Wrapping up a recent course, one of my students approached and asked to talk. It turns out she wasn’t there to review an assignment or clarify a grade. Instead, she was seeking my advice on her future career: what were my thoughts on job prospects for her major; what professional pathways made sense, given our rapidly changing world.
As the conversation touched on search strategies, market forces, and even the shifting nature of work itself, I was struck by how the moment represented a growing phenomenon in higher education: helping students succeed beyond the academic setting is a shared responsibility, particularly as the call for post-academic success continues to grow.
Dedicated career centers lead the way for student success beyond campus, but when students seek guidance on their future professional roles, chances are it will be an instructor to whom they turn. That’s good news for those of us committed to academic success. When students reach out to faculty for career advice, it’s an opportunity to deepen trust and strengthen learner confidence–principles that correlate with learning success. It also allows us to link learning with purpose, while helping us more deeply understand the evolution of our disciplines.
Integrating career readiness into our courses benefits us all. Here are some simple steps to get started:
Instructors Are Career Influencers—Whether We Know It or Not
Classroom instructors are the most consistent professional mentors that students encounter throughout their college years. A passing comment about your own career trajectory, or a few minutes spent discussing potential paths in your field, can expand a student’s sense of what’s possible, particularly for those whose backgrounds lack the types of professional networks that can impact professional success. Inviting professionals into the classroom–whether through alumni networks, or local industry—is an opportunity to provide students with professional roadmaps. Sharing examples of the different ways your discipline shows up in the world can likewise orient students towards a meaningful future in which they will likely change careers multiple times. To help guide conversations, invite students to explore so-called “clusters” of careers using tools such as the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Information Network which provides data on growing fields and industries.
Relevance Drives Engagement
When students understand how their academic work connects to real-world applications, their engagement deepens. They’re more likely to push through a complex assignment when they see how it builds toward the type of skills they can apply to future employment. Not every lesson needs to turn into a job training session but connecting the “what” of our teaching to the “why” that students are so often seeking strengthens outcomes and can also improve student satisfaction. Studies indicate that students gain motivation when they can see how the skills they’re developing serve a purpose beyond the classroom, so canvassing students about their future career goals and integrating conversations and activities that help them map content to careers can be highly effective.
Every Discipline Includes Transferable Skills
Supporting students with future career goals means guiding them to recognize key competencies that develop across disciplines and that are prioritized across professional fields. Key among these are the skills of critical thinking, communication, teamwork, cultural fluency, and ethical decision-making. Students won’t always recognize these as in-demand skills unless we name them, so consistently referencing their utility is an impactful step. That might mean pointing out that a history paper builds research skills; a biology lab fosters analytical reasoning; and a group project in any discipline develops collaboration and leadership skills that are prized in the workplaces of today. By drawing attention to these connections, we help students value the breadth of what they’re learning while helping them understand how to showcase these skills to future employers.
Hybrid Skills Define the Modern Workforce
Today’s employers seek graduates who bring both depth and versatility, meaning team members who know the specifics of their field, but can also communicate, adapt, and think creatively. These hybrid profiles are in demand across sectors and instructors can support their students by embedding assignments that mirror real-world demands. Case studies, presentations, simulations, along with reflective writing, all offer chances to practice skills that matter in professional life. When we give students opportunities to apply knowledge in dynamic ways, we prepare them not only for jobs, but for the type of lifelong learning these professional positions will demand.
Helping students prepare for their careers doesn’t dilute academic rigor; it strengthens it by affirming that education matters in the world beyond academics. That day in the classroom, as I listened to my student’s questions about her future, I realized she wasn’t looking for certainty, but rather the opportunity to engage in the very skills we’ve always valued in teaching: critical questioning, reflection, and the ability to envision new ways to advance. Faculty are in a unique position to offer this type of guidance. Embracing and integrating career readiness into our teaching supports the pedagogical goals of the classroom while helping students succeed well beyond them.
Juli S. Charkes, EdD, is a former Director of a Center for Teaching and Learning where she led faculty development across 100 academic programs. She has been a classroom instructor for the past 14 years, teaching organizational leadership, communications, and media studies at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
Pleschová, G., Sutherland, K. A., Felten, P., Forsyth, R., & Wright, M. C. (2025). Trust-building as inherent to academic development practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 30(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2025.2454704
Fish, N., Bertone, S., & van Gramberg, B. (2025). Improving student engagement in employability development: recognising and reducing affective and behavioural barriers. Studies in Higher Education, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2025.2461271
What if the AI tools we are trying to limit and caution against were actually essential (or beneficial) to enhancing the critical thinking skills we are afraid of losing? Since the 2023 proliferation of generative AI, faculty have been inundated with warnings that human intelligence is being eroded by AI. As a result, some faculty have adopted policies banning or severely limiting AI use driven by concerns of academic integrity and the fear of students bypassing essential learning.
However, banning AI will not prevent students from using it, whether for nefarious or appropriate purposes. Instead, it may deny students a chance to practice and engage with AI in an educational setting where they and faculty can explore its full potential collaboratively. This kind of restrictive thinking is based on two flawed assumptions: that AI cannot support student thinking and that students will only use AI to cheat. The challenge is not to police every use, but to reframe our approach from one of prohibition to one of collaborative partnership.
This shift in perspective allows faculty to systematically integrate AI into courses in a developmentally appropriate manner. By centering policies on learning, we can encourage students to take an active, self-regulated approach to their education. This reframes the focus from dishonesty to autonomous learning, emphasizing academic values while scaffolding meaningful assignments that challenge student thinking.
Integrating AI into the curriculum requires a developmental approach, much like teaching toddlers. Expecting a first-year student to rely on AI for essential skills development is like asking a toddler to color within the lines—it’s developmentally inappropriate. Instead, our policies should align with a student’s progression. In lower-level courses, the focus must be on foundational skill-building including learning how to use AI. For upper-level and graduate students, we can empower them to autonomously evaluate AI’s role in their learning and whether or not AI is developing or replacing learning. Meanwhile, mid-level courses can provide a scaffolded transition, with specific instructions on how and when to use AI.
It is important to consider students’ prior knowledge of AI as well. While many are comfortable using technology and AI, they may lack metacognitive awareness of how their use affects learning. Understanding students’ technology usage is crucial when designing courses. Ultimately, use your best judgment—some graduate courses may require a cautious approach, while entry-level courses might benefit from a more permissive policy, especially since students within the same course can have a wide range of AI abilities.
How to Integrate AI Developmentally into Your Courses
Lower-Level Courses: Focus on building foundational skills, which includes guided instruction on how to use AI responsibly. This moves the strategy beyond mere prohibition.
Mid-Level Courses: Use AI as a scaffold where faculty provide specific guidelines on when and how to use the tool, preparing students for greater independence.
Upper-Level/Graduate Courses: Empower students to evaluate AI’s role in their learning. This enables them to become self-regulated learners who make informed decisions about their tools.
Balanced Approach: Make decisions about AI use based on the content being learned and students’ developmental needs.
Now that you have a framework for how to conceptualize including AI into your courses here are a few ideas on scaffolding AI to allow students to practice using technology and develop cognitive skills.
To introduce AI into your course, create a prompt that asks students to have a conversation with an AI about a concept you will be discussing. This anticipatory set can prime student thinking and encourage them to use AI in a conversational manner, moving beyond simply asking for answers. You can then discuss the AI’s responses—exploring bias, hallucinations, and the depth of its answers—which naturally leads to a conversation about crafting better prompts. This simple, ungraded exercise allows all students to participate, provides valuable practice, and serves a clear learning purpose.
Another example of a nongraded, purposeful use of AI is for providing feedback on learning. When students are writing papers, you can create custom AI agents to provide feedback on different parts of the writing process, from idea development to final submission. These agents can be designed to follow assignment criteria without writing any portion of the work. If students choose to use the agent, you can ask them to share their feedback conversations to assess the quality of the feedback and to write about how they incorporated it to develop their ideas—adding a crucial element of metacognition.
This method is also ideal for reinforcing and mastering skill development. For example, in a counseling course, students can practice articulating confidentiality and its limits to a fictional client created by AI. Once this foundational skill is mastered, the agent can be instructed to demonstrate signs of self-harm, allowing the student to practice assessing client safety and deciding whether to break confidentiality. As with the other examples, you can ask students to share their conversations for your feedback, have them critique their own performance, and provide a rationale for their approach. The agent itself can even provide feedback at the end of the session.
Finally, a higher level of AI integration is to have students create their own custom learning AI agent. By this point, students will have had multiple chances to improve their prompt writing, practice using AI for learning (not bypassing skills), and evaluate how AI supports their development. Creating a personalized study agent would be an ideal way for students to be active in their learning and assess the areas they need to develop. Faculty could provide guidelines and ask students to share how they are using AI positively.
How to Scaffold AI into Your Courses
Start with low-stakes, ungraded activities.
Then use AI to provide meaningful, real-time feedback.
Create opportunities for skill reinforcement and mastery.
Finally, empower students to become creators, not just users.
To truly prepare students for life after graduation, institutions and faculty must be willing to provide training on new technologies with a lens of learning. Faculty must move beyond fear and prohibition and engage directly with these tools. By exploring AI’s potential faculty can transform their teaching from a place of restriction to one of collaborative partnership.
By taking a development and scaffolded approach to AI implementation students can benefit from its potential. If this approach is embraced, the question is no longer “Should we allow AI in the classroom?” The more productive question becomes “How can we teach our students to become discerning and effective creators of a world shaped by AI?”
Michael Kiener, PhD, CRC, is a professor at Maryville University of St. Louis in their Clinical Mental Health Counseling program. For the past 10 years he has coordinated their Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Program, where faculty participate in a yearlong program with a goal of improved student learning. In 2012 and 2024 he received the Outstanding Faculty Award for faculty who best demonstrate excellence in the integration of teaching, scholarship and/or service. He has over thirty publications including a co-authored book on strength-based counseling and journal articles on career decision making, action research, counseling pedagogy, and active and dynamic learning strategies.
When students of different years of study share a common class, their levels of experience and confidence differ. Students from lower years of study may hesitate to speak up in the presence of those in higher years, while more experienced students may contribute more freely. These dynamics are common and, if left unaddressed, can reinforce a power imbalance that discourages active learning.
The same challenge shows up at the start of a semester. When students meet a lecturer for the first time, the unfamiliarity often makes them cautious. Most hold back. It is not because they lack curiosity, but because they are unsure how their answers or questions will be received.
This hesitation can hold back meaningful participation. I have come to learn that all it takes is a simple, intentional tool to change the energy of a room and give every student the confidence to contribute.
One such tool that has had a lasting impact on my teaching is the “Parking Lot.”
Discovering the Parking Lot
The Parking Lot is a simple but powerful active-learning tool: a dedicated space, physical or digital, where students can “park” their questions, comments, or reflections for later discussion. This allows a session to keep its flow while assuring students that their contributions will be acknowledged.
I first encountered this tool during a two week professional development course on Competency-Based Education and Training (CBET) delivery organized by my university.
I left the training with many ideas for making my teaching more interactive, but the Parking Lot stayed with me as a practical, low-cost strategy I could implement immediately.
A few months later, in early September 2025, I have the privilege of leading an inaugural 40-Hour Mediation Training and Certification program, a capacity-building initiative for students and staff members.
As project lead, I handled admissions and could tell from the applications that we had a mix of students from different years and one staff member. I worried that students from lower years might hold back and that quieter voices might be lost. I wanted every participant to feel their questions, comments, and opinions mattered.
During the pre-training meeting, I asked the trainers if I could introduce the Parking Lot as a way to encourage engagement, and they graciously agreed.
Bringing the Parking Lot to Life
On the first day of the training, I wrote PARKING LOT on a manila sheet, taped it to the front wall near the exit, and placed sticky notes on each participant’s table. The trainers invited me to explain how it worked.
I explained the purpose of the parking lot and encouraged participants to write their questions on sticky notes at any point in the day, during sessions, breaks, or even early the next morning, if they were not ready to raise their hand.
The results were immediate and encouraging. By the end of the first day, the Parking Lot had several notes posted. The trainers reviewed and addressed them the following morning, and participants continued to engage with it throughout the week.
Some who started by writing anonymous notes eventually became confident enough to ask questions aloud. The trainers later confirmed that the Parking Lot had improved participation and enriched the discussions.
This success made me curious to see what would happen if I tried it in my regular semester classes, which were about to begin the following week.
Applying the Parking Lot in My Classes
It was my first class of the semester, and I wanted to set the tone for participation. I was teaching a fourth year second semester class on Alternative dispute Resolution.
This time, I didn’t use the Parking Lot just to collect questions — I used it to invite feedback and spark discussion.
The first question I asked was “What rules should govern our class this semester?” Students wrote their suggestions on sticky notes, and we created a “social contract” for the semester, another active learning technique I am experimenting with.
I read the suggestions aloud and asked students, “What does this rule mean for us as a class?” or “How might we apply this rule in practice?” Their answers led to rich discussion, and I saw the power of shared responsibility as play when we agreed on the class rules, their application and consequences for both the students and the teacher.
I then used the Parking Lot to ask questions to introduce the course I was teaching that semester: “What do you think is conflict?”, “What do you think is a dispute?”, “What is the difference?” Reading their answers helped me identify and gently correct misconceptions without putting anyone on the spot. The class became so interactive that students were surprised when time was up.
Motivated by the positive results, later that same day, I used the Parking Lot in my first-year, second-semester on Legal Research & Writing class.
I asked students to write down on the sticky notes why they chose to study law and what they hoped to do with their degree. I told them that their reasons could serve as a compass something to help them find direction, stay true to their path, and never lose sight of their reason for being in law school when the journey becomes challenging.
I read their answers aloud, offered encouragement, and connected their aspirations back to the course outcomes. For example, I reminded them that to become a defender of human rights, one must not only know how to find the correct law but also be capable of writing clearly and persuasively.
This exercise gave even the quietest students a voice and set a tone of openness and shared purpose for the rest of the semester.
Lessons Learned
In the three instances I have applied the Parking Lot with different groups of students, I have seen it:
Activate students’ thinking early as they process the material and reflect on what they are learning.
Open up discussion by creating a safe space where every student’s voice can be heard.
Reveal misconceptions and allow them to be addressed gently, without putting anyone on the spot.
Connect student contributions to learning outcomes, helping them see why what they wrote matters to the course.
Encourage students to take ownership of their learning, which builds confidence and keeps them engaged.
Create opportunities for mentorship, by affirming students’ ideas, encouraging them, and guiding them as they think about their future career paths.
Reflection
This experience brought me to the realization that innovation in teaching, even in public universities where resources are often limited, does not need complicated technology or big budgets.
A manila paper sheet, some sticky notes, and a willingness to listen can transform the classroom.
Most of all, this experience affirmed why I teach: to create spaces where every student, confident or quiet, can grow.
Seeing students engaged, sharing openly, and losing track of time because they are so absorbed in the conversation is one of the most rewarding experiences I can have as an educator.
What You Can Do Tomorrow
Bring a manila sheet and sticky notes to class, tape the sheet where students can see it as they leave, and invite them to post their questions, answers or reflections.
Review and address a few notes immediately or at the start of the next class. You may be surprised how quickly even the quietest students start to contribute.
J. Muthoni Mwangi, LL.B, PGDip Law, LL.M, is an Assistant Lecturer at JKUAT School of Law – Karen Campus, an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya, an Associate Member of CIArb, and an Accredited Mediator with SDRC. She served as Project Lead for the inaugural JKUAT 40-Hour Mediation Training & Certification and is passionate about learner-cantered legal education, mentoring the next generation of mediators, and promoting access to justice.
When students of different years of study share a common class, their levels of experience and confidence differ. Students from lower years of study may hesitate to speak up in the presence of those in higher years, while more experienced students may contribute more freely. These dynamics are common and, if left unaddressed, can reinforce a power imbalance that discourages active learning.
The same challenge shows up at the start of a semester. When students meet a lecturer for the first time, the unfamiliarity often makes them cautious. Most hold back. It is not because they lack curiosity, but because they are unsure how their answers or questions will be received.
This hesitation can hold back meaningful participation. I have come to learn that all it takes is a simple, intentional tool to change the energy of a room and give every student the confidence to contribute.
One such tool that has had a lasting impact on my teaching is the “Parking Lot.”
Discovering the Parking Lot
The Parking Lot is a simple but powerful active-learning tool: a dedicated space, physical or digital, where students can “park” their questions, comments, or reflections for later discussion. This allows a session to keep its flow while assuring students that their contributions will be acknowledged.
I first encountered this tool during a two week professional development course on Competency-Based Education and Training (CBET) delivery organized by my university.
I left the training with many ideas for making my teaching more interactive, but the Parking Lot stayed with me as a practical, low-cost strategy I could implement immediately.
A few months later, in early September 2025, I have the privilege of leading an inaugural 40-Hour Mediation Training and Certification program, a capacity-building initiative for students and staff members.
As project lead, I handled admissions and could tell from the applications that we had a mix of students from different years and one staff member. I worried that students from lower years might hold back and that quieter voices might be lost. I wanted every participant to feel their questions, comments, and opinions mattered.
During the pre-training meeting, I asked the trainers if I could introduce the Parking Lot as a way to encourage engagement, and they graciously agreed.
Bringing the Parking Lot to Life
On the first day of the training, I wrote PARKING LOT on a manila sheet, taped it to the front wall near the exit, and placed sticky notes on each participant’s table. The trainers invited me to explain how it worked.
I explained the purpose of the parking lot and encouraged participants to write their questions on sticky notes at any point in the day, during sessions, breaks, or even early the next morning, if they were not ready to raise their hand.
The results were immediate and encouraging. By the end of the first day, the Parking Lot had several notes posted. The trainers reviewed and addressed them the following morning, and participants continued to engage with it throughout the week.
Some who started by writing anonymous notes eventually became confident enough to ask questions aloud. The trainers later confirmed that the Parking Lot had improved participation and enriched the discussions.
This success made me curious to see what would happen if I tried it in my regular semester classes, which were about to begin the following week.
Applying the Parking Lot in My Classes
It was my first class of the semester, and I wanted to set the tone for participation. I was teaching a fourth year second semester class on Alternative dispute Resolution.
This time, I didn’t use the Parking Lot just to collect questions — I used it to invite feedback and spark discussion.
The first question I asked was “What rules should govern our class this semester?” Students wrote their suggestions on sticky notes, and we created a “social contract” for the semester, another active learning technique I am experimenting with.
I read the suggestions aloud and asked students, “What does this rule mean for us as a class?” or “How might we apply this rule in practice?” Their answers led to rich discussion, and I saw the power of shared responsibility as play when we agreed on the class rules, their application and consequences for both the students and the teacher.
I then used the Parking Lot to ask questions to introduce the course I was teaching that semester: “What do you think is conflict?”, “What do you think is a dispute?”, “What is the difference?” Reading their answers helped me identify and gently correct misconceptions without putting anyone on the spot. The class became so interactive that students were surprised when time was up.
Motivated by the positive results, later that same day, I used the Parking Lot in my first-year, second-semester on Legal Research & Writing class.
I asked students to write down on the sticky notes why they chose to study law and what they hoped to do with their degree. I told them that their reasons could serve as a compass something to help them find direction, stay true to their path, and never lose sight of their reason for being in law school when the journey becomes challenging.
I read their answers aloud, offered encouragement, and connected their aspirations back to the course outcomes. For example, I reminded them that to become a defender of human rights, one must not only know how to find the correct law but also be capable of writing clearly and persuasively.
This exercise gave even the quietest students a voice and set a tone of openness and shared purpose for the rest of the semester.
Lessons Learned
In the three instances I have applied the Parking Lot with different groups of students, I have seen it:
Activate students’ thinking early as they process the material and reflect on what they are learning.
Open up discussion by creating a safe space where every student’s voice can be heard.
Reveal misconceptions and allow them to be addressed gently, without putting anyone on the spot.
Connect student contributions to learning outcomes, helping them see why what they wrote matters to the course.
Encourage students to take ownership of their learning, which builds confidence and keeps them engaged.
Create opportunities for mentorship, by affirming students’ ideas, encouraging them, and guiding them as they think about their future career paths.
Reflection
This experience brought me to the realization that innovation in teaching, even in public universities where resources are often limited, does not need complicated technology or big budgets.
A manila paper sheet, some sticky notes, and a willingness to listen can transform the classroom.
Most of all, this experience affirmed why I teach: to create spaces where every student, confident or quiet, can grow.
Seeing students engaged, sharing openly, and losing track of time because they are so absorbed in the conversation is one of the most rewarding experiences I can have as an educator.
What You Can Do Tomorrow
Bring a manila sheet and sticky notes to class, tape the sheet where students can see it as they leave, and invite them to post their questions, answers or reflections.
Review and address a few notes immediately or at the start of the next class. You may be surprised how quickly even the quietest students start to contribute.
J. Muthoni Mwangi, LL.B, PGDip Law, LL.M, is an Assistant Lecturer at JKUAT School of Law – Karen Campus, an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya, an Associate Member of CIArb, and an Accredited Mediator with SDRC. She served as Project Lead for the inaugural JKUAT 40-Hour Mediation Training & Certification and is passionate about learner-cantered legal education, mentoring the next generation of mediators, and promoting access to justice.
Interpersonal communication theories not only help students navigate personal and professional relationships but also strengthen teacher-student connections. Drawing on Orón (2018) and Orón Semper & Blasco (2018), we encourage instructors to use this one-day activity to shift from a “student-centered” to an “interpersonal relationship-centered” pedagogy. This approach views instructor-student relationships as essential to learning and as a space for students to apply theory with relational intent. The activity promotes self-reflexivity, theory analysis, and collaborative dialogue, resulting in improved theory comprehension, stronger rapport, and communication practices that respect classroom diversity.
Student and instructor diversity in higher education has grown significantly in recent years (Li & Koedel, 2017), with over a million international students enrolled in U.S. universities (Urban, 2016). This diversity—across culture, gender, race, ability, and socioeconomic status—shapes classroom dynamics and presents unique challenges related to language, identity, and cultural differences (Jones et al., 2021). Instructors must respond by creating inclusive learning environments that support all students (Downing & Billotte Verhoff, 2023). Diversity also presents an opportunity to apply communication theories to foster intercultural empathy and improve collaboration. Students may initially struggle to understand and respect differing perspectives, affecting group work and engagement (Gray et al., 2020), but these challenges can become learning opportunities that deepen classroom inclusivity.
Communication scholars often apply interpersonal communication theories in the classroom to strengthen student–teacher relationships (Xie & Derakhshan, 2021). This single class activity integrates uncertainty management, self-disclosure, and communication accommodation theory (CAT) for undergraduate students to (a) to understand and (b) apply these theories to facilitate an inclusive and self-reflexive classroom. Teachers are the leading actors during everyday interaction and play a significant role in shaping communication and enhancing the teaching and learning process (Almas Rizkika Nabila, 2020). This activity encourages students to actively co-create a meaningful learning experience, highlighting the reciprocal nature of classroom interaction (Anyichie & Butler, 2023; Kong, 2021).
Self-disclosure: Communication Privacy Management
Self-disclosure is “any conversation about the self that a person communicates to others” (Ampong et al., 2018). Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory helps students understand how they set and manage privacy boundaries with peers and instructors (Petronio et al., 2021). The intersection of privacy boundaries and the learning space is complicated as students and instructors navigate privacy. Instructors deliver the lecture and explain the course content, but they also intentionally and willingly share their personal stories (Liu & Zhu, 2021). For instance, the first author, an international graduate assistant, connects class discussions to experiences from his home country, helping students relate and engage. Such instructor self-disclosure encourages student participation and fosters more meaningful classroom communication (Goldstein, 1994) (Liu & Zhu, 2021).
However, instructors and students rarely critically examine the disclosure norms in the classroom and their role in learning and relationship building. For example, disclosure boundaries (i.e., how far instructors can go to share their experiences) (Cayanus, 2004). Additionally, while students may attend to how much information they share in the classroom, this activity challenges them to apply CPM theory to examine their disclosure practices, expectations, and privacy boundary negotiations.
Communication Accommodation Theory
Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) explains how individuals adjust their communication such as speech, tone, pace, gestures, or body language—to interact effectively with others. Instructors can use CAT to enhance student understanding during lectures (Howard Giles, 2023).The theory outlines two key strategies: convergence, where a speaker adapts to another’s communication style (e.g., simplifying vocabulary, repeating phrases, pausing, smiling, nodding), and divergence, where a speaker maintains differences by avoiding shared cues (e.g., using complex words, changing topics, or not adjusting speaking pace) (Marko Dragojevic, 2016) (Pardo et al., 2022).
Drawing on this research, the goal of this activity is 1) to understand the theories and analyze how they facilitate the teaching process, 2) to explore the perceptions of students about these theories and their inclusion in the classroom, 3) to determine the expectations of students related to characteristics of these theories.
The Activity
This single-class activity applies to various undergraduate courses, such as public speaking, communication among cultures, communication in interpersonal relationships, argument analysis and advocacy, and persuasion. Instructors can do this activity during introduction week as they begin navigating disclosures about themselves and student expectations. Moreover, planning this activity at the beginning will challenge students to examine their positionalities, norms, and expectations critically.
Step 1: Personal Reflection
Before implementing the activity, instructors should familiarize themselves with relevant communication theories and reflect on how their own identities shape their teaching assumptions (Nabila, 2020, Downing & Billotte Verhoff, 2023). We recommend engaging in self-reflexive questions, such as: What disclosure boundaries do I set and why? What uncertainties do I face around privacy or accommodation in teaching? What expectations exist between me and my students regarding communication and flexibility? Instructors should identify what personal information they’re willing to share, why they’re sharing it, and how it might impact classroom relationships. For example, the first author reflected on cultural and linguistic differences and adjusted his teaching by using simpler language, acknowledging English is not his first language, and setting shared guidelines to support mutual understanding and accommodation. This reflective process helps align instructional practices with inclusive, theory-informed pedagogy.
Step 2: Students’ Perceptions About Components of Theories
This activity takes approximately 30 to 40 minutes and is best suited for a full class session. Instructors should introduce the key theories with examples and explain the activity’s purpose and timing. For advanced courses, assigning theory readings beforehand can deepen analysis, making it more effective to conduct the activity later in the semester rather than at the start. During the session, students should be divided into groups of four and asked to write their expectations for the course and the instructor. To guide discussion, instructors can pose prompts such as:
What expectations do you have for your instructor when it comes to using different communication accommodation strategies?
How do you manage your own self-disclosure in the classroom? Where do you draw the line on what you choose to share?
What are your thoughts on instructors’ self-disclosure? What types of disclosures have a positive or negative impact on your learning experience?
How comfortable are you with classroom communication? What strategies could reduce uncertainty or discomfort?
How do you plan to engage with and accommodate diversity in terms of culture, race, gender identity, and sexual orientation in your classroom interactions?
Can you connect your responses to the core ideas of the communication theories we’ve discussed? How do these theories help explain disclosure and accommodation in the classroom context?
These questions will provide space for students to reflect on their experiences. Moreover, during that time, the instructor will also answer these questions from the instructor’s perspective and enlist the convergence techniques they perceive to accommodate. Instructors can give 15 to 20 minutes to answer the provided questions briefly.
Step 3: Describing the Theories and Their Impact
Instructors will invite each group to share their responses, followed by the instructor’s own disclosure of planned strategies—such as accommodation, anticipated uncertainties, and boundaries around self-disclosure. A comparison table with two columns (students vs. instructor) can be used to visually display both perspectives. Instructors then lead a discussion with prompts like: Why do these expectations exist? What differences or overlaps emerge? How do these perspectives interact? This activity encourages students to (a) practice perspective-taking shaped by diverse identities, (b) apply key concepts like co-creating privacy boundaries (CPM), and (c) see how theory fosters a supportive learning environment. Since student familiarity with these theories may vary, instructors should first assess their basic understanding.
Debriefing
At the end of the activity on the same day. Instructors can initiate the debriefing by including the Q&A sessions such as:
How did this activity impact, how you view self-disclosure and accommodation?
What do you understand about embedding these theories in the classroom?
How can this activity help to build a good student-teacher relationship and create an inclusive environment in the classroom?
Appraisal
In the second week, I (the first author) compiled all responses into a table and presented it to the class. I briefly discussed both student and instructor perspectives, then posted reflection prompts on Blackboard for feedback. Students responded positively, noting that the activity was enjoyable and helped them get to know one another. Many emphasized the importance of communication accommodation, agreeing that in a diverse classroom, convergence strategies are essential for fostering inclusion and mutual respect. One student highlighted that accommodation is key to ensuring understanding and promoting respectful interaction (see Table 1).
Table 1: Responses of Students and Instructor
Communication Accommodation
Self-disclosure
Uncertainty
Students
-Speaking slower during a speech even when anxious** -Staying away from slang words to avoid language barriers -Clear annunciation -Respectful of each other’s speaking language** -Appropriate tone/voice -In class participation -Speaking clearly and loudly**** -Visual cue images if doing a speech. -Articulation -Be patient -Stay engaged -Ask him to repeat
-Disclose how comfortable you are speaking in front of a group, so the professor understands your anxiety or emotion towards speech presentation ** -Disclosing where you are from, what languages you, speak, and how much you understand a topic will be very important to critiquing your peers on their speeches -Safe space -No personal information**** -No social media -Should disclose important and relevant events that could affect quality -Establish boundaries
-Topics that peers choose to speak about throughout the semester may be understood less or more by others -How to write a speech -How we will be graded -How heavy the workload will be -Fear of asking questions -Ask for help when needed -Talking in front of people preparation -Speech topics (Range of issues) -Comfort -What is expected of us from the professor -Memorizing speeches -Deadlines -Clear instructions for assignments -Reminders of important dates -Remember to submit assignments -Nervous
Instructor
-Speak slowly -Use clear words -Allow students to ask questions -Repeat my words without asking -Take a break during lecture and ask students if they have any concern or not -Making good eye contact -Listen everyone carefully -Give everyone chance to speak
-If you are comfortable to share your personal information you can, we can make a rule that whatever you share in this class will stay in this class
-How do you feel when I show attendance sheet on BB -How do you feel about forgetting your name -What do you think when it takes time to respond to your email -How you think when you meet me outside of class at court street on weekends
One limitation of this activity is the time required to develop and implement it during the first week of the semester, making early planning essential. Second, the activity is best suited for small classes; in larger classrooms, it may be difficult to follow all steps without modification. Lastly, delayed feedback or response-sharing may reduce the activity’s impact, as students may forget key details over time.
Athar Memon, MBBS, MSPH, is a graduate student in the PhD program in the Scripps School of Communication Studies at Ohio University. Athar Memon research interest is related to health communication specifically health care access, behaviors to access healthcare services among marginalized population, barriers related to patient-provider interpersonal communication, health literacy and its relationship with health outcomes and healthy behaviors. His work has been published in various journals including Professional Medical Journal, Journal of Pakistan Medical Association, Pakistan Journal of Public Health, PEC Innovation, and Eastern Mediterranean Journal.
China C. Billotte Verhoff, PhD, (Purdue University) is an Assistant Professor in the School of Communication Studies at Ohio University. Dr. Billotte Verhoff’s research agenda lies at the intersections of interpersonal and organizational communication. Specifically, she explores how individuals with marginalized and stigmatized identities navigate self-disclosure and social support processes to identify the associated relational, career, and health outcomes. Dr. Billotte Verhoff’s work has been published in peer-reviewed journals such as Communication Monographs, the Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Communication Studies, Sex Roles, Women and Language, and Health Communication.
References
Almas Rizkika Nabila, A. M., Syafi’ul Anam. 2020. “TEACHER’S MOTIVES IN APPLYING COMMUNICATION ACCOMMODATION STRATEGIES IN SECONDARY ELT CLASS. Linguistic, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal, 3(2), 373-384.”
Ampong, G. O. A., Mensah, A., Adu, A. S. Y, Addae, J. A., Omoregie, O. K., & Ofori, K. S. 2018. “Examining Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites: A Flow Theory and Privacy Perspective. Behav Sci (Basel), 8(6).”
Anyichie, A. C., & Butler, D. L.. 2023. Examining culturally diverse learners’ motivation and engagement processes as situated in the context of a complex task. Frontiers in Education,
Cayanus, J. L.. 2004. “Effective Instructional Practice: Using Teacher Self-Disclosure as an Instructional Tool. Communication Teacher, 18(1), 6-9.”
Downing, S. S., & Billotte Verhoff, C. C. 2023. “Incorporating mini lessons on the hidden curriculum in communication classrooms. Communication Teacher, 37(3), 246-253.”
Ewa Urban, L. B. P.. 2016. “International Students’ Perceptions of the Value of U.S. Higher Education Journal of International Students, 6(1), 153-174.”
Gray, D. L., McElveen, T. L., Green, B. P., & Bryant, L. H.. 2020. Engaging Black and Latinx students through communal learning opportunities: A relevance intervention for middle schoolers in STEM elective classrooms. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101833.
Howard Giles, A. L. E., Joseph B. Walther. 2023. Communication accommodation theory: Past accomplishments, current trends, and future prospects.
Jones, B. D., Krost, K., & Jones, M. W.. 2021. Relationships between students’ course perceptions, effort, and achievement in an online course. Computers and Education Open, 2, 100051.
Kong, Y. 2021. The Role of Experiential Learning on Students’ Motivation and Classroom Engagement. Front Psychol, 12, 771272.
Li, D., & Koedel, C. 2017. “Representation and salary gaps by race-ethnicity and gender at selective public universities. Educational researcher, 46(7), 343-354.”
Liu, X., & Zhu, L. 2021. The Role of EFL Teachers’ Self-Disclosure as Predictors of Student’s Willingness to Communicate and Their Engagement. Front Psychol, 12, 748744.
Marko Dragojevic, J. G., Howard Giles. 2016. Accommodative Strategies as Core of the Theory. Communication Accommodation Theory: Negotiating Personal Relationships and Social Identities across Contexts, 36-59.
Pardo, J. S., Pellegrino, E., Dellwo, V., & Möbius, B. 2022. Special issue: Vocal accommodation in speech communication. Journal of Phonetics, 95, 101196.
Petronio, S., Child, J. T., & Hall, R. D. 2021. Communication privacy management theory: Significance for interpersonal communication. In Engaging theories in interpersonal communication (pp. 314-327). Routledge.
Xie, F., & Derakhshan, A. 2021. A Conceptual Review of Positive Teacher Interpersonal Communication Behaviors in the Instructional Context. Front Psychol, 12, 708490.
Parents who grew up in the ’80s and ’90s know the feeling: you’re listening to your kid’s playlist, and suddenly a song hits you with a wave of uncanny familiarity. Despite the claims by your teen that it is the latest and greatest, you know that it is just a repackaging of one of your favorite tunes from the past. I am noticing a similar trend with generative AI. It is inherently regurgitative: reshaping and repackaging ideas and thoughts that are already out there.
Fears abound as to the future of higher education due to the rise of generative AI. Articles from professors in many different fields predict that AI is going to destroy the college essay or even eliminate the need for professors altogether. Their fears are well founded. Seeing the advances that generative AI has made in just the past few months, I am constantly teetering between immense admiration and abject terror. My Chatbot does everything for me, from scheduling how to get my revise and resubmit done in three months to planning my wardrobe for the fall semester. I fear becoming too self-reliant on it. Am I losing myself? Am I turning my ChatGPT into a psychological crutch? And if I am having these thoughts, what effect is generative AI having on my students?
Remix vs. Originality: Girl Talk or Beyonce
Grappling with the strengths and weaknesses of my own AI usage, I feel I have discovered what might be the saving grace of humanity (feel free to nominate me for the Nobel Peace Prize if you wish). As I hinted earlier, AI is more like a DJ remixing the greatest hits of society rather than an innovative game changer. My ChatGPT is more like Girl Talk (who you have probably never heard of. Just ask your AI) than Beyonce (who you most definitely have heard of). Not that there’s anything wrong with Girl Talk. Their mashups are amazing and require a special kind of talent. Just like navigating AI usage requires a certain balance of skills to create a usable final product. But no matter how many pieces of music from other artists you mash together, you will not eventually turn into a groundbreaking, innovative musician. Think Pat Boone vs. The Beatles, Sha Na Na vs. David Bowie, Milli Vanilli vs. Prince, MC Hammer vs. Lauryn Hill.
What AI Gets Wrong in Writing
As a mathematician and a novelist, I see this glaring weakness in both of these very different disciplines. I’ll start with writing. ChatGPT is especially helpful in coming up with strange character or planet names for my science fiction novels. It will also help me create a disease or something else I need to drive the plot further. And, of course, it can help me find an errant comma or fix a fragmented sentence. But that is about it. If I ask it to write an entire chapter, for example, it will come up with the most boring, derivative, and bland excuse for prose I have ever seen. It will attempt my humor but fail miserably. It sometimes makes my stomach turn, it’s so bad.
A study from the Wharton School found that ChatGPT reduces the diversity of ideas in a pool of ideas. Thus, it diminishes the diversity of the overall output, narrowing the scope of novel ideas. Beyond that, I find that when I use ChatGPT to brainstorm, I typically don’t use its suggestions. Those suggestions just spark new ideas and help me come up with something different and more me.
For example, I asked ChatGPT to write a joke for its bad brainstorming practice of using the same core ideas over and over again. It said:
Joke: That’s not brainstorming—it’s a lazy mime troupe echoing each other.
That’s lame. I would never say that. But another joke it gave me sparked the music sampling analogy I opened this article with.
In any case, because of generative AI’s inability to actually generate anything new, I have hope that the college essay, like the fiction novel, will not die. Over-reliance on AI may indeed debilitate the essay, perhaps causing it to go on life support forcing students and faculty to drag its lifeless body across the finish line of graduation. But there is still hope.
I remember one of my favorite English teachers in middle school required that we keep a journal. Each day she asked us to write something, anything in our journal, even if it was only a paragraph or just a sentence. Something about putting pen to paper sparked my creativity. It also sparked a lifelong notebook addiction. And even though I consider myself somewhat of a techie and a huge AI enthusiast, to this day I still use notebooks for the first draft of my novels.
It is clear to me that ChatGPT will never be able to write my novels in my voice. I don’t claim to be a great novelist. I just feel that some of my greatest work hasn’t been written yet. While ChatGPT may be able to write a poem about aardvarks in the style of Robert Frost or a ballad about Evariste Galois in the style of Carole King, it can’t write my next novel, because it doesn’t yet exist. And even when it tries to imitate my voice and my style, predicting what I will write next, it does a poor job.
The Research Paper Dilemma: AI vs. Process
A research paper is inherently different from a creative work of fiction, however. ChatGPT does do a pretty good job of gathering information on a topic from several sources and synthesizing it into a coherent paper. You just have to make sure to check for the errant hallucinated reference. And honestly, when are our students ever going to be asked to write a 15-page research paper on Chaucer without any resources? And if they are, ChatGPT can probably produce that product better than an undergraduate student can. But the process, I would argue, is more important than the final product.
In his Inside Higher Ed paper Writing the Research Paper Slowly, JT Torres recommends a scaffolding process to writing the research paper. This method focuses on the process of writing a paper, exploring and reading sources, taking notes, organizing those notes into a ‘scientific story’ and creating an outline. Teaching students the process of writing the paper instead of focusing on the end product results in students feeling more confident that they can not only complete the task required but transfer those skills to another subject. Recognizing these limitations pushed me to rethink how I design assignments.
Using AI in the Classroom
Knowing that generative AI can do somethings (but not all things) better than a human has made me a more intentional professor. Now when I create assignments, I think: Can ChatGPT do this better than an undergraduate student? If so, then what am I really trying to teach? Here are a few strategies I use:
Method #1: Assess Your Assessments with AI in Mind
When designing an assignment, ask yourself whether it is testing a skill that AI already performs well. If so, consider shifting your focus to why that skill matters, or how students can go beyond AI’s capabilities.
Method #2: Use AI Where It Adds Value – Remove It Where It Does Not
In some cases, it makes sense to integrate AI directly into the assignment (e.g., generating code, automating data analysis). In others, the objective may be to build a human-only skill like personal expression or creative voice. I decide case by case whether AI should be a part of the process or explicitly excluded.
Method #3: Clarify Whether You are Teaching Theory or Application
When I am teaching tests, I have to ask myself: Am I assessing whether students understand the theory behind the test or whether they can run one using software? If it’s the latter, using AI to generate code might be appropriate. But if it’s the former, I’ll require manual calculations or a written explanation.
Method #4: Add a Reflection to any AI Supported Assignment
Any assignment where they are allowed to use AI, they also have to write a reflection about how they used AI and whether it was helpful or not. This encourages metacognition and reduces overreliance.
Method #5: Require Students to Share Their Prompts and Revisions
Having students share the prompts they used in completing the assignment teaches them about transparency and the need for iteration in their interaction with an AI. Students should not just be cutting and pasting the first response from ChatGPT. They need to learn how to take a response, analyze it then refine their prompt to get a better result. This helps them develop prompt engineering skills and realize that ChatGPT is not just a magic answer machine.
AI and the Limits of Innovation in Research
What about academic research in general? How is AI helping or hindering? Given that generative AI merely remixes the greatest hits of human history rather than creating anything new, I think its role in academic research is limited. Academic breakthroughs start with unasked questions. Generative AI works within the confines of existing data. It can’t sense the frontier because it doesn’t know there is a frontier. It can’t sample past answers of a question that hasn’t been asked yet. About a year ago, I was trying to get my AI to write a section of code for my research and it kept failing. I spent a week trying to get it to do what I wanted. I realized it was having such a difficult time because I was asking it to do something that hadn’t been done before. Finally, I gave up and wrote the piece of code myself, and it only took me about half an hour. Sure, the coding capabilities have gotten better over the past year, but the core principle remains the same. AI still struggles to innovate. It can’t do what hasn’t already been done. Also because of ‘creative flattery’ it wants to make you happy so it will try to do what you tell it to do even if it can’t. The product will be super convincing, but it can still be wrong.
I recently asked AI to write a theoretical proof that shows polygonal numbers are Benford distributed (Spoiler: They are not). Then I had it help me write a convincing journal-ready article. The only problem is it also wrote me a theoretical proof that Polygonal numbers are NOT Benford distributed as well. I submitted the former to a leading mathematics journal to see what would happen. Guess what, they caught it. A human was able to detect the ‘AI Slop’. This shows me, that (1) there will always be a need for human gatekeepers and (2) ‘creative flattery’ is extremely dangerous in a research setting and confirms the need for human review. The chatbot tries too hard to please, thus reinforcing what the user already thinks even if that means proving or disproving the exact same thing. Academic research thrives on novel questions and unpredictable answers, which AI is incapable of doing since it inherently just regurgitates what is already out there.
Helping Students See AI’s Blind Spots
The Benford Polygonal Numbers experiment is an important example of how we need to educate our students about AI usage in an academic setting. The Time.com article Why A.I. is Getting Less Reliable, Not More states that despite its progress over the years, AI can still resemble sophisticated misinformation machines. Students need to know how to navigate this.
One of my favorite assignments in my Statistics course is what I call:
Method #6: “Beat ChatGPT” – A Concept Mastery Challenge
Students must craft a statistics question that the chatbot gets wrong, explain why the chatbot got it wrong and then provide the correct answer. A tweak of this activity would be to take AI generated content and human written then compare and critique tone, clarity, or originality.
Remixing isn’t Creation
AI-generated content is like a song built entirely from remixed samples. Sampling has its place in music (and in writing) but when everything starts to sound the same, our ears and brains begin to tune out. A great remix can breathe new life into a classic, but we still crave the shock of the new. This is why people lost their minds the first time they heard Beyonce’s Lemonade or Kendrick Lamar’s To Pimp a Butterfly – not because they followed a formula, but because they bent the rules and made something we’d never heard before. AI, for all its value, doesn’t break the rules. It follows them. That is the difference between innovation and imitation. It is also the reason why AI, in its current capacity, will not kill original thought.
Sybil Prince Nelson, PhD, is an assistant professor of mathematics and data science at Washington and Lee University, where she also serves as the institution’s inaugural AI Fellow. She holds a PhD in Biostatistics and has over two decades of teaching experience at both the high school and college levels. She is also a published fiction author under the names Sybil Nelson and Leslie DuBois.
Meincke, Lea, Gideon Nave, and Christian Terwiesch. 2025. “ChatGPT Decreases Idea Diversity in Brainstorming.” Nature Human Behaviour 9: 1107–1109. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02173-x.
If you’ve ever tried to make sense of a big, messy topic, whether it’s anatomy, psychology, or even planning a family vacation, you know how easy it is to get lost in the details. That’s where concept maps come in.
A concept map is more than just a fancy diagram. It’s a visual tool that helps you capture, organize, and connect ideas so you can see the “big picture” at a glance.
Why Concept Maps Work
Concept maps tap into how our brains naturally work, by connecting information rather than memorizing isolated facts. When you create one, you’re not just copying notes; you’re actively making sense of information, spotting patterns, and building links between concepts.
This active engagement is backed by research: visual representations improve comprehension, support critical thinking, and boost retention. In short, concept maps make learning stick. Nesbit and Adesope’s (2006) meta-analysis of dozens of studies found that students who used concept maps showed significantly stronger learning outcomes compared to those who relied only on traditional notetaking.
Cognitive psychology suggests that learning is strongest when it is meaningful—when new knowledge connects to what we already know. Concept maps encourage this process by forcing us to ask, how does this idea relate to that one? That act of questioning builds deeper understanding and promotes long-term memory. Novak and Cañas (2008), pioneers in concept mapping, argue that these tools “make thinking visible” by transforming abstract knowledge into something concrete and structured.
How to Build a Concept Map
Start with a central idea. Write it in the center or top of your page.
Branch out. Add related subtopics, drawing lines or arrows to show relationships.
Label your connections. These labels (like “causes,” “leads to,” “is a type of”) turn your map into a meaningful web rather than a random cluster of words.
Add details. Keep branching until you’ve covered all major points and their relationships.
Review and refine. Your first map is rarely your last. Adjust as you deepen your understanding.
The beauty of concept maps is that they are highly adaptable. Some people prefer a simple structure with just a few layers, while others create elaborate webs with cross-links between multiple concepts. There’s no single “right” way to build one. The key is whether it helps you make sense of the material.
Real-World Uses for Concept Maps
Concept maps shine in both academic and professional settings:
Studentsuse them to study complex topics, such as linking symptoms, diagnoses, and treatments in a medical course. This not only aids exam prep but also mirrors how professionals think in the real world.
Educators design them to structure lessons, showing how each concept builds on the previous one. Concept maps also work as formative assessments. Teachers can quickly see what students understand and where misconceptions remain.
Professionals apply them in project planning, research design, and problem-solving. A well-structured map can turn a vague idea into a clear, actionable plan.
In healthcare education, for example, concept maps are widely used in nursing programs to help students link theory to practice. By mapping patient symptoms to interventions and outcomes, learners demonstrate both clinical reasoning and holistic thinking. In business, managers use concept maps to brainstorm strategies, identify risks, and visualize workflows before moving into detailed planning. Even in everyday life, families use concept maps to coordinate large events like weddings or vacations—organizing everything from budgets to timelines at a glance.
Going Beyond the Basics
Once you’ve mastered the fundamentals, concept maps can become even more powerful with advanced techniques:
Cross-links: Draw connections between branches that may not seem directly related. These links often spark “aha” moments by revealing hidden relationships.
Hierarchy: Organize ideas from the most general at the top to the most specific at the bottom, which helps clarify levels of abstraction.
Integration with technology: Digital concept mapping tools allow for collaboration, multimedia integration, and real-time updates, making them ideal for group projects or remote learning environments.
Teachers can also use concept maps to measure growth over time. For example, students might create a map at the start of a unit and then expand or revise it at the end. Comparing the two versions provides a visible record of learning progress, something that’s harder to capture with multiple-choice tests alone.
Pro Tips for Making Your Map Effective
Use color coding to group related ideas.
Keep your wording short—think keywords, not paragraphs.
Experiment with digital tools like Coggle, MindMeister, or Lucidchart for easy editing and sharing.
Don’t be afraid to collaborate. Building a map with classmates or colleagues can reveal insights you might have missed on your own.
The Takeaway
Concept maps aren’t just about making pretty diagrams; they’re about making thinking visible. Whether you’re a student, teacher, or lifelong learner, this tool can transform the way you process and remember information.
So next time you’re overwhelmed by a new topic, skip the endless bullet points and map it out. You might be surprised at how much clearer everything becomes.
Michele Poulos has dedicated more than twenty-five years to education, with experience spanning elementary, secondary, and post-secondary settings. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education, a Master’s degree in Psychology, and is currently pursuing her doctoral degree in Human and Learning Science. Throughout her career, she has taught and learned in both traditional classrooms and fully online environments, giving her a unique perspective on how students thrive across modalities. Michele currently serves as the Director of Online Education at Pima Medical Institute, where she oversees online programs, faculty development, and strategic initiatives designed to enhance student learning and success. Her professional accomplishments have been recognized nationally, as she was inducted into Marquis Who’s Who in America for four consecutive years (2022–2025). Her passion for education is matched by her commitment to family life. She resides in Naples, Florida, with her husband and their two children—ten-year-old Trenton and eight-year-old Eliana—who continually inspire her dedication to both teaching and lifelong learning.
References
Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076003413
If you’ve ever tried to make sense of a big, messy topic, whether it’s anatomy, psychology, or even planning a family vacation, you know how easy it is to get lost in the details. That’s where concept maps come in.
A concept map is more than just a fancy diagram. It’s a visual tool that helps you capture, organize, and connect ideas so you can see the “big picture” at a glance.
Why Concept Maps Work
Concept maps tap into how our brains naturally work, by connecting information rather than memorizing isolated facts. When you create one, you’re not just copying notes; you’re actively making sense of information, spotting patterns, and building links between concepts.
This active engagement is backed by research: visual representations improve comprehension, support critical thinking, and boost retention. In short, concept maps make learning stick. Nesbit and Adesope’s (2006) meta-analysis of dozens of studies found that students who used concept maps showed significantly stronger learning outcomes compared to those who relied only on traditional notetaking.
Cognitive psychology suggests that learning is strongest when it is meaningful—when new knowledge connects to what we already know. Concept maps encourage this process by forcing us to ask, how does this idea relate to that one? That act of questioning builds deeper understanding and promotes long-term memory. Novak and Cañas (2008), pioneers in concept mapping, argue that these tools “make thinking visible” by transforming abstract knowledge into something concrete and structured.
How to Build a Concept Map
Start with a central idea. Write it in the center or top of your page.
Branch out. Add related subtopics, drawing lines or arrows to show relationships.
Label your connections. These labels (like “causes,” “leads to,” “is a type of”) turn your map into a meaningful web rather than a random cluster of words.
Add details. Keep branching until you’ve covered all major points and their relationships.
Review and refine. Your first map is rarely your last. Adjust as you deepen your understanding.
The beauty of concept maps is that they are highly adaptable. Some people prefer a simple structure with just a few layers, while others create elaborate webs with cross-links between multiple concepts. There’s no single “right” way to build one. The key is whether it helps you make sense of the material.
Real-World Uses for Concept Maps
Concept maps shine in both academic and professional settings:
Studentsuse them to study complex topics, such as linking symptoms, diagnoses, and treatments in a medical course. This not only aids exam prep but also mirrors how professionals think in the real world.
Educators design them to structure lessons, showing how each concept builds on the previous one. Concept maps also work as formative assessments. Teachers can quickly see what students understand and where misconceptions remain.
Professionals apply them in project planning, research design, and problem-solving. A well-structured map can turn a vague idea into a clear, actionable plan.
In healthcare education, for example, concept maps are widely used in nursing programs to help students link theory to practice. By mapping patient symptoms to interventions and outcomes, learners demonstrate both clinical reasoning and holistic thinking. In business, managers use concept maps to brainstorm strategies, identify risks, and visualize workflows before moving into detailed planning. Even in everyday life, families use concept maps to coordinate large events like weddings or vacations—organizing everything from budgets to timelines at a glance.
Going Beyond the Basics
Once you’ve mastered the fundamentals, concept maps can become even more powerful with advanced techniques:
Cross-links: Draw connections between branches that may not seem directly related. These links often spark “aha” moments by revealing hidden relationships.
Hierarchy: Organize ideas from the most general at the top to the most specific at the bottom, which helps clarify levels of abstraction.
Integration with technology: Digital concept mapping tools allow for collaboration, multimedia integration, and real-time updates, making them ideal for group projects or remote learning environments.
Teachers can also use concept maps to measure growth over time. For example, students might create a map at the start of a unit and then expand or revise it at the end. Comparing the two versions provides a visible record of learning progress, something that’s harder to capture with multiple-choice tests alone.
Pro Tips for Making Your Map Effective
Use color coding to group related ideas.
Keep your wording short—think keywords, not paragraphs.
Experiment with digital tools like Coggle, MindMeister, or Lucidchart for easy editing and sharing.
Don’t be afraid to collaborate. Building a map with classmates or colleagues can reveal insights you might have missed on your own.
The Takeaway
Concept maps aren’t just about making pretty diagrams; they’re about making thinking visible. Whether you’re a student, teacher, or lifelong learner, this tool can transform the way you process and remember information.
So next time you’re overwhelmed by a new topic, skip the endless bullet points and map it out. You might be surprised at how much clearer everything becomes.
Michele Poulos has dedicated more than twenty-five years to education, with experience spanning elementary, secondary, and post-secondary settings. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education, a Master’s degree in Psychology, and is currently pursuing her doctoral degree in Human and Learning Science. Throughout her career, she has taught and learned in both traditional classrooms and fully online environments, giving her a unique perspective on how students thrive across modalities. Michele currently serves as the Director of Online Education at Pima Medical Institute, where she oversees online programs, faculty development, and strategic initiatives designed to enhance student learning and success. Her professional accomplishments have been recognized nationally, as she was inducted into Marquis Who’s Who in America for four consecutive years (2022–2025). Her passion for education is matched by her commitment to family life. She resides in Naples, Florida, with her husband and their two children—ten-year-old Trenton and eight-year-old Eliana—who continually inspire her dedication to both teaching and lifelong learning.
References
Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076003413
“Colleges are now closing at a pace of one per week. What happens to the students?” Jon Marcus asked in a recent Hechinger Report piece. It’s not a rhetorical question — and it doesn’t have an easy answer. As educators, we’ve read the headlines, seen the numbers, and felt the pressure. Undergraduate enrollment is down. Student confidence is eroding. The enrollment cliff looms.
But instead of asking when higher education will fail, we might ask: What if this is a market correction — not a collapse? What if the problem isn’t higher education itself, but how we’ve framed its value and how we’ve taught? What if this moment is less an ending and more a beginning?
In the face of uncertainty, it’s tempting to focus on control: measurable learning outcomes, career-ready skills, standardized assessments. But today’s students are entering a competitive job market — and a world defined by accelerating change, emerging technologies, and challenges we haven’t yet named. That means our teaching needs to prepare them what’s likely and for what’s possible — and even what’s unknowable.
Ronald Beghetto’s framework for “educating for unknowable futures” offers a helpful lens. He proposes three levels of preparation:
Educating for likely futures: equipping students with foundational skills and durable knowledge.
Educating for possible futures: helping students build agency, creativity, and adaptability.
Educating for unknowable futures: inviting students to grapple with uncertainty through reflection and imagination.
Each level requires a shift in how we think about learning and a new set of pedagogical commitments.
1. Educating for Likely Futures: Redesigning Assignments Around Students’ Real Lives
Career readiness remains a core concern. But often, our tools for building it are misaligned with students’ actual experiences. Take the classic business case method, for example: many cases center Fortune 500 CEOs or global crises, which can feel abstract or inaccessible to undergraduates, especially first-generation students.
That’s why I now write my own cases: short, specific, and grounded in contexts my students know. In one recent one, I explored a conflict between student-athletes and faculty at a nearby Division III college. For my mostly student-athlete class, this was familiar and therefore grounding. Their analysis shifted. So did their engagement.
Designing assignments that reflect students’ likely futures — their majors, their industries, their regions — signals that their lives are valid sites of learning. It builds relevance. And it reminds them that professional decision-making doesn’t start “out there.” It starts here.
2. Educating for Possible Futures: Using EdTech with Purpose
Students also need to develop adaptive skills: how to think critically, navigate ambiguity, and evaluate tools in evolving environments. EdTech is a perfect place to practice this.
Today’s education market is flooded with tools — over 370 vendors across over 40 market segments, according to Encoura. But quantity isn’t quality. Too often, we adopt tools based on novelty or institutional trends rather than instructional value.
To support students in building discernment, we must model it ourselves. That means asking: Does this tool solve a real problem in my class? Does it deliver on its promises? Does it support learning equitably and sustainably?
In other words, we must shift from passive adopters to intentional evaluators and invite students into that evaluative process. Helping them think about how technology shapes learning (and their own agency within it) equips them for any environment, not just the one we’ve built.
3. Educating for Unknowable Futures: Making Space for Reflection
Preparing students for the truly unknown requires something more radical: making space for performance, yes, but also for reflection.
In a recent MBA course on negotiation and conflict, I made a bold move: I assigned weekly reflection journals — raw, stream-of-consciousness entries that linked course themes to students’ lived experiences. Some students resisted at first. But by the end, many said it changed the way they approached class and life.
Reflection is often treated as an add-on, something optional or “soft.” But it’s essential. It helps students surface assumptions, interrogate choices, and practice metacognition. And in a world where knowledge and skills are constantly evolving, the ability to learn how to learn may be the most durable skill of all.
Possibility Thinking, in Practice
If our current moment is a reckoning, then our response must be one of responsibility. We cannot guarantee our students a particular future. But we can offer them the tools to shape one.
Beghetto calls this “agentic awareness” — a belief in one’s ability to influence outcomes. It’s a curriculum and a posture. And it’s something we can model by how we teach: with creativity, clarity, and curiosity.
So the next time you see another headline about higher ed’s collapse, ask yourself: What if we treated this as a moment to reimagine rather than as a crisis to survive?
That’s resilience, and it’s possibility thinking in action.
Three Small Shifts You Can Make This Semester
Now is the perfect time to start leaning into the possibility of our problems. To do so, try:
Redesigning one assignmentto reflect your students’ actual career goals or lived experiences. Meeting students where they are will help them better envision where they’re headed.
Asking your classroom technology better questions. Push beyond features to real learning outcomes when you choose to invite EdTech into your classroom.
Making reflection part of the grade. Don’t treat it as busywork but as weighted, important meaning-making.
Higher education may be facing unprecedented disruption, but disruption doesn’t have to mean decline. In fact, the classroom may be one of the last places where we still have real influence over what comes next. Each lesson we design, each conversation we facilitate, each moment we create for reflection — these are acts of future-building.
Educating for unknowable futures doesn’t mean we need to predict what’s next. It means we help students learn to ask better questions, adapt with confidence, and recognize their own capacity to shape change. And it means we embrace that same mindset ourselves.
The future of higher education won’t be saved by sweeping reforms or silver-bullet technologies. It will be co-created — one thoughtful assignment, one intentional choice, one student at a time. And that work starts not in distant policy meetings, but right here, in our classrooms.
Laura Nicole Miller, DET, is an assistant professor in the Grenon School of Business at Assumption University, where she teaches organizational communication, marketing, and management. A first-generation college graduate and former EdTech executive, she studies how communication practices shape equity, trust, and student success in high-stakes environments.
Craft, A. (2015). Possibility thinking: From what is to what might be. In R. Wegerif, L. Li, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on teaching thinking (pp. 15–26). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315797021
Miller, L. N. (2025). “D-III students deserve better”: strategic communication with college stakeholders. The CASE Journal, 21(3), 493-516. https://doi.org/10.1108/TCJ-06-2024-0184
“Colleges are now closing at a pace of one per week. What happens to the students?” Jon Marcus asked in a recent Hechinger Report piece. It’s not a rhetorical question — and it doesn’t have an easy answer. As educators, we’ve read the headlines, seen the numbers, and felt the pressure. Undergraduate enrollment is down. Student confidence is eroding. The enrollment cliff looms.
But instead of asking when higher education will fail, we might ask: What if this is a market correction — not a collapse? What if the problem isn’t higher education itself, but how we’ve framed its value and how we’ve taught? What if this moment is less an ending and more a beginning?
In the face of uncertainty, it’s tempting to focus on control: measurable learning outcomes, career-ready skills, standardized assessments. But today’s students are entering a competitive job market — and a world defined by accelerating change, emerging technologies, and challenges we haven’t yet named. That means our teaching needs to prepare them what’s likely and for what’s possible — and even what’s unknowable.
Ronald Beghetto’s framework for “educating for unknowable futures” offers a helpful lens. He proposes three levels of preparation:
Educating for likely futures: equipping students with foundational skills and durable knowledge.
Educating for possible futures: helping students build agency, creativity, and adaptability.
Educating for unknowable futures: inviting students to grapple with uncertainty through reflection and imagination.
Each level requires a shift in how we think about learning and a new set of pedagogical commitments.
1. Educating for Likely Futures: Redesigning Assignments Around Students’ Real Lives
Career readiness remains a core concern. But often, our tools for building it are misaligned with students’ actual experiences. Take the classic business case method, for example: many cases center Fortune 500 CEOs or global crises, which can feel abstract or inaccessible to undergraduates, especially first-generation students.
That’s why I now write my own cases: short, specific, and grounded in contexts my students know. In one recent one, I explored a conflict between student-athletes and faculty at a nearby Division III college. For my mostly student-athlete class, this was familiar and therefore grounding. Their analysis shifted. So did their engagement.
Designing assignments that reflect students’ likely futures — their majors, their industries, their regions — signals that their lives are valid sites of learning. It builds relevance. And it reminds them that professional decision-making doesn’t start “out there.” It starts here.
2. Educating for Possible Futures: Using EdTech with Purpose
Students also need to develop adaptive skills: how to think critically, navigate ambiguity, and evaluate tools in evolving environments. EdTech is a perfect place to practice this.
Today’s education market is flooded with tools — over 370 vendors across over 40 market segments, according to Encoura. But quantity isn’t quality. Too often, we adopt tools based on novelty or institutional trends rather than instructional value.
To support students in building discernment, we must model it ourselves. That means asking: Does this tool solve a real problem in my class? Does it deliver on its promises? Does it support learning equitably and sustainably?
In other words, we must shift from passive adopters to intentional evaluators and invite students into that evaluative process. Helping them think about how technology shapes learning (and their own agency within it) equips them for any environment, not just the one we’ve built.
3. Educating for Unknowable Futures: Making Space for Reflection
Preparing students for the truly unknown requires something more radical: making space for performance, yes, but also for reflection.
In a recent MBA course on negotiation and conflict, I made a bold move: I assigned weekly reflection journals — raw, stream-of-consciousness entries that linked course themes to students’ lived experiences. Some students resisted at first. But by the end, many said it changed the way they approached class and life.
Reflection is often treated as an add-on, something optional or “soft.” But it’s essential. It helps students surface assumptions, interrogate choices, and practice metacognition. And in a world where knowledge and skills are constantly evolving, the ability to learn how to learn may be the most durable skill of all.
Possibility Thinking, in Practice
If our current moment is a reckoning, then our response must be one of responsibility. We cannot guarantee our students a particular future. But we can offer them the tools to shape one.
Beghetto calls this “agentic awareness” — a belief in one’s ability to influence outcomes. It’s a curriculum and a posture. And it’s something we can model by how we teach: with creativity, clarity, and curiosity.
So the next time you see another headline about higher ed’s collapse, ask yourself: What if we treated this as a moment to reimagine rather than as a crisis to survive?
That’s resilience, and it’s possibility thinking in action.
Three Small Shifts You Can Make This Semester
Now is the perfect time to start leaning into the possibility of our problems. To do so, try:
Redesigning one assignmentto reflect your students’ actual career goals or lived experiences. Meeting students where they are will help them better envision where they’re headed.
Asking your classroom technology better questions. Push beyond features to real learning outcomes when you choose to invite EdTech into your classroom.
Making reflection part of the grade. Don’t treat it as busywork but as weighted, important meaning-making.
Higher education may be facing unprecedented disruption, but disruption doesn’t have to mean decline. In fact, the classroom may be one of the last places where we still have real influence over what comes next. Each lesson we design, each conversation we facilitate, each moment we create for reflection — these are acts of future-building.
Educating for unknowable futures doesn’t mean we need to predict what’s next. It means we help students learn to ask better questions, adapt with confidence, and recognize their own capacity to shape change. And it means we embrace that same mindset ourselves.
The future of higher education won’t be saved by sweeping reforms or silver-bullet technologies. It will be co-created — one thoughtful assignment, one intentional choice, one student at a time. And that work starts not in distant policy meetings, but right here, in our classrooms.
Laura Nicole Miller, DET, is an assistant professor in the Grenon School of Business at Assumption University, where she teaches organizational communication, marketing, and management. A first-generation college graduate and former EdTech executive, she studies how communication practices shape equity, trust, and student success in high-stakes environments.
Craft, A. (2015). Possibility thinking: From what is to what might be. In R. Wegerif, L. Li, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on teaching thinking (pp. 15–26). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315797021
Miller, L. N. (2025). “D-III students deserve better”: strategic communication with college stakeholders. The CASE Journal, 21(3), 493-516. https://doi.org/10.1108/TCJ-06-2024-0184
