Higher Ed HR Accelerator: Building AI-Ready, Compliant HR Practices
Thursday, February 5, 2026 | 1:00-3:30 p.m. ET
$195 for CUPA-HR Members | $295 for Nonmembers
Sponsored By
Registration is required to attend this virtual event.
Join us for a dynamic virtual event designed specifically for higher ed HR professionals, focused on the effective and responsible use of AI in the workplace. We’ll explore the legal and ethical implications of AI compliance and offer practical insights on how to ensure AI-driven tools are implemented in ways that enhance HR effectiveness while maintaining adherence to compliance standards. The presenters will showcase real-world applications of AI and highlight how these technologies can be used to streamline processes and support higher ed HR in everyday work.
Topics include:
Navigating Legal HR in the Age of AI
HR professionals should understand not only the benefits of AI but also the risks and regulations that have emerged in this new legal frontier. In this segment, we’ll discuss the use of AI in employment practices, relevant government regulations related to AI, and how to address employees using ChatGPT and other generative AI programs in their work. We’ll also explore the latest trends in AI-related employment litigation and steps employers can take to reduce the likelihood of legal risk related to AI.
AI and the ADA: Accommodations and Compliance
In this segment, we’ll discuss how AI is transforming workplace accessibility and get an overview of the legal responsibilities that come with this transformation. Explore how AI can interact with the Americans with Disabilities Act and how AI-driven tools and strategies can be adapted to support reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities.
Showcase: Prompt Engineering For Smarter, Easier HR Workflows
In this segment, presenters from LSU will highlight how prompt engineering tools like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot have transformed their institution’s HR processes. Learn how to reduce time spent on HR administrative tasks like HR document templates, communication, policies, performance management and training. We’ll also hear about security and confidentiality considerations when using AI and how HR leaders can be proactive in safeguarding employee information.
Showcase: Assessing AI Risk: A Practical Evaluation Framework
AI is reshaping HR, but ensuring responsible adoption starts with understanding vendor risk. In this segment, presenters from Segal will offer a practical AI risk survey process designed to evaluate third-party vendors across 30 key questions — from data privacy and bias mitigation to security and transparency. Learn how this framework can help HR leaders make informed decisions, strengthen governance and reduce operational risk, and leave with actionable insights and a tool you can adapt for your own campus.
CUPA-HR is a nonpartisan, nonprofit educational organization of HR professionals serving our nation’s institutions of higher education. The content and discussions in this virtual event are intended to be educational in nature. They do not constitute legal advice or counsel, and they shall not promote partisan positions on the issues discussed. To that end, we request that participants refrain from promoting partisan positions during this event as well.
Presenters
Lisa Koblin Partner Saul Ewing
Matthew D. Kohel Partner Saul Ewing
Emily Hernandez HRIS Manager LSU Health Sciences Center-New Orleans
Aaron Miley Associate Director, Human Resources LSU Health Sciences Center-New Orleans
Michael Stoyanovich Vice President and Senior Consultant, Administration and Technology Segal
CORE AI Technology Risk Management, Compliance, Public Policy
This program has been submitted for recertification credit through HRCI and SHRM, and we anticipate approval for 1.75 hours.
New to CUPA-HR Virtual Events? The CUPA-HR website requires you to create a free site account if you don’t already have one. After you’ve created a website account and established a login, you can then proceed to register for this event. If you have any questions while registering, please contact CUPA-HR toll free at 877-287-2474 or via e-mail at [email protected].
This blog includes personal reflections shared at the 2025 Independent Higher Education Conference by James Pitman, Outgoing Chair of IHE and Managing Director U.K. and Ireland, Study Group.
International education is important to many IHE members but for some of our biggest members, including my own organisation Study Group, it is our entire business.
Government policies on international education over the last 15 have been less than supportive, and some in the last 2 years have been materially value destructive for the UK.
The Dependents Visa – policy and discrimination
The removal of the Dependants visa in 2024 and questions over the Graduate Route cost the UK 54,000 international students in 2024 vs 2023. That is worth £6 billion at today’s values, and over £2 billion in receipts to the exchequer each year. Certainly the dependants visa had a major flaw, but it was one that could have been corrected rather than withdrawing the whole visa scheme entirely for taught degrees.
As predicted by the sector, that withdrawal was gender discriminatory, leading to the loss of 19,000 female students vs the prior year, in the January 2024 intake alone. Every one of those was a human story, of ambitions denied, families fractured, careers restricted and yet again women being discriminated against – in this case by UK government policy. It is particularly ironic, considering the importance the UN Sustainable Development Goals place on women’s education as arguably the most effective way of lifting a whole society.
Such discrimination is also a risk with the tightening of the BCA metrics to barrier levels that no other export sector has to endure, such that universities are already withdrawing completely from certain countries. This is collateral damage that will stop those good students that do exist in every country from coming to study in the UK. Compliance absolutely yes, but constriction beyond what is rational – that is a step too far.
This government makes much of taking decisions that are in the interests of the UK and not overtly political; and they tell us that they are driving growth and jobs. And yet the loss of international students almost always leads to the loss of jobs in every region of our country, most especially those that need inward investment the most and will find it hardest to fund an alternative.
Those lost 54,000 international students lost us well over £1 billion in inward investment, and the UCU says nearly 15,000 jobs have been lost in Higher Education, many probably at graduate level.
Research from Oxford Economics and others implies that you can double that with job losses in local economies and supply chains. So, some 30,000 jobs lost or at risk with no substitution possible, as those students have already taken their £1 billion elsewhere. When Tata Steel’s Port Talbot plant announced 2,800 job losses, with more in the supply chain, this was front-page news. Where are the headlines that ask for immediate intervention to prevent ten times that impact?
The International Student Levy – the new export tax
Which brings me on to the International Student Levy, or more correctly, an export tariff or jobs tax. The Institute for Fiscal Studies calls it a ‘tax on a major UK export’.
Whether the tariff goes on international student fees – which research indicates will lose us 16,000 students straight away – or is absorbed by universities (which they are in no position to cope with) jobs will be lost. The loss of 16,000 students implies 4,000 jobs at risk in higher education and 4,000 more jobs in local economies. Martin Wolf in the Financial Times earlier this week wrote, ‘the proposed…tax on international student fees is a dagger aimed at one of the UK’s most successful export industries’. Who can disagree!
The Government is arguing that there is no alternative to fund domestic student maintenance (which to be clear is a worthy cause for support). I can’t be the only one who can think of an obvious alternative. Current US policy is hammering the competitiveness of the market leader, so that offers the UK a golden opportunity, if government would only work with the sector to grow our international education exports rather than endlessly restricting them.
Back of the envelope calculation indicates that recovering only half of the students we lost in 2024 because of government policy would generate the required income to the exchequer to fund those maintenance grants sustainably and create jobs, not destroy them.
The Graduate Route subsidy
Finally the Graduate Route, which is an incredibly sensible tool to encourage students to study here and contribute after graduation, but which also subsidises UK tax payers and the NHS specifically, every year that it is available to international students. Why? If you pay the same Income Tax and National Insurance as a domestic equivalent but can, by law, only access less than half the services that are paid for from those taxes, then that is a subsidy in my book.
We should all hope the Graduate Route visa is here to stay, but it has already been shortened by six months and the consequences could yet be dire. According to the ICEF, an Indian graduate on an average salary may take 25 years to repay the cost of undergraduate study in a Russell Group university – 36 without two years of post study work. As families calculate return on investment in a challenging market for graduate employment, nibbling away at policies that allow an opportunity to recoup investment may risk it altogether.
Education not immigration
A year ago, I recommended to the IHE conference that the Government needed to decouple international students from the toxicity of immigration politics, which research shows much of the public also supports. They have not done so and show no inclination to do so.
Education and immigration must be decoupled if we are to ever escape relentlessly self-harming policies. Until they do so, I am afraid that their maxim of doing what is right for our country and not just what is supposedly popular is destined to continue to ring very hollow for international education, one of our greatest exports and probably greatest source of influence for good.
Doesn’t it seem as if the world gets more complicated every day? It is difficult to keep track of all the global calamities, let alone make sense of them.
When News Decoder came into being 10 years ago, it was to combat one thing: the problem of too much news and information in a world of constant streaming and posting and too little context and understanding of what all this news and information means. News Decoder Founder Nelson Graves called this a “knowledge gap.”
But 10 years on, this gap is even more difficult to close. That’s because the problems have metastasized and each one seems more unsolvable — climate change, disease, hunger, genocide, racial hatred, homelessness, mass unemployment. How can you work to solve each problem when they are all interconnected? The result is widespread despair caused by the belief that these problems are unsolvable.
We need an antidote to this despair.
It is no longer enough to close the knowledge gap. We need to bust the myth that problems are unsolvable, when really they are just overwhelming. And they are overwhelming because too often the news and information young people get focuses on obstacles to solutions — the inability of governments and organizations to work together, and politicians who prioritize winning elections at all cost. Too often, media focuses on the same problems in the same places so young people don’t see the solutions that can be found in places media ignore.
Determination, not despair
Once young people see problems as solvable, they can find the energy to work towards those solutions. That’s why solutions journalism has become a cornerstone of our educational mission.
We teach students to apply a critical, curious lens to the media and the world around them — continually questioning, taking nothing at face value. And at the same time we show them how to find the solutions and the people working on those solutions all over the world. In doing so they might just see that the problem in their community that seemed unsolvable is being tackled elsewhere and those solutions can be applied back home.
Consider the story we published on Monday by University of Toronto Fellow Natasha Yu Chia Hu. In looking at the overwhelming and connected problems of food insecurity, poverty, obesity and diabetes she focused on a program New York City has launched to make the foods young people get in school healthier, and how other places around the world are tackling the problems in similar ways.
At News Decoder, students don’t just read about these solutions, they seek out the stories themselves. In the United States, student Aiden Huber explored the problem of food deserts. In Switzerland, Liv Egli explored the disconnect between environmentally-minded consumers and the beef they eat. In France, Clover Choi looked at the connection between war and food shortages.
And they engage in thoughtful conversations on these topics with experts and with their peers in other countries through our school-to-school cross-border webinars and our Decoder Dialogues.
From disempowerment to agency
By encouraging global perspectives and enabling cross-continental exchange, by nurturing their voices and giving them a platform to communicate with global audiences, we transform young people’s sense of disempowerment into agency.
Going into our second decade, News Decoder wants to do this in more ways.
We want to meet educators where they are and within their real-world constraints and opportunities to help them implement experiential learning and AI-resilient methodologies. This means more than listening; it means an active partnership.
We want to expand our reachto enable as many educators and young people as possible to benefit from our approach and build a truly diverse global community.
We intend to find new ways to diversify our network of correspondents, emphasising those in Global South nations to enable us to explore solutions in places the mainstream media ignores. And we want to create new ways for young people, journalists and experts to connect across borders — through live virtual roundtables and in-person workshops.
Working together across borders
In a world where so many laudable nonprofit organizations are vying for funds, we need to forge partnerships with like-minded organizations and share our knowledge and expertise in ways that benefit everyone working in the field.
At News Decoder, we keep our mission foremost: Informing, connecting and empowering young people to be engaged citizens and changemakers locally, nationally and globally. We need funds to do that, but fundraising isn’t our mission. Where we can work with other organisations to fulfill our mission and where we can share our resources towards that purpose, we will.
We have been doing this all along. With the University of Toronto we take on journalists-in-training and give them a platform to report on important, complicated issues. With The Environment and Human Rights Academy at the European School of Brussels II, we created a teaching curriculum for climate change that educators can implement in their classes, complemented by a 3-day in-person teacher training workshop. With Prisa Media of Spain and some seven other organizations, we joined WePod, a cross-border project to support the growth and sustainability of the European podcasting ecosystem. And with Mobile Stories in Sweden, we helped create open-access resources — video tutorials, articles and educators’ guides — to help young people report and write trustworthy news stories grounded in ethical practice.
All this is part of our desire to create a global community of young people who refuse to be discouraged by news and who instead use news to drill down into problems to identify solutions and work towards those solutions — whether that means pushing their government representatives to pass laws, voting out representatives who foment division, pressuring corporations to change their ways or using social media to rally the people around them to fight for change.
Moving forward, we’re making our educational experiences accessible to more young peopleby expanding open-access materials and creating public engagement forums. We’ll continue to adapt our classroom work to individual school needs while prioritizing communities where we can make the greatest difference: under-resourced or under-represented groups.
Together, as a global community, we can fight the despair that comes with the myth that problems are too overwhelming to solve.
Anyone who has worked with young people knows this: When they are inspired and energized, it is hard for anyone to stand in their way.
When Collegedale Academy, a PreK–8 school outside Chattanooga, Tennessee, needed a new elementary building, we faced a choice that many school leaders eventually confront: repair an aging facility or reimagine what learning spaces could be.
Our historic elementary school held decades of memories for families, including some who had once walked its halls as children themselves. But years of wear and the need for costly repairs made it clear that investing in the old building would only patch the problems rather than solve them. At the same time, Southern Adventist University–on whose land the school sat–needed the property for expansion.
Rather than cling to the past, we saw an opportunity. We could design a new, future-focused environment on our middle school campus–one that reflected how students learn today and how they will need to learn tomorrow.
Putting students first
As both a teacher and someone who helped design our middle school, I approached the project with one condition: every design choice had to prioritize students and teachers. That philosophy shaped everything that followed.
My search for student-centered design partners led us to MiEN. What impressed me most was that they weren’t simply selling furniture. They were invested in research–constantly asking what classrooms need to evolve and then designing for that reality. Every piece we chose was intentional, not about aesthetics alone, but about how it could empower learners and teachers.
Spaces that do more
From the beginning, our vision emphasized flexibility, belonging, and joy. Every area needed to “do more,” adapting seamlessly to different uses throughout the day. To achieve this, we focused on designing spaces that could shift in purpose while still sparking curiosity and connection.
Community hubs reimagined: Our cafeteria and media center now transform into classrooms, performance stages, or meeting spaces with minimal effort, maximizing every square foot.
Interactive, sensory-rich design: An interactive wall panel with a ball run, sensory boards, and flexible seating encourages students to collaborate and explore beyond traditional instruction.
Learning everywhere: Even hallways and lobbies have become extensions of the classroom. With mobile whiteboards, soft seating, and movable tables, these spaces host tutoring sessions, small groups, and parent meetings.
Outdoor classrooms: Students gather at the campus creek for science lessons, spread out at outdoor tables that double as project workspaces, and find joy in spaces designed for both inquiry and play. Walking into the building, students immediately understood it was made for them. They take pride in exploring, rearranging furniture, and claiming ownership of their environment. That sense of belonging is priceless and drives real engagement in the learning.
Supporting teachers through change
For teachers accustomed to traditional layouts, the shift to flexible spaces required trust and support. At first, some colleagues wondered how the new design would fit with their routines. But once they began teaching in the space, the transformation was rapid. Within weeks, they were moving furniture to match their themes, discovering new instructional strategies, and finding creative ways to engage students.
The beauty of this approach is that it doesn’t dictate a single method. Instead, it enables teachers to adapt the space to their vision. Watching colleagues gain confidence and joy in their teaching reinforced our original intent: create an environment that empowers educators as much as it excites students.
A partnership that mattered
No school leader undertakes a project like this alone. For us, partnership was everything. The team that supported our vision felt less like outside vendors and more like collaborators who shared our dream.
They weren’t just delivering products; they were helping us shape a culture. Their excitement matched ours at every step, and together, we turned ideas into realities that continue to inspire.
Immediate and lasting impact
The outcomes of the project were visible from day one. Students lit up as they explored the new features. Teachers discovered fresh energy in their classrooms. Parents, many of whom remembered the old building, were struck by how clearly the new design signaled a commitment to modern learning and to prioritizing their children’s futures.
Financially, the project was also a smart investment. Multi-purpose areas and durable, mobile furnishings mean that every dollar spent generates long-term value. And because the spaces were designed with flexibility in mind, they will remain relevant even as instructional practices evolve.
Looking ahead
The success of our elementary project has created momentum for what’s next. Collegedale is already planning high school renovations guided by the same student-first philosophy. The excitement is contagious, not just for our community but for how it models what schools can achieve when they align design with mission.
For me, this project was never just about furniture. It was about creating a culture where curiosity, creativity, and joy thrive every day. With the right partners and a clear vision, schools can build environments where students feel they belong and where teachers are empowered to do their best work.
As education leaders consider their own building projects, my advice is simple: design for the learners first. When students walk into a space and know, without a doubt, that it was built for them, everything else follows.
Beth Stone, Collegedale Academy
Beth Stone serves as a designer and visual arts teacher at Collegedale Academy in Chattanooga, TN.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
For decades, America was gripped by college mania, a culturally and structurally manufactured frenzy that elevated higher education to near-mythical importance. Students, families, and society were swept up in the belief that a college degree guaranteed status, financial security, and social validation. This was no mere aspiration; it was a fevered obsession, fueled by marketing, rankings, policy incentives, and social pressure. Today, the spell is breaking, but the demand for credentials persists.
Historically, the term “college mania” dates to the 19th century, when historian Frederick Rudolph used it to describe the fervent founding of colleges in the United States, driven by religious zeal and civic ambition. Over time, the mania evolved. Postwar expansion of higher education through the GI Bill normalized college attendance as a societal expectation. Rankings, elite admissions, and media coverage transformed selective schools into symbols of prestige. By the early 2000s, for-profit colleges exploited the frenzy, aggressively marketing to students while federal and state policy incentivized enrollment growth over meaningful outcomes.
The early 2010s revealed the fragility of this system in what I have described as the College Meltdown: structural dysfunction, declining returns on investment, predatory practices, and neoliberal policy failures exposed the weaknesses behind the hype. At its height, college mania spun students and families into a cycle of aspiration, anxiety, and debt.
Now, even students at the most elite institutions are disengaging. Many do not attend classes, treating lectures as optional, prioritizing networking, internships, or social signaling over actual learning. This demonstrates that the spell of college mania is unraveling: prestige alone no longer guarantees engagement or meaningful educational outcomes. Families are questioning the value of expensive degrees, underemployment is rising, and alternative pathways, including vocational training, apprenticeships, and nontraditional credentials, are gaining recognition.
Yet the paradox remains: for many jobs, credentials are still required. Nursing, engineering, teaching, accounting, and countless professional roles cannot be accessed without degrees. The waning mania does not erase the need for qualifications; it simply exposes how much of the cultural obsession — the anxiety, overpaying, and overworking — was socially manufactured rather than inherently necessary for employment. Students are now forced to navigate this tension: pursuing credentials while seeking value, purpose, and meaningful learning beyond the symbol of the degree itself.
The breaking of the spell is not unique to higher education. History demonstrates that manias — economic, social, or cultural — rise and fall. College mania, once fueled by collective belief and systemic reinforcement, is now unraveling under the weight of its contradictions. Institutions must adapt by emphasizing authentic education rather than prestige, while policymakers can prioritize affordability, accountability, and outcomes. Students, in turn, may pursue paths aligned with practical skills, personal growth, and career readiness rather than chasing symbolic credentials alone.
The era of college mania may be ending, but with the spell broken comes an opportunity. Higher education can be reimagined as a system that serves public good, intellectual development, and genuine opportunity, balancing the need for credentials with the pursuit of meaningful education.
Sources:
Frederick Rudolph, The American College and University: A History (1962).
Frank Bruni, Where You Go Is Not Who You’ll Be: An Antidote to the College Admissions Mania (2015).
Dahn Shaulis, Higher Education Inquirer, “College Meltdown and the Manufactured Frenzy” (2011–2025).
Stanford Law Review, Private Universities in the Public Interest (2025).
Higher Education Handbook of Theory & Research, Volume 29 (2024).
Recent reporting on student engagement, class attendance, and labor-market requirements for degrees, 2023–2025.
DHS said ICE arrested Sumith Gunasekera on Nov. 12.
Lawrey/iStock/Getty Images Plus
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has detained a Ferris State University professor, according to a Department of Homeland Security news release that calls him “a criminal illegal alien sex offender from Sri Lanka.”
ICE arrested Sumith Gunasekera in Detroit on Nov. 12, DHS announced in its Nov. 25 release. That’s the date Ferris State “became aware of accusations regarding” Gunasekera, university spokesperson David Murray said in an emailed statement. Murray didn’t answer further questions from Inside Higher Ed Monday, including whether the university performed a background check on Gunasekera before hiring him.
“He has been placed on administrative leave while the university gathers more information,” Murray wrote. “This is a personnel issue and it would be inappropriate for the university to further discuss the matter.”
The university’s website lists Gunasekera as director of its Data Analytics Consulting and Research Center. A Sumi Gunasekera is also listed as an assistant professor of marketing.
As of last week’s news release, DHS said Gunasekera “remains in ICE custody pending further immigration proceedings.” DHS spokespeople didn’t respond to Inside Higher Ed’s questions Monday about whether he’s still being held and where.
The DHS release says that, in 1998, “a criminal court in Brampton, Ontario convicted Gunasekera for utter threat to cause death or bodily harm and sexual interference and sentenced him to 1 month of incarceration and 1 year of probation.” Anita Sharma, group leader at the Ontario Court of Justice in Brampton, told Inside Higher Ed the case has been archived, so she couldn’t provide further details Monday.
DHS’s release says “the convictions in Canada” rendered Gunasekera “ineligible for legal status in the United States.” Tricia McLaughlin, a DHS spokesperson, said in the release that “it’s sickening that a sex offender was working as a professor on an American college campus and was given access to vulnerable students to potentially victimize them. Thanks to the brave ICE law enforcement officers, this sicko is behind bars and no longer able to prey on Americans.”
Inside Higher Ed was unable to reach Gunasekera for comment.
As a PR professional, you can equip students on your campus with the skills and confidence to excel in interviews. Here are four reasons why you should invest the time and resources in media training your students.
It makes your life easier. When a reporter contacts you and asks for a student to weigh in on the news of the day or your institution’s latest initiative, you will have a pool of students to pick from at the ready rather than reaching out to deans or faculty to find a student and vet them that day.
While it will make your life easier in the long run, it does require you to put in the time up front. Meet students on their timelines. Most student group meetings are outside of class time, so it might mean you are attending a student government association meeting at 8 p.m. or doing a Zoom training with the College Democrats or Republicans on your lunch break.
It helps students and the community navigate crisis situations. With protests becoming regular occurrences on our campuses and in our communities, media training students will help them remain calm under pressure. When a reporter is looking for a comment, students won’t just say the first thing that pops into their mind. They will know how to get their key messages across to the audiences they are trying to reach.
It’s not just national and local media students need to respond to; student reporters are often the first to approach peers for quotes. All student newspapers are online, can be accessed by anyone and are an extension of your institution and its values. Engaging with student media isn’t just a learning opportunity—it shows how students will represent themselves, which in turn has a direct impact on the reputation of your institution.
Many students don’t know they can choose to not talk to the media or say no to interview requests. We’ve all seen the videos of reporters knocking on students’ doors and the students saying something unfavorable rather than just not opening the door in the first place, or of students having a microphone put in their face as they are walking to class to weigh in on a subject they don’t know about instead of saying, “I don’t know.” Media training can help students realize they have the option to respectfully decline interviews and interactions, which can help alleviate the pressure they might feel to respond in the moment.
Students build career-ready competencies. Whether it’s an internship or job interview, being able to succinctly articulate their points will help students for the rest of their lives. From public speaking to leadership roles to internships, media training gives students skills for their future.
We want our students to be able to weigh in on important issues, and media outlets are always looking for a student perspective. For example, my team was recently on campus for faculty and staff media and op-ed training when a professor asked if his students could sit in. Afterward, one student drafted an op-ed that she successfully placed. I’ve also provided op-ed writing training to seminar classes in which students learn the nuts and bolts of writing an op-ed and how to get published as an undergrad.
Name, image and likeness (NIL) has changed the game for student athletes. It takes students out of the arena and into the public eye where their reputation will be on the line. If you are at a larger school, some of your student athletes may have their own publicist, but if you are not at school where the NIL money is flowing, media training helps prepare student athletes for local commercials, being the face of the pizza shop down the street or even a postgame interview.
When a scandal occurs—a coach is fired, or student athletes are gambling or being hazed—you want students to know they can come to you for advice and guidance when reporters descend on campus.
Students are the most prominent ambassadors of your institution. Media training isn’t about making them a professional correspondent; it’s about making them feel prepared when they are in the spotlight. Whether they are engaging in a protest, talking with a peer reporter at the school newspaper or navigating a postgame interview, media training can serve them in the moment and long term. It’s worth your time to engage with your best spokespeople.
Cristal Steuer is associate vice president at TVP Communications, a national public relations and crisis communications agency solely focused on higher education.
More colleges and universities are seeking ways to embed work-based learning into the student experience, ensuring graduates are prepared to tackle their first job.
The University of Delaware’s Lerner College of Business and Economics received a grant in January from the Delaware Workforce Development Board to create yearlong employment opportunities for current students, connecting them with businesses across the state that are interested in hiring local talent. Program leaders say the goal is to provide deeper learning opportunities for students and create a talent pipeline for the region.
“We want to keep homegrown talent here in Delaware after they graduate,” said Scott Malfitano, chair of the Delaware Workforce Development Board, in a press release. “We also want to keep those students who come from out of state to Delaware here when they see the wonderful opportunities that are available.”
Part of the challenge is that companies in Delaware compete for talent with employers in nearby regions including Washington, D.C.; Philadelphia; and New York, Malfitano said. “We want [students] to see the opportunities that are here, and they’ll find out that businesses are hungry and they want to keep the talent here.”
How it works: The Lerner Co-Op program launched in January. The university’s career center solicited businesses in the region to host co-op participants and opened a form for students to apply. In the spring, companies provided job descriptions, and students submitted applications before being selected for interviews by the employers.
The co-op officially started in June, when students began their full-time summer internships, working 40 hours per week. Since classes started back up in the fall, students continue to work up to 20 hours per week, which they will do until next spring.
“A lot of our students tend to intern in the summer for eight to 10 weeks, which is great, but we wanted for them to have a much longer experience to build their résumé, build their networks and make money,” Jill Panté, director of Lerner career services, said in a January press release.
Grant funding was used to hire a program coordinator to oversee the co-op, including posting positions, scheduling interviews and assisting with the offer process, Panté said.
The impact: For the initial cohort, 25 students were placed with 21 employers, including WSFS Bank, JPMorgan Chase, 2L Race Services, the Siegfried Group and DuPont. Student roles include business operations, event coordination and data product solutions.
Feedback from participants, collected in surveys and blog posts, showed that continuing the work beyond the summer has been productive for both students and employers. Employers get more work done, and students expand their learning experiences and benefit from longer-term mentors who provide career advice and support during the program.
Looking ahead, the university hopes to grow the program to 50 companies in the next year, allowing additional students to participate.
Does your college or university provide paid work experiences for students during the academic year? Tell us more here.
Texas State Technical College is striving to fill the state’s workforce gaps, but college leaders say the institution has been hampered by out-of-date facilities and a lack of funding to expand.
The technical college has historically been entirely reliant on state funding, which can fluctuate. Unlike the state’s community colleges, it’s not allowed to levy taxes or issue bonds. And yet, the institution is bursting at the seams with 45 out of its 127 programs at capacity this semester across its 11 campuses. Enrollment at the institution has risen steadily over the last few years, jumping up to 13,682 students this year from 12,518 last year.
But this past election cycle, Texas voters gave the institution a rare gift for a technical college—an $850 million endowment.
In November, almost 70 percent of Texans backed a constitutional amendment to create an endowment for TSTC out of the state’s general revenue fund, which will include annual disbursements for capital improvements. College leaders expect up to $50 million from the endowment each year, said Joe Arnold, the college’s deputy vice chancellor of government relations.
He called the endowment “transformational for the institution and for the state of Texas.”
“Texas has grown and grown and grown in businesses and population over the last 20 years, and it’s going to continue to grow,” Arnold said. “You’re going to have to have the workforce to meet the demand, and this is going to help us do that.”
This is the second time TSTC has sought to get an endowment on the ballot. In 2023, an attempt to establish a $1 billion endowment for the college died in conference committee, The Texas Tribune reported.
An Unusual Advantage
Endowments at two-year institutions are rare compared to their four-year counterparts, but they aren’t unheard of. Southwest Wisconsin Technical College, for example, recently used its $700,000 Aspen Prize for a student success plan endowment run by its foundation. Ivy Tech Community College’s foundation also raises money for endowments to pay for student scholarships and other needs.
Some states have also provided such funds for their public higher ed institutions. Alabama, for example, has an education trust fund for its institutions, including two-year and four-year colleges. Tennessee also put lottery reserves in an endowment to sustain Tennessee Promise, its free community college program. Texas’s Permanent University Fund also allows the University of Texas and Texas A&M systems to generate money from land leased by oil and gas companies.
But still, “most public institutions don’t have state-provided endowments like that,” said Robert Kelchen, head of the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. The advantage of an endowment is college leaders “know that the funds are going to be there and they have some level of control over how it gets drawn down.” But it’s a hard model for other states to replicate unless they have “a windfall [of] one-time funds” they’re willing to devote, without pulling back on state appropriations.
“Because of a lot of the politically conservative legislation coming out of Texas, I think the perception is that Texas doesn’t financially support higher ed, but they do, and they’ve done some pretty innovative things in finance,” Kelchen added.
Arnold said it makes a real difference knowing the institution has a set amount of money coming in each year.
“We can plan for growth” and “plan ahead,” Arnold said.
Support and Opposition
Plans for the endowment had the backing of a wide range of employer groups, including the Texas Association of Manufacturers, the Texas Association of Builders and the Texas Economic Development Council, among others.
It also drew opponents, including the Libertarian Party of Texas and a few other groups that support limited government. These organizations raised concerns that creating a separate tranche of long-term funding for TSTC could get in the way of its fiscal oversight.
For example, Texas Policy Research, a research organization that seeks “liberty-based solutions” to improve Texas governance, recommended Texans vote no—arguing that “locking funding mechanisms into the Constitution erodes transparency and limited government” and that “programs should be funded through the regular budget process, where lawmakers justify spending every two years.”
But Arnold stressed that the money can only be used for specific purposes, such as renovations, infrastructure improvements and buying new land, buildings and equipment for programs.
Those types of funds are sorely needed, Arnold said. TSTC was founded 60 years ago and its flagship campus is on an old U.S. Air Force base. The funding will allow the college to update its “rather old facilities” and move forward with plans to add new campuses in three additional counties.
Defenders of the proposition also argue TSTC’s funding model holds it accountable. The state tracks graduates’ wages five years after they leave TSTC, and state money is doled out to the college based on their wage gains. Select programs also refund students’ out-of-pocket tuition costs if they don’t get a job interview in their field of study within six months.
The college’s funding depends on “graduates securing good jobs,” Meagan McCoy Jones, president and CEO of McCoy’s Building Supply, wrote in an op-ed in The Austin American-Statesmandefending the endowment proposal. “That ensures accountability to students, taxpayers and employers alike.” She told voters the endowment would “strengthen our economy, support families with life-changing education and keep our state on a path of growth and innovation.”
Since the funding formula was implemented in 2013, the college has discontinued programs that didn’t lead to well-paying or in-demand jobs.
“It made us really work hard with our employers to understand what the needs were,” Arnold said.
He believes the endowment is the next step in continuing to improve the institution.
“We’re excited to be able to increase our capacity and put more people to work in Texas,” he said. “That’s kind of our thing.”
In late 2023, Robin Baker made the career pivot from assistant professor at OHSU-PSU School of Public Health to learning designer at Dartmouth College. I asked if Robin would be willing to share some thoughts about her career path, and she graciously agreed.
Q: What motivated you to shift from a traditional faculty position into a learning designer role? What preparation and background did you bring to the work of a learning designer, and what advantages and challenges have been posed by coming from a faculty role?
A: I decided to transition from a traditional faculty role to a learning designer position after considerable reflection on what I wanted my work and life to look like. I was in a soft money–funded position, where success often felt tied to research output and securing grants. But in practice, most of my energy went into teaching and supporting students, the parts of the job that truly mattered to me. Over time, I began to realize that the pace and structure of that kind of academic role were not sustainable for me in the long run. As I thought more deeply about what aspects of my work I found most rewarding, I realized that, in addition to teaching and mentoring, I found immense satisfaction in designing learning experiences that were inclusive, authentic and relevant. I often spent significant time redesigning assignments and activities to make them more engaging and meaningful for my students. Learning design offered a way to stay connected to the core of what I value: teaching, learning and student success.
I brought to this role a strong foundation in pedagogy, assessment and curriculum design, developed through years of intentionally reflecting on my teaching. Whenever I noticed a strategy fell flat, I dug into the literature and experimented with new approaches, refining my practice based on evidence and observation. Another advantage that my previous life as a faculty member has provided me is that I have developed empathy and practical insight into the challenges that faculty face when trying to create robust learning experiences, provide meaningful feedback and maintain a work-life balance. I have found that acknowledging those realities and engaging in open, honest dialogue helps build trust and leads to more creative and effective solutions. Coming from a faculty background has allowed me to serve as a bridge between teaching practice and design strategy.
At the same time, that transition has come with some challenges. In my faculty role, I was accustomed to being the sole decision-maker for my courses, so adapting to a highly collaborative environment, where I needed to influence others without formal authority, was a major shift. In this context, I had to develop strong project-management skills, work within structured timelines and production workflows, and communicate clearly across teams. Learning to navigate these processes and contribute meaningfully without directing every decision was initially difficult, but it strengthened my ability to work strategically, build consensus and support high-quality learning experiences in partnership with others.
Q: Having now experienced life as both a full-time professor and full-time learning designer, how do the two roles compare and contrast? For someone trained for research and employed mostly in teaching (as most Ph.D.s are), what recommendations might you have for anyone else contemplating a similar career path?
A: Having experienced life as both a full-time professor and now as a full-time learning designer, I see both roles as connected by a shared commitment to improving student learning, though they differ in scope and kind of impact. As a faculty member, I had a very immediate connection with students: teaching, mentoring and witnessing their growth in real time. That direct engagement was deeply rewarding and energizing, but it also came with heavy workloads, administrative pressures and blurred boundaries. Over time, I found that level of intensity difficult to sustain, which prompted me to reflect on the kind of work-life balance and long-term impact I wanted.
As a learning designer, the work feels broader and more strategic. Instead of focusing on one group of students, I now collaborate with faculty across disciplines to design courses and learning environments that enhance teaching and learning for many more students. The impact is less direct but often greater in scale, as it shapes the systems and supports that enable effective teaching.
At the same time, I think it is important to acknowledge that the loss of direct connection with students can be a real adjustment. There is something uniquely special about witnessing students’ aha moments and seeing the immediate results of your teaching. As a learning designer, that feedback loop is more indirect. Faculty are often very appreciative of our collaboration, but it does not carry quite the same emotional resonance as seeing students thrive firsthand. For anyone considering this transition, it is worth reflecting on how central that kind of direct engagement is to their sense of purpose and whether there are other ways, such as mentoring colleagues, engaging in professional development or contributing to the broader learning community, to fill that gap.
Another concern I often hear from faculty considering this path is the fear of losing autonomy, particularly the flexibility to structure their own days or pursue creative ideas. In my experience, that depends heavily on the team and institutional culture. In my current role, which is largely remote and hybrid, there is a genuine appreciation for the whole person. We are trusted to manage our time and energy, and that autonomy is still very much present.
The difference is that I now have a healthier kind of control. I set realistic goals for what I can achieve in a given day, while being careful not to let work bleed into personal or family time. That structure allows me to work efficiently and intentionally and it has given me space to reconnect with family, friends, community and nature. For anyone thinking about making this transition, it’s worth having open conversations about team expectations, workflows and culture. Understanding these aspects up front can help you gauge whether the role is a good fit and set you up for long-term satisfaction.
A: In many ways, my role as course co-director is a meaningful complement to my work as a learning designer. In this role, I serve as one of the faculty for the capstone course, guiding students as they pull together what they’ve learned across the program and apply it to complex, real-world challenges. It’s been incredibly rewarding to reconnect directly with students, something I’d missed since stepping away from a full-time faculty role.
What makes this role even more meaningful is that I was one of the learning designers who helped faculty develop many of the courses in the M.H.A. program. Now, I get to see that work come full circle. It provides me with a unique perspective on how our strategies are implemented in practice and highlights opportunities to further refine the learning experience.
I also appreciate how this teaching role complements, rather than competes with, my work in learning design. My design experience informs how I approach the capstone, helping me think carefully about scaffolding, alignment and authentic assessment. At the same time, teaching keeps me connected to the student perspective, giving me a firsthand understanding of how learners experience our courses. That insight flows directly back into my design work and strengthens my collaborations with faculty.
Balancing both roles does require intentional structure and realistic expectations. I’ve learned to be clear about what I can reasonably accomplish each week and to protect time for rest, family and personal commitments. I rely on block scheduling to focus on design projects, faculty consultations and capstone mentoring, while making sure these blocks don’t spill into evenings or weekends. Maintaining these boundaries has been essential for sustaining both quality and balance.
I’m also fortunate to have supportive leadership in both the learning design team and the M.H.A. program, who recognize the value of these complementary roles. That culture of trust and flexibility makes it possible to do both well.
In many ways, this dual role gives me the best of both worlds: the broader, systemic perspective of learning design and the direct, human connection of teaching. Together, they keep me grounded in why this work matters and allow me to contribute to both faculty and student success in meaningful, sustainable ways.
