Over the past year, many Texas politicians and university leaders have pursued hamfisted and unconstitutional higher education reforms that too often violate the expressive rights of students and faculty.
We recently explained how some government officials misread the law and used online outrage to chill controversial speech and punish a Texas A&M professor for protected expression. Other recent highlights from Texas include a campus speech law prohibiting expressive activities after 10:00 p.m. and a systemwide ban on drag shows at Texas A&M schools. In both cases, FIRE filed suit and won preliminaryvictories ensuring students can continue exercising their expressive rights.
Recently, FIRE learned that Texas State University is taking its own stab at institutional reform. It is conducting a “curricular review” built around a guide titled “Value Neutral Instruction and the Curriculum,” which encourages faculty to frame their teaching around inquiry and intellectual exploration, rather than beginning from predetermined conclusions.
This is a sound pedagogical goal. Professors should present competing arguments and perspectives to students, teach them to evaluate the evidence and think critically, and arrive at their own conclusions. And the guidance does much more than most to protect the core of academic freedom and stay within constitutional bounds. However, like many other efforts at curricular reform, it nevertheless risks chilling protected expression and infringing upon academic freedom. The Devil, as they say, is in the details.
The good
Much of the guidance is framed as best practices, not mandatory policy. That matters because academic freedom requires giving faculty broad latitude to direct classroom discussion and design syllabi as they see fit. The guidance also focuses more on teaching style than class content, which limits the scope of the risks discussed below.
It also promises that faculty may “share their own scholarly perspective when relevant,” and that academic freedom includes the right to “pursue truth without political constraints” and reach “controversial scholarly conclusions.” Those provisions are essential because faculty at public colleges have the First Amendment right to teach pedagogically relevant material. And unlike many reform efforts that offer vague nods to academic freedom, this language specifies what faculty can actually do — pursue truth, reach controversial conclusions, and share their views in class.
Regarding course content, the guidance makes clear that faculty may “cover any topic, including obvious moral wrongs,” and when it comes to “contested questions . . . neutral instruction does not avoid these topics” (more on that later). This is a far cry from the many bills we’ve opposed that identify certain “divisive concepts” and restrict the freedom to discuss them in class. Here again, constitutional considerations demand nothing less. The Supreme Court has explained that the First Amendment “does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom.”
VICTORY: Federal court halts Texas’ ‘no First Amendment after dark’ campus speech ban
A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the University of Texas from enforcing a law that bans virtually all free speech on public university campuses after dark
The guidance also protects the right of students to come to their own conclusions, stating that they should not be graded on viewpoint-based criteria, such as “whether [they] agree with [a] particular ideology.” Along the same lines, the guidance warns against class learning objectives that assume students will leave with particular viewpoints, highlighting some examples that it claims are “frequently flagged”:
“Students will value diversity”
“Students will demonstrate commitment to social justice”
“Students will recognize their privilege”
“Students will develop empathy for marginalized groups”
“Students will embrace antiracist identity”
If this type of learning objective is common, as the guidance claims, that’s a real problem for students’ freedom to come to their own well-reasoned conclusions. Such learning outcomes stray from education and veer into indoctrination.
The guidance instead suggests that students should leave any class with the ability to:
Remember: Retrieve relevant knowledge.
Understand: Construct meaning from material.
Apply: Use procedures in given situations.
Analyze: Break material into parts and determine relationships.
Evaluate: Make judgments based on criteria.
Create: Put elements together to form coherent whole.
In sum: Students should learn the material, understand the material, and be able to apply the material to reach their own well-reasoned conclusions. These are high-level learning objectives, and setting them is well within the purview of university decision-makers.
The risks
While the language highlighted above may be unobjectionable, or even desirable on its face, it’s important to remember the context in which it comes: a review of the entire curriculum. This review might fairly aim to target courses with ideologically prescriptive learning outcomes, but it could also be a leverage point for strictly applying the guidelines and targeting disfavored ideas. We have warned schools that curricular reviews targeting certain ideas can violate the First Amendment by creating a chilling effect.
And right off the bat, the guidance dips its toe in these waters by advising faculty to avoid using particular words or phrases in course titles and descriptions. For example, the guidance cautions against using the following words in course titles: “Dismantling, Decolonizing, Interrogating, Challenging, Centering, Combating, Liberation, Resistance, Activism, Justice-Oriented, Transformative, Anti-[Group], and Pro-[Political Position].”
Although public university leaders may give some direction to educational style and goals, the guidance’s focus on particular words suggests a level of pedagogical micromanagement that will chill expression and undermine faculty autonomy.
If this process results in Texas State censoring professors or banning ideas from the classroom, we urge faculty to reach out to FIRE.
And its core framing language — “value-neutral instruction” — is itself fraught. Texas State positions this principle as a defining feature of its curriculum going forward, but public university faculty members have a First Amendment right to share their non-neutral views on relevant material. Though despite this framing concern, the guidance explicitly protects that right.
The guidance also says professors should consider whether a class reading list “represent[s] intellectual pluralism.” But as ever with this type of direction, the question is: how much pluralism is enough?
The key with these provisions will be how they’re applied, particularly within the context of the curricular review. Are they merely best practices that serve as high-level pedagogical guidance from the university? Or are they policies that will be strictly enforced to target disfavored ideas and micromanage classroom discussion?
Similarly, although the guidance tells faculty that they should not “avoid [controversial] topics,” it adds that “neutral instruction . . . approaches them differently.” Suggested best practices include avoiding straw-man arguments, focusing on the logical structures of different arguments, modeling intellectual humility, and prioritizing process over outcome. In general, this is legitimate pedagogical guidance. But again, professors must retain wide latitude to apply them in different ways that fit particular classroom environments and pedagogical imperatives. And these standards must never serve as a pretext to punish professors for expressing or defending controversial but relevant ideas.
In this fraught moment for higher education, we must remember that not every attempt at institutional reform is created equal. Some are good-faith attempts to redirect educational approaches and goals. Others attempt to police ideas and micromanage discussion. In Texas State’s case, there’s both reason for caution and room for optimism. We’ll soon see whether university leaders are serious about academic freedom when the rubber meets the road.
If this process results in Texas State censoring professors or banning ideas from the classroom, we urge faculty to reach out to FIRE. Faculty can submit a case online or reach out to us via our 24-hour Faculty Legal Defense Fund hotline at 254-500-FLDF (3533).
The next wave of prospective students is already taking shape: Generation Alpha, born between 2010 and 2024. They’re poised to become the most digitally fluent, diverse, and tech-immersed generation in history, raised on smartphones, voice assistants, and AI from day one. By 2028, the first Gen Alpha freshmen will be setting foot on college campuses, bringing entirely new expectations for how learning happens and how schools communicate their value.
Here’s the thing: education marketers can’t afford to wait. Gen Alpha’s habits and motivations differ sharply from Millennials or even Gen Z. In this article, we’ll unpack who Gen Alpha is, what drives their choices, and why institutions must start adapting their recruitment strategies now.
Drawing on Higher Education Marketing (HEM)’s latest research and webinar insights, we’ll introduce our recommended “PAC” framework, Platform, Algorithm, Culture, a model designed to help schools reach Gen Alpha effectively. We’ll also explore strategies like dual-audience messaging (targeting both students and their Millennial parents), along with content tactics centered on authenticity, user-generated content (UGC), answer-first communication, and AI-ready web experiences.
These ideas will be grounded in real-world examples, from universities using Roblox campus tours to schools experimenting with Snapchat AR lenses, and illustrated through HEM client success stories across K–12, language, and higher education sectors.
By the end, you’ll have a clear roadmap to engage both Gen Alpha and their parents through an integrated approach that connects CRM lead nurturing, SEO, social media, and multilingual content into a cohesive next-gen recruitment strategy.
Let’s dig into what makes Generation Alpha unique and how your institution can get ready now.
Who Is Generation Alpha?
Generation Alpha refers to children born between 2010 and 2024. They are the first cohort raised entirely in the 21st century, often called the first true digital natives.
From iPads in the crib to AI assistants in the living room, Gen Alpha has never known life without touchscreens or high-speed internet. Many learned to navigate apps and streaming platforms before they could read, making technology an effortless part of everyday life.
Early experiences with remote and hybrid learning have also shaped them. Even in primary school, they joined online video classes, used learning apps, and explored online games, giving them a comfort with digital learning that feels natural.
Raised largely by Millennial parents, Gen Alpha is globally minded and culturally diverse. They are aware of issues like climate change and social justice, value inclusivity, and seek purpose in education.
Their aspirations are high, and so are their expectations. They and their parents will assess the return on investment of higher education carefully. College decisions will be shared within the family, meaning recruitment messages must appeal to both the student and the parent.
Gen Alpha’s Behavior, Media Use, and Decision Drivers
To connect with Generation Alpha, institutions need to meet them on their terms. Let’s look at how they interact with media, information, and the factors shaping their decisions.
Authenticity Over Polish
Gen Alpha can spot inauthenticity a mile away. Surrounded by social media from birth, they value honesty over gloss. Highly produced marketing materials feel distant to them; real voices earn trust. Peer content matters more than official content, and a student’s testimonial filmed on a phone will often outperform a polished promo video. Schools that feature current students or young alumni as micro-influencers tend to resonate most. A student-led TikTok dorm tour, for instance, can do more to inspire confidence than a scripted campus video.
Short-Form Video and Shared Screens
Raised on YouTube and TikTok, Gen Alpha consumes information in quick bursts. They use short-form videos to learn, discover, and be entertained. Yet, they also share viewing time with family, watching longer videos together on smart TVs. This dual habit creates an opportunity for schools to publish family-friendly content on YouTube while using TikTok or Instagram Reels for short, high-impact storytelling.
Social Means Conversational and Interactive
Gen Alpha doesn’t just scroll; they participate. They use Snapchat for authentic chats and AR filters for creative expression. Gaming worlds such as Roblox and Minecraft double as social spaces where they collaborate and build together. This generation expects to engage, not just observe. Recruitment content should invite participation through polls, challenges, or interactive Q&As rather than simply broadcasting messages.
Digital-Native, but Still Campus-Curious Although they are digital natives, Gen Alpha still craves real-world experiences. Campus visits remain important, but they expect them to be hands-on and immersive. They want to test a lab, attend a mini class, or pilot a drone. For them, visiting campus feels like trying on an experience to see if it fits. Schools should design events that blend physical and virtual engagement to appeal to this tactile curiosity.
Instant Answers and Micro-Decisions This generation grew up with instant search and voice assistants. They want quick, direct answers, not lengthy explanations. They prefer content structured as questions and answers, such as “What scholarships does this college offer?” followed by a concise response. This approach supports both their research style and the shift toward AI-driven search engines that prioritize clear, digestible information.
Values-Driven and Proof-Oriented Gen Alpha deeply cares about social impact. Issues such as sustainability, inclusion, and mental health influence their decisions. However, they don’t take claims at face value. They expect evidence through authentic stories, real programs, and visible results. Institutions that demonstrate genuine action, rather than marketing slogans, will earn their trust.
Bottom line: Gen Alpha lives online but thinks critically. They move fast, multitask across screens, consult their parents, and expect authenticity at every turn. To earn their attention and trust, institutions must create marketing that is honest, interactive, and evidence-based.
Why Institutions Must Start Preparing Now
Why should institutions start preparing now? It might seem like there’s still time before Generation Alpha reaches college. The oldest are only about 15 or 16 today, but the time to prepare is now.
The Oldest Are Already in High School
Those born in 2010 are entering the college research phase alongside their Millennial parents. By 2028, they’ll be enrolling in universities. For K–12 private schools, Gen Alpha isn’t the future; they’re your current students. Enrollment strategies, open houses, and outreach events already need to align with their digital-first expectations.
Strategy Shifts Take Time
Building authentic social channels, redesigning content ecosystems, and integrating CRM workflows can’t happen overnight. Starting now means time to test and refine. Schools experimenting with TikTok, YouTube Shorts, or AI-powered content today will lead the field when Gen Alpha applications surge.
Gen Z Is the Bridge
Current college students have already pushed institutions to modernize through video storytelling and social media. Those adaptations laid the groundwork. Now, Gen Alpha’s shorter attention spans and AI fluency require schools to go further. If you’ve successfully reached Gen Z, you’re ahead. If not, there’s catching up to do.
Early Adopters Will Stand Out
Institutions that embrace next-gen tactics, from interactive chat tools to UGC-driven campaigns and dynamic FAQ hubs, will gain a visible edge. These schools appear more innovative and student-centered to both teens and parents.
Parent Expectations Are Rising Too
Millennial parents expect quick, personalized communication. Text alerts, Instagram Live Q&As, and ROI-focused content all resonate. Preparing now allows you to fine-tune messaging for both audiences: students and parents.
In short, every admissions cycle will include more Gen Alpha students. The strategies that worked for Millennials and Gen Z must evolve now, and Higher Education Marketing (HEM) is ready to help institutions future-proof recruitment.
HEM’s Next-Gen Recruitment Strategies: The PAC Framework and Beyond
At Higher Education Marketing (HEM), our research into Generation Alpha’s habits has led to the development of the PAC Framework, short for Platform, Algorithm, Culture. This model helps institutions design content and campaigns that genuinely connect with Gen Alpha and get noticed in today’s media environment. Around PAC, we integrate complementary tactics such as dual-audience messaging, authenticity systems, answer-first content, immersive campus experiences, and AI search optimization.
1. Platform: Go Where Gen Alpha Is
It sounds simple, yet many institutions still miss this step. “Platform” means existing where Gen Alpha spends their time, on platforms like TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat, or even Roblox. Don’t just create accounts; learn how each ecosystem works. What’s trending? What humor or language feels native? Explore these platforms like a student would. Then decide how your institution should engage, through creator collaborations, banner placements, or sponsored events. The key is to meet students where they are, not where you’re comfortable.
Example: Florida International University (USA): FIU has adopted TikTok to connect with Gen Alpha, where they spend their time. FIU’s social team went viral by leveraging a trending audio challenge on TikTok aimed at students hoping to excel on their midterms. The result was a TikTok that garnered over 10 million views and 1.46 million engagements, demonstrating how being present on Gen Alpha’s favorite platforms can massively boost reach.
Algorithms decide who sees your content. Success depends on understanding how each platform’s system rewards engagement. On TikTok, videos with high watch time and early comments rise quickly. On Google, structured Q&A pages and strong metadata perform best. Research shows attention spans among younger audiences now average two to three seconds. Lead with a hook, such as a bold question, emotion, or relatable visual. Keep captions tight and content shareable. Treat the algorithm like a person you need to impress fast.
Example: Colorado State University (USA): CSU has strategically designed content to please each platform’s algorithm and grab attention within seconds. Seeing the rise of TikTok’s algorithm-driven “For You” feed, CSU shifted heavily to short-form vertical video and front-loaded content with hooks. The social team launched an official TikTok in 2022 with a “non-manicured” approach: four student creators post 4–5 raw, authentic videos per week. This consistency and emphasis on trending audios and quick, relatable hooks led to about 130,000 video views and 12,000 engagements per month on CSU’s TikTok. By tailoring content format (e.g., snappy cuts, engaging captions) to each platform’s algorithmic preferences, CSU ensures its posts get maximum distribution in Gen Alpha’s feeds.
Culture is where authentic connection happens. Gen Alpha responds to real voices, humor, and values. Collaborate with students to produce takeovers, TikToks, or short vlogs. Reflect diversity and align with current conversations. Join cultural moments carefully, whether that’s referencing a popular meme or spotlighting sustainability initiatives. Imperfection, such as a slightly unpolished student video, signals truth and authenticity.
As HEM puts it, algorithms get you seen, but culture gets you remembered. Using PAC as a creative checklist ensures your marketing is visible, relevant, and real.
Because Generation Alpha’s education decisions will be co-driven by their Millennial parents, Gen Alpha student recruitment messaging must speak to both audiences at once. HEM’s approach, dual-audience messaging, ensures every touchpoint, from websites to ads, connects with both teens and parents in harmony.
For Students
Gen Alpha students care about community, creativity, and experience. They’re asking, “Will I fit in? Will this be exciting?” Highlight student life, clubs, and hands-on learning opportunities through visuals and peer perspectives. Use quotes or short video clips from current students discussing campus life or real projects. Peer voice matters more than institutional formality; a student testimonial will always carry more weight than a dean’s welcome.
For Parents
Millennial parents want reassurance. Their questions are about safety, credibility, and ROI. Showcase graduation rates, career outcomes, accreditation, and alumni success stories. Include details on support services, mental health resources, and campus security. Demonstrating both value and care builds confidence.
How to Integrate Both
Every major recruitment asset should serve both audiences. You can segment sections (“For Students” vs. “For Parents”) or blend them seamlessly. For instance, a video might open with student testimonials, transition into outcomes and parental perspectives, and end with a message that resonates with both.
Action Step: Audit your current materials for balance. Ensure students feel inspired and parents feel assured.
Example: Queen Anne’s School (UK): This independent girls’ school in England structures every recruitment touchpoint to speak to both Gen Alpha students and their millennial parents in tandem. For example, Queen Anne’s hosts Open Mornings that explicitly cater to “you and your daughter.” During these events, girls sample classes and campus life (answering the student’s “Will I have fun and fit in?”), while parents tour facilities and hear the Head’s vision for the school (addressing the parents’ concerns about values and outcomes). The school offers a wide range of visit options – from personal family tours to student “taster days” where 11–13 year olds spend a day on campus – ensuring both audiences are engaged.
3. Establish an “Authenticity System” (UGC and Influencers)
For Generation Alpha, authenticity is the ultimate trust signal. To deliver it consistently, HEM recommends building an Authenticity System, a structured process that continuously produces genuine, student-driven content.
User-Generated Content (UGC) Cadence
Plan for a steady flow of unpolished, real moments. Repost student photos or short TikToks weekly to show campus life through their eyes. Campaigns like #MyCampusMondays, where students share everyday snapshots, keep your content authentic and current. The goal is to make sure that whenever a Gen Alpha prospect visits your social channels, they see real students, not PR gloss.
Student Ambassadors and Creators
Empower students to take part in marketing. Invite ambassadors or micro-influencers to run Instagram takeovers, film vlogs, or stream events. These voices carry credibility because they feel peer-to-peer, not top-down. As HEM research shows, student creators can dramatically increase engagement by making your institution feel accessible and alive.
Authentic Voice and Visuals
Encourage content that sounds natural and looks real. A video filmed on a phone, with casual language or inside jokes, often performs better than a polished shoot. Include candid photos or unscripted clips, authenticity over perfection every time.
Integrate Authentic Content Across Channels
Don’t let UGC live in isolation. Embed student testimonials, quote cards, or video clips directly on program or FAQ pages. Pairing factual info with real student stories creates a persuasive one-two punch.
In short, authenticity shouldn’t happen by accident, it should already be built into your system.
Example: Colorado State University (USA): CSU has built a systematic pipeline for authentic, student-driven content. After officially launching its TikTok, CSU deliberately adopted a “raw” content style – no slick ads, just students with smartphones. It set up a core group of student content creators who post unfiltered clips multiple times a week, giving a continuous stream of real campus moments. In addition, CSU regularly reposts user-generated content from students: from dorm room mini-blogs to everyday campus snapshots. Every week, prospective Gen Alpha students checking CSU’s socials will see new posts by their peers, not just the PR team. By baking student UGC into the content calendar, CSU continuously projects an honest, peer-to-peer voice that Gen Alpha trusts.
4. Embrace Answer-First Content and AI Search Readiness
Generation Alpha searches differently. They ask full questions and expect immediate, concise answers. To connect with them and perform well in AI-driven search, schools need an answer-first content strategy.
Build Q&A Hubs
Create web pages organized by questions and answers, not long paragraphs. For example:
What hands-on experiences will I get in the Nursing program?
What are the career outcomes for graduates? This structure helps both humans and AI bots find what they need quickly. HEM calls these “answer-first hubs,” expanded FAQ-style pages covering dozens of micro-questions. Use data from inquiries and chats to identify what prospects ask most often.
Add Video and Micro-Content
Gen Alpha prefers short, visual responses. Embed 30–60 second video answers from students or staff directly on your pages. A student selfie explaining “What’s the first-year experience like?” feels more authentic than text alone. For parents, include short clips addressing safety or support topics. Repurpose each Q&A across platforms like YouTube Shorts or Reddit for added reach.
Implement Structured Data
Make content machine-readable. Adding FAQ schema markup tells Google and AI assistants what each Q&A covers, improving visibility in featured snippets and AI chat results. HEM research shows this can increase AI-driven visibility by up to 30%.
Write for Voice and Natural Language
Use conversational phrasing such as “How do I apply for financial aid?” instead of standard titles. Ensure each answer short but complete, ideal for AI summaries or voice assistants. Schools already applying this approach have seen measurable boosts in organic traffic and “People Also Ask” placements.
Bottom line: think like an answer engine. Gen Alpha asks questions, so make sure your content answers first.
Example: Cumberland University (USA): Cumberland makes information instantly accessible by structuring its admissions content around questions and direct answers. Its website features a comprehensive Admission FAQs hub that compiles “our most frequently asked questions to help you find the answers you need quickly”. Prospective students and parents can click categories like Undergraduate, Graduate, International, etc., and find dozens of bite-sized Q&As (e.g., “What are the application requirements?”, “Is there housing for freshmen?”). Each answer is concise and written in plain language – perfect for Gen Alpha’s tendency to ask full questions in Google or AI assistants. By adopting this answer-first approach (instead of burying info in long paragraphs), Cumberland not only improves user experience but also boosts its visibility on search engines. Many of its FAQ entries use structured data markup, so they often appear as featured snippets or “People Also Ask” results on Google.
5. Treat Your Campus as a Product: Demos and Immersive Experiences
For Generation Alpha, choosing a school feels like choosing a lifestyle brand. They want to experience it before committing. That’s why HEM recommends marketing your campus like a product demo, through in-person and virtual experiences that let students and parents “test-drive” what you offer.
Creator-Hosted Events
Make campus events hybrid and interactive. Invite student creators to livestream open houses or campus days on TikTok, YouTube, or Instagram Live. A student host with a GoPro or phone camera gives the experience authenticity and energy. Let online viewers ask questions in real time while seeing dorms, labs, or the dining hall rush. It’s immersive, engaging, and feels like hanging out with a trusted peer.
Hands-On Campus Trials
When prospects visit in person, let them participate. Replace passive tours with interactive demos, mini labs, culinary workshops, or creative challenges. Some schools have gamified tours, turning them into scavenger hunts or student-led challenges. Participation builds emotional connection and makes visits memorable.
Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Worlds
Add AR filters or lenses during events to blend play with information. Imagine scanning a building to reveal fun facts or seeing your mascot in AR. Schools like Kent State University have used Snapchat AR lenses to boost engagement while lowering recruitment costs.
Take it further by creating virtual campuses in platforms like Roblox or Minecraft. Students can explore, play, and imagine life at your school long before applying.
Use Existing Tools
360° tours and virtual events on platforms like YouVisit or CampusTours make immersion easy.
The goal is to let Gen Alpha see themselves on campus. When they can explore, touch, and interact, even virtually, they’re far more likely to enroll.
Examples: Kent State turned its campus into an interactive product demo via augmented reality on Snapchat. In a pioneering campaign (the first of its kind in higher ed), Kent State built a custom AR lens that let prospective students virtually “try on” a piece of the college experience – in this case, placing a Kent State graduation cap on their heads, tassel and all. Users could move and see the tassel shake, and with one tap, were prompted to “apply to the university” right from Snapchat. This immersive lens was deployed to Snapchatters aged 16–18 in Kent State’s key recruiting regions. The results were astounding: engagement soared, and the AR campaign achieved a cost-per-application 24% lower than the university’s goal.
University of Sussex (UK): At Sussex, students themselves have helped create a virtual campus that anyone can explore – effectively offering a perpetual, gamified open house. In 2024, a Sussex Computer Science student led a project to recreate the entire university campus in Minecraft, block by block. Using satellite data, the team imported ~1.4 km² of campus into the game (over 19 million blocks), achieving a 1:1 scale replica of Sussex’s buildings and grounds. Now, a group of 20+ students (and even alumni) is collaboratively adding interiors and details to bring it fully to life.
6. Integrate CRM, SEO, Social Campaigns, and Multilingual Content
Creating next-gen content for Generation Alpha is only half the battle. To convert attention into enrollment, schools need to align these tactics with the systems that power modern digital marketing. Here’s how HEM integrates CRM, SEO, social media, and multilingual strategy into a single recruitment engine.
CRM for Lead Nurturing
A robust education CRM is essential for tracking Gen Alpha inquiries and engaging them across multiple touchpoints—social DMs, event sign-ups, web forms, and more. Automated workflows can send personalized follow-ups instantly, such as a welcome video from a student ambassador or a link to a virtual Q&A. HEM often implements Mautic or HubSpot to manage this process. The result: faster responses, stronger engagement, and less manual work. Segment Gen Alpha students and their parents into complementary streams—student-life content for one, academic and ROI-focused messaging for the other.
Example: Michael Vincent Academy: Michael Vincent Academy, a private career school in Los Angeles, partnered with HEM to deploy a customized Mautic CRM for student recruitment. “It’s essential that we work smarter, not harder. The HEM Mautic CRM helps us do that,” said Tally B. Hajek, the academy’s CEO. HEM’s CRM solution automated key marketing workflows (such as follow-ups with prospective students) and provided reports to track lead progress and team activities. The system also included a lead-scoring mechanism to identify and prioritize high-value leads, ensuring staff focus on serious, good-fit applicants. As a result, core recruitment processes became automated, allowing the admissions team to spend more time building personal connections with prospects.
All that great content needs visibility. Use SEO to make it discoverable through optimized site structure, keyword strategy, and internal linking. Develop content clusters, interconnected pages and blogs built around key topics, to boost authority. HEM’s SEO overhauls have helped clients like Cumberland College achieve double-digit growth in organic traffic. Technical SEO, schema markup, and fast mobile performance are nonnegotiable for Gen Alpha’s on-demand expectations.
Social Media Campaigns
Meet Gen Alpha where they live: TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat, and Instagram. Blend organic storytelling with paid targeting. Use TikTok Spark Ads or Snapchat placements to amplify authentic student content that already performs well. Combine this with parent-focused Facebook and Google campaigns for a full-funnel strategy. HEM’s campaign for Queen Anne’s School used this dual approach, improving conversion rates from inquiry to enrollment.
Multilingual and International Reach
Gen Alpha is global. Translate or localize key pages and ads to reach families in multiple languages. Include subtitles, translated summaries, and multilingual SEO to capture diverse search traffic. HEM’s work with Wilfrid Laurier University demonstrated that localized messaging in Portuguese and Spanish drove stronger ROI in international markets.
Integrating these elements (CRM, SEO, social, and multilingual content) creates a seamless ecosystem that attracts, nurtures, and converts Gen Alpha prospects efficiently. It’s how institutions move from generating attention to generating results.
Actionable Takeaways for Reaching Gen Alpha
Generation Alpha may still be young, but the time to reach them is now. To connect authentically, schools must meet them where they are and communicate in ways that feel human, immediate, and real.
Be present on the platforms they love, such as YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat, and even gaming spaces, featuring student creators who speak their language. Empower current students and recent graduates to share their stories, building trust through authenticity.
Balance messaging for both students and parents, addressing excitement and reassurance in equal measure. Adopt an answer-first content model using structured FAQs and schema to increase visibility in AI and voice search. Treat campus tours like product demos, creating interactive, hands-on, or virtual experiences that bring your institution to life.
Finally, measure what matters by tracking engagement, conversions, and insights from data to refine continuously. Above all, stay authentic and adaptable. The institutions that start now will lead the next generation of recruitment success.
Frequently Asked Questions
Question: Who is Generation Alpha?
Answer: Generation Alpha refers to children born between 2010 and 2024. They are the first cohort raised entirely in the 21st century, often called the first true digital natives.
Question: Why should institutions start preparing now?
Answer:Institutions must start preparing now because Generation Alpha is already entering the college decision phase, and adapting strategies early allows schools to refine digital, authentic, and parent-inclusive recruitment approaches before their enrollment surge.
This week on the podcast, live from our Festival in London, we discuss access and social mobility as the Office for Students reshuffles its leadership, and the Sutton Trust publishes a new report that paints a sobering picture.
Plus we discuss university governance and our new paper for the Post-18 Project, and we capture the vibes from our event, from the best quotes to the big debates shaping the sector’s future.
With Alistair Jarvis, Chief Executive at Advance HE, Janet Lord, Deputy Pro Vice Chancellor for Education at Manchester Metropolitan University, and Michael Salmon, News Editor at Wonkhe – and presented by Jim Dickinson, Associate Editor at Wonkhe.
Through storytelling, we can bring climate-related data to life. Through storytelling, young people can use their voice and the voices of those around them to turn something complex, global and overwhelming, into something local, tangible and meaningful. Through storytelling, young people can help shift narratives and bring to the forefront stories of action and of hope.
This is the idea behind the EYES climate storytelling curriculum.
The Climate Change 101 unit begins with the basics: human activities driving climate change and what temperature increase means for our planet. Students are tasked with producing an article that explains the topic to a younger audience.
A unit on Climate Injustice walks students through the uncomfortable reality that those causing climate change are suffering the least from its impacts. Those who have contributed the least? They tend to be in the grip of climate change.
Human stories from a man-made disaster
We know that learning about the devastations of the climate crisis can leave young people feeling anxious and angry. We also know from the teachers who piloted the EYES curriculum that it’s important to localise these topics.
So in the Climate Injustice unit, students are tasked with finding a human story: someone to illustrate climate injustice at play in their local area or region.
Hearing stories about people lets us understand the reality of an issue. Telling these stories gives young people a device for meaning-making and a platform for agency.
In our Systemic Change unit, students learn about the interconnected mechanisms that keep our economy rooted in endless economic growth and fossil fuel use. They learn about the ‘deep’ leverage points for making change — the rules, the goals and the mindset of a system. They research case studies on commodity supply chains and form their questions into a story pitch.
In Systemic Solutions to the Climate Crisis, we showcase seven inspiring examples of climate solutions from around the world, from local projects such as community-owned solar panels in Mexico to the transition to renewables in Uruguay, to global movements such as recognising the rights of nature or degrowth in the Global North.
Meaningful action can happen at any scale. By engaging with these case studies, students can see that stories of just and transformative systems change happen all around them.
There are so many stories yet to be told, and that in itself is empowering.
“Storytelling can turn young people into active users of climate knowledge, and even change makers,” said Andreea Pletea, The Environment and Human Rights Academy programme manager. “Students can even help shift dominant narratives by bringing to the surface systemic solutions to the environmental crises that also address inequalities.”
Causes and systems
Aside from storytelling, the main focus of the EYES curriculum is on systems thinking and climate injustice.
“We invite learners to go upstream to the root causes of the crises we face, and question why, despite increasing awareness, meaningful action often lags behind,” Pletea said. “Seeing the big picture particularly through systems thinking and global justice can also help young people make sense of what’s going on in their own local context.”
Pletea said that ultimately, the goal is to plant a seed. “That all of us, including young people, are more than consumers,” she said. “We are citizens with a voice and power to act and demand change, and especially when we come together.”
The EYES project itself began as a seed. TEHRA and News Decoder came together to improve climate change education through storytelling, and created a set of materials that were piloted in multiple education contexts across Europe, Africa and Latin America.
The seeds to stories
In Slovenia, Kenya and Colombia, pilot students exchanged letters on their local experiences of climate change. In Kosovo, a Roma community of young people visualised their personal experience of climate change through art.
At a summer camp in Belgium, students played climate change games, pulled apart the individual carbon footprint and were guided through a nature meditation. In Kenya, students visited the precious Karura national park and wrote stories about tipping points and the value of forests.
The feedback from students and educators, including at a three-day educators workshop in Brussels in October, helped shape and restructure the curriculum. It evolved into a set of off-the-shelf resources that can be used by multiple teachers in one school or independently by learners.
If you are an educator, we invite you to dive into climate change with your students and use the EYES curriculum. Students need to learn about the root causes of the climate crisis so that they know in which direction to head — in their future careers as much as in their personal set of values.
Through storytelling, young people can engage with the reality that is climate change, both as authors and as listeners. Storytelling is the way we understand ourselves: why we act the way we do and how together we can solve the problems that humankind has caused.
Questions to consider:
1. How can storytelling can turn someone into an active user of climate knowledge?
2. What types of climate activities did students in different countries do through the EYES lessons?
3. What stories about climate change have you found interesting to read or hear about?
A career-centered education built on real experience
One of the most transformative aspects of Career and Technical Education is how it connects learning to real life. When students understand that what they’re learning is preparing them for long and fulfilling careers, they engage more deeply. They build confidence, competence, and the practical skills employers seek in today’s competitive economy.
I’ve seen that transformation firsthand, both as a teacher and someone who spent two decades outside the classroom as a financial analyst working with entrepreneurs. I began teaching Agricultural Science in 1987, but stepped away for 20 years to gain real-world experience in banking and finance. When I returned to teaching, I brought those experiences with me, and they changed the way I taught.
Financial literacy in my Ag classes was not just another chapter in the curriculum–it became a bridge between the classroom and the real world. Students were not just completing assignments; they were developing skills that would serve them for life. And they were thriving. At Rio Rico High School in Arizona, we embed financial education directly into our Ag III and Ag IV courses. Students not only gain technical knowledge but also earn the Arizona Department of Education’s Personal Finance Diploma seal. I set a clear goal: students must complete their certifications by March of their senior year. Last year, 22 students achieved a 100% pass rate.
Those aren’t just numbers. They’re students walking into the world with credentials, confidence, and direction. That’s the kind of outcome only CTE can deliver at scale.
This is where curriculum systems designed around authentic, career-focused content make all the difference. With the right structure and tools, educators can consistently deliver high-impact instruction that leads to meaningful, measurable outcomes.
CTE tools that work
Like many teachers, I had to adapt quickly when the COVID-19 pandemic hit. I transitioned to remote instruction with document cameras, media screens, and Google Classroom. That’s when I found iCEV. I started with a 30-day free trial, and thanks to the support of their team, I was up and running fast.
iCEV became the adjustable wrench in my toolbox: versatile, reliable, and used every single day. It gave me structure without sacrificing flexibility. Students could access content independently, track their progress, and clearly see how their learning connected to real-world careers.
But the most powerful lesson I have learned in CTE has nothing to do with tech or platforms. It is about trust. My advice to any educator getting started with CTE? Don’t start small. Set the bar high. Trust your students. They will rise. And when they do, you’ll see how capable they truly are.
From classroom to career: The CTE trajectory
CTE offers something few other educational pathways can match: a direct, skills-based progression from classroom learning to career readiness. The bridge is built through internships, industry partnerships, and work-based learning: components that do more than check a box. They shape students into adaptable, resilient professionals.
In my program, students leave with more than knowledge. They leave with confidence, credentials, and a clear vision for their future. That’s what makes CTE different. We’re not preparing students for the next test. We’re preparing them for the next chapter of their lives.
These opportunities give students a competitive edge. They introduce them to workplace dynamics, reinforce classroom instruction, and open doors to mentorship and advancement. They make learning feel relevant and empowering.
As explored in the broader discussion on why the world needs CTE, the long-term impact of CTE extends far beyond individual outcomes. It supports economic mobility, fills critical workforce gaps, and ensures that learners are equipped not only for their first job, but for the evolution of work across their lifetimes.
CTE educators as champions of opportunity
Behind every successful student story is an educator or counselor who believed in their potential and provided the right support at the right time. As CTE educators, we’re not just instructors; we are workforce architects, building pipelines from education to employment with skill and heart.
We guide students through certifications, licenses, career clusters, and postsecondary options. We introduce students to nontraditional career opportunities that might otherwise go unnoticed, and we ensure each learner is on a path that fits their strengths and aspirations.
To sustain this level of mentorship and innovation, educators need access to tools that align with both classroom needs and evolving industry trends. High-quality guides provide frameworks for instruction, career planning, and student engagement, allowing us to focus on what matters most: helping every student achieve their full potential.
Local roots, national impact
When we talk about long and fulfilling careers, we’re also talking about the bigger picture: stronger local economies, thriving communities, and a workforce that’s built to last.
CTE plays a vital role at every level. It prepares students for in-demand careers that support their families, power small businesses, and fill national workforce gaps. States that invest in high-quality CTE programs consistently see the return: lower dropout rates, higher postsecondary enrollment, and greater job placement success.
But the impact goes beyond metrics. When one student earns a certification, that success ripples outward—it lifts families, grows businesses, and builds stronger communities.
CTE isn’t just about preparing students for jobs. It’s about giving them purpose. And when we invest in that purpose, we invest in long-term progress.
Empowering the next generation with the right tools
Access matters. The best ideas and strategies won’t create impact unless they are available, affordable, and actionable for the educators who need them. That’s why it’s essential for schools to explore resources that can strengthen their existing programs and help them grow.
A free trial offers schools a way to explore these solutions without risk—experiencing firsthand how career-centered education can fit into their unique context. For those seeking deeper insights, a live demo can walk teams through the full potential of a platform built to support student success from day one.
When programs are equipped with the right tools, they can exceed minimum standards. They can transform the educational experience into a launchpad for lifelong achievement.
CTE is more than a pathway. It is a movement driven by student passion, educator commitment, and a collective belief in the value of hard work and practical knowledge. Every certification earned, every skill mastered, and every student empowered brings us closer to a future built on long and fulfilling careers for everyone.
Dr. Richard McPherson is an Agriculture Science Teacher at Rio Rico High School in Arizona. A former financial analyst and CTE advocate, he returned to the classroom with a passion for combining real-world experience with purpose-driven instruction.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
An auditor said that staffing vacancies at Texas Southern University had contributed to financial mismanagement.
Istockphoto.com/michelmond
Texas governor Greg Abbott and lieutenant governor Dan Patrick have ordered an investigation of Texas Southern University, a historically Black institution in Houston, after a state audit found evidence of financial mismanagement and bookkeeping inconsistencies, The Texas Tribune reported. Patrick also said he would look into freezing state funding to the institution.
The audit found 700 invoices, totaling $280 million, linked to contracts that were listed as expired in the institution’s database. Another 800 invoices, worth $160 million, were dated before the purchases were approved, the Tribune reported. TSU was also months late in turning in financial statements for the past two fiscal years.
The auditor attributed the errors to staffing vacancies, poor asset oversight and weak contracting processes.
TSU officials said they had already fixed some of the issues outlined in the audit.
“Texas Southern University has cooperated with the state auditor in evaluating our processes,” officials said in a statement. “The University enacted corrective measures prior to the release of the interim report, including a new procurement system. We look forward to gaining clarity and continuing to work with the state auditor to ensure transparency for all taxpayers of Texas.”
UC Berkeley School of Law dean Erwin Chemerinsky spoke at this week’s APLU conference.
Carlos Avila Gonzalez/The San Francisco Chronicle/Getty Images
PHILADELPHIA—The final speech at the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities’ annual conference this week dissected the Trump administration’s “financial assault” on universities and urged the Supreme Court to be a check on a president whom Congress hasn’t reined in.
Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law and a constitutional scholar, also told the attendees of the APLU meeting that their institutions should be united against the administration’s attacks on higher ed.
“The one thing we all learned on the playground is if you give in to a bully, it only makes it worse in the long term,” Chemerinsky said Tuesday, adding—to applause—that “it’s so important that institutions of higher education stand together at this moment and stand together for our shared missions.”
The speech comes after multiple prominent universities, including a few public ones, refused to sign Trump’s proposed “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” which asked them to give up significant autonomy in exchange for an unspecified edge in competitions for federal funds.
It also follows legal victories against the administration’s grant cancellations. Litigation by UC researchers against Trump, the Department of Government Efficiency and other federal agencies and officials has restored more than $500 million in federal research grants, which the administration cut at UCLA after the Justice Department accused it of tolerating antisemitism during a spring 2024 pro-Palestinian protest encampment. Chemerinsky, who is Jewish, is representing the researchers in that litigation.
Asked for comment, a White House official told Inside Higher Ed in an email, “UC Berkely clearly needs to make some changes – violence broke out on UC Berkeley’s campus just last night and they have failed to police antisemitism by tolerating an ‘unrelenting’ steam of antisemitic harassment toward Jewish students and faculty.”
Even before the latest cuts, Chemerinsky estimated the Trump administration had already slashed close to $1 billion in funding for faculty and researchers across the UC system, a figure that he said was much higher than DOGE’s tally. The UC system didn’t confirm or deny this estimate or provide a more recent estimate Tuesday, saying the system was closed for Veterans Day.
“I think the termination of grants that we’ve seen, whether it’s to researchers and faculty or to universities, is clearly illegal,” Chemerinsky said. But when it comes to “nonrenewal of grants in the future and funding in the future,” he added, the “government has far more discretion, and there it’s going to be much harder to bring legal challenges.”
Chemerinsky also said federal funding cuts are just one of four financial vulnerabilities the administration has identified in universities: “they’re very dependent” on federal money, tuition, philanthropy and foreign students. Using his own institution as an example, he said Berkeley Law has an L.L.M., or master of laws, degree program that’s exclusively for foreign students and represents $20 million in its annual budget.
He then expressed concern about how the Supreme Court has ruled on the administration’s actions, even beyond higher ed.
“By my count, 39 matters have come to the Supreme Court since [Inauguration Day] Jan. 20, challenging actions of the Trump administration,” he said. “All are instances where the lower courts ruled against the Trump administration, and in 36 of 39, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Trump administration.”
Noting eight of the nine justices graduated from the law schools at either Harvard or Yale Universities (Amy Coney Barrett graduated from the University of Notre Dame), he said, “My optimistic self believes that the United States Supreme Court will stand up for higher education.” Chemerinsky added that since Congress hasn’t served as a check on the president, it’s up to the federal judiciary to uphold the laws and the Constitution.
Fittingly, his speech took place at a Philadelphia hotel about a 15-minute walk from where the founders adopted the Constitution. APLU said more than 1,300 people attended this week’s three-day conference.
“Ultimately, I believe the guardrail of our democracy has to be the courts and the Supreme Court,” Chemerinsky said. “If there is going to be a check on a president who has authoritarian impulses, it’s going to have to be from the restraints of the Constitution—and the only way we can enforce those is the courts.”
Chemerinsky noted that “one characteristic of every authoritarian—or would-be authoritarian—rule is the way they go after universities. What we’ve seen in the last nine and a half months is unprecedented in American history.”
He compared Trump’s actions to McCarthyism, the 1950s-era political persecution of faculty, government employees and others. But Chemerinsky pointed out that back then, “it wasn’t the president of the United States leading the attack on higher education,” and “there wasn’t the financial assault on universities.”
“But the one thing that the McCarthy era should say to all of us is that history will judge us,” he said. “Twenty, 30, 50, 75 years from now, people will look back on us the way we look at university officials in the McCarthy era, and they will judge us as to whether we capitulated or whether we had courage.”
Amy Reid spent more than 30 years at New College of Florida, where she served as a professor of French and the founder and director of the gender studies program. Her relatively secure employment as a tenured professor emboldened her to become one of the most outspoken critics of the conservative effort to transform NCF into a “Hillsdale College of the South,” led by then-interim president Richard Corcoran, who was hired by a swath of conservative trustees installed by Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2023.
That same year, Reid was elected to serve as faculty representative on the Board of Trustees; she voted against Corcoran’s appointment to be the college’s permanent president and pushed back against numerous policies, including an effort by the administration to use the faculty to help enforce gendered bathroom laws.
Last month, Corcoran denied a recommendation from the New College provost that Reid be granted emerita status at the college, citing Reid’s advocacy for faculty and academic freedom, which he described as “hyperbolic alarmism and needless obstruction.” In response, the New College Alumni Association Board of Directors made Reid an honorary alum.
Since taking unpaid leave in August 2024 and then retiring a year later, Reid has brought her talents and penchant for advocacy to PEN America, a nonprofit focused on fighting education censorship and protecting press freedom.
Inside Higher Ed spoke with Reid over Zoom about her experience as the faculty representative on the New College Board of Trustees, the transformation of the public liberal arts college and expanding efforts by Florida conservatives to censor faculty speech.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Q: Before you became faculty representative on the Board of Trustees at New College, the previous representative quit in protest. What motivated you to pursue the role and what were you hoping to do with it?
A: Things had been contentious on campus. Frankly, that’s an understatement. When the new board members were appointed that January [2023], they described their arrival on campus as a “siege”—using military language. So I began organizing with other faculty members and providing support to students so that they could respond to the rapid changes on campus, changes that included the immediate firing of our president [Patricia Okker], and then, over the coming weeks, a number of key leaders; the censoring of student speech and chalking on campus; the denial of tenure to a number of very qualified faculty.
I started holding weekly teas for students, providing them a place to ask questions and to be heard and also to have cookies. So working with my colleagues and providing support for students were the two things that I really wanted to do.
As a senior member of the faculty and as the leader of the gender studies program, I felt like I had a particular responsibility to speak up on campus. I knew that colleagues of mine who were not tenured couldn’t necessarily do that, so I tried to speak up for my community. And after Matt Lipinski resigned from the Board of Trustees and from his faculty position [after the board denied tenure to five professors], he actually reached out and asked me to stand for election as chair of the faculty, because I’d been both working in collaboration with others through the union and also because of my outspokenness as director of the gender studies program. So after talking with other colleagues, I agreed to stand for election in collaboration with two other colleagues.
Q: What was the initial reception from the board when you joined?
A: What I really remember, actually, was the real support that I had from colleagues and students and alums. So yes, there was a certain amount of tension with certain members of the Board of Trustees. There were people on the board who did reach out in friendly and professional ways—greeting me at meetings, things like that—but really I had strong support from faculty, alums and students, and that’s what mattered.
Q: Do you think you were successful in the faculty representative role?
A: That’s really a challenging question, and it depends on what metrics you want to use. I think I did a good job of raising serious questions and concerns in the trustee meetings, even if my votes were not often on the winning side. I always brought my integrity with me, and as an educator, that was really important to me. I think I was able to help rally faculty around various policy proposals that we put forth, because my job wasn’t just in the Board of Trustees, it was also in the management of the faculty, which meant multiple meetings every week about budgets and other administrative issues.
There was a lot of work there behind the scenes to support faculty, to support the curriculum and also to advocate for students in a number of ways. I know that students and faculty and alums felt that they could reach out to me about their concerns, that they knew I would listen and respond. When people spoke at Board of Trustees meetings, I paid attention and took notes on all of the people who came to speak. In that way, I think I was effective, but frankly, the votes on the board were stacked.
Q: When you resigned, you said that the “New College where you once taught no longer existed.” Was there a specific moment that tanked your faith in New College leadership?
A: It’s really not about a loss of faith in the new leadership. Richard Corcoran came in with a set of ideas about how he wanted to change the campus, to change what one trustee called the “hormonal and political balance on campus.” And Corcoran followed through on that. I can point first to the firing of valuable and dedicated campus leaders, including President Patricia Okker, the dean of diversity, the campus research librarian. [I can also point to] the denial of tenure to six very qualified and effective faculty, the chasing away of over 30 percent of the faculty and about 100 students—and that’s a real record for the first eight months of this administration.
Then you have the painting over of student art on campus, the replacement of grass with Astroturf and the plowing down of hundreds of trees along the bay front. You have the wasting of millions of dollars of state funds on bloated administrative salaries and portable dorms that were uninhabitable within three months due to mold. You have the abolishing of the gender studies program in the summer of 2023, the erasure of our budget, our eviction from our campus office in December of 2023. The imposition of a rigid and limited core curriculum in spring of 2024. The withholding of diplomas from a cohort of students in May 2024, the wholesale destruction of the student-led gender and diversity center in August 2024. That was a student-led space with a collection of books that had been curated by students for over 30 years, all thrown in the dumpster.
So not one moment, but a lot. But what I still have faith in, even today, is the determination of students and alums to pursue an education that embodies academic freedom, which I understand is the right of students to pursue an education free from government censorship. And also, I have great faith in those faculty who are remaining, who support the New College academic mission and who are doing their best day in and day out to support our students.
Q: Were you surprised when Corcoran denied the dean’s recommendation to grant you emerita status?
A: Not really. I’d say it’s par for the course, but I was surprised that he was so up front about his reasons. In his statement, he noted that despite my record of achievement as a teacher and a researcher, it was my advocacy for the college—my opposition to him—that was the problem. So now he’s on the record explicitly as punishing speech, and that is stunning.
What happened to me is just one small thing, but it reflects a pattern of censorship on the campus that needs to be called out. But more importantly at this moment, I really want to thank my colleagues who nominated me for emeritus status and the New College alums who adopted me as one of their own. That’s meaningful, and I am very grateful.
Q: As a reporter, I spend a lot of time reading and writing bad news, but I’m seeing the same types of attacks on faculty speech and academic freedom that happened at New College occur at other institutions, in Florida and elsewhere. Would you say these current attacks on faculty speech are unprecedented?
A: A lot of people have talked about this as unprecedented, but what I see is the culmination of a pattern of censorship we’ve seen playing out at state levels across the country. In Florida, in 2022, they passed House Bill 233, which allows or encourages students to surreptitiously record faculty if they intend to file a complaint against them.
Since then, really, the state has been tightening a gag around faculty speech in myriad ways. Just in the past couple of months, we’ve seen a number of faculty sanctioned—even one emeritus professor at [University of Florida] lost his status based on complaints about his social media posts. So what’s happening now could be cast as unprecedented, but yet, it’s part of this pattern we see playing out now, not just in Florida, but across the country, where some 50 faculty members have been sanctioned or fired because of their speech or social media posts since the start of September.
Since 2021, PEN America has been actively tracking efforts to censor speech in college and university classrooms across the country, and we’ve seen a real rise in the number of bills introduced to censor speech … and in the numbers that are being passed; 2025 was really a banner year for censorship in higher education in this country. There were a record number of gag orders passed across the country—10 of them, 10 bills that explicitly limit what can be said in college and university classrooms.
And then there are other restrictions designed to chill faculty speech—restrictions on tenure or curricular control bills, and let’s also remember the bills that were introduced or passed to limit student protests on campus. All of those things are designed to make people afraid to speak up and to question things on campus. That’s not healthy for our education system, and it’s not healthy for our democracy. Currently, about 40 percent of the U.S. population lives in a state that has at least one state-level law restricting classroom speech at the college and university level. Is that something we’re OK with as a country? Do we really think that our First Amendment rights are that fungible?
Is it possible for someone you’ve never met to be a mentor?
I don’t know how else to describe Ken Bain, author of What the Best College Teachers Do, a book that transformed not just my teaching, but my entire life.
Ken Bain passed away on Oct. 10. I first learned this news on LinkedIn from Jim Lang, who did know and was directly mentored by Ken Bain and, like the several dozen folks who offered comments on his passing—and also me—whose life and work were profoundly affected by Ken Bain’s work.
I read an advance copy of What The Best College Teachers Do sometime in early 2004 in a period where I was starting to question the folklore of teaching I had absorbed as a student and graduate assistant, and it immediately changed how I thought about my own work, kicking off a process of consideration and experimentation around teaching writing that continues to this day.
What the Best College Teachers Do reflects more than a decade of study and is entirely based in observations of teaching, teaching materials, student responses and reflections, interviews and other sources, filtered through various lenses (history, literary analysis, sociology, ethnography, investigative journalism) to draw both big conclusions about not just what teachers do, but how they think, how they relate to students, how they view their work and how they evolve their approaches.
The method is relentlessly qualitative rather than quantitative, and it can be straightforwardly adapted to one’s own work.
At least that’s how I used the book. Looking through some of the text for the first time in years, I can see significant strands of What the Best College Teachers Do DNA in my writing about the writer’s practice. The lens of “doing” as the central feature of any work has been part of my personal framework for so long that I almost lost its origin, but there it is.
The book is more than 20 years old, but its framing questions are evergreen and even more relevant in this AI age. The book asks and answers the following questions:
What do the best teachers know and understand?
How do they prepare to teach?
What do they expect of their students?
What do they do when they teach?
How do they treat students?
How do they check their progress and evaluate their efforts?
The book helpfully encapsulates the study’s findings under these categories, and as bullet points of good teaching practice they are spot-on. But I am also here to testify that they are not a substitute for the full experience of reading What the Best College Teachers Do, because the act of reading the specific illustrations and examples that gave rise to these findings allows for the individual to reflect on their own practices relative to others.
The first thing I did after reading and absorbing What the Best College Teachers Do was change my attendance policy to no longer punish students based on a maximum number of absences. I’d engaged in this practice because it had been handed down as conventional wisdom: If you don’t police student attendance, they won’t show up. Bain’s best teachers challenged this conventional wisdom.
The positive effects were immediate. I stepped up my game in terms of making sure class was viewed by students as productive and necessary. My mood improved, as I no longer stewed over students who were pushing their luck in terms of absences, daring me to dock their overall semester grade.
Attendance went up! I asked students about this, and they said that when a class says you “get four absences” they were treating that as a kind of permission (or even encouragement) to go ahead and miss four classes. Student agency and self-responsibility increased. If they missed a class, they knew what they had to do, and it didn’t involve me.
The experiments continued, leading ultimately to the writer’s practice and my embrace of alternative assessment, developments that made me a much more effective instructor and now, improbably, someone invited to colleges and universities to share his expertise on these subjects.
It would not have happened without the work and mentorship of Ken Bain, mentorship I experienced entirely through reading his book.
I worry that mentorship is going to be further eroded by AI, particularly if entry-level jobs with their apprenticeship tasks are now completed through automation, rather than by working with other, more experienced humans. The enthusiasm for letting large language models compress texts into summaries rather than reading the full work of another unique intelligence is also a threat.
My conviction that our way forward through the challenge of AI is rooted in deeply examining the experiences of learning and fostering those experiences for students only grows stronger by the day. What the Best College Teachers Do is experiences all the way down, a book of observations conveyed in such a way that allows us to make use of them, literally, in what we do.
A great man. A great mentor. Ken Bain’s work will live on through the many pedagogues he’s inspired.
The dramatic enhancement in the capability of AI as it moves from bots to agents will bring about efficiencies and have a far greater impact on the day-to-day operations, strategies and effectiveness of our institutions. We will become less expensive, more personalized and more responsive to students and employers. Those are big claims, so for this column, I turned to my personal assistant, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro on Nov. 1, 2025, to help me with identifying the pathway to those outcomes.
Caveats
In this article, I can only hit the high points along the way in developing an agentic AI–enhanced university. This is merely a broad-brush, incomplete view that each university should adjust and enhance in order to meet its structures and needs. I also encourage you to read the valuable McKinsey article “Deploying agentic AI with safety and security: A playbook for technology leaders,” published on Oct. 15, 2025, for important security and safety information.
Gemini Pro prefaced its recommendations with:
This is the central strategic challenge for the next 36 months. The institution has successfully navigated the first wave—generative AI, which is about creating content. You are right to be concerned about the second, more powerful wave: agentic AI, which is about taking action.
Where generative AI is a research assistant, an agentic AI is a 24/7, autonomous project manager. It can understand a high-level goal (e.g., “increase retention for first-generation students”), create a multi-step plan, execute that plan across different software systems and learn from its mistakes without constant human prompting.
Competitors will use this to create profound operational efficiencies and new, hyper-personalized student services. The institutions that wait will be competing on price and quality against a rival that has automated its back office and given every student a personal AI adviser.
This will take significant thought and planning across the university. It will be important that we include all members of the university community to make this a coordinated, comprehensive change that will significantly advance the efficiency, effectiveness and relevance of the institution. Timing is important. We must begin immediately if we hope to have major changes in place before the end of 2027. Let’s begin!
First Half of 2026 Foundation and Vision
We will need an executive task force with the knowledge, resources and shared vision to accomplish this task. Gemini recommends we be sure to include:
Chief information officer: To map the data and systems.
Chief financial officer: To identify cost-saving opportunities and fund pilots.
Provost: To champion the academic quality and student-facing initiatives.
VP of enrollment: To represent the entire student life cycle (recruitment to alumni).
VP of operations: To represent the “back office” (HR, grounds, facilities).
The executive task force will want to set up opportunities for input and support of the initiative. Perhaps the first step will be to seek ideas of whether the first order of priority should be quality improvement (hyperpersonalization of services to the learners) or cost efficiency (operational excellence). Both of these will be needed in the long run in order to survive the agent-enabled competition that will be both of higher quality and less expensive. In seeking input on this choice, universitywide awareness can be fostered. Perhaps a broad university forum could be scheduled on the topic with smaller, targeted follow-ups with faculty, staff, students, administrators and external stakeholder groups scheduled as the initiative proceeds.
One of the first steps of the executive task force will be to perform a universitywide Agent Readiness Audit. Since agents run on data and processes, we need to identify any data silos and process bottlenecks. These will be among our first priorities to ensure that agents can perform work smoothly and efficiently. Resolving these may also be among the most time-consuming changes. However, removing these data roadblocks can begin to show immediate progress in responsiveness and efficiency.
Second Half of 2026 Into Spring 2027 Pilot and Infrastructure
Gemini suggests that a good starting point in the summer of 2026 would be to set up two pilots:
Cost-Saving Pilot: The Facilities Agent
Goal: Reduce energy and maintenance costs.
Action: An AI agent integrates with the campus event schedule, weather forecasts and the building HVAC/lighting systems. It autonomously adjusts climate control and lighting for actual use, not just a fixed timer. It also fields all maintenance requests, triages them and dispatches staff or robotic mowers/vacuums automatically.
Quality-Improvement Pilot Example: The Proactive Adviser Agent
Goal: Improve retention for at-risk students.
Action: An agent monitors student data in real time (LMS engagement, attendance, early grade-book data). It doesn’t replace the human adviser. It acts as their assistant, flagging a student who is at risk before the midterm and autonomously executing a plan: sending a nudge, offering to schedule a tutoring session and summarizing the risk profile for the human adviser to review.
Our most significant centralized expense will be to set up a secure digital sandbox. The pilots cannot live on a faculty member’s laptop. The CIO must lead the creation of a central, secure platform. This sandbox is a secure environment where AI agents can be developed, tested and given access to the university’s core data APIs (e.g., SIS, LMS and ERP).
Gemini reminds me that, concurrently, we must set up a new entity. The generative AI rules were about plagiarism. The agentic AI rules must be about liability. The new entity is a kind of Agent Accountability Framework. It deals with policy questions such as:
Who is responsible when an agent gives a student incorrect financial aid advice?
What is the off-switch when an agent-driven workflow (like course wait lists) creates an inequitable outcome? Who has authority to flip the switch?
By whom and how are an agent’s actions audited?
Implementation Across University Through Fall 2027
There will be many personnel and staffing topics to address. By the summer of 2027, we should be well on the way to refining roles and position descriptions of employees. The emphasis should be efficient, enhanced redesign of roles rather than staffing cuts. Some cuts will come from normal turnover as staff find more attractive opportunities or retire. In most cases, employees will become much more productive, handing off their redundant, lower-level work to agents. For example, Gemini Pro envisions:
The admissions counselor who used to answer 500 identical emails now manages a team of AI agents that handle the routine questions, freeing the counselor to spend one-on-one time with high-priority applicants.
The IT help desk technician no longer resets passwords. The technicians now train the AI agent on how to troubleshoot new software and directly handle only the most complex, level-three issues.
The human adviser now manages a caseload of 500 students (not 150), because the AI assistant handles 90 percent of the administrative churn, allowing the adviser to focus on high-impact mentoring.
Gemini Pro suggests that this approach can result in a higher-quality, more efficient university that will be able to compete in the years ahead. The final step is the most critical and is the job of everyone, from the president and board on down. We must champion a culture where AI agents are seen as collaborators, not replacements. This is a human-AI “co-bot” workforce.
The institutions that win in 2027 will be those that successfully trained their managers to lead mixed teams of human and AI employees. This is the single greatest competitive advantage one can build.
This framework will position the university not just to survive the agentic AI wave but to lead it, creating an institution that is both more efficient and, critically, more human-centered.
