Tag: technical

  • Employers will increasingly focus on graduates’ skills over technical knowledge

    Employers will increasingly focus on graduates’ skills over technical knowledge

    There are few safe bets about the future, so the impact of technology on labour markets, how transitions through education and into work will change, and the need to reskills and upskill, can only be predicted.

    But we do know that technology – AI in particular – is a disruptive force. We know that declining birth rates and higher employer skills needs have the potential to create a difficult labour market that hinders growth. We also know it’s likely that people who don’t adapt to changes in work could see their careers suffer.

    In response to these shifts, graduate and apprentice employers are considering fresh approaches to their talent strategies. Strategies that will focus less on a person’s age, education and technical experience, and more on their skills, capabilities and aptitudes.

    The Institute of Student Employers (ISE) recent report, From early career to emerging talent, shows that 68 per cent of early career employers have already adopted or partially adopted a skills-based strategy to hiring – and another 29 per cent are considering it.

    A constricted labour market

    Quite rightly, we are all concerned about the tough jobs market facing students, the high volumes of applications they make, and the time it takes many to get a graduate job. Because of the UK’s anaemic growth, the current labour market is tight (ISE predicts graduate vacancies will only grow by one per cent this year). But once growth returns to the economy, it’s likely employers will see significant talent shortages.

    We can see latent labour market problems in the current Labour Market Information (LMI) data. The UK’s unemployment rate at 4.4 per cent is historically low. Only 16.4m people in England and Wales are educated to level 4 or over – yet there are 18.6m jobs currently at that level, rising to 22.7m over the next 10 years. Over the next decade the working age population will increase only by 1.14m people (the over-70s, on the other hand, will increase by 2.1m).

    Mention 2022 and while most remember the heatwave, recruiters remember the post-pandemic growth spurt which left many vacancies unfilled. A CIPD labour market survey from summer of that year reported that 47 per cent of employers had hard-to-fill vacancies and the top response to difficulties reported by employers was to upskill existing staff.

    A problematic word

    What is a skill, an attribute or a capability? What can be taught, learned and developed, and what individual traits are innate? Some skills are technical, some more behavioural. And we’ll all have our own views on the abilities of ourselves and others. So, the word skills is problematic, which makes agreement on what approach we take to skills problematic.

    In their recent Wonkhe articles, Chris Millward and Konstantinos Kollydas and James Coe are right to highlight the challenge of differentiating between knowledge, technical behavioural and cognitive skills. To varying degrees, employers need both. I’d add another challenge, particularly in the UK: the link between what you study and what you do is less pronounced. Over 80 per cent of graduate recruiters do not stipulate a degree discipline. This makes connecting skills development to the labour market problematic.

    Another problem with the use of the word skills is the danger that we take a reductive, overly simplistic view of skills. A student who does a group activity successfully may think they’ve nailed teamworking skills. In reality, working with people involves a multitude of skills that many of us spend our working lives trying to master.

    Employers are already increasing their focus on skills

    In their report The skill-based organisation: a new operating model for work and the workforce, Deloitte describe how organisations are developing “a whole new operating model for work and the workforce that places skills, more than jobs, at the centre.”

    As recruitment for specific expertise becomes more challenging, people are matched to roles based on skills and potential, less on experience in a role. Skills-based hiring strategies encompass career changers, older workers, people who have near-to work experience. Technology maps an organisation’s skills base to create an internal marketplace for roles and employees are encouraged to re-skill and upskill in order to move about the organisation as jobs change.

    Graduates will need the skills and associated mindset to navigate this future world of work. World Economic Forum 2025 Future of Jobs analysis shows that 69 per cent of UK organisations placed resilience, flexibility and agility in the top five skills that will increase in importance by 2030.

    Graduate recruitment strategies could evolve to make less use of education exit points to define the talent pool hired from: career-changers, older-workers, and internal switchers are incorporated into development programmes. More learning content becomes focused on developing behavioural and cognitive skills to promote a more agile cohort.

    Students do develop skills

    Within HE, practitioners have already established a considerable body of knowledge, research and practice on employability skills. Where change is occurring, is in the campus-wide approach to skills that many institutions have developed (or are in the process of developing). Approaches that aim to ensure all students have the opportunity to develop a core set of skills that will enable them to transition through education and into work. Bristol and Kingston, among others, have shown how skills can be embedded right across the curriculum.

    I’m a big fan of Bobby Duffy’s work on delayed adulthood which suggests to me that the average student or graduate in their late teens and early twenties is at quite a different stage of development to previous generations. Which means that it’s wrong-headed to think of deficits in students’ work readiness as the fault of students (or their coddling parents).

    Employers and educators together have a role to play in helping students understand their own skills and how to develop them. Skills require scaffolding. Surfacing skills in the curriculum ensures students understand how their academic work develops core skills.

    And the provision and promotion of extra-curricular activities, including work experience, can be built into the student journey. Programmes where students develop their ability to deal with change and challenging situations, to analyse and solve complex problems, to adopt a positive approach to life-long learning.

    The skills agenda opportunity

    At the ISE we leave the language of skills gaps and employers’ apparent low opinion of graduates to the tabloids. Only 17 per cent of employers in our annual survey say they disagree that graduates are not work-ready. We do ask a more subtle question on the attitudes and behaviours that employers expect early career hires to possess when they start work. The top skills employers thought students weren’t as proficient in as they expected were self-awareness, resilience and personal career management.

    I am not, never have been, and never will be, a policy wonk. Maybe someone who is can design the architecture of incentives and systems that better connect education pathways to labour market needs. This architecture will also have to be able to predict labour market needs four to five years in advance, because that’s the lag between a typical students’ course choice and their job application. But if that can’t be done, surely a good investment is ensuring that students have plenty of opportunities to develop their skills and attributes to deal with an ever more changing workplace.

    Fully embracing a skills approach is a great opportunity to demonstrate how HE adds value to the UK economy through the triangulation of student interests, employer needs and a great education experience.

    Read the ISE’s report, From early talent to emerging talent, for a detailed analysis of the forces impacting how employers will hire and develop students in the future.

    Source link

  • Governors tout career and technical education in 2025 State of States

    Governors tout career and technical education in 2025 State of States

    Dive Brief:

    • Career and technical education, teacher workforce funding and student achievement are some of the main education policy priorities for governors across the country, according to a report from the Education Commission of the States and the National Governors Association. 
    • The report tracked and analyzed 2025 State of the State addresses so far this year from 49 governors, including the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam. The State of the State Address is an annual speech given by state governors that provides the opportunity to outline policy priorities and elevate successes. 
    • The top education policy trend this year, the report found, was workforce development opportunities for students. Thirty-three governors discussed career and technical education as an opportunity to prepare students for entering the workforce and bolster the economy.

    Dive Insight:

    The Education Commission of the States has tracked and analyzed trends in education policy accomplishments and proposals featured in governors’ State of the State addresses for the last 20 years. This is the sixth year the commission has partnered with the National Governors Association to create a special report that highlights the top education policy topics mentioned.

    The 33 governors speaking about CTE also discussed internships and apprenticeships as avenues to gain real-world skills that prepare young people for workforce demands. 

    Some states highlighted their current offerings and programs, like Tennessee’s Youth Employment Program and Wyoming’s Innovation Partnership. Others, like Delaware and Oklahoma, highlighted incoming legislative efforts to provide more workforce development opportunities.

    In previous years, K-12 funding has been a consistent priority expressed across most of the state addresses. This year, at least 32 governors addressed funding, and several highlighted historic investments in K-12 funding — like Nevada’s investment of over $2 billion in new funding for students and schools last session, which marked the largest education investment in the state’s history.

    Fiscal certainty for school districts is one of the fundamentals that can improve student success, said Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek in her address. 

    Federal funding for K-12, however, is facing some risks. While the Trump administration has promised to preserve “all statutory programs that fall under the agency’s purview,” such as funding for students with disabilities, the downsizing of the U.S. Department of Education is putting school districts at financial risk, according to Moody’s Ratings.

    Teacher workforce is another common priority among governors. At least 26 mentioned teacher recruitment and retention or teacher compensation, the report states. 

    Some states like Connecticut and Maryland are trying to create workforce programs that bring more diverse teacher demographics, while other states mentioned recent investments into teacher salaries.

    Indiana highlighted legislation that will raise the minimum salary for public school teachers by $5,000 and require that 65% of state school funding support to districts go to teacher compensation. 

    Cuts to the federal Education Department have also impacted the teacher workforce. On April 4, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s emergency request to maintain a freeze on millions of dollars in federal teacher training grants.

    Additionally, at least 25 governors addressed academic achievement, including commitments to math and reading instruction. Several states created and implemented literacy and proficiency programs that have shown growth and increased scores. 

    For example, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy spoke about early data from the state’s implementation of the Alaska Reads Act. In his address, Dunleavy said that the percentage of Alaskan students who met early literacy benchmarks grew from 41% to 57%. 

    According to the report, governors stressed the importance of early literacy skills for life-long achievement. Science of reading was also highlighted as a major contributor to building early literacy skills.

    Source link

  • How 24/7 Technical Support Drives Student Success and Retention

    How 24/7 Technical Support Drives Student Success and Retention

    From speed-to-lead to 24/7 support: Meeting student needs in the digital age

    In our recent webinar, “The Importance of Speed to Lead in Meeting Your Enrollment Goals,” we highlighted how rapid, personalized responses to prospective students can significantly impact their perception of an institution’s quality and commitment. This principle of timely, relevant communication extends beyond the admissions process and into the heart of the student experience, particularly in online education. In this post, we’ll delve into how this same philosophy applies to technical support, forming a crucial component of student success and retention.

    The critical role of 24/7 technical support in online education

    Building on the speed-to-lead concept, the need for swift and effective technical support in online learning environments has become paramount. As we transition from initial student engagement to ongoing support, responsive assistance becomes even more critical. Let’s explore why timely technical support is essential and how it ties to student retention, institutional credibility, and mission fulfillment.

    The importance of quick response to technical needs

    Just as rapid responses to inquiries can influence a student’s decision to enroll, quick resolution of technical issues can determine a student’s ability to succeed in their coursework. Student satisfaction is closely tied to the quality of the overall experience institutions provide to students, including addressing technical issues and how the institution responds to the students as individuals when they have a concern. When students encounter technical barriers without immediate resolution, their frustration can lead to disengagement and even withdrawal from courses.

    The importance of swift technical support in higher education cannot be overstated, as exemplified by several leading institutions.

    • Penn State University’s IT Service Desk stands out with its comprehensive 24/7 technology support model. Utilizing a blend of 20 students and full-time staff members, they efficiently manage up to 600 daily requests during peak periods. This continuous operation throughout the year, pausing only for university holidays, ensures that the Penn State community receives timely assistance for diverse IT-related issues, from learning management systems to account access and new IT service implementations.
    • Arizona State University (ASU): ASU’s help center provides round-the-clock service for their large student body. They have 81 employees and 22 student representatives who offer 24/7 support for approximately 100,000 students, including both on-campus and online learners. The center serves as a comprehensive “front door” to the university, assisting with various inquiries beyond just technical issues.
    • The University of Central Florida (UCF) has adopted a strategic approach to technical support. By deploying technicians during high-demand hours, UCF effectively minimizes downtime for both students and faculty. This proactive strategy maintains the continuity of the learning process and demonstrates the institution’s commitment to student success.

    In instances where staffing may be limited, universities are increasingly turning to AI-powered solutions to meet the demand for immediate, round-the-clock support. For example, Thompson Rivers University has implemented a 24/7 chatbot support system. This AI-driven tool automates 83% of incoming chats to their Future Student department, providing instant responses outside of regular business hours. Moreover, a number of innovative platforms such as RNL’s Compass digital assistant provide AI-powered chatbots designed for higher education. These AI-powered assistants can seamlessly integrate with various campus systems, including SIS/ERP, ITSM, and LMS, to address a wide range of inquiries related to IT, admissions, financial aid, and more. By leveraging such technologies, institutions can significantly reduce support costs while ensuring students and faculty receive timely, personalized assistance at any hour.

    The case for a 24×7 support model

    A 24/7 support model aligns with the flexibility that online education promises. Students often engage with coursework outside traditional hours, making access to technical assistance at any time a necessity rather than a luxury. Institutions like Faith Christian School emphasize the importance of uninterrupted access to educational resources, which fosters independence and self-directed learning. Similarly, Google Cloud’s Student Success Services leverage virtual assistants to provide instant answers around the clock, freeing up staff for more personalized guidance.

    Moreover, research shows that institutions offering comprehensive support services see higher retention rates. RNL data show how targeted outreach and timely interventions can significantly improve student outcomes and graduation rates. By addressing technical issues promptly, universities not only retain students but also fulfill their mission of guiding them toward successful program completion.

    Perception of a well-equipped university

    The availability of 24/7 technical support is increasingly viewed as a marker of institutional quality. Students now expect seamless access to both academic content and support services when selecting a university. Institutions that fail to meet these expectations risk damaging their reputation and losing prospective students. RNL student satisfaction and priorities data shows that approximately two-thirds of students value institutions addressing their personal needs throughout the recruitment process, which can factor in their decision to enroll at the institution. Offering robust technical support signals that a university is technologically advanced and committed to providing an optimal learning environment.

    Enabling student success and institutional mission

    Timely technical support directly contributes to student success by removing barriers to learning. When students can focus on their studies without being derailed by technical difficulties, they are more likely to persist in their programs. This aligns with the broader mission of most universities: helping students succeed academically and graduate. Demonstrating the lived expression of institutional mission through 24/7 support for student services can enhance retention and overall well-being. By addressing both academic and non-academic challenges in real-time, universities create an ecosystem where students thrive.

    Conclusion: Timely support is critical to the online student experience

    From the initial point of contact through to graduation, the principle of timely, personalized support remains crucial. The importance of responding quickly to students’ technical needs is a natural extension of the speed-to-lead philosophy in enrollment management. A 24/7 support model not only ensures uninterrupted learning but also strengthens institutional credibility and fosters student retention. By prioritizing timely assistance across all aspects of the student journey, universities can live up to their mission of empowering students to succeed academically and graduate with confidence. As these examples illustrate, investing in comprehensive support systems is an investment in both student success and institutional sustainability.

    We’re here to help you navigate the technology you need to engage students and provide them with that 24/7 support. Reach out and we’ll set up a time to talk with an RNL enrollment technology expert.

    How can you leverage technology across the student lifecycle?

    With students expecting personalized attention 24/7, you need to be able to engage them at any point in the student lifecycle. Talk with our experts about how you can use the latest technology to create those connections to strengthen recruitment and retention.

    Ask for a complimentary consultation

    Source link

  • EEOC and DOJ Issue Technical Assistance Documents on Unlawful DEI-Related Discrimination

    EEOC and DOJ Issue Technical Assistance Documents on Unlawful DEI-Related Discrimination

    by CUPA-HR | March 20, 2025

    On March 19, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) released two technical assistance documents intended to educate “the public about unlawful discrimination related to ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI) in the workplace.” The two documents aim to inform the public about how civil rights rules and laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to employment policies, programs and practices, including those labeled or framed as “DEI.”

    Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on protected characteristics, including race, color, religion, sex or national origin. As the agencies note in both documents, DEI is a broad term that is not defined under statute. The technical assistance explains that DEI practices may be unlawful if they involve an employer or other covered entity taking an employment action motivated in whole or in part by an employee’s race, sex, or other protected characteristic. The agencies emphasize that Title VII’s protections apply equally to all racial, ethnic, and national origin groups, as well as both sexes, and that unlawful discrimination may exist no matter which employees are harmed.

    Technical Assistance Document #1: The EEOC describes what DEI-related discrimination looks like.

    The first document, “What To Do If You Experience Discrimination Related to DEI at Work,” explains how DEI-related practices may manifest as discrimination under Title VII.

    • Title VII bars disparate treatment: Any employment action motivated in whole or in part by race, sex, or another protected characteristic that is taken in the context of the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment may be unlawful.*
    • Title VII prohibits limiting, segregating, and classifying: Any action taken that limits, segregates, or classifies employees based on race, sex, or other protected characteristics in a manner affecting their status or depriving them of employment opportunities may be unlawful. Examples of these practices include the establishment of workplace groups (employee resource groups or employee affinity groups) that limit membership to a protected group or groups, as well as the separation of employees into groups based on a protected characteristic when administering trainings or other privileges of employment. The document makes clear that the latter may still violate Title VII even if the separate groups receive the same training or programming content.
    • Title VII prohibits workplace harassment: Workplace harassment is illegal when it results in an adverse change to a term, condition, or privilege of employment, or it is so frequent or severe to reasonably be considered intimidating, hostile, or abusive. The document explains that DEI training may give rise to a hostile work environment claim and that harassment may occur when an employee is subject to unwelcome remarks or conduct based on protected characteristics.
    • Title VII prohibits employer retaliation: The agencies explain that reasonable opposition to a DEI training may constitute protected activity if the employee provides a fact-specific basis for their belief that the training violated Title VII, and that an employer may not retaliate if an employee participates in an EEOC investigation or files an EEOC charge.

    The document reaffirms that Title VII protects employees, potential and actual applicants, interns, and training program participants. It directs individuals who suspect to have experienced DEI-related discrimination to contact the EEOC “promptly” as claimants have 180 to 300 days to file a claim depending on whether a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis.

    Technical Assistance Document #2: The EEOC answers additional questions about DEI-related discrimination in the workplace.

    The second technical assistance document, titled “What You Should Know About DEI-Related Discrimination At Work,” expands upon the information provided in the technical assistance document discussed above and answers a number of additional questions on how Title VII intersects with DEI-related practices in the workplace.

    Notably, the document addresses questions surrounding employers’ DEI-related considerations of race, sex, and other protected characteristics when the protected characteristic wasn’t the “sole or deciding factor” for the employers’ action. The document states that “race or sex (or any other protected characteristic under Title VII) does not have to be the exclusive (sole) reason for an employment action or the ‘but-for’ (deciding) factor for the action” for there to be unlawful discrimination. Additionally, the agencies explain that workers only need to show “some injury” or “some harm” affecting their terms, conditions or privileges of employment to allege a colorable claim of discrimination under Title VII.

    The document also makes clear that an employer may not justify an employment action simply on the basis that they have a business necessity or interest in “diversity” as Title VII prohibits employers from using business necessity as a defense against intentional discrimination claims. Likewise, the agencies explain that “client or customer preference is not a defense to race or color discrimination” and that “basing employment decisions on the racial preferences of clients, customers, or coworkers constitutes intentional race discrimination.”

    CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for updates related to Title VII enforcement from the EEOC.


    *The terms and conditions of employment include: hiring; firing; promotion; demotion; compensation; fringe benefits; exclusion from training; exclusion from mentoring or sponsorship programs; exclusion from fellowships; selection for interviews (including placement on candidate slates).



    Source link

  • We need strategic technical leaders

    We need strategic technical leaders

    As a society we’re seeing rapid changes, especially in technology, that impact how we live, work and learn. Higher education institutions have needed to reevaluate their priorities and adapt to this new environment. Strong, diverse and skilled leadership to drive change is more important than ever – and strategic technical leaders can play a key role.

    These relative new positions in the sector bridge the gap between organisational goals and technical capabilities. They champion their teams, drive innovation and collaboration.

    Technicians are critical to teaching, research and innovation and there is an increasing demand for strategic technical leaders in universities to strengthen and develop this vital workforce, helping institutions to thrive in this ever-changing landscape.

    Filling the technical leadership gap

    Historically there has been a leadership gap for technicians in higher education institutions, with their roles often being capped at lower levels, meaning a lack of representation in strategic decision-making.

    In recent years this trend has been reversed, with several institutions appointing strategic technical leaders. At first glance, HESA data indicates that 45 per cent of UK HEIs have a strategic technical leader in position, which – while not ideal – at least illustrates a promising improvement.

    But given this figure is based on those institutions that opt-in to submit data to HESA for their non-academic staff, the number of senior strategic technical leaders is potentially far lower than the statistics suggest. Conversely, the HESA statistics also do not account for strategic technical leaders who are operating at lower levels in institutions.

    Variation across remits and institutions

    Data from existing strategic technical leaders (published in the report Strategic technical leadership: advocacy, empowerment and transformation) revealed variations in these roles between institutions, particularly around responsibilities, remit and seniority.

    As relatively new roles in the HE landscape, they are still evolving. Institutions establishing these roles have often defined the scope with limited reference points, resulting in positions being shaped around individuals or tailored to specific priorities. While some inconsistencies are to be expected, greater consistency in defining the remit and responsibilities of these roles would be beneficial.

    There’s an opportunity to guide the integration of strategic technical leaders into leadership structures. This would not only support their effective implementation but also ensure continuity, which is critical for their long-term impact and sustainability.

    Defining the role

    Previously undefined, our report proposed the following definition of a strategic technical leader:

    An empowered decision-maker who aligns the technical workforce with the institution’s long-term goals by anticipating future needs, advocating for technicians, and shaping policies that impact both technical staff and the broader organisation. They play a pivotal role in strategic planning, particularly in areas such as workforce sustainability, skills development, and investment in technical resources, while ensuring technicians have access to meaningful development opportunities.

    Acknowledging that the definition and roles of strategic technical leaders are still evolving, their benefits are already clear, bringing significant advantages to their institutions, technical staff, and the wider higher education sector.

    Strategic technical leaders are vital for aligning technical operations with university strategy, offering significant benefits to institutions, technical staff, and the wider higher education sector. Their holistic view of technicians’ roles across teaching and research ensures consistency in opportunities, operations, and experiences. By fostering the development and application of technical skills, they drive efficiency across the institution.

    Working as changemakers

    Input into the university’s overall strategy ensures sound investments in equipment and facilities while reducing inefficiencies and duplications of equipment, resulting in cost-savings. Where responsibility for the technical portfolio of activities is integrated into the executive level of the institution, our report indicated wide-reaching benefits internally and externally.

    Strategic technical leaders who are embedded within the higher level of the institutional decision making act as important changemakers for the technical community, advocating for representation in decision-making.

    Improving the visibility of technicians is vital for improving the long-standing lack of recognition and visibility technicians have endured. The results can be far-reaching with evidence suggesting improved results in two often challenging areas associated with technical careers – recruitment and retention.

    Embracing and influencing change

    The focus of the strategic technical leader’s role extends beyond the boundaries of their own organisation – they also have an important externally-facing role. The strategic leaders we spoke to highlighted the importance of their external networks, for developing opportunities for collaboration and sharing of best practice to benefit their home institutions.

    Beyond this, strategic technical leaders are well placed to engage with bodies that advocate for technicians such as the UK Institute for Technical Skills and Strategy and the Technician Commitment.

    Their influence reaches other important networks such as policymakers, professional bodies and sector stakeholders where they can influence sector change, an approach that was recommended in the TALENT Commission report.

    To work at their optimal, universities need innovative and collaborative leadership that represents the entire workforce. It is time that technicians and the vital work that they do is represented in university leadership. Investment in these roles not only supports the development of an institution’s technical teaching, research and operational efficiency but safeguards future excellence.

    Source link