Tag: News

  • What Higher Ed Learned From 12 Months of Trump 2.0

    What Higher Ed Learned From 12 Months of Trump 2.0

    College leaders return to campus this term appearing steady and resolved. After a year of tumult, they remain vigilant about more attacks from Washington but are ready to refocus on the other crises knocking at their doors—million-dollar deficits, declining enrollments and AI’s disruption. And now that higher ed has gone through nearly 12 months of Trump 2.0, it’s learned a few things.

    First, we now know that nothing is sacred. Funding for cancer research? Canceled. Support for colleges serving low-income students? Chopped. Due process? Passed over. The sector was caught off guard by the administration’s creativity in its attacks last year, and colleges should continue to expect the unexpected. But in an interview before Christmas, Education Secretary Linda McMahon told Breitbart that her department would “shift a little bit away from higher education” in 2026 and focus more on K–12 reform.

    The year didn’t just teach colleges what to expect—it also showed them how to respond. And we’ve seen that fighting back works. Harvard is holding firm against the administration’s pressure to strike a deal and has not publicly conceded anything (though rumors abound an agreement is nigh). George Mason University president Gregory Washington came out swinging when the Department of Education accused him of implementing “unlawful DEI policies” on his campus. That’s a sharp contrast to University of Virginia president Jim Ryan, who resigned in June after the Department of Justice’s successful bid to topple him. So far, Washington remains in his post, with unanimous support from his board, campus community and state lawmakers. And in a collective act of defiance, the nine institutions initially invited to sign the White House’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” declined without repercussion.

    Leaders have also woken up to the fact that visibility matters. At the Council for Independent Colleges’ Presidents Institute in Orlando, Fla., this week, presidents seemed ready to play offense. They spoke with a newfound political savviness about recruiting board members and alumni to do advocacy work, hiring in-house government relations professionals and spending more time on the Hill. “We all let our guard down on government relations in the lead-up to 2025,” one president said. “Being able to brand yourself in D.C. is now a necessity, not a luxury.”

    At times the administration has appeared sloppy, sending “unauthorized” letters, issuing threats and never following up, or publishing typo-ridden mandates. But beyond the culture-war accusations that colleges are factories of woke indoctrination, it’s clear the government is serious about wanting to effect change in higher ed. Cost transparency, graduate outcomes and greater emphasis on workforce training are all sound policy issues lawmakers are pursuing through legislation.

    Whether or not McMahon follows through on her intention to shift focus away from higher ed, the fallout from 2025 persists. We’ll be looking to see how college budgets weather new loan caps for graduate courses and the loss of international students impacted by stricter visa requirements—or turned off by the country’s hostile environment.

    In December, Education under secretary Nicholas Kent vowed to “fix” accreditation. The administration’s unofficial playbook, Project 2025, suggests that could mean more accreditors, including states authorizing their own accrediting agencies, or ending mandatory accreditation to access federal financial aid. Congress will continue to apply pressure on the sector to lower the cost of college and improve transparency regarding fees and tuition. Meanwhile, negotiated rule making has begun on the accountability measures mandated by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. And will colleges take responsibility for their role in the loss of public trust in their institutions?

    We shouldn’t normalize the lasting harm the Trump administration has done to institutional independence, minoritized students and scientific research in just 12 months. And there is a risk that more is coming. But after surviving a dizzying year of attacks, the sector will face its challenges a little wiser and more informed.

    Sara Custer is editor in chief at Inside Higher Ed.

    Source link

  • College Dining Halls Embrace Plant-Forward Menus

    College Dining Halls Embrace Plant-Forward Menus

    Not long ago, chalky tofu and limp lettuce constituted some of the only vegetarian meal options available at campus dining halls. But that’s changed in recent years as more colleges and universities have set broader sustainability goals, which often include pledges to offer more plant-based foods.

    Nowadays, students have access to more adventurous plant-based dishes, such as cauliflower ceviche, japchae and sesame tempeh, to name just a few.

    Over the past decade, dozens of colleges and universities have vowed to provide more plant-based meals, including Smith College, the University of North Texas and the University of California, Los Angeles.

    In November, the University of California, Riverside—where meatless meals already make up about 45 percent of its dining options—became one of the latest universities to commit to expanding its meatless offerings, pledging to make 50 percent of meals plant-based by 2027.

    While such pledges are rooted in sustainability goals, they’ve also led to the creation of more diverse and healthier menu options—both things students have called for. And regardless of students’ motivation for consuming more plant-based food, prioritizing such options at campus dining halls—which feed millions per year—has the power to affect environmental change at scale.

    “Without question, institutional procurement is a massive lever for climate solutions at school and an often-overlooked tool for public health,” said Sophie Egan, co-director of the Menus of Change University Research Collaborative housed at Stanford University. Founded in 2012, the collaborative is a network of 85 colleges and universities that are using campus dining halls as living laboratories to research promotion of plant-forward options, food-waste reduction and increasing food literacy. “The decision-makers at universities who hold the purse strings and design menus are the potential heroes in this story. They can make small tweaks to menu sourcing and operations that can have a huge impact at scale.”

    For colleges, the shift satisfies multiple goals.

    “There are so many things that play into sustainability that are low-hanging fruit, including trying to offer menu items that don’t require a lot of water,” said Lanette Dickerson, director of culinary operations at UC Riverside. At the same time, she’s also focused on creating menus that reflect students’ varied and changing tastes. “UC Riverside is a really diverse campus—more than 40 percent of students are Latino and 34 percent are Asian—which makes it easier for us to offer these items because they’re already deeply rooted in these cultural diets.”

    She added that offering vegetarian foods—which tend to be lower in fat, cholesterol and other ingredients associated with an increased risk of chronic disease—may also help some students adopt healthier overall eating habits.

    Vegan Labels a ‘Turn-Off’

    Reaching the university’s new plant-forward menu goals will require more training for Dickerson’s staff. “Our team needs to know how to prepare these items to make sure they’re palatable,” she said. What won’t work is advertising plant-based menu options as meatless, vegan or vegetarian. “We got such bad feedback on our ‘meatless Mondays,’” she said, noting that students assigned more value to meat-based proteins. “We did still try to do it, but without such heavy marketing behind it.”

    Experts say that kind of reaction to food labeled vegetarian, vegan or meatless is exceedingly common, despite consumers’ increased appetite for plant-based foods and the growing availability of plant-based ingredients.

    “The term ‘vegan’ has a bit of a bad connotation. ‘Plant-based’ seems a lot sexier,” said Scott Zahren, director of culinary development at Aramark, which provides dining and food services to more than 275 U.S. colleges and universities. “Plant-based products these days are much better than they were 10 or 20 years ago. We have such great alternative dairy products now that we can offer a lot more dishes.”

    Vegetarian dining at Smith College

    Jessica Scranton/Smith College

    But Zahren and his team recognized that “vegan” can be a “turn-off,” and Aramark recently updated its marketing content to describe its menu items as “plant-based” instead. “The marketing reads a lot better for the masses.”

    Presenting plant-based foods as a default menu item rather than an alternative also increases the likelihood that students will eat them. According to a 2024 study published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology, on days that dining halls set up food stations with a vegan default—say, stir fry with tofu—those stations saw a 58 percent increase in plant-based dining, and meat consumption declined anywhere from 21 percent to 57 percent. In short, students don’t run away from plant-based dishes when they’re presented as the norm.

    ‘It’s About Good Food’

    In addition to sustainability initiatives, changing food preferences are also driving dining halls to offer more meatless options.

    In 2020, the global market for plant-based foods was valued at $29.4 billion; by 2030, it is expected to grow more than fivefold to $162 billion, according to a report by Bloomberg Intelligence. While data also shows that about 22 percent of Gen Z are actively limiting their meat consumption, what students really want out of campus dining is more options. According to a 2023 Inside Higher Ed Student Voice survey, respondents said that if dining halls want to improve their offerings, they should prioritize variety and quality of flavors, reduce ultra-processed foods and offer a variety of cuisines.

    “Campus dining programs are responding to customer preferences,” said Robert Nelson, president and CEO of the National Association of College and University Food Services. “The focus is on making great-tasting dishes that happen to be plant-forward. What’s important for dining halls as they expand their plant-forward, vegan and vegetarian offerings is to market them with descriptive, flavorful language. It’s not meatless curry, it’s coconut curry; it’s amazing mushroom pasta; it’s crispy cauliflower tacos.”

    That’s the approach Smith College has taken in its quest to offer more plant-based meals.

    A light-skinned man in a black chef's coat, backward baseball cap and black gloves stands in front of a large flattop cooking surface stirring a pile of greens.

    Chef Adam Dubois sauteing local greens at Smith College.

    Jessica Scranton/Smith College

    “We’re showing students that it’s not about the words ‘vegetarian’ or ‘vegan’—it’s about good food. It doesn’t have to have meat to be good,” said German Alvarado, director of culinary services at Smith. “With all of the technology that’s available, students are seeing all the variety of food out there and they want to see it in front of them. What’s trending is variety and healthy choices.”

    In 2015, the college pledged to reduce meat consumption by 5 percent each year, aiming to make 55 percent of its entrées plant-based by 2025. As of December, it was around 51.5 percent, according to Alvarado.

    “We’re not that far off,” he said, adding that the college just needs to add a handful of additional menu items to reach its goal. “We don’t want to do this for the sake of doing it. We want to make sure students are enjoying it and we’re creating good recipes.”

    Choice Is Key

    But Smith, UC Riverside and many other colleges have no plans to stop serving meat entirely. A dustup in the opinion pages of the Williams College student newspaper already showed limited appetite for that: In November, a student wrote an op-ed suggesting the college go vegan to mitigate animal cruelty, prompting blowback.

    “When accepting the invitation to attend the College, students did not sign up for a vegan menu,” Ella Goodman, a freshman at Williams, wrote in response. “Suddenly restricting our meal offerings would be unfair to students for whom a vegan menu could have been a dealbreaker in choosing between colleges.”

    Preserving personal choice is key for institutions undertaking plant-based dining initiatives, said Egan, the co-director of Menus of Change.

    “The word ‘meatless’ really backfires. People tend to not like being told they can’t have something,” she said. “The behavioral science is very clear: Having something taken away or restricting choice is a very good way to make people not excited about what’s left. Plant-forward is really about celebrating what’s in a dish.”

    And those initiatives at campus dining halls can also shape student relationships with food, which has implications that stretch far beyond the campus.

    “A person’s college years are a particular formative time for developing food identity, food preferences and making decisions about food,” Egan said. “Showing students that healthy, sustainable, plant-forward ways of eating can be delicious, comforting, satisfying and help them perform well in sports, academics and their different pursuits—those preferences stay with them long after their college years.”

    Source link

  • Doing the “Data Work” in Student Success

    Doing the “Data Work” in Student Success

    The latest episode of The Key, Inside Higher Ed’s news and analysis podcast, features a discussion between higher ed leaders and IHE editor in chief Sara Custer on how colleges can harness data to better support students. 

    Speaking at the Student Success 2025 event in November, Courtney Brown, vice president of strategic impact and planning at the Lumina Foundation; Elliot Felix, higher education advisory practice lead at Buro Happold; and Mark Milliron, president of National University, offered unique perspectives to the question of how institutions can be data-driven and student-centered.

    “You are not going to serve a student population well unless you do your data work,” said Milliron. The “data work” includes establishing good data governance and data mapping, building a data warehouse, and facilitating data integration across support platforms such as a learning management system and student information systems, he said. 

    Putting processes and best practice in place is what allowed National to expand its capacity, he said. “I don’t think we could’ve scaled some of the strategies we’ve done unless we did the plumbing work upfront.”

    On the question of scale, Felix encouraged institutions to combine their resources to serve more students. “How many institutions are creating their own, bespoke AI policy when they can do [it] as a group or borrow from Educause? There are so many ways to work together to go farther, to go faster.”

    While colleges might be teeming with data, Felix encouraged institutions to look at external sources to gain a clearer picture of students’ learning journeys. “I do think more data beyond the walls—employer data, labor market data, employment outcomes—would be really helpful.”

    Meanwhile, Brown argued that the needs of the modern-day student are varied and institutions must adapt to their students, rather than students adapting to colleges. Institutions that use data to understand whom today’s students are will be better placed to support their success, she said. “[Students] are parents, they are working, they are financially independent from their own parents. But most policymakers and others don’t think about that. So we need to understand who they are and then transform the system to better serve [them].”

    Listen to the full episode here

    Source link

  • Plato Censored as Texas A&M Carries Out Course Review

    Plato Censored as Texas A&M Carries Out Course Review

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Nice_Media_PRO/iStock/Getty Images | rawpixel

    At least 200 courses in the Texas A&M University College of Arts and Sciences have been flagged or canceled by university leaders for gender- or race-related content as the university undertakes its review of all course syllabi, faculty members told Inside Higher Ed.

    This is just the beginning of the system board–mandated course-review process. Faculty were required to submit core-curriculum syllabi for review in December, and some faculty members have yet to receive feedback on their spring courses, scheduled to begin Monday.

    So far, queer filmmakers, feminist writers and even ancient Western philosophers are on the chopping block. One faculty member—philosophy professor Martin Peterson, who is supposed to teach Contemporary Moral Problems this spring—was asked by university leadership to remove several passages by Plato from his syllabus.

    In an email from department chair Kristi Sweet, Peterson was given two options: either remove “modules on race and gender ideology, and the Plato readings that may include these,” or be reassigned to teach a different philosophy course.

    “Your decision to bar a philosophy professor from teaching Plato is unprecedented … You are making Texas A&M famous—but not for the right reasons,” Peterson said in his response to Sweet, which he shared with Inside Higher Ed. The Plato texts include passages from his Socratic dialogue Symposium that discuss patriarchy, masculinity, gender identity and the human condition. In one excerpt, the “Myth of the Androgyne,” the Greek playwright Aristophanes says, “First, you should learn the nature of humanity … for in the first place there were three kinds of human being and not two as nowadays, male and female. No, there was also a third kind, a combination of both genders.”

    Peterson ultimately chose to revise his syllabus and replace the censored material with lectures on free speech and academic freedom. “I’m thinking of using this as a case study and [to] assign some of the texts written by journalists covering the story to discuss,” Peterson told Inside Higher Ed via text. “I want [students] to know what is being censored.”

    Another censored class is Introduction to Race and Ethnicity. Students enrolled in the sociology course this spring were told via email Tuesday that the class was canceled because there was no way to bring it into compliance with the system policy. One professor, who wished to remain anonymous, was asked in the fall to remove content related to feminism and queer cinema from their History of Film class. The professor refused, and the dean resubmitted the syllabus as a noncore “special topics” class, which enrolled students were notified of Wednesday.

    “I’m seeing the enrollment drops as we speak,” the professor said.

    The enrollment declines could have the same result as the course review.

    “The expectation is that a lot of those classes will ultimately be canceled, not because of content but because of underenrollment,” said another professor in the College of Arts and Sciences who wished to remain anonymous.

    English faculty members received an email Tuesday from senior executive associate dean of the college Cynthia Werner telling them that literature with major plot lines that concern gay, lesbian or transgender identities should not be taught in core-curriculum classes.

    In a follow-up email Wednesday, Werner said, “If a course includes eight books and only one has a main character who has an LGBTQ identity and the plot lines are not overly focused on sexual orientation (i.e. that is THE main plot line), I personally think it would be OK to keep the book in the course.” She also clarified that faculty may assign textbooks with chapters that cover transgender identity, so long as they do not talk about the material or include it on assignments or exam questions.

    In November, the Texas A&M University System Board of Regents decided that courses that “advocate race or gender ideology, sexual orientation, or gender identity” would be subject to presidential approval and launched a systemwide, artificial intelligence–driven course-review process across all five campuses. Faculty members are still confused about who exactly is reviewing their syllabi.

    “The university is doing different things in different departments and colleges. They’re interpreting these policies differently,” said Leonard Bright, a professor of government and public service at Texas A&M and president of the university’s American Association of University Professors chapter. “I’ve heard some say they were told that there are some committees [carrying out the review]. I’ve heard some say that it’s just the provost and his close affiliates. We really don’t have a real clear answer as to how these decisions are being made.”

    It’s also unclear whether Texas A&M is violating a rule from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board that requires institutions to seek its approval before revising its core curriculum and “deleting courses.” A spokesperson for the university did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s questions about the review Wednesday, including a question about how many total courses have been canceled so far.

    The Texas A&M AAUP condemned the university’s decision to censor Plato in a statement Wednesday.

    “At a public university, this action raises serious legal concerns, including viewpoint discrimination and violations of constitutionally protected academic freedom,” the AAUP chapter wrote. “Beyond the legal implications, the moral stakes are profound. Silencing 2,500-year-old ideas from one of the world’s most influential thinkers betrays the mission of higher education and denies students the opportunity to engage critically with the foundations of Western thought. A research university that censors Plato abandons its obligation to truth, inquiry, and the public trust—and should not be regarded as a serious institution of higher learning. We are deeply saddened to witness the decline of one of Texas’s great universities.”

    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression also slammed the move.

    “Texas A&M now believes Plato doesn’t belong in an introductory philosophy course,” Lindsie Rank, director of campus rights advocacy at FIRE, said in a statement. “This is what happens when the board of regents gives university bureaucrats veto power over academic content. The board didn’t just invite censorship, they unleashed it with immediate and predictable consequences. You don’t protect students by banning 2,400-year-old philosophy.”

    Source link

  • A new approach to driving STEM workforce readiness

    A new approach to driving STEM workforce readiness

    Key points:

    STEM workforce shortages are a well-known global issue. With demand set to rise by nearly 11 percent in the next decade, today’s students are the solution. They will be the ones to make the next big discoveries, solve the next great challenges, and make the world a better place.

    Unfortunately, many students don’t see themselves as part of that picture.

    When students struggle in math and science, many come to believe they simply aren’t “STEM people.” While it’s common to hear this phrase in the classroom, a perceived inability in STEM can become a gatekeeper that stops students from pursuing STEM careers and alters the entire trajectory of their lives. Because of this, educators must confront negative STEM identities head on.

    One promising approach is to teach decision-making and critical thinking directly within STEM classrooms, equipping students with the durable skills essential for future careers and the mindset that they can decide on a STEM career for themselves.

    Teaching decision-making

    Many educators assume this strategy requires a full curriculum overhaul. Rather, decision-making can be taught by weaving decision science theories and concepts into existing lesson plans. This teaching and learning of skillful judgment formation and decision-making is called Decision Education. 

    There are four main learning domains of Decision Education as outlined in the Decision Education K-12 Learning Standards: thinking probabilistically, valuing and applying rationality, recognizing and resisting cognitive biases, and structuring decisions. Taken together, these skills, among other things, help students gather and assess information, consider different perspectives, evaluate risks and apply knowledge in real-world scenarios. 

    The intersection of Decision Education and STEM

    Decision Education touches on many of the core skills that STEM requires, such as applying a scientific mindset, collaboration, problem-solving, and critical thinking. This approach opens new pathways for students to engage with STEM in ways that align with their interests, strengths, and learning styles.

    Decision Education hones the durable skills students need to succeed both in and out of the STEM classroom. For example, “weight-and-rate” tables can help high school students evaluate college decisions by comparing elements like tuition, academic programs, and distance from home. While the content in this exercise is personalized and practical for each student, it’s grounded in analytical thinking, helping them learn to follow a structured decision process, think probabilistically, recognize cognitive biases, and apply rational reasoning.

    These same decision-making skills mirror the core practices of STEM. Math, science, and engineering require students to weigh variables, assess risk, and model potential outcomes. While those concepts may feel abstract within the context of STEM, applying them to real-life choices helps students see these skills as powerful tools for navigating uncertainty in their daily lives.

    Decision Education also strengthens cognitive flexibility, helping students recognize biases, question assumptions, and consider different perspectives. Building these habits is crucial for scientific thinking, where testing hypotheses, evaluating evidence objectively, and revising conclusions based on new data are all part of the process. The scientific method itself applies several core Decision Education concepts.

    As students build critical thinking and collaboration skills, they also deepen their self-awareness, which can be transformative for those who do not see themselves as “STEM people.” For example, a student drawn to literacy might find it helpful to reimagine math and science as languages built on patterns, symbols, and structured communication. By connecting STEM to existing strengths, educators can help reshape perceptions and unlock potential.

    Adopting new strategies

    As educators seek to develop or enhance STEM education and cultures in their schools, districts and administrators must consider teacher training and support.

    High-quality professional development programs are an effective way to help teachers hone the durable skills they aim to cultivate in their students. Effective training also creates space for educators to reflect on how unconscious biases might shape their perceptions of who belongs in advanced STEM coursework. Addressing these patterns allows teachers to see students more clearly, strengthen empathy, and create deeper connections in the classroom.

    When educators come together to make STEM more engaging and accessible, they do more than teach content: they rewrite the narrative about who can succeed in STEM. By integrating Decision Education as a skill-building bridge between STEM and students’ everyday lives, educators can foster confidence, curiosity, and a sense of belonging, which helps learners build their own STEM identity, keeping them invested and motivated to learn. While not every student will ultimately pursue a career in STEM, they can leave the classroom with stronger critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making skills that will serve them for life.

    Creating that kind of learning environment takes intention, shared commitment, and a belief that every student deserves meaningful access to and engagement with STEM. But when the opportunity arises, the right decision is clear–and every school has the power to make it.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • How Many Vice Presidents Does Any College Need? (opinion)

    How Many Vice Presidents Does Any College Need? (opinion)

    Amherst College, where I teach, recently changed the designation of its senior administrators, who were formerly called “chiefs,” as in chief financial officer, to “vice presidents.” We now have 10 of them, as well as 15 other individuals who hold titles such as senior associate, associate or assistant vice president.

    Not too long ago, in the time before they became chiefs, our VPs would have been called deans, directors or, in the case of our chief financial officer, treasurer. (Indeed, some retain a dean title along with their vice presidential one—the vice president of student affairs and dean of students, or the vice president and dean of admission and financial aid.) I respect and value the work that they do, regardless of their title. I know them and am aware of their dedication to the college and the well-being of its students, faculty and staff.

    But, for a small, liberal arts college that has long been proud to go its own way in many things, including in its idiosyncratic administrative titles, that’s a lot of vice presidents and associate and assistant VPs.

    Today, many of America’s colleges and universities are grappling with the issue of grade inflation. They are coming to terms with the fact that if everyone gets an A, as Christopher Schorr argues, “grading becomes a farce.” At the same time that grades have become inflated, another kind of inflation has affected our campuses.

    I call it the “vice presidentialization” of higher education.

    That trend is a sign of a shift in power from faculty to administrators, who are focused on protecting and managing their college’s brand. It is another sign of the growing administrative sector in American colleges and universities.

    Titles matter.

    For example, the title “dean of students” suggests a job that is student-facing, working closely with students to maximize their educational experience. The title of “vice president for student affairs” suggests something different, a role more institution-facing, dealing with policy, not people.

    Mark J. Drozdowski, a commentator on higher education, put it this way more than a decade ago: “Higher ed, as the casual observer might divine, is awash in titles.” He observes that for faculty, “The longer the faculty title, the more clout it conveys … Yet among administrators, the opposite holds true: president beats vice president, which in turn beats assistant vice president, which thoroughly trounces assistant to the assistant vice president.”

    “We’ve grown entitled to our titles,” Drozdowski continues. They “bring luster to our resumes and fill us with a sense of pride and purpose … Titles confer worth, or perhaps validate it. They have become a form of currency. They define our existence.”

    What was true when Drozdowski wrote it is even more true today. Administrative titles may “confer worth” on the individuals who hold them, but higher ed will not prosper if administrative titles define its worth.

    The multiplication of vice presidents and title inflation mark an embrace of hierarchy on the campuses where it happens. They may also signify and propel a division between those who see themselves as responsible for the fate of an institution and those who do the day-to-day work of teaching and learning.

    What was once designated a “two cultures” problem to explain the divide between humanists and scientists now may describe a divide between the cadre of vice presidents and the faculty, staff and students on college campuses.

    Having someone serve in the position of vice president at a college or university is not new, although the growth in the number of vice presidents at individual colleges and universities is. In fact, the role can be traced back to the late 18th century, when Princeton’s Samuel Stanhope Smith (son-in-law of the university president) became what the historian Alexander Leitch calls “the first vice president in the usual sense.” His primary duty was to step in when the president was unavailable. Yet, as Jana Nidiffer and Timothy Reese Cain note in their study of early vice presidencies, the position was not “continuously filled” at Princeton after that: After 1854, they write, “the role remained unfilled for almost thirty years and the title disappeared for more than a half-century.”

    Today, having a single vice president—or having none at all—seems almost unimaginable across the landscape of higher ed. Harvard University, for example, now lists 14 people as vice presidents in addition to the 15 deans of its schools and institutes. The University of Southern California has 13 vice presidents on its senior leadership team. Yale University lists nine vice presidents, as does Ohio State University. Emory University lists eight, and Rutgers University seven.

    The number of vice presidents at liberal arts colleges also varies significantly. Middlebury College has eleven. Dickinson College has nine, Kenyon College seven, Whitman College six, Goucher College six, Williams College three.

    And don’t forget Amherst’s 10 VPs.

    Those figures suggest that the number of vice presidents a place has is not simply a function of its size or complexity. The proliferation of vice presidents is driven, in part, by the desire of colleges and universities to make their governance structures legible to the outside world, and especially the business world, where having multiple vice presidents on the organization chart is standard operating procedure.

    And once one institution of higher education adopts the title of vice president for its administrative officers, others are drawn to follow suit, wanting to ensure that their leadership structures are mutually legible. The growth of vice presidencies may also help propel career mobility. How can a mere dean compete with vice presidents for a college presidency?

    More than a century ago, the distinguished economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen warned that “standards of organization, control and achievement, that have been accepted as an habitual matter of course in the conduct of business will, by force of habit, in good part reassert themselves as indispensable and conclusive in the conduct of the affairs of learning.” His response was to argue that “as seen from the point of view of the higher learning, the academic executive and all his works are anathema, and should be discontinued by the simple expedient of wiping him off the slate.”

    That is not my view. However, we have a lot to learn from Veblen.

    It would be a mistake for faculty and others who may be accustomed to the way things are done in banking or in other businesses to overlook the impact of the proliferation of academic executives on campus culture. It will take hard work and vigilance to make sure that the cadres of vice presidents on campuses govern modestly and that vice presidents don’t become local potentates.

    To achieve this, colleges must insist that their VPs stay close to the academic mission of the places where they work. This requires that we not allow our vice presidents to accrue privileges foreign to the people they lead and not escape from the daily frustrations that faculty and staff experience working in places where emails are not answered and nothing can get done without filling out a Google form.

    It may be helpful if our vice presidents leave their offices and interact with faculty and students on a regular basis. They should sit in on classes, visit labs and studios, and occasionally answer their own phones.

    Ultimately, even places like Amherst may be able to live with our own vice presidentialization—so long as those who have the title don’t take it too seriously and never forget that the business of education is not a business.

    Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College.

    Source link

  • College and University Closing Indicators

    College and University Closing Indicators

    The sectorwide concern about the future of many colleges and universities stays top of mind in 2026. The struggle to keep institutions open sometimes plays out publicly through rallies to alumni for contributions (Limestone University), pleas to government entities for a bailout (Birmingham Southern College), negotiations over mergers and closures (Pennsylvania State System), or the sale of an art collection (Randolph College). Other times, the signs stay hidden to most and closure comes as a swift, shockingly coldcock to the face for constituents (University of the Arts).  All instances raise the question “How does one know if a shutdown or merger is imminent?”

    The following checklist with 11 categories and 58 signs represents possible warnings that closure may be on the horizon. Words of caution: It really isn’t one or even several things from this list that predict a closure. It is the number, gravity and severity of the issues, along with whether the measures save enough money and whether revenue-generation measures have been enacted simultaneously. For example, are costs cut or assets liquidated to pay monthly operational costs, or are funds used to invest in revenue generation? Are actions ethical, legal and standard best practices, or do they cross the line? Do actions lead to reputational loss or lack of constituent (internal and external) and government and lender/investor confidence?

    ‘They Aren’t Buying What You’re Selling’ (Revenue Generation)

    Indicators: Can’t attract and keep students. Apathetic alumni. Donor disinterest. Auxiliary revenue generators are failing.

    • Enrollment decline (demographic cliff)
    • Lack of investment in new programs
    • Hiring consultants
    • Lack of branding and marketing
    • Declining (or poor) persistence/retention/graduation rates
    • Increased discount rate (above peer and national averages)
    • Increased cost to attend (above CPI and peer averages)
    • Decrease in alumni giving
    • Decrease in the annual fund
    • Auxiliary efforts not achieving financial goals (housing, ticket sales, etc.)

    ‘The Reorg’ (Institutional Structure)

    Indicator: Employing numerous cost-saving measures.

    • Positions combined or eliminated
    • Departments or divisions consolidated
    • Programs eliminated or put on hiatus

    ‘Past-Due Notices’ (Services)

    Indicator: Trying to hold off creditors.

    • Not paying invoices within 30 days
    • Spending freezes

    ‘Throwing Out the Baby with the Bathwater’ (Personnel: Part 1)

    Indicator: Trying hard not to let people go.

    • Hiring freezes
    • Furloughs
    • Lack of annual raises
    • Lack of retirement plans
    • Increased costs to employees for health care
    • Not filling open positions
    • Elimination of tenure

    ‘Not With a 10-Foot Pole’ (Personnel: Part 2)

    Indicator: Numerous employees with behind-the-scenes knowledge leave the institution because they see the writing on the wall. The institution can’t find or adequately compensate qualified employees.

    • Increased administrative turnover
    • Increased internal promotions for unqualified staff
    • Six to 12 months or more to fill a position

    ‘The Fire Sale’ (Assets)

    Indicator: Liquidating or trying to monetize noncash assets. Selling donated or purchased personal property (art, rare books, vehicles, equipment); real property (buildings, land); intellectual property (copyrights to music, books, art and patents); and debt.

    • Auctioning off art collection (whole or part)
    • Selling real estate
    • Making deals with land developers
    • Selling debt to debt collectors

    ‘Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures’ (Endowment Management)

    Indicators: Changing policies, endowment value decreases significantly, hiring estate/trust attorneys to find loopholes in agreements, opaque actions with endowment funds, asking donors or the state attorney general’s office to change or negate gift agreements, and dissolving individual endowments.

    • Significant decreased fair-market value
    • Increasing percentage spent from investment earnings (above 5 percent best practice)
    • Spending corpus
    • Releasing funds from quasi-endowment
    • Sweeping or reallocating available earnings at end of fiscal year
    • Using restricted funds for unrestricted purposes

    ‘The Neighborhood Went to Hell’ (Deferred Maintenance)

    Indicator: Unable to maintain or improve physical plant.

    • Not budgeting for deferred maintenance
    • Unclean buildings
    • Broken equipment or fixtures
    • Waiting “until next fiscal year” to fix equipment
    • Taking buildings off-line
    • Long periods between trash removal, mowing, panting, pruning, etc.

    ‘The Moral Compass Doesn’t Point North’ (External Audits and Legal Action)

    Indicators: Questions arise about financial controls, noncompliance with accounting practices and other actionable legal issues.

    • Audit findings
    • Lawsuits increase

    ‘Bad Financial Risk’ (Financial Ratings and Rankings)

    Indicators: External monitoring agencies (such as accreditors, professional and affiliate organizations, lenders, credit rating agencies, Department of Education) raise red flags. National rankings decline.

    • Accreditation warning, probation or loss
    • High debt ratios
    • Deficit budgets over multiple years
    • Can’t secure loans
    • Loans called by creditors
    • Less than 60 days’ cash on hand
    • No cash reserves
    • National rankings falling

    ‘The Smell of Fear’ (Board of Trustees’ Behaviors)

    Indicators: Major changes in board behavior signaling dissatisfaction, alarm and crossing the lines between governance and management of the institution.

    • Board giving declines
    • Board members making major contributions to other institutions
    • Board members serving as president or senior administrators
    • Increased conflicts of interest
    • Making management decisions
    • Board member resignations
    • Board members making decisions based on political affiliations

    This list offers a broad brushstroke on the matter of closures, and some categories and indicators are more telling and serious than others. Ultimately, and perhaps somewhat obviously, whether a closure happens boils down to several basic questions to be answered:

    • Is there enough revenue to meet expenses? Is revenue growing to meet increases in the cost to do business? Are forecast models accurate?
    • Is there enough cash on hand to address emergencies, revenue shortfalls and/or times of the year when revenue lags expenses?
    • Is the institution managing finances, funds and resources ethically, legally and according to national standards?
    • Are there action-oriented, realistic plans to stay relevant in the future? Are administrative decisions reactive or proactive?

    Kathy Johnson Bowles is the founder and CEO of Gordian Knot Consulting.

    Source link

  • How Colleges Hope to Approach International Higher Ed in 2026

    How Colleges Hope to Approach International Higher Ed in 2026

    Colleges and universities are deep in the first admissions cycle since the Trump administration dramatically disrupted the landscape for international students in the United States, and experts say that the past year has altered how they’re recruiting this year—and perhaps beyond.

    Amid uncertainty about what the future may bring for international higher education, institutions are investing in new recruitment strategies or looking at new ways to reach international students, according to international education experts. That may involve recruiting more from countries that weren’t as affected by visa delays, forging new partnerships with international recruiting agencies or launching new branch campuses to reach international students in their home countries.

    Anthony C. Ogden, founder and managing director at Gateway International Group, an international higher education firm, said he’s heard from a swath of institutions in recent months that are considering shaking up their international recruitment strategies as a result of the tumult of the past year.

    “And that’s not unique to a certain section of higher ed,” he said. “It’s from the Big Tens to smaller institutions. Everybody’s considering different partners.”

    In the year since President Donald Trump took office, his administration has, among other things, revoked students’ SEVIS records, implemented travel bans, advocated for institutions to cap the number of international students they admit, attempted to disallow Harvard University from hosting international students and frozen visa interviews for about three weeks, creating a backlog that has made it incredibly difficult to secure an appointment in many countries once interviews resumed. Further restrictions are expected on how long international students can stay in the United States and on Optional Practical Training, which allows international students to work in the country for up to three years after completing their schooling.

    The number of new international students enrolled college in the U.S. this past fall dipped 17 percent as compared to the year before. Although surveys show international students still want to study in the U.S., they worry that they could have their visas revoked or face discrimination here.

    Those fears, as well as concerns about securing a visa, have also influenced how students and their families are approaching the admissions process this year, international education leaders say. Many are still applying to U.S. universities, but an increasing number of students and families are developing backup plans, applying to institutions in other countries like the United Kingdom or Australia, said Samira Pardanani, associate vice president for international education and global engagement at Shoreline Community College.

    “I think students are interested in more flexibility, and universities that used to not be very flexible, I’m seeing more flexibility,” she said. “What we’re seeing is students are looking for that low-risk start.”

    International Innovations

    But this precariousness and demand for flexibility could lead to new innovations in how institutions engage with international students, Ogden said.

    “If we can’t bring students here, should we go to them, either on-site in-country or remotely in some ways? I think there’s some optimism there and when new modalities and new approaches—what we saw in the pandemic—comes out, some of that moves from the periphery to the mainstream,” he said. “Is that a Pollyannaish way of looking into January 2026?”

    The University of Cincinnati, for one, is leaning in to new strategies to attract international students to its campus, according to Jack Miner, UC’s vice provost for enrollment management. The institution is exploring partnerships with schools in other nations—both high schools, which can funnel applicants to UC, and colleges where students can start a degree before transferring to the Ohio university.

    Partnering with institutions rather than recruiting broadly across an entire country, Miner said, gives UC access to students who are already aware of and interested in studying in the U.S., removing a hurdle in the recruitment process. UC already has such partnerships in China and Vietnam but is planning to expand.

    “What these partnerships has done for us is essentially streamline those conversations, because the students always end up knowing peers who have come to the U.S. or come to the University of Cincinnati. You know 20 students in the grade before you … or you have an older brother or sister that came to the university,” he said. “So that conversation about what it’s like to study in the United States, what it’s like to be at the University of Cincinnati, is a much easier conversation because it’s in context.”

    It’s not just the Trump administration that has changed the international education landscape, said Liz Nino, executive director of international enrollment at Augustana College, a private Lutheran college in Illinois that began recruiting large numbers of international students in 2013. She said that visa appointment delays this year did seem to impact Augustana—the college’s first-year international cohort declined about 16 percent this fall from fall 2024—but that problems with visa interviews stretch back to COVID-19.

    In recent years, she said, the “flood” of students who are interested in studying in the U.S. is more than U.S. embassies can handle, leading to interview wait times as long as a year and a half in certain countries. Currently, she said, she’s working with about 10 students from Ghana who were hoping to enroll in fall 2025 but had to defer to spring 2026; now it appears they may not be able to secure visas until October.

    Such issues have influenced how Augustana recruits international students.

    “This has been a huge challenge for U.S. universities because, as you can imagine, we’ve invested so much. I used to travel to Ghana once, sometimes twice a year, and now we’ve had to pull back because we cannot be putting so many resources into a market where we know that students simply cannot enroll,” Nino said.

    The unpredictability can also be reflected in university budgets, said George F. Kacenga, vice president for enrollment management at William Paterson University in New Jersey.

    “One of the most important things we can do, as enrollment managers, from my perspective, is give a forecast that is reliable so that a sound budget can be built,” Kacenga said. “In certain times, I might be aspirational about what I think that incoming number [of international students] looks like or share certain stretch goals. But right now, at least for myself and I think most of my colleagues, we are being very conservative in those international enrollment numbers.”

    Deferred Students

    The ultimate fates of students who were unable to secure visas in time for the fall 2025 semester appear to vary by institution.

    Cornell University ended up having only a small number of students—primarily in graduate programs—who weren’t able to make it for the fall. Of that number, almost all will arrive for the spring semester.

    “We feel like students were able to get to campus and were really relieved about the visa pressures not being as bad as we thought,” said Wendy Wolford, vice provost for international affairs at Cornell.

    William Paterson had dozens of deferrals from fall 2025 to spring 2026 due to visa issues, Kacenga said. It’s not yet clear how many of those students will make it by the start of classes later this month, he said, but there has been “a lot of continued interest from those students.”

    William Paterson also offered those students the opportunity to begin their coursework online until they’re able to secure visas, but Kacenga said students were generally uninterested in that option.

    “There was too much uncertainty about actually being able to get here for the spring that people didn’t want to have a lost semester or an investment, and I’ve heard that story from institution types located all over the country,” he said. “So, a valiant effort to rally and support the students, but because of the uncertainty principle, it just wasn’t a smart choice for many folks.”

    Fanta Aw, CEO and executive director of NAFSA, said in an email to Inside Higher Ed that visa delays have persisted, especially in China and India, the two largest suppliers of international students in the U.S. As a result, she wrote, it’s likely that most students who didn’t get visas in time to come in the fall opted to begin their studies elsewhere.

    “The losses seen this past fall will continue to be felt for the foreseeable future as a decline in enrollments is not a one-term issue, but will have a compounding effect,” she wrote. “It is vitally important for the administration to reverse course if it wishes for a stronger, safer and more prosperous America.”

    Aw and other experts expect visa delays to continue, but they say that, because there is so little new enrollment in the spring semester, those numbers won’t indicate much about the state of visa processing. Instead, the fall 2026 numbers will offer more insights into whether these delays were just a blip or if they’ll have a longer-term impact on international higher education.

    As institutions begin to dole out acceptances this year, Kacenga said, he has been emphasizing to prospective and admitted students the importance of starting the college application and visa processes early.

    “We’re helping students understand the urgency to complete your process to get admitted early—it’s not just about getting your class selection that you want or the housing arrangements that you’re most interested in,” he said. “It’s about doing it early so that you have the runway that you need for the immigration process.”

    Source link

  • How One Calif. College Helped Rebuild Child Care After the Eaton Fire

    How One Calif. College Helped Rebuild Child Care After the Eaton Fire

    Last January, Alana Lewis felt an all-too-familiar dread as the Santa Ana winds tore through the tents above the playground at her home-based day care.

    Little did she know, those winds weren’t just a harbinger of fire—they marked the beginning of a crisis that would leave lasting scars on her Altadena community.

    She watched in disbelief as the Eaton Fire raged through California’s San Gabriel Mountains, creeping close to the outdoor slide and toys in her yard, which she would later find melted into the artificial grass.

    As fire sirens blared and acrid smoke filled her home, Lewis evacuated, helplessly watching nearby homes and child-care sites like hers go up in flames.

    “I hate that it happened, but I thank God that it wasn’t in the daytime,” said Lewis, founder of Auntie Lana’s Daycare. “I thank God that when the fire did hit, it was at night when the children were already home safe.”

    Today, on the one-year anniversary of the blaze, it’s clear the fire wasn’t just an environmental disaster; it upended the everyday rhythms of life for Lewis and many other child-care providers across Los Angeles.

    Nearly 60 percent of licensed child-care sites in Altadena were damaged or destroyed, according to data from the Pasadena Community Foundation.

    “Everything outside was completely destroyed, demolished and unrecognizable,” said Lewis, adding that the condition inside her home was no better. “The soot from the fire was so thick that when you walked on the carpet, it would get underneath and inside your tennis shoes.”

    Lewis spent months living in hotels and with family as she repaired her home, discarding furniture and salvaging what little remained from a shed that once housed art materials, bikes, toys and other equipment for her day-care charges.

    Although initial emergency subsidies helped Lewis and other child-care providers for 30 days after the fire, she says she felt abandoned and neglected as she continued to face mounting out-of-pocket costs.

    Relief came when Lewis received a $45,000 grant from Pacific Oaks College, allowing her to reopen her day care in early July.

    The Pasadena-based college, in partnership with the Pasadena Community Foundation and Save the Children, distributed about $2 million to 43 child-care sites affected by the Eaton Fire. Grants ranged from $900 to $45,000, helping providers like Lewis rebuild and continue serving families.

    “It helped a lot of providers who were stressed out,” Lewis said, noting that the loss of income prevented many from paying rent and that some were denied small business loans.

    Breeda McGrath, president of Pacific Oaks College, said she recognized early on that child-care providers were suffering and mobilized to find donors.

    McGrath said the decision to support them came naturally, given the college’s roots as a preschool in the 1940s and its evolution by the late 1950s into a four-year institution known for its work in early childhood education and teacher training.

    “The identity of Pacific Oaks College over the years … has been focused on social justice, equity and diversity,” McGrath said. “So if we are not at the table to help rebuild and sustain early childhood education in our area, then we’re forgetting who we are.”

    She sent a formal proposal to the Pasadena Community Foundation requesting $1.3 million to help child-care providers rebuild or secure new leases, pay staff, replace lost materials, and provide tuition support for families.

    Within two days, the philanthropic organization that funds nonprofits and community initiatives in the greater Pasadena area agreed to support the effort.

    McGrath later secured an additional $800,000 from Save the Children, a nonprofit that provides health, education and emergency aid to support children’s rights and well-being.

    “This is our responsibility as a true community leader,” she said. “If we believe in teacher preparation, if we believe in supporting children, this is part of what you do.”

    Pacific Oaks Steps In: In the immediate aftermath of the fire, Pacific Oaks College served as a hub for local child-care providers seeking air purifiers, diapers and other essentials.

    McGrath said this was critical because, although the Pasadena Convention Center operated as the main coordination and distribution site, it proved difficult for some child-care providers to access the specific supplies they needed.

    Breeda McGrath (first photo, left) joins Pacific Oaks College staff and student workers in helping child-care providers stock up on critical items.

    She said Pacific Oaks College not only served as a hub, but also provided the “human power” of its staff and students—many of whom are training to become early childhood educators themselves.

    McGrath said higher education institutions play a unique role in disaster recovery, particularly in supporting and preparing the next generation of educators.

    “I believe in the long-term investment that higher education makes in a community,” McGrath said, noting that many child-care providers in the area studied at Pacific Oaks College.

    “So educating early childhood providers about the best ways to build strong community relationships, run their businesses, care for children and access opportunities for continued learning—that’s where we can contribute our knowledge,” she said.

    One year later, McGrath said long-term recovery is top of mind as the community works to rebuild its child-care system and support students training to become early childhood educators.

    “If you look at the destruction, the rebuilding process takes a lot of time, effort and energy,” McGrath said. “Not just in terms of the insurance process, but also how long it takes to decide what it means to return—or what it means not to return.”

    Auntie Lana’s Daycare: For more than 13 years, Lewis has run her Altadena-based day care for children from infancy through age 12, many of whom are enrolled in Pasadena Unified elementary schools.

    The district serves about 15,000 students, the majority Black and Latino, with more than 70 percent socioeconomically disadvantaged. During the Eaton Fire, five schools were destroyed or severely damaged, including Eliot Arts Magnet, Edison Elementary, Loma Alta Elementary, Noyes Elementary and Franklin Elementary.

    Alana Lewis, a Black woman, is holding a toddler and surrounded by kids of varying ages on a field trip with children from her Altadena-based daycare.

    Lewis on a field trip with children from her Altadena-based day care.

    Lewis said most of the children she cares for are Black and Latino, come from low-income families, and were directly affected by the fire, including three who lost their homes.

    She added that some of the children had attended elementary schools destroyed by the fire and were displaced to other schools in Pasadena. That grief only deepened when they returned to their beloved day care and saw what had been lost.

    “When the kids came back and saw that the things they played with were gone, you could see the look in their eyes—the disbelief,” Lewis said. “This will be with them forever.”

    In the photo on the left, five young children are gathered around a table with two gingerbread houses decorated with candy. On the right, a small boy is inside a structure made of giant Magnatiles.

    Some of Lewis’s charges work on a group project in her indoor play area.

    McGrath said Altadena’s diverse history makes the loss of child-care providers especially profound.

    “Over the years, families in Altadena have built strength and, across generations, a deep history in the community,” McGrath said. “A history of moving toward justice—a history of being a community that recognizes everyone’s desire to succeed and everyone’s right to earn a living wage.”

    She said child-care providers are deeply woven into that history, often serving multiple generations of the same families and anchoring stability for working parents. That stability, McGrath added, is critical for college students—particularly student parents, who rely on child care to stay enrolled.

    “To lose your day-care provider when you’re in those very vulnerable, sensitive stages of life is really destabilizing,” McGrath said. “That was a powerful loss—not just to families, but to long-held homes and to generational wealth that was deeply affected and destroyed.”

    Lewis agreed, adding that child-care providers are often overlooked in conversations about disaster recovery and economic stability.

    “As child-care providers, the role we play in the economy is extremely important,” Lewis said. “We help people go to work. We help mothers and fathers who are still in school. We have parents and grandparents who need their children cared for in a safe, quality learning environment.”

    Lewis said her experience after the fire underscored just how essential—and vulnerable—the child-care sector is during times of crisis.

    “We’re providing care to children who will run our economy someday,” Lewis said. “If we can come to the table and find a better solution, that would be awesome.”

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

    Source link

  • The Rise of the Agentic AI University in 2026

    The Rise of the Agentic AI University in 2026

    In a very active and highly competitive environment, AI has grown at breakneck speed. As with so many technologies, business and industry have moved far faster than academe to embrace the cost savings, capability expanding and wholly innovative aspects of AI. Fraught with our own industry-specific challenges such as enrollment downturns, sharp drops in perceived value, the striking “math cliff” in higher ed and a rapidly changing regulatory policy shift in state and federal administration, our field has been cast into a sea of pressing priorities for changes.

    This year is likely to be the one where we begin to implement institutionwide AI-powered solutions to help us move forward with agility and effectiveness in adapting to the changing environment. As Aviva Legatt writes in Forbes’ “7 Decisions That Will Define AI in Higher Education in 2026”,

    “Over the past year, the shift from AI as a tool to AI as institutional infrastructure has become unmistakable. Students have already integrated AI into daily academic workflows, vendors are pushing enterprise deployments, federal and accreditation expectations are rising and labor-market volatility is forcing colleges to rethink how learning connects to opportunity. At the same time, agentic AI is moving from experimentation to execution, reshaping how advising, enrollment, learning support and operations can be delivered. In 2026, these threads converge: institutions that operationalize AI will widen their performance gap, while those that don’t will inherit a shadow system they can’t control.”

    Yet, where these changes will take place within the field, how these changes will impact our higher education workforce and the extent to which we can change in time to meet our market demand by producing knowledgeable and skilled employees for the economy at large remains in question. For those of us in early and midcareer positions, pressing questions arise: “Will I still have a job? How will my position description change? Will I be prepared? What should I do now to ensure I remain a valuable asset to my university?” It is my purpose in this brief column to identify some of the areas in which changes seem most likely to take place in this new year.

    To date, we have made significant progress in developing chatbot-hosted, transactional generative AI in which the user inputs questions and answers to the bot. One of the many high-quality examples is the Khan Academy’s Khanmigo. These have been effective in hosting tutors, study apps, curricular design and much more.

    The use of generative AI continues to expand in new ways. Meanwhile, the development of AI agents is driving the expansion and efficiency of AI. In the agentic AI models, we have tools that are capable of reasoned assessment of what is needed to accomplish a goal, aligning a series of stacked tasks and completing those tasks without direct supervision in an efficient way, much like a human assistant would perform a series of tasks to achieve desired outcomes. For example, this often includes data collection, analysis of the data, identifying and implementing ways in which to accomplish the goals, documenting the findings, and finding better ways to accomplish the outcomes.

    This opens the possibility that portions of individual position descriptions can be offloaded from humans and integrated into agentic AI duties. This results in fewer overall employees; lower indirect costs such as insurance, vacation and sick leave; and a more cost-efficient operation. Beginning now, institutions are moving from scattered pilots to governed, agentic workflows that will define the next decade of ensuring student success and operational efficiency.

    I asked my virtual digital assistant, Gemini 3 Deep Research, on Dec. 28 to suggest some of the implementations we will most likely see broadly implemented to address the student lifecycle. Gemini suggested that the work will be “personalized, proactive and persistent.” Gemini 3 Thinking mode predicted we will see a wide range of implementations in 2026, including:

    1. The 24/7 Digital Concierge (Recruitment): Beyond simple FAQs, agents now manage the entire “nurturing funnel,” handling complex credit transfer evaluations and scheduling campus tours via multichannel SMS and web interfaces. Source: 2026 Higher Education Digital Marketing Trends (EducationDynamics)
    2. Socratic Tutors for Every Learner: AI tutors that don’t just give answers but engage in Socratic dialogue, scaffolding difficult concepts and generating infinite practice problems based on real-time course performance. Source: AI Tutors and the Human Data Workforce 2026 Guide (HeroHunt)
    3. Mental Health First Responders: AI agents serving as low-barrier triage points, offering immediate coping strategies for anxiety and seamlessly escalating high-risk cases to human counselors. Source: How AI Chatbots Are Transforming Student Services (Boundless Learning)
    4. Predictive Intervention for Gatekeeper Courses: Using “behavioral trace data” from LMS platforms to identify students struggling in high-risk introductory courses (e.g., College Algebra, Gen Chem) before the first midterm. Source: Predictive Analytics in Higher Ed: Promises and Challenges (AIR)
    5. Admissions Document Verification Agents: Autonomous systems that verify international credentials, flag missing forms and check for eligibility in milliseconds, reducing the time to decision from weeks to minutes. Source: AI Agents for Universities: Automating Admissions (Supervity)

    Gemini 3 Thinking mode continued with examples of back-office efficiencies that AI will provide to universities that are early adopters of an agentic AI approach:

    1. Automated University Accounting: AI agents that handle invoice processing, general ledger coding and “smart” expense management, ensuring policy compliance without manual entry. Source: 5 Use Cases for AI Agents in Finance (Centric Consulting)
    2. Grant Management and Writing Assistants: Agents that scan federal databases (Grants.gov) to match faculty research with funding, draft initial narratives and manage postaward financial reporting. Source: AI Grant Management: Driving Efficiency (Fluxx AI)
    3. Dynamic Enrollment Marketing Agents: “Search everywhere optimization” (GEO/AEO) tools that ensure the university appears in AI-generated best-of lists and voice-search results on platforms like TikTok and Reddit. Source: Transitioning to the Agentic University 2026–27 (UPCEA)
    4. Procurement and Spend Analysis: Agents that continuously monitor contract compliance and supplier health, identifying hidden savings that can be reallocated to student scholarships. Source: How AI Agents Change Procurement Work in 2026 (Suplari)
    5. Regulatory Reporting and Audit Agents: Systems that autogenerate audit-ready reports for state and federal compliance, reducing the administrative burden on institutional research offices. Source: FINRA 2026 Oversight Report: The Reckoning for Autonomous AI (Snell & Wilmer)
    6. HR and Benefits Support: 24/7 staff-facing agents that answer complex questions about leave policies, payroll and benefits, freeing HR staff for strategic culture-building work. Source: Agentic AI: Top Tech Trend of 2025/2026 (Gartner/EAB)
    7. The “AI-First” Curriculum Redesign: Moving beyond academic integrity to “AI fluency” as a graduation standard, where agents help faculty redesign assessments to focus on process rather than product. Source: 2026 Predictions for AI in Higher Education (Packback)

    Of course, there will be many comparable efficiencies implemented in other areas of universities. These are examples that demonstrate the cost and time efficiencies that can be realized through thoughtful implementation of agentic AI. In the Nov. 12 issue of this column, “Transitioning to the Agentic University 2026–27,” I detail an approach to begin the administrative agentic AI transition.

    Although there is less mention publicly about direct instruction by AI, this is inevitable in coming years. Most likely AI-led instruction will begin in noncredit offerings, but ultimately no teaching task will be out of reach. It will come at a significantly lower cost, greater personalization and instant updating with every new development in the field as it happens.  How can we best prepare our colleagues in higher education for the changes that are coming this year and each successive year?

    Source link