Today I’m taking a break from blogging to wish all of you who celebrate a merry Christmas. If you’re in a cold and/or wet climate, be warm and dry. Hug your loved ones and relish some downtime. Be safe and take care.
See you all soon.
Liked it? Take a second to support Bryan Alexander on Patreon!
Not everyone around the world celebrates Christmas. But it does seem that on December 25 of each year, much of the world takes a bit of a breather. In many countries, everything shuts down so that even those who don’t celebrate Christmas take the day off.
For this December 25, we give you some stories from across the world from our correspondents and students that you might have missed this past year and that might leave you feeling better about the world you inhabit. Wait till after the new year to begin working on those resolutions and worrying about obligations.
Today’s News Headlines for School Assembly, December 26, 2025: Here are the news headlines for school assembly on December 26. A Maoist leader was killed in Odisha, Delhi’s fog eased, and Kerala introduced photo identity cards. Tarique Rahman returned to Bangladesh, blasts in Nigeria and Gaza. Australia faces England in cricket on Friday, while young Indians shine in chess. India’s GDP data defended, CTET window reopens, AI courses surge in 2025.
Paka Hanumanthu alias Ganesh alias Chamru, a top Maoist leader hailing from Telangana’s Nalgonda district, and three other Maoists were shot dead in an encounter in Odisha on the intervening night between Wednesday and Thursday, officials said.
After days of recording dense fog conditions, the weather improved in Delhi early Thursday, with hardly any fog over at Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport, according to the India Meteorological Department (IMD) forecast.
The Kerala government decided to introduce permanent photo-affixed nativity cards, doing away with the prevailing practice of issuing nativity certificates.
The son of former Bangladeshi president Ziaur Rahman and first woman Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, Tarique Rahman returns Thursday to the nation after a 17-year self-imposed exile.
Blast at mosque in Nigeria kills 5 and injures more than 30 in an apparent suicide attack
Blast in Gaza wounds a soldier as Israel accuses Hamas of ceasefire violation
Story continues below this ad
Steven Smith’s Australia will lock horns with Ben Stokes’ England in the fourth of the five-match Test series at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in Melbourne on Friday.
IM Ethan Vaz, WFM Shubhi Gupta win at National Junior Chess Championship
Calling for a more even and symmetric evaluation of India’s economic performance, Chief Economic Advisor (CEA) V Anantha Nageswaran defended the GDP data and said “we don’t hear too many murmurs” when growth numbers disappoint.
The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) assessment of India’s official statistics should improve significantly once the ongoing review of the key macroeconomic indicators is complete, according to Mridul Saggar, Chairman of the Technical Advisory Committee on the Index of Industrial Production (IIP).
Story continues below this ad
The Central Board of Secondary Education will reopen the application window for the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) February registration for candidates who did not fill out the form.
In 2025, courses on generative AI, artificial intelligence, data science, and cybersecurity, among others, were the top choices of Indian learners.
© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Learning data has played a larger role in the planning and operations of education systems. In 2026, the focus will shift from reporting what happened to actually using data to make informed decisions. Institutions are already tracking a wider range of learning conditions. System‑level indicators are being used to understand how students experience education in real settings. As data governance expectations mature, this evolution is a strategic opportunity and an operational requirement.
In 2025, learning data practices moved beyond experimentation and into daily operations. Several patterns stood out across the sector.
As many platforms started responding dynamically to learner behavior, AI‑driven personalization and real‑time analytics became harder to ignore. The U.S. Department of Education’s AI report shows how real‑time data signals support educators with decision‑making tools like content pacing and targeted feedback. It also highlights why human oversight and transparency in AI‑supported systems are necessary.
At the same time, institutions began using large‑scale datasets to identify intervention points earlier. CoSN’s 2025–26 emerging technology trends show that K–12 leaders are using aggregated engagement data to inform decisions earlier in the academic year.
With the expansion of personalization, concerns about privacy and bias also increased. Ethical AI and federated learning models gained traction. Distributed data approaches that limit centralized storage while still enabling learning insights became more relevant, particularly for organizations serving multiple districts or states.
Another notable shift was the rise of immersive and multimodal data sources. Deloitte’s analysis of higher‑education trends shows growing use of simulations, virtual labs, and experiential learning environments, all of which generate complex engagement data that goes beyond clicks or completion rates.
The shift from retrospective analysis to predictive insights is the most vital learning data trend as we move into 2026. Dashboards that explain what already happened are giving way to models that signal what is likely to happen next.
Predictive retention models are becoming central to student‑success strategies. Enrollment data from the National Student Clearinghouse show continued volatility in postsecondary enrollment, reinforcing the importance of early identification of at‑risk students rather than reactive interventions.
Adaptive learning systems increasingly use AI‑driven signals to adjust content difficulty, recommend resources, or trigger educator outreach before learners disengage. Institutions are also applying predictive analytics to enrollment forecasting and resource planning, helping leaders prepare for demand shifts rather than responding after the fact.
For 2026, the value lies in proactive decision‑making.
The shift toward prediction marks a practical change in how learning data is used.
As learning data becomes more powerful, governance expectations are tightening. In 2026, ethical and privacy‑first data practices will be foundational, not optional.
Federated learning and decentralized analytics models are gaining relevance because they reduce the need to move or duplicate sensitive student data. Federal guidance on student privacy emphasizes minimizing data exposure while still enabling legitimate educational use, particularly when advanced analytics or AI are involved.
At the same time, compliance requirements are becoming more explicit. Updated FERPA resources and guidance reinforce schools’ responsibilities around data access, consent, and transparency, while COPPA and state‑level privacy laws continue to evolve.
In 2026, strong governance will not slow innovation. It will determine which organizations are trusted to scale it.
Learning data still sits in separate systems. LMS platforms track activity. SIS tools store records. Assessment and engagement tools add another layer. As a result, information often remains fragmented. As noted in market analysis, interoperability challenges continue to slow integration across these systems. When data are brought together, their role changes.
What unification enables:
Viewed together, this information supports earlier and more informed decisions across instruction and operations. District leaders are actively pushing for integrated data environments to make this possible at scale.
By 2026, leadership teams will expect consolidated learner views rather than disconnected reports generated by individual systems.
For EdTech companies, analytics are no longer limited to reporting usage. They increasingly influence how products evolve.
Teams are using analytics to understand how features are adopted, where learners disengage, and which workflows support sustained use. Feature‑level usage data are becoming a core input for continuous‑improvement decisions across learning products.
Common areas of focus include:
Product teams are also relying more on controlled testing to validate changes before scaling them. Evidence‑based iteration is increasingly tied to quality and accreditation expectations, reinforcing the role of analytics in product decision‑making.
By 2026, EdTech companies that consistently use analytics to guide product iteration will be better positioned to respond to changing learner needs.
As learning data grows in volume, usability becomes a limiting factor. Information that cannot be interpreted quickly rarely informs day‑to‑day decisions in classrooms or academic teams.
Clear and accessible data presentation has long been tied to better decision‑making in education systems, particularly when insights are intended for non‑technical users. This emphasis on clarity becomes more important as analytics move closer to instructional practice.
Educators tend to engage with analytics when:
By 2026, trust in learning analytics will depend less on model sophistication and more on whether educators can understand where insights come from and how to act on them.
Different segments are solving different problems with learning data.
Focus on execution, not frameworks
The next phase of learning data will be shaped not by how much insight organizations generate, but by how consistently they act on it. As data move closer to everyday decisions, they start influencing instruction, product design, and learner support in real ways.
That shift brings opportunity, but it also raises expectations. Insight needs to be usable. Systems need to be trustworthy. Decisions need to be grounded in evidence, not noise.
Organizations that treat learning data as a practical tool rather than a theoretical asset will be better positioned for what 2026 demands.
From the mid‑19th century to today, U.S. interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean have consistently combined military force, political influence, and economic pressure. Across this long arc, millions of lives have been shaped—often shattered—by policies that prioritize strategic advantage over human flourishing. Today’s geopolitical tensions with Venezuela are the latest flashpoint in a historical pattern that rewards elites while exacting profound human costs.
Note on Timing: This article is intentionally posted on Christmas Day 2025, a day traditionally associated with peace, goodwill, and reflection, to underscore the contrast between those ideals and the ongoing human toll of U.S. militarism and intervention abroad. The symbolic timing is a reminder that while many celebrate, others suffer the consequences of policies driven by power, profit, and geopolitics.
As Higher Education Inquirer has repeatedly argued, the United States’ military footprint—its wars, recruitment programs, and entanglements with higher education—has deep consequences not just abroad but at home. ROTC programs and military enlistment are often marketed as pathways to education and economic stability, but they also funnel young people into systems with long‑term obligations, moral hazards, and psychological risk. Prospective enlistees and their families should think twice before committing to military pathways that may bind them to morally questionable conflicts and institutional control.
Moreover, U.S. higher education has become deeply entwined with kleptocracy, militarism, and colonialism, supporting war economies and benefiting from federal research contracts with defense and intelligence partners that obscure the real human costs of empire. These warnings are especially salient in the context of Venezuela and similar interventions, where human toll and geopolitical stakes demand deeper scrutiny.
Major General Smedley D. Butler, among the most decorated U.S. Marines, became one of the U.S. military’s most outspoken critics. In his 1935 War Is a Racket, Butler rejected romantic notions of military glory and exposed the economic motives behind many interventions:
“War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious.”
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service… being a high‑class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism.”
“Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.”
Butler’s warnings were not abstract. In 1933, he was approached to lead a coup against President Franklin D. Roosevelt, known as the Business Plot, which he publicly exposed. His testimony before Congress revealed how elite interests sought to use military power to overthrow democratic government, an episode that underscores his critique of war as a tool for entrenched interests at the expense of ordinary people.
Below is a timeline of major U.S. interventions in the Americas, with estimated deaths, showing the human cost of policies that often served strategic or economic interests over humanitarian ones:
| Period | Location | Event / Nature of Intervention | Estimated Deaths |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1846–1848 | Mexico | Mexican-American War: Territorial conquest | ~25,000 Mexicans |
| 1898 | Cuba/P.R. | Spanish-American War: U.S. seized P.R.; Cuba protectorate | ~15,000–60,000 (90% disease) |
| 1914 | Mexico | Occupation of Veracruz: U.S. port seizure | ~300 Mexicans |
| 1915–1934 | Haiti | Military Occupation: Suppression of rebellions | ~3,000–15,000 |
| 1916–1924 | Dominican Rep. | Marine Occupation: Control of customs/finance | ~4,000 |
| 1954 | Guatemala | Op. PBSuccess: CIA coup against Árbenz; led to civil war | 150,000–250,000* |
| 1965 | Dominican Rep. | Op. Power Pack: U.S. intervention during civil war | ~3,000 |
| 1973–1990 | Chile | U.S.-backed Coup/Regime: Pinochet dictatorship | 3,000–28,000* |
| 1975–1983 | S. America | Operation Condor: CIA-supported intelligence network | ~60,000* |
| 1976–1983 | Argentina | Dirty War: U.S.-supported military junta and coup | ~30,000* |
| 1979–1992 | El Salvador | Civil War: Massive military aid to govt forces | 35,000–75,000* |
| 1981–1990 | Nicaragua | Iran-Contra Affair: Covert support for Contras | ~30,000–50,000* |
| 1989 | Panama | Operation Just Cause: Invasion to remove Noriega | 500–3,000 |
| 2025 | Venezuela | Naval Blockade: Active maritime strikes and standoff | 100+ (to date) |
*Estimates include civilian casualties and deaths indirectly caused by U.S.-supported interventions.
Venezuela’s 2025 crisis is the latest in a long history of U.S. pressure in the hemisphere. A naval blockade—accompanied by maritime strikes and political isolation—has already produced more than 100 confirmed deaths. Historically, interventions like this have often prioritized U.S. strategic or economic interests over local welfare.
The situation is further complicated by global geopolitics. Former President Donald Trump, who recently pardoned key figures involved in controversial interventions, including Iran‑Contra actors, also maintains strategic ties with China and Russia, highlighting how interventions are entangled with global power plays that affect universities, recruitment pipelines, and domestic politics alike.
Smedley Butler’s critique remains urgent: to “smash the racket,” profit must be removed from war, military force should be strictly defensive, and decisions about war must rest with those who bear its consequences. From Mexico to Venezuela—and including covert operations like Iran‑Contra—the historical record shows how interventions serve a narrow elite while imposing massive human costs.
HEI’s warnings underscore that higher education, ROTC programs, and military recruitment pipelines are not neutral pathways but deeply embedded parts of systems that reproduce extraction, militarism, and inequality. Students, educators, and families must critically evaluate the incentives and promises of military pathways and demand institutions that serve learning, opportunity, and justice rather than empire.
Butler, Smedley D. War Is a Racket. Round Table Press, 1935.
U.S. Congressional Record and Butler testimony on the Business Plot, 1934.
Kinzer, Stephen. Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq.
Scott, Peter Dale. Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America.
Reporting on Trump pardons, Iran‑Contra participants, and global alliances (2020–2025).
Higher Education Inquirer, “Kleptocracy, Militarism, Colonialism: A Counterrecruiting Call for Students and Families,” December 7, 2025. (link)
Higher Education Inquirer, “The Hidden Costs of ROTC — and the Military Path,” November 28, 2025. (link)
Historical records on U.S. interventions: Mexican‑American War, Spanish‑American War, Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Argentina (1976–1983), El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Venezuela (2025).
eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #5 focuses on a math platform that offers AI coaching for maximum impact.
Math is a fundamental part of K-12 education, but students often face significant challenges in mastering increasingly challenging math concepts.
Many students suffer from math anxiety, which can lead to a lack of confidence and motivation. Gaps in foundational knowledge, especially in early grades and exacerbated by continued pandemic-related learning loss, can make advanced topics more difficult to grasp later on. Some students may feel disengaged if the curriculum does not connect to their interests or learning styles.
Teachers, on the other hand, face challenges in addressing diverse student needs within a single classroom. Differentiated instruction is essential, but time constraints, large class sizes, and varying skill levels make personalized learning difficult.
To overcome these challenges, schools must emphasize early intervention, interactive teaching strategies, and the use of engaging digital tools.
Last year in New York City Public Schools, Franklin Delano Roosevelt High School (FDR) teachers started using a real-time AI math coaching platform from Edia to give students instant access to math support.
Edia aligns with Illustrative Mathematics’ IM Math, which New York City Public Schools adopted in 2024 as part of its “NYC Solves” initiative–a program aiming to help students develop the problem-solving, critical thinking, and math skills necessary for lifetime success. Because Edia has the same lessons and activities built into its system, learning concepts are reinforced for students.
FDR started using Edia in September of 2024, first as a teacher-facing tool until all data protection measures were in place, and now as an instructional tool for students in the classroom and at home.
The math platform’s AI coaching helps motivate students to persevere through tough-to-learn topics, particularly when they’re completing work at home.
“I was looking for something to have a back-and-forth for students, so that when they need help, they’d be able to ask for it, at any time of the day,” said Salvatore Catalano, assistant principal of math and technology at FDR.
On Edia’s platform, an AI coach reads students’ work and gives them personalized feedback based on their mistakes so they can think about their answers, try again, and master concepts.
Some FDR classes use Edia several days a week for specific math supports, while others use it for homework assignments. As students work through assignments on the platform, they must answer all questions in a given problem set correctly before proceeding.
Jeff Carney, a math teacher at FDR, primarily uses the Edia platform for homework assignments, and said it helps students with academic discovery.
“With the shift toward more constructivist modes of teaching, we can build really strong conceptual knowledge, but students need time to build out procedural fluency,” he said. “That’s hard to do in one class session, and hard to do when students are on their own. Edia supports the constructivist model of discovery, which at times can be slower, but leads to deeper conceptual understanding–it lets us have that class time, and students can build up procedural fluency at home with Edia.”
On Edia, teachers can see every question a student asks the AI coach as they try to complete a problem set.
“It’s a nice interface–I can see if a student made multiple attempts on a problem and finally got the correct answer, but I also can see all the different questions they’re asking,” Carney said. “That gives me a better understanding of what they’re thinking as they try to solve the problem. It’s hugely helpful to see how they’re processing the information piece by piece and where their misconceptions might be.”
As students ask questions, they also build independent research skills as they learn to identify where they struggle and, in turn, ask the AI coach the right questions to target areas where they need to improve.
“We can’t have 30 kids saying, ‘I don’t get it’–there has to be a self-sufficient aspect to this, and I believe students can figure out what they’re trying to do,” Carney said.
“I think having this platform as our main homework tool has allowed students to build up that self-efficacy more, which has been great–that’s been a huge help in enabling the constructivist model and building up those self-efficacy skills students need,” he added.
Because FDR has a large ELL population, the platform’s language translation feature is particularly helpful.
“We set up students with an Illustrative Math-aligned activity on Edia and let them engage with that AI coaching tool,” Carney said. “Kids who have just arrived or who are just learning their first English words can use their home languages, and that’s helpful.”
Edia’s platform also serves as a self-reflection tool of sorts for students.
“If you’re able to keep track of the questions you’re asking, you know for yourself where you need improvement. You only learn when you’re asking the good questions,” Catalano noted.
The results? Sixty-five percent of students using Edia improved their scores on the state’s Regents exam in algebra, with some demonstrating as much as a 40-point increase, Catalano said, noting that while increased scores don’t necessarily mean students earned passing grades, they do demonstrate growth.
“Of the students in a class using it regularly with fidelity, about 80 percent improved,” he said.
For more spotlights on innovative edtech, visit eSN’s Profiles in Innovation hub.
OPINION/ANALYSIS
Undaunted by the murder of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, students are fighting to keep the light shining on truth and freedom on college campuses all across the country.
In the month that followed Kirk’s death, TPUSA reported receiving more than 62,000 requests to start or join a chapter.
Since then, some students have faced death threats, and others battles with administrators and student governments. But the September tragedy stirred up courage in many young adults – and with it came new hope for the future.
The College Fix has covered many of these efforts. Here are a few of the highlights:
Welcoming debate
This essay by Benjamin Ellis, a student at University of North Carolina Asheville and a Democrat, captured wide-spread attention after Ellis described his surprise at finding the campus TPUSA club was more welcoming of him than the College Democrats.
Battling death threats
TPUSA chapter president Jacob York, a sophomore at Olivet Nazarene University, received graphic death threats linked to his attempts to get his chapter officially recognized. York told The College Fix that those who stand for truth should expect persecution, and he is not backing down.
Students on other campuses also have faced harassment and threats.
Celebrating persistence
If at first you don’t succeed: TPUSA students at Fort Lewis College in Colorado refused to take “no” for an answer when the student government rejected their request for official recognition. After the situation garnered attention online, including from state lawmakers, the student government quickly reversed course and granted the chapter’s request.
Finding strength in community
Madailein McDonough, president of University of Mary Washington’s newly formed TPUSA chapter, told The College Fix that her ultimate goal is to be “confident in our beliefs, respectful in our approach, and fearless in defending free speech.”
“When you join TPUSA, you’re not standing alone; you’re joining a network of students nationwide who have your back. Our chapter prioritizes safety, respect, and support, and we believe that strength comes from standing together peacefully and proudly,” she said.
Denied but not defeated
Meanwhile, students at private institutions like Seton Hall, Vanguard, and Point Loma Nazarene universities have faced obstacles from administrators and student government leaders. Their requests for official recognition have been denied, but TPUSA students at those schools continue to make their voices heard.
While TPUSA was the name that dominated, other students and conservative organizations also served as beacons of light on their campuses, dedicating their efforts to liberty, faith, family, and our Constitutional rights.
Consider the thriving Catholic campus ministry at Arizona State University and the revival spreading through a Bible study that University of Pittsburgh athletes started earlier this year.
There are the young pro-life women who started a scholarship for parenting moms at Queens College, and the Massachusetts college student who has given out 15,000 pro-life bumper stickers to spread the word about unborn babies’ human rights.
Others fought administrators, including a Young Americans for Freedom chapter that succeeded in lobbying the University of Alabama to grant a waiver to omit gender ideology language from the club’s organizational constitution.
And there are the bold, lone voices of the de-transitioners – students who share their heartbreaking personal stories about transgenderism in an effort to help their peers avoid the same painful mistakes.
These young adults are exhibiting strength in difficult times. They are refusing to compromise or deny their beliefs even in the face of a very real danger.
And they give us another reason to hope this season.
MORE: We spoke with the Turning Point leader forced off campus after death threats
As the leaves begin to turn across Central Ohio and your students head back to campus in the fall each year, we often focus on the excitement of the new semester — the football games, the homecoming dance, and the bright futures ahead. But as financial planners, we also know that life can change in an instant.
A few years ago, I witnessed a tragedy that hit close to home. A local family was suddenly upended when a father — the sole breadwinner of the household — passed away unexpectedly during his son’s sophomore year of college.
The family was left reeling, navigating a dual crisis: the emotional weight of their loss and the financial reality of how to keep their son in school.
While the family’s previous income level had originally disqualified them from receiving need-based aid, they had made one critical, proactive decision: they filed the FAFSA earlier that year.
Because that document was already on file, the university didn’t have to start from scratch. They had a baseline — a “before” and “after” snapshot of the family’s reality. This allowed the school to move swiftly, recalculating the student’s eligibility in real-time.
When the tragedy struck, a compassionate financial aid administrator stepped in. Because the FAFSA was already on file, the university had an immediate baseline. They collected additional information, of course, but they didn’t have to wait for new tax returns or start from scratch.
Within just a few weeks, the university awarded the student an additional $8,000 per semester. That grant allowed the son to stay in school, providing a sense of stability when everything else felt like it was falling apart. It was the difference between the student dropping out or taking on a mountain of debt.
In the world of higher education, the story above is a perfect example of what is known as a Special Circumstance Appeal (sometimes called “Professional Judgment”).
Many families believe that once a financial aid package is set, it’s written in stone. In reality, financial aid offices have the authority to adjust your aid if your current financial reality no longer matches the “prior-prior” tax year data used on the FAFSA.
Under the FAFSA Simplification Act (fully implemented for the 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 cycles), the federal government now mandates that every college have a process for “Professional Judgment.”
Colleges are no longer allowed to have a “no-appeal” policy. They are required by law to:
As a reminder, ALWAYS file the FAFSA. Even if you think you make “too much” for aid, filing creates a financial “snapshot” that serves as an insurance policy of sorts if your circumstances change mid-year. And also, keep your records organized. Having easy access to tax returns and financial aid forms allows you (or your advocate) to act swiftly during a crisis.
If your family experiences a significant financial shift, you don’t need to “wait until next year.” As the story above shows, you should reach out to the college’s financial aid office to request a review as soon as possible. You will typically be asked to:
While the loss of a parent is a clear catalyst for an appeal, schools can also reconsider your aid for several other reasons:
If there is one thing we know for sure, it is that life is going to throw us curveballs. No one can control the future, but as financial planners, we help prepare for the worst and hope for the best. At Capstone, we don’t just manage portfolios and push paper; we help you navigate these complex life transitions.
Artificial intelligence has rapidly evolved from experimental pilots into practical tools in higher education. Colleges and universities are now adopting AI agents, intelligent, autonomous systems designed to perform tasks, learn continuously from data, and act proactively to support students and staff throughout the entire enrollment and student journey.
Unlike traditional chatbots that offer scripted responses, AI agents for colleges can analyze behavior, adapt to changing inputs, and take meaningful actions based on goals or context. They can handle tasks like personalized communication, lead nurturing, application guidance, and even predicting student attrition, all with minimal human intervention.
For higher ed leaders, enrollment managers, and marketing teams, the question is no longer if AI will play a role in education; it’s how to use it strategically, ethically, and effectively. The potential is significant: smarter outreach, streamlined operations, and stronger support for students.
In this article, we’ll unpack what AI agents are, how they differ from simpler tools, how institutions are using them today, and what practical steps schools can take to get started or scale up AI-powered initiatives.
An AI agent is a dynamic, intelligent system designed to perform tasks autonomously on behalf of users or institutions. Unlike static tools or rule-based chatbots, AI agents can analyze data, interpret complex intent, and act independently in pursuit of defined goals. They are capable of:
In a higher education context, AI agents are not simply answering questions; they’re helping institutions solve problems. These agents can assist with lead nurturing, application guidance, appointment scheduling, academic advising, and more. Their ultimate purpose is to support institutional goals such as improving enrollment conversion, enhancing student engagement, and reducing the manual workload on admissions, marketing, and student services teams.
AI agents for colleges are defined by several core capabilities that set them apart from traditional tools or scripted chatbots:
Together, these characteristics enable AI agents to act as proactive, adaptive partners in student engagement, going well beyond static digital assistants to drive meaningful institutional impact.
A common source of confusion in higher education is the distinction between traditional chatbots and AI agents. While the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, the capabilities and strategic impact of each are vastly different.
Chatbots are typically rule-based or scripted tools that respond to user prompts. They are reactive rather than proactive, meaning they wait for a user to initiate contact. Most chatbots are limited in scope: they may answer FAQs or provide links to resources, but they cannot understand context or evolve. Their utility is often confined to narrow use cases like answering admissions deadlines or sharing campus event information.
AI agents, by contrast, are intelligent, goal-driven systems that can operate autonomously across platforms. They are capable of interpreting complex intent, initiating actions, and retaining memory across sessions and channels. These agents integrate with CRMs, SIS, and learning platforms to deliver personalized experiences. More importantly, AI agents can adapt their strategies based on behavioral data and outcomes. For example, an AI agent might detect that an admitted student has not opened key onboarding emails and proactively reach out with a nudge or alternative format.
What makes an AI agent different from a chatbot? AI agents are autonomous, goal-driven systems that understand context, learn over time, and take proactive actions. Unlike chatbots, which respond to scripted prompts, AI agents can guide users through processes and initiate engagement across multiple platforms.
In essence, chatbots answer questions, but AI agents help move students through a process. They not only provide information but also drive outcomes like enrollment completion, financial aid submission, and course registration. As institutions seek to improve service quality and efficiency at scale, AI agents offer a more strategic, integrated approach than chatbots alone.
Higher education is undergoing a seismic shift. Institutions are under mounting pressure from multiple directions: growing competition for a shrinking pool of prospective students, fluctuating domestic enrollment in many regions, rising expectations for personalized and digital-first engagement, and increasingly limited internal resources. In this environment, colleges and universities need tools that enable them to do more with less without sacrificing student experience.
AI agents offer a powerful solution. These intelligent systems enable colleges to shift from reactive service models to proactive, anticipatory engagement across the student lifecycle. Whether guiding prospective applicants through the admissions process or supporting enrolled students with course selection and financial aid navigation, AI agents help scale operations while preserving a sense of personal touch.
One of the most transformative applications of AI agents is in enrollment management. Traditional outreach methods often rely on bulk communications and static timelines. AI agents, by contrast, enable real-time, tailored engagement based on where each student is in the funnel.
Key functions include:
Rather than replacing admissions professionals, these agents act as digital extensions of the team, helping manage volume while maintaining quality interactions.
On websites, landing pages, and student portals, intelligent AI assistants for higher ed help convert interest into action. These systems can dynamically guide users to the most relevant content or next steps based on browsing behavior, geography, or persona.
Use cases include:
When embedded at strategic touchpoints, these tools improve the prospective student experience and boost lead conversion rates.
Beyond recruitment, AI agents are increasingly being used to reduce administrative burden and expand access to essential student services. This is especially valuable for institutions serving diverse populations, including adult learners, international students, and part-time students who may need help outside of regular office hours.
Key areas of support:
By handling routine inquiries, AI agents free up staff to focus on more complex or sensitive cases.
Student success teams often lack real-time visibility into which students are disengaging. AI agents can analyze signals such as missed logins, dropped classes, or overdue assignments to flag early risk indicators.
Once identified, agents can:
These interventions help prevent attrition by reaching students before they fully disengage.
AI agents also bring efficiency to enrollment marketing operations. They can support:
For marketing teams, this means campaigns can scale without losing relevance. AI ensures that prospective students receive the right message, at the right time, via the right channel, improving conversion rates and ROI.
In short, AI agents are not a future-facing concept. They’re a current strategic advantage. By embedding intelligence and automation into student engagement, colleges can improve outcomes, reduce strain on staff, and create experiences that meet the expectations of today’s digital-native learners.
Across Canada, the United States, and internationally, colleges and universities are already deploying AI agents to support critical areas like enrollment, student services, academic advising, and marketing. These are no longer just experimental tools or isolated pilot projects. Instead, many institutions are integrating AI agents into their core strategies, using them to improve responsiveness, personalize outreach, and ease the burden on staff.
From automating admissions follow-ups to guiding students through financial aid, real-world use cases are multiplying. The focus has shifted from “if” to “how best” to implement these tools.
(See the curated examples at the end of this article.)
This is a common concern, and the answer is no. AI agents are not designed to replace college staff, but to support them.
These intelligent tools handle routine, high-volume, and time-sensitive tasks that can overwhelm busy teams. They can respond instantly to frequently asked questions, guide users to resources, and even operate around the clock, especially useful during evenings, weekends, or high-traffic application periods.
By managing first-line support, AI agents free up staff to concentrate on what matters most: personalized advising, meaningful relationship-building, and strategic planning. They also surface real-time data and student behavior insights that staff can use to make more informed decisions.
Importantly, human expertise remains essential for nuanced conversations, equity-based support, and complex decision-making. Rather than replacing staff, AI agents extend their capacity, allowing institutions to offer more consistent, timely, and personalized service without adding headcount. When implemented thoughtfully, AI agents strengthen, not diminish, the human touch in education.
As colleges adopt AI agents, ethical implementation is paramount. Institutions must ensure these tools align with institutional values and uphold trust.
Data Privacy and Security:
AI agents must comply with relevant privacy laws such as PIPEDA or GDPR. Clear, transparent data usage policies help reassure users and safeguard institutional integrity.
Bias and Fairness:
To prevent unintended bias, especially in areas like admissions or advising, institutions should conduct regular audits, use diverse training data, and maintain human oversight in high-stakes decisions.
Governance and Oversight:
Successful AI initiatives require clear accountability. Define who owns the AI agent, how it’s monitored, and when human staff should step in.
Ultimately, AI agents should enhance equitable access, not compromise it. Thoughtful design and oversight are essential.
For colleges and universities exploring AI agents for the first time, a phased and strategic approach ensures alignment with institutional goals while minimizing risks.
Step 1: Identify High-Impact Use Cases
Start by targeting clear, high-volume needs where automation delivers immediate value. Common entry points include admissions inquiries, application follow-ups, and frequently asked questions in student services. These areas typically require timely, consistent responses and are ideal for early pilots.
Step 2: Align with Enrollment and Marketing Strategy
AI agents should reinforce your institution’s enrollment goals, not operate in a silo. Ensure that the use cases support broader priorities such as inquiry-to-application conversion, yield improvement, or retention. Collaboration between admissions, marketing, and IT is key.
Step 3: Integrate with Existing Systems
To be effective, AI agents must connect with your existing technology stack. Integrate them with CRM platforms, student portals, and marketing automation tools to ensure seamless data flow and actionable insights.
Step 4: Pilot, Measure, Optimize
Launch a limited-scope pilot with clear objectives. Track metrics like reduced response times, increased application completion, or staff time saved. Use feedback and data to refine both the agent’s responses and its integration with team workflows.
Step 5: Scale Thoughtfully
Once the agent has proven value, consider expanding to new functions (e.g., academic support or financial aid). Establish governance policies, ensure ongoing training and monitoring, and communicate transparently with users.
With the right foundation, AI agents can scale intelligently, becoming a long-term asset for your institution.
Georgia State University (USA): Georgia State pioneered an AI chatbot named “Pounce” to assist incoming students with admissions queries, financial aid forms, and other enrollment steps. By answering thousands of questions 24/7 via text messages, Pounce helped reduce “summer melt” (admitted students failing to enroll) by 22% in its first year, meaning hundreds more freshmen made it to campus. This AI assistant continues to guide students through registration and financial processes, improving support for new Panthers.
Source: Georgia State University
University of Toronto (Canada): U of T is actively exploring AI-driven tools to enhance student advising and services. A university-wide AI task force has recommended integrating AI into student support and administration. Initiatives include pilot projects for AI chatbots and data analytics to assist academic advisors, streamline routine administrative queries, and personalize student services. By embracing these technologies with a human-centric approach, U of T aims to improve how students receive guidance and navigate campus resources.
Source: University of Toronto
Arizona State University (USA): ASU has implemented AI-enabled digital assistants (including voice-activated tools) to guide prospective and current students. Notably, ASU partnered with Amazon to create a voice-based campus chatbot via Alexa, allowing users to ask the “ASU” skill about campus events, library hours, dining menus, and more. In residence halls, students received Echo Dot devices as part of a smart campus initiative, making it easy to get instant answers about enrollment or campus life. These AI assistants augment student engagement by conversationally providing on-demand information and support.
Source: Arizona State University
University of British Columbia (Canada): UBC leverages AI in both research and practical applications to improve student experiences. The university deploys AI chatbots and advising assistants to help answer student questions and streamline services. For example, UBC’s “AskCali” project is an AI-driven advising tool that uses generative AI to answer academic planning questions and direct students to resources. UBC Okanagan’s campus also introduced an AI chatbot across departments like IT support and Student Services, automating routine inquiries and reducing wait times by handling ~99% of chats, which frees up staff for complex issues. Through these efforts, UBC enhances student support while improving operational efficiency.
Source: UBC
Harvard University (USA): Harvard is applying AI systems to enhance academic advising, streamline administrative tasks, and bolster student engagement. The university’s digital strategy encourages responsible use of AI in advising and student services. For example, Harvard has explored AI chatbots for answering routine student questions and experimented with AI tutors to augment academic advising. These AI initiatives are aimed at improving the efficiency of advising processes and enriching how students interact with academic support, all while maintaining a human-centered approach (Harvard’s advisors and faculty guide AI use to ensure it aligns with educational values).
Source: Harvard University
University of Michigan (USA): U-M has rolled out AI-powered tools to support student services, including conversational assistants for advising and campus information. The College of LSA launched “Maizey,” a 24/7 AI academic advising chatbot that answers questions on course requirements, policies, and study tips, providing a “smart sidekick” for students seeking guidance after hours. Additionally, U-M developed “MiMaizey,” a personalized AI campus assistant that helps students find information on dining, events, organizations, and more in a chat interface. By deploying these AI-supported services, Michigan offers instant help and tailored support to students while complementing its human advisors.
Source: University of Michigan
University of Alberta (Canada): UAlberta is integrating AI into student services and campus operations to improve efficiency and support. The university’s AI committees explicitly guide the use of AI to “improve university operations, services, resource management, and administrative tasks.” This means deploying AI tools in areas like student advising, where chatbots or predictive analytics can assist with inquiries, and in back-office processes, where automation can streamline workflows. By embracing these technologies, the U of A seeks to enhance the student service experience (faster responses, 24/7 support) and optimize institutional decision-making and resource use.
Source: University of Alberta
Stanford University (USA): Stanford has been a leader in leveraging AI agents for student support, learning analytics, and administrative innovation. Researchers at Stanford have developed AI systems that detect when students are struggling in digital courses and then recommend interventions to instructors, effectively acting as an AI tutor/assistant to keep students on track. In student services, Stanford has experimented with chatbots and AI-driven data analysis to personalize learning and improve advising. These efforts—from AI “teaching assistants” that answer student questions to predictive models that inform advisors—illustrate Stanford’s use of AI to enhance learning outcomes and streamline academic administration.
Source: Stanford University
AI agents represent a transformative opportunity for colleges and universities that approach them with purpose and alignment. When embedded within broader strategies for enrollment management, student success, and marketing, these tools can significantly enhance institutional impact.
By automating high-volume tasks and providing real-time, personalized support, AI agents help institutions engage students earlier in their journey, offer more relevant touchpoints, and deliver a seamless digital experience that today’s learners expect. At the same time, they free up staff to focus on strategic, human-centered work, creating a more agile and efficient institution.
The real value lies not in simply deploying AI tools, but in how they’re integrated across departments and designed to serve long-term goals. For higher education leaders, this means shifting the conversation from technology for its own sake to technology as an enabler of student-centric transformation. With thoughtful implementation, AI agents can become a cornerstone of modern, resilient, and responsive institutions.
Question: What makes an AI agent different from a chatbot?
Answer: AI agents are autonomous, goal-driven systems that understand context, learn over time, and take proactive actions. Unlike chatbots, which respond to scripted prompts, AI agents can guide users through processes and initiate engagement across multiple platforms.
Question: How are colleges using AI agents today?
Answer: Across Canada, the United States, and internationally, colleges and universities are already deploying AI agents to support critical areas like enrollment, student services, academic advising, and marketing.
Question: Do AI agents replace college staff?
Answer: This is a common concern, and the answer is no. AI agents are not designed to replace college staff, but to support them. These intelligent tools handle routine, high-volume, and time-sensitive tasks that can overwhelm busy teams.
