Tag: Urgent

  • Why PR May Be One of Higher Ed’s Most Urgent Strategies Right Now 

    Why PR May Be One of Higher Ed’s Most Urgent Strategies Right Now 

    Trust in colleges and universities is slipping. Public narratives about higher education are being shaped without institutional input. At the same time, search behaviors that marketing teams have spent years refining are being rapidly overtaken by artificial intelligence and that shift is fundamentally altering how visibility is earned and maintained. If institutions do not begin treating public relations as a strategic imperative they risk being left out of the conversations that define relevance. 

    The urgency becomes clearer when we look at the data. According to our 2026 Landscape of Higher Education Report, 74% of Americans in 2010 believed college was “very important” to success. By 2025, that number has dropped to just 35%, as shown in Gallup’s latest trend data. Meanwhile, the percentage of people saying college is “not too important” has increased fivefold. These are not isolated shifts in public opinion. They are broad signals that confidence in higher education is diminishing and with it, the sector’s influence in shaping the future workforce and civic landscape. The reality that this is not business as usual, but what comes next, is becoming harder for leadership teams to ignore. 

    Despite this, many institutions continue to rely on messaging frameworks and digital strategies that were designed for a web environment that no longer exists. 

    AI Is Rewriting the Rules Quietly and Quickly 

    Search behavior is evolving at a pace that is difficult to match and artificial intelligence is now redefining what visibility looks like. EducationDynamics’ Q3 2025 data shows that nearly 43% of all Google searches end without a click. In other words, users are getting their answers directly from AI-generated summaries, often without ever reaching an institution’s website. 

    That change does not diminish the importance of websites or blog content, but it does alter how they function. Pages that were once primary destinations are now source material feeding large language models and search algorithms. The value of that content is not in clicks alone, but in its ability to influence what AI tools surface in response to user questions. 

    The AI Visibility Pyramid featured in our 2026 Landscape of Higher Education Report illustrates how visibility is earned in this new environment. At its foundation is owned content, which includes blogs, faculty profiles, explainer articles and program pages. These assets contribute essential signals that shape how AI systems understand and rank institutional authority. However, they are not sufficient on their own. They must be elevated and validated through external sources to carry meaningful weight in this ecosystem. 

    Owned content becomes most effective when it is distributed and linked through credible channels. Media coverage, thought leadership placements and backlinks from high-authority outlets all play a critical role in reinforcing an institution’s visibility and shaping its reputation in the broader information landscape. What matters most is not just what institutions say about themselves, but where and how those messages are repeated, cited and trusted. 

    For leaders building their broader growth roadmap, the dynamics of AI, trust and visibility align directly with the strategies outlined in The 2026 Growth Strategy Higher Ed Needs Right Now and in the 2026 Higher Education Digital Marketing Trends and Predictions

    We Cannot Let the Work Go Unseen 

    The transformational work happening within higher education is substantial, but it is often not reaching the audiences who need to see it most. Whether it is a first-generation student securing a high-impact internship, a research partnership influencing policy or faculty-led innovation with industry implications, these stories are powerful proof points of institutional value. Yet too often, they remain confined within internal channels or are overlooked altogether. 

    Public relations plays an essential role in ensuring this work does not go unseen. Visibility must be actively cultivated, not assumed. Trust is built not only through consistent messaging, but through third-party validation that reinforces an institution’s credibility and relevance. As AI becomes the first layer of search for many users, the presence of credible, external proof will determine whether institutions are even included in the digital conversation. 

    The absence of that visibility has consequences. When institutions are not showing up in external media, not being cited in trusted sources and not contributing to narratives beyond their own platforms, they become harder to discover and easier to overlook. That decline in visibility often coincides with declines in public trust, prospective student interest and donor engagement. Reversing those trends begins with being present and recognized in the places that matter most. 

    For many colleges and universities, that also means grounding PR strategy in data from resources like the EducationDynamics’ Marketing and Enrollment Management Benchmarks, which tracks how visibility, demand and student behavior are shifting across the sector. 

    Public Relations Is Not a Press Release Function 

    In many institutions, public relations remains anchored to a traditional calendar of announcements tied to internal milestones. Press releases about new buildings, faculty honors, strategic plans and major gifts continue to dominate the output. While these updates have their place, they rarely break through the broader noise or shift the public narrative in a meaningful way. The same structural constraints that can keep marketing from leading, as we describe in Marketing Can’t Lead If Shackled by Structure, often limit what PR is allowed to be. 

    Today, public relations must function as a core strategic asset, not a service center. Its value lies in its ability to translate institutional mission and outcomes into public narratives that are credible, compelling and consistent with the institution’s brand. These stories should not be reactive, nor should they be generic. They should be aligned with the brand pillars that define what the institution stands for and where it is headed. 

    Institutions that claim leadership in areas like social mobility, research innovation or workforce readiness must make those claims evident through the stories they place and the voices they elevate. It is not enough to state the promise. It must be demonstrated through ongoing, credible engagement that reflects those themes in national and regional conversations. 

    This is where owned content and earned media intersect. Blogs, faculty profiles and campus features continue to matter, but they must be intentionally positioned and supported through media outreach and content distribution that expand their reach. 

    According to Muck Rack’s 2025 Generative Pulse report, more than 95% of the sources cited by generative AI tools are unpaid. Of those, 27% are journalistic, with the most frequently cited outlets including Reuters, NPR, the Associated Press, The New York Times and Bloomberg. These platforms are not pulling directly from institutional press centers. They are reflecting content that has been validated, shared and linked widely across trusted networks. 

    For institutions that want to shape public perception, these are the environments where visibility must be earned. That means placing stories where they will be seen, cited and shared. It also means ensuring that those stories reflect the strategic priorities and differentiators that define the institution’s place in a competitive market. 

    Leaders do not have to guess where to begin. EducationDynamics’ market research solutions and consulting services are built to help institutions translate insight into narrative strategy, then connect that strategy to measurable revenue and reputation outcomes. 

    Public relations is no longer optional. It is an infrastructure investment in how institutions are discovered, described and believed. It builds the signals that matter most to both human audiences and machine-driven systems. It is not enough to have a good story. It must be findable, credible and aligned with the identity the institution wants to project. 

    What Leadership Should Do Now 

    For presidents, CMOs and enrollment leaders, treating PR as infrastructure starts with a few concrete moves: 

    • Audit your external visibility 
      Compare how you are described on your own channels with how you show up in search results, media coverage and AI summaries. Identify the gaps between the story you tell and the story the market sees. 
    • Align PR with brand and enrollment goals 
      Build PR around a small set of institutional themes, such as social mobility, research impact or workforce readiness, that reinforce your brand and support priority programs. Measure success in terms of visibility, inquiry growth and reputation, not just clips. 
    • Prioritize a short list of voices and proof points 
      Elevate a consistent bench of leaders, faculty and partners who can speak to your themes with credibility. Match their stories to concrete outcomes, such as student trajectories, employer partnerships or policy influence. 
    • Resource PR to lead, not just respond 
      Shift PR from a press release calendar to a proactive pipeline of narratives aimed at the outlets, conversations and audiences that matter most. Integrate that work with marketing, enrollment and crisis leadership, as we emphasize in Leadership Matters During Crisis. 

    These steps move PR from a communications activity to a strategic system that shapes how your institution is discovered and believed. 

    Leadership Cannot Afford to Miss This Moment 

    The question is no longer whether an institution is doing meaningful work. It is whether that work is being seen, cited and valued in the right places. Institutions that fail to show up in earned media, in search results and in national conversations are not simply underexposed. They are at risk of becoming irrelevant, not because they have failed to deliver, but because they have failed to be discovered. 

    The stakes of that visibility gap increase during times of disruption. The same is true for the sector’s own story. EducationDynamics’ In the News presence and Insights hub illustrate how consistent, strategic visibility can reinforce a clear point of view and a challenger mindset in the market.  

    This is not a short-term communications problem. It is a long-term visibility challenge. For colleges and universities that want to remain vital to the communities they serve, public relations may be one of the most urgent and strategic tools available right now. When PR is aligned with full-funnel marketing services, enrollment strategy and market intelligence, it becomes a force multiplier for both revenue and reputation. 

    Discover how we help institutions proactively shape their narrative in an AI-driven world. Contact the PR experts at EducationDynamics for a personalized discussion. 

    Source link

  • Student suicides: why stable data still demand urgent reform 

    Student suicides: why stable data still demand urgent reform 

    Author:
    Emma Roberts

    Published:

    This HEPI guest blog was kindly authored by Emma Roberts, Head of Law at the University of Salford. 

    New figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that student suicide rates in England and Wales for the period 2016 to 2023 remain stable – but stability is no cause for complacency. The age-adjusted suicide rate among higher education students stands at 6.9 deaths per 100,000, compared with 10.2 per 100,000 for the general population of the same age group. Over the seven years of data collection, there were 1,163 student deaths by suicide – that is around 160 lives lost every year. 

    The rate being lower than the wider population is encouraging and may reflect the investment the sector has made in recent years. Universities have developed more visible wellbeing services, invested in staff training and created stronger cultures of awareness around mental health. The relative stability in the data can be seen as evidence that these interventions matter. But stability is not a resolution. Each student suicide is a preventable tragedy. The data should therefore be read not as reassurance, but as a call to sustain momentum and prepare for the challenges that lie ahead. 

    What the ONS data tells us 

    The figures highlight some familiar patterns. Male students remain at significantly higher risk than female students, accounting for nearly two-thirds of all suicides. Undergraduate students are at greater risk than postgraduate students, while students living at home have the lowest suicide rate. The data also shows that rates among White students are higher than for Black or Asian students, though the sample sizes are small, so these figures may be less reliable. 

    In terms of trend, the highest rate was recorded in the 2019 academic year (8.8 per 100,000). Since then, the rate has fallen back but remains stubbornly consistent, with 155 deaths recorded in the most recent year. The ONS notes that these figures are subject to revision due to coroner delays, meaning even the latest year may be under-reported. 

    The key point is that the problem is not worsening, but it is also not going away. 

    A changing student demographic 

    This year’s recruitment trends have introduced a new variable. Several high-tariff providers (universities with the highest entry requirements) have reduced entry requirements in order to secure numbers. This can open up opportunities for students who might otherwise not have had access to selective institutions. But it does raise important questions about preparedness. 

    Students admitted through lower tariffs may bring with them different kinds of needs and pressures: greater financial precarity, additional academic transition challenges, or less familiarity with the social and cultural capital that selective universities sometimes assume. These are all recognised risk factors for stress, isolation and, in some cases, mental ill-health. Universities with little prior experience of supporting this demographic may find their existing systems under strain. 

    Building on progress, not standing still 

    Much good work is already being done. Many universities have strengthened their partnerships with local National Health Service (NHS) trusts, introduced proactive wellbeing campaigns and embedded support more visibly in the student journey. We should recognise and celebrate this progress. 

    At the same time, the ONS data is a reminder that now is not the moment to stand still. Stability in the numbers reflects the effort made – but it should also prompt us to ask whether our systems are sufficiently flexible and resilient to meet new pressures. The answer, for some institutions, may well be yes. For others, particularly those adapting to new student demographics, there is a real risk of being caught unprepared. 

    What needs to happen next 

    There are several constructive steps the sector can take: 

    • Stress-test provision:  
      Assess whether wellbeing and safeguarding structures are designed to support the needs of the current, not historic, intake. 
    • Broaden staff capacity:  
      Ensure that all staff, not just specialists, have the awareness and training to spot early warning signs so that distress does not go unnoticed. 
    • Strengthen partnerships:  
      Align more closely with local NHS and community services to prevent students falling between two in-demand systems. 
    • Share practice sector-wide:  
      Collectively learn across the sector. Good practice must be disseminated, not siloed. 

    These are not dramatic or expensive interventions. They are achievable and pragmatic steps that can reduce risk while broader debates about legal and regulatory reform continue

    Conclusion 

    The ONS data shows that student suicide is not escalating. But the rate remains concerningly consistent at a level that represents an unacceptable loss of life each year. The progress universities have made should be acknowledged, but the danger of complacency is real. As recruitment patterns shift and new student demographics emerge, the sector must ensure that safeguarding and wellbeing systems are ready to adapt. 

    Every statistic represents a life lost. Stability must not become complacency – it should be a call to action, a chance to consolidate progress, anticipate new challenges and keep the prevention of every avoidable death at the heart of institutional priorities. 

    Source link

  • The urgent need to facilitate environmental justice learning in HE institutions

    The urgent need to facilitate environmental justice learning in HE institutions

    by Sally Beckenham

    The crises we are facing globally, from climate change and climate change dispossession to drought and food insecurity, are intersecting social and environmental issues, which need to be recognized and addressed accordingly through integrated and holistic measures. This can only be achieved by eschewing the tendency of existing governance and economic systems to silo social and environmental problems, as if they are separate concerns that can be managed – and prioritised – hierarchically. Much of this requires a better understanding of environmental injustice – the ways in which poor, racialised, indigenous and other marginalized communities are overlooked and/or othered in this power hierarchy, such that they must face a disproportionate burden of environmental harm.

    This is happening with disconcerting regularity around the world, often going under the radar but sometimes making headlines, as for example in May this year, when institutionalised environmental racism in the U.S. manifested in the placement of a copper mine on land inhabited by and sacred to the Apache indigenous group (Sherman, 2025). With limited political power to challenge it they are left to face dispossession, loss of livelihood and physical and mental health ill-effects (Morton-Ninomiya et al, 2023). We have seen this making headlines closer to home recently too, with evidence suggesting that toxic air in the UK is killing 500 people a week and most affecting those in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas (Gregory, 2025). An environmental problem (such as air pollution) cannot be disentangled from its social causes and effects. Or to put it another way, violence done to the environment is violence done to a particular group of people.

    A transformative response to our global challenges that re-centres environmental justice will require a paradigm shift in the ways that we govern, construct our societies, build our communities, run our economies, design our technologies and engage with the non-human world. The role of higher education will be critical to even a modest move in this direction. This is because, as they are probably tired of hearing, this generation of students will shape our collective futures, so it matters that they are literate in the deep entanglement of environmental and social justice challenges. Moreover, as Stickney and Skilbeck caution, “it is inconceivable that we will meet drastic carbon reduction targets without massive coordinated efforts, involving policymakers and educators working in concert at all levels of our governments and education systems (Stickney and Skilbeck, 2020).

    In Ruth Irwin’s article ‘Climate Change and Education’ she alerts us to Heidegger’s treatise in Being and Time (1962) that the effectiveness of a tool’s readiness is ‘hidden’ – only revealed when it ceases to function. Climate might be viewed as a heretofore ‘hidden’ tool, in that it affords opportunities for human action; it has “smoothly enabled our existence without conscious consideration” (Irwin, 2019). Yet its dynamic quality is now an overt, striking, looming spectre threatening the existence of all life on earth; the ‘environment’ writ large is revealing itself through ecological and social breakdown, surfacing our essential reliance upon it as natural beings. Thus unless higher education is competent in dealing with the issues of environmental crisis at all of its registers – social, environmental, political and ecological – the institution of education will be unable to fulfil its fundamental task of knowledge transfer for what is a clear public good (Irwin, 2019). Put another way, “HEIs have a responsibility to develop their educational provision in ways that will support the social transformation needed to mitigate the worst effects of the environmental crisis.” (Owens et al, 2023).

    Indeed, HE requires a paradigm shift in itself given that these realities are unfolding alongside widespread scrutiny of higher education institutions; including about decolonising the academy (Jivraj, 2020; Mintz, 2021), free speech on university campuses and how they are preparing students to meet these pressing issues (Woodgates, 2025). To keep pace with these changes and meet such challenges, educators from across disciplines will need to commit to embedding environmental justice education more widely across programme curricula, session design and teaching practices. It must be recognised as a vital – rather than token – component of environmental education. Doing so fully and effectively also requires us to recognise that environmental justice education encompasses not only subject matter but pedagogical practice. This is the case for all academic disciplines – including those that might seem peripheral to the teaching of environmental issues.

    EJE in HE is a developing area of scholarship and field of study that has gathered pace only over the last decade. Much of the research to date has been focused on the US, where studies have shown that environmental justice remains marginal to or excluded from the curricular offerings of most environmental studies programmes – let alone those not directly related to environmental education (Garibay et al, 2016). A report by the North American Association for Environmental Education (NAAEE), which studied the policies of 230 public U.S. HE institutions and 36 state boards of higher education, found that only 6% of institutions with climate change content in their policies referred to climate justice issues and indigenous knowledge practices (MECCE Project & NAAEE, 2023). Other work has shown that STEM education has tended to frame questions around exploitation of natural resources or technological development as disconnected from social and economic inequalities, though this is starting to be challenged (Greenberg et al, 2024).

    Emerging research into EJ in HE encompasses pedagogical approaches (Rabe, 2024; Moore, 2024); classroom and teaching practices (Walsh et al, 2022; Cachelin & Nicolosi, 2022; D’Arcangelis & Sarathy, 2015), the relationship between sustainability and climate justice education (Haluza-DeLay, 2013; Kinol et al, 2023) and curriculum development (Garibay et al, 2016). In identifying what EJE looks like these studies foreground the importance of community-engaged learning (CEL), providing students with the opportunity to learn about a socio-environmental problem from those with lived experience; critical thinking with regards to positionality, power structures and (especially indigenous) knowledge systems, and a deep concern with place. These critical components are crucial because tackling an act or acts of environmental injustice against marginalised populations often cannot be achieved without addressing systemic power imbalances.

    What also links these studies is an acknowledgement of the complexity of EJE. It is a difficult subject and practice to grapple with for several reasons. Firstly, it means exposing students (and educators) to “an onslaught of bad news,” (Cachelin & Nicolosi, 2022) which can elicit feelings of hopelessness and helplessness, so it is little wonder that expressions of anxiety and alarm are growing within these cohorts (Wallace, Greenburg & Clark, 2020) and that needs to be borne in mind. Secondly EJE requires us to find a way to meaningfully connect with philosophical, discursive, historical and practical questions about power, ethics and the relationship between human beings and the natural environment, within the disciplinary parameters of a specific curricula. This means doing difficult work not only to change current systems and processes (Forsythe et al, 2023) but also to make transformative rather than piecemeal efforts. For example, this might mean actively absorbing students into a community partner’s work in an engaged rather than service-learning model, or moving beyond a simple ‘guest lecture’ format to invite more in-depth input into modules or programmes from a community partner.

    This is a challenge that we shouldn’t understate for many academics and institutions already coping with high workloads (Smith, 2023), stress (Kinman et al, 2019) and job insecurity across a beleaguered sector (The Independent, 2024; The Guardian, 2025). Through this emerging EJE scholarship literature, we are starting to see that, “promoting opportunities for HE educators to develop and enact critical and transformative environmental pedagogy… is a complex business mediated by a variety of (personal, material and social) factors. It involves negotiating conflict, and understanding and confronting entrenched structures of power, from the local and institutional to the national and global.” (Owens et al, 2023). 

    A third (though by no means final) challenge in teaching and learning EJ in higher education is in finding and making space for it in a landscape that is strongly oriented towards sustainability education. Although there is certainly overlap – for example to the extent that the liberal logic underpinning the latter also informs distributive justice – sustainability education has different intellectual and ideological origins to EJ scholarship. Both are valuable, but we should be questioning whether we can justify a lack of explicit EJ practice and framing simply because we are already having sustainability conversations, and instead find space for both. It can be easy to (inadvertently) depoliticise environmental education by avoiding the perceived messiness and complexity of justice in favour of the more technocratic and measurable ‘sustainability’ (Haluza-DeLay, 2013).

    My research seeks to develop a better understanding of the state of environmental justice education in the HE landscape, beginning by mapping its development in the UK. This will reveal the extent and means by which EJE is being incorporated across programme curricula, session design and teaching practices in the UK HE context. In doing so we can identify the intersections of EJE with other dominant pedagogies, including sustainability education and solutions-focused approaches. To pursue a provincialising agenda and avoid the parochial perspective that EJE is the preserve of HEIs in the global North, there is also much value in exploring what EJE looks like in HEIs in the global South, and where cross-cultural lessons can be shared. The questions we need to be asking are:

    • How is environmental justice being taught and learnt and where do we go from here?
    • How are educators overcoming the challenges involved in engaging with EJE?
    • What best practices could we champion?

    Sharing methods, strategies and pedagogical approaches for EJE cross-institutionally and cross-culturally will be a step towards helping us build a better collective, collaborative response to the urgency of our intersecting socio-environmental crises.

    Dr Sally Beckenham is Lecturer in Human Geography and Programme Lead and Admissions Tutor for the BA Human Geography & Environment in the Department of Environment & Geography, University of York. She is also Chair of the Teaching Development Pool and member of the Interdisciplinary Global Development Centre (IGDC). She is an interdisciplinary political geographer with degrees in Modern History, International Politics and International Relations, and welcomes collaboration. Email: [email protected] Bluesky: @sallybeckenham.bsky.social.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • International education in Australia needs an urgent rethink – Campus Review

    International education in Australia needs an urgent rethink – Campus Review

    The federal government’s recent decision to again raise the international student visa application fee to $2,000 has reignited concerns about the country’s approach to international education.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • Urgent Need for AI Literacy

    Urgent Need for AI Literacy

    The rapid advent of AI capabilities, coupled with the developing economic pressures worldwide, have led to a surge in employers seeking to reduce operating expenses through widespread use of generative and agentic AI to augment, and in some cases, replace, humans in their workforce. This follows last year’s warning from the World Economic Forum that said, “AI skills are becoming more important than job experience.”

    The World Economic Forum report goes on to cite the 2024 Work Trend Index Annual Report, which draws on a survey of 31,000 people across 31 countries, hiring trends from LinkedIn, Microsoft 365 productivity data and research with Fortune 500 companies: “Over the past eight years, hiring for technical AI roles was up 323%, and businesses are now turning to non-technical talent with the skills to apply generative AI tools like ChatGPT and Copilot. Two-thirds of business leaders surveyed say they wouldn’t hire a candidate without AI skills. Nearly three-quarters said they would rather hire a less experienced candidate with AI skills than a more experienced candidate without them.”

    Writing in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Beth McMurtrie defines AI literacy: “The term AI literacy can feel squishy. But the definitions circulating among campus working groups, disciplinary associations, and other organizations share several key components. To be AI literate, they agree, you must understand how generative AI works, be able to use it effectively, know how to evaluate its output, and understand its weaknesses and dangers. For AI skeptics, that last point is crucial. Too many workshops stop short, they say, focusing only on how to use AI tools.”

    In a survey conducted last November, Educause reported only 37 percent of institutions were supporting needed AI abilities by “upskilling or reskilling” faculty or staff, and just 1 percent reported hiring new AI staff. A larger percentage of faculty and staff were addressing related academic integrity and assessment issues. The Educause AI Landscape Study reported,

    “Respondents from smaller institutions are remarkably similar to respondents from larger institutions in their personal use of AI tools, their motivations for institutional use of AI, and their expectations and optimism about the future of AI.

    “Respondents from small and larger institutions differ notably, however, in the resources, capabilities, and practices they’re able to marshal for AI adoption.”

    These responses from as recently as the end of last semester show that the majority of institutions are lagging behind in preparing themselves and their graduates and certificate completers for the rapid changes that are expected to take place in workplaces around the world over the coming months. Yet, as reported in Government Technology, new laws creating frameworks in California and the European Union are leading the way in ensuring learners are well prepared for the emerging workplace:

    “Under California’s new law, AI literacy education must include understanding how AI systems are developed and trained, their potential impacts on privacy and security, and the social and ethical implications of AI use. The EU goes further, requiring companies that produce AI products to train applicable staff to have the ‘skills, knowledge and understanding that allow providers, deployers and affected persons … to make an informed deployment of AI systems, as well as to gain awareness about the opportunities and risks of AI and possible harm it can cause.’ Both frameworks emphasize that AI literacy isn’t just technical knowledge but about developing critical thinking skills to evaluate AI’s appropriate use in different contexts.”

    The American Library Association has taken a leading role in developing a draft document, “AI Competencies for Academic Library Workers,” that is currently under review based upon recommendations made by constituencies in recent weeks. The document includes two sections: “dispositions (tendencies to act or think in a particular way) and competencies (skills, knowledge, behaviors, and abilities). Dispositions are presented as a single list. Competencies are organized into four categories: Knowledge & Understanding; Analysis & Evaluation; Use & Application; and Ethical Considerations.”

    In a project backed by a $1 million grant from Google, Government Technology reports that the City University of New York is supporting 75 faculty members to develop teaching methods that support best practices in utilizing AI in higher education. The report goes on to say,

    “Such initiatives are spreading rapidly across higher education. The University of Florida aims to integrate AI into every undergraduate major and graduate program. Barnard College has created a ‘pyramid’ approach that gradually builds students’ AI literacy from basic understanding to advanced applications. At Colby College, a private liberal arts college in Maine, students are beefing up their literacy with the use of a custom portal that lets them test and compare different chatbots. Around 100 universities and community colleges have launched AI credentials, according to research from the Center for Security and Emerging Technology, with degree conferrals in AI-related fields increasing 120 percent since 2011.”

    These initiatives are exemplars of a variety of approaches that institutions might consider to respond to the urgent need to prepare learners for the workplace that is so rapidly emerging. Yet, now, as we move into the final weeks of the spring semester, it still appears that many, if not most, of the institutions of higher learning are failing their students. We are failing to fully prepare those students to enter the workforce where, as the World Economic Forum says, two-thirds of business leaders surveyed say they wouldn’t hire a candidate without AI skills and nearly three-quarters said they would rather hire a less experienced candidate with AI skills than a more experienced candidate without them.

    What is your institution doing to meet this urgent need? Who is leading a universitywide initiative to meet this need? Will your spring graduates and certificate completers be able to compete with others who have credentials that include knowledge and competencies in AI?

    Source link