Tag: Vision

  • WEEKEND READING The art of reimagining universities: a vision for higher education

    WEEKEND READING The art of reimagining universities: a vision for higher education

    Join HEPI for a webinar on Thursday 11 December 2025 from 10am to 11am to discuss how universities can strengthen the student voice in governance to mark the launch of our upcoming report, Rethinking the Student Voice. Sign up now to hear our speakers explore the key questions.

    This blog was kindly authored by Professor Rathna Ramanathan, Provost, Central Saint Martins; Executive Dean for Global Affairs and Professor of Design and Intercultural Communication, University of the Arts London.

    The structure of our universities is stuck in the past. The recent post-16 education and skills white paper praises our universities as globally excellent institutions but calls for a reorientation towards national priorities and greater efficiency. As academics and creatives functioning as outsiders, we can use this position productively to define future pathways.

    We’re living through multiple crises at once – climate emergency, polarization, AI disruption – yet most universities still organize themselves around departments created decades ago. Institutions talk endlessly about ‘interdisciplinary collaboration’ and ‘preparing students for the future’, yet their actual structures often make both nearly impossible.

    At Central Saint Martins, University of the Arts London, we have tried something different. We have redesigned the College by rethinking what an art and design college should focus on and how it can work, guided by shared principles that emerged from asking: ‘What does it look like when we work together at our best?’

    The real question

    We ask students to be creative, adaptive, bold. To embrace complexity and imagine different futures. What could our universities achieve if we reorganised ourselves with the same creativity we demand from students?

    The institutions that thrive in the coming decades won’t be those defending traditions most fiercely. They will be those with the courage to redesign themselves for the world emerging, not the one they were built for. That’s uncomfortable. Structural change is difficult and uncertain. Letting go of familiar categories and hierarchies requires trust. Building new collaborative cultures alongside new organisational structures demands sustained effort. This discomfort might be precisely the point. If universities can’t model the adaptive, experimental, principles-led thinking we claim to teach, why should anyone trust us to prepare the next generation for an uncertain future? More bluntly, if we don’t practice what we teach, do we deserve to thrive?

    The problem: structure shapes everything

    For over a century, universities have organised themselves into disciplinary silos. This made sense when knowledge was more stable, and career paths were more predictable. But today’s urgent challenges  don’t heed disciplinary boundaries and require insights from science, policy, economics, ethics, design, and creative practice simultaneously.

    Most universities recognise this. They create joint programmes and support cross-department initiatives. Yet the fundamental architecture remains unchanged: separate budgets, isolated governance structures, academic staff working within disciplinary lanes. It’s like trying to renovate a house by rearranging the furniture while leaving the walls intact.

    For students, this disconnect is glaring. They see interconnected problems everywhere, yet are asked to choose a single discipline and stay within it. They want to learn how to think, not just master a predetermined skill set. Traditional university structures also inadvertently reinforce whose knowledge counts and whose doesn’t, often privileging Western over non-Western perspectives, theory over practice, and individual achievement over collective wisdom. In an era demanding intercultural, community-centred, and future-focused approaches, these inherited biases have become institutional liabilities.

    The experiment: principles before structure

    Central Saint Martins’ transformation began with a fundamental question: ‘What does it look like when we work together at our best?’ From this inquiry emerged five core principles that now guide decision-making at College level: address shared conditions that transcend disciplines; seek common ground through equitable collaboration; treat the whole life of the College as creative material; bring practice to every space; and deepen connections with communities beyond our walls. These aren’t aspirational statements. They’re operational principles that inform the creation of a new structure: ‘Schools of Thought’.

    Three schools of thought: foundations, not hierarchies

    Most university ‘schools’ function as management layers above departments with administrative structures for top-down control. At Central Saint Martins, we are inverting this model. Our Schools of Thought establish shared foundations beneath courses and programmes, creating common ground where disciplines naturally converge.

    Each school aims to be transdisciplinary (integrating ways of thinking), not merely multidisciplinary (putting disciplines side-by-side). They’re collective, not just collaborative. The naming strategy – C + S + M = CSM – emphasises the whole over parts. Rather than reinforcing disciplinary boundaries, they create space for working across schools while adapting to changing conditions.


    C School [Culture]     explores culture as a vital form of enquiry and expression, developing thinking and practice across art, performance and curation. It recognises culture in the immediate world around us, understanding it as a sense-making activity.


    S School [Systems]     explores how different forms of designing allow us to understand and intervene in the complex human systems shaping our world through graphic communication, product and industrial design, architecture, business innovation, and creative enterprise.


    M School [Materials]     investigates radical approaches to materials, making, and meaning-making through fashion, textiles, and jewellery to digital interaction, scientific innovation, and multi-species regeneration.

    Why principles matter more than plans

    What makes this transformation different from typical restructuring is its foundation in shared principles rather than predetermined outcomes. The principles emerged from collective reflection on the College’s actual lived experience, examining when authentic collaboration and meaningful impact happen. They aim to capture the heart of the College’s culture rather than imposing an abstract ideal. They create coherence without rigidity, alignment without conformity.

    Schools of Thought are not viewed as resolved but as vehicles for ongoing transformation. They provide low-walled frameworks for continuous evolution, adapting to changing conditions while staying true to core values. As communities and conversations develop, the schools themselves will transform, shaped by the very practices they enable.

    The deeper shift: embedding justice and sustainability

    Traditionally, art and design education has reinforced colonial perspectives, unsustainable production and cultural hierarchies; biases that reproduce invisibly through inherited disciplinary structures. The principle of ‘addressing shared conditions’ makes complicity in global crises unavoidable rather than optional, preventing justice and sustainability from being relegated to elective courses or diversity initiatives.

    ‘Seeking common ground’” creates space for marginalised knowledge systems, while ‘taking the whole life of the College as material’ reveals institutional truths through the lived experiences of our staff and our students rather than stated values alone.

    We can’t truly prepare students for the climate crisis, technological disruption, or polarisation by adding modules to unchanged systems. The structure needs to embody the values and capacities these challenges demand.

    What creativity teaches

    Creative education isn’t primarily about self-expression or beautiful objects. But approached as Central Saint Martins has, creativity becomes a methodology for engaging with uncertainty as traditional certainties collapse.

    ‘Bring practice to every space’ makes thinking-in-formation visible, cultivating comfort with ambiguity and the capacity to learn from failure—all critical for navigating unpredictable futures. “Deepen external connections” recognises that knowledge develops through genuine dialogue with communities beyond institutional walls, not expert pronouncements.

    These approaches value prototyping and iteration over perfect solutions, holding contradictory ideas simultaneously, collaborating across difference, and making abstract possibilities tangible. We want to apply creative principles to institutional transformation, treating the restructuring as an experimental, collaborative, and iterative process rather than a top-down plan.

    Lessons for all higher education

    Although rooted in creative arts, the principles-led approach transfers across sectors. Imperial College London’s recently launched Schools of Convergence Science reflects similar recognition that traditional structures no longer serve contemporary challenges. Structural change requires more than new organisational charts. It requires:

    • Culture shifts embedded in governance: Principles that guide decision-making at every level, ensuring new structures don’t simply replicate old patterns.
    • Foundation-level transformation: Creating common ground where collaboration becomes natural rather than requiring special initiatives.
    • Recognition of complicity: Acknowledging how inherited structures perpetuate problems, then actively working to transform those conditions.
    • Treating institutional structure as material: Applying the same creative, experimental, iterative approaches we teach students.
    • Making the whole life of the institution visible: Valuing informal experience alongside formal roles, practice alongside theory, collective wisdom alongside individual expertise.

    Any university can ask itself: What principles characterise when we work at our best? How could we design structures that enable rather than constrain that work? What would it mean to organise around shared conditions rather than inherited categories?

    As higher education gets increasingly othered in new policies, outsiders can provide the breakthroughs needed by taking a fresh perspective. As ‘The genius of the amateur’ points out, outsiders often succeed because progress is about generating models which we then test, apply and refine. We can’t do this alone at Central Saint Martins, University of the Arts London, we need to do this collectively: to genuinely practice for ourselves what we teach and to create a space which isn’t about silos or othering but where all of us are welcome.

    Source link

  • a different vision of TNE

    a different vision of TNE

    Across the UK, universities are scrambling to expand their transnational education (TNE) footprints. In the wake of declining international student enrolments at home and a domestic funding model under acute strain, offshore delivery has re-emerged as a strategic hedge.

    New projects are announced almost weekly, typically centred on business, computing, and other classroom-based disciplines with low capital requirements and modest regulatory complexity. Much of this expansion is pragmatic, responsive, and seen as necessary by its proponents.

    But the speed and shape of this growth obscures an uncomfortable truth: the UK has mainly defaulted to a narrow model of TNE, one optimised for rapid expansion rather than academic depth, high stakes provision or long-term national capacity building. As a result, the sector’s diversification strategies increasingly look alike – thinly spread, opportunistic, and largely confined to low-risk subject areas.

    A recent visit to Bahrain has reminded me that international higher education can look very different. Just over an hour’s flight from London, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) has developed a form of TNE that stands in almost complete contrast to the dominant UK: high investment, clinically intensive, deeply embedded in national systems, and aligned to strategic workforce needs.

    RCSI Bahrain opened in 2004 and is now a fully-fledged medical university with purpose-built clinical and educational facilities, deep partnerships across Bahrain’s health system, and a student and graduate community that plays a meaningful role in the country’s healthcare workforce. This is not a flying-faculty project, not a joint diploma model, and not an exercise in offshore classroom leasing. It is an institution.

    A global footprint with real depth

    What struck me is how long RCSI has been doing this, and how quietly. While most UK universities are only now building or acquiring capacity for offshore growth, RCSI has been operating overseas for nearly three decades. Its Malaysia campus, originally Penang Medical College, dates back to 1996. Postgraduate leadership and healthcare management education has been delivered in Dubai since 2005.

    More recently, new activity has emerged in Saudi Arabia. These ventures are not opportunistic or defensive responses to market turbulence; they form part of a long-term strategy grounded in health-system needs and in a clear institutional mission.

    Importantly, all of this activity sits within the high-stakes world of medical and clinical education, probably the most heavily regulated and risk-sensitive domain in the entire global HE landscape. Where many institutions are pursuing TNE in the subjects that are cheapest to deliver and fastest to scale, RCSI operates in the areas that are most demanding to deliver offshore. That difference matters.

    An unexpectedly diverse and high-calibre student body

    But the real revelation in Bahrain was the students. The academic calibre is extremely high, and the student body is more diverse than I had assumed. The majority come from Bahrain and the wider Gulf region, with many drawn by the RCSI brand, its teaching hospitals, and its international pathways. What surprised me is that almost 10% of the cohort is North American.

    For students from the United States and Canada, choosing to study medicine in Bahrain is a bold step. Yet the rationale is compelling: a prestigious medical qualification that is portable, internationally recognised, and delivered to global standards but without the enormous financial and time of the traditional US route into medicine.

    The real revelation in Bahrain was the students. The academic calibre is extremely high, and the student body is more diverse than I had assumed

    In North America, students must complete a four-year bachelor’s degree before being eligible to enter medical school. This adds both significant direct cost and four additional years of living expenses and lost earning potential. Only then do they begin a four-year MD program, with total medical-school tuition routinely exceeding US $300,000 – and that’s before accommodation, insurance or clinical fees.

    RCSI Bahrain, by contrast, follows the Irish and British model of direct entry from high school, enabling students to start medical training immediately and progress through a continuous five- or six-year program. This eliminates the cost of a prior undergraduate degree and reduces opportunity cost by allowing students to enter clinical practice years earlier.

    The result is a stark difference in the total cost of becoming a doctor. RCSI Bahrain offers a rigorous medical program with strong clinical exposure, international accreditation pathways and a clear route back into North American licensing systems at a significantly lower overall cost. For many families, it represents a rational and high-value alternative to the US model, not a compromise.

    The TNE contrast: scale vs substance

    Set against this, the current UK TNE boom looks very different. Offshore campuses and partnerships are proliferating rapidly, but they overwhelmingly target business and management programs – disciplines with low regulatory barriers, minimal specialised infrastructure needs, and high domestic and international demand.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with this; diversification is essential, and partnering overseas can strengthen institutional resilience and relevance. But it does highlight a structural truth: most TNE models are designed for scale, not depth. They minimise risk by limiting investment, and they expand access by lowering the cost base.

    By contrast, RCSI Bahrain shows what international engagement can look like when it is mission-driven, academically demanding, and built over decades. It demonstrates that global footprints do not need to be thin, transactional, or opportunistic. They can be embedded, trusted, and strategically aligned with national health-workforce needs.

    A reminder for the sector

    RCSI Bahrain is not a model that every university can or should replicate. Offshore medical education requires capital, regulatory alignment, institutional patience and mission clarity. But it is a powerful counterexample at a moment when the UK is thinking urgently, and sometimes narrowly, about what TNE is for.

    The sector conversation about TNE often focuses on volume, compliance, and partnership mechanics

    If our offshore activity is driven primarily by income diversification and speed to market, we risk building global footprints that are wide but shallow. The sector conversation about TNE often focuses on volume, compliance, and partnership mechanics. What is missing is a discussion about purpose, discipline mix, national contribution, and the kinds of international engagement that strengthen institutional identity rather than dilute it.

    RCSI Bahrain shows that TNE can be academically demanding, strategically aligned and socially impactful. It demonstrates that an overseas campus can contribute to national capacity building, not just institutional revenue; that clinical programs can be delivered to global standards offshore; and that international students, including those from North America, will travel for quality and value.

    As the UK sector rethinks its international strategies, we would do well to look beyond the models that are easiest to scale, and towards those, like RCSI’s, that are deepest, most durable, and most aligned to mission.

    Source link

  • The New Head of SACS Shares His Vision for the Accreditor

    The New Head of SACS Shares His Vision for the Accreditor

    After two decades with Belle Wheelan at the helm, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges is under new leadership since she retired earlier this year.

    New SACS president Stephen Pruitt comes from the Southern Regional Education Board, which he led from 2018 until June, when he stepped down, before starting his current job in August. Pruitt previously served as the commissioner of education in Kentucky, worked for the Georgia Department of Education and taught both at the K–12 level and as an adjunct faculty member.

    Pruitt arrives at a time when accreditors are increasingly under fire from federal and state officials, who have accused such bodies—and SACSCOC specifically—of overstepping, and as the Trump administration aims to make it easier for new accreditors to enter the market. In a phone interview last week with Inside Higher Ed, Pruitt discussed how he intends to approach the job, his 100-day plan, the current landscape for accreditation and more.

    The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

    Q: First, what interested you in the job? What drew you to the accreditation world?

    A: I enjoyed my time at the Southern Regional Education Board. It was really a fantastic place to work and [has] great people, and we did a lot of good stuff there, but when the opportunity to move over to SACS came up, I had a desire to help shape policy that can improve how we see higher ed and hopefully improve aspects of higher ed. And it felt like the right avenue.

    Q: What’s it like to follow in the footsteps of Belle Wheelan, who was an institution unto herself?

    A: It helps that Belle is a good friend. I’ve known Belle for a good while now, so our transition has been a good one. She was our longest-serving president; she was there for 20 years, and I kept joking with her that her record was safe. I don’t see myself there for 21 years. But following her has been an absolute pleasure and honor to get to build on the things that she started, to realize that now’s a good time, because we also need to look to the future and see that the world and how we approach things in higher ed has to change.

    Q: How does one dive into a job like this? I imagine there’s so much to learn and take on.

    A: Part of my background was in accountability. Given, it was at the K–12 level, but there’s a lot of parallel there. Jumping into something like this, the No. 1 thing—whether it’s this or any other job, and I did the same thing when I was commissioner of education in Kentucky—you have to listen to people, learn the dynamics of accreditation, learn the current system. My staff will tell you that I ask probably a thousand questions a day, because I tend to get into the weeds so I can understand it. Every day I’m in a different office asking questions. But there was a month in the transition where I had no managerial responsibilities. I was able to take that month and get on calls with presidents, with liaisons, spend time with staff and spend a lot of time listening.

    Q: Did your predecessor give you any advice on how to approach the job?

    A: She did. I don’t know that I could sum it up in a single statement, but she gave me advice on different aspects. She gave me a list of things that she felt like I needed to address early, and some of the things you do see in the 100-day plan. She provided some ideas. But at the end of the day, the most poignant advice, probably, was that it’s important to listen to membership.

    Q: You announced a 100-day plan not long after you started. What’s in it?

    A: Our focus as we move forward is thinking about, how do we really need to respond and be flexible, to be able to manage things in this current year, this current environment, so that our institutions are both being held accountable appropriately, but also to be able to incentivize the behaviors that that we know [are] our best for students? … Students first, always, is our No. 1 pillar. Everything has to be about, is what we’re doing actually making the world better for our students?

    Second thing is we’ve got to have leadership and transparency. We want to make sure that everything we’re doing is aboveboard and transparent. We want to have some service with accountability … To me, it’s about walking alongside our institutions, working with our state agencies, so that we build a common vision of what we believe higher ed can be, and then we invest in that vision.

    We are going to have our own communications department, which we’ve never had. We are conducting a communication audit right now of the way we communicate with our members and the general public. Probably one of the big things that has the most impact is that we’re going to be doing a principles-of-accreditation review—in other words, a standards review. We’re going to be announcing and launching that in October … Arguably, right now, I think that we need to have a focus on streamlining our principles.

    [Reporter’s note: Full details of the First 100 Days Plan are available on the SACSCOC website.]

    Q: Does SACS plan to expand or do you want to keep membership numbers where they are?

    A: I think we’re going to continue to expand. Right now, I’m more focused on getting our house in order, so to speak. Like our sister organizations, we would prefer to not go out and recruit away from other places, but we also want to be available. We do have members that are international, and I think that we may see some potential expansion there when people come to us. But at the end of the day we’re going to be open for business. If there are other institutions out there that like what we’re doing, that like that we can offer value, then of course, we’ll be glad to bring them in.

    Q: SACS has been caught up in political headwinds in recent years and is often targeted by conservative politicians. Given the current political climate, does that concern you as you seek renewal of federal recognition later this year? What do you expect from that process?

    A: I’ve spent the last 20 years of my career working with state legislators and governors, and one thing that I hope people will see in the new SACSCOC is that we’re going to be completely free of ideology. We want to ensure that we’re fiercely nonpartisan and make sure that the things that are divisive in our country right now—and things that a lot of our legislatures and the [Trump] administration are saying are divisive—that we are stepping away from those things, and we’re focused on the business at hand. And that business at hand is ensuring quality for higher ed.

    So does it worry me? Not really, because I can’t control any of that. What I can control is doing our best to ensure that we are not going to be seen as an organization that pushes a particular doctrine or particular ideologies. One of the things that we are planning on doing is creating a legislative advisory council of legislators that will help us ensure that we are staying in the proper bounds of focusing in the right way to ensure that we don’t get crossways with any of those ideologies. I think they need to be part of the process. They’ve never really been part of the process here; I’m not sure if they are anywhere else. Legislators that we’re going to invite to the table will be representative of our states. We want to hear from them and hopefully let them help guide us in how to avoid some of the pitfalls that we’ve gotten caught up in in the past.

    Q: Related to conservative backlash, several state systems with universities accredited by SACS announced that they were getting into the accreditation business themselves with the launch of the Commission for Public Higher Education. How do you view the launch of CPHE?

    A: I personally have always believed that competition makes us better. My understanding is they are working to make sure that their mission is supporting public institutions, but that all of them are making it another option versus making it required. Again, it’s something that’s not in my control. I certainly hope that as we all go through affirmation with the U.S. Department of Education that we all are going through the same affirmation, and I believe we will. We’re going to be supportive of one another. From my side, I’m not going to speak ill of any of them.

    Q: Broadly speaking, given the political landscape, what do you see as the future of accreditation?

    A: I don’t know completely how to answer that. I get asked that question a lot. I don’t know where it goes, but—if I have, maybe not a crystal ball, but my magic wand—my hope is that what we do is we really focus on the things that are important around accreditation, which is improving our schools, providing an environment that students can go to that feels fully supported, that they have structures in place to help them get through to attainment.

    That attainment can be anything from a certificate through a doctorate degree, and it’s preparing students to go out into the workforce and to be productive members of society. And I think accreditation has a role to play in that. And it’s way more than counting library books or any of that. It is more about, how do we evaluate the progress that our institutions are making? And so my hope is that the future of accreditation is, frankly, where I believe we’re headed, and that is a place that believes in achievement, a place that believes in flexibility based on the size and mission of the institution, and a place that also provides opportunities for excellence.

    Q: What else would you want readers to know?

    A: Welcome to the new SACSCOC. We have an incredible foundation and great people who have led and worked in this organization, but we also are at a point that it’s time for us to look to the future. So for me, we are grounded in certain things—like peer review—that have been the hallmark and the gold standard of what’s happened in the past. But we also are in a new day and the way we want to approach the work, I hope people will look at us and [recognize our flexibility].

    And to reiterate some of your political questions earlier, states’ rights matter. We need to acknowledge that, and as an organization, we will acknowledge that. I think, historically, we’ve maybe dabbled in that more than we should. So we’re going to recognize state authority, the work that happens with our institutions at the state level, from governors all the way through boards of governors, through boards of higher ed. So that matters, and then we just want to make sure that we’re free of the ideologies that have created some of the divisiveness and some of the real angst and some of the slings and arrows that have come our way.

    Source link

  • How will the India-UK Vision 2035 impact education?

    How will the India-UK Vision 2035 impact education?

    The India–United Kingdom Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), negotiations for which began in January 2022, was finalised on July 24, with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi calling it a ‘step-change’ in bilateral relations. 

    While the trade deal covers a wide range of areas, including tariff reductions, market access, mobility, and investment protection, aimed at delivering a £4.8bn annual boost to the UK economy and an estimated USD $9-10bn in export growth, the two Prime Ministers also endorsed the India-UK Vision 2035, “reaffirming their shared commitment to unlocking the full potential of a revitalised partnership”.

    Although technology, innovation, defence, and climate action are key pillars of India-UK cooperation under the Vision 2035 framework, education remains central to the shared goal of developing a skilled, future-ready talent pool to tackle global challenges and drive a sustainable future, according to a policy statement released alongside the FTA signing.

    In a first, both countries are launching an annual ministerial India-UK Education Dialogue, which will include reviews of mutually recognised qualifications and knowledge-sharing through joint participation in platforms such as the UK’s Education World Forum and India’s National Education Policy initiatives. 

    The launch of the ministerial dialogue also comes as UK universities increasingly recognise the potential of establishing academic and research-focused branch campuses in India.

    Just this Tuesday, the University of Bristol joined a growing list of UK institutions that have received approval to open campuses in India under the University Grants Commission’s Foreign Higher Educational Institutions (FHEI) regulations.

    Bristol’s Mumbai campus, slated to launch in Summer 2026, will offer undergraduate and postgraduate programs in data science, economics, finance and investment, immersive arts, and financial technology.

    Once operational, Bristol, ranked 51st globally, will become the highest-ranked British university to establish a campus in India, surpassing the University of Southampton, which launched its Gurugram campus earlier this month with classes beginning this August.

    Though Modi has welcomed the establishment of British campuses in India, calling it a “new chapter in the education sector of both countries”, some UK universities are facing flak at home “for seeking fortunes in India” amid ongoing financial woes and domestic job cuts.

    However, with universities like Bristol positioning their India campus as a hub for students, researchers, and industry to shape a better future, the Vision 2035 framework also underscores the India-UK Green Skills Partnership, an initiative focused on equipping young people in both countries with future-ready skills.

    The partnership aims to bridge skill gaps and enable joint initiatives, such as centres of excellence, climate-focused ventures, and courses and certifications in areas such as sustainability. 

    Moreover, the Vision 2035 framework also “encourages exchange and understanding among youth and students” to strengthen the success of existing initiatives like the Young Professionals Scheme (YPS) and the Study India Programme.

    While the YPS, launched in February 2023, is designed as a reciprocal visa scheme enabling British and Indian citizens aged 18-30 to live, work, travel, and study in each other’s country for up to two years, it has so far been largely one-sided. 

    Over 2,100 visas were issued to Indian nationals in 2023, while no such data is available for UK nationals going to India – suggesting participation has been minimal.

    But on the educational front, with UK universities setting up campuses in India and more exchange opportunities emerging, British students may also be encouraged to study in the South Asian country, Alison Barrett, country director India at the British Council, said in a recent interview with Financial Express.

    Once the FTA is ratified, the responsibility will shift to business organisations, institutions, and industry leaders to bring it to life
    Amarjit Singh, India Business Group

    Furthermore, a recent article by Bhawna Kumar, Acumen’s director of TNE and institutional partnerships, and Nikunj Agarwal, the company’s consultant in research and TNE, highlighted the pivotal role of India’s National Education Policy in shaping the FTA and the Vision 2035. 

    “Chapter 8B of the FTA (UK Schedule of Commitments) places no restriction on UK providers offering higher education services (CPC 923) in India. This opens doors for UK universities to expand through various TNE models such as joint degrees, dual degrees, and campus partnerships,” they noted, citing the example of University of Birmingham’s joint master’s programs with IIT Madras in Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, and Sustainable Energy Systems, as a key example. 

    “Chapter 14 of the FTA aligns closely, promoting joint R&D, researcher exchanges, and institutional partnerships in areas like digital innovation, clean energy, agriculture, and healthcare mirroring NEP’s multidisciplinary agenda,” they added. 

    While the Vision 2035 framework appears robust on paper, the authors point out several implementation challenges that remain pressing, chief among them being regulatory alignment, visa bottlenecks, and the slow pace of progress on mutual recognition agreements. 

    “Establishing a Joint Education and Skills Council, co-chaired by senior officials from both countries, would institutionalise cooperation, monitor delivery, and resolve bottlenecks in real time,” they suggested. 

    While the trade deal does not explicitly mention international students, CETA is expected to broaden “high-quality employment pathways” for young Indians by easing access to the services market and facilitating short-term mobility for skilled talent across sectors such as IT, healthcare, finance, and the creative industries. 

    Each year, up to 1,800 Indian chefs, yoga instructors, and classical musicians would be able to work in the UK temporarily under CETA. 

    Additionally, Indian workers will benefit from the Double Contribution Convention (DCC), which will exempt them and their employers from UK National Insurance contributions for up to three years.

    Will CETA stand the test of time in delivering benefits to students and professionals? Amarjit Singh, CEO, India Business Group, believes it can but only with a collaborative approach to ensure its long-term success.

    “The UK-India partnership is respected across party lines. While the 2030 Roadmap was negotiated last year, the framework has been in the making for nearly a decade. There is broad consensus not to jeopardize this progress,” Singh told The PIE News. 

    Though CETA has been signed by both countries, it still requires ratification by their respective parliaments, a process expected to take another six to 12 months.

    “Once the FTA is ratified, the responsibility will shift to business organisations, institutions, and industry leaders to bring it to life. That’s where we need more awareness, active engagement, and a bit of hand-holding to realise its full potential.” 

    Source link

  • Wearable tech helps students overcome central vision challenges

    Wearable tech helps students overcome central vision challenges

    Central vision loss–a condition that impairs the ability to see objects directly in front of the eyes–can have profound academic and social impacts on K-12 students. Because this type of vision loss affects tasks that require detailed focus, such as reading, writing, and recognizing faces, students with central vision impairment often face unique challenges that can affect their overall school experience.

    In the classroom, students with central vision loss may struggle with reading printed text on paper or on the board, despite having otherwise healthy peripheral vision. Standard classroom materials are often inaccessible without accommodations such as large print, magnification devices, or digital tools with text-to-speech capabilities. These students might take longer to complete assignments or may miss visual cues from teachers, making it difficult to follow along with lessons. Without appropriate support, such as assistive technology, students may fall behind academically, which can affect their confidence and motivation to participate.

    As a result, they may be perceived as aloof or unfriendly, leading to social isolation or misunderstanding. Group activities, games, and unstructured time like lunch or recess can become sources of anxiety if students feel excluded or unsafe. Moreover, children with vision loss may become overly dependent on peers or adults, which can further affect their social development and sense of independence.

    While this may seem daunting, there are assistive technologies to help students navigate central vision loss and have fulfilling academic and social experiences.

    One such technology, eSight Go from Gentex Corporation’s eSight, uses an advanced high-speed, high-definition camera to capture continuous video footage of what a user is looking at. Algorithms optimize and enhance the footage and share it on two HD OLED screens, providing sharp, crystal-clear viewing. The user’s brain then synthesizes the images to fill any gaps in their vision, helping them to see more clearly, in real time.

    “The ability to have central perception brought back into your set of tools for education is critically important,” said Roland Mattern, eSight’s director of sales and marketing. “Ease of reading, ease of seeing the board, using tablets or computers–all of these things [lead to] the ability to complete an academic task with greater ease.”

    One key feature, Freeze Frame, lets the user capture a temporary photograph with the device’s camera, such as an image on an interactive whiteboard, a textbook page, or a graphic. The student can magnify the image, scan and study it, and take what they need from it.

    “This eases the ability to absorb information and move on, at a regular pace, with the rest of the class,” Mattern noted.

    Socially, central vision loss can create additional barriers. A major part of social interaction at school involves recognizing faces, interpreting facial expressions, and making eye contact–all tasks that rely heavily on central vision. Students with this impairment might have difficulty identifying peers or teachers unless they are spoken to directly. The glasses can help with these social challenges.

    “There’s a huge social aspect to education, as well–seeing expressions on teachers’ and fellow students’ faces is a major part of communication,” Mattern said.

    What’s more, the glasses also help students maintain social connections inside and outside of the classroom.

    “Think of how much peer-to-peer communication is digital now, and if you have central vision loss, you can’t see your phone or screen,” Mattern said. “The educational part is not just academic–it’s about the student experience that you want to enhance and optimize.”

    Educators, parents, and school staff play a crucial role in fostering inclusive environments–by educating classmates about visual impairments, encouraging empathy, and ensuring that students with central vision loss are supported both academically and socially. With the right accommodations and social-emotional support, these students can thrive in school and build strong connections with their peers.

    “If we can make daily living, hobbies, and education easier and facilitate participation, that’s a win for everybody,” Mattern said.

    For more spotlights on innovative edtech, visit eSN’s Profiles in Innovation hub.

    Laura Ascione
    Latest posts by Laura Ascione (see all)

    Source link

  • Breaking Barriers: Dr. Charles Lee Isbell Jr. Brings Vision for Inclusive Excellence to Illinois

    Breaking Barriers: Dr. Charles Lee Isbell Jr. Brings Vision for Inclusive Excellence to Illinois

     Dr. Charles Lee Isbell Jr.In a move that signals both continuity and transformation in higher education leadership, Dr. Charles Lee Isbell Jr. has been named the 11th chancellor of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, bringing with him a distinguished record of academic innovation and an unwavering commitment to expanding access in STEM fields.

    The appointment, announced by University of Illinois System President Tim Killeen, represents more than just a leadership transition. It marks the arrival of a scholar-administrator whose career has been defined by his efforts to democratize technology education and create pathways for underrepresented students in computing and artificial intelligence.

    Isbell, currently serving as provost at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, will formally assume his new role on August 1. The 56-year-old computer scientist brings more than two decades of experience in higher education leadership to one of the nation’s premier public research institutions.

    What sets Isbell apart in the landscape of academic leadership is his dual expertise in cutting-edge technology and social justice advocacy. As a Fellow of both the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence and the Association for Computing Machinery, his technical credentials are impeccable. Yet it’s his work as a nationally recognized advocate for broadening participation in STEM fields that may prove most transformative for Illinois.

    “His efforts to create more inclusive academic pathways have influenced national conversations on the importance of making a way for all to access, contribute to and benefit from technology education,” the university noted in announcing his appointment, highlighting work that has garnered attention from major national publications.

    This focus on inclusion comes at a critical time for higher education, as universities nationwide grapple with questions of access, affordability, and representation in rapidly evolving technological fields. Isbell’s approach has been to build bridges rather than barriers, recognizing that the future of computing depends on drawing talent from all corners of society.

    Isbell’s innovative approach to education was perhaps most visible during his tenure at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he spent 20 years climbing the academic ranks. As dean of the College of Computing, he helped transform the program into one of the largest and most diverse computing programs in the nation—a testament to his ability to scale inclusive excellence.

    His most groundbreaking achievement at Georgia Tech was the launch of the university’s Online Master of Science in Computer Science program, the first of its kind offered at scale by a leading research university. The program broke new ground in making graduate-level computer science education accessible to students who might otherwise be excluded by geography, work schedules, or financial constraints.

    This innovation in educational delivery demonstrates Isbell’s understanding that true accessibility requires not just opening doors but reimagining how those doors function. The success of the Georgia Tech program has since influenced online graduate education across the country, proving that rigorous academic standards and broad accessibility need not be mutually exclusive.

     Killeen’s enthusiasm for Isbell’s appointment centers on his “clear, creative and inspiring vision for what public higher education can and should be.” 

    “He brings a deep understanding of not only technology and its fast-evolving, far-reaching impacts, but also the vast range of disciplines that are integral to any great university and our society,” Killeen noted, emphasizing Isbell’s appreciation for the interconnectedness of academic disciplines.

    This interdisciplinary perspective may prove crucial as Illinois faces the challenges common to public research universities: maintaining excellence while expanding access, securing adequate funding while controlling costs, and preparing students for a rapidly changing economy while preserving the liberal arts traditions that create engaged citizens.

    Isabell said that he is excited to take the helm of a university with more than 56,000 students and nearly 13,000 faculty and staff. 

    “It’s the honor of a lifetime to be appointed to the role of chancellor and I’m deeply grateful to President Killeen and the Board of Trustees,” Isbell said upon his appointment. “I’m energized by this chance to serve the citizens of Illinois and advance the mission of learning, discovery, engagement and economic development.”

    Source link

  • Scholarship Thrives on Peripheral Vision (opinion)

    Scholarship Thrives on Peripheral Vision (opinion)

    The problem with scholarly focus is that it leads where you intend to go. And this is a problem because when you get there, you’re likely to find that your destination isn’t all that interesting. In practice, scholarship is not about effectively carrying out a plan but about exploring a terrain and developing the plan that is warranted by what you discover in that terrain.

    This issue with the act of scholarship in particular is really just an extension of what we know about the act of writing in general. Namely, writing is not the process of explaining the argument that is embedded in your outline but instead the process of finding out what that argument should be. If your paper follows your outline from beginning to end, it’s clear that you haven’t learned anything in the course of writing that paper. You found what you were looking for rather than what was actually out there waiting to be found.

    This reminds me of a question that my friend David Angus used to ask candidates for faculty positions at the University of Michigan College of Education: “Tell me about a time that your research forced you to give up an idea you really cared about.” If you discover something that upsets your thinking, that’s an indicator that you’re really learning something in the course of carrying out your study. This in turn suggests that the reader is likely to learn something from reading your paper on the subject, instead of just confirming a previous opinion.

    Scholars need an intellectual starting place for a piece of research—an established conceptual framework that provides us with a promising angle of approach into a complex intellectual problem space. But the danger is getting trapped within the confines of the conceptual framework in a manner that predetermines the conclusions we reach. Instead, we need to be open to the possibility that our favored framework needs to adapt to the demands of the data we encounter. Perhaps we need to add an additional perspective to this framework or adapt or even discard parts of the framework that don’t seem to be validated by the data at hand. After all, getting things wrong and then correcting them in light of evidence is at the heart of the discipline we call science.

    The need to open ourselves to perspectives that are beyond the scope of our established conceptual frameworks is what calls for us to deploy our peripheral vision. As I used to tell my students, the book you’re looking for may not be the one you need to read, which may be a few books down on the shelf. In this manner, scholarship becomes a process of continually evolving your conceptual framework over time, as each study nudges you in new directions. This is what can make academic pursuits so stimulating, as you bump into problems your current perspective can’t resolve and construct a new perspective that allows you to move forward in developing an argument. You can’t predict where you’re going to end up, but you’ll know that it’s going to be interesting—both for you and for your reader.

    David Labaree is a professor emeritus at Stanford Graduate School of Education. He blogs at davidlabaree.com and his recent books include Being a Scholar: Reflections on Doctoral Study, Scholarly Writing, and Academic Life (2023, Kindle Direct Publishing).

    Source link

  • Trump’s vision for dismantling the Department of Education (PBS News Hour)

    Trump’s vision for dismantling the Department of Education (PBS News Hour)

    The Department of Education is on the Trump chopping block. Details have not been fully released yet, but the president has signaled plans to dismantle it and move some of its key functions elsewhere. The department oversees student loans, federal funds for lower-income students, special education programs and more. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Laura Meckler of The Washington Post.

     

    Source link

  • IBM’s Armand Ruiz Presents Vision for AI Agents in the Workplace

    IBM’s Armand Ruiz Presents Vision for AI Agents in the Workplace

    In a recent presentation to RNL’s AI Leadership Council, Armand Ruiz, Vice President of Product – AI Platform at IBM, shared his vision for the future of work and the role of AI agents in making it more efficient.

    According to Ruiz, AI agents will become a key component of the future of work, enabling tasks to be completed autonomously and freeing up humans to focus on higher-level thinking. “The real promise of AI is in agents, which can actually do work and take action,” he said. “We’re moving into a world where we have multi-agent assistance, where multiple agents work together to achieve a common goal.”

    Ruiz also highlighted the importance of addressing the challenges of security, governance, and compliance in the use of AI agents in enterprise settings. “We cannot allow these agents to leak sensitive and confidential information, delete files or send data to the wrong recipients,” he emphasized.

    In terms of the future of work, Ruiz predicted that most General AI interactions will be in the form of autonomous agents, with 2/3 or 3/4 of the General AI workforce consisting of agents. He cited the example of GitHub, where an agent can automatically fix bugs and issues, freeing up developers to focus on higher-level tasks.

    Ruiz also discussed the potential impact of AI agents on education, citing the example of a tool that can take notes and create an outline from handwritten notes. “We’re moving into a world where AI will develop AI by itself, and AI will develop agents automatically,” he said.

    Regarding the recent developments in deep learning, Ruiz said that the market’s reaction to the release of the DeepSeek model was an overreaction. “We’ve been pushing for open innovation and open source at IBM, and it’s not surprising that someone else has come into the market with a similar model,” he said. “This will actually increase the demand for chips and energy and will unlock more consumption of AI and more use cases.”

    When asked about the potential impact on decisions related to data centers, Ruiz said that the increased demand for chips and energy will lead to a surge in consumption of AI, particularly in inference workloads. “We see a lot of micro inference going on, and it requires more compute than a regular model,” he explained.

    The presentation sparked a lively discussion among the attendees, with several questions and comments from the audience. Ruiz emphasized the importance of addressing the challenges of governance, compliance, working with a trusted partner who understands what you are trying to accomplish with AI, and the need for education and training in the use of these tools.

    As the presentation came to a close, Stephen Drew, COO of RNL and chair of the AI Leadership Council, reflected on the importance of working with companies that understand the unique needs of higher education and are committed to the responsible use of AI. “As institutions like RNL continue to navigate the complex landscape of AI and its applications, we are focused on working with our partner universities to help them establish AI governance frameworks, educate their teams on responsible AI, and incorporating AI into our services so our clients benefit from the efficiencies AI offers along with the higher education expertise at RNL,” he said.

    Learn more about RNL’s AI governance services and how they can support your institution’s AI initiatives here.

    Source link

  • University 4.0: A Vision for the Future of Higher Education

    University 4.0: A Vision for the Future of Higher Education

    ***It’s not too late to register for HEPI’s events this week: ‘Earning and learning: What’s the reality for today’s students?‘ webinar with Advance HE at 10am, Tuesday 14 January and ‘Who Pays? Exploring Fairer Funding Models for Higher Education‘ Symposium at Birkbeck, Thursday 16 January 10am to 5pm.***

    By Professor Aleks Subic, Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, Aston University.

    Universities have always been at the heart of knowledge and innovation. But in today’s rapidly evolving world, they must transcend their traditional roles to address complex global challenges, harness emerging opportunities and embrace heightened responsibilities. They must become champions of inclusive innovation and drivers of positive socioeconomic transformation, creating thriving innovation ecosystems that deliver sustainable, place-based development and inclusive growth. This is the promise of University 4.0.

    From Classical Roots to Transformational Ecosystems

    In late 2024, Aston University hosted the Global Federation of Competitiveness Councils (GFCC) University Research and Leadership Forum, marking a pivotal moment in the reimagining of higher education. Leaders, innovators, and visionaries from universities, industry, government, and communities gathered to confront a critical question: How can universities redefine their role in a world that is transforming at an unprecedented pace?

    The GFCC, a global multi-stakeholder membership organisation, is dedicated to accelerating productivity, growth, prosperity, and sustainability through best practices. Central to this forum was the exploration of University 4.0 — a bold and transformative vision for the future of higher education in an era of digital disruption, hyper-connectivity, the emergence of powerful technologies like artificial intelligence, social inequities, and sustainability challenges.

    The Global Federation of Competitiveness Councils (GFCC) University Forum, which I have had the privilege to lead from Aston University, and Elsevier Fourth Generation University (4GU) Development Group, inspired by the pioneering work of the University of Technology Eindhoven, have independently arrived at remarkably aligned perspectives on the evolution of universities to date. This shared understanding traces the progression through four distinct generations of higher education institutions, culminating in the transformative vision of University 4.0 (or 4GU).

    Universities have evolved through several transformative stages to meet the demands of each era:

    1. The Classical University: The first generation focused on teaching, by transmitting knowledge through oral communication and manuscripts. Its primary purpose was education.
    2. The Research University: The second generation emphasised the creation of new knowledge through scientific research, making universities hubs of research and innovation.
    3. The Entrepreneurial University: The third generation saw universities become economic players, commercialising research, fostering start-ups, and forging closer ties with industry. This era marked the rise of the ‘triple-helix’ model, integrating academia, industry, and government.
    4. University 4.0: The fourth generation is a response to a rapidly changing, technology-driven world. It envisions universities that are focused on socio-economic impact, inclusive innovation, and sustainable development goals, interconnected with industry, government, and society. These institutions are engines of innovation and transformation, embracing the ‘quadruple-helix’ model by integrating academic expertise with diverse societal needs to deliver real-world impact.

    The University 4.0 model is not about solitary academic pursuits. Instead, it thrives on collaboration, drawing diverse perspectives and inputs to address real-world challenges. Innovation precincts and districts — geographically concentrated hubs of high-tech companies, research institutions, and civic infrastructure — are emerging as the epicentres of economic revitalisation, creating opportunities for skilled workforces and fostering sustainable and high-value growth through place-based innovation.

    Universities embedded in such precincts, acting as catalysts of engagement and innovation are emerging as the fourth-generation universities – University 4.0. They are aligned more closely to technological and digital transformations, ensuring greater interconnectivity between the future of work and learning, bringing society along and alleviating the so-called societal pain when education lags behind industrial and digital revolutions.

    University 4.0 in Action: Aston University and the Birmingham Innovation Precinct

    At Aston University, the University 4.0 vision is central to our Aston 2030 Strategy. We are transforming into a fourth-generation university that is future-ready and aligned with national higher education reform priorities as outlined recently by Secretary of State for Education Bridget Phillipson. Universities must shift from isolated knowledge hubs to active participants in their regional and national ecosystems, embracing transformational business models and their roles as civic anchors.

    A flagship example of this vision is the Birmingham Innovation Precinct, part of the West Midlands Investment Zone. This innovation cluster, based on the quadruple-helix model, integrates academia, industry, government, and communities to create a globally significant hub of collaboration and innovation. By co-locating stakeholders, the precinct fosters digital innovation, improves health equity, drives skills development, and accelerates the transition to net-zero emissions.

    Key initiatives within the Birmingham Innovation Precinct include:

    • 10 Woodcock Street: A newly acquired 225,000 sq ft facility, set to house Aston Business School, the Aston Integrated Healthcare Hub, the Aston Business Incubator, and the Green Energy Centre delivering sustainable energy solutions to the precinct with net zero emissions.
    • The Aston Integrated Healthcare Hub: A model for community healthcare that offers preventative health and wellbeing services while showcasing advancements in digital healthcare technology, including remote patient monitoring. Operating as a ‘living lab’, it integrates translational research and inclusive innovation, student placements, and training to address local health inequities.
    • The Aston Business Incubator: Launching in 2025, the incubator will provide a home to 100 tech startups and innovative businesses. Offering state-of-the-art facilities, collaborative workspaces, and access to academic expertise, mentoring and investment, it will transform ideas into thriving enterprises.

    These initiatives are more than projects; they are integral to Aston University’s commitment to place-based innovation, delivering measurable socioeconomic impact for Birmingham, the West Midlands, and beyond.

    A Call to Action for the Future of Higher Education

    The transition to University 4.0 represents a fundamental shift in how higher education operates, collaborates, and contributes to society. However, to fully realise this vision, systemic change is required—not only within universities but across the funding models and evaluation frameworks that shape them.

    The current funding and ranking systems often prioritise traditional metrics that fail to capture the broader socioeconomic contributions of universities, like access and participation, employability, social mobility, digital inclusion, contributions to health outcomes and sustainability, and impacts stemming from knowledge transfer and innovation. To truly support and reward the transformative impact of University 4.0, these systems must evolve to measure and incentivise the right indicators. As we move forward, it is essential to ask not just what we are good at but what we are good for. Only then can universities fulfil their potential as engines of innovation, inclusion, and growth for a better future.

    Source link