Tag: Learning

Virtual Learning Supports Adult College Student Success

Research shows that adults often enter college with a goal in mind, such as a career pivot, additional education in their current industry or completion of a degree they previously started. But returning to the classroom can be challenging, particularly for first-generation students or those who haven’t been in school for a while.

In 2024, Wichita State University launched a college bridge program, the Adult Learner Community and Connections Program, to ease the transition for adult and online learners. The program, part of the university’s Shocker Preseason series, offers eight modules of self-paced online content designed to assist them in their first term at the university.

In the most recent episode of Voices of Student Success, host Ashley Mowreader speaks with Brett Bruner, assistant vice president for student success and persistence at Wichita State, about adult learner pedagogy and lessons learned in the first year.

An edited version of the podcast appears below.

Q: Can you introduce us to your adult learner population? Whom do you serve and how does their makeup change how you serve them?

Brett Bruner, assistant vice president for student success and persistence

A: At Wichita State University, our adult learners come from various backgrounds. We know that two-thirds of our adult learners are first-generation college students. And when we think about being the first age friendly [University Global Network]–designated university in the state of Kansas, I think we’re really focused on how do we support learners of all ages, including adult learners of all ages?

When we think about the more than 2,200 adult learners and more than 1,600 online learners at Wichita State, our adult learners are enrolled in on-campus programs and fully online programs. We always approach our adult learners with that mindset of, how do we center this through our first-generation lens, recognizing that two-thirds of them will be first in their families to graduate from college?

Q: I’m also thinking about your orientation program focused on adult learners. I wonder if you can give us some background on, what does a Shocker Preseason look like across the board? And how does this look different for your adult learner populations, given all the backgrounds that you mentioned—first generation, online learners, et cetera.

A: Our Shocker Preseason programs were created from a university standpoint to really focus on building academic resource awareness, providing all our students with the academic skills they need to be successful and helping students make connections with each other. Our Shocker Preseason programs were also created as part of our strategic enrollment management plan, as well as one of our student success priorities.

We’ve grown [the program]; this fall, we’ll now have 20 different Shocker Preseason programs.

Q: Wow.

A: I know, it’s amazing to see growth from even just when I started here two years ago, from six programs now to 20. I think the beauty of our Shocker Preseason programs is this differentiated care. We talk about differentiated care at WSU from a student success standpoint, but it means the program modality—on campus versus online—program length, content, is really driven by each of the individual units that are designing their programs.

In spring of 2024, as the Office of Online and Adult Learning that I get the privilege of working with sat down to really look at career congruence of our adult learners’ transitions, health and well-being emerged as a topic, but really that overall support of, how do we form connections? Because so many times adult learners in the research cite that they aren’t finding peers, they aren’t finding friends, because they feel that they are the one and only older student, returning student or student who didn’t come fresh out of high school to college.

I’m so proud of our team, who said, “Let’s design a Shocker Preseason program, but let’s make it look different to meet the needs of our students.” And so as they rolled out this online format for our Adult Learner Community and Connections program, they really rooted it in health and well-being, because they were able to do that in meaningful ways that may look different from how we talk about health and well-being for an 18- to 22-year-old, but then also building in community and connection opportunities in different ways. Maybe they’re more likely to lean into conversations about how the Ulrich Museum of Art on campus can provide a means for social connection, and maybe that will resonate with our adult learners.

Q: I love that you’re focusing on community and that sense of belonging and engagement on campus. Because I think when we consider online learners’ needs, or adult learners’ needs, oftentimes we think it’s providing services expeditiously. We want them to get through their degree program, we want to get them into a job, which are great priorities to have. But students also want a college experience, and they do want to engage with their peers. And so I wonder if you can speak to that dimension of this, that it’s not just getting them to timely degree completion, but everything else as well.

A: It’s all about finding their people, helping them realize that with 2,200 adult learners across campus, you’re not the only one. So how can we connect you with others who are experiencing similar transitional pieces?

We think about the 83 students who engaged in our optional program last year, but then also the eight peer ambassadors that we hired who had lived these experiences and can bring some insight when we talk about social wellness and why it’s an important part of thriving in college as an adult learner, or financial wellness, or whatever dimension of wellness.

I think that’s the important part, because we’re seeing then these connections continue beyond just this orientation and transition experience. We’re seeing friendships bloom. We’re seeing opportunities to make connections in the classroom. After year one of the program, specifically related to the social wellness connection, students were saying, “I appreciated what you shared about how to make connections, but I want more. I want more about how to build my network. How do I invite people to my network and grow my network?”

And I don’t think that was something that we were intentionally designing. So as we think about the 2.0 version of this program, we’re really deepening the content about networking. Because I think we’re all always striving to build and grow our networks as we move throughout life. That desire for connections, that community, that sense of belonging, was clearly, clearly articulated in our postprogram surveys from the first year of the program.

Q: Can we talk about how the program works logistically for people who might not be familiar and how it’s scaffolded?

A: Our program is designed around the eight dimensions of wellness, and it is an online program. We built it in our learning management system so that it mirrors a lot of the other classes that an adult student is taking, whether they’re taking an online class or an in-person class that has the learning management system component to it. So they’re also getting access to the technology upskilling that we so often see in research about what adult learners want as they transition into college.

They move through the eight modules, which are all rooted in the eight dimensions of wellness. The beauty of the program is it’s self-directed and self-paced, so it doesn’t necessarily build upon one another. We’ve had some adult learners who are like, “I really want to jump in and dive into module five and start talking about physical wellness, or module eight and talking about occupational wellness.” So they can do that, or they can sequentially go module by module.

As a student completes each module, there is an incentive that was provided through the Urban Adult Learner Institute, [Wichita State] being the inaugural winners of an Accelerate Pitch Competition that funded a lot of these incentives. But one of the things that we learned in year one is that incentives are not a motivating factor for our adult learners. We know that adult learners are intrinsically motivated, and so a lot of times we had the extra incentives that they didn’t strive to pick up, but they were completing the modules.

We’ve got campus partners who provide content for the modules. Our Shocker Career Accelerator office is providing content for the module about occupational wellness. And Shocker Financial Wellness staff are providing content for the module about financial wellness. So each module connects individuals to campus resources. It’s providing some actual content and then some reflective experience. The modules open Aug. 1 and they close in December.

So students can move throughout that time however quickly they want, or maybe they just want to complete one module, whatever it may be. And then if they complete all eight modules, we’re able to provide an overall incentive with some merchandise from our Shocker store.

Q: You mentioned it’s self-motivated, and students can really opt in to which sections speak to them. I think it’s interesting that you’ve all chosen to make this optional. It’s an orientation program, but it’s something that they can do throughout their first term. Can you talk a little bit about that decision? Because I think some people might say, “No, you have to make it mandatory and make this something that they must complete before they start classes, because we know that this will be good for them.” What’s that balance of ensuring students are getting this information but letting them do it at their own pace and timing?

A: This program doesn’t replace our in-person or online adult learner orientation, but I think, as someone who spent 10 years as a new student orientation director before moving up, sometimes people say, “We can solve all the world’s problems just by adding five minutes in orientation.” And I like to say, “Sometimes orientation is like drinking from a fire hose,” there’s so much information. And it also doesn’t relate to three words: time, place and manner.

When we think about orientation, we have to know, what do we share with individuals? When do we share it, and especially with our adult learners, as we dive into andragogy [adult learner pedagogy]? And what we know from Malcolm Knowles in 1985, when he developed the six tenets of andragogy, is adult learners need to know what they need to know when they need to know it.

If we’re sharing resources about knowing your values and what’s your why, and we’re sharing that on June 13, when they’re on campus for adult learning orientation, is it really going to sink in and resonate with them versus in August or September, when they’re knee-deep in the semester? Or when we’re talking about intellectual wellness and we’re sharing all of the resources from our 13 different tutoring centers across campus—that may go in one ear and out the other ear in July when they’re here, but maybe they’re going to need it in week five or six, when they’re struggling with a certain class and trying to figure out “where do I go to get connected?”

Our team wanted to keep it optional, much like that kind of aligns with all of our Shocker Preseason programs, because the Shocker Preseason programs never take the place of orientation. They’re an additional element in a student’s transition. But as we lean into some of those core elements of andragogy, we lean into the need to know, and we lean into the readiness to learn that students—adult learners, specifically—when they see a need, that’s when they’re going to be ready to learn. We wanted to provide that in an asynchronous format, but they can still come back to and access those resources throughout the duration of that critical first semester at WSU.

Q: You’ve obviously rooted this program in pedagogy and the best understanding we have of adult learners, but I wonder how you’ve incorporated the student voice from this first season of the Shocker Preseason program and how you’re incorporating it into version two?

A: As we dug into assessment feedback from version one, not only looking at completion rates by each module, we definitely know 86 percent of all students who registered [for the program] and did something completed social wellness. That’s great. Is that because of the concept, is that because it was the first module? We don’t necessarily know.

As we look at the qualitative feedback, I think that’s been the most interesting thing. From the social wellness piece and students saying they appreciate it, but they want to know more about how to network. We think about the intellectual wellness model, and some of the feedback that we receive from that is … “Give us more information, we want all the additional apps, all the additional resources beyond basic technology. What are those apps or things that I need to do to succeed academically?” So we’re diving deep into that.

One of the most interesting things that caught us off guard, in a good way, was that the most popular session by students [who provided qualitative feedback] was the spiritual wellness module, because it was really rooted in helping students articulate, “What is your why?” Whether you’re coming back to school because you’re a career changer, you’re switching career paths in life or you want to finish a degree because you want to climb higher into the occupation that you’re in, but then also, then connecting that why to their values and continuing to drive that forward as a motivation factor.

Then I think we’re also taking some of the other elements of the areas and growth of opportunity. For example, when we think about occupational wellness and adult learners, we learned that we’re serving two very different groups within the adult learner piece: the career changers and the career climbers. And so we need to know, how do we go about approaching occupational wellness from both an individual who’s saying, “I’m going from industry to being a teacher at the age of 50” or “I need a degree to move up in this career path that I’ve been doing for quite some time”? So we have to almost take the differentiated care approach, if that makes sense, especially in that.

Or financial wellness, that was probably one of the most, I wouldn’t say, polarizing, but one we need to think a little bit more about. We got great opportunity for growth feedback that said, “I’ve been doing finances for quite some time” and recognizing the experiences, but the piece of finances that many adult learners said is, “Can you help me figure out where can I find additional scholarships? Where can I find additional ways to pay for all of my educational expenses?” So we need to focus a little bit more on scholarship resources rather than just maybe the general how to budget, how to manage finances that we may think about … our 18- to 22-year-old population.

Q: I think it’s interesting that the feedback you received, it seems to fall into a few categories, like, one, help me navigate the institution better, but two, help me navigate myself as a student better.

It seems like they know how to be an adult, and they know how to manage their own budgets or engage with one another on a social level. But when it comes to that professional networking, or when it comes to understanding what tools they might need to be a learner, again, that’s the piece where they’re really asking for feedback. And I think that’s so unique to our adult learner population at large. It might be our 18-year-olds who need more help figuring themselves out as people, but our adult learners need help figuring themselves out as students.

A: In version 2.0 we’re also trying to be much more intentional about providing some extended podcasts with campus partners. So someone who really wants to embrace the concept of social wellness and wants to engage in a podcast with our Student Engagement and Belonging Team or our Ulrich Museum of Art and really dive deep into those, we’re connecting this to various podcast episodes from our Shockers Learning Out Loud podcast series. It’s been around for quite some time. So how are we just connecting the pieces of the puzzle for students who want to deep dive a little bit more, recognizing that, once again, what we know about adult learners is they’re very problem-focused. And how can we provide those additional asynchronous resources for them to dive much deeper into the concept?

Q: I mean, I think podcasts are the best format ever.

When you talk to your peers in this space, because I know you’ve presented on this topic at conferences and really shared this with others who are working in similar roles, what are you hearing from them? What other ideas are you getting? Or what are some opportunities that you see for others to engage in this work as well?

A: I think the biggest piece that I’ve heard from others is this whole notion of differentiated care, and how can campuses lean in and not just replicate a transition experience that they may have for an 18- to 22-year-old, but they’re recognizing the needs of our adult learners, and we’re centering some of those elements. Adult learners bring a lot of experiences, so how do we harness that? How do we name that? How do we give them the opportunity to own that space and bring that into whatever content we design, whether it’s from a well-being [or] from a career standpoint, bring that into that space and recognize that that looks different? You can’t just copy and paste. You can’t just lift what we’re doing from a first-year, first-time-in-college student and apply that, because that’s doing a major disservice.

I think the other piece that I’m hearing from colleagues as we’re doing this is leveraging and leaning into making this a virtual space, because the lives of an adult learner look very different. You may be an adult learner that’s also a caregiver, and you may only have evenings to hop on and learn, or dive deep because you’re working full-time, trying to go to school full-time, maybe giving care to parents, to children, to partners, to spouses, etc. Or we’ve had some students who are adult learners who are working third shift. You may be available during the workday, but you may have just got off work at 8 a.m., so how are we leveraging technology in new ways? Because going back to that research, one of the biggest pieces that adult learners want in their transition and want from colleges universities is to help them upskill with the technology that they’re going to need to be successful.

I think those two pieces of really leaning into the adult learner needs, leveraging technology and leaning into this notion of differentiated care is needed and is the easy way to start thinking about, how do I take something like this and apply it to the adult learners on my own campus?

Q: As we think about the new age of college students or today’s learners, and how we’re seeing a larger population of adult learners, or more high school students are considering taking a break before going to college, I think this is going to be even more applicable, maybe for a 20-year-old who took a break and was working for a few years, and not just our traditional 25-, 35-year-old who’s coming back to school.

A: Absolutely. I think there are elements of this that can be applied to many facets of today’s learner.

Q: So what’s next for you all as you’re considering launching for the fall?

A: We have been taking all the feedback in from version 1.0 [and] we’re redesigning some of our modules. We’re bringing in new campus partners, which I think has been super exciting.

We’re leaning into this well-being concept, and we know health and well-being is important for all of today’s college learners. You can’t read any article, have a conversation at a conference or go to a meeting on your own campus where the concept of health and well-being of today’s college students is not at the forefront. I think as I’ve continued to share this data, we’ve gained lots of support from various entities across campus, especially those who really are approaching it from a health and well-being lens.

But we’re just really excited as we launch version 2.0 and engage some of those completers of version 1.0 in various peer ambassador roles to support the next generation of ALCC participants.

Q: Can you talk about how this program transitions into larger support on campus and making sure that students aren’t just getting these modules online, but that they’re translating it to in-person experiences or online experiences as it’s relevant?

A: Our peer ambassadors, I think, are great representatives of the Office of Online and Adult Learning, and so they have been a great resource to connect individuals in their small groups to our associate director of student engagement in the Office of Online and Adult Learning or online and adult learning retention specialist who’s providing some additional follow-up pieces. So I think the peer ambassadors have been great representatives to connect the students who are going through this experience with the amazing support staff and the network of individuals through our Office of Online and Adult Learning and across campus who are here to help them be successful, because we want all of our adult learners to successfully complete their first year, that first milestone, and then ultimately graduate with their degree from WSU.

Get more content like this directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.

Source link

July 10, 2025
Hard up for students, more colleges are offering college credit for life experience, or ‘prior learning’

PITTSBURGH — Stephen Wells was trained in the Air Force to work on F-16 fighter jets, including critical radar, navigation and weapons systems whose proper functioning meant life or death for pilots.

Yet when he left the service and tried to apply that expertise toward an education at Pittsburgh’s Community College of Allegheny County, or CCAC, he was given just three credits toward a required class in physical education.

Wells moved forward anyway, going on to get his bachelor’s and doctoral degrees. Now he’s CCAC’s provost and involved in a citywide project to help other people transform their military and work experience into academic credit.

What’s happening in Pittsburgh is part of growing national momentum behind letting students — especially the increasing number who started but never completed a degree — cash in their life skills toward finally getting one, saving them time and money.

Colleges and universities have long purported to provide what’s known in higher education as credit for prior learning. But they have made the process so complex, slow and expensive that only about 1 in 10 students actually completes it.

Many students don’t even try, especially low-income learners who could benefit the most, according to a study by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education and the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, or CAEL.

“It drives me nuts” that this promise has historically proven so elusive, Wells said, in his college’s new Center for Education, Innovation & Training.

Stephen Wells, provost at the Community College of Allegheny County in Pittsburgh. An Air Force veteran, Wells got only a handful of academic credits for his military experience. Now he’s part of an effort to expand that opportunity for other students. Credit: Nancy Andrews for The Hechinger Report

That appears to be changing. Nearly half of institutions surveyed last year by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, or AACRAO, said they have added more ways for students to receive these credits — electricians, for example, who can apply some of their training toward academic courses in electrical engineering, and daycare workers who can use their experience to earn degrees in teaching.

Related: Interested in innovations in higher education? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter.

The reason universities and colleges are doing this is simple: Nearly 38 million working-age Americans have spent some time in college but never finished, according to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Getting at least some of them to come back has become essential to these higher education institutions at a time when changing demographics mean that the number of 18-year-old high school graduates is falling.

“When higher education institutions are fat and happy, nobody looks for these things. Only when those traditional pipelines dry up do we start looking for other potential populations,” said Jeffrey Harmon, vice provost for strategic initiatives and institutional effectiveness at Thomas Edison State University in New Jersey, which has long given adult learners credit for the skills they bring.

Being able to get credit for prior learning is a huge potential recruiting tool. Eighty-four percent of adults who are leaning toward going back to college say it would have “a strong influence” on their decision, according to research by CAEL, the Strada Education Foundation and Hanover Research. (Strada is among the funders of The Hechinger Report, which produced this story.)

The Center for Education, Innovation & Training at the Community College of Allegheny County in Pittsburgh. The college is part of a citywide effort to give academic credit for older students’ life experiences. Credit: Nancy Andrews for The Hechinger Report

When Melissa DiMatteo, 38, decided to get an associate degree at CCAC to go further in her job, she got six credits for her previous training in Microsoft Office and her work experience as everything from a receptionist to a supervisor. That spared her from having to take two required courses in computer information and technology and — since she’s going to school part time and taking one course per semester — saved her a year.

“Taking those classes would have been a complete waste of my time,” DiMatteo said. “These are things that I do every day. I supervise other people and train them on how to do this work.”

On average, students who get credit for prior learning save between $1,500 and $10,200 apiece and nearly seven months off the time it takes to earn a bachelor’s degree, the nonprofit advocacy group Higher Learning Advocates calculates. The likelihood that they will graduate is 17 percent higher, the organization finds.

Related: The number of 18-year-olds is about to drop sharply, packing a wallop for colleges — and the economy

Justin Hand dropped out of college because of the cost, and became a largely self-taught information technology manager before he decided to go back and get an associate and then a bachelor’s degree so he could move up in his career.

He got 15 credits — a full semester’s worth — through a program at the University of Memphis for which he wrote essays to prove he had already mastered software development, database management, computer networking and other skills.

“These were all the things I do on a daily basis,” said Hand, of Memphis, who is 50 and married, with a teenage son. “And I didn’t want to have to prolong college any more than I needed to.”

Meanwhile, employers and policymakers are pushing colleges to speed up the output of graduates with skills required in the workforce, including by giving more students credit for their prior learning. And online behemoths Western Governors University and Southern New Hampshire University, with which brick-and-mortar colleges compete, are way ahead of them in conferring credit for past experience.

“They’ve mastered this and used it as a marketing tool,” said Kristen Vanselow, assistant vice president of innovative education and partnerships at Florida Gulf Coast University, which has expanded its awarding of credit for prior learning. “More traditional higher education institutions have been slower to adapt.”

It’s also gotten easier to evaluate how skills that someone learns in life equate to academic courses or programs. This has traditionally required students to submit portfolios, take tests or write essays, as Hand did, and faculty to subjectively and individually assess them.

Related: As colleges lose enrollment, some turn to one market that’s growing: Hispanic students

Now some institutions, states, systems and independent companies are standardizing this work or using artificial intelligence to do it. The growth of certifications from professional organizations such as Amazon Web Services and the Computing Technology Industry Association, or CompTIA, has helped, too.

“You literally punch [an industry certification] into our database and it tells you what credit you can get,” said Philip Giarraffa, executive director of articulation and academic pathways at Miami Dade College. “When I started here, that could take anywhere from two weeks to three months.”

Data provided by Miami Dade shows it has septupled the number of credits for prior learning awarded since 2020, from 1,197 then to 7,805 last year.

“These are students that most likely would have looked elsewhere, whether to the [online] University of Phoenix or University of Maryland Global [Campus]” or other big competitors, Giarraffa said.

Fifteen percent of undergraduates enrolled in higher education full time and 40 percent enrolled part time are 25 or older, federal data show — including people who delayed college to serve in the military, volunteer or do other work that could translate into academic credit.

“Nobody wants to sit in a class where they already have all this knowledge,” Giarraffa said.

At Thomas Edison, police academy graduates qualify for up to 30 credits toward associate degrees. Carpenters who have completed apprenticeships can get as many as 74 credits in subjects including math, management and safety training. Bachelor’s degrees are often a prerequisite for promotion for people in professions such as these, or who hope to start their own companies.

Related: To fill ‘education deserts,’ more states want community colleges to offer bachelor’s degrees

The University of Memphis works with FedEx, headquartered nearby, to give employees with supervisory training academic credit they can use toward a degree in organizational leadership, helping them move up in the company.

The University of North Carolina System last year launched its Military Equivalency System, which lets active-duty and former military service members find out almost instantly, before applying for admission, if their training could be used for academic credit. That had previously required contacting admissions offices, registrars or department chairs.

Among the reasons for this reform was that so many of these prospective students — and the federal education benefits they get — were ending up at out-of-state universities, the UNC System’s strategic plan notes.

“We’re trying to change that,” said Kathie Sidner, the system’s director of workforce and partnerships. It’s not only for the sake of enrollment and revenue, Sidner said. “From a workforce standpoint, these individuals have tremendous skill sets and we want to retain them as opposed to them moving somewhere else.”

Related: A new way to help some college students: Zero percent, no-fee loans

California’s community colleges are also expanding their credit for prior learning programs as part of a plan to increase the proportion of the population with educations beyond high school.

“How many people do you know who say, ‘College isn’t for me?’ ” asked Sam Lee, senior advisor to the system’s chancellor for credit for prior learning. “It makes a huge difference when you say to them that what they’ve been doing is equivalent to college coursework already.”

In Pittsburgh, the Regional Upskilling Alliance — of which CCAC is a part — is connecting job centers, community groups, businesses and educational institutions to create comprehensive education and employment records so more workers can get credit for skills they already have.

That can provide a big push, “especially if you’re talking about parents who think, ‘I’ll never be able to go to school,’ ” said Sabrina Saunders Mosby, president and CEO of the nonprofit Vibrant Pittsburgh, a coalition of business and civic leaders involved in the effort.

Pennsylvania is facing among the nation’s most severe declines in the number of 18-year-old high school graduates.

“Our members are companies that need talent,” Mosby said.

There’s one group that has historically pushed back against awarding credit for prior learning: university and college faculty concerned it might affect enrollment in their courses or unconvinced that training provided elsewhere is of comparable quality. Institutions have worried about the loss of revenue from awarding credits for which students would otherwise have had to pay.

That also appears to be changing, as universities leverage credit for prior learning to recruit more students and keep them enrolled for longer, resulting in more revenue — not less.

“That monetary factor was something of a myth,” said Beth Doyle, chief of strategy at CAEL.

Faculty have increasingly come around, too. That’s sometimes because they like having experienced students in their classrooms, Florida Gulf Coast’s Vanselow said.

Related: States want adults to return to college. Many roadblocks stand in the way

Still, while many recognize it as a recruiting incentive, most public universities and colleges have had to be ordered to confer more credits for prior learning by legislatures or governing boards. Private, nonprofit colleges remain stubbornly less likely to give it.

More than two-thirds charge a fee for evaluating whether other kinds of learning can be transformed into academic credit, an expense that isn’t covered by financial aid. Roughly one in 12 charge the same as it would cost to take the course for which the credits are awarded.

Debra Roach, vice president for workforce development at the Community College of Allegheny County in Pittsburgh. The college is working on giving academic credit to students for their military, work and other life experience. Credit: Nancy Andrews for The Hechinger Report

Seventy percent of institutions require that students apply for admission and be accepted before learning whether credits for prior learning will be awarded. Eighty-five percent limit how many credits for prior learning a student can receive.

There are other confounding roadblocks and seemingly self-defeating policies. CCAC runs a noncredit program to train paramedics, for example, but won’t give people who complete it credits toward its for-credit nursing degree. Many leave and go across town to a private university that will. The college is working on fixing this, said Debra Roach, its vice president of workforce development.

It’s important to see this from the students’ point of view, said Tracy Robinson, executive director of the University of Memphis Center for Regional Economic Enrichment.

“Credit for prior learning is a way for us to say, ‘We want you back. We value what you’ve been doing since you’ve been gone,’ ” Robinson said. “And that is a total game changer.”

Contact writer Jon Marcus at 212-678-7556, [email protected] or jpm.82 on Signal.

This story about credit for prior learning was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for our higher education newsletter. Listen to our higher education podcast.

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.

Join us today.

Source link

July 10, 2025
5 Steps to Update Assignments to Foster Critical Thinking and Authentic Learning in an AI Age – Faculty Focus

I recently attended a student panel on use of AI in college classes. The three panelists shared their perspectives, borne out in an April 2025 Gallup survey: they want to learn to use AI tools in appropriate ways, they’re anxious about the potential negative impact on their critical thinking skills, and they want explicit guidance from their faculty members—which they’re not consistently getting.

Even, or especially, in an AI age, we know our students need to think critically and learn authentically to be productive and engaged citizens and future employees. We recognize we need to update assignments to promote academic integrity in an AI age, yet many of us feel unprepared to do so. The crux of the problem is this: how do we foster critical thinking and authentic learning when it’s so easy for students to outsource their cognitive work?

One promising solution to the triple challenge of fostering critical thinking, meaningful learning, and academic integrity is to double down on transparency. We can provide the guidance students want, embed analysis and evaluation into our assignments to get at that all-important critical thinking, and nudge students toward integrity. How? By embracing transparency.

Let’s detail our expectations for responsible AI use. Let’s emphasize the why: why we want students to use their own cognitive abilities for some tasks, why using AI could be helpful at times, and why we’ve crafted our AI-integrated assignments in the ways we have. Finally, let’s ask students to disclose their use in full transparency (and reflect on their learning, as Marc Watkins argues here).

In short, we can promote integrity when assessments are meaningful, purposeful, and include transparent instruction on appropriate AI use. We can teach students to critically analyze AI-assisted work and promote authentic learning as we do. To help us achieve these aims, here are five steps to update assignments in ways that help students learn the skills they need while fostering a culture of academic honesty.

Step 1: Take a critical look at your current syllabus.

If you’re like me, you have tried-and-true activities and assignments that you’ve relied on for many years. Some of these may be updateable, but others may just need to go. If AI can easily complete a task (try running your instructions through a tool like ChatGPT to find out), maybe it’s no longer a relevant measure of authentic learning. Also, following the remaining steps below will likely mean that you add new instructional practices (like modelling AI use) and new components of the assignments you update (like a reflection on how AI helped or hindered learning). Make time for these important new course elements by getting rid of outdated tasks.

Step 2: Consider whether and how students should use AI on the assignments you keep.

Remember, students want to know exactly what is appropriate for AI use in your class. A helpful tool for this process is the 5-level AI Assessment Scale (AIAS). The levels range from No AI, AI Planning, AI Collaboration, Full AI, and AI Exploration. Each one identifies and sanctions different ways students can use AI in appropriate and meaningful ways to support their learning.

Leon Furze, one of the creators of the AIAS, presents it a tool that helps update our assignments and start conversations with our students. He recommends using this framework to guide your thinking: break down each assignment, project, or discussion board activity into disparate steps, then decide for which parts of the process AI use is appropriate. Providing transparent guidance, guidance that may vary for different parts of the project, is what students need right now.

Step 3: Carve out time to discuss and model your expectations.

Many students are not sure what is acceptable in this current moment. What better way to help them feel confident while developing the AI skills they need than modelling what you’re looking for? Take class time or record a video for your online class to teach your students what you expect them to do with AI for each assignment, what not to do, and what you’ll be looking for in their finished product.

As you approach this aspect of instruction, take heart. I don’t think every instructor needs to be an AI expert, but I do think we’re doing our students a disservice if we’re not teaching them how to be AI Whisperers, a concept I gleaned from Ethan Mollick’s 2024 book, Co-Intelligence. A new kind of expertise is emerging, he argues: the skilled and effective use of AI in every field. As disciplinary experts, you know what kind of AI use will help students learn your material and what will disempower them as learners. Let’s allocate time to help students develop AI literacy while maintaining their agency.

Step 4: Ask students to disclose their AI use, as noted above.

The student panelists showed palpable relief when they described instructors who simply had them cite their use of AI. “Encourage your students to be transparent about their AI use,” one student, a finance major, said. As she talked about how simple it was to add a line at the end of the assignment such as, “ChatGPT generated the outline for this essay,” the anxiety that had previously clouded her expression disappeared.

One approach is to use the AI Disclosure (AID) framework to document how students used AI, or add an appendix to each assignment, or add comments or footnotes to make transparent what they wrote and what AI wrote. Get students to declare their AI use and even better, ask them to reflect on whether their use helped or hindered their learning.

Step 5: If you suspect inappropriate use of AI, don’t accuse students of cheating.

Instead, have a conversation with them. Recall that a primary goal of the AIAS is to facilitate discussions about AI use. Imagine that as a class, you agreed that Level 2 (AI Planning) was appropriate for a particular project. If a student submits work that seems to have been completed at Level 4 (Full AI), refer back to the framework to facilitate a conversation about your perception of their work and their process. As AIAS co-creator Leon Furze points out, now you can get away from wondering whether a student cheated with AI and instead ask, “can I make a valid judgement of this student’s capabilities [whether they have used AI or not]?”

And as argued by the authors of a new book titled The Opposite of Cheating: Teaching for Integrity in an Age of AI, this takes moral accusation out of the conversation, reduces the adversarial tone, and enables students to reflect on and hopefully learn from the experience. You can also decide together what actions should take place next, whether the student resubmits the assignment in accordance with your AI-usage guidance, whether they lose the opportunity to earn a grade for that assignment, or whatever else you and your student decide is appropriate in that situation.

Students want to know how to use AI well. “If we don’t teach students how to use AI responsibly, they’re going to be poorly equipped for the workforce,” said the third student panelist, a computer science major. Let’s update our assignments to facilitate meaningful learning of our content, the skills students need in an AI age, and ethical, integrous use of AI to equip them for the workplace they’ll enter. In doing so, we’re helping to develop engaged citizens who think critically about information they encounter. I can’t think of more important work to be engaged in at this moment in time.

Flower Darby is an associate director of the Teaching for Learning Center at the University of Missouri, a co-author of The Norton Guide to Equity-Minded Teaching (2023), and the lead author, with James M. Lang, of Small Teaching Online: Applying Learning Science in Online Classes (2019).

References

Bertram Gallant, Tricia, and David A. Rettinger. 2025. The Opposite of Cheating: Teaching for Integrity in the Age of AI. University of Oklahoma Press.

Furze, Leon. 2024. “Updating the AI Assessment Scale.” August 28. https://leonfurze.com/2024/08/28/updating-the-ai-assessment-scale/

Furze, Leon. 2025. LinkedIn post. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/leonfurze_artificialintelligence-aieducation-assessment-activity-7295247135480889346-UWFC/

Kassorla, M. 2024. “Our New Course: Some Highlights.” January 4. https://michellekassorla.substack.com/p/our-new-course-some-highlights

McMurtrie, Beth. 2025. “AI Unready.” January 30. https://www.chronicle.com/newsletter/teaching/2025-01-30?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_12441556_nl_Teaching_date_20250130&sra=true

Mollick, E. 2024. Co-Intelligence: Living and Working with AI. Portfolio.

Walton Family Foundation and Gallup. 2025. How American Youth View and Use Artificial Intelligence. https://www.gallup.com/analytics/658901/walton-family-foundation-gallup-voices-gen-american-youth.aspx

Watkins, Marc. 2024. “Make AI Part of the Assignment.” October 2. https://www.chronicle.com/article/make-ai-part-of-the-assignment?sra=true

Weaver, Kari D. 2024. “The Artificial Intelligence Disclosure (AID) Framework: An Introduction.” College & Research Libraries News 85 (10). https://crln.acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/article/view/26548/34482

Source link

July 9, 2025
Reimagining the Flipped Classroom: Integrating AI, Microlearning, and Learning Analytics to Elevate Student Engagement and Critical Thinking – Faculty Focus

The traditional flipped classroom model, which reverses the conventional lecture-homework structure, has evolved significantly since its inception. In the digital era, especially post-pandemic, this strategy has gained renewed importance for fostering active learning, critical thinking, and academic resilience. Today, the flipped classroom is no longer just about moving lectures online but about curating immersive, personalized learning environments. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), microlearning, and learning analytics provides new dimensions to this pedagogical approach, enhancing both student preparation and in-class engagement. This article explores how these three components can reshape flipped learning and address persistent challenges such as student unpreparedness, fear of participation, and lack of motivation.

Flipped Classroom 2.0: Enriching the Core Strategy

The original flipped classroom model aimed to reverse the traditional structure of education by shifting the transmission of basic content, often done through lectures, outside the classroom, while using face-to-face class time for active engagement and problem-solving. While this model offered significant benefits, the ever-changing dynamics of education in the digital era demand a more adaptive and responsive framework. This has led to the evolution of Flipped Classroom 2.0, a pedagogy that not only retains the foundational principles of the original model but enhances them with modern technologies and learner-centered practices.

AI Tools

In the Flipped Classroom 2.0 model, the learning process is amplified by integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, which help personalize student learning pathways. AI-enabled systems such as adaptive learning platforms, chatbots, and generative tools like ChatGPT can provide students with on-demand explanations, simulate peer discussions, offer low-stakes quizzes, and give instant feedback. This technological support allows students to learn at their own pace and revisit complex material without feeling anxious or dependent solely on the instructor. From the educator’s side, AI tools help identify patterns in learner behavior and performance, allowing for more targeted interventions during class time.

Microlearning

Microlearning plays a central role in supporting pre-class preparation under the Flipped Classroom 2.0 framework. Instead of overwhelming students with lengthy video lectures or dense readings, microlearning delivers short, focused modules that concentrate on single learning objectives. These modules are ideal for students who are accustomed to fast-paced digital environments and may have limited attention spans. Microlearning enhances retention by segmenting information and reinforcing key concepts through repetition and brief assessments. It also empowers students to learn efficiently on mobile devices and during flexible hours, which is particularly valuable in hybrid and online learning contexts.

Learning Analytics

Learning analytics represents another foundational component of the Flipped Classroom 2.0 design. By utilizing Learning Management Systems (LMS) and built-in analytics dashboards, instructors can gain valuable insights into which students have completed pre-class activities, how they have performed, and where they may need additional support. Analytics tools also promote student accountability, as learners are able to track their own progress and receive early alerts when they are falling behind. These data-driven approaches make it possible to transition from reactive teaching to proactive guidance.

Collectively, these innovations: AI, microlearning, and learning analytics, enhance the effectiveness of the flipped classroom by aligning content delivery, student support, and real-time feedback. Flipped Classroom 2.0 is not merely a technological upgrade; it is a reimagined learning experience that promotes self-directed learning, critical thinking, and inclusivity. It encourages students to become active participants rather than passive recipients, and it positions educators as facilitators and data-informed decision-makers in the learning process.

Understanding Student Resistance in the Digital Era

Unpreparedness often stems not from laziness or disinterest, but from deeper psychological or contextual barriers that influence a student’s ability to engage. In many cases, students may feel overwhelmed by the unfamiliarity of new instructional models or lack the confidence needed to navigate them successfully. This resistance is especially prominent in environments where flipped classroom strategies are introduced abruptly or without adequate scaffolding. In digitally enhanced learning spaces, Artificial Intelligence tools can serve as diagnostic aids to help educators understand the roots of student resistance.

By monitoring metrics such as time spent on tasks, levels of participation, and types of interactions within pre-class activities, AI systems can identify patterns of disengagement or confusion. For example, if students frequently abandon certain video modules or quiz sections, this may signal content complexity, misalignment with learning styles, or underlying cognitive fatigue. Moreover, many students, especially those transitioning from traditional learning environments, may carry negative assumptions about active learning approaches. They may perceive them as chaotic, unpredictable, or more demanding than passive learning formats. Educators must dig deeper to explore these sentiments and confront the emotional undercurrents that influence classroom behavior. Addressing resistance with empathy, transparency, and gradual acclimatization is crucial for long-term student buy-in.

Addressing Fear Through Technology-Supported Safety

Fear is one of the most formidable barriers to classroom participation. Whether it’s the fear of giving incorrect answers, speaking publicly, or being judged by peers, these emotions can significantly hinder student engagement. In the flipped classroom, where much of the responsibility for learning shifts to students, this fear may become even more pronounced if not properly addressed. Technology, particularly AI-driven tools, can be strategically used to create psychologically safe learning environments. For example, private practice environments powered by chatbots or simulations can offer students a space to make mistakes, ask questions, and rehearse ideas without fear of embarrassment. These tools are particularly beneficial for introverted students or those who lack confidence in their subject knowledge.

Microlearning also plays a vital role in reducing anxiety. By breaking down complex content into manageable chunks, students can focus on mastering one concept at a time. This incremental mastery builds confidence and reduces cognitive overload. When paired with formative assessments and feedback loops, microlearning helps normalize error-making as part of the learning process. Analytics further enhance psychological safety by providing both educators and students with objective data on progress. When students see that others are also struggling with the same concepts or that their performance is gradually improving, they are more likely to perceive learning as a collective and iterative journey.

Making Learning Visible with Analytics and Scaffolds

Visibility of learning progress is essential in maintaining student accountability and fostering meaningful classroom interactions. In traditional flipped classrooms, instructors often face the challenge of determining whether students have genuinely completed pre-class tasks or engaged with the material in a substantive way.

Flipped Classroom 2.0 addresses this issue by leveraging data and scaffolding techniques that make learning both measurable and visible. Learning analytics tools embedded in LMS platforms can track completion rates, quiz scores, engagement time, and areas of difficulty. This data is accessible to both teachers and students through visual dashboards, which serve as powerful motivators and intervention tools. Educators can use this information to adjust instruction, form differentiated groups and provide individualized support. Scaffolding further supports this visibility. Templates, guided note-taking structures, interactive mind maps, and learning journals help students organize their thoughts and reflect on their understanding. When integrated with AI, these scaffolds can be customized based on student performance and learning preferences. This transparency not only improves learning outcomes but also enhances communication between instructors and students.

Designing Pre-Class Work That Drives In-Class Success

A key feature of the flipped classroom model is the dependency on students completing pre-class work so they can actively participate in class discussions and activities. However, the perceived value of pre-class tasks directly influences student compliance and effort. To elevate this value, educators must clearly connect pre-class preparation with in-class success. AI can support this connection by generating customized content summaries, quizzes, and diagnostic questions based on each student’s pre-class performance. For instance, if a student demonstrates mastery of foundational concepts, they can be prompted with higher-order questions to challenge their thinking. Conversely, students who struggle can be provided with remedial resources and practice modules. In-class activities should build directly on pre-class efforts. Group discussions, simulations, debates, and problem-solving exercises should reference or utilize outputs from the pre-class assignments. This integration reinforces the message that preparation is essential for success and ensures that students recognize the practical benefits of investing time in asynchronous learning.

Gamification techniques, such as digital badges, progress milestones, and peer recognition can further motivate students to complete pre-class tasks. When these activities contribute to course grades or unlock exclusive learning opportunities, their relevance is amplified.

Establishing Routine and Engagement with Focusing Activities

The transition from asynchronous pre-class learning to synchronous in-class application can be challenging if not facilitated through structured routines. Focusing activities, particularly those conducted at the beginning of class, serve as critical bridges that help students activate prior knowledge and reorient their attention. These activities may include short reflective prompts, polls, problem-solving warmups, or collaborative brainstorming sessions. When enhanced with technology, focusing activities become even more impactful. For example, AI-driven polling platforms can pose adaptive questions tailored to the students’ recent performance.

Visualization tools can help students construct or revise concept maps based on their understanding of the pre-class content. Establishing predictable routines around these activities builds habits of participation. Over time, students internalize the rhythm of flipped learning: prepare independently, apply collaboratively, reflect continuously. Such engagement patterns increase cognitive readiness and reduce classroom management challenges.

Avoiding Pitfalls in Tech-Enhanced Flipped Classrooms

While Flipped Classroom 2.0 offers numerous benefits, its success is contingent upon thoughtful implementation. Several common pitfalls can undermine the model’s effectiveness. One of the most prevalent mistakes is treating technology as a substitute for pedagogy. Simply replacing lectures with videos or adding quizzes does not constitute a true flip. Without alignment to learning objectives and instructional goals, these tools can confuse rather than support learners.

Another challenge is content overload. Students may feel overwhelmed if asked to review long readings, videos, and quizzes without clear guidance or purpose. Microlearning and scaffolding should be used to break down materials and provide learning pathways that are manageable and coherent. Educator readiness is another often-overlooked factor. Successful adoption of AI tools and data dashboards requires faculty training and support. Instructors must be equipped not only with technical skills but also with an understanding of how to interpret analytics and adjust pedagogy accordingly.

Lastly, student feedback should be incorporated into the design and refinement of flipped classroom practices. Continuous evaluation, surveys, and informal check-ins can reveal usability issues and highlight opportunities for improvement.

Toward a Future-Ready Learning Model

Reimagining the flipped classroom requires more than adopting trendy tools, it demands a philosophical shift. By combining AI, microlearning, and learning analytics, educators can create classrooms that are not only flipped but also fluid, feedback-driven, and future-ready. These strategies support student autonomy, foster critical thinking, and build academic resilience in an unpredictable world. The next frontier of flipped learning is not about technology for its own sake, but about purposeful integration that places learners at the center.

N. P. K. Ekanayake

Ms. Neranjana Priyangani Kumari Ekanayake, a senior lecturer at the University of Kelaniya, teaches Investment and Portfolio Management, Enterprise Resource Planning, Behavioural Finance, and Advanced Management Accounting. She holds a BBA in Accounting (Special) and an MSc in MMs. Neranjana Priyangani Kumari Ekanayake, a senior lecturer at the University of Kelaniya, teaches Investment and Portfolio Management, Enterprise Resource Planning, Behavioural Finance, and Advanced Management Accounting. She holds a BBA in Accounting (Special) first-class and an MSc in Management (Specialized in Finance) and is a CIMA passed finalist. Further she has completed a Diploma in Enterprise Resource Planning in University of Kelaniya.

N.K.L. Silva

Ms. Nilanthige Kaushalya Lakmali Silva is a Lecturer at the Department of Accountancy, University of Kelaniya. She teaches Management, Economics, Human Resource Management, Marketing Management, Strategic Management and Information Management. Ms. Silva holds a B.B.Mgt. (Special) Degree in Accountancy with a First-Class Honours and an M.Sc. in Management with a Merit. Her research interests include major areas of Accounting and Finance, with a particular focus on Sri Lanka’s Capital Markets, Micro and Macro Economic Environment, Corporate Governance, and Corporate Fraud. She has published several research papers in academic journals and conference proceedings. She is a CMA Sri Lanka Passed Finalist and has completed the Diploma in Banking and Finance at the Institute of Bankers of Sri Lanka.

References

Berrett, D. (2012, February 19). How “flipping” the classroom can improve the traditional lecture. Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/how-flipping-the-classroom-can-improve-the-traditional-lecture/130857

Gerstein, J. (2012, May 15). Flipped classroom: The full picture for higher education. User Generated Education. https://usergeneratededucation.wordpress.com/2012/05/15/flipped-classroom-the-full-picture-for-higher-education/

Source link

July 2, 2025
Building a More Inclusive, Personalized Learning Environment

In today’s higher education landscape, the idea that future students will need more academic support is far from a catchphrase—it reflects a profound shift in both student needs and faculty responsibilities.

Over the past few decades, the demands on faculty have surged due to an increasing number of accommodation requests and the diverse challenges that students bring from their varied high school experiences and personal lives. Consequently, educators are now expected to deliver a more personalized and differentiated education than ever before.

As the student population becomes increasingly diverse and faces new external pressures, traditional support models are proving inadequate. We must move beyond reactive accommodations and embrace a comprehensive, tailored and proactive system of academic support. This transformation is essential for empowering both students and educators to thrive in an increasingly complex academic environment.

Expanding Accommodation Needs

One of the most noticeable changes in today’s academy is the sharp increase in the number of students requiring accommodations. As many as a quarter of my students have a registered disability, and the accommodations that I am required to provide have changed in significant ways post-pandemic.

Previously, universal design principles were seen as adequate to ensure accessibility for all. Courses were retrofitted with extended deadlines, recorded lectures and online resources, providing a common platform without isolating individual needs.

However, today’s reality demands a more nuanced and tailored approach. Accommodations now often involve significant modifications—such as flexible attendance policies, alternative assessment formats and even exemptions from standard class participation—that alter the very nature of the educational experience.

These changes necessitate careful planning and ongoing communication between faculty, students and disability services to create a learning environment where every student can succeed. It also requires more training, resources and support for faculty and students—which hasn’t taken place.

The Legacy of Uneven Educational Backgrounds

Another key challenge arises from the uneven educational experiences that many students received in high school. Over the past several decades, the disparity in academic preparation has widened significantly. As a result, students now enter college with a much broader range of skills, background knowledge and even vocabulary than in previous generations.

For some, high school provided a strong foundation, equipping them with the critical thinking skills and subject mastery necessary for the rigors of higher education. These students are well prepared to dive into complex course material and participate actively in academic discussions.

In contrast, others come from educational environments where resources were limited or where the curriculum was less challenging. These students frequently struggle to meet the high standards expected at the collegiate level, finding themselves overwhelmed by the pace and depth of instruction.

This variation in preparation places an additional burden on faculty, who must continuously adapt their teaching strategies to meet the needs of an unevenly prepared student body. In many classes, instructors face the daunting task of simultaneously engaging students who excel academically while also providing targeted support for those who are less prepared.

This often means developing multiple instructional approaches, creating supplementary materials and offering additional feedback and tutoring sessions. Faculty must work diligently to ensure that every student has the opportunity to succeed, balancing the needs of advanced learners with those who require more foundational support.

The challenge of uneven educational backgrounds underscores the critical need for a more flexible and individualized approach to teaching. Institutions must recognize this disparity and invest in innovative teaching methods, robust academic support services and ongoing faculty development. Only through such concerted efforts can educators ensure that all students, regardless of their starting point, are given the tools they need to thrive in college and beyond.

Increasing Demands on Students’ Time

Today’s students confront unprecedented pressures on their time. The demands of balancing work, extracurricular activities and family responsibilities have become an everyday reality, leaving many with significantly less time to devote to their studies. This predicament is not merely an inconvenience—it directly affects students’ academic performance and well-being.

One of the most critical challenges is that these competing demands can hinder students’ ability to engage fully with challenging course material. I expect my students to tackle lengthy, demanding texts that demand deep concentration and sustained effort. When students are pressed for time, they often resort to skimming or incomplete reading, which can lead to gaps in understanding and ultimately a shortfall in academic achievement.

This phenomenon not only compromises the quality of their learning but also contributes to a broader pattern of stress and burnout. The cumulative effects of these pressures can have long-lasting impacts on both academic performance and overall mental health.

Given these realities, it is incumbent upon faculty to recognize the multiple challenges faced by today’s students. Traditional teaching methods and rigid assessment schedules may no longer be effective or equitable. Instead, educators must explore flexible teaching methods and alternative assessment strategies that allow students to manage their time more effectively.

For example, integrating online discussion or tutoring sessions, offering modular coursework and incorporating a mix of formative assessments can provide students with the flexibility they need to engage with the material at their own pace. Such approaches not only accommodate the varied schedules of modern students but also help maintain academic integrity by ensuring that learning outcomes are met without forcing students to sacrifice quality for convenience.

Adapting teaching strategies to reflect the realities of modern student life is not just a matter of convenience—it is a necessity for fostering academic success and reducing stress. By creating more flexible, responsive learning environments, faculty can help students overcome the challenges of time management and ensure that they have the resources needed to thrive both academically and personally.

This rethinking of academic support is essential in an environment where the well-being of students must remain at the heart of the educational experience.

Cultural and Socioeconomic Diversity

Higher education’s student body is more diverse than ever, encompassing a wide range of cultural, linguistic and socioeconomic backgrounds. This diversity enriches the academic environment, infusing classrooms with a wealth of perspectives and experiences. However, it also brings significant challenges, particularly when it comes to addressing varied perspectives on identity, language and values.

In today’s classrooms, educators are tasked not only with delivering academic content but also with navigating a complex array of social sensitivities and assertive demands for cultural responsiveness.

One emerging trend is that many students have become increasingly sensitive about their peers’ feelings. They are cautious about expressing opinions that might inadvertently harm or offend, reflecting a heightened awareness of diversity and the impact of language on identity. They worry about appearing stupid or out of touch. This sensitivity, while rooted in a genuine desire for inclusivity, can lead to self-censorship in discussions and a reluctance to engage in the robust debates that have long been a hallmark of academic inquiry.

In contrast, another segment of the student population is more assertive and less deferential than in the past. These students actively demand that the curriculum reflects their interests and addresses the realities of their lives. They expect academic content to be culturally responsive—incorporating diverse voices and challenging traditional perspectives. This shift in attitude is not merely about political correctness; it is about ensuring that the educational experience is relevant and reflective of the complex, diverse, globalized world in which they live.

To meet these evolving needs, courses must be designed with a keen awareness of these differences. Faculty must create learning environments that are both safe and intellectually challenging, where discussions are inclusive yet rigorous and where students feel empowered to express themselves without fear of causing unintended harm.

This requires a deliberate shift in curriculum design and pedagogical approaches. Educators must become facilitators of cultural dialogue, employing strategies such as structured debates, reflective exercises and collaborative projects that allow students to explore multiple perspectives. In doing so, instructors not only address academic objectives but also help students develop the critical communication skills needed to advocate for themselves and engage in meaningful discourse.

Moreover, institutions must invest in professional development for faculty, ensuring that they are well equipped to navigate these complexities. Workshops on culturally responsive teaching and conflict resolution can provide valuable tools for managing sensitive discussions and balancing diverse viewpoints. By integrating these practices into everyday teaching, universities can foster a dynamic academic community that respects individual differences while promoting shared learning.

The challenges posed by a more sensitive yet assertive student body underscore the need for a broader rethinking of the educational experience. True academic support must be proactive and individualized—transcending one-size-fits-all accommodations to embrace a model that is responsive to the unique needs and cultural contexts of each student. This holistic approach not only enhances academic performance but also enriches the overall learning environment, creating a space where every student can thrive.

Rethinking Course Design

In the past, courses were often structured around a standardized curriculum intended to serve a homogeneous student body. Universal design for learning provided a foundation for making courses accessible, yet it was designed as a one-size-fits-all solution. Today, however, students enter higher education with vastly different backgrounds, learning styles and personal challenges. These differences demand a more nuanced approach. Faculty must now consider how to build courses that not only accommodate diverse needs but actively build on each student’s unique strengths.

This involves reimagining traditional assignments and assessments to allow for multiple avenues of expression—whether through essays, presentations, projects or creative multimedia formats—ensuring that mastery of the subject matter is measured in ways that align with individual capabilities.

Faculty as Facilitators of Inclusive Learning

To implement these changes effectively, educators must transition from being mere transmitters of information to becoming facilitators of a dynamic, inclusive learning environment. This shift requires faculty to develop new skills and adopt innovative teaching strategies that go beyond conventional lectures.

For instance, incorporating collaborative learning methods, peer mentoring and structured feedback sessions can help create a classroom culture where students feel empowered to engage with the material and with one another. Such methods not only support individual learning journeys but also foster a sense of community and shared responsibility for academic success.

Beyond Reactive Disability Accommodations

One of the most glaring weaknesses in current disability policies at many colleges, including mine, is their failure to equip students with the practical skills and resources necessary for long-term academic success.

While accommodations—such as extended deadlines, modified attendance requirements or alternative assessment methods—are undoubtedly important, they often function as a one-way street. Disability centers, overwhelmed by demand and constrained by limited resources, focus primarily on implementing reactive measures rather than providing proactive, skill-building support.

This approach leaves many students without the essential tools they need to navigate the rigors of higher education independently. For instance, while accommodations may allow a student to attend class remotely or receive extra time on exams, they rarely come with training in self-advocacy. Students who struggle to articulate their needs or negotiate further modifications remain at a disadvantage, potentially compromising their academic performance.

Similarly, critical skills such as effective study techniques, note taking and time management are often overlooked. Without guidance in these areas, students may continue to face obstacles that hinder their ability to fully engage with course material and meet academic expectations.

The result is a support system that, while well intentioned, treats accommodations as the end point rather than the beginning of a broader educational strategy. True academic support should empower students to develop self-reliance and resilience, ensuring that they are not merely recipients of modified policies but active participants in their own learning journeys.

This requires a fundamental shift from a model that simply reacts to student needs toward one that proactively builds the skills necessary for lifelong success.

In order to address this critical shortfall, institutions must invest in comprehensive support programs that extend beyond traditional accommodations. Workshops on self-advocacy, time management and effective study habits should be integrated into the academic framework.

Moreover, disability centers need to establish stronger partnerships with academic departments to create a seamless support network that bridges the gap between accommodations and skill development. Only by adopting a holistic approach can colleges ensure that students with disabilities are not just surviving within the academic system, but truly thriving.

The Need for Ongoing Professional Development

One of the biggest challenges is that most faculty members were neither expected to learn nor trained in these inclusive teaching practices. The rapidly evolving educational landscape demands continuous professional development. Institutions must invest in workshops, seminars and training programs that equip faculty with the latest strategies in inclusive pedagogy and collaborative teaching.

By learning to use new digital tools and adapting to flexible teaching methods, educators can better address the wide range of learner needs. Ongoing training is crucial for fostering an environment where faculty feel supported and empowered to experiment with innovative teaching practices without compromising academic rigor.

Faculty members face mounting pressure to adapt to new teaching methodologies, technological advancements and evolving accommodation practices. While universities routinely mandate training on issues like conflicts of interest, Title VI and IX compliance and technology risks, support in the core areas of pedagogy and assessment remains minimal. To address this gap, institutions must invest in comprehensive, ongoing in-service training for faculty. This training should cover inclusive teaching practices, innovative assessment strategies and the effective integration of digital tools into the classroom.

Moreover, faculty should have continuous access to expert guidance and peer support. Dedicated centers for teaching excellence or mentoring programs need to offer real-time assistance, enabling instructors to navigate challenges as they arise. By fostering a culture of professional development and collaboration, universities can empower educators to experiment with new approaches and refine their methods over time—ensuring that teaching remains both rigorous and responsive to the diverse needs of modern students.

A Call for a Comprehensive Reimagining

The current model of academic support—with its patchwork of reactive accommodations and sporadic training sessions—is no longer sufficient to address the evolving challenges facing both faculty and students. The demands of modern higher education have shifted dramatically, requiring more than temporary fixes; they demand a radical reimagining of the educational experience that is individualized, personalized and differentiated to meet the unique needs of every member of the academic community.

At the heart of this transformation lies a fundamental shift in institutional priorities. Universities must reallocate resources toward continuous professional development for educators and establish robust support systems for students. This means creating structured, ongoing training programs that equip faculty with the latest inclusive teaching strategies and digital tools, enabling them to adapt their methods to the diverse learning styles and backgrounds of today’s students.

Such an investment not only enhances academic performance but also cultivates the critical skills and self-advocacy that are essential for lifelong success.

Moreover, we must move beyond the reactive, one-size-fits-all accommodations that have characterized the past. Instead, academic support should be integrated into every aspect of teaching and learning, forming the backbone of a dynamic and responsive educational ecosystem.

For example, early intervention strategies, such as formative assessments and iterative feedback, ensure that learning gaps are addressed before they widen and personalized learning plans can be developed to build on each student’s unique strengths.

The benefits of such a comprehensive approach are twofold. First, it supports academic success by creating an inclusive learning environment that is adaptable to the individual needs of each student. Second, it alleviates the burden on faculty, who currently face the daunting task of juggling research, administrative duties and the increasing diversity of student needs.

By establishing a framework of proactive support, institutions can empower both educators and learners to thrive in a challenging, rapidly shifting academic landscape.

As higher education continues to evolve, so too must our strategies for academic support. The traditional model of reactive accommodations and ad hoc training is no longer adequate in the face of growing student diversity, uneven preparation and heightened external pressures on students’ time.

Only by embracing a comprehensive, proactive and flexible approach can we ensure that every student—and every educator—is equipped to navigate the complexities of modern academic life.

This reimagined support system will not only boost academic performance but also enrich the overall educational experience, fostering a vibrant, inclusive and resilient community that is prepared to meet the challenges of the future.

In an era of tightening institutional finances and overburdened faculty, the shift toward a more individualized approach to education may seem like an overwhelming challenge. However, this shift is not optional—it is both a legal requirement and an essential strategy for improving student retention, graduation rates and postgraduation outcomes.

As student populations become increasingly diverse and face complex external pressures, campuses must prioritize academic and faculty support to create a learning environment where every student can thrive.

The Legal Mandate for Individualized Support

Legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act mandate that institutions provide equal access to education for all students. These legal frameworks require not only reactive accommodations but also proactive, individualized support that anticipates and addresses the diverse needs of the student body.

In practice, this means that colleges and universities must design courses, develop teaching methods and implement support systems that are flexible and tailored to individual learning styles. Ignoring this mandate not only risks legal repercussions but also undermines the institution’s commitment to inclusivity and equal opportunity.

Enhancing Academic Success and Student Outcomes

In addition, the current challenges faced by students—ranging from increased accommodation needs and uneven educational backgrounds to intense time pressures and cultural diversity—demand more than a one-size-fits-all solution.

When students receive personalized academic support, retention and graduation rates improve significantly. Tailored support enables students to engage deeply with course material, develop critical skills and ultimately achieve better postgraduation outcomes. By creating a comprehensive support system, institutions can help bridge the gap between diverse student needs and the rigorous demands of higher education, ensuring that every student has the opportunity to succeed.

The Burden on Faculty and the Need to Rethink Institutional Priorities

For faculty, the shift to an individualized educational model requires a significant rethinking of traditional teaching methods.

Instructors must balance the needs of advanced learners with those requiring additional support, all while managing other academic responsibilities such as research and grant writing. This challenge is compounded by the lack of sufficient training and resources currently available to help educators implement inclusive teaching practices. Institutions must respond by reallocating resources and prioritizing continuous professional development.

Only by providing faculty with the necessary tools and support can universities foster a dynamic, responsive learning environment that benefits both teachers and students.

The move toward a more individualized, personalized and differentiated approach to education is no longer a luxury—it is a legal and institutional imperative. As student needs evolve in a rapidly changing world, institutions must reframe academic support as a core element of the educational experience.

By prioritizing continuous faculty training, investing in robust support systems and rethinking course design, colleges and universities can enhance academic performance, improve student retention and graduation rates and ensure better outcomes after graduation.

There is no way around this transformation: If we are to equip every student and educator to thrive in an increasingly complex academic environment, the shift to a comprehensive, proactive and flexible support model must become the cornerstone of higher education.

Steven Mintz is professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin and recipient of the AAC&U’s 2025 President’s Award for Outstanding Contributions to Liberal Education.

Source link

June 25, 2025
5 online resources to beat the summer slide

Key points:

As the final school bells ring and students head into summer vacation, educators and parents alike are turning their attention to the phenomenon known as the summer slide–the learning loss that can occur when children take a long break from structured academic activity.

NWEA research notes that students can lose up to two months of math skills over the summer, and reading abilities can also decline, particularly for students from underserved communities.

But the summer slide isn’t inevitable. With the growing availability of engaging, high-quality online learning tools, students have more opportunities than ever to keep their skills sharp. These tools offer interactive lessons, personalized learning paths, and fun activities that reinforce what students learned during the school year–without making summer feel like school.

Here are five standout online resources designed to help K-12 students stay on track over the summer months:

1. Khan Academy: Khan Academy’s free online platform offers comprehensive lessons in math, science, history, and more. Its summer learning programs provide structured plans for students in grades K-12, including daily activities tailored by grade level. Each lesson includes short instructional videos, interactive quizzes, and mastery challenges. For students who want to get ahead or reinforce tricky concepts from the previous school year, Khan Academy is an ideal, self-paced resource.

Khan Kids, a separate app for younger learners (ages 2-8), combines educational videos, stories, and games that focus on early literacy, math, and social-emotional development.

2. PBS LearningMedia: PBS LearningMedia curates thousands of free videos, lesson plans, and interactive activities aligned to state and national standards. The content is engaging and age-appropriate, drawing from trusted PBS programs like Wild Kratts, NOVA, and Peg + Cat. During the summer, PBS typically offers special themed weeks–like “Summer of Reading” or “Science Week”–featuring playlists and activity bundles to help children stay curious and engaged.

For younger children, PBS Kids also provides games and shows that reinforce foundational skills in reading, math, and critical thinking.

3. ReadWorks: Reading skills are among the most vulnerable to decline during the summer, especially for students who do not have regular access to books or structured reading activities. ReadWorks is a nonprofit platform offering free, research-based reading comprehension materials for grades K-12. Teachers and parents can assign grade-level texts, paired with vocabulary lessons and comprehension questions. The platform also features an Article-A-Day challenge that encourages students to build background knowledge and reading stamina with just 10 minutes a day. ReadWorks is especially helpful for English Language Learners, offering audio versions and question supports to aid comprehension.

4. Prodigy: For students who struggle to stay motivated during math practice, Prodigy turns learning into a role-playing adventure game. Students solve math problems to earn rewards and level up characters, making the experience both educational and fun. Aligned with state standards and suitable for grades 1-8, Prodigy adapts to each learner’s skill level, offering targeted practice without the pressure of grades or tests. Parents can access dashboards to track progress and set goals over the summer. Prodigy also offers a version for English Language Arts, expanding the platform’s reach beyond numbers.

5. Smithsonian Learning Lab: For families looking to incorporate cross-curricular learning, the Smithsonian Learning Lab provides a treasure trove of multimedia collections that blend history, science, art, and culture. Students can explore virtual exhibits, complete inquiry-based lessons, and create their own digital portfolios. The platform is well-suited for middle and high school students, especially those interested in project-based learning and critical thinking. Whether studying the Civil Rights Movement or learning about ecosystems, students can explore real artifacts, images, and primary sources from the Smithsonian’s vast collection.

Keeping minds active and curious

Experts emphasize that summer learning doesn’t need to mirror the structure of the traditional classroom–keeping students intellectually engaged as they explore their personal interests reinforces academic skills in an low-stress environment.

Families can also incorporate daily routines that promote learning–reading together before bed, practicing math while cooking, or exploring nature to spark scientific curiosity.

As the digital learning landscape expands, there are more tools than ever to support students year-round. With just 20-30 minutes of meaningful academic engagement each day, students can maintain their momentum and return to the classroom in the fall ready to learn.

Laura Ascione is the Editorial Director at eSchool Media. She is a graduate of the University of Maryland’s prestigious Philip Merrill College of Journalism.

Latest posts by Laura Ascione (see all)

Source link

June 20, 2025
For Learning, Focus on the Essence and the Experiences

When I was teaching, I always thought of this time on the calendar as the “postexhale” period.

The end of the semester is a headlong sprint to the finish, which, unlike a race where you get to break the tape and coast to a stop, is more like hitting a wall and collapsing on the spot. At least that’s how it always felt to me, at least until I started ending the semester at week 13 (of 15) and using the last two weeks for wind-down and reflection on what we’d all learned.

In the immediate aftermath of the semester, particularly spring semester, I couldn’t be bothered with any thinking or planning for the next semester. The next scheduled activity, usually something I started around the first week of August, would be the specific planning for the forthcoming semester, but there is also this postexhale period where no work needs to be done, conditions that are fertile for thinking and dreaming before the planning.

The postexhale period is the spot where you’re likely to gestate your best ideas, because at least for the next month or so, you don’t have to do anything with them.

I want to plant a seed of thought for anyone who is confronting having to or wanting to make changes to their course in order to accommodate the reality of generative AI technology being in the world.

Here it is: Next semester, do less that means more.

As I’ve been traveling around talking to people about how we can (and should) adjust how we think about teaching writing, one of the persistent worries is that introducing some AI-related content or experiences around ethics or safe use or whatever requires layering something new on what’s already happening. For many instructors, it’s an uninvited and therefore unwelcome burden.

I get it. We can never cover everything to begin with. Here’s one more thing to cover.

But what if we can use this as an opportunity to rethink what learning looks like? As we move through this period where we can reflect and reconsider, we can think about how to boil the experiences in the classroom down to an essence that can be reflected in learning experiences.

Consider the learning that has proved most enduring from the full trajectory of your education and I think you’ll find that it clusters around essential, deep lessons. What has mattered are the moments where we have learned how to learn and think and act inside a particular domain. It is this learning that allows us to go forth and continue to learn eagerly, ceaselessly.

Even as a decidedly and well-documented overall mediocre student, there are numerous learning experiences (in and out of class) that I can point to as inflection points that made a significant difference in the overall trajectory of my life because they provided something essential to my journey forward.

One moment I invoke frequently is when my third-grade teacher asked us to write instructions for making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and then had us try to make the sandwiches following the instructions to the letter. Because I forgot to say that you should use a knife to spread the peanut butter on the bread, I ended up sticking my hand in the jar of peanut butter to fulfill my own directive. I have a picture memorializing the occasion.

That moment introduced me to the rhetorical situation and the fact that writing has a purpose and an audience—and careless writing has consequences. I’m sure I learned all kinds of other things in third grade and maybe some of them were important, but only one moment was indelible, and that’s all I needed.

In high school, excited about the subject matter for my junior-year English term paper (the New Journalism of Tom Wolfe), while being not enthused about the parameters of what I was supposed to do with that subject matter, I decided to write my term paper in the style of Tom Wolfe, earning a not-so-great grade from my teacher, but a meaningful lesson in how to keep myself interested with a task. (I wrote in more detail about this previously.)

Some reflection unearths other moments. A college nonfiction writing class had us pretending we were writing for specific publications and producing columns that could fit under the editorial banner. I chose Esquire, imagining myself a sophisticated male, I guess. We were required to understand how to write for very specific audiences with very specific aims, excellent practice for all kinds of different futures. At the end of the semester, we had a competition where we voted for the “best” columns across a number of different categories. I was a finalist in several but won zero, losing out to one specific classmate’s work every time.

In a conference with the instructor, I must’ve expressed some kind of disappointment, and he said something that stuck with me: “X’s stuff sounds like themselves writing for a publication. You sound like someone doing an imitation of someone writing for a publication.” I walked away believing that authenticity was ultimately the differentiator in connecting with readers.

I could name more moments. My first semester of grad school, my professor, Robert Olen Butler, had us do an in-class writing exercise based in sense memory (which can be found in his book From Where You Dream), and I experienced what it was like to tap into my artistic subconscious for an extended, focused period. Bob was not the most engaged of mentors, but I’m not sure I’d still be writing if I hadn’t had that experience.

When I started teaching, the indelible lessons delivered by my students came even more often, possibly because I recognized my responsibility over the work in ways I hadn’t achieved as a student.

All these moments are rooted in very specific and specifically designed experiences. These kinds of experiences are not threatened by the existence of large language models, because it was clear to me that the point of the exercise is to have the experience.

Of course, generative AI tools could be present as part of an important learning experience, but when generative AI is used by students as a substitute for the experience, the learning is obviously deformed. Injecting LLMs into our courses simply because it seems like something we have to be doing is not a great recipe for learning.

There are some, perhaps many, places where it is not and should not be welcome because it is not conducive to the experience of learning we’re trying to instantiate.

As I think about these experiences, what I learned was really contained in a crystallizing moment made possible by the earlier experience of that class, or even before that class. This is not necessarily predicated on the amount of material covered or the volume of what students are exposed to.

As you enjoy this exhale period, maybe spend some time thinking how little you could do in your course and still have students walk away with something that will be meaningful years down the road. That may be the core of your course when you come back and start thinking about it for real in a month.

Source link

June 20, 2025
Machine learning technology is transforming how institutions make sense of student feedback

Institutions spend a lot of time surveying students for their feedback on their learning experience, but once you have crunched the numbers the hard bit is working out the “why.”

The qualitative information institutions collect is a goldmine of insight about the sentiments and specific experiences that are driving the headline feedback numbers. When students are especially positive, it helps to know why, to spread that good practice and apply it in different learning contexts. When students score some aspect of their experience negatively, it’s critical to know the exact nature of the perceived gap, omission or injustice so that it can be fixed.

Any conscientious module leader will run their eye down the student comments in a module feedback survey – but once you start looking across modules to programme or cohort level, or to large-scale surveys like NSS, PRES or PTES, the scale of the qualitative data becomes overwhelming for the naked eye. Even the most conscientious reader will find that bias sets in, as comments that are interesting or unexpected tend to be foregrounded as having greater explanatory power over those that seem run of the mill.

Traditional coding methods for qualitative data require someone – or ideally more than one person – to manually break down comments into clauses or statements that can be coded for theme and sentiment. It’s robust, but incredibly laborious. For student survey work, where the goal might be to respond to feedback and make improvements at pace, institutions are open that this kind of robust analysis is rarely, if ever, the standard practice. Especially as resources become more constrained, devoting hours to this kind of detailed methodological work is rarely a priority.

Let me blow your mind

That is where machine learning technology can genuinely change the game. Student Voice AI was founded by Stuart Grey, an academic at the University of Strathclyde (now working at the University of Glasgow), initially to help analyse student comments for large engineering courses. Working with Advance HE he was able to train the machine learning model on national PTES and PRES datasets. Now, further training the algorithm on NSS data, Student Voice AI offers literally same-day analysis of student comments for NSS results for subscribing institutions.

Put the words “AI” and “student feedback” in the same sentence and some people’s hackles will immediately rise. So Stuart spends quite a lot of time explaining how the analysis works. The word he uses to describe the version of machine learning Student Voice AI deploys is “supervised learning” – humans manually label categories in datasets and “teach” the machine about sentiment and topic. The larger the available dataset the more examples the machine is exposed to and the more sophisticated it becomes. Through this process Student Voice AI has landed on a discreet number of comment themes and categories for taught students and the same for postgraduate research students that the majority of student comments consistently fall into – trained on and distinctive to UK higher education student data. Stuart adds that the categories can and do evolve:

“The categories are based on what students are saying, not what we think they might be talking about – or what we’d like them to be talking about. There could be more categories if we wanted them, but it’s about what’s digestible for a normal person.”

In practice that means that institutions can see a quantitative representation of their student comments, sorted by category and sentiment. You can look at student views of feedback, for example, and see the balance of positive, neutral and negative sentiment, overall, segment it into departments or subject areas, or years of study, then click through to see the relevant comments to see what’s driving that feedback. That’s significantly different from, say, dumping your student comments into a third party generative AI platform (sharing confidential data with a third party while you’re at it) and asking it to summarise. There’s value in the time and effort saved, but also in the removal of individual personal bias, and the potential for aggregation and segmentation for different stakeholders in the system. And it also becomes possible to compare student qualitative feedback across institutions.

Now, Student Voice AI is partnering with student insight platform evasys to bring machine learning technology to qualitative data collected via the evasys platform. And evasys and Student Voice AI have been commissioned by Advance HE to code and analyse open comments from the 2025 PRES and PTES surveys – creating opportunities to drill down into a national dataset that can be segmented by subject discipline and theme as well as by institution.

Bruce Johnson, managing director at evasys is enthused about the potential for the technology to drive culture change both in how student feedback is used to inform insight and action across institutions:

“When you’re thinking about how to create actionable insight from survey data the key question is, to whom? Is it to a module leader? Is it to a programme director of a collection of modules? Is it to a head of department or a pro vice chancellor or the planning or quality teams? All of these are completely different stakeholders who need different ways of looking at the data. And it’s also about how the data is presented – most of my customers want, not only quality of insight, but the ability to harvest that in a visually engaging way.”

“Coming from higher education it seems obvious to me that different stakeholders have very different uses for student feedback data,” says Stuart Grey. “Those teaching at the coalface are interested in student engagement; at the strategic level the interest is in strategic level interest in trends and sentiment analysis and there are also various stakeholder groups in professional services who never get to see this stuff normally, but we can generate the reports that show them what students are saying about their area. Frequently the data tells them something they knew anyway but it gives them the ammunition to be able to make change.”

The results are in

Duncan Berryman, student surveys officer at Queens University Belfast, sums up the value of AI analysis for his small team: “It makes our life a lot easier, and the schools get the data and trends quicker.” Previously schools had been supplied with Excel spreadsheets – and his team were spending a lot of time explaining and working through with colleagues how to make sense of the data on those spreadsheets. Being able to see a straightforward visualisation of student sentiment on the various themes means that, as Duncan observes rather wryly, “if change isn’t happening it’s not just because people don’t know what student surveys are saying.”

Parama Chaudhury, professor of economics and pro vice provost education (student academic experience) at University College London explains where qualitative data analysis sits in the wider ecosystem for quality enhancement of teaching and learning. In her view, for enhancement purposes, comparing your quantitative student feedback scores to those of another department is not particularly useful – essentially it’s comparing apples with oranges. Yet the apparent ease of comparability of quantitative data, compared with the sense of overwhelm at the volume and complexity of student comments, can mean that people spend time trying to explain the numerical differences, rather than mining the qualitative data for more robust and actionable explanations that can give context to your own scores.

It’s not that people weren’t working hard on enhancement, in other words, but they didn’t always have the best possible information to guide that work. “When I came into this role quite a lot of people were saying ‘we don’t understand why the qualitative data is telling us this, we’ve done all these things,’” says Parama. “I’ve been in the sector a long time and have received my share of summaries of module evaluations and have always questioned those summaries because it’s just someone’s ‘read.’ Having that really objective view, from a well-trained algorithm makes a difference.”

UCL has tested two-page summaries of student comments to specific departments this academic year, and plans to roll out a version for every department this summer. The data is not assessed in a vacuum; it forms part of the wider institutional quality assurance and enhancement processes which includes data on a range of different perspectives on areas for development. Encouragingly, so far the data from students is consistent with what has emerged from internal reviews, giving the departments that have had the opportunity to engage with it greater confidence in their processes and action plans.

None of this stops anyone from going and looking at specific student comments, sense-checking the algorithm’s analysis and/or triangulating against other data. At the University of Edinburgh, head of academic planning Marianne Brown says that the value of the AI analysis is in the speed of turnaround – the institutionl carries out a manual reviewing process to be sure that any unexpected comments are picked up. But being able to share the headline insight at pace (in this case via a PowerBI interface) means that leaders receive the feedback while the information is still fresh, and the lead time to effect change is longer than if time had been lost to manual coding.

The University of Edinburgh is known for its cutting edge AI research, and boasts the Edinburgh (access to) Language Models (ELM) a platform that gives staff and students access to generative AI tools without sharing data with third parties, keeping all user data onsite and secured. Marianne is clear that even a closed system like ELM is not appropriate for unfettered student comment analysis. Generative AI platforms offer the illusion of a thematic analysis but it is far from robust because generative AI operates through sophisticated guesswork rather than analysis of the implications of actual data. “Being able to put responses from NSS or our internal student survey into ELM to give summaries was great, until you started to interrogate those summaries. Robust validation of any output is still required,” says Marianne. Similarly Duncan Berryman observes: “If you asked a gen-AI tool to show you the comments related to the themes it had picked out, it would not refer back to actual comments. Or it would have pulled this supposed common theme from just one comment.”

The holy grail of student survey practice is creating a virtuous circle: student engagement in feedback creates actionable data, which leads to education enhancement, and students gain confidence that the process is authentic and are further motivated to share their feedback. In that quest, AI, deployed appropriately, can be an institutional ally and resource-multiplier, giving fast and robust access to aggregated student views and opinions. “The end result should be to make teaching and learning better,” says Stuart Grey. “And hopefully what we’re doing is saving time on the manual boring part, and freeing up time to make real change.”

Source link

June 19, 2025
Flexible Learning and Policy Challenges
What impact is flexible learning having on learners from K-12 through to professional development?

New Zealand has remarkably high levels of digital access across the population. Why aren’t we out performing other countries in educational measurements?

This piece serves to introduce a series of six challenges faced by policy makers around flexible learning.

These six challenges are:
1. Unequal Access to Technology and Connectivity
2. Socioeconomic Disparities
3. Digital Literacy and Skills Gaps
4. Quality Assurance and Consistent Experience
5. Teacher Preparedness and Support
6. Policy and Funding Models
In this first piece I want to establish what I mean by ‘flexible learning’.

Like many I struggle to have a single, concise, and consistent “definition” of flexible learning. I would say that flexible learning is a model of delivery that offers learners agency and control over various aspects of their learning experience. Flexible learning is a spectrum. Formal learning courses exist on a continuum between “rigid” and “flexible” delivery. The more control and choice given to the learner, the more flexible the learning experience.

Flexible learning aims to “empower the student to choose what learning should be studied face-to-face and that which should be studied online, and how to go about engaging with that learning” (2022). This Means empowering the learner to make choices regarding:
- When: synchronous or asynchronous learning, pace-mandated or self-paced progression.
- Where: Learning in different locations (home, campus, workplace, etc.).
- How: Different modes of engagement (online, in-person, blended, hybrid, hyflex).
- What: Some degree of choice over content or learning pathways, though this is often more associated with “open learning.” Indeed in a world where students are overwhelmed with choices, there are strong arguments that having a prescriptive programme serves students well.
In my article “Definitions of the Terms Open, Distance, and Flexible in the Context of Formal and Non-Formal Learning,” (2023) I argued that flexible learning is a model of delivery, rather than a fundamental mode of learning. I posit that there are only two core modes of learning: in-person (or face-to-face) and distance learning. Flexible learning then emerges from various combinations and approaches to curriculum design that empower learners to choose amongst these two modes

As education has a habit of inventing new terms for marginally different practices it might be worth just pointing out the relationship I think exists between flexible learning and forms of Blended, Hybrid, and HyFlex learning. I perceive blended, hybrid, and HyFlex learning as specific models of delivery that fall under the umbrella of flexible learning. They all aim to give agency to the learner regarding how they engage with the material, combining elements of in-person and distance learning.

I believe that designing for flexible learning means considering the learner’s context and perspective, and creating learning experiences that are relevant, meaningful, motivating, realistic, and feasible within an agreed timeframe. This also involves careful consideration of learning outcomes and assessment in diverse delivery contexts. This means course creators need clarity about learning design principles in relation to flexible approaches, such as working with Notional Study Hours (2020a) and the importance of Learning Outcomes (2020b).

Based on my broad definition thatFlexible Learning refers to educational approaches and models of delivery that provide learners with a significant degree of choice and control over the time, place, pace, and mode of their learning, leveraging combinations of in-person and distance learning to enhance accessibility and cater to diverse learner needs, how do we face those six policy challenges?

Watch this space…

Atkinson, S. P. (2020a, April 14). Working with Notional Study Hours (NSH) or “How much is enough?” Simon Paul Atkinson. https://sijen.com/2020/04/14/working-with-notional-study-hours-nsh-or-how-much-is-enough/

Atkinson, S. P. (2020b, April 4). Designing Courses: Importance of Learning Outcomes. Simon Paul Atkinson. https://sijen.com/2020/04/04/designing-courses-importance-of-learning-outcomes/

Atkinson, S. P. (2022a, July 15). How do you define hybrid, or hyflex, learning?. Simon Paul Atkinson. Retrieved from https://sijen.com/2022/07/15/how-do-you-define-hybrid-or-hyflex-learning/

Atkinson, S. P. (2023). Definitions of the Terms Open, Distance, and Flexible in the Context of Formal and Non-Formal Learning. Journal of Open, Flexible, and Distance Learning, 26(2).3 Retrieved from https://jofdl.nz/index.php/JOFDL/article/view/521

Like this:

Like Loading…
Source link
June 18, 2025
The identity crisis of teaching and learning innovation

Universities love to talk about innovation. Pedagogical innovation is framed as a necessity in an era of rapid change, yet those expected to enact it – academics – are caught in an identity crisis.

In our research on post-pandemic pedagogical innovation, we found that the decision to engage with or resist innovation is not just about workload, resources, or institutional strategy. It’s about identity – who academics see themselves as, how they are valued within their institutions, and what risks they perceive in stepping beyond the status quo.

Academics are asked to be both risk-taking pedagogical entrepreneurs and compliant employees within increasingly bureaucratic, metric-driven institutions. This paradox creates what we call the moral wiggle room of innovation – a space where educators justify disengagement, not necessarily because they oppose change, but because their institutional environment does not meaningfully reward it.

The paradox of pedagogical innovation

During the pandemic, universities celebrated those who embraced new digital tools, hybrid learning, and flexible teaching formats. “Necessity breeds innovation” became the dominant narrative. Yet, as the crisis has subsided, many of these same institutions have reverted to rigid processes, managerial oversight, and bureaucratic hurdles, making innovation feel like an uphill battle.

On paper, universities support innovation. Education strategies abound with commitments to “transformative learning experiences” and “sector-leading digital education.” However, in practice, academics face competing pressures – expectations to drive innovation while being weighed down by institutional inertia.

The challenge is not just about introducing innovation but sustaining it in ways that foster long-term change. While institutions may advocate for pedagogical innovation, the reality for many educators is a system that does not provide the necessary time, support, or recognition to make such innovation a viable, sustained effort.

The result? Many feel disillusioned. As one academic in our research put it:

I definitely think there’s a drive to be more innovative, but it feels like a marketized approach. It’s not tangible – I can’t say, ‘Oh, they’re really supporting me to be more innovative.’ There’s no clear pathway, no structured process.
Academic at a post-92 university

For some, engaging in pedagogical innovation is a source of professional fulfilment. For others, it is a career gamble. Whether academics choose to innovate or resist depends largely on how their identity aligns with institutional structures, career incentives, and personal values.

Three identity tensions shaping pedagogical innovation

Regulated versus self-directed identity Institutions shape identity through expectations: teaching excellence frameworks, fellowship accreditations, and workload models dictate what “counts” in an academic career. Yet, many educators see their professional identity as self-driven – rooted in disciplinary expertise and a commitment to students. When institutional definitions of innovation clash with personal motivations, resistance emerges.

As one participant put it:

When you’re (personally) at the forefront of classroom innovation…you’re constantly looking outwards for ideas. Within the institution, there isn’t really anyone I can go to and say, ‘What are you doing differently?’ It’s more about stumbling upon people rather than having a proactive approach to being innovative. I think there’s a drive for PI, but it feels like a marketised approach.
Academic at a post-92 university

For some, innovation is an extension of their identity as educators; for others, it is a compliance exercise – an expectation imposed from above rather than a meaningful pursuit.

This tension is explored in Wonkhe’s discussion of institutional silos, which highlights how universities often create structures that inadvertently restrict collaboration and cross-disciplinary innovation, making it harder for educators to engage with meaningful change.

Risk versus reward in academic careers Engaging in pedagogical innovation takes time and effort. For those on teaching and scholarship contracts, it is often an expectation. For research and scholarship colleagues, it is rarely a career priority.

Despite strategic commitments to pedagogical innovation, career incentives in many institutions still favour traditional research outputs over pedagogical experimentation. The opportunity cost is real – why invest in something that holds little weight in promotions or workload models?

As one academic reflected:

I prioritise what has immediate impact. Another teaching award isn’t a priority. Another publication directly benefits my CV.

Senior leader at a Russell Group university

Until pedagogical I is properly recognised in career progression, it will remain a secondary priority for many. As explored on Wonkhe here, the question is not just whether innovation happens but whether institutions create environments that allow it to spread. Without clear incentives, pedagogical innovation remains the domain of the few rather than an embedded part of academic practice.

Autonomy versus bureaucracy Academics value autonomy. It is one of the biggest predictors of job satisfaction in higher education. Yet pedagogical innovation is often entangled in institutional bureaucracy (perceived or real) through slow approval processes, administrative hurdles, and performance monitoring.

The pandemic showed that universities can be agile. But many educators now feel that flexibility has been replaced by managerialism, stifling creativity.

I’ve had people in my office almost crying at the amount of paperwork just to get an innovation through. People get the message: don’t bother.

Senior leader at a Russell Group university

To counteract this, as one educator put it:

It’s better to ask forgiveness afterwards than ask permission beforehand.

Senior leader at a Russell Group university

This kind of strategic rule-bending highlights the frustration many educators feel – a desire to innovate constrained by institutional red tape.

Mark Andrews, in a Wonkhe article here, argues that institutions need to focus on making education work rather than simply implementing digital tools for their own sake. The same logic applies to pedagogical innovation – if the focus is solely on regulation, innovation will always struggle to take root.

Beyond the rhetoric: what needs to change

If universities want sustained innovation, they must address these identity tensions. Pedagogical innovation needs to be rewarded in promotions, supported through streamlined processes, and recognised as legitimate academic work – not an optional extra.

This issue of curriculum transformation was explored on Wonkhe here, raising the critical question of how universities can move beyond rhetoric and make change a reality.

The post-pandemic university is at a crossroads. Will pedagogical innovation be institutionalised in meaningful ways, or will it remain a talking point rather than a transformation? Academics are already navigating an identity crisis – caught between structural constraints, career incentives, and their own motivations. Universities must decide whether to ease that tension or allow it to widen.

Source link

June 12, 2025