Collaborative Classroom, a leading nonprofit publisher of K–12 instructional materials, announces the publication of SIPPS, a systematic decoding program. Now in a new fifth edition, this research-based program accelerates mastery of vital foundational reading skills for both new and striving readers.
Twenty-Five Years of Transforming Literacy Outcomes
“As educators, we know the ability to read proficiently is one of the strongest predictors of academic and life success,” said Kelly Stuart, President and CEO of Collaborative Classroom. “Third-party studies have proven the power of SIPPS. This program has a 25-year track record of transforming literacy outcomes for students of all ages, whether they are kindergarteners learning to read or high schoolers struggling with persistent gaps in their foundational skills.
“By accelerating students’ mastery of foundational skills and empowering teachers with the tools and learning to deliver effective, evidence-aligned instruction, SIPPS makes a lasting impact.”
What Makes SIPPS Effective?
Aligned with the science of reading, SIPPS provides explicit, systematic instruction in phonological awareness, spelling-sound correspondences, and high-frequency words.
Through differentiated small-group instruction tailored to students’ specific needs, SIPPS ensures every student receives the necessary targeted support—making the most of every instructional minute—to achieve grade-level reading success.
“SIPPS is uniquely effective because it accelerates foundational skills through its mastery-based and small-group targeted instructional design,” said Linda Diamond, author of the Teaching Reading Sourcebook. “Grounded in the research on explicit instruction, SIPPS provides ample practice, active engagement, and frequent response opportunities, all validated as essential for initial learning and retention of learning.”
Personalized, AI-Powered Teacher Support
Educators using SIPPS Fifth Edition have access to a brand-new feature: immediate, personalized responses to their implementation questions with CC AI Assistant, a generative AI-powered chatbot.
Exclusively trained on Collaborative Classroom’s intellectual content and proprietary program data, CC AI Assistant provides accurate, reliable information for educators.
Other Key Features of SIPPS, Fifth Edition
Tailored Placement and Progress Assessments: A quick, 3–8 minute placement assessment ensures each student starts exactly at their point of instructional need. Ongoing assessments help monitor progress, adjust pacing, and support grouping decisions.
Differentiated Small-Group Instruction: SIPPS maximizes instructional time by focusing on small groups of students with similar needs, ensuring targeted, effective teaching.
Supportive of Multilingual Learners: Best practices in multilingual learner (ML) instruction and English language development strategies are integrated into the design of SIPPS.
Engaging and Effective for Older Readers: SIPPS Plus and SIPPS Challenge Level are specifically designed for students in grades 4–12, offering age-appropriate texts and instruction to close lingering foundational skill gaps.
Multimodal Supports: Integrated visual, auditory, and kinesthetic-tactile strategies help all learners, including multilingual students.
Flexible, Adaptable, and Easy to Teach: Highly supportive for teachers, tutors, and other adults working in classrooms and expanded learning settings, SIPPS is easy to implement well. A wraparound system of professional learning support ensures success for every implementer.
Accelerating Reading Success for Students of All Ages
In small-group settings, students actively engage in routines that reinforce phonics and decoding strategies, practice with aligned texts, and receive immediate feedback—all of which contribute to measurable gains.
“With SIPPS, students get the tools needed to read, write, and understand text that’s tailored to their specific abilities,” said Desiree Torres, ENL teacher and 6th Grade Team Lead at Dr. Richard Izquierdo Health and Science Charter School in New York. “The boost to their self-esteem when we conference about their exam results is priceless. Each and every student improves with the SIPPS program.”
Kevin is a forward-thinking media executive with more than 25 years of experience building brands and audiences online, in print, and face to face. He is an acclaimed writer, editor, and commentator covering the intersection of society and technology, especially education technology. You can reach Kevin at [email protected]
When we write about creativity, we often refer to the work of geniuses; [distancing] ordinary members of society from the act of creativity by reinforcing a perception that they could never be creative themselves (Dymoke, 2020: 80).
Digital story by Kate Shpota
The state of creativity
The damage wrought by the stereotype of a creative as an isolated genius seems likely to increase within the current context of the UK school system, where an overloaded curriculum and assessment driven pedagogies dominate. The 2023 State of Creativity report notes that creativity has been ‘all but expunged from the school curriculum in England’. Educators across schools and departments in HEIs are attempting to resist the current educational practice which promotes students as consumers and centres our students as active producers in their own learning. Yet, as education policy from primary through to higher education continues not only to cut its emphasis on the humanities and creativity, but also eliminate arts and humanities departments altogether, higher education runs a profound risk of further alienating students from the benefits of creative thinking and artistic practice.
Our undergraduates, being educationalists, use sociological and psychological lenses to understand the social and cultural landscape affecting both classroom learning and community education more broadly. Nevertheless, despite education being at the intersection of many academic disciplines (Sociology, English, Philosophy, History to name a few), students are often reluctant to incorporate alternative approaches into their learning and even less so into their assessments.
Fear and discomfort
As educators, we ask students to embrace discomfort when learning different theoretical approaches or understanding alternative viewpoints. But often, we do not ask them to embrace discomfort in operating outside of the neoliberal HE system, a ‘results driven quantification [which] directs learning’ (Kulz, 2017 p. 55). Within this context, learning focuses on the product (the assessable outcome), rather than the process (the learning journey). Thus, it is unsurprising that our undergraduates initially baulked at the idea of an assessment that incorporated a creative element, preferring essays and multiple-choice exams instead. Hunter & Frawley (2023) define arts-based pedagogy (ABP) as a process by which students can observe and reflect on an art form to link different disciplines, thus encouraging students to lean into uncomfortable subject matter and explore their place within in the wider world. To build more dynamic and critically analytical students, we had to simultaneously encourage an ABP approach so they would understand their academic and theoretical course content more fully while scaffolding their learning through a series of creative activities designed to engage students with different forms of learning and reflection. By incorporating cultural visits, mentorship, and creative assessments into the module, art enhanced subject teaching while encouraging students to think more deeply about their own practice (Fleming, 2012). Yet, incorporating practice was not enough, we were faced with the question: how do educationalists ask students to engage with their vulnerabilities around creative practice (the belief and the engrained fear that they cannot do art or are not good at art) and lead them to an understanding that vulnerability itself can be beneficial?
Perhaps, the most basic answer came by asking ourselves, are we, as academics, scared of implementing creative pedagogies because we are scared of showing our own vulnerabilities? What if we as educators fail at a task and our students see? What would happen if we became vulnerable alongside our students? Jordan (2010) argues that when vulnerability is met with criticism, we disengage as a self-preservation tactic. For Brown, acknowledging our insecurities offers a means of understanding ourselves, developing shame resilience and acting authentically. In our session, our vulnerability as lecturers was tested when engaging with textile art, specifically a battle with crochet. Our students saw educators who were not secure or competent in a task. This resulted in a small amount of mockery, but also empathy and offers of support. By stepping out of our comfort zone and embracing a pedagogy of discomfort (Boler 1999), we encouraged our students to challenge themselves. Romney and Holland (2023) refer to this as a ‘paradox of vulnerability’: by overcoming our own reluctance to be vulnerable with our learners we create connections and a sense of trust. We should add that the session explored women’s textile art as activism and the outcome, a piece of textile art, symbolically woven together by students and staff—all female.
Collective textile piece
Importance of community and connection
Once we examined theoretical and personal aspects of discomfort and vulnerability, to support and enhance our focus on creative practice, we drew on local cultural partnerships. The incorporation of cultural visits, mentorship from resident artists, and creative exercises enriched our subject teaching while simultaneously encouraging students to think more deeply about their own practice (Fleming, 2012). It also built an alliance between social scientists and colleagues in arts and humanities disciplines, capitalising on their expertise and years of honing ABP. Nottingham is a city where the legend of Robin Hood, outlaws, and rebellion intersect with vibrant cultural community. But many of our students do not engage with cultural spaces, leading to double disconnect, first from their own creative practice and second from the cultural sector altogether. Our students expressed their disconnect from the cultural heart of Nottingham was due to the spaces being ‘not for them’ or a worry that they would not ‘understand’ the art. By exploring the city centre as a group, walking from one site to another, we broke down barriers around these prohibited spaces.
Engagement with Nottingham by Alisha Begum
Once inside the Nottingham Contemporary, the resident artists told their own stories of fear, worries of judgement, and expressed anxieties of creative practice, thus setting our students free from the myth of the genius artist – untouchable by self-doubt. This realisation allowed our students to relax and engage worry-free into the creative tasks.
Found poem by Alisha Begum‘I object’ by Nicole Robinson
By joining in with these activities, lecturers and students learned alongside each other, tackling our insecurities regarding our creative abilities together as a learning community. Perhaps community was the most important outcome in the project as connection was central. Exposure to the cultural sites created a feeling of connection with the cultural heart of the city. Students also, perhaps more importantly, reported that they became more connected to an understanding of themselves as creatives, becoming more autonomous and engaged in their own learning.
Digital storytelling: Identity Crisis by Shahnaz Begum
Perhaps it is most appropriate to end this post with the voice of one of our year-two students—the transcript from a podcast created as part of her larger portfolio. She asserts:
Art in education is a goldmine of untouched opportunities [and can be] used to foster students’ holistic development, stimulate creative thinking and engagement with social justice. … and to my fellow Artivists, embrace creativity one canvas at a time.
Katherine Friend is an Associate Professor of Higher Education at Nottingham Trent University. Her work focuses on three themes: the underrepresented student experience on university campuses, the importance of undergraduate engagement in the cultural sector, and reconciling international and academic identities. Threading all three themes together are discussions of one’s ‘place’ and/or ‘space’ in HE and how social and cultural hierarchies contribute to identity, representation, and belonging.
Aisling Walters is a Senior Lecturer in Secondary Education at Nottingham Trent University whose research focuses on the development of writer identity in trainee English teachers, preservice teachers’ experiences of prescriptive schemes of learning, arts-based pedagogies, and students as writers.
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes an integral part of modern education, instructional coaches play a pivotal role in guiding teachers on its implementation, bridging the gap between emerging educational technologies and effective classroom practices.
As trusted mentors and professional development leaders, they guide teachers in implementing AI tools thoughtfully, ensuring that technology enhances student learning while aligning with pedagogical best practices. This article briefly synthesizes responses from instructional coaches regarding their experiences, challenges, and recommendations for integrating AI into K-12 education.
Ten instructional coaches, all with advanced degrees, had the following insights into the instructional use of AI in K12 education. They all have more than 10 years of experience in education and work across all three types of school environments: urban, suburban, and rural.
The coaches reported that AI is used for various instructional purposes. The most-cited applications included providing feedback on student work, creating professional development materials, supporting writing and content generation, creating course content, and enhancing accessibility for students with special needs. Many coaches note that AI tools assisted in grading assignments, offering real-time feedback, and supporting differentiated instruction. AI-powered feedback helps teachers provide more personalized responses without increasing their workload. Regarding professional development, AI is being used to generate training content for teachers, ensuring they stay updated on educational trends. Coaches are leveraging AI to curate research, synthesize best practices, and develop instructional strategies tailored to their schools. They encourage teachers and students to utilize AI for brainstorming, outlining essays, and improving writing mechanics.
Perceived impact of AI on instruction
The vast majority of instructional coaches expressed positive expectations regarding AI’s potential to reduce educator workload, create personalized learning experiences, and improve access for students with disabilities. However, perspectives on AI’s overall impact on education varied. While most believe AI has positively influenced instruction, a few remain cautious about its potential risks. One coach suggested that allowing students to utilize the tools in a structured setting and teaching them to use AI as a tool is one of the biggest potentials for generative AI in education. About three-fourths of coaches feel that AI will reduce teacher workload by automating repetitive tasks such as grading and data analysis.
Concerns about AI in education
While AI presents numerous benefits, instructional coaches also raised concerns about its potential drawbacks, including ethical dilemmas, student engagement challenges, and equity issues. Despite its advantages, instructional coaches identified several challenges and ethical concerns. They worry some students will use AI tools without critically engaging with the material, leading to passive learning and an overreliance on generative tools. Some had concerns that AI-generated content could reduce the need for creativity and independent thought. Coaches worry that AI makes it easier for students to plagiarize or rely on generated answers without truly understanding concepts which can negatively impact academic integrity. Coaches cite technical challenges as well. Educators face issues with AI tool reliability, compatibility with existing learning management systems (LMS), and steep learning curves. The coaches mentioned that some schools lack the infrastructure to support meaningful widespread AI integration.
Several ethical and privacy concerns were mentioned. AI tools collect and store student data, raising concerns about data privacy and security–particularly with younger students who may be less aware or concerned about revealing personally identifiable information (PII). They mention the need for clear guidelines on responsible AI use to prevent bias and misinformation.
Coaches emphasize the importance of verifying AI-generated materials for accuracy. They suggest teachers be encouraged to cross-check AI-produced responses before using them in instruction. They recommend robust integrating discussions on digital literacy, AI biases, and the ethical implications of generative AI into classroom conversations. Schools need to train educators and students on responsible AI usage. Some schools restrict AI for creative writing, critical thinking exercises, and certain assessments to ensure students develop their own ideas–an idea that coaches recommend. Coaches suggest embedding AI literacy into existing courses, ensuring students understand how AI works, its limitations, and its ethical implications.
Equity concerns are a serious issue for instructional coaches. Schools should ensure all students have equal access to AI tools. AI should be leveraged to bridge learning gaps, not widen them. Making sure all students have access to the same suite of tools is essential to create a level playing field for all learners. Instructional coaches generally agree that AI is not just a passing trend, but an integral part of the future of education. There is a concern that generative AI tools will reduce the human interaction of the teaching and learning process. For instance, interpersonal relationships are not developed with AI-based tutoring systems in the same way they can be developed and encouraged with traditional tutoring processes.
The integration of AI in K-12 education presents both opportunities and challenges. Instructional coaches largely recognize AI’s potential to enhance learning, improve efficiency, academic integrity, and maintain human-centered learning experiences. As AI continues to evolve, educators must be proactive in shaping how it is used, ensuring it serves as a tool for empowerment rather than dependency. Future efforts should focus on professional development for educators, AI literacy training for students, and policies ensuring equitable AI access across diverse school settings.
Dr. Steve Baule, Dillon Martinez, Dr. Shauna Mayer, & Dr. Ray Martinez
Dr. Steve Baule is a faculty member at Winona State University (WSU), where he teaches in the Leadership Education Department. Prior to joining WSU, Baule spent 28 years in K-12 school systems in Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa, and two years teaching in the University of Wisconsin System. For the 13 years prior to moving to the university level, Baule served as a public -school superintendent. He holds a doctorate in instructional technology from Northern Illinois University and a doctorate in educational leadership and policy studies from Loyola University Chicago.
Dr. Shauna Mayer is an assistant professor in Education Studies at Winona State University. She is a graduate of Winona State University’s Doctorate of Education program and has previous K12 classroom experience.
Dillon Martinez is a faculty member in Physical Education and Sports Science at Winona State University, where he serves as Director of the Developmentally Adapted Physical Education (DAPE) teacher preparation program. He is currently pursuing his Doctor of Education at Winona State as well.
Dr. Ray Martinez is a professor and chair professor and chair of the Department of Physical Education & Sport Science at Winona State University.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
The EY organization and Microsoft announced this month the launch of the AI Skills Passport (AISP), which assists students aged 16 and older in learning about artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, and how to work with and apply them to various industries and careers. This free online program is part of an ongoing social impact collaboration focused on supporting young people and those furthest from opportunity to build the AI skills necessary to thrive in today’s AI economy.
According to Randstad research, demand for AI skills in job postings has surged by 2,000%. However, a recent EY and TeachAI survey, with support from Microsoft, found that only 15% of Gen Z respondents feel fully satisfied with how their schools or employers are preparing them for the implications of AI and the use of AI tools. The AISP aims to bridge this gap by equipping learners with essential AI skills for the modern workplace, with a goal of upskilling one million individuals.
The free online learning program is accessible on web and mobile platforms and participants can take the 10-hour course at their own pace to learn about key topics such as the fundamentals of AI, ethical considerations and its applications across business, sustainability and technology careers. By completing the course, participants will receive an EY and Microsoft certificate of completion to strengthen resumes and gain access to additional learning and employment resources.
The EY organization and Microsoft have now successfully activated the course in the United States, United Kingdom, India, Italy, Greece, Belgium, S. Africa, Ireland, Switzerland, Cyprus, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Sweden, China and India. Expansion plans are underway to roll out to additional countries through 2025 — and to translate to five languages.
Together, the EY organization and Microsoft have collaborated on a multitude of programs to help empower job seekers and impact entrepreneurs with the skills needed for an AI-driven future, furthering the EY Ripples ambition to impact one billion lives by 2030.
Other high-impact EY and Microsoft social programs include:
Microsoft Entrepreneurship for Positive Impact: This Microsoft program provides support to innovative tech-first entrepreneurs who are addressing our world’s most pressing challenges. The EY organization and Microsoft run a series of Skills Labs to support more than 100 entrepreneurs to date on key growth challenges identified, such as investment strategies, financial planning, environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategy and business resilience.
EY and Microsoft Green Skills Passport: A program aimed to help learners aged 16 and over develop skills to find green jobs and pursue opportunities in the growing green economy. To date, more than 46,000 learners have completed this free course and are on their way to a green skills career.
Future Skills Workshops (FSW): An EY offering to upskill young or underserved groups equipping them with knowledge to help them navigate a changing world. The “All about AI” module is the newest module and will be launched across Latin America through in-person delivery with the EY organization, Microsoft and Trust for Americas.
Gillian Hinde, EY Global Corporate Responsibility Leader, says:
“The EY and Microsoft collaboration is a powerful example of how organizations can come together to help drive meaningful social change and help shape the future with confidence. The AI Skills Passport program aims to equip young people and underserved communities with the AI experience needed to thrive in today’s digital age, while also sharing the skills necessary for tomorrow.”
Kate Behncken, Global Head of Microsoft Philanthropies, says:
“Through this new initiative with EY, we’re helping young people build the AI skills they need to succeed in the evolving AI economy. By bridging the gap between education and employability, we’re creating opportunities for the next generation to contribute, innovate, and thrive in the new AI economy.”
Learn more about the EY-Microsoft AI Skills Passport here.
Kevin is a forward-thinking media executive with more than 25 years of experience building brands and audiences online, in print, and face to face. He is an acclaimed writer, editor, and commentator covering the intersection of society and technology, especially education technology. You can reach Kevin at [email protected]
HOUSTON — Jefferson Early Learning Center bears little resemblance to elementary schools many adults recall attending in their earliest years. The classrooms have child-sized boats and construction vehicles children can play on, and ceilings painted to resemble outer space. There are no desks — all space is devoted to learning through play. Windows are low to the ground so children can easily look outside. The gym floor is made of “pre-K friendly” layered vinyl, rather than hardwood, to cushion inevitable trips and falls. Hallways are lined with a corrugated plastic for wiggly fingers to touch as children transition to other locations.
Children love coming to the building, said teacher Cathy Delamore. “They feel like they own it.”
Alief Independent School District, which serves about 40,000 children in west Houston, is one of a growing number of districts across the country to pump money into creating a building that is tailor-made for pre-kindergarteners. Its new facility cost about $21 million and enrolls nearly 400 4- and 5-year-olds. By making the investment, school leaders are trying to avoid some of the pitfalls of placing young children in buildings designed for older students, including lost learning time when tiny feet have to meander down long hallways to bathrooms and cafeterias. Research suggests that when designed well, buildings can contribute to better outcomes for children. Creators of the Reggio Emilia approach to early learning, an educational philosophy that emphasizes child-led learning, even refer to the environment as the “third teacher” in a classroom.
A Gulf Coast themed classroom at Jefferson Early Learning Center. The themed classrooms reflect local careers and locations to help children connect what they learn with their local environment. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger ReportThe “Space City” classroom at Jefferson Early Learning Center is an homage to the local NASA space center. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
Over the past few years, educators have grown aware of the benefits of a personalized pre-K environment, said Melissa Turnbaugh, a senior principal at the architecture firm PBK, which has designed more than 240 elementary schools nationwide, including Jefferson and several others in Texas. “There’s an openness and willingness to rethink these sites,” Turnbaugh said.
Related: Young children have unique needs and providing the right care can be a challenge. Our free early childhood education newsletter tracks the issues.
Nationally, districts of all sizes have embraced the trend over the past few years, including the Troy School District in Michigan and New York City Public Schools. In some cases, building a specialized facility helps a district with limited resources get “the biggest bang for their buck,” while meeting enrollment needs, said Turnbaugh. Some states and cities are also dedicating money to the efforts, including Illinois, Detroit and San Mateo, California.
That embrace is in part because of a growing recognition nationwide of the importance of play for young children, as well as reports that play time has been increasingly squeezed out of the early grades. States are also seeing record high enrollment in state-funded preschool programs. During the 2022-23 school year, investment in state-funded preschool reached an all-time high. Spending on the programs increased in 29 states, buoyed in part by Covid relief funds. Between 2022 and 2023, for example, Texas saw more than 21,000 additional 3- and 4-year-olds enroll. The state also slightly increased pre-K funding and, beginning in 2019, started requiring districts to offer full-day pre-K programs. The full-day programs have been rolling out in districts since 2020.
Scores of districts are “adding this new grade of 4-year-olds,” said Shelly Masur, vice president of advisory and state policy for the Low Income Investment Fund, which runs an initiative focused on creating and improving high-quality facilities for early learning programs. “They have to figure out where those kids are going to go.”
A facility built for their needs, like Jefferson, is exactly where young children should go, some experts say. The children seem to agree.
On a sunny fall morning, joyful screams could be heard as children chased each other up and down gentle hills on a large playground with natural-looking features meant to replicate the highlands and lowlands of Texas. Pre-K students in elementary schools don’t always have age-appropriate playgrounds, and structures are often designed for children who are older. But Jefferson has multiple large playgrounds and play courtyards, all designed for pre kindergarteners, featuring natural structures and textures, like logs and grass.
A playground at Jefferson Early Learning Center. Credit: Jackie Mader/ The Hechinger Report
In Alief, where more than 83 percent of children qualify as economically disadvantaged, more than 20 percentage points higher than the state average, residents voted in 2015 to approve a property tax increase to help pay for full-day pre-K programs in the district. After touring the Mansfield Independent School District’s early learning facility, Alief’s district leaders decided they wanted to invest in an early learning building with immersive, themed classrooms, instead of simply adding on or repurposing classrooms in elementary schools around the district. Jefferson opened in 2022 as one of two new early learning facilities in the district. About 6 miles away, the second, Maria Del Carmen Martinez Early Learning Center, which has a similar design, serves around 400 students.
A growing body of research shows that not all pre-K classrooms, or the facilities they’re housed in, are appropriate for young kids. Early learning settings in particular should have a warm, homelike environment with ample natural light, research shows. There should be spacious classrooms that allow children to move their bodies and play in a variety of spaces around the room. Facilities should have playgrounds that are appropriate for the littlest learners, and provide ample opportunities to experience and explore nature.
There are also practical details to keep in mind for preschoolers, like having bathrooms adjacent to classrooms, child-sized furniture, tiny toilets, and sinks low to the ground so children can practice routines like hand washing independently. “When we make things more accessible to them, they start to learn the independence that we need them to develop over time,” said Masur. This type of setting isn’t always present in elementary schools, which are built to accommodate a much wider age range of children and are typically designed for instruction rather than play.
Facilities can have a surprisingly large impact on the experiences of teachers and young children. A study of a preschool program in West Hartford, Connecticut, for example, found the amount of children’s time spent interacting with an adult caregiver increased from 3 percent to 22 percent after the program moved from a crowded basement room to a larger classroom with bathrooms, sinks, storage space and phones inside the classroom. Although all other factors remained the same, the teachers reported their students had fewer tantrums, something they attributed to having a larger, brighter and more organized space.
A facility can even affect how satisfied early educators are with their jobs. Delamore, the Jefferson teacher, who has worked in the district for 18 years, said the bright, spacious rooms and hallways help keep her from feeling “confined” during the day. While aimed at 4-year-olds, the building’s “calming atmosphere” helps her enjoy being at work, she said.
A student builds with blocks in a classroom at Jefferson Early Learning Center. The facility was built with 4- and 5-year-olds in mind and unlike elementary schools, revolves mostly around play.
Certain aspects make more sense for children at this age, she added, like the spiral shape of the building, which makes it easier to keep students together as they transition. Students eat family-style meals around circular tables, creating a sense of community, Delamore said, a contrast to the long, rectangular tables often seen in elementary school cafeterias.
Buildings that are not designed to meet childrens’ needs, or that are cramped and outdated, can impede development and learning, experts say.
One of the most recent examples of this comes from a 2016 study of Tennessee’s public preschool classrooms, which are mostly housed in existing elementary schools. That study, conducted by researchers at Vanderbilt University, found 25 percent of each school day was lost transitioning children to another activity, including walking to bathrooms and lining up to go to lunch.
When designing Jefferson, Turnbaugh and her team tried to “think of the campus through the eyes of a 4-year-old.” Delamore, at Jefferson, said the intricately-designed classrooms motivate students to go deeper in their play. On a recent morning in the “veterinary” classroom, a dozen 4- and 5-year-olds busied themselves around the room, immersed in play or small group work with a teacher. Children drew pictures of animals, read books and played animal-themed card games beneath large, colorful pictures of dogs and cats painted on the walls.
On one side of the room, 4-year-old Jaycyon had donned a white lab coat and was inspecting a fluffy gray and white toy cat lying on the counter in front of him. The cat was hurt, Jaycyon announced, likely from a sharp corner of the cage he was kept in.
“I have to give him a shot,” he said bravely. Jaycyon dipped a clear, plastic syringe into an orange medication bottle and confidently injected invisible medication into the cat.
At the end of three weeks, Jaycyon and his classmates will transition to a new classroom, such as “Tinker Town,” where they will learn about construction, or “Space City,” an homage to the nearby NASA space center.
On a daily basis, students have access to one of several outdoor spaces called a “back porch,” where families can also come and eat lunch together. These spaces also act as surrogate back yards for students, many of whom don’t have yards at home or access to parks. Students also have access to a sensory room with toys and soft mats, where they can take a break when they are overstimulated and practice skills to calm down.
Jefferson sits on nearly 20 acres of land, accessible via trails for students to explore with their teachers. (Alief returned the surrounding land back to its natural prairie state to help with climate-change related flooding.)
The educators at Alief say the district’s investment in a facility that encourages play-based learning has paid off. “What I see as a major difference is the children’s self-regulation, but also their confidence,” said the school’s principal, Kim Hammer, now in her 16th year leading an early childhood center. “A traditional pre-K setting is more teacher led and teacher directed,” she said. “Here it’s more teacher facilitated, so you see more of the children taking more initiative,” she added. “Children have autonomy, and children have much more choice.”
Two students play in a veterinary-themed classroom at Jefferson Early Learning Center. Each classroom is designed with a specific theme to encourage deeper play. Credit: Jackie Mader/ The Hechinger Report
There is evidence that the new facility may be helping children progress. During the 2023-24 school year, 49 percent of students came in meeting vocabulary benchmarks. By the end of the year, 73 percent were at that level, Hammer said, a higher rate than previous years when the district’s pre-K programs were in traditional elementary schools. School officials say the themed classrooms help enhance children’s language skills, as children learn the vocabulary specific to that room. Attendance rates are high and holding steady, something that is uncommon in pre-K.
Despite the success and benefits of programs like Jefferson’s, educators agree there are challenges. A pre-K only facility adds an extra transition for students who, in traditional programs, might otherwise attend pre-K at their home elementary school.
Without more funding, revamped pre-K facilities are unlikely to spread fast. Many districts lack the money, partly because state and federal funding for pre-K is often less than for other grades. In Texas, for example, although the state now requires districts to offer full day pre-K, it only provides funding for half a day of pre-K. Alief has to cover the rest from local funds.
Although sustaining the building will be financially challenging in the long run, educators are determined to find a way to make it work for the benefit of the kids.
Back at the veterinary center on that fall morning, Jaycyon finally had a breakthrough. He had discovered something alarming about his patient, or “kitty,” as he had been named by the pre-kindergarteners, that would direct his next veterinary tactics.
The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.
AI is becoming a bigger part of our daily lives, and students are already using it to support their learning. In fact, from our studies, 90% of faculty feel GenAI is going to play an increasingly important role in higher ed.
Embracing AI responsibly, with thoughtful innovation, can help students take charge of their educational journey. So, we turn to the insights and expertise of you and your students — to develop AI tools that support and empower learners, while maintaining ethical practices, accuracy and a focus on the human side of education.
Training the Student Assistant together
Since we introduced the Student Assistant in August 2024, we continue to ensure that faculty, alongside students, play a central role in helping to train it.
Students work directly with the tool, having conversations. Instructors review these exchanges to ensure the Student Assistant is guiding students through a collaborative, critical thinking process —helping them find answers on their own, rather than directly providing them.
“I was extremely impressed with the training and evaluation process. The onboarding process was great, and the efforts taken by Cengage to ensure parity in the evaluation process was a good-faith sign of the quality and accuracy of the Student Assistant.” — Dr. Loretta S. Smith, Professor of Management, Arkansas Tech University
Supporting students through our trusted sources
The Student Assistant uses only Cengage-authored course materials — it does not search the web.
By leveraging content aligned directly with instructor’s chosen textbook , the Student Assistant provides reliable, real-time guidance that helps students bridge knowledge gaps — without ever relying on external sources that may lack credibility.
Unlike tools that rely on potentially unreliable web sources, the Student Assistant ensures that every piece of guidance aligns with course objectives and instructor expectations.
Here’s how:
It uses assigned Cengage textbooks, eBooks and resources, ensuring accuracy and relevance for every interaction
The Student Assistant avoids pulling content from the web, eliminating the risks of misinformation or content misalignment
It does not store or share student responses, keeping information private and secure
By staying within our ecosystem, the Student Assistant fosters academic integrity and ensures students are empowered to learn with autonomy and confidence.
“The Student Assistant is user friendly and adaptive. The bot responded appropriately and in ways that prompt students to deepen their understanding without giving away the answer.” – Lois Mcwhorter, Department Chair for the Hutton School of Business at the University of Cumberlands
Personalizing the learning journey
56% of faculty cited personalization as a top use case for GenAI to help enhance the learning experience.
The Student Assistant enhances student outcomes by offering a personalized educational experience. It provides students with tailored resources that meet their unique learning needs right when they need them. With personalized, encouraging feedback and opportunities to connect with key concepts in new ways, students gain a deeper understanding of their coursework. This helps them close learning gaps independently and find the answers on their own, empowering them to take ownership of their education.
“What surprised me most about using the Student Assistant was how quickly it adapted and adjusted to feedback. While the Student Assistant helped support students with their specific questions or tasks, it did so in a way that allowed for a connection. It was not simply a bot that pointed you to the correct answer in the textbook; it assisted students similar to how a professor or instructor would help a student.” — Dr. Stephanie Thacker, Associate Professor of Business for the Hutton School of Business at the University of the Cumberlands
Helping students work through the challenges
The Student Assistant is available 24/7 to help students practice concepts without the need to wait for feedback, enabling independent learning before seeking instructor support.
With just-in-time feedback, students can receive guidance tailored to their course, helping them work through challenges on their own schedule. By guiding students to discover answers on their own, rather than providing them outright, the Student Assistant encourages critical thinking and deeper engagement.
“Often students will come to me because they are confused, but they don’t necessarily know what they are confused about. I have been incredibly impressed with the Student Assistants’ ability to help guide students to better understand where they are struggling. This will not only benefit the student but has the potential to help me be a better teacher, enable more critical thinking and foster more engaging classroom discussion.” — Professor Noreen Templin, Department Chair and Professor of Economics at Butler Community College
Want to start using the Student Assistant for your courses?
The Student Assistant, embedded in MindTap, is available in beta with select titles , such as “Management,” “Human Psychology” and “Principles of Economics” — with even more coming this fall. Find the full list of titles that currently feature the Student Assistant, plus learn more about the tool and AI at Cengage right here.
Since late 2022, generative AI has disrupted all levels of education, and higher education must adapt quickly to ensure that the integrity of qualifications is not compromised.
New technologies can be disruptive and present challenges and opportunities. They influence how we work, interact with others, source information, and learn.
Although artificial intelligence (AI) has been around for decades, generative AI has emerged as both a risk to traditional learning and an opportunity for students to use new technologies responsibly and ethically. Generative AI is disrupting all levels of education, and higher education must adapt quickly to ensure that the integrity of the qualifications awarded is not compromised.
Recently, researchers examined policies and guidelines documents from 116 US universities on the use of GenAI. They found a lack of concern in these documents for ethics and privacy associated with using GenAI while encouraging its use by both staff and students. That is, intellectual property and student privacy seem to be an afterthought.
The introduction of GenAI has added complexity to the detection of plagiarism, and some argue that using GenAI tools should not be deemed academic dishonesty because they enhance the learning experience and improve productivity.
In June 2024, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) asked all registered higher education providers for action plans addressing the risk-generative AI in their courses. There was a 100 per cent response rate from providers to this request.
TEQSA then analysed responses to develop resources to support the higher education sector and released Gen AI strategies for Australian higher education: Emerging practicein late November 2024[1]. This document is designed as a toolkit to assist higher education providers. The toolkit is structured into three key dimensions: Process, People and Practice. The toolkit notes that:
There is no single form of assessment that can enable students to demonstrate achievement of all learning outcomes or support development of all appropriate uses of gen AI. Similarly, no single tool or technology can be deployed to guarantee assessment security (p43).
Therefore, the higher education sector needs to be agile and adapt to the ubiquitous adoption of GenAI, so that we can adapt the learning experience so that students meet the learning outcomes of their course. This requires a significant shift for institutions and educators to achieve these objectives in a GenAI world.
Ensuring equitable access to AI
A key challenge for integrating GenAI in education is ensuring equitable access to AI-powered tools and resources for all students, regardless of their socio-economic background or geographical location. GenAI’s promise for student learning can only be achieved if students’ and staff’s access to GenAI tools is equitable, inclusive, and free from bias.
TEQSA cautions that higher education institutions need to carefully consider the needs of diverse student populations and prioritise an inclusive and equitable educational environment when integrating GenAI in teaching, learning and assessment. This includes ensuring everyone recognises their responsibility to implement and engage in culturally safe practices.
References
Eden, C.A., Chisom, O.N. and Adeniyi, I.S., 2024. Integrating AI in education: Opportunities, challenges, and ethical considerations. Magna Scientia Advanced Research and Reviews, 10(2), pp.006-013.
McDonald, N., Johri, A., Ali, A. and Hingle, A., 2024. Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Evidence from an analysis of institutional policies and guidelines. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01659.
Yusuf, A., Pervin, N. and Román-González, M., 2024. Generative AI and the future of higher education: a threat to academic integrity or reformation? Evidence from multicultural perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), p.21.
Hear more from A/Professor Yvette Blount and other education leaders at the Generative AI for Education Leaders Summit 2025 and gain access to cutting-edge insights and strategies that will put your institution ahead of the curve. Learn more.
To access the detailed conference program, download the brochure here.
Two big things, personally, happened this week, and I want to explain how while they may seem different on the surface, they’re sort of inextricable from each other.
One thing that happened was the release of my book More Than Words: How to Think About Writing in the Age of AI. Regular readers of this space will be well familiar with the subjects and themes of the book, but of course a book is a different thing than a blog or column.
I do my best to always make what I share here worth reading, but often the ideas I explore in this forum are in a much earlier stage of gestation. Writing is thinking, and while sufficient thinking has to occur for me to get a post onto the page, posting a column does not end the thinking.
A book is a chance to hone that thinking into an extended argument and experience, seeing those initial individual thoughts join together, and in this joining shift in important ways as I seek greater clarity and more impactful presentation. One of the reasons I don’t really understand people’s enthusiasm for turning their writing over to large language models is that the process of working through my own thoughts is 100 percent necessary to delivering the final product.
There is no shortcut if I want the book to be as good as possible.
Anyway, as I wrote at my personal newsletter in a post celebrating the book’s release, I’m proud of it. It’s good! Or the best I can do at this time, anyway, which is its own form of good. If you’re at all concerned about how tools powered by generative AI are encroaching on our spaces of working, learning and thinking, you might find some value in it.
CDAF has been organized around a vision statement and a mission statement.
Vision Statement
We believe that teaching, learning, and the pursuit of knowledge are essential to creating and sustaining multi-racial and plurinational societies. For those of us working and studying within institutions of higher education, this means pursuing knowledge wherever it leads, free from intimidation and retaliation. Such freedoms serve as the foundation upon which we educate students, produce and disseminate credible research, nurture artistic expression and foster critical inquiry.
Mission Statement
The Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom is committed to preserving and expanding conditions that make it possible to work, teach, learn, create, and share knowledge in ways that promote the common good. The center serves as a resource and knowledge hub for all people—including faculty, students, campus workers, alumni, administrators, trustees, parents, journalists, policymakers, and business leaders—seeking to build a flourishing higher education system, rooted in institutional autonomy, workplace democracy, and freedom from coercion and external interference.
To work towards these goals we:
create practical resources and build strategic partnerships for those engaged in defending academic freedom,
produce original research that can serve as the evidentiary basis for this work, and
communicate the value of academic freedom and institutional autonomy to wide audiences.
The first newsletter post is an annotated version of these statements, where some of the other fellows comment on different parts of each, and I encourage you to check it out for yourself to see how important individual perspectives are even inside of communication that is meant to reflect group consensus.
I also encourage you to sign up for the newsletter ,since we’ll be sharing more information and research all the time.
A couple of weekends ago, we had an in-person gathering of CDAF, along with some other folks concerned about the attacks on academic freedom (PEN, AAUP, et al. …), and I was struck by how important it is to have all these different perspectives when considering complex and important problems.
Even though it was a gathering of people with a broad base of shared values, there were many different perspectives, and I lost track of the number of times I experienced a moment of, I hadn’t thought of it that way.
Here’s how I see these two different strains of my work as intimately related. At the heart of More Than Words is my belief that humans have a right to their own minds, that part of exercising our freedom is being given the chance to interpret the world and then impress ourselves onto the world around us through communication rooted in our unique intelligences. Writing is a great way to achieve this, as I’ve experienced firsthand, not just because I have some public platforms for my writing, but because the act of writing allows me to know what I think and believe.
The boosters of the syntax-generating technology speak of it in liberatory terms, that the technology frees one up to not have to do difficult and maybe even unrewarding work. But in my view, giving over the work of writing to a probability machine is anti-freedom. The process matters.
The process of academic freedom matters, too, which is why we sometimes (often) have disputes about what academic freedom means or how it can be supported in institutions. As a baseline, we need people to believe that academic freedom matters, that it is more than an abstract idea and it is, in fact, a way to make possible the work we want our institutions to do. This is what is being threatened at this time.
One of the consistent themes of the weekend gathering was that deep down, we’re not just defending academic freedom, a term that we all acknowledge comes with some baggage, but we are trying to preserve important parts of our democracy.
I don’t want to overinflate the importance of this work, either my own with my writing about writing or the efforts of the fellows of CDAF. There are clearly more urgent threats at this moment.
But at the same time, I don’t want to shy away from the fact that there’s a lot at stake, and that what’s being threatened is our ability to self-govern.
Professor Harriet Dunbar-Morris is Pro Vice-Chancellor Academic and Provost at The University of Buckingham.
Whilst we are still waiting for the government to decide on the operationalisation of the future direction of the Lifelong Learning Entitlement (LLE), it is easy to agree that providing all new learners with a tuition fee loan entitlement to the equivalent of four years of post-18 education to use up to the age of 60 is a good thing in principle.
In recent articles, Professor Deborah Johnston and Rose Stephenson have both presented useful positions and summaries on the status quo. For the University of Buckingham, the merits of the LLE are clear, but it is the relationship between the LLE and courses of different lengths that is central to our concern.
At Buckingham, we take pride in our unique approach to education. As a disruptor institution and the only private university in the UK with a Royal Charter, we emphasise our small and independent nature. Our distinctive positioning has enabled us to create a unique learning environment. We have successfully developed ‘accelerated degrees’, including our flagship degree models: the two-year undergraduate degree and the four-and-a-half-year undergraduate medical degree.
Where other institutions have a long summer holiday, at Buckingham we have a fourth term – the same amount of classroom time over a whole degree as in other universities, but a term in the summer which means that students can enter the labour market a year earlier and incur a year’s less accommodation and living expenses as well.
Alternatively, in three years, our students at Buckingham can undertake two qualifications: a foundation plus an undergraduate or an undergraduate plus a postgraduate degree. The year’s shape also more closely resembles the world of work and therefore ably prepares students more authentically for their future careers. We know this approach is working, and adds value. We are in the Top 10 for Graduate Prospects (outcomes) and:
92% of our graduates agree their current activity is meaningful (sector 85%).
88% of our graduates feel their current activity fits with their future plans (sector 78%).
83% of our graduates say they are using what they learn while studying (sector 69%).
97% of our graduates are in work or study (sector 89%).
72% of our graduates are in full-time employment (sector 61%).
Buckingham has been a beacon for accelerated degrees to help students achieve their degrees in a shorter period and get out into the workplace or onto further study sooner. We can also see this model allowing students to interrupt their studies and take their degrees in shorter chunks (each of our terms, for example), which would be possible with the LLE framework once it is implemented. However, there is a fundamental unfairness facing Buckingham and others that needs to be addressed.
To understand this issue, we must first delve into the technical world of registering with the Office for Students (OfS), the regulator for higher education in England. Providers of higher education can (although not at the moment as new registrations are paused) register with the OfS under two categories:
1) Approved (fee cap)
Providers in the Approved (fee cap) category can only charge up to the fee cap of £9,250 (2024/25) / £9,535 (2025/26) for full-time students. Students can take out a tuition fee loan to cover their entire fee (for undergraduate courses). Approved (fee cap) providers can also access teaching and research grant funding. Most institutions are in this category.
2) Approved
Providers in the Approved category, which includes Buckingham, can charge tuition fees above the cap. However, students at these institutions can only access tuition fee loans up to the lower limit (£6,355 per annum for three-year programmes and £7,625 per annum for two-year programmes). Any additional fees charged need to be covered privately. Further, these institutions cannot access teaching and research grants.
Because of our category of registration, students can only get the fee loan for the accelerated (two-year) degree programmes at the lower fee loan limit. Our students study for more of the year, and in each of their two years, yet they are entitled to less of a loan each year to support their learning, meaning that through the current category of registration they are discriminated against, even though our accelerated degrees are clearly better for getting students into the workforce and for the skills agenda being pushed by the new Labour government.
What is also grossly unfair is that despite approved providers being unable to access direct government funding for learning and teaching, research, or capital activity, they remain subject to nearly every aspect of OfS regulation. One exception is the Access and Participation Plan (although we still produce an Access Statement). Yet, re-stating the above, students at approved category institutions cannot benefit from a full loan for the studying they do.
So, as the government considers how to support the skills agenda and deliver on skills shortages, here at Buckingham we make a request on behalf of the sector and the potential students: implement the LLE and remove the disparities.
We are calling for one of two developments:
A government review to address tuition fee loan eligibility (tied to current categorisations). Why should students be disadvantaged for the loan they can apply for by the category of their institution’s registration? In The University of Buckingham’s case, we have a TEF, we meet OfS requirements, and we even directly support the government’s desire to get students into work faster. Should it not be £9,250 (or now £9,535 from 2025/26) for all?
If not that, a change to loans for the credits studied will allow the students studying in that fourth term with us at Buckingham, and completing in two years, to be able to seek loans for the full amount of their two years of full-time study. The point here is that the implementation of the LLE means that the loan is for the credit instead, so this inequity is removed. All students can get a loan for the credit they study. Our students then would, as a bonus, gain the credit quicker, as they would study over two years.
Most students, due to the cost of living and other responsibilities, should now be considered part-time students, and we need to consider ways to help them fit their lives around their studies – something we certainly pride ourselves on. To support those who also need to work during their intensive studies, we timetable differently and teach differently. Ultimately this is about helping every one of our students to study more effectively (and in a shorter timescale), and as presented in The University of Buckingham’s Strategic Plan 2023-28, supporting our students by embedding employability and entrepreneurship within the curriculum.
In higher education, your relationship with learners shouldn’t end when their program does. If fostered correctly, they’re applying the knowledge they gained, sharing their experiences with their personal and professional networks, and staying engaged with your institution.
Strengthening your relationships post-program will not only enhance the learning experience and create a sense of belonging, but inspire lifelong learning and repeat engagement, build awareness in a competitive education landscape, and transform your learners into your brand’s biggest advocates.
Building a vibrant community is vital for maintaining these post-program relationships. In a survey by the community marketing platform TINT, 73 percent of consumers reported having a positive opinion of brand communities, while 84 percent said the community surrounding a brand impacts their feelings about it.
Many online learning providers must battle the misperception that community-building and networking only happen in person. At Harvard Business School Online, we launched our Community in 2018 to provide online learners the chance to connect off-line by forming chapters worldwide. Over the last six years, we’ve expanded to nearly 40 chapters and more than 650,000 members from 190 countries. And importantly, we’ve evolved beyond in-person meetups to also host virtual events and discussions through our Community platform.
If you’re interested in building a global community at scale, here are seven tips to consider.
Tips for Building an Engaged Global Community
Find Your Superusers Early
Start by identifying your most active, engaged learners. Perhaps they’re always the first to comment on their peers’ responses and provide feedback. Or maybe they’re sharing their certificate and learning experiences on LinkedIn, taking multiple programs, or promoting your school and proactively addressing questions in Reddit threads. Determine your engagement metrics and use them to spot your superusers early.
Programs should offer multiple connection points throughout the experience. HBS Online offers networking opportunities before, during and after courses. Anyone can join a public chapter to learn more about the brand and build knowledge. Once enrolled and upon course completion, they’re added to different private discussion boards and gain access to exclusive networking opportunities.
The earlier you integrate community into their experience, the faster they’ll become familiar with it and the more engaged they’ll be over the long term—helping you more easily surface your superusers.
Transform Your Superusers Into Brand Ambassadors
Communities are stronger when everyone is involved. Once you’ve identified your superusers, empower them to be brand ambassadors. Provide ownership of the community experience to keep them invested and committed to fueling its success. In turn, you can scale faster by delegating some of the event and community management.
Our chapters are run by chapter organizers—volunteers who’ve taken at least one HBS Online course and been vetted by our team. These volunteers are responsible for hosting an event a quarter and posting on their chapter’s discussion board.
This structure enables us to grow our Community globally and offer in-person and virtual events and networking opportunities throughout the year. Our learners forge real-world connections while our chapter organizers gain experience they can add to their LinkedIn profiles and résumés.
Provide Them With Helpful Tools, Training and Tactics
To help your learners become brand ambassadors, equip them with the right tools, tips and training. Onboard them to your community software, develop documentation and responses to frequently asked questions, and regularly host training sessions to explain new and existing platform features.
Data is another powerful tool. Track which conversations garner the most engagement or the events with the highest registrations, and share those insights with your community leaders. It will provide a jumping-off point and help them build stronger networking opportunities and relationships.
Establish and Share Clear Guidelines
During onboarding, share clear brand guidelines and expectations with your community leaders, including:
Your community’s goals and objectives
What their role entails and how to refer to it
How they should attribute your brand, and if/when they can leverage your logo
Your social channels and any campaign hashtags
Examples of effective content, whether a social post, forum discussion or event
Specific brand style guidelines
By providing this material, you can empower them to be stronger advocates and alleviate branding concerns as you grow and scale your community.
Highlight Achievements and Incentivize Advocacy
For your community to be successful, it needs to be mutually beneficial. Your learners are likely juggling their education alongside various personal and professional commitments. Acknowledge their time spent volunteering.
At HBS Online, we share our praise in various ways, including dedicated learner profiles, Community engagement and recognition badges, social media callouts, a monthly Community-focused newsletter where we promote upcoming events and achievements, and free tickets to and dedicated recognition at our annual hybrid learner conference, Connext.
Consider how you can leverage gamification to encourage engagement or incentivize your community leaders to promote your brand. Perhaps you gift them exclusive swag if they hit certain engagement metrics or welcome them to beta-test new products. Determine what works best for your institution, but ensure you’re meaningfully saying, “Thank you.”
Give Your Community Meaning
Purpose fuels passion. Find ways to make your community something your learners are proud to participate in. Survey them to discover how they view your community and the value they derive from it and leverage those insights to create programming aligned with your institution’s mission.
Six years ago, HBS Online introduced the Community Challenge to empower our learners to enact global change. Through the challenge, we collaborate annually with a nonprofit and ask for a pressing issue facing their business. We then share that problem with our learners, who gather worldwide to develop and pitch solutions. Over the years, they’ve tackled topics like food insecurity, climate change and education access while applying the business knowledge gained through our courses and fostering teamwork globally.
Create an Internal Support System
For any of these community efforts to take off, you need buy-in from senior leadership. Without it, you’re unlikely to get the necessary tools and resources to grow an engaged community. Communicate the value to your institution’s key stakeholders and provide them with the talking points to advocate for the initiative organizationwide since you’ll need support from multiple teams—like tech, program delivery and marketing—to make this work possible.
If feasible, having a dedicated community manager can also help supercharge your efforts. That employee can provide a safe space for your community leaders, give them a direct point of contact, listen to and enact feedback, and ensure brand guidelines and expectations are met.
Build Lifelong Relationships
Your learners are your higher education brand’s most valuable asset. They can provide insights to help you develop new programs, advocate on your brand’s behalf, build awareness and drive repeat engagement.
To foster lifelong learning, you must prioritize building lifelong relationships. Is your institution missing out on a competitive advantage?
Lauren Landry is the director of marketing and communications at Harvard Business School Online, overseeing its organic marketing strategy, brand messaging, Community and events. Prior to joining HBS Online, she served as an associate director of content marketing at Northeastern University and as a reporter and editor covering higher education and start-ups for the likes of BostInno and Boston Magazine.
