Tag: questions

  • 3 Questions for Professor–Turned–Learning Designer Robin Baker

    3 Questions for Professor–Turned–Learning Designer Robin Baker

    In late 2023, Robin Baker made the career pivot from assistant professor at OHSU-PSU School of Public Health to learning designer at Dartmouth College. I asked if Robin would be willing to share some thoughts about her career path, and she graciously agreed.

    Q: What motivated you to shift from a traditional faculty position into a learning designer role? What preparation and background did you bring to the work of a learning designer, and what advantages and challenges have been posed by coming from a faculty role?

    A: I decided to transition from a traditional faculty role to a learning designer position after considerable reflection on what I wanted my work and life to look like. I was in a soft money–funded position, where success often felt tied to research output and securing grants. But in practice, most of my energy went into teaching and supporting students, the parts of the job that truly mattered to me. Over time, I began to realize that the pace and structure of that kind of academic role were not sustainable for me in the long run. As I thought more deeply about what aspects of my work I found most rewarding, I realized that, in addition to teaching and mentoring, I found immense satisfaction in designing learning experiences that were inclusive, authentic and relevant. I often spent significant time redesigning assignments and activities to make them more engaging and meaningful for my students. Learning design offered a way to stay connected to the core of what I value: teaching, learning and student success.

    I brought to this role a strong foundation in pedagogy, assessment and curriculum design, developed through years of intentionally reflecting on my teaching. Whenever I noticed a strategy fell flat, I dug into the literature and experimented with new approaches, refining my practice based on evidence and observation. Another advantage that my previous life as a faculty member has provided me is that I have developed empathy and practical insight into the challenges that faculty face when trying to create robust learning experiences, provide meaningful feedback and maintain a work-life balance. I have found that acknowledging those realities and engaging in open, honest dialogue helps build trust and leads to more creative and effective solutions. Coming from a faculty background has allowed me to serve as a bridge between teaching practice and design strategy.

    At the same time, that transition has come with some challenges. In my faculty role, I was accustomed to being the sole decision-maker for my courses, so adapting to a highly collaborative environment, where I needed to influence others without formal authority, was a major shift. In this context, I had to develop strong project-management skills, work within structured timelines and production workflows, and communicate clearly across teams. Learning to navigate these processes and contribute meaningfully without directing every decision was initially difficult, but it strengthened my ability to work strategically, build consensus and support high-quality learning experiences in partnership with others.

    Q: Having now experienced life as both a full-time professor and full-time learning designer, how do the two roles compare and contrast? For someone trained for research and employed mostly in teaching (as most Ph.D.s are), what recommendations might you have for anyone else contemplating a similar career path?

    A: Having experienced life as both a full-time professor and now as a full-time learning designer, I see both roles as connected by a shared commitment to improving student learning, though they differ in scope and kind of impact. As a faculty member, I had a very immediate connection with students: teaching, mentoring and witnessing their growth in real time. That direct engagement was deeply rewarding and energizing, but it also came with heavy workloads, administrative pressures and blurred boundaries. Over time, I found that level of intensity difficult to sustain, which prompted me to reflect on the kind of work-life balance and long-term impact I wanted.

    As a learning designer, the work feels broader and more strategic. Instead of focusing on one group of students, I now collaborate with faculty across disciplines to design courses and learning environments that enhance teaching and learning for many more students. The impact is less direct but often greater in scale, as it shapes the systems and supports that enable effective teaching.

    At the same time, I think it is important to acknowledge that the loss of direct connection with students can be a real adjustment. There is something uniquely special about witnessing students’ aha moments and seeing the immediate results of your teaching. As a learning designer, that feedback loop is more indirect. Faculty are often very appreciative of our collaboration, but it does not carry quite the same emotional resonance as seeing students thrive firsthand. For anyone considering this transition, it is worth reflecting on how central that kind of direct engagement is to their sense of purpose and whether there are other ways, such as mentoring colleagues, engaging in professional development or contributing to the broader learning community, to fill that gap.

    Another concern I often hear from faculty considering this path is the fear of losing autonomy, particularly the flexibility to structure their own days or pursue creative ideas. In my experience, that depends heavily on the team and institutional culture. In my current role, which is largely remote and hybrid, there is a genuine appreciation for the whole person. We are trusted to manage our time and energy, and that autonomy is still very much present.

    The difference is that I now have a healthier kind of control. I set realistic goals for what I can achieve in a given day, while being careful not to let work bleed into personal or family time. That structure allows me to work efficiently and intentionally and it has given me space to reconnect with family, friends, community and nature. For anyone thinking about making this transition, it’s worth having open conversations about team expectations, workflows and culture. Understanding these aspects up front can help you gauge whether the role is a good fit and set you up for long-term satisfaction.

    Q: Recently, you took on an additional role as course co-director of the Capstone for the Dartmouth M.H.A. program. How does that work integrate with your learning design role, and how have you been able to balance both responsibilities?

    A: In many ways, my role as course co-director is a meaningful complement to my work as a learning designer. In this role, I serve as one of the faculty for the capstone course, guiding students as they pull together what they’ve learned across the program and apply it to complex, real-world challenges. It’s been incredibly rewarding to reconnect directly with students, something I’d missed since stepping away from a full-time faculty role.

    What makes this role even more meaningful is that I was one of the learning designers who helped faculty develop many of the courses in the M.H.A. program. Now, I get to see that work come full circle. It provides me with a unique perspective on how our strategies are implemented in practice and highlights opportunities to further refine the learning experience.

    I also appreciate how this teaching role complements, rather than competes with, my work in learning design. My design experience informs how I approach the capstone, helping me think carefully about scaffolding, alignment and authentic assessment. At the same time, teaching keeps me connected to the student perspective, giving me a firsthand understanding of how learners experience our courses. That insight flows directly back into my design work and strengthens my collaborations with faculty.

    Balancing both roles does require intentional structure and realistic expectations. I’ve learned to be clear about what I can reasonably accomplish each week and to protect time for rest, family and personal commitments. I rely on block scheduling to focus on design projects, faculty consultations and capstone mentoring, while making sure these blocks don’t spill into evenings or weekends. Maintaining these boundaries has been essential for sustaining both quality and balance.

    I’m also fortunate to have supportive leadership in both the learning design team and the M.H.A. program, who recognize the value of these complementary roles. That culture of trust and flexibility makes it possible to do both well.

    In many ways, this dual role gives me the best of both worlds: the broader, systemic perspective of learning design and the direct, human connection of teaching. Together, they keep me grounded in why this work matters and allow me to contribute to both faculty and student success in meaningful, sustainable ways.

    Source link

  • Asking the Right Questions- Archer Education

    Asking the Right Questions- Archer Education

    Why Universities Need the Right Partnership Criteria 

    When a higher education institution outsources its enrollment, marketing, or student engagement efforts, the stakes are high. Missteps don’t just cost money — they cost time and, most critically, can hinder enrollment growth. Many universities make the mistake of selecting vendors that focus on chasing leads, rather than aligning with the school’s mission or long-term goals.

    Without clear partnership criteria, even well-intentioned collaborations can falter. Misaligned university partnerships often lead to disjointed campaigns and wasted resources. What begins as a lead generation effort can evolve into dependency on a vendor that operates in isolation, without being guided by the institution’s strategy. 

    The right partner, by contrast, integrates seamlessly with the institution’s mission, aligns its services with the institution’s desired outcomes, and acts as a true extension of the institution.

    The Risks of Choosing the Wrong Partner               

    The wrong partner can create more problems than it solves. Some vendors sell services focused solely on activities — ads placed, events hosted, emails sent — without tying its efforts to the institution’s overarching strategy. This approach often fails to generate real enrollment growth, causing internal teams to struggle with unqualified leads and retention challenges. 

    Another potential risk stems from failing to consider how a partner will mesh with the institution’s legacy systems. Universities invest heavily in their marketing resources, such as their customer relationship management (CRM) platforms and brand assets. A vendor that imposes its own tools without considering the university’s existing infrastructure can create costly redundancies. 

    Equally concerning are long-term, restrictive partnership contracts that lock an institution into dependency and limit its flexibility, leaving it at the mercy of a vendor whose priorities may clash with the institution’s broader objectives or evolving market conditions.

    Strategic Alignment as the Core Test               

    The foundation of any successful university partnership is strategic alignment. True partners base the services they offer on the institution’s unique goals. They view marketing, admissions, and student success teams as interconnected — not completely separate entities.

    Shared key performance indicators (KPIs) are a key component of this alignment. When both the institution and its partner commit to tracking metrics such as the conversion rate from inquiry to application, the yield rate from admission to enrollment, and the one-year retention rate, they create mutual accountability across every stage of the student journey.  

    Archer’s Growth Readiness Assessment offers a model for this type of collaboration. This tool helps an institution evaluate its readiness to scale its programs — whether they are in person or online — by evaluating the university’s internal capacity, identifying any potential hurdles, and aligning its in-house teams and external partners. Performing such an assessment early in the vendor selection process ensures the university partnership is built on a foundation of clarity and trust. 

    Procurement Criteria That Drive Success              

    When it comes time for an institution to formalize a partnership, focusing on transparency, flexibility, and accountability can make the difference between achieving sustainable growth and creating new operational challenges. 

    Institutions that emphasize these criteria are better positioned to form partnerships that deliver measurable results and long-term value. 

    • Transparency in reporting and asset ownership is vital. An institution should establish whether it will retain full ownership of the assets created and determine how often performance reports will be shared. A transparent partner will make reporting accessible and collaborative, not proprietary. 
    • Flexible contracts are another hallmark of a strong university partnership. The institution should have the freedom to pivot when markets shift or as its internal capacity grows. It should avoid rigid, long-term agreements that limit its control or create dependency. 
    • Accountability across the student journey should be among the institution’s demands. The most effective partners understand that success extends beyond generating leads and inquiries. Contracts should define what accountability looks like from marketing through enrollment and retention, with clearly articulated performance standards for each stage. 

    Integrating With Legacy Systems               

    Integration is a crucial element of successful university partnerships. A capable partner doesn’t replace or disrupt the institution’s existing systems — it strengthens them. 

    When integration is done well, the partner respects the university’s existing data, assets, and workflows, leading to a more unified, seamless experience for both staff and students. When integration is done poorly, the results can be costly, creating redundancies, inefficiencies, and siloed teams. 

    Archer’s Onward student engagement platform demonstrates how thoughtful integration can amplify an institution’s capacity without disrupting its operations. Onward uses behavior-based triggers and personalized multichannel engagement efforts to guide students from inquiry through enrollment — working alongside admissions services and complementing the institution’s existing systems rather than supplanting them. 

    By respecting the institution’s infrastructure, this kind of partnership model helps the university scale its engagement strategies without losing its operational continuity.  

    10 Questions to Ask Before Choosing a Partner

    Selecting the right partner for an institution requires more than comparing price points or promises of lead volume. The most beneficial partnerships are built on mutual accountability, transparency, and shared metrics for success. The right partner should have staff with extensive institutional knowledge and higher ed industry experience, enabling it to provide universities and colleges with the best tools to improve their operations and achieve growth. 

    Asking the right questions early helps ensure alignment and prevent costly missteps. Institutions can consider asking the following 10 questions when vetting potential partners:

    1. How do you handle internal and external communications? Institutions need to know who their main points of contact will be, and how knowledge and strategies will be shared across teams.
    2. What metrics do you use to measure success across the student journey? The ideal vendor should be able to provide full-funnel visibility and focus on metrics that truly drive enrollment growth. 
    3. How frequently will our teams review results together? Successful partnerships depend on transparency and regular communication.
    4. What have you learned from working with other institutions, and how will that inform our partnership? Vendors should always be willing to adjust their services based on past wins and challenges. They should also have the right resources to serve all of their clients with equal urgency.
    5. How will you collaborate with us to set enrollment goals and forecast program growth? Credible vendors rely on historical data to inform their projections, and take the time to carefully explore existing growth drivers. 
    6. How do you differentiate marketing strategies at the institutional level from those at the program level? Institutions can benefit from asking for examples that illustrate this distinction.
    7. What can we expect from this partnership in the first 90 days? Vendors should be able to communicate clear timelines for processes, such as onboarding steps, reporting cadence, and performance metrics. 
    8. Will our institution own all assets, data, and creative from day one? Institutions should have ownership of any assets created and have a clear understanding of how they will be shared and managed.
    9. Are there any additional fees we should be aware of? Items such as creative assets will need to be refreshed over time, so institutions need to understand what associated costs may arise.
    10. What questions do you have for us? An ideal partner wants to understand the institution’s unique needs, strengths, and challenges. Using historical data, it can shape a data-driven strategy for the institution, including realistic marketing budgets and lead goals.

    These questions establish a framework for transparency, accountability, and scalability — ensuring the partnership begins from a place of trust and aligned goals.

    Key Takeaways

    • Effective university partnerships start with asking the right questions.
    • When your institution prioritizes alignment, accountability, and integration, you can avoid critical missteps.
    • The right partner will strengthen — not replace — your institutional vision and help equip you to scale sustainably.

    Build University Partnerships That Advance Your Goals

    At Archer Education, we work with accredited universities to build strategic partnerships rooted in a shared vision that drive scalable enrollment growth. With decades of higher ed experience, our team of industry experts has developed a flexible partnership model that supports internal growth, so that institutions can build self-sufficiency over time. 

    Contact our team to learn how our tech-enabled marketing, enrollment, and retention services can support your institution’s long-term goals. 

    Source link

  • When young people ask big questions and seek answers

    When young people ask big questions and seek answers

    Cliffrene Haffner attended the African Leadership Academy (ALA) in South Africa during the Covid-19 pandemic. Her university applications were stalling and she felt stressed and anxious.

    “Life felt unstable, as if I were hanging by a thin thread,” Haffner said. But it was at ALA that she discovered News Decoder.

    “Joining News Decoder helped me rebuild my voice,” she wrote. “It created a place to write honestly and with purpose whilst supporting others in telling their stories. At a time when the world felt numb and disconnected, we used storytelling to bring back hope on campus by sharing our fears, thoughts and expectations.”

    At News Decoder, students work with professional editors and news correspondents to explore complicated, global topics. They have the opportunity to report and write news stories, research and present findings in global webinars with students from other countries, produce podcasts and sit in on live video roundtables with experts and their peers across the globe.

    Many get their articles published on News Decoder’s global news site.

    A different way of seeing the world

    Out of these experiential learning activities, they take away important skills valuable in their later careers, whatever those careers might be: How to communicate clearly, how to recognize multiple perspectives, how to cut through jargon and propaganda and separate facts from opinion and speculation.

    One milestone for many of these is our Pitch, Report, Draft and Revise process, which we call PRDR. In it, students pitch a story topic to News Decoder with a plan on how to research and report it. We ask them to identify different perspectives on problems they want to explore and experts they can reach out to for information and context.

    Then we guide them through a process of introspection, if the story is a personal reflection on their own experience, or a process of reporting and interviewing. News Decoder doesn’t promise students that their stories will get published at the end of the process. They have to work for that — revising their drafts until the finished story is clear and relevant to a global audience.

    One student who went through the process was Joshua Glazer, now a student at Emory University in the United States. Glazer came to News Decoder in high school as an exchange student in Spain with School Year Abroad.

    “I think the skills that I got out of that went on to really change the course of my education and how I view the world,” Glazer said. “Because when you step into the world of journalism you learn a different way of seeing the world.”

    Recognizing our biases

    Glazer learned that for journalism, he had to be less opinionated. “You have to really approach things kind of as they are in the world,” Glazer said. “And that is hard to do. That is not an easy skill that we can do as humans because we inherently have biases.”

    He said it challenged him to look inwards and recognize his biases and counter them with evidence.

    “So I think those skills have really changed the course of how I view having an argument with somebody because all of a sudden, you know, when you have an argument with someone, it’s all opinion,” he said.

    For Haffner, who is now a business administration student at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University in Japan, News Decoder reshaped how she and her peers understood storytelling.

    “It taught us to let go of rigid biases and to make authenticity the centre of our work,” Haffner said. “Students from different backgrounds found a space where their voices were heard, respected and valued. Our stories formed a shared map, each one opening a new room to explore, each voice strengthening the collective journey we were on. In that chaotic period, we created something meaningful together. Something bigger than us.”

    Working through the complexity of a topic

    Marouane El Bahraoui, a research intern at The Carter Center in the U.S. state of Georgia, also discovered News Decoder at the African Leadership Academy. At the time, he was interested in writing about the effectiveness of the Arab Maghreb Union — an economic bloc of five North African countries. He grew up in Morocco but didn’t want to approach the topic from a purely Moroccan perspective.

    “It was like a very raw idea,” he said.

    He pitched the story and worked with both News Decoder Founder Nelson Graves and correspondent Tom Heneghan to refine the idea. They guided him in the reporting and writing process.

    “One aspect that I liked a lot from my research was the people that I had the chance to talk to,” he said. “It was during Covid and I was just at home and I’m talking to, you know, professors in U.S. universities, I’m talking to UN officials, experts working in think tanks in D.C. and I was thinking oh those people are just so far, you can’t even reach them. And then you have a conversation with them and they’re just normal people.”

    He also found writing the story daunting. “It was a little bit overwhelming for me at the time,” he said. “You know, you’re not writing like an academic essay.”

    Graves encouraged him to write in a straightforward manner. In school, he had been taught to write in a beautiful way to impress.

    “From News Decoder, something I learned is to always keep the audience in mind who you are speaking to, who are you writing to,” he said.

    He took away the importance of letting readers make their own conclusions. “You’re not writing to tell the reader what to think,” he said. “You are writing to give them ideas and arguments, facts and leave the thinking for them.”

    Source link

  • 3 Questions for MIT’s Luke Hobson

    3 Questions for MIT’s Luke Hobson

    Luke Hobson does it all. He is not only assistant director of instructional design for MIT xPRO and a lecturer at the University of Miami’s School of Education and Human Development, but Luke also writes books, hosts a podcast, blogs, publishes a newsletter, creates videos on YouTube and seems to know everyone in our field.

    I asked if Luke would be willing to step away from all these commitments and projects to answer my questions, and he graciously agreed.

    Q: How did your career progress from an individual learning design contributor to advancing into a leadership role at your institution, as well as a thought leader and creator in the learning, technology and design space? What advice do you have for others in our field looking to increase their campus and national impact?

    A: I have a bit of an obsession within our field. I still find it remarkable that, for a living, I get to care about designing learning experiences. Funny enough, I had no idea this field even existed until I met an instructional designer back in 2013. As soon as I learned that this was a career, I went all in. That obsessive mentality stayed with me when I became a contributor at Northeastern University and later at MIT. I wanted to find every possible way to create the most effective and meaningful kinds of courses and programs.

    Through all of my seldom successes and many, many failures, I learned a thing or two along the way, and I decided to start sharing these stories online. It began with answering questions in Facebook groups, which eventually turned into a blog, a podcast, a YouTube channel, a book and more. What I discovered through sharing these moments is that I developed a love for teaching about instructional design. This led me to pursue a leadership role at MIT and to build a team of instructional designers. It also led me to teach in the University of Miami’s online Ed.D. program. Being able to teach future leaders in learning science has been an incredibly rewarding experience.

    The best piece of advice I can give is to share. Share everything. Share your wins. Share your losses. Share your moments of glory. Share the times you fall flat on your face. People appreciate transparency. That’s how I built my brand online and my presence at MIT. I didn’t realize how much of an impact I was having until multiple faculty members mentioned following me on LinkedIn and asked how they could hire an instructional designer for their team. It’s been amazing to see the growth of IDs here from when I first started to now.

    Another step you can take today is to build your network. Dig the well before you’re thirsty. You mentioned how it seems like I know everyone in our field and I chuckled, thinking back to when I didn’t know a soul in instructional design. The pandemic opened my eyes: Everyone was stuck at home and on Zoom, so I took advantage of that. I reached out to people on LinkedIn for virtual coffee chats, invited them on my podcast, gave webinars for universities and companies, and more. All of this was to get to know people. If you want to make an impact, you can’t do it alone. You need the support of others, and there is no better community than the learning nerds.

    Q: Your Ed.D. is in educational leadership. Please tell us about your program and how completing a terminal degree in this field has impacted your career. For our community of nonfaculty educators—learning nerds—what are your recommendations around pursuing a doctorate while working?

    A: I’m thankful that I had a truly fantastic Ed.D. experience. I have to give all the credit in the world to Dr. Peg Ford for what she built at Southern New Hampshire University. I was on the fence about pursuing this degree, but after speaking with current students at the time, I felt like it was the right place for me. The program was built on a core foundation of a cohort-based model and forging strong bonds with fellow members. Dr. Ford understood the perils and curve balls life throws your way when you’re pursuing a doctorate and how easily those challenges can land you in A.B.D. limbo. It didn’t take long to see she was absolutely right. Our cohort faced major life events—losing loved ones, taking on new roles, having children, relocating to new cities and more. Through it all, we stuck together.

    What I appreciated most about my Ed.D. in educational leadership was the range of educators I met. From business professors to special education teachers, from deans to superintendents, I had the opportunity to hear a wide variety of perspectives on education and what it means to support students and fellow educators. I was introduced to the good, the bad and the ugly. By taking in all of those voices, I was able to apply their teachings and life lessons to my own learning experiences. That program shaped me into the educator I am today.

    What I find most surprising is that I now teach in an online Ed.D. program in applied learning sciences at the University of Miami. I often share with my students the same message about sticking together as a cohort and how those bonds will carry them through. While Dr. Ford is no longer associated with SNHU’s program, my dissertation chair, Dr. Audrey Rodgers, is now leading it. I recently had the chance to speak with current students, and it’s amazing to see how much the program has grown since I graduated.

    Here’s what I wish I knew before pursuing a doctorate: It’s absolutely possible to do, but it will be the hardest thing you’ve ever done. There’s a reason why only a small fraction of the population holds the title of doctor. No matter which school you attend, it’s going to be difficult. But in my opinion, it’s worth it. I knew I wanted to work in academia, and after speaking with a few colleagues, they all advised me to go back to grad school. Every role I wanted in the future required either an Ed.D. or a Ph.D., so it was the logical choice.

    With all that said, the first step in your journey as a working professional should be finding the right program for your needs. Not all programs are created equal. After all, you’re about to commit at least three to seven years of your life to this institution, so it’s important to choose wisely. Do your due diligence. Contact the institution and ask as many questions as you want. Watch program webinars. Find currently enrolled students on LinkedIn and ask for a quick chat about their experience. Connect with faculty and administrators. Read online reviews. Go the extra mile before starting this journey.

    Once you’ve found the right program for your goals, my best advice is to set up a system that works for your life. Your schedule has to shift to make space for classwork, research, lectures, readings and everything else. For me, this meant starting my days earlier. I found myself constantly distracted during the day, so I decided to wake up before everyone else. Surprisingly, it worked. Once you find a system that fits, it needs to become sacred and a top priority. I also relied heavily on the Pomodoro technique to stay focused and on track. If you haven’t used the “study with me” videos on YouTube, you’re missing out. Whatever helps you get into a state of flow is going to be key.

    And I know your question was about going back to school while working, but honestly, work wasn’t the hardest part of my academic journey. For me, it was family and my social life. Work will always be there. But when you start missing family functions, birthdays and social events, it’s tough. I essentially became a hermit during the final stretch of my dissertation. That was the only way I could stay focused and meet my goals.

    Q: The growth of online programs has increased the demand for learning designers. There is concern within our profession that in the (near) future, AI will be able to do much of the work that learning designers have traditionally done. How worried should learning designers be and what can they do to ensure they are not replaced by AI?

    A: Ah yes, the million-dollar question. What’s funny is that I’ve been designing AI courses long before the generative AI boom, and I could’ve never predicted that AI would find its way into our space. In health care, medication discovery or 3-D printing? Sure. But instructional design? That thought never crossed my mind. Yet here we are.

    Let’s break down your question a bit, starting with the concern around AI. You’re going to see this come in waves. A new breakthrough will happen, there will be mass pandemonium online and, within a few weeks, it fades. AI tools will continue to evolve and become more helpful, but someone still has to drive the bus. AI can’t do everything for you. I think that’s where many decision-makers are getting confused. Everyone is trying to add AI into their products, but do people actually want those features? The answer is often no.

    AI can be helpful for kick-starting ideas. But if you’re a student and you find out that your entire course was generated by AI and not created by a human, you’d likely be furious.

    A great source of insight on this is Reddit. You’ll find post after post from students deeply concerned about how AI is being used, whether by classmates or even by professors. LLMs tend to have a certain tone and style. It’s hard to describe exactly, but the writing often feels off. Unnatural. AI isn’t magical, even though that’s exactly how marketers are presenting it. LLMs work by predicting patterns based on data and trying to say the next most probable thing to please the user. In many cases, this doesn’t add up.

    Now, on to the second part of your question: What can instructional designers do to ensure they’re not replaced?

    We do what we’ve always done. We learn. Become the most knowledgeable person on your team when it comes to the ins and outs of AI. For many, AI still feels like a black box, and that’s understandable. But if you know which tool serves which purpose and how to use these tools to enhance your designs, ensure accessibility, create flexible learning pathways, transform content into different formats and generate compelling visuals, you’ll be far ahead of the curve.

    As you experiment, you’ll also encounter the limits of these tools. And when you see where AI stumbles, you’ll feel much more secure about your place in this evolving landscape. It’s not there yet. And getting an entire industry to adopt something at scale, especially something as complex as AI, is a massive undertaking.

    Source link

  • 3 Questions for Professor Mary Wright

    3 Questions for Professor Mary Wright

    Last year, Brown University announced that Mary Wright was embarking on a new adventure in early 2025.

    If you are anywhere near or around the CTL world, you likely know (or know about) Mary Wright. Her 2023 JHU Press publication, Centers for Teaching and Learning: The New Landscape in Higher Education, is a must-read for every university leader. Mary—along with Tracie Addy, Bret Eynon and Jaclyn Rivard—also has a forthcoming book with Johns Hopkins (2026), which will provide a 20-plus-year look at continuities and changes in the field of educational development.

    Therefore, it was big news earlier this year when Mary moved from her role as associate provost for teaching and learning and executive director of Sheridan Center at Brown to a new position as a professor of education scholarship at the University of Sydney. With Mary now more than six months in her new role, this was a good time to catch up with how things are going.

    Q: Tell us about your new role at the University of Sydney. What does a faculty appointment in Australia constitute in terms of teaching, research and administrative responsibilities?

    A: As in the U.S., a faculty appointment (here, called an academic appointment) varies greatly across and even within Australian institutions. In my role, I serve as a Horizon Educator, an education-focused academic role, which carries a heuristic of 70 percent time to education, 20 percent to scholarship and 10 percent to leadership or service-related activities. Like my prior 20-plus years of experience in the U.S., I am still an academic developer (called an educational developer in the U.S.), which means that education most frequently involves teaching and mentoring other academics as learners.

    I am a level-E academic, which is akin to a full professor role in the U.S. (The trajectory starts at level A, which encompasses associate lecturer and postdoctoral fellows and goes through level B [lecturer], level C [senior lecturer], level D [associate professor] and level E [professor].)

    There are many differences between U.S. and Australian higher education, but I’ll highlight two here in relation to those who work in CTLs. The first and most significant is that, in the U.S., educational developers are often positioned as professional staff. In Australia, many universities treat this work with parity to other academics. I feel that this substantially raises the credibility and value of academic development.

    Second, professional learning around teaching is a required part of many academics’ contracts, initially or for “confirmation,” and it is structured into their workloads. I first worried that this would prompt a good deal of reactance, but I have not found this to be the case. I now find this to be a more equitable system for students (and academic success), compared to the U.S.’s (primarily) voluntary approach.

    Q: Moving from Rhode Island to Australia is a big move. What is it about the University of Sydney that attracted you to the institution, and why did you make this big move at this point in your career?

    A: Three factors attracted me to the University of Sydney. First, I was attracted to what I will call their organizational honesty. The institution was very open that they were not where they wanted to be in regard to teaching and the student experience; they wanted to be a different kind of institution. They also had a very clear theory of change, mapping very much onto metaphors I write about elsewhere: requiring convening and community building (hub); support of individual career advancement (incubator); development of evidence-based practice, such as the scholarship of teaching and learning (sieve); and advancing the value of teaching and learning through recognition and reward (temple).

    Specifically, USyd was investing in over 200 new Horizon Educator positions, education-focused academics charged to be educational leaders. One part of my role is to work with this amazing group of academics to advance their own careers, as well as to realize the institution’s ambitions for enhanced teaching effectiveness. To anchor this work at a macro level, USyd also had been working very hard on developing and rolling out a new Academic Excellence Framework, which provides a clear pathway to the recognition and reward of education—in addition to other aspects of the academic role

    The University of Sydney is also making a significant investment in grants to foster the scholarship of teaching and learning, which has been a long-standing interest of mine but was often done “off the side of the desk.” My role involves working with people, programs and practices to facilitate SoTL.

    In addition to university strategy, I was attracted by the opportunity to work with Adam Bridgeman and colleagues in the university’s central teaching and learning unit. Educational Innovation has been engaged in very interesting high-level work around AI and assessment, as well as holistic professional learning to support academics, but like many CTLs, it has been stretched since COVID to advance a growing number of institutional aims. Because of my prior leadership in CTLs, I felt like I could also contribute in this space.

    Q: Pivoting from a university leadership staff role to a faculty role is appealing to many of us in the nonfaculty educator world. (Although I know you also had a faculty position at Brown). Can you share any advice for those who might want to follow in your footsteps?

    A: For some context, I started my career in the early 2000s in a professional staff role in a CTL and also occasionally adjuncted. I became a research scientist in the CTL, then moved to direct a CTL in 2016 and had an affiliate faculty position (with the staff/administrative role as primary). In 2020, I then moved to a senior administration role (again, my primary role was professional staff). So, I have worn a number of hats.

    Three factors have been helpful in transitioning across roles. First, I love to write, and while the scholarly work rarely “counted” for anything in these series of positions, I think it helped me advance to the next step. Second, it’s important to read a lot to stay current with the vast literature on teaching and learning. I think this can add value to my work with individual academics—to help them publish—as well as my work on committees, where there is often some literature to cite on the topic at hand.

    Finally, I think professional associations can be very helpful in building bridges and networks, especially for those considering an international transition. In the U.S., the POD Network was a key source of support. Now, before even applying to my current role, I subscribed to the newsletter of HERDSA (Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia) and I participated in one of their mentoring programs. I also serve as a co-editor of the International Journal for Academic Development, which exposed me to articles about Australian academic development, and I got some generous and wise advice from Australian and New Zealand IJAD colleagues about the job search.

    Source link

  • 3 Questions for Fractional COLO Jeremiah Grabowski

    3 Questions for Fractional COLO Jeremiah Grabowski

    Jeremiah Grabowski’s LinkedIn article “Announcing Fractional Chief Online Learning Officer (COLO): Building Independence in Online Higher Education” caught my attention. Setting aside my worry that a fractional hire could replace my full-time role, I decided to reach out to Jeremiah to understand what this offering is all about. 

    Q: What is a fractional COLO? What types of schools might this service be a good fit for? Why would a college or university invest in a fractional COLO instead of recruiting for a full-time online learning leader?

    A: A fractional COLO is a senior-level executive, chief online learning officer, who embeds within an institution on a part-time basis, providing executive-level expertise without the full-time commitment.

    This service is particularly well suited for small to midsize universities that recognize the need to invest in online learning but lack the start-up capital for a full-time executive position, which can be quite expensive when you factor in salary and benefits at the senior level.

    Many institutions approach fractional COLO services because they need to see a return on investment before making larger commitments. Building online learning programs requires significant up-front investment, and schools don’t always see returns in the first year. (I recently wrote an article exploring this: “Can You Build a Brand New Online Program for Half a Million Dollars?”)

    Essentially, many schools know they need to make the investment in online learning leadership, but they can’t commit to a full-time hire right out of the gate. A fractional COLO allows them to get started with expert guidance while building revenues, which go towards that larger investment.

    Q: Help us understand the fractional COLO from the provider perspective. How do you provide this service? How scalable is the model? How does the fractional COLO idea differ from the work of consultants/consulting companies, in terms of methods, deliverables, costs and outcomes?

    A: I offer several service levels to meet schools where they are. Some institutions want an assessment of their current online operations—essentially an outsider’s perspective on their strengths and opportunities. I’ve developed a comprehensive rubric covering 10 key areas, from strategic planning to marketing, admissions, course design, faculty support and student services. I spend two days on campus meeting with staff, faculty and administrators to understand how they holistically support online students, then deliver a report with actionable improvements for six- and 12-month time frames.

    From there, service levels scale up. Some schools need help launching specific programs, while others commit to the full fractional COLO engagement.

    When I begin working with any institution, I always visit campus first to meet everyone, from senior leaders to registrars, financial aid staff, instructional designers and the entire support team. After conducting my assessment, we then develop a six- to 12-month strategic plan tailored to that institution’s specific needs.

    Regarding scalability, that’s a great question. As a new venture, I haven’t reached my bandwidth limit yet. Hopefully, that becomes a good problem to have! If demand grows, I’d look for individuals with a similar mindset: individuals with a teacher’s heart who want to roll up their sleeves and help institutions learn and implement best practices. I like to say I “teach institutions how to fish.”

    What differentiates my approach from traditional consulting or vendors is the hands-on, DIY element. There are many excellent consultants and companies that do great work for institutions and achieve results. I focus on teaching and blending consultation with implementation. I’ll conduct assessments and provide strategic guidance, but I also get my hands dirty helping different departments across the institution implement those strategies.

    This approach works best for institutions that want to build online learning capabilities internally [and] retain all tuition revenue and can commit to a one- to two-year development timeline. The costs are significantly less than a full-time hire, without the overhead of salary and benefits, and deliverables are always scaled to meet each institution’s specific needs.

    Q: Why have you decided to build up this fractional COLO business instead of pursuing a more traditional COLO role at a single institution? Tell us about your educational and professional background and how that prepared you to create this concept.

    A: I’ve always had an entrepreneurial itch, even though I spent over 20 years of my career in higher education in traditional roles. I was fortunate to serve as COLO at an institution for eight years. That was a valuable experience since fewer than 10 percent of institutions have an online learning leader serving on the cabinet or reporting directly to the president. That role gave me a unique perspective on integrating online learning throughout an institution rather than keeping it siloed.

    My educational background combines business and education, which prepared me for this venture. My undergraduate degree was in business, which seeded those entrepreneurial interests, but I transitioned to education for my master’s and completed a Ph.D. in learning sciences.

    In my previous role, we were essentially building from scratch, so I referred to our team as a start-up. We developed new standard operating procedures, created budget models and hired new team members. In some ways, I felt like I was running a business within the university. That unique combination of business skills, educational expertise and start-up experience prepared me for this role. Also, maybe most importantly, if you’re going to start a new company, you’d better have a supportive spouse because it’s not easy, lol. 

    One last comment related to the intro—my goal isn’t to replace full-time COLOs. It’s actually the opposite. My intent is that as institutions work with me and see the value a COLO brings, they’ll eventually hire their own full-time leader once operations are established. I hope this work helps more schools recognize the importance of dedicated online learning leadership, ultimately growing the pool of full-time COLO positions across higher education. I don’t want to take work away from anyone. I want to grow the position and demonstrate the value these roles bring to institutions.

    Source link

  • What happens when universities stop asking questions?

    What happens when universities stop asking questions?

    For the last 15 years, I have used my knowledge as a barrister and former university lecturer to advise students on their academic appeals and misconduct cases.

    In that time, I have seen the best and worst of student behaviour. I have dealt with students who paid others to write their entire PhDs and who recruited stand-ins to attend clinical placements.

    I have encountered countless methods of cheating, from tiny notes hidden in pockets, to phones concealed in toilets, to modified ear protectors.

    Only recently, a law student told me she had seen classmates slip earphones beneath their hijab during exams, whispering questions and receiving answers from a distant accomplice.

    The ethics of representation

    Occasionally, students ask me to act unethically on their behalf. I recall one student who had failed a resit exam and been withdrawn from his course.

    In a moment of panic, he told the university that his parents had been killed in a terrible accident shortly before his exam. He begged me to repeat the lie in my formal appeal statement to the university. I refused.

    As barristers, we will fight tooth and nail for our clients, whatever they have done, but only within the confines of the truth.

    I remember one Russian client who had paid someone to write every single essay and eventually been caught. I explained that the evidence against him was strong, that the prospects of success were slim, and that I could not advise him to lie to the university.

    He shook his head in disgust:

    What is wrong with this country? In Russia, we pay the professor and everything is okay!

    Recently, I had a conversation with a person – a non-lawyer – who had set up a university appeals business abroad. Like me, he had seen the underside of higher education.

    He told me that students regularly cheat in the English language proficiency tests required by universities as a condition of entry. These tests ensure that students have sufficient command of English to cope with academic study.

    According to him, cheating on these tests is widespread, with some companies approaching him directly with answers to the language tests.

    He explained that there were several “university appeal services” in his home country offering forged medical certificates. They also provide fabricated “essay notes” for students wishing to convince their universities they had worked on an assignment.

    With a plausible medical note or a set of backdated essay drafts, a dishonest student can present a convincing case for leniency or mitigation.

    Despite many years in the business, I was horrified by these revelations. I searched online and quickly found websites that sell fake tests. Thus, Legit Certify states:

    We help you legally obtain an official, verifiable TOEFL certificate without taking the test…The certificate is identical to one earned through exams, fully accepted by universities…

    And DoctorsNoteStore.com offers, or £10.99:

    …fake/replica sick notes in the United Kingdom and Australia.

    Are universities aware of this? Do they know that some of their international students gain admission, or overturn decisions, on the basis of falsified or manipulated documents? What checks do they make to ensure the authenticity of medical and other documentary evidence?

    Conflicts of interest

    With 40 per cent of English universities in financial deficit, there is also the uncomfortable question of money. The revenue from international students is so significant that many institutions may struggle to survive without it.

    This financial dependence creates a conflict of interest. If a university uncovers widespread cheating in English language tests, or if it learns that students gained entry or remained on a course with false credentials, how should it react? If it investigates properly, the findings may threaten the much-needed flow of income.

    Handling the growing number of cases of misconduct and appeals is itself resource-intensive and costly. A professor friend of mine, who examines PhDs, told me that he never fails a PhD student because, in his words, “it’s not worth the hassle of an inevitable appeal”.

    A university that turns a blind eye may preserve the balance sheet but corrodes academic standards.

    Some universities take the issue seriously. They invest in resources to detect cheating, run hundreds of misconduct panel hearings, and occasionally expel students. However, I doubt all institutions appreciate the scale of the problem or the sophistication of the cheating industry.

    There is an international trade in dishonesty that exploits the pressure on students to succeed and the reluctance of universities to jeopardise their financial health and reputation.

    If universities are not already alive to this reality, they need to wake up. Every forged medical letter that passes unchecked, every essay or thesis written by a ghostwriter, every fraudulent placement report that slips through the net, undermines the credibility of the institution and the degree it awards.

    Paying the price

    The harm is not limited to universities themselves. Employers, patients, clients and the public at large may pay the price if unqualified or dishonest graduates enter professional roles. Who wants to hire a lawyer or engineer who cheated in their exams, or be treated by a doctor who paid someone to attend clinical placements for them?

    The purpose of higher education is not simply to hand out degrees in exchange for fees but to cultivate knowledge and skill, to educate. If universities fail to address the growing industry of deception, they risk betraying that purpose.

    The question is not whether students cheat – they plainly do and probably more than ever before with the advent of generative AI – but whether universities have the courage to confront it, even at the cost of short-term financial loss and reputational damage.

    Source link

  • 3 Questions for Coursera’s Tom Fail

    3 Questions for Coursera’s Tom Fail

    Tom Fail and I work together on my institution’s Coursera portfolio, with Tom serving as our main point of contact. So far, I’ve enjoyed this collaboration, as Tom has been an effective and energetic partner. Tom not only works for Coursera, but he was also a consumer of university/Coursera partnerships as an online M.B.A. student (and now graduate) from the Gies College of Business at the University of Illinois. As I’m always interested in colleagues who combine full-time work and full-time learning, I was excited to engage Tom in a conversation about his career and education.

    Q: Tell us about your role at Coursera. What are your primary accountabilities and responsibilities? What does a typical day look like?

    A: As a strategic account manager at Coursera, I’m passionate about improving access to affordable, high-quality education from leading universities and industry partners. I’ve been with Coursera for nearly four years, initially as a technical account manager, where I focused on platform functionality and project success. Over time, I’ve had the opportunity to expand my scope both with the volume of partners as well as building strong partnerships focused on aligning their goals with Coursera’s mission to expand global learning opportunities.

    On a typical day, I’m collaborating with university and industry leaders and internal teams to design, scale and optimize online programs. Some days I’m pitching new features or program designs to partners; other days I’m focused on marketing strategies and learner life-cycle experiments that drive engagement and retention. I’m also listening to our partners for opportunities, big and small, to improve workflows both for staff and students that allow our strategy to scale and work in reality. I love getting into the weeds to understand exactly how something works and coming up with solutions that can be adopted to improve outcomes.

    I’m accountable to my partners to help them get the most out of Coursera; internal stakeholders rely on me to ensure we’re driving key priorities, features and work streams with our partners. And, of course, my first priority is the learner. Everything we do is about making sure learners can gain access to the skills they need to advance their careers and thrive in a rapidly changing world. Ultimately, success means creating programs that deliver real value, are accessible at scale and help drive better outcomes for learners everywhere.

    Q: How did the process of working towards your iMBA influence how you think about Coursera’s role in working with universities on online degrees? What should universities be doing to make graduate degrees more accessible, feasible and high value for full-time working adults?

    A: The most helpful part of earning my M.B.A. while working at Coursera has been understanding our platform from the learner perspective and what really differentiates content on our platform. Since I started at Coursera, I’ve completed my M.B.A., as well as professional certificates in data analytics and project management and Specializations in business strategy and data visualization. I always have fresh strategies and love getting to demo features from the lens of my own student account to give partners a real-world view of our learner experience and the outcomes they can drive with course design.

    When it comes to any offerings on the platform, flexibility and accessibility are absolutely critical. Not all working adults have the means, or the desire, to leave their jobs and return to school full-time. I have a ton of respect for anyone who does, but that wasn’t the path for me. The iMBA gave me the opportunity to earn my degree over two years while continuing to work, and that flexibility made all the difference. It wasn’t easy, but the program’s design and curriculum kept me engaged and excited.

    Every single class had a direct connection to my day-to-day work at Coursera, which kept me going forward and learning within the program. When I got my first master’s in management and leadership back in 2012, I didn’t have the professional context to apply what I was learning, so this was really meaningful, and I’m proud of completing the degree.

    For universities, the key is designing programs that allow learners to learn on their own terms and start programs more like a consumer purchase. Having stackable content available in open courses that can be applied towards the degree allows learners to try the content and gain confidence in the program and themselves before they fully commit to a full program. Also, performance-based admissions pathways offer learners the opportunity to earn their way into degrees regardless of their background. Some people want live sessions; others prefer fully asynchronous options. Some enjoy group work; others need flexibility to work independently. There’s no one-size-fits-all model, and that’s where universities can differentiate themselves—by striking a healthy balance between structure and flexibility, best practices and personalization. Ultimately, accessibility, flexibility and relevance are what make these programs high value for working professionals.

    Looking forward, a critical element for universities is the evolution of content. Two to three years ago, AI was barely part of the conversation; now every instructional design team and faculty member is grappling with its implications, from academic integrity to assessing skills in a new economy. You can’t “set it and forget it” with your curriculum and courses anymore. Learners have endless options, and that competition will only intensify. The partners that stand out will be the ones that prioritize continuous improvement: integrating learner feedback, refreshing content to stay aligned with industry trends and delivering programs that feel robust, relevant and career-focused.

    Q: Reflecting on your career and educational path, what advice do you have for early and midcareer professionals interested in building a career at the intersection of technology and education?

    A: When I started in undergrad at East Stroudsburg University, I wanted to be a high school social studies teacher. I hit a turning point when I realized all high school students—myself included—can be a handful, so I pivoted into economics and history. My adviser, Dr. Christopher Brooks, and my first boss, hall director and now friend Patrick Monoghan, helped me beyond words to figure out where I excelled and pushed me to shape my career. At ESU, I had so many incredible people invest time and energy into me, and I especially love my career in ed tech because I can help other students gain access to technology and education that helps them figure out their path.

    As I think about my early career at EAB, I had the opportunity to work with almost 100 schools deploying student success technology to help identify at-risk students and get them the help and resources they need. You learn a lot as a 24-year-old explaining to provosts and CTOs how the system works, what the road map is and what you did to mitigate after a self-inflicted data error occurs. Coursera has taken that even further, as I get the opportunity to work with some of the most prestigious universities and companies in the world to improve education and build programs that can improve people’s careers and lives, the way education improved mine.

    For anyone looking to build a career in education, I’d say this: You can work in any industry—telecom, banking, pharmaceuticals, whatever—but education offers a unique chance to make a meaningful difference. It’s not lip service to say that education lifts people up and improves lives, and being part of a team focused on making learning more accessible, scalable and affordable worldwide is incredible.

    Source link

  • The New COVID Vaccine Rules Leave Parents with More Questions than Answers – The 74

    The New COVID Vaccine Rules Leave Parents with More Questions than Answers – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    The federal government’s latest guidelines for COVID-19 vaccines make it difficult to know who, exactly, will be able to access shots this fall. While Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and some of his staff claim anyone will be able to access a shot in consultation with their doctor, medical groups are warning that the new guidance will impact a broad swath of people, including postpartum people and healthy children.

    “For children and young adults that I see, there are constraints, and they are significant,” said Dr. Molly O’Shea, a pediatrician in Michigan and a spokesperson for the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

    It might also take several more weeks to know who will be able to receive no-cost COVID-19 vaccines covered by health insurance. That decision partly depends on formal recommendations from a vaccine panel that isn’t scheduled to meet until mid-September. 

    Actions by the Food and Drug Administration last week mean that none of the COVID-19 vaccines that are slated to be on the U.S. market this fall will have an emergency use authorization that had allowed their quick (yet still rigorously tested) approval at the height of the pandemic. The removal of this designation means the drug company Pfizer will no longer offer COVID-19 vaccines to very young children, limiting parents’ brand options and potentially impacting supply.

    Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax, the three main COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers, have all shared news releases about what they’ve been approved to offer:

    • Moderna, Pfizer or Novavax will offer shots to anyone who is 65 and older, irrespective of medical history.
    • Pfizer will offer shots to anyone between the ages of five and 64 if they have at least one underlying condition that puts them at high risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19.
    • Moderna will offer shots to anyone between six months and 64 if they have at least one underlying condition that puts them at high risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19.
    • Novavax, the only company providing a non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, will offer shots to anyone between 12 and 64 if they have at least one underlying condition that puts them at high risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19.

    The vaccine panel known as the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) is expected to make formal recommendations on these FDA-approved vaccines, and those recommendations have historically determined whether insurance providers will cover a vaccine at no cost under insurance.

    An HHS spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for information and comment from The 19th, but in a post on X, Kennedy said: “These vaccines are available for all patients who choose them after consulting with their doctors.” Separately, USA Today reported on a document from HHS stating the FDA’s actions do “not affect access to these vaccines for healthy individuals. These vaccines remain available to those who choose them in consultation with their healthcare provider.”

    Dr. Marty Makary, FDA commissioner, added in a separate X post: “100% of adults in this country can still get the vaccine if they choose. We are not limiting availability to anyone.”

    But what that means practically for everyday people who want to access a COVID-19 shot — everything from whether their doctor will prescribe it, or if a pharmacy will be able to administer it, and whether there will be an out-of-pocket cost — is unclear for now. 

    How will it impact postpartum people?

    Pregnant people are expected to still have access to the vaccine because the CDC continues to list pregnancy as an underlying condition that puts an individual at high risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19. (The list of at least two dozen conditions also includes chronic health conditions and immunocompromised conditions.)

    But Kennedy, who has repeatedly questioned the safety of COVID-19 vaccines despite research that shows their effectiveness, announced in May that the CDC would no longer formally recommend such vaccines to pregnant people and healthy children, a move that seemed to contradict his own department. 

    Lactating and postpartum individuals must have an underlying medical condition to be eligible for one of the FDA’s approved vaccines, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)’s understanding of the announcement. ACOG continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination to people who are contemplating pregnancy, are pregnant, were recently pregnant or are now lactating.

    “We recognize that now, disappointingly, only lactating and postpartum individuals with an underlying condition will be eligible for vaccination. Still, it remains critical that pregnant patients receive the vaccines so that they are able to provide passive immunity from COVID-19 to their infants in those first few months of life before they can be vaccinated,” said ACOG President Steven J. Fleischman in an email.

    How will it impact healthy children?

    Healthy children will likely still be able to access the COVID vaccine, but the cost for a parent or guardian, as well as availability, will be impacted by these decisions.

    Charlotte A. Moser, co-director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said parents who want to get their kids the COVID-19 vaccine should still be able to do so through what is called shared clinical decision-making in consultation with their child’s health care provider, according to the CDC’s current vaccine schedule. But it’s unclear whether this will change when ACIP meets again.

    But physicians who prescribe a COVID-19 vaccine outside of the parameters of how the FDA approved them would be OKing use of the shot “off-label” — a designation that means a medical product is being used outside of how the FDA approved it. That raises questions about access and cost. Physicians might not be willing to prescribe off-label because of concerns about liability.

    “I think that there will be a substantially smaller number of pediatricians, pharmacies, etc., who will be comfortable taking that risk,” O’Shea said.

    Dr. Dial Hewlett, medical director of tuberculosis services at Westchester County Department of Health in New York and a spokesperson for the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said an off-label prescription might also not be covered by insurance.

    “A mother or father can go in with their child and say, ‘I’d like for them to have the vaccine,’ but they may be told, ‘Well we’ll give it, but you’re going to have to pay $200,’” he said.

    The science on COVID vaccines has consistently indicated they are safe for children to receive.
    (Joseph Prezioso / AFP / Getty Images)

    Depending on the circumstances, pharmacists may also not be able to provide off-label vaccines. Some states tie pharmacist immunization authority to FDA approval,which has the potential to create a hodgepodge of access. The New York Times reported that CVS and Walgreens, the country’s largest pharmacy chains, have begun restricting COVID-19 shots in some states to people with a prescription. 

    “There may be some variability from state to state, but it’s a big barrier if FDA approval is not there, and the FDA approvals have been pulled back from where they were previously,” Hewlett said.

    The FDA announcement is “concerning,” added Moser, who noted that limiting Pfizer’s vaccine will make it more difficult for all children to get a COVID-19 vaccine this year because of anticipated supply limitations.

    O’Shea, the pediatrician in Michigan, said her office is currently deciding how many COVID-19 shots to stock, and it’s proving tricky as they weigh the cost vs. demand — the percentage of children under 18 getting the shot is under 15 percent.

    “Figuring out how much we want to have at any one time, and how we are going to give it to people — this really makes it a lot more complicated,” she said.

    What happens next?

    Moser said the announcement adds confusion for providers and families, and noted that the unilateral approach by Kennedy so far when it comes to vaccine policy “removes hundreds of voices of clinicians and scientists that were part of the process.” Moser recently served on ACIP and is among the members that Kennedy removed. He has replaced the panel with people who do not have relevant experience.

    “That army of voices ensured a process informed by clinical experience and scientific expertise to which the small group making these decisions now cannot possibly compare,” she said in an email.

    The revamped ACIP panel is scheduled to meet over two days beginning on September 18. Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, a doctor who is chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, is now questioning whether that panel has enough legitimacy to meet, especially amid a leadership shakeup at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

    “Serious allegations have been made about the meeting agenda, membership, and lack of scientific process being followed for the now announced September ACIP meeting,” he said in a statement. “These decisions directly impact children’s health and the meeting should not occur until significant oversight has been conducted. If the meeting proceeds, any recommendations made should be rejected as lacking legitimacy given the seriousness of the allegations and the current turmoil in CDC leadership.”

    AAP called Kennedy’s latest COVID guidelines “deeply troubling” and urged COVID vaccine decision-making to remain between medical experts and families. 

    Dr. Susan J. Kressly, president of AAP, said in a statement that any barrier to COVID-19 vaccination as the nation enters the respiratory virus season creates “a dangerous vulnerability for children and their families.”

    “Any parent who wants their child vaccinated should have access to this vaccine,” she said, adding that HHS’ action “not only prevents this option for many families, but adds further confusion and stress for parents trying to make the best choices for their children.”

    This story was originally reported by Barbara Rodriguez of The 19th. Meet Barbara and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Source link

  • 3 Questions for Senior Learning Designer Heather Hans

    3 Questions for Senior Learning Designer Heather Hans

    On Aug. 12, senior learning designer Heather Hans posted on LinkedIn,

    After 7 years of service with a great team, I’ve been laid off from Duke, like many of my colleagues. 

    I’m taking some time to consider what I want to do next. This includes any of my areas of expertise, from learning design and libraries to visual art and journalism. I’m also keeping my eye out for roles that combine my experience in new ways.

    If you have 5 minutes, could you please share this post, connect me with someone you think I should talk to, or share any relevant job openings?

    I’m looking for hybrid roles in the Triad and Triangle of NC and remote roles anywhere (willing to travel some, too).

    I saw Heather’s post, read all the supportive comments the post generated and had two questions: 1) Which university or organization will be smart and lucky enough to recruit Heather? 2) Would Heather be willing to share her story in this space for this community? 

    On my second question, Heather graciously agreed to participate in this Q&A.

    Q: Tell us about your professional and educational background. What are the projects, initiatives and services that you have contributed to and led? What are your superpowers that potential employers should know about?

    A: I’m an art major who worked in journalism for five years after college, doing writing and editing. Then I pursued my master’s in library and information studies and worked for several years as an academic librarian focused on teaching and learning. I moved into instructional design for online learning at UNC Chapel Hill and then worked at Duke University for seven years, most recently as a senior learning experience designer. 

    My recent accomplishments include: 

    • Establishing digital education strategies with five professional schools and developing certificate programs in UAS (Drones) Applications and Operations in Environmental Science, Church Administration and Human Resources, and Healthcare Leadership for Climate Science.
    • Leading continuous improvement initiatives to develop new or updated workflows, create standard operating procedures and update team roles and responsibilities.
    • Mentoring and coaching newer designers in project leadership and advanced learning design skills, like creating assessments and drafting course content.
    • Developing team AI guidelines that set expectations for how generative AI is used in course development work.

    My superpowers are empathy, strategy and creativity. I excel at building relationships, collaborating and coaching, whether that be to design an online course for the first time or to grow as a professional. I think analytically and strategically about work processes, projects and goals. I generate a lot of ideas, and I enjoy figuring out how to take an idea or vision and implement it successfully.

    Q: In thinking about your next role, what is the organizational culture and institutional priorities that you are looking for in determining the fit with your strengths and values?  

    A: As I look for roles, I keep going back to the idea of work being human-centered. Does the organization value its people and its impact more than its profits? Does it genuinely want to improve educational access for everyone? How has it shown that it keeps humans centered in discussions of technology and AI? Further, is it continuing to prioritize equity and inclusivity, and does it ask, “Who needs a seat at the table?” when embarking on new projects and initiatives?

    Like people, organizations are works in progress—ultimately, what I care about is follow-through. Do you set human-centered intentions and see them through? I want a workplace where leaders embrace empathy and difficult conversations while encouraging healthy collaboration and boundaries. Finally, I want a workplace where workers have agency to think deeply and creatively.

    Q: From your experience navigating the fallout of the federal attack on higher education, what advice do you have for all of us also dealing with job uncertainty and professional stress?  

    A: I’ve been asking everyone else this question! What I’ve learned so far is that we are a community of educators that is much bigger than any particular institution or organization. How can we help each other and continue to do the important work we care about? 

    I wasn’t expecting the outpouring of support I received, and it reminded me that it’s okay to reach out and ask for help. It also strengthened my resolve to help others when I can.

    Finally, remember that you are much more than your role and your organization–you can figure it out, and you contain multitudes that may end up surprising you.

    Source link