Major Updates

ED Sends Distance Ed, R2T4, TRIO Rules to OIRA for Final Review Before Release and Public Comment
The US Department of Education has advanced a set of proposed regulations to the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review. This submission marks the final procedural step before the proposed rules are made available for public comment. The proposed regulations encompass several key areas previously addressed during negotiated rulemaking sessions earlier this year, specifically focusing on Distance Education, Return of Title IV (R2T4), and TRIO Programs.

Absent from this submission are the topics of State Authorization, Cash Management, and Accreditation. We anticipate those topics’ proposed regulatory changes should be released at a future date. We continue to monitor the situation closely, particularly to see if any of our recommendations, noted below, which were submitted earlier this month in collaboration with other organizations, are incorporated into the proposed distance education regulations. We will provide updates as new information becomes available, including when the regulations are released, and open for public comment.

 

Coalition Letter on Proposed Distance Education Regulations, Offering Alternatives 

We joined a letter to the Department of Education addressing proposed regulations that would affect distance education programs. In this letter, we expressed our concerns regarding the recent proposed changes to: 

  • Enact mandatory attendance-taking in all distance education courses 
  • Not allowing distance education for clock hour courses

We are worried about the institutional burdens as well as how it will affect students’ outcomes, especially for marginalized communities. With our peer organizations (WCET, OLC, QM, DEAC, and AACC) we proposed thoughtful alternatives within the letter. We all are committed to ensuring that any new regulations strengthen—rather than weaken—student access to high-quality distance education programs. There also were a number of provisions proposed which we support, and highlighted those and a few caveats within the letter. We encourage you to share with your institutional administration as well as contact elected officials and share our letter and continue to stay informed. 

 

Other News

 

  • US Department of Education Opens Applications for Basic Needs for Postsecondary Students program (Federal Register)
    Applications for new awards are due by August 5th. The program provides grants to eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs), or a consortia or system of such institutions, to advance systemic and sustainable solutions to student basic needs insecurity through support programs that address the basic needs of students and to report on practices that improve outcomes for students. 

 

A person (Marie Cini) smiling

By Marie Cini

Knowing what our potential students want is critical in a time of greater competition for students who will enroll in our programs. 

Things have dramatically changed since the early 2000s when almost any online program was successful by almost any measure. Demand for online education was growing, while the supply of online programs could not keep pace. The standard advice to any leader in higher education seeking to increase enrollments was “go online.” 

Fast forward to 2024, and online programs are no longer a major growth engine. They are simply “the cost of doing the business of education.” According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 53.3% of students were enrolled in distance education courses in 2022. This means that if you want to serve all your students well, some segments will demand flexible online models. If you are not providing that, others most certainly will.  

The risks of going online or expanding your online offerings are also higher now. Not all online programs are good bets. Not all have a large potential student enrollment base. Pinpointing what your students look for in an online program will be important to developing a healthy program mix. 

It is also true that students may not actually know what they want before they enroll. It’s only when they don’t get what they expected that the gaps become clear to them. 

During my career in online education, I’ve seen a lot of these “broken expectations” and have worked diligently to raise the bar for online program quality. I offer these thoughts here, categorized by what students want from their institution, their program of study, their faculty, and their technology platform. 

It’s important to note that students don’t really differentiate among the various departments of an institution. To our students, everything is the “Institution.”  We may know internally where program-level decisions end and faculty preferences start, but students don’t. Our internal processes and departments are not transparent to our students and shouldn’t have to be. Students are best served when the institution has a tightly integrated and well-defined student experience. 

 

What Students Want from their Institution? 

While students view their entire experience as “the Institution,” the following aspects of what they need can only come from institution-level support. With strategic and resource support, these aspects will be easier to introduce. 

Well Designed Programs and Courses. This means that the program should have a clear set of outcomes, that courses are all clearly connected to those program outcomes, and that these outcomes are all clear and transparent to the students. Programs of study need to have this explicit integration so that students can spend their energy on learning rather than trying to make sense of the intersections of the curriculum. Are your programs built using a backward-design model? They should be. This is the best way to ensure that program outcomes are all integrated and at the appropriate levels of knowledge so that students can learn without getting lost in the content. 

Career Relevant Knowledge and Skills. The debate about whether an institution education should prepare students for life, community engagement, or their careers is unnecessary. A degree can and should prepare students for all aspects of their lives. However, our students will struggle with all aspects of their lives without a good career, so career preparation needs to be high on your list. If your institution does not provide intensive career development services, internships, and career placement opportunities for your online students, that should become a priority in your planning. 

Affordability. In my experience, affordability and financial assistance are high on the list of what students want. According to the EducationDynamics Online College Students 2024 report, affordability is the #1 factor in the student’s decision-making process, followed by the programs as #2. In a time when adult students juggle their own educational costs along with family and career responsibilities, the price of a degree is a significant factor in their decision. Keeping tuition low, ensuring that additional fees don’t add up to higher costs, and keeping the costs of course materials low help students afford an education and stay away from burdensome debt. Financial assistance for online students is a must. Online programs cannot be considered the “cash cow” for the institution. 

Support Services. Online students want and deserve the type of support that on-campus students have come to expect. Academic advising, student success support, access to a help desk, online library services, fast turnaround times from faculty to their questions, and disability accommodations are table stakes for a sound online program. Have you audited your support services for online programs lately? 

 

What Do Students Want from their Faculty? 

Our faculty are really the frontline of our interaction with students. To most students, their interactions with faculty represent the largest and most significant set of engagements with the institution. You need to help faculty maximize their impact as they interact with students online. Not all faculty know how to do this if they have taught only in live classrooms. How well are you developing your online instructors?  

The Chronicle of Higher Education article, “How to Be a Better Online Teacher”, while a few years old, provides practical advice for faculty to improve their online teaching that still holds true today. 

Interaction and Engagement. In my years as an administrator, the thing students complain about most is when faculty do not respond to them. This is the equivalent of an instructor not showing up for a face-to-face class. You should monitor faculty interaction in the online classroom and help those who do not meet the standard to improve. Even better, train your online educators in the innovative practices of effective online education and provide them with continuing education regularly. 

Meaningful Assessments. High-stakes assessments that are more recall than application are not the optimum way to assess student learning, nor do they help students learn deeply. More frequent, application-based assessments are far more useful for student learning. If your model is to have faculty develop their own assessments, be sure they understand how to create meaningful ones. 

Empathy and Understanding. Most students today are juggling a myriad of responsibilities. Many are not comfortable in a college setting and do not feel competent or confident. Faculty who are understanding and empathic and who will help students overcome barriers to their own learning and success are important in the online classroom. Do you educate your faculty about empathy in the online classroom? 

 

What Do Students Want from their Technology Infrastructure? 

You may think I would list Artificial Intelligence as the first thing students want in their online programs. But the truth is that we don’t know that yet. Do students understand AI well enough to “want it” in some way? That is doubtful. Most administrators and faculty are still figuring it out. Frankly, we need to understand AI so we can add it as appropriate to our operations and learning experience in ways that deepen student learning. 

Intuitive/Easy Navigation. Right now, your LMS is the front door to your institution for your online students. Is it intuitive? Mobile-first? Easy to navigate? Don’t make assumptions. Test this frequently and ask your students. They are the best indicators of how easy it is to navigate your LMS environment. If it’s not easy, students will move to an institution that makes it so. 

Easy Integration with Other Applications. The world of online education is really an integration model. As we choose new products for our students to benefit from, easy integration with the core LMS is important. You don’t want your students to leave the LMS and sign on to a different system just to access a tool related to their course. We don’t want students getting lost on campus; make sure we aren’t losing them online! 

Reliability. If you’ve experienced a service break with your LMS that prevented students and faculty from logging in for some time, you know the negative consequences this can cause. Students have come to expect almost no downtime in their ability to “go online” and complete their work in an asynchronous environment. So, monitor this closely and have a plan to communicate with students and faculty as soon as an incident occurs. 

The 2022 Educause Students and Technology Report:  Rebalancing the Student Experience, speaks to these points, as well as to the shifting preference for online course options. 

 

Advice to Online Administrators 

If I could boil my thoughts down to a concise set of recommendations, there would be three: 

  1. Design (or redesign, if it exists already) the program with the students in mind as the clear “end learners.” Determine what the students seek to learn, why they want this degree, and how you can support them. 
  2.  Focus on affordability. Find ways to keep costs to students low. Provide financial assistance and payment plans. Those who need a college education the most are often the ones who struggle the most to afford it. Find ways to break the cycle of ever-increasing costs to students. 
  3. Integrate all aspects of the learning experience: the courses, the instruction, and the technology. Anytime a student faces a barrier or a gap in the program, it can be a moment of failure for the student. If a student loses momentum or confidence, they can walk away, blaming it on “life got in the way.” I believe we should develop programs that help students continue and feel confident despite life’s vicissitudes. That’s why our students come to us—to help make their lives better. 

Marie Cini, Ph.D., is the Provost and Chief Academic Officer at UoPeople, the world’s first non-profit, tuition-free, American, accredited, online university.  She has over 30 years of experience in online and adult education, and currently serves as a Strategic Advisor with UPCEA.  

 

The Generative AI (GenAI) revolution has not ignored higher education, a whole host of tools are available now and more revolutionary tools are on the way.

Beginning with concern over the potential for plagiarism and cheating by way of the use of GenAI chatbots, higher education has paid attention to the development of this technology. Soon, educators came to realize that the depth and scope of the AI revolution was such that it would require some adaptation in the delivery modes, methods and pedagogies of classes. Given that GenAI is rapidly becoming a daily-use tool in the workplace, higher education needs to embrace the technology in teaching methods as well as content. Just as with the Internet, the personal computer and common office software that preceded the release of GenAI chatbots decades ago, graduates needed to be well versed in the operation and application of new technologies to be hired and function successfully in the workplace.  Once again, we need to adapt to society-wide technological changes.

Now, as GenAI develops and matures in business, industry, commerce, and society as a whole, it is becoming an integral part of the design, implementation and delivery of higher education as a whole. Let’s look at some of the applications that are developing that will advance higher education. 

A whole host of chatbot apps have been released that can be effectively used in the development, delivery and participation in higher education classes. With more than 35 million users, the most attention has been given to ChatGPT by OpenAI. Yet, there are many more apps such a Google Gemini, Perplexity AI, Claude by Anthropic, Pi by Inflection, and ones that effectively combine GenAI with Internet search such as CleeAI. All of these general applications have useful roles for enhancing teaching and learning in higher education.

Of course, the relationship between OpenAI and Khan Academy has resulted in a rather phenomenal online tutor named Khanmigo. The founder and CEO of Khan Academy, Sal Khan says “Generative AI can be a force for good in education. Khan Academy now has an educational AI chatbot, Khanmigo, which can guide students while still promoting critical thinking. Khan says developments like these could allow for every student to have a personal AI tutor and every teacher an AI teaching assistant. And Khan thinks incorporating AI in the classroom can allow for exciting new learning opportunities — with the right programming and guardrails.” With Khanmigo, the Khan Academy provides teachers with a tool with which “educators can easily tackle a wide range of duties, such as the following:

  • Generating rubrics
  • Developing quiz and exercise questions
  • Crafting exit tickets
  • Creating captivating lesson hooks tailored to student interests
  • Supporting Individual Education Plan (IEP) development”

The tool is available to individuals and families at $4 per month or $44 a year, while teachers are provided free access and educational institutions and school districts can negotiate licenses.

Some of the apps that have been developed for general use can be customized for specific topical areas in higher ed. For example, I created a version of GPT,“Ray’s EduAI Advisor,” that builds onto the current GPT-4o version with specific updates and perspectives on AI in higher education.  It is freely available to users. With few tools and no knowledge of the programming involved, anyone can build their own GPT to supplement information for their classes or interest groups.

Professors in foreign languages at Arizona State University developed a GPT “Language Buddy” that “can interact with students based on the prompts given, and training the technology to be more human-like and to interact at an appropriate language level. Ideally, they would like Language Buddy to be able to have conversations with beginner-level students (based on course content), generate a transcript of the conversation and provide tailored feedback for the student.” 

Open AI has announced that it will soon release a wide-ranging application for higher education use. “ChatGPT Edu” will provide a wide range of new features as described in this response to an inquiry I posed to ChatGPT “What will this provide to higher education?” These features include customized tutoring, enhanced teaching tools with additional resource recommendations, and administrative support including assistance in tracking student progress, organizing schedules, and managing course materials. In addition, ChatGPT recognizes that there is speculation that it will additionally include:

  • Adaptive Learning Systems: More advanced personalization features that adapt in real-time to student performance and engagement.
  • Integration with Learning Management Systems (LMS): Seamless integration with popular LMS platforms for more cohesive educational experiences.
  • Advanced Analytics: Enhanced data analytics for deeper insights into student learning patterns and outcomes.

OpenAI has not forgotten associations and other non-profits that may be associated with higher education by “offering nonprofits discounted access to premium versions of ChatGPT to make the chatbot more accessible with its OpenAI for Nonprofits initiative, offering nonprofits “discounted access to premium ChatGPT, providing a ChatGPT Team license for just $20 per user per month — a $10 discount.”

Just in case we need to remind ourselves of why those of us in higher education must begin to integrate GenAI into our teaching and learning, data are now emerging that indicate that students may be more likely to be considered for higher paying positions if they include experience with AI in their employment applications. A study by Nick Drydakis in the Oxford Economic Papers, recently reported:

It was found that university graduates with AI capital, obtained through an AI business module, experienced more invitations for job interviews than graduates without AI capital. Moreover, graduates with AI capital were invited to interviews for jobs that offered higher wages than those without AI capital. Furthermore, it was found that large firms exhibited a preference for job applicants with AI capital, resulting in increased interview invitations and opportunities for higher-paying positions. The outcomes hold for both men and women. The study concludes that AI capital might be rewarded in terms of employment prospects, especially in large firms.

Thus, through including experience in utilizing and understanding the potential of AI in their discipline, we may be able to assist our students in preparing for the changing workplace environment that awaits them.  Perhaps this summer affords us an opportunity to begin integrating GenAI into our fall semester offerings.

 

This article was originally published in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning blog.

In a new national study of the preferences and expectations of online students, RNL has identified five interconnected strategies that institutions must have in place at the core of their growth strategy. The data are drawn from a survey of 1,500 prospective and current online students administered just two months ago.   

The survey asked students about their motivations, concerns, search patterns, and decision-making processes, but also about their views on online study, the key features of programs in which they are most likely to enroll, specifics about how to make their courses work with the rest of their lives, and perhaps most importantly, their interest in and use of AI in their daily lives and their studies.  

There are five interlinked take-aways that comprise “action items” for institutions seeking to expand online enrollment. These action items are presented below in a specific order designed to ensure success. How so? Many institutions begin by creating a great program, with few resources left for all that it takes for success. However, the highest quality, most market-relevant programs will not result in robust enrollment if underpinning foundations – like effective follow-up, targeted messaging, state-of-the-art marketing, and infusing AI into everything you do – are not in place at the point of program launch.   

Five interconnected Strategies for Online Growth 

1. Invest in the recruitment process: Online students told us that their experience during the recruitment process will guide their decision. Investing in the recruitment team is the foundation of all the other “must dos” for institutions seeking growth.  

  • 44% expect a personalized response within 3 hours and all but 23 percent expecting within 24 hours 
  • 45% think a slow response indicates that they are not a priority to the program 
  • 49% will either very likely or definitely enroll in the program that responds to them first

2. Position programs to address aspirations and concerns: Online students told us why they enroll, why they select online, what concerns them, and more about who they are. Before institutions decide on channels and platforms, they need to work on messages and positioning.  

  • 50% of online students pursue a degree to advance their career. 
  • 50% indicate that their greatest concern about online study is the lack of interaction with either their instructors or classmates.  
  • 34% indicate that their online learning experience is better than past classroom experiences.  

3. Marketing strategies begin with search engine optimization: The research shows how students search, how many programs they consider, and how they get information on programs of interest. Institutions need to figure out how to stretch their marketing budget to effectively reach as many students as possible. 

  • 92% of online students use a search engine as either the first or second step in their program search.  
  • 73% clicked on digital ads – most often because the “copy” interested them.  
  • 76% watch videos during their search, equally split between program pages and YouTube 

4. Artificial intelligence is increasingly effective in aligning processes with student expectations. Online students are using AI daily and are increasingly satisfied with the experience. Institutions need to advance AI in their operations both to meet student expectations and improve their own efficiency.  

  • 47% of online students use an AI tool at least once per week. 
  • 50% would be likely to use an AI-driven research assistant in their studies.  
  • 79% used an AI-driven chatbot during their search for a program.  

5. Create programs and courses that students want: Respondents shared which types of programs are attractive to online students and how they need their courses organized. Successful online programs are built on a careful balancing of student needs and academic priorities. 

  • The top 10 online degrees include business, computer science, healthcare, and liberal arts topics.  
  • 75% enroll in programs offered in accelerated terms. 
  • 62% enroll in programs with either optional or no “live” meetings. 
  • 50+% indicate technical support or career development are the most important student services. 
  • The second most important factor in the enrollment decision (after cost) is career preparation – making this a curricular imperative as well as a “services” imperative.   

 

RNL is pleased to offer UPCEA members access to the full executive summary of the report. Click here to request a copy.

 

About RNL 

RNL offers a full range of services for institutions seeking to grow online (as well as graduate and undergraduate) enrollment. From consulting and market research to messaging architecture to digital marketing, RNL is committed to providing the help that institutions need to grow enrollment while retaining ownership and control. RNL’s approach provides what we call “radical transparency”, meaning that we want you to understand what we are doing and learn how to do it yourself.  

Photo of a person (Emily West) smiling at the camera

Emily West

Jim Fong, UPCEA

Jim Fong

Although the timelines are rarely ever accurate, Hollywood has often expanded our minds to see what the future could bring us, ranging from Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey predicting a future with artificial intelligence and Star Wars with robotics being commonplace, to The Simpsons predicting certain presidents. Back to the Future, The Jetsons, Blade Runner and The Fifth Element introduced us to a world with flying and self-driving cars. Hollywood also shows us that our jobs will change. While Minority Report showed a far-fetched future of special lifeforms predicting crime before it happens, the real point is, as in the television series Person of Interest, some crimes can be predicted, anticipated, and prevented ahead of the occurrence. This also requires humans to play a major role in the outcome. 

With an AI world evolving, jobs will change. They will change in the criminal justice field, much of which is dependent on many factors, including the role of government, the private sector, and the citizens it impacts. There are many technologies under development (and some fully developed) that can identify past and potential violators, as well as engage them, but the integration of these tools is not 100% accurate and potentially violates many ethical, philosophical, and societal beliefs and rights. If society were willing to accept a high margin of error and wrongful identification, facial recognition and potential criminal tracking would be legal and accepted. This shouldn’t be, as many are biased, and until a level of accuracy is reached, the integration of new tools, processes, and systems to combat, battle, and prevent crime will be slow. 

What we do know is that it will impact existing jobs in law enforcement and prevention, as well as with the corrections system. Drone technology and the use of body cameras are two examples that have high adoption rates, as does the role of predictive analytics. What is less certain is what the police officer, detective, and corrections officer of the future will look like, what skills they will have, what tools and technologies they will use, and what policies will shape their jobs. Newer roles to prevent crime will also grow in the future, such as forensic and data analysts.   

UPCEA, in partnership with Lightcast, the leading data and information company in higher education and workforce development, is producing a number of occupational briefings spotlighting professions that will be impacted by technology. The first of the series is on law enforcement, which will be followed by the legal profession. Other occupational areas will include jobs from the healthcare, education, and engineering industries, among others. 

Click here to read the Jobs of the Future…and the Present: What Will Happen in Criminal Justice? occupational briefing.

While there are isolated examples of wholesale layoffs among a few individual companies, the broad scale loss of jobs has not yet materialized. 

So far, the impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on the general workforce has been to enhance productivity rather than to reduce the overall number of jobs. Of course, we are barely into the beginning of the fourth industrial revolution.

In April of 2023, Goldman Sachs economists analyzed the potential impact of GenAI on the workforce:

Shifts in workflows triggered by these advances could expose the equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs to automation, Briggs and Kodnani write. Analyzing databases detailing the task content of over 900 occupations, our economists estimate that roughly two-thirds of U.S. occupations are exposed to some degree of automation by AI. They further estimate that, of those occupations that are exposed, roughly a quarter to as much as half of their workload could be replaced. But not all that automated work will translate into layoffs, the report says.

The Economist reported last June that “AI is not yet killing jobs.”  However, that doesn’t mean that significant job reductions may not be on the way:

In a recent paper Tyna Eloundou of OpenAI and colleagues say that ‘around 80% of the US workforce could have at least 10% of their work tasks affected by the introduction of LLMs’. Another paper suggests that legal services, accountancy and travel agencies will face unprecedented upheaval.

Using American data on employment by occupation, we single out white-collar workers. These include people working in everything from back-office support and financial operations to copy-writers. White-collar roles are thought to be especially vulnerable to generative ai, which is becoming ever better at logical reasoning and creativity. However, there is as yet little evidence of an ai hit to employment. In the spring of 2020 white-collar jobs rose as a share of the total, as many people in service occupations lost their job at the start of the covid-19 pandemic. The white-collar share is lower today, as leisure and hospitality have recovered. Yet in the past year the share of employment in professions supposedly at risk from generative ai has risen by half a percentage point.

The AIGrid podcast recently discussed why we have not seen major effects to this point, and what is restraining the implementation of GenAI bots and agents. Largely, government regulations generally do not include affordances for AI, rather the regulations are slow to revise and currently are human-centric. The purchase and installation of the enormous computing support for AI will take time. The infrastructure expenditures will be cost-effective, but only after time. The rollout of large-scale, broadly useful AI agent software is just about to begin. We can expect to see agent models become far more prevalent in the second half of this year and 2025. However, the sociological aspects of such changes are not to be minimized. Humans in many cases may prefer to work with and support other humans. Other market changes will need to take place in order to most efficiently employ AI agents, for example AI agents are less likely to be persuaded by Web marketing than are humans. In sum, while in some career paths and job classifications AI will be implemented very soon, in most areas, the current infrastructure and entrenched practices will take months and years to change in order to take full economic advantage of GenAI.

Yet leaders remain convinced that massive changes are on the way.  Kristalina Georgieva, the Managing director of the International Monetary Fund, says that “AI will hit the labor market like a tsunami, we have very little time to get people ready for it.” Speaking in Zurich Georgieva said “It could bring tremendous increase in productivity if we manage it well, but it can also lead to more misinformation and, of course, more inequality in our society,”

A wide-ranging poll of 2,000 executives earlier this year, conducted by staffing firm Adecco Group in collaboration with research firm Oxford Economics, showed that 41% of them expect to employ fewer people because of the technology. Anna Cooban of CNN reports:

The survey’s results provide another indication of the potential for AI and generative AI — which can create original text, images and other content in response to prompts from users — to revolutionize employment and the way people work. AI is emerging ‘as a great disruptor in the world of work,’ Denis Machuel, chief executive of Adecco Group, said in a statement. ‘Companies must do more to re-skill and redeploy teams to make the most of this technological leap and avoid unnecessary upheaval.’

Mary Daly, the CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco is quoted in an April issue of Wired, taking a more measured approach with the impacts and opportunities:

Technology has never reduced net employment over time for the country. If you look at technology over multiple centuries, what you see is that the impact lands somewhere in the middle, not necessarily dead-set in the middle, but somewhere in there, and where we end up depends a lot on how we engage with the technology. When I think of generative AI—or AI writ large—what I see is an opportunity. You can replace people, you can augment people, and you can create new opportunities for people. But you do have winners and losers. I came of age as an economist in the computerization era. That computer surge and the productivity that came with it clearly produced inequalities. AI in general, but especially generative AI, is an opportunity to assist those middle-skilled people in being more productive. But that’s our choice, and that requires a lot of thinking on our part.

The rollout of the largest number of AI replacements for employees will come with the robust development of AI agents that are developed with an inventory of the skills and specific task abilities that need to be addressed in a given position. For example, NVIDIA is developing AI-powered intelligent healthcare agents. These agents are being designed to cover many of the specific duties that are currently handled by human nurses. Such agents are under development at many companies for a vast array of jobs. Ken Yeung writes in Venture Beat that Microsoft says it will migrate the Khan Academy’s Khanmigo AI tutor bot to its Azure OpenAI Service, enabling them to provide all U.S. K-12 teachers free use of Khanmigo.

Agents are under development and testing around the world.  We can anticipate a steady stream of releases through the end of 2024 and into 2025. It will be important to monitor news of such releases that may be relevant to your job. The “tsunami” is still ahead of us. Recognizing that an average of one college or university is closing each week, we may see the implementation of agent-faculty and other academic professionals in order to reduce operating costs to stave off closures. Meanwhile, perhaps readers might use a real-time AI-powered search engine to monitor progress on the development of agents that can augment or replace their own positions.

This article was originally published in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning blog.