of each other’s hands, fostering non-verbal teamwork). These classic icebreakers can be easily adapted to fit your group size and learning objectives.
Selecting activities
The key is to encourage students to share, connect, and engage with one another in a way that feels natural and enjoyable. By selecting the right icebreakers, you’ll set the stage for a lively and inclusive classroom experience.
Best practices for icebreaker design
Inclusivity and comfort
Designing effective icebreakers means keeping your students’ needs and comfort in mind. Start by choosing activities that are inclusive and respectful, ensuring that every student feels welcome to participate. Avoid icebreakers that might make some students uncomfortable or single anyone out.
Clear instructions
Make sure your instructions are clear and the activity is easy to follow, so students know exactly what to expect. As the teacher, be ready to guide the activity, answer questions, and offer support as needed.
Building community
The goal is to create a sense of community and belonging in your class, helping students feel connected to each other and to the course material. By following these best practices, you’ll design icebreakers that not only break the ice but also lay the foundation for a positive and collaborative classroom environment.
Now that you know how to plan and design effective icebreakers, let’s dive into a variety of activities you can use in your classroom.
7 group games for college students (with fun icebreaker questions)
This list features a variety of effective icebreakers for college students, including fun, low-pressure activities like Two Truths and a Lie, Human Bingo, interactive games like the Marshmallow Challenge, and simple question prompts. These activities are designed to help students relax, connect, and build community, whether you’re teaching in-person or online.
1. Concentric circles
This is a great team-building icebreaker for an in-person learning environment. Arrange students in two circles, one inside the other, with students facing each other in pairs. Ask a fun icebreaker question, such as “what’s your favorite thing about college and why?” Pairs discuss the answer, then rotate the circle to form new pairs for the next question—exposing students to the different perspectives of their peers. The trick is to provide open-ended questions rather than those with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to get students to talk and engage in meaningful conversation.
2. Find someone who…
Alternative: Human Bingo: students find classmates who match traits on a bingo card.
Students are given bingo cards with a grid of squares. Each square contains an item, such as ‘traveled to another continent’ or ‘has a younger sister.’
During the activity, students can pass their bingo cards to others to verify matches or to keep the game moving.
Students are given a time limit to find classmates who fit the description.
Whoever gets ‘Bingo’ first wins. You can even award a prize of your choice, such as a bonus point or two on an upcoming assignment.
Human Bingo is considered an effective, low-pressure icebreaker for college students and is a good classroom activity to help your students warm up to one another at the start of the school year—especially those who are meeting one another for the first time.
3. Name game
Enables participants to informally interact with their teammates.
This classic party game can also be applied in the classroom—you can even tweak it to reflect the curriculum. Write down names of famous people (or names related to course material) on sticky notes. Students place a sticky note on their forehead and interact with their classmates, asking fun icebreaker questions to understand which person they are embodying. For example, a student might ask, “Am I a historical figure?” and another might respond, “Yes, you are,” helping the student narrow down their guess. This team icebreaker helps students loosen up and informally interact with their classmates. It also helps them learn about a figure who may have previously been unknown to them.
4. Poker hand
This classroom icebreaker for college students is ideal for large groups (a maximum of 50). Shuffle a deck of cards and hand out a card to each student.
Give students a set amount of time to find four classmates and form a hand of poker.
The best hand ‘wins’ when their time is up—consider offering a couple of bonus points on an assignment.
To encourage connections among students with similar academic interests, you can adapt the activity by having students form groups based on their major, or by assigning card suits to different majors.
Keep in mind that not everyone knows how to play poker, so display the rules of the game on a whiteboard or a slide at the front of the classroom.
This activity may help students develop their analytical skills.
5. Three of a kind
Helps students find commonalities with each other.
Set a time limit and instruct students to find commonalities by seeking out three other students they share something in common with—though not anything obvious or visible, such as hair color.
The idea is to help them make connections that may not be immediately apparent.
In advance of class, prepare word pairs—such as salt and pepper, or ketchup and mustard—on separate pieces of paper.
Have students select a piece of paper from the pile, ensuring they don’t share their word with anyone else.
Run the activity as a quick round, giving students a limited time to walk around the room and ask yes or no questions to their peers to try and figure out what word they have (and helping them get to know more people in your class).
Once students have figured out what word they have, they then must find their pair (if they haven’t already) by continuing to ask fun icebreaker questions.
7. Act and react
Ask students to write down an event or scenario on a piece of paper. These may range from “I just got fired from my job” to “I just got stung by a bee.” For a more meaningful experience, you can choose scenarios that encourage students to connect on a personal level, helping them share relatable or significant moments.
Fold the pieces of paper up and put them in a bag or hat.
Have students randomly draw a slip of paper and react to the experience using their facial features, gestures or words.
The remaining students can guess what just happened.
This activity will help lighten the mood in your class and allow for student-student interaction.
A fun way to help students get to know each other.
Divide the class into small groups. Each group sits in a circle, and each participant tells their group three statements; two are true and one is a lie. The other students in the group must guess which is the lie. This interactive icebreaker could be used during the first day of class to make introductions and reduce first-day jitters, with each student sharing a fun fact about themselves as part of the activity.
9. This or that
Prompts students to choose between two options, revealing preferences through movement or gestures.
Present students with a choice between ‘this or that.’ Topics should be relatively light, such as whether they prefer dogs or cats (though you could also tie this back to course material). For example, ask students whether they would rather visit the mountains or the beach.
Students move to the side of the room that reflects their choice.
After a few minutes, encourage one or two members in each group to defend their position amongst a new group of students.
Ask students to repeat this process for several rounds to help familiarize themselves with a variety of standpoints.
Similar to would you rather, this or that is ideal for small or large groups and spurs conversations and makes connections.
10. Longest line
Instruct students to form one continuous line based on certain criteria, such as alphabetically by first name or from shortest to tallest. For large classes, you could ask students to gather in groups based on some commonality (such as by birthday month). Another engaging option is to have students line up according to the part of the world they are from or a country in the world they would most like to visit. The goal is for students to line up as fast as possible—a result of clear and open communication in medium-sized groups. This classroom icebreaker for college students is a great team-building activity and can help create a sense of community should it be used as a first day icebreaker or at the beginning of the year.
11. Three Ps
Divide students into small groups, and have them share three facts about themselves to help them connect on a personal level: something personal, something professional, and something peculiar, such as an interesting hobby or habit. This icebreaker idea can easily be used in virtual meetings. It should be noted, the personal fact shouldn’t be anything too personal—it could be something as simple as a country they’ve always wanted to travel to. Use this great icebreaker when students go back to school from the summer, helping them warm up to their peers.
Like the name suggests, this activity requires an inflatable plastic beach ball. Ahead of class, write different get-to-know you questions on each segment of a beach ball using a Sharpie. Arrange students in a circle. For larger classes, you may want to divide the class into smaller groups. The fun icebreaker questions could be “what was one of your highlights from the summer?” or “who is your celebrity idol and why?”
Toss the ball. Whoever catches it asks the question closest to their left thumb, answers it and then tosses the ball to another student.
In a virtual or hybrid setting, students could post their answers to the beach ball questions on a discussion board or class social media page to encourage interaction and connection.
13. Syllabus questionnaire
Before sharing your syllabus with students, place them into groups of five and have them fill in a Google Doc or worksheet with questions they have about your course.
Structure the first five minutes as a brainstorming session.
After each group has prepared their list of questions, distribute the syllabus and have students find answers to their questions using this document.
Re-convene as a group and give students an opportunity to ask any further questions that couldn’t be answered from the syllabus.
For remote teams, this activity can be easily adapted by using virtual breakout rooms and collaborative online documents to ensure all participants are engaged, regardless of location. You may also wish to facilitate this activity using individual lesson plans throughout the semester.
14. String a story
Arrive to class with a big roll of yarn or string and cut various pieces ranging from five to 20 inches in length. Bunch the pieces of string together and place them to the side.
Have each student draw a piece of string from the pile and slowly wind it around their index finger.
As they are winding the string around their finger, students must introduce themselves and give a first-person account of their life—in whatever capacity they wish—until the string is completely wound up.
For example, a student might share a story about moving to a new city for college, describing how they felt nervous at first but made friends by joining a campus club.
6 course- or assignment-specific icebreakers for college students
15. Blind contour
This activity is a fun way to get your visual arts students talking in a small group of people.
Split students into groups of five and have each student choose an object to sketch—without looking at their paper.
Give students five minutes to complete their sketch, then have them share it with their team members and ask the remaining students to guess what they drew.
Repeat the process with another item or object, until time runs out.
This game helps hone students’ observational skills, while making sure students are mentally present.
16. It was the best of classes, it was the worst of classes
This classroom icebreaker not only helps students relate to each other, it can help inform your teaching practices throughout the term.
On one side, write “the best class I ever had” and on the other side, write “the worst class I ever had.”
Without referring to specific professors or courses, ask students to share what they liked and disliked about their previous courses.
For example, a student might say their best class experience involved interactive group projects and clear feedback, while their worst class experience was a lecture-heavy course with little student engagement.
Make a list of these items to potentially implement—or avoid—in your own course this semester.
Additionally, consider using an anonymous discussion board or a group worksheet in your virtual classroom to encourage participation.
17. The living Likert scale
This icebreaker question for college students lets learners see where they—and their peers—stand on a variety of topics related to your discipline.
Before class, write numbers ‘1′ through ‘7′ on pieces of paper and place them across the room. The sheet with ‘1′ on it could refer to ‘strongly disagree’ while ‘7′ might refer to ‘strongly agree.’
Acting as a facilitator, pose a series of statements related to your discipline—such as “I think television can make children act aggressive” in a social psychology class—and have students move to the side of the wall according to their stance.
Students who are comfortable sharing their opinions pertaining to the topic may do so.
18. Why am I here?
Have students draw a picture that represents why they enrolled in your course.
Encourage them to include their major in the drawing or explanation, and to think beyond the fact that they may need your course credit to graduate, or that their high school guidance counselor recommended your course.
They could think about wanting to learn more about your field, how their major connects to the course, or simply that their friends were enrolled in your class, too.
After five minutes, have students share their picture with the larger group if they’re comfortable—helping students feel like part of one interconnected community.
Want to assign these icebreakers and more using your Top Hat account? Get started by downloading our classroom icebreaker resource now!
19. Class in one word
Have students share their perceptions of your discipline in one word, such as ‘complicated,’ ‘analytical,’ or ‘enjoyable.’
Students can go around in a circle—or the order they appear in your Zoom tile view—and describe their past experiences in your field using a single word.
This activity offers a humanizing view of who else is in the same boat.
20. Philosophical chairs
A statement that has two possible responses—agree or disagree—is read out loud.
Depending on whether they agree or disagree with this statement, students move to one side of the room or the other.
After everyone has chosen a side, ask one or two students on each side to take turns defending their positions.
This allows students to visualize where their peers’ opinions come from, relative to their own.
Classroom icebreakers aren’t just a ‘feel good’ exercise. The best icebreakers can help students create connections and build a sense of camaraderie in your classroom. It can also help educators get to know their students and build better relationships. Whether you’re in a physical classroom or in a remote team setting, the above icebreakers will surely create a light-hearted environment for your students to thrive in.
As Jennifer Gonzalez explains on her website, Cult of Pedagogy, “building solid relationships with your students is arguably the most important thing you can do to be an effective teacher. It helps you build trust so students take academic risks, allows you to better differentiate for individual needs, and prevents the kinds of power struggles often found in poorly managed classrooms.”2
5 good icebreaker questions to engage college students in your classroom
21. Dream dinner party
Ask students: If you could invite any three people, living or dead, to a dinner party, who would they be and why? This question allows students to share their interests, values, and the historical or influential figures they admire. It can spark interesting conversations and provide insights into each student’s personality.
22. Bucket list sharing
Ask students to share one item from their bucket list. This can range from travel destinations to personal goals. It helps students discover shared interests and aspirations, fostering connections based on common goals.
23. Memory lane
Ask each student to share a significant or memorable experience from their past, such as a favorite childhood memory, a significant achievement, or an interesting travel story. This allows students to open up about their lives in a positive way.
24. Favorites icebreaker
Ask students to share their favorites, such as their favorite book, movie, food, or vacation spot. This simple icebreaker can reveal common interests among students and provides an easy topic for conversation.
25. Superpower scenario
Ask students, if they could have any superpower, what would it be and why? This question adds a creative and imaginative element to the discussion, and students can explain the reasoning behind their choice, providing insights into their personalities.
Download The Ultimate List of Icebreakers for College Students, packed with 20+ easy-to-implement activities that you can assign directly in Top Hat. Get the full list of fun icebreakers.
Related stories
References
Creating a welcoming digital community: Teaching online with personality, compassion and with real interaction. (2021). Retrieved from https://www.ntu.ac.uk/media/documents/adq/flexible-learning-documentation/creating-a-welcoming-digital-community.pdf
Gonzalez, J. (2017, July 23). A 4-Part System for Getting to Know Your Students. Retrieved from https://www.cultofpedagogy.com/relationship-building/
Frequently asked questions
1. What are the most effective icebreakers for college students on the first day of class?
Effective first-day icebreakers for college students are activities that help students feel comfortable, reduce anxiety, and encourage early participation. Popular options include Two Truths and a Lie, Human Bingo, and This or That, all of which allow learners to connect quickly without feeling put on the spot. These activities work well for both small and large classes and set a positive tone for discussion and collaboration throughout the semester.
2. How do icebreakers help build community in the college classroom?
Icebreakers for college students support community-building by breaking down social barriers, encouraging conversation, and helping classmates discover shared interests or experiences. When students feel more connected to one another, they are more likely to participate, collaborate on group work, and engage with course material. This sense of belonging is especially important for first-year students who may be adjusting to a new environment.
3. What types of icebreakers work best for large college classes or lecture halls?
For large groups, the best icebreakers for college students are high-movement or fast-interaction activities. Examples include Longest Line, Poker Hand, and Concentric Circles, which encourage students to meet many peers in a short period of time. These scalable activities help foster connection in spaces where traditional discussion-based icebreakers may be less practical.
Join HEPI and Advance HE for a webinar on Tuesday, 13 January 2026, from 11am to 12pm, exploring what higher education can learn from leadership approaches in other sectors. Key topics will include innovative approaches to recruitment and diversity, and how to ensure future sector stability through effective leadership. Sign up hereto hear this and more from our speakers.
This blog was kindly authored by Sholto Lindsay-Smith, Founder Director at Industry.
Universities have always had brands, long before they had brand guidelines. Their names carry weight, their reputations shape choice, and their architecture and tone say as much as any visual identity ever could. But as competition intensifies and finances tighten, branding is being used differently. It is no longer just a way of expressing who you are; it is increasingly seen as a tool to fix who you have become.
When brand becomes a quick fix
That shift has made brand strategy more visible, but not always more meaningful. Some institutions reach for branding too early, hoping design or language can solve deeper issues of identity. Others turn to it too late, treating it as an afterthought once major structural changes are already in motion. Either way, brand becomes detached from truth.
The University of Bolton’s plan to rename itself the University of Greater Manchester captured this tension perfectly. The logic was clear: broaden recognition, attract international students, and align with a region better known abroad. Yet the reaction from local MPs, alumni and commentators revealed discomfort at the idea that relevance could be borrowed. In chasing prestige, the university risked diluting the story that made it distinctive while blurring the line with its established neighbour.
If Bolton represents the outward pursuit of stature, the University of Warwick’s 2025 rebrand shows the opposite instinct: refinement. The new identity is modern and assured, visually linked to the university’s Brutalist architecture and centred on the word “Beyond.” It projects ambition and clarity, yet feels detached from the lived experience of a dynamic, human and intellectually alive campus. Capturing a university within a single narrative will always be difficult.
Together, these examples show a pattern. Universities are reshaping how they appear before clarifying what they stand for. Branding becomes a way to project control and confidence in an uncertain market. But when meaning is unresolved, those choices risk feeling cosmetic: tidy, professional and slightly hollow.
Reclaiming substance
The strongest university brands start from substance, not style. Their distinctiveness lies in how they interpret their purpose: curiosity made public at Oxford, invention woven into MIT, civic service at Manchester. These are not slogans; they are living narratives.
The universities founded in the 1960s, Warwick, Sussex, York and others, were built on a different kind of ambition: a post-Robbins optimism that saw higher education as a national engine of progress. Their founding principles championed interdisciplinarity, access and relevance to society. Many still reference innovation in their brand stories today, but the opportunity lies in making that spirit tangible again by translating institutional ambition into lived experience.
Branding through change
That same search for identity now plays out at an organisational level. Across the UK and Europe, alliances and mergers are accelerating as universities seek scale, stability and shared purpose. Yet branding often enters too late, once the legal and operational frameworks are fixed, rather than guiding the process from the start.
A Forvis Mazars paper on college mergers quoted Benjamin Franklin’s line that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”: a reminder that the time to define purpose is before the process begins. When brand is part of that conversation early, clarifying mission and aligning cultures, it can hold the whole thing together. When it is left to follow, it merely papers over the cracks.
Different models show what is at stake. The partnership between Greenwich and Kent, which share a parent brand but retain distinct operating identities, shows how collaboration can create scale without erasing individuality. By contrast, City and St George’s have chosen full integration under a single name and structure. Each route carries trade-offs: one balances collaboration with complexity; the other clarity with compromise.
Coherence before appearance
Ultimately, effective university branding is not about logos or taglines. It is about coherence: aligning purpose, place and perception so that every expression, visual or verbal, reflects who the institution is and what it stands for. Expression gives form to meaning, turning strategy into something people can see, feel and trust.
For governing bodies and executive teams, brand coherence should be treated as a leadership issue, not a design one. When meaning comes first, design becomes not decoration but evidence.
The universities that thrive will be those that resolve meaning before appearance, modernising without flattening, expressing ambition without abstraction, and using brand to clarify meaning rather than replace it. That might mean articulating what makes their teaching distinctive, defining research specialisms, or strengthening their role in civic and social innovation.
Because the question facing higher education is not how to look relevant, it is how to be relevant.
This blog was kindly authored by Heidi Fraser-Krauss, Chief Executive of Jisc.
UK higher education is in a period of profound change. Artificial intelligence, data-driven research, and new models of learning are redefining what it means to deliver value to students and society. At the same time, institutions must navigate complex risks, from cyber threats to infrastructure demands, while responding to significant financial challenges and ensuring they remain agile, competitive, and a key delivery partner in supporting the government’s growth ambition. The question is not whether technology will transform education, but how we harness it to strengthen the sector for the long term.
Jisc’s 2030 vision was developed with these realities in mind. Designed not as a digital revolution but rather an evolution, it ensures that Jisc is focused on providing the tertiary education, research, and innovation sectors across the UK with the secure infrastructure, digitally empowered leadership, economic sustainability, and agility needed to meet the next decade head-on. Here’s how its four pillars align with the sector’s most pressing needs.
1. Sector leadership and strategic influence
For universities and colleges to thrive in a rapidly evolving digital landscape, the sector needs a strong, informed voice influencing national policy. Decisions on AI governance, cybersecurity standards, and digital research infrastructure will shape the conditions for innovation and competitiveness. By ensuring these policies are informed by evidence-based research and insights into how digital, data, and technology are experienced and managed across education and research, the sector can secure investment, reduce risk, and create an environment where technology drives better outcomes for learners, researchers, and the broader economy.
That voice must also ensure smart use of data – where Jisc’s role as the designated data body, through its merger with the Higher Education Statistics Agency, helps reduce burden and improve insight. Strategic partnerships, such as the recent agreement with the Association of Colleges and collaborations with Colleges Wales, Ufi VocTech Trust, and Universities UK strengthen advocacy and ensure digital priorities reflect the needs of learners and educators across all nations. Over the next five years, Jisc’s deeper engagement with government, funders, and senior leaders will be critical to embedding digital thinking into policy and strategy across the UK.
2. Focus on sector-wide challenges
Digital infrastructure underpins everything from research breakthroughs to everyday learning. As demand for bandwidth and data grows, driven by AI, high-performance computing, and new learning models, the sector needs networks and security systems that can scale.
At the same time, financial pressures compound these challenges. Rising costs, resource constraints, and the need to keep pace with digital technology affects all institutions. Collective negotiations with major vendors can deliver significant savings, while shared services for cloud, cybersecurity, and data management reduce duplication and free up resources for teaching and research.
These efficiencies work only if the underlying infrastructure is strong. The Janet network remains the backbone for UK education and research. Projects such as the Isambard AI supercomputer at the University of Bristol highlight the scale of future requirements: vast data flows and advanced computing power that demands resilient, high-capacity connectivity. Sustaining and strengthening Janet, alongside robust cybersecurity measures, ensures institutions can innovate confidently, protect intellectual property, and remain globally competitive. This is about creating the conditions for progress, not just for today, but for the next decade.
3. Financial sustainability and commercial focus
To continue delivering value and protect essential services, Jisc must operate sustainably. For 12 years, Jisc has operated on flat cash funding, even as demand for digital infrastructure and services has grown exponentially. To continue meeting members’ evolving needs, Jisc is becoming more commercially focused, developing sustainable models and exploring new ways to support members. This approach ensures that collaboration continues to be at the heart of all that we do, and that every institution, regardless of size, can access the tools and infrastructure needed to succeed.
4. Operational excellence and agility
Embedding digital into strategy also means ensuring the organisations that support education are fit for the future. Jisc is investing in its own products, services, and back-office systems to deliver a more streamlined, joined-up experience for members. By removing silos and modernising processes, we aim to save money and provide greater value, while responding quickly to emerging needs. These changes are designed to make it easier for institutions to access the infrastructure, data, and expertise they need, without complexity or duplication, helping the sector focus on what matters most: teaching, research, and innovation.
Looking ahead to 2030
At Jisc, we are fully aware of the scale of the challenges facing the sector, and we take our supportive responsibilities seriously. The next five years will define how UK tertiary education responds to the accelerating pace of digital change. Our commitment is not only to help institutions meet those challenges, but to ensure they can seize the opportunities that digital and data present, helping students, researchers, and all of us across the UK to prosper in the future.
We will work with our members to create the right conditions for innovation: secure infrastructure, smarter use of data, and a culture that sees digital as integral to strategy, not an add-on. By working collectively and planning for scale, we can turn complexity into opportunity and ensure learners and researchers benefit from world-class technology.
The challenge is clear, and so is our ambition: to make digital transformation the foundation for the sector’s future.
This blog was kindly authored by Juliette Claro, Lecturer in Education at St Mary’s University Twickenham and Co-chair of the UCET Special Interest Group in Supporting International Trainee Teachers in Education.
The Immigration White Paper, published in Summer 2025, introduced sweeping reforms that will reshape England’s teacher workforce. One of the most consequential changes is the reduction of the Graduate Visa route from 24 to 18 months, which directly undermines the ability of international trainees to complete their Early Career Teacher (ECT) induction. Ahead of the debate at the House of Lords on the sustainability of Languages teachers and the impact of the immigration policies on the supply of qualified languages educators in schools and universities, this article examines the implications of this policy shift, supported by recent labour market data and the House of Lords paper by Claro and Nkune (2025), and offers recommendations for mitigating its unintended consequences.
The White Paper and the impact on shortage subjects
The National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) Annual Report (2025) confirms that Physics and Modern Foreign Languages (MFL) remain among the most under-recruited secondary subjects. Physics met just 17% of its Initial Teacher Training (ITT) target in 2024/25, while MFL reached 42%. These figures reflect a decade-long struggle to attract and retain qualified teachers International trainees have historically played a vital role in plugging these gaps, particularly in MFL, where EU-trained teachers once formed a significant proportion of the workforce.
Following the significant rise in international applicants for teacher training in shortage subjects such as Physics and MFL, The University Council for the Education of Teacher (UCET) launched in June 2025 a platform for Initial Teacher Education (ITE) providers to discuss the support of international trainee teachers through a Special Interest Group (SIG) composed of 83 members representing ITE providers across England. Members of the SIG shared their concerns towards the immigration reforms and the impact the White Paper may have on the recruitment and retention of teachers in shortage subjects such as Physics or MFL where a strong majority of applicants come from overseas.
Graduate visa reform: a critical barrier
The most contentious element of the 2025 Immigration White Paper is the reduction of the Graduate Visa route from 24 to 18 months, which started on 1 January 2026. The new 18-month limit creates a structural misalignment where international trainees will be forced to leave the UK before completing their two-year Early Career Framework (ECF) induction, unless their school sponsors them early through a Skilled Worker Visa. At this stage, many schools are unwilling or unable to undertake this process due to cost, administrative burden, and the complexity of the process.
UCET SIG members conducted a small-scale research in their settings to understand the barriers with school leaders to sponsor international Early Career Teachers (ECT). Across the sector, the reasons are complex and multilayered, reflecting the lack of financial and administrative support schools have to navigate sponsorship. This is especially true for smaller schools that are not part of a Multiple Academy Trust (MAT).
The changes in the White Paper not only disrupt career progression but also risk wasting public investment. International trainees in shortage subjects are eligible to receive bursaries of up to £29,000 in Physics and £26, 000 in MFL (2025-2026). If they are forced to leave before completing induction, the return on this investment is nullified. Coherence in policies between the Department for Education recruitment targets and the Home Office immigration policies is needed in a fragile education system.
The fragile pipeline of domestic workforce
Providers from the SIG who liaised with their local Members of Parliament and other officials were reminded that the White Paper encourages employers not to rely on immigration to solve shortages of skills. Moreover, the revised shortage occupation list narrows eligibility, excluding MFL and Physics teaching specialisms and requiring schools to demonstrate domestic recruitment efforts before sponsoring.
This adds friction to recruitment as the pipeline of domestic workforce for secondary school teachers in MFL, and Physics is relatively non-existent. The Institute of Physics highlighted in their 2025 report that 700,000 GCSE students do not have a Physics specialist in front of them in class. In MFL, the successive governments and decades of failed government policies to increase Languages students at GCSE and A Level are now showing the signs of a monolingual nation, reluctant to take on languages studies at Higher Education. This has contributed to a shortage of linguists willing to join the teaching profession.
Why do international teachers matter in modern Britain?
While the current political climate refutes the importance of immigration to sustain growth and skills in the economy, the White Paper undermines not only the Department for Education recruitment targets in a sector struggling to recruit and retain teachers in shortage subjects, but it also undermines the Fundamental British Values on which our curriculum and Teachers’ Standards are based on. Through a rhetoric that a domestic workforce is better than a foreign workforce, we both deny our young people the opportunity to be taught by subject specialists, and we refute the possibilities for our schools to promote inclusion in the teaching workforce.
International teachers bring a breadth of experience and expertise. This is being denied to students based on the assumptions that making visas more difficult to obtain and reducing the opportunities for sponsorship will make the economy stronger.
International trainee teachers joining the teacher training courses from Europe and the Global South often come to England with decades of experience teaching in their country. UCET SIG members’ small-scale research suggests that the majority of them want to stay and work in English schools after they qualify. The latest 2025 Government report on international teacher recruitment also highlights the fact that the majority of internationals aspire for careers progression in highly a performing education system in England. These studies suggest that the rhetoric behind the White Paper is not necessarily applicable in Education and needs reviewing.
International teachers show strength and resilience adapting to new curricula and new educational systems. They are role models and aspirations for learners not only sharing their expertise in the classroom but also their resilience and determination to thrive.
Recommendations
The following recommendations would help to address the current issues:
Restore the Graduate Visa to 24 months for teachers to align with the ECT induction period.
Introduce automatic Skilled Worker sponsorship for international trainees in shortage subjects who complete Year 1 of induction successfully.
Provide centralised visa support for schools, including legal guidance and administrative assistance.
Ring-fence bursary funding to ensure it supports retention, not short-term recruitment.
Monitor and publish retention data for international teachers to inform future policy.
To support the sector, Education andSkills England should collaborate with the Industrial Strategy Advisory Council and the Migration Advisory Committee to bring coherence to policies linked with sponsorship and visa waivers for shortage subjects for example in Languages and Physics.
Conclusion
The 2025 White Paper offers ambitious reforms to address England’s teacher shortages, but its immigration provisions risk undermining progress. The reduction of the Graduate Visa route creates a structural barrier to retention, particularly in MFL and Physics, where international trainees are most needed and the domestic workforce is not supplying the pipeline of specialist teachers. Without urgent policy realignment, England risks losing valuable talent and wasting public investment at a time when stability and inclusion should be the priority.
This blog was kindly authored by Ahmed Al-Athwari, PGCert Student and Academic Support Tutor employed at the London School of Science and Technology (LSST).
My name is Ahmed Al-Athwari. I was born in Yemen and raised amid hardship, eventually graduating from Sana’a University with a degree in Oceanography and Environmental Science.
My life changed dramatically in December 1999 when I was forced to flee Yemen. I found myself in a refugee camp in the Netherlands, starting from scratch in a new country, with a new culture and language. Rebuilding my life was not easy, but I succeeded, securing a job with the city council in Heerlen.
In 2012, family reasons brought me to the UK, and once more, I had to adapt to a different culture and environment, starting over.
While living in the Netherlands in 2006, I tried to enrol in an MSc programme. My application to the University was rejected due to limited experience in environmental issues and language requirements. I was advised to start with a BSc, but this application also failed because, at the time, the system didn’t allow students over 30 to access government loans. My dream of higher education, to fulfil the promise I made to myself and make my family in Yemen, and later my children, proud, never left me.
After moving to the UK, I continued my quest. In 2013, I visited Birmingham City University and contacted several higher education providers to explore MSc opportunities in Environmental Sustainability Engineering. In 2016, I finally received an offer. However, at the first meeting, my application was rejected again, citing the long gap since I completed my BSc in Yemen. That was the moment I almost gave up, truly believing the obstacles were insurmountable. It was a moment of certainty that the train had truly passed, and any hope that I would get a second chance to correct the course of my life, which circumstances beyond my control had diverted, vanished.
I still remember September 2019 vividly; I felt as if I were standing on a platform at dusk as the last train approached. My English was uncertain. I was an older student, grey-haired and full of doubt, wondering if it was too late to begin again.
Then, the London School of Science and Technology (LSST) opened the door. What changed everything was the opportunity to study through a franchised programme: Buckinghamshire New University (BNU) offered its degree through a partnership, with BNU as the lead provider and LSST as the local delivery partner. Had recent proposals to restrict franchising been in place, that pathway might not have existed. This highlights why policy matters. Franchised provision is often portrayed as a risk; however, my experience suggests the opposite. When a university designs a rigorous curriculum and assures academic quality, and a dedicated local partner delivers responsive support, the model can widen participation and deliver strong outcomes.
From the very first week, I felt seen. Study-skills sessions were strategic, showing me that progress is a process, not a miracle. I learned to draft summaries, write in focused bursts, and seek feedback early. By my second year, I could argue a point, speak without freezing, and write with purpose.
Returning to education later in life is not the same as going straight from school to university. It means entering a classroom after years away, carrying not just books but a whole life, work, bills, family, and responsibilities that don’t pause for a 9am seminar. I studied on buses, revised in corridors, and wrote essays between school drop-offs. Some weeks were woven from early mornings and late nights, as sleep was traded for progress.
Back in Yemen, the conflict that began in 1994 has only worsened. Family emergencies don’t wait for exam schedules. Calls come at difficult hours. News from home can drain your focus in an instant. In that context, studying is not just an academic pursuit; it is an act of hope.
I chose LSST because it offered access with ambition. The message was clear: if you are willing to work, we are eager to help. I was not looking for easy; I was looking for possible.
I was not seeking the prestige or amenities of a traditional campus. I needed a campus culture that understood mature students, commuters, and migrants, one that offered affordability, flexibility, and personalised support. Had regulation squeezed out providers like LSST, many students, especially those returning to education, would face far fewer choices.
The support at LSST was practical and visible, comprising one-to-one academic advice, workshops on academic skills, access to librarians and digital resources, quiet study spaces, and well-being support when life outside the classroom became overwhelming. Encouragement was not sentimental; it was momentum. Gradually, the platform’s feeling faded. I was no longer chasing the train; I was on it.
Through this route, I completed a BA (Hons) in Business Management with BNU via LSST, then progressed to an MSc in International Business Management at the University of West London. I am now completing a PGCert while preparing for my PhD. The habits I developed outlining, redrafting, critical reading, referencing did more than help me pass assignments; they sharpened my voice. The clarity that earned praise reflects a more profound truth: well-governed franchise partnerships can combine access with quality. The HEPI report “What Is Wrong with Franchise Provision?” explores perceived risks and argues for robust oversight, reporting, and governance to ensure these benefits are realised.
In 2023 I won first prize for an essay on the Metaverse, which was praised by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change and CNN for its clarity and narrative flow. The essay competition was organised by LSST.
I often wonder what my journey would have looked like without LSST. Honestly, I might still be on that platform, promising myself “next term,” studying alone after long days, writing without a reader, working without a mentor. I would have continued caring and staying busy, but I missed the compound effect of structure, feedback, community, and belief. Franchised provision is not a loophole; it is a lifeline.
Later, I became a Student Ambassador and then a Students’ Union Coordinator, roles that helped new cohorts feel they belonged and allowed me to work with staff to improve the student experience. As an Academic Support, I help students turn feedback into meaningful change.
This pathway, from hesitant mature entrant to aspiring lecturer, was made possible by a policy environment that allowed universities to franchise degrees through trusted partners. Recent regulatory proposals risk painting those partnerships as inherently problematic. However, my experience suggests something different: the right approach is not to strangle the model, but to strengthen it, ensuring quality while maintaining open access.
If you are coming from a non-traditional route, returning after years away, balancing work or caring responsibilities, or studying across borders, know this: you do not need a perfect start. You need the right place, steady habits, and people who will back you.
Higher education policy should also consider this. If regulation makes it harder for providers like LSST to operate, the students who lose out will be those who most need a second chance. The focus should be on transparent quality assurance, risk-based oversight, and supportive partnerships between lead and delivery partners, not on discouraging the model altogether.
Studying at LSST not only gave me degrees; it gave me resilience, confidence, and the belief that nothing is easy, but everything is possible. With the encouragement of my former professors, now my colleagues, I am currently preparing to submit a doctoral proposal.
I began all this on a platform at dusk, afraid the last train would leave without me. It did not. I got on, learned the rhythm, and kept moving. Policy should keep that train running for others.
Higher education is entering a new era defined by proactive, intelligent digital helpers. Tech leaders such as Marc Benioff and Sam Altman have described 2025 as a pivotal year for AI agents, as colleges shift from basic chatbots to more advanced, autonomous AI systems. AI agents are not just tools; they are digital partners designed to support the entire student lifecycle.
AI agents are transforming how colleges recruit, support, and engage learners. Unlike static chatbots, these systems analyze context, adapt over time, and take initiative. Their capabilities include automating application nudges, answering complex questions, and supporting academic success. This marks a major technological leap for institutions aiming to do more with fewer resources.
In this article, we’ll define what AI agents are, explain how they differ from traditional digital assistants, and explore the growing role of agentic AI in higher education. We’ll also highlight practical benefits and examine why 2025 is a turning point for adoption.
Are you prepared for the next evolution of enrollment and student support?
What Is an AI Agent in Higher Education?
In higher education, an AI agent is a software-based digital colleague designed to carry out tasks and make decisions autonomously, much like a human team member. Unlike traditional rule-based chatbots or static analytics dashboards, AI agents are dynamic, context-aware, and capable of proactive engagement. They anticipate needs, analyze data, and take meaningful action without waiting for human prompts.
Key Capabilities of AI Agents in Higher Ed:
Real-Time Data Analysis: AI agents continuously ingest data from various systems, such as student information systems (SIS), learning management systems (LMS), and CRMs, and analyze it instantly. For example, if a student hasn’t logged into their course portal in over a week, the agent can flag this as a concern before a human staff member might even notice.
Complex Reasoning: While a basic chatbot might reply, “You missed your payment deadline,” an AI agent can infer that the student might be facing financial hardship. It reasons through that context and may recommend financial aid outreach or support services.
Proactive Action: Rather than waiting for a student to reach out, an AI agent can send reminders, book appointments, or trigger alerts based on predefined conditions and patterns it observes. This proactive behavior is one of the defining features that separates agents from other digital tools.
Human Collaboration: AI agents are not replacements for staff but digital teammates. They handle repetitive and data-heavy tasks, freeing up staff to focus on complex, high-touch interactions like one-on-one advising or sensitive student concerns.
Imagine a first-year student named Alex who begins missing classes and deadlines. An AI agent, let’s call it “Corey,” detects these signs, reviews Alex’s recent activity, and notices additional indicators such as a missed financial aid deadline and a recent visit to the counseling center. Corey logs this information and acts.
Corey sends Alex a supportive message suggesting tutoring and financial aid options, recommends an advising appointment, and even books a time. It also notifies the academic advisor and shares a detailed context summary, ensuring a more informed, empathetic meeting. Behind the scenes, the agent identifies other at-risk students based on similar patterns and launches personalized interventions.
This example illustrates the power of agentic AI in higher education in managing complex student workflows with speed, precision, and care. From recruitment and enrollment to retention and autonomous student support, AI agents are redefining digital service delivery across higher education.
AI Agents vs. Chatbots: How Are They Different?
As colleges explore digital tools to improve student support and enrollment outcomes, it’s critical to understand the difference between AI agents and traditional chatbots. While the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably, their capabilities and strategic value are markedly different.
Reactive vs. Proactive
Chatbots are reactive tools. They wait for a student to initiate a question and respond with a scripted answer, often drawn from an FAQ database. Their usefulness is limited to straightforward interactions like, “What’s the application deadline?” AI agents, by contrast, are proactive.
They can detect when something needs attention, such as a missing transcript or a disengaged student, and initiate outreach or action without being prompted.
Scripted Responses vs. Intelligent Actions
Chatbots operate within a narrow script. If a question falls outside their programmed flow, they may fail to respond meaningfully. AI agents go further. They are autonomous systems capable of analyzing context, making decisions, and completing tasks.
For example, if a student asks about uploading a transcript, a chatbot might share a link. An AI agent would identify the missing document, send a personalized reminder, check for completion, and escalate if necessary, driving the outcome rather than just responding.
Single-Channel vs. Omnichannel Engagement
Chatbots often live on a single webpage and lack memory of past conversations. AI agents work across platforms, web chat, SMS, email, and student portals, and retain context across all interactions. They recognize students, recall prior discussions, and tailor communications accordingly, enabling more seamless and personalized support.
FAQ Support vs. Lifecycle Engagement
Chatbots help with quick answers, but AI agents support multi-step processes and lifecycle touchpoints. In admissions, for instance, a chatbot might handle inquiries, but an AI agent can follow up on incomplete applications, suggest resources, and nurture leads through enrollment. In student services, chatbots may share library hours, while AI agents detect academic disengagement and initiate support outreach.
In short, chatbots answer questions. AI agents drive outcomes. As one expert noted, chatbots are like automated help desks, while AI agents function as full digital assistants embedded in institutional workflows. In an era of rising service expectations and limited staff capacity, this distinction matters more than ever. Institutions that embrace AI agents gain a powerful ally in delivering timely, personalized, and outcome-driven student experiences.
How Do AI Agents Benefit Colleges and Students?
The excitement around AI agents in higher education isn’t just about cool technology. It’s about solving real problems and creating tangible improvements for both institutions and learners. Here are some of the major benefits AI agents offer:
AI agents provide around-the-clock assistance, giving every student a digital personal assistant. Whether it’s midnight before an assignment is due or a weekend deadline looms, students can get timely help. More importantly, the support becomes proactive. For example, Georgia State University’s “Pounce” chatbot texts reminders to new students about critical steps like completing financial aid.
The result? Summer loss dropped from 19% to 9%, meaning hundreds more students showed up in the fall. Multiple surveys indicate that a significant share of students feel AI-powered tools help them learn more effectively, often citing faster access to personalized support.
2. Increased Efficiency and Staff Augmentation
AI agents act as force multipliers for campus teams. They handle thousands of repetitive inquiries, freeing staff for high-value work. Maryville University’s AI assistant “Max” answers thousands of student questions each month, resolving the majority without the need for human intervention.
Some institutions report up to 75% time savings on routine tasks. Agents send deadline reminders, track document submissions, and streamline follow-ups. This eases staff workload and ensures faster responses for students.
3. Improved Outcomes (Enrollment, Retention, and Success)
AI agents improve key metrics. Integrated AI systems have been linked to measurable gains in student engagement and retention, particularly when used to support proactive outreach and early intervention.
At Bethel University, a chatbot named “Riley” helps identify and guide prospective students to relevant resources, reducing the risk of drop-off. Since every 1% yield increase can represent hundreds of thousands in tuition revenue, tools that drive application completion and enrollment are essential.
4. Consistency, Accuracy, and Scalability
AI agents help deliver more consistent and accurate information across student-facing touchpoints. Unlike human staff who may interpret rules differently, agents follow uniform protocols. They scale effortlessly during peak periods.
When the University of Pretoria launched its chatbot, it handled 30,000+ queries in just months, easing pressure on staff and speeding up student responses. In crises or transitions, agents can quickly disseminate accurate updates to thousands.
5. More Engaging and Proactive Student Experience
AI agents make engagement feel more personalized. They nudge students with reminders and timely suggestions, reducing anxiety. For instance, an agent might prompt early tutoring or check in on disengaged students.
Nearly 48% of students report that chatbots improve their academic performance. For routine questions, many prefer AI over navigating office bureaucracy.
6. Addressing Staff Challenges and Burnout
With high student-to-staff ratios, burnout is common. AI agents ease this by managing low-level tasks, allowing staff to focus on complex support. Georgia Tech’s AI teaching assistant “Jill Watson” answered student questions so effectively that many didn’t realize she wasn’t human. The result was higher satisfaction and improved grades. Faculty benefit from fewer repetitive queries and more time for meaningful instruction.
7. Data-Driven Decision Making
AI agents generate actionable insights. For example, if hundreds of students ask how to change majors, administrators might simplify that process. Rising mental health-related queries might justify expanding counseling services. These agents serve students individually and help institutions see patterns and improve policies.
AI agents are not about replacing human support. Instead, they enhance it. They handle scale, speed, and consistency, while humans deliver empathy, strategy, and complex care. In the ideal model, AI handles the routine so people can focus on relationships, creating a stronger, more responsive higher education experience for all.
Why 2025 Is Called “The Year of the AI Agent”
AI in higher education is not new. Predictive analytics, early chatbots, and automated workflows have existed on campuses for years. So Why is 2025 considered the “Year of the AI Agent”?
The answer lies in a rare convergence of technological maturity, institutional urgency, and cultural readiness. Together, these forces have pushed AI agents out of experimentation and into real, scalable deployment across higher education.
From Generative AI Hype to Agentic Execution
The last few years have delivered dramatic advances in generative AI, particularly large language models capable of human-like reasoning and communication. By late 2024, however, many institutions were still grappling with a familiar challenge: impressive technology without clear operational value.
That changed as agentic AI frameworks emerged. Unlike standalone chatbots, AI agents can reason across systems, make decisions, and take action autonomously. By 2025, the standards, tooling, and governance models needed to deploy these agents had largely solidified. Technology leaders across industries began openly describing 2025 as the moment when AI moves from novelty to infrastructure, and higher education followed suit.
A Shift From Reactive to Proactive Campus Systems
Perhaps the most profound change is philosophical. Traditional campus technologies are reactive: staff respond to dashboards, alerts, or student inquiries after problems arise. AI agents invert that model.
In 2025, institutions are deploying systems that continuously monitor behavior, detect risk signals, and intervene before issues escalate. Instead of waiting for a student to ask for help, AI agents can proactively reach out with reminders, resources, or guidance. This shift, from responding to problems to preventing them, marks a fundamental evolution in how universities support students.
A Mature Ecosystem Ready for Scale
Another reason 2025 stands out is ecosystem readiness. Major CRM and LMS platforms now support AI agent integrations, while many universities have already launched institution-wide AI environments that allow teams to build custom tools safely and responsibly.
Equally important, AI literacy has improved dramatically. Faculty, administrators, and students now have a shared baseline understanding of AI, reducing resistance and accelerating adoption. The organizational “soil,” in other words, is finally fertile.
Urgency in a Challenging Higher Ed Landscape
The broader context cannot be ignored. Enrollment pressure, budget constraints, staffing shortages, and growing student support needs have created an acute demand for scalable solutions. AI agents offer a compelling return on investment: automating routine tasks, extending staff capacity, and directly supporting recruitment, retention, and student success.
Early results have reinforced this case, demonstrating that modest investments can yield outsized operational and experiential gains.
Momentum and Institutional Confidence
Finally, momentum matters. As respected associations, peer institutions, and sector leaders publicly endorse AI adoption, hesitation gives way to action. The conversation has shifted decisively, from “Should we use AI?” to “How do we implement it effectively and responsibly?”
Taken together, these forces explain why 2025 feels different. This is the year of AI execution in higher education. Agentic AI has moved from concept to practice, and institutions embracing it now are redefining what responsive, student-centered operations look like in the modern university.
Real-World Examples of AI Agents in Higher Ed
University of Toronto (Canada): U of T is integrating AI agents into autonomous student support and advising. A university-wide task force recommended deploying AI tools in these areas, and a pilot program is underway for a course-specific AI chatbot that lives on course websites. This “virtual tutor” agent can answer students’ questions about class materials and guide them through content.
Unlike public chatbots, U of T’s version runs on a secure platform with course-specific knowledge, protecting instructors’ content and student privacy. If successful, the AI tutor will be rolled out across the institution to enhance how students receive academic help outside of class.
Arizona State University (USA): ASU has implemented AI-powered digital assistants – including a voice-activated campus chatbot through Amazon’s Alexa. In a first-of-its-kind program, ASU provided Echo Dot smart speakers to students in a high-tech dorm and launched an “ASU” Alexa skill that anyone can use to get campus information.
Students can ask the voice assistant about dining hall menus, library hours, campus events, and more. This AI agent offers on-demand answers via natural conversation, extending student engagement and support to a hands-free, 24/7 format.
University of British Columbia (Canada): UBC is leveraging AI agents to enhance advising and student services. For example, the Faculty of Science piloted “AskCali,” an AI academic advising assistant that uses generative AI to answer students’ questions about course requirements and program planning at any time of day.
AskCali draws on UBC’s academic calendar and official documents to provide accurate, personalized guidance, helping students navigate complex requirements. UBC’s Okanagan campus has also deployed chatbots for departments like IT help and student services, reportedly handling the vast majority of routine inquiries and dramatically reducing wait times.
University of Michigan (USA): U–M has rolled out AI-driven assistants to support students in academics and campus life. Notably, the College of Literature, Science, and Arts introduced “LSA Maizey,” a 24/7 AI advising chatbot described as a “smart sidekick for college life.” Maizey answers questions about degree requirements, academic policies, registration, study strategies, and more – anytime, day or night. It provides links to official information and helps students find advising info outside of business hours.
This AI agent augments U–M’s human advisors by handling common queries and pointing students to the right resources instantly. (U–M has also developed a campus-wide assistant called “MiMaizey” for general questions like dining, events, and wayfinding, further personalizing the student experience)
Harvard University (USA): Harvard is experimenting with autonomous AI tutors and assistants to improve learning and advising. In one pilot, Harvard faculty built a custom AI “tutor bot” for an introductory science course that allows students to get immediate help with difficult concepts outside of class.
Students could ask this bot unlimited questions at their own pace, without fear of judgment, and a study found it improved engagement and motivation in the course. Harvard’s IT department has also launched AI chat assistants (nicknamed “HUbot” and “PingPong”) to aid students with tech or academic questions, and Harvard Business School tested an AI teaching assistant in a finance course.
Stanford University (USA): Stanford has been a leader in using AI agents to support students academically. One example is a Stanford-developed AI system that monitors online learning platforms to detect when a student is struggling. Researchers created a machine-learning agent that predicts when a student will start “wheel-spinning” (getting stuck repeatedly on practice problems) and recommends targeted interventions to help the student overcome the obstacle.
Essentially, the AI acts like an autonomous tutor/coach in self-paced digital courses, flagging at-risk students and suggesting that instructors or the system intervene (for example, by reviewing an earlier concept). Beyond this, Stanford has trialed AI chatbots as virtual TAs in large classes (answering common questions on course forums) and used data-driven AI models to alert advisors about students who may need support.
University of Sydney (Australia): The University of Sydney developed “Cogniti,” an AI platform that serves as an “AI stunt double” for instructors, essentially allowing teachers to clone their expertise into custom AI agents for their courses. More than 800 Sydney faculty are already using Cogniti to support their teaching.
These AI agents (designed by the educators themselves) can answer student questions, provide instant feedback on practice exercises, and offer guidance 24/7, in alignment with the instructor’s curriculum and guidelines.
For example, a speech pathology class uses a Cogniti bot that role-plays as a patient’s parent to help students practice clinical conversations. Cogniti won a national award for innovation, and it’s given students at Sydney access to personalized help at all hours – while letting instructors remain in control of the AI’s scope and knowledge.
Deakin University (Australia): Deakin Genie is a pioneering digital assistant that has been serving Deakin students since late 2018. Branded as a “digital concierge,” Genie lives in the Deakin University mobile app and uses AI (natural-language processing with voice and text) to help students navigate university life. It can answer thousands of common questions (“When is my assignment due?”, “Where is the library?”), manage personal schedules and reminders, and even proactively prompt students to study or register for classes.
Genie’s rollout was phased; it started with pilot groups and went university-wide in 2018. Within the first year, its user base more than doubled, reaching over 25,000 student downloads by 2019. At peak times (such as the start of term), Genie handles up to 12,000 conversations per day, a volume equivalent to Deakin’s call center traffic. Top queries center on first-year needs: class timetables, assignment details, finding unit (course) resources, and key dates. The Genie team closely monitors performance and tracks whether Genie’s answers resolve the question or if a human staff follow-up is needed, continually updating Genie’s knowledge base and dialog flow.
This iterative improvement has paid off in high student satisfaction; many students treat Genie like a supportive “friend” always on hand. Genie is also context-aware: it knows who the student is (program, year, campus) and personalizes responses (“Your next class is…”, “Your assignment 2 is due next Monday”).
As AI agents gain traction across higher education, one point deserves emphasis: their value lies not in replacing people, but in working alongside them. The most successful institutions view AI agents as tools that extend human capacity rather than diminish it.
The goal is a blended workforce in which routine, data-heavy tasks are automated, freeing faculty and staff to focus on what humans do best: empathy, judgment, creativity, and mentorship.
In practice, this collaboration is already taking shape across campus operations. Admissions offices are using AI agents to track application completeness and communicate with prospective students, while human counselors retain responsibility for final decisions and nuanced conversations.
Advising teams rely on agents to monitor engagement data and flag potential risks, but the advising itself remains a human-centered interaction and is strengthened by better insight and preparation rather than automated away.
This shift also requires a cultural adjustment. Institutions leading the way are investing in AI literacy and professional development to help staff understand how these tools work and how they can be applied responsibly. When employees are empowered to experiment and contribute ideas, AI adoption becomes collaborative rather than imposed, encouraging innovation from the ground up.
From Experimentation to Organizational Advantage
Human oversight remains essential to responsible AI deployment. AI agents operate most effectively within clear governance frameworks that prioritize data privacy, institutional policy alignment, and human oversight. For high-impact decisions, such as academic standing, financial aid determinations, or student well-being, humans stay firmly in the loop. The agent may analyze data or draft recommendations, but people make the final call.
Importantly, AI agents can actually strengthen the human touch. By helping staff prioritize outreach and monitor large student populations, they reduce the likelihood that students fall through the cracks. The result is a campus environment that is more responsive, more personalized, and ultimately more humane, where technology supports, rather than replaces, meaningful human connection.
Are you prepared for the next evolution of enrollment and student support?
Frequently Asked Questions
Question: What is an AI agent in higher education?
Answer: In higher education, an AI agent is a software-based digital colleague designed to carry out tasks and make decisions autonomously, much like a human team member. Unlike traditional rule-based chatbots or static analytics dashboards, AI agents are dynamic, context-aware, and capable of proactive engagement. They anticipate needs, analyze data, and take meaningful action without waiting for human prompts.
Question: How do AI agents benefit colleges and students?
Answer: The excitement around AI agents in higher education isn’t just about cool technology. It’s about solving real problems and creating tangible improvements for both institutions and learners. Here are some of the major benefits AI agents offer:
Question: Why is 2025 considered the “Year of the AI Agent”?
Answer:The answer lies in a rare convergence of technological maturity, institutional urgency, and cultural readiness. Together, these forces have pushed AI agents out of experimentation and into real, scalable deployment across higher education.
In May, prior to the start of his tenure as Chair of the OfS, Professor Edward Peck wrote for HEPI about his thoughts for the future of higher education, and the announcement that the government was ‘exploring’ a levy on the income universities receive from international tuition fees got the sector talking.
In June, the undergraduate academic year wrapped up with HEPI’s Annual Conference, which focused on the student journey, as well as the publication of our 2025 Student Academic Experience Survey. This year’s survey found that 68% of undergraduates are now undertaking paid work during term time. This is a dramatic rise from just 42% in 2020. Also, this month, we were thrilled that the work of our Director, Nick Hillman, was recognised with an OBE.
July saw the publication of a report highlighting the catastrophic state of language provision within the UK’s schools and universities and the big drop in formal language learning that has accompanied this.
In August, we thought that the Post-16 Education and Skills white paper might be about to arrive, and even ran a blog asking what might be in it. But it was not to be. Despite that, there were still exciting developments in HEPI as we launched our new website and published the 2025 Minimum Income Standard for Students.
September saw the start of the party conference season, with HEPI holding events at both the Labour and later the Conservative Party conferences. There was a particularly memorable moment during a HEPI panel event on Student Support at the Labour Party conference, when the Secretary of State for Education, Bridget Phillipson, announced in the main conference hall that targeted maintenance grants were returning. Alex Stanley of the NUS announced this to the room mid-panel, to much celebration. (We did not know the small print at this point.)
In October, that long-awaited White Paper finally arrived (although a little closer to the evening than many of us would have liked) on 20 October. This then kicked off our 10-part blog series, platforming a range of voices and reactions in response to the paper. You can find our first response here, and our final one here.
The government papers continued to roll in as the Curriculum and Assessment Review Final Report arrived on 5 November. Don’t worry, we covered this as well with a range of responses. A number of HEPI colleagues attended the inaugural Smart Thinking Think Tank awards, picking up the award for ‘Most Niche Report of the Year’ for our work on The hidden impact of menstruation on higher education. (In case you missed our Director of Policy, Rose Stephenson, shouting from the rooftops about this – research into menstruation is not niche, it is taboo!) However, the recognition from other think tankers and the ginormous jar of Smarties were both gratefully received.
Then, in December, the big news was the announcement that Susan Lapworth will be leaving the OfS in Easter 2026. A remarkably prescient blog from HEPI President Bahram Bekhradnia on the OfS leadership had arrived a while before the announcement but these days the HEPI blog is so popular with authors that it sadly ended up being published after the event.
So, as we arrive now in 2026, HEPI looks ahead to another packed year of events, topical blogs, and continued debate. We’re beginning our events schedule with a webinar with Advance HE at 11am on 13th January entitled ‘What can higher education leadership learn from other sectors?’. Do sign up here to join us!
Thank you to everyone who has written for us, attended our events, supported our research, kept up with our blogs, and engaged with us in any way over the past year – HEPI couldn’t be here without you.
The blog is back in full force for the new year, so do keep an eye out for our arrival in your inbox. If you fancy writing one for us, then take a look at the guidelines here, and send a draft to [email protected]
We will see you for lots more debate throughout 2026!
