“How would you describe your leadership style?”
This question is a common one for both mid-level and senior-level candidates in the interview process. In the past, many relied on descriptors such as transformative, collaborative, or authentic to explain how they approached people and built teams. But as you think about your next career step, perhaps it is time to prepare for a new twist on that question: How does your leadership style intersect with artificial intelligence (AI)?
Lincoln’s Legacy of Leadership
Much of my professional career has been spent in Springfield, Illinois, the Land of Lincoln. Springfield is home to the only home Abraham Lincoln ever owned, the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum, and Oak Ridge Cemetery, where Lincoln, Mary Todd Lincoln, and three of their children are buried. Lincoln built his legal and political career in Springfield before becoming president. It was here that he honed the leadership skills that would ultimately shape history.
Many scholars have analyzed Lincoln’s leadership, noting his ability to inspire trust, delegate authority, and navigate conflict with clarity (Phillips, 1993; Goodwin, 2005; Aubrey, 2012). According to Gemini (2025), Lincoln demonstrated a transformational style through listening to diverse viewpoints, inspiring loyalty, and communicating with confidence and clarity.
What If Lincoln Had AI?
While it is always challenging to view the past through the lens of today, I posed a question to ChatGPT (2025).
Using the literature on Abraham Lincoln’s leadership, how might he have utilized artificial intelligence to complement his style?
ChatGPT’s response outlined five intriguing possibilities:
- Public opinion analysis – Using AI to analyze newspapers, correspondence, and political publications in real time. This is visually depicted by one of the most impactful exhibits at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Museum. The display represents how public opinion was shaped, and distorted, through media of the time.
- Battlefield synthesis – AI could have consolidated conflicting battlefield reports, helping Lincoln and his leadership team make clearer, more informed decisions.
- Predictive strategy – AI might have helped Lincoln anticipate outcomes more precisely.
- Communication testing – Although Lincoln was a masterful speaker, AI may have supported him by testing rhetorical strategies before he delivered them to the public.
- Empathy at scale – Social listening tools might have amplified Lincoln’s ability to understand and connect with citizens across the country.
While I don’t fully agree with all the assessments provided, I appreciated that ChatGPT also raised cautionary points about ethical risks, overreliance, and fairness. Using AI as a thought partner in examining Lincoln’s leadership was an engaging scholarly exercise.
Lessons for Today’s Leaders
So, what can we learn about our own leadership in the age of AI? How do we use these tools ethically and effectively without becoming overly reliant or unfair in application of the tool? And how do we address the modern version of that familiar interview question:
“How would you describe your leadership style in a time when AI is evolving?”
As Zarifis (2025) suggests, today’s leaders must consider how they guide both people and AI to achieve shared goals.
Here are five practices I recommend for developing a clear roadmap that integrates your leadership style with the use of artificial intelligence tools available today:
- Establish clear moral guidelines for how you and your team engage with AI.
- Put people first. Relationships and human understanding remain central.
- Understand your leadership style and how both your team and AI tools can function together.
- Avoid overreliance. AI should augment, not replace, your judgment.
- Insist on fairness. Develop and follow policies that ensure equitable use of AI.
Conclusion
Leading during the evolution of AI offers tremendous opportunity, but it also challenges us to rethink how we define success. As leaders, we must balance human values with technological tools, staying true to our principles while adapting to new realities.
So, I leave you with a question: How will you lead both your human team and your AI team members?
References
Abraham Lincoln Presidential Museum. https://www.lincolnlibraryandmuseum.com/the-museum
Aubrey, G. (2012). Lincoln’s leadership—If you want success, lead like this. Creative Team Pub.
Goodwin, D. K. (2005). Team of rivals: The political genius of Abraham Lincoln. Simon & Schuster.
Phillips, D. (1993). Lincoln on leadership. Warner Books.
Zarifis, A. (2025). Leadership with AI and trust. De Gruyter.
Vickie Cook is the Vice Chancellor for Enrollment and Retention Management and a Research Professor of Education at the University of Illinois Springfield, as well as a Strategic Advisor for UPCEA Research and Consulting. To learn more about UPCEA Research and Consulting, please contact [email protected].
There are few conferences that truly bring together such an inspiring mix of vision, innovation, and authenticity as UPCEA’s Convergence. This year, the event in Washington D.C. proved why it’s one of my favorite gatherings in the field of continuing education. The energy, the openness, and the collective drive to redefine learning for a changing world were palpable – from the early morning sessions to the hallway conversations.
While I didn’t get to see every session (as much as I wish I could!), I left with an overwhelming sense of pride in this community – one that balances ambition with collaboration and grounded curiosity. Every time I attend Convergence, I’m reminded of why we do what we do: helping learners, wherever they are, continue their educational journey with purpose and possibility.
The University of Iceland managed to implement Eduframe in just three months, an incredible feat that showcased not just technical execution but deep organizational alignment. Their success was not only about moving fast – it was about moving together. Before the project even started, Iris and Elva had already built internal commitment by making the process visible: presentations, shared timelines, open Q&A sessions, and regular staff involvement. They ensured that everyone felt part of the transformation – not as bystanders, but as contributors.
This resonated deeply with me, especially because at Convergence this year, many sessions underscored that staff buy-in is the make-or-break factor in digital transformation. The University of Iceland turned that principle into action. Their approach embodies something I often repeat: there may be massive differences between institutions worldwide, but the commonalities always outweigh them. The language, titles, or structures might differ, but the human elements – trust, communication, and shared purpose – remain the same.
Their agility also reflects what I would call the emerging “COLO mindset” – drawn from The Chief Online Learning Officer’s Guidebook by Jocelyn Widmer and Thomas Cavanagh. While Elva and Iris might not hold that exact title, they demonstrate the same core traits described in the book: adaptability, collaboration, vision, and the ability to bridge strategy and execution. In Iceland’s case, that leadership led to remarkable speed – not reckless urgency, but structured momentum.
Their golden nugget was their ability to create speed to course – building and launching courses within weeks. They embraced experimentation, accepted that around 30% of courses might never go live, and viewed that not as failure but as evidence of responsiveness. By working closely with companies, associations, and unions to understand emerging needs, they ensured every offering aligned with real workforce demand. It’s a pragmatic form of innovation – one that values progress over perfection.
What stood out was their shared emphasis on clarity. Both institutions stressed the importance of defining what terms like CLR, LER, and digital credentialing actually mean in their context. These concepts can still feel “fluffy” or abstract to many, but by articulating their institutional definitions clearly and turning those into something visual, they’re making these frameworks actionable and trusted.
UMGC and Morgan also reinforced a powerful truth: you don’t need to wait for perfection to begin. Both universities have built strong foundations for CLR and LER, but acknowledged that these systems will always evolve. The key is to start, learn, and iterate – not to stall in pursuit of an unattainable ideal. This principle mirrors the Icelandic approach: act with intention, then refine with insight.
Perhaps most importantly, both institutions highlighted that learning data – when well-structured and shared – doesn’t just serve administrators; it empowers learners. CLRs and LERs make skills visible and portable, allowing learners to present verifiable evidence of what they know and can do. This shift ties directly to the growing movement toward skills-based hiring and Prior Learning Assessment (PLA) – areas that bridge academia and the workforce more closely than ever.
Institutions like the University of Iceland, UMGC, and Morgan State exemplify what happens when universities build living bridges to the workforce. They design courses with employers, recognize informal learning through PLA, and create records that travel beyond institutional walls. This responsiveness is not just operational agility – it’s a moral imperative. Learners deserve systems that keep pace with the realities of modern work.
During my own Industry Insights session at Convergence, I shared how these global trends are unfolding across institutions we work with worldwide – from Europe to North America and beyond. What struck me most is that while every context is unique, the underlying drivers are the same: agility, clarity, and the ability to connect learning to employability. The discussions reinforced that continuing education isn’t an afterthought anymore; it’s becoming the blueprint for how institutions adapt to lifelong learning at scale.
As one speaker put it beautifully, “Lifelong learning is no longer a slogan – it’s the infrastructure of employability.” I couldn’t agree more.
At Drieam, we see this every day: when institutions reduce the time between course design and course launch, they’re not simply increasing efficiency – they’re creating access. Learners can engage faster, apply new skills sooner, and (re-)enter the workforce with momentum. Clean, connected data systems make that possible. And that’s where technology, when done right, becomes an enabler of transformation rather than an obstacle.
Too often, systems are designed around technology rather than pedagogy. But when technology enables purpose – when it strengthens relationships, simplifies workflows, and supports the learner’s journey – transformation accelerates. The partnership model between universities and EdTech providers has to reflect that shared accountability.
Even among those who don’t carry formal COLO titles, the mindset is there: leaders who build bridges between innovation and implementation, between institutional tradition and future possibility. That’s where the true evolution of continuing education lies – in the hands of those who dare to experiment, reflect, and share their lessons openly.
Looking Ahead
As we look toward the UPCEA Annual Conference in April 2026 in New Orleans, I can’t wait to see how these conversations continue to evolve, and what new collaborations and innovations will emerge.
In the meantime, I’m excited about our upcoming webinar series, featuring insights from the University of Iceland and Jones College’s Online Workforce College, with another speaker to be announced soon. These sessions continue what Convergence began: sharing perspectives across borders, learning from one another, and reminding ourselves that while the contexts may differ, the mission remains the same – to make learning accessible, relevant, and transformative.
For those who attended Convergence, it was wonderful connecting in person – whether during sessions, in the hallways, or at the familiar blue Eduframe booth. Those conversations are what make this community so strong: open, curious, and deeply committed to improving education together.
Because in the end, the future of learning is not just about technology or policy.
It’s about people – and the collective willingness to keep leading, adapting, and learning together.
We have begun a transformation in higher education that will make us more responsive, efficient, and effective at achieving our multiple missions. This will not be easy or without trauma, but it is necessary.
I had the honor and good fortune to be invited by the generous and insightful Board Chair of the International Professors Project, Sriprya Sarathy, to speak via Zoom to the Re-think AI conference, sponsored in part by the International Academy of Science, Technology, Engineering and Management (IASTEM) and hosted by the ICLED Business School in Lagos, Nigeria. The conference brought together thought leaders, researchers, innovators, and industry professionals to explore how Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transformation are reshaping businesses, societies, and the future of humanity. The conference prompted me to consider how the many forces now at play in the academy and society at large are propelling us in higher education into a comprehensive transformation that is built upon Artificial Intelligence (AI). This column includes portions of a presentation I made at that conference.
The recent UPCEA and Education Dynamics report, “Marketing and Enrollment Management AI Readiness Report 2025,” makes a powerful case: AI is no longer a peripheral advantage but a non-negotiable necessity for survival and growth. The report warns that a significant gap persists between optimism about AI and operational readiness. Institutions that delay adoption risk being left permanently behind.
To build this new future, we must first “rethink” the very foundations of our institutions. This is not about adding a few new apps to the learning management system. Rather, it’s about a fundamental re-architecture of how we operate, how we teach, and how we define the work of our faculty and students. Key factors include institutional strategy, pedagogy, and the future of work.
For years, higher education has been facing existential headwinds: the much discussed “demographic cliff” that is just now arriving, a steady decline over the past several years in public confidence and falling enrollments. In this context, unfortunately many in higher education responded with concerns about how students might use AI to take unfair advantage of outdated pedagogy in their classes. Instead of pressing ahead in implementing the best available features of AI, many institutions were stalled in unfruitful debating how to best regulate the use of the technology. This shortsightedness delayed action in developing aggressive plans to make the most of the technology to advance the institution and its learners. We must provide affordable access to learning opportunities. In doing so, we will utilize the power of AI to help teach, assess and advise students at all levels.
Instead of limiting the use of AI in classes, we must rethink our pedagogy. For example, for centuries the dream of a personal tutor for every student, the Socratic ideal, was an economic and logistical impossibility. We settled for the one-to-many lecture model as a necessary compromise. That compromise is now obsolete. We can now envision, and build, a future where every student has a 24/7 AI tutor. This intelligent assistant can adapt to their individual learning pace, explain complex concepts using multiple analogies, generate infinite practice problems, and provide instant, formative feedback. This technology finally allows us to democratize mastery-based learning at scale. Imagine classes in which, by definition, everyone masters the material! This will require re-thinking the semester-based system, in favor of an outcomes-based system. Students conclude classes when they actually master the material, rather than after an arbitrary number of weeks.
Our implementation of AI is rapidly evolving from generative, systems that create content in response to prompts, to agentic systems that can autonomously perform complex, multi-step tasks. Instead of the transactional question-generative response approach, agentic AI is one in which a goal or outcome is set for which AI develops a plan, conducts research, implements actions and accomplishes the desired goal or outcome. As one of my recent columns noted, 2025 is the year this “hurricane of change” truly makes landfall.
Agentic AI will fundamentally redefine the roles of both students and faculty. An AI agent can act as a profoundly sophisticated research assistant, capable of analyzing vast datasets, summarizing entire fields of literature, test hypotheses by designing experiments and comparing curricula across institutions. This is not automation replacing intellect, but augmentation amplifying it. This shift elevates human work, freeing our finite cognitive resources for what is most expertly human: creativity, critical insight, and ethical judgment.
This comprehensive transformation can be visualized as a shift across all core university functions. In my June 2025 column, “Walking, Talking, Engaging AI in Higher Ed,” I explored this coming revolution as embodied AI (intelligent robots) come to campuses. I ask you to join me on a brief tour of a university campus in the year 2030.
Imagine walking into the library. Instead of a single, overwhelmed librarian, you are greeted by several humanoid assistants. They don’t just answer your questions; they can access vast databases in real-time, physically retrieve books from the stacks, and guide you through complex archival systems. Overnight, these tireless assistants re-shelve every book, ensuring the library is perfectly organized each morning, ready for a new day of discovery.
Now, let’s visit the science labs. Behind a protective barrier, an embodied AI assistant, impervious to hazardous materials, conducts a delicate chemistry experiment with superhuman precision. Students observe safely via high-resolution monitors, asking the AI questions in real-time and directing it to repeat or modify steps. They can, actually see through the cameras, in the robot’s eye sockets get a point-of-view vision. This opens up entirely new possibilities for safe, repeatable, and complex demonstrations that were previously too dangerous or expensive to conduct regularly.
Finally, consider student services. An embodied AI acts as a campus guide, providing multilingual support to international students and visitors 24/7. Another is programmed as a first responder for mental wellness crises, able to detect physiological and verbal signs of distress, provide immediate, calming support, and discreetly alert human professionals. This is not a dystopian replacement of people but a strategic augmentation. Embodied AI handles the repetitive, the dangerous, and the round-the-clock tasks, freeing up our human staff for more complex, empathetic, and creative roles. This allows us to address budget constraints while simultaneously improving the quality and availability of student services.
In sum, by 2030 we will be approaching what I would call the synergetic campus. This is a campus in which embodied AI robots join human faculty, staff and administrators in addressing the needs and wants of the learners. It is synergetic in the evolving of many human physical and intellectual capabilities in these robots and the collaboration of missions pursued by both. The cost of these robots will be far less than current salaries and indirect costs per staff member. The productivity of these embodied AI units will be round the clock, seven days a week. They will expand capabilities, lower costs and improve efficiency.
Who is leading the planning for this major transition on your campus in the coming few years? What will these changes mean for you in your position? Are you adequately preparing to support these changes that will make your institution relevant and viable in the future?
This column was originally published in Inside Higher Ed.
Half of prospective students use AI tools weekly, and early-adopting institutions stand to gain in enrollment visibility.
NEW ORLEANS, La., October 13, 2025 – 50 percent of prospective students now use AI-powered search tools at least weekly, making artificial intelligence a critical first step in discovering and evaluating higher education programs. The 2025 AI Search in Higher Education Research Study, conducted by UPCEA, the Online and Professional Education Association, and higher education SEO agency Search Influence, reveals how AI, traditional search engines, and university websites shape the student decision-making journey.
Although AI use is on the rise, student trust still favors direct information from traditional search engines and university websites. In total, 77 percent of respondents consider university websites the most reliable source, while AI tools and other platforms are gaining credibility; 79 percent read Google’s AI-generated overviews, and 56 percent are more likely to trust institutions cited in them. Institutions that optimize for AI-driven search can capture attention early and connect prospects with trusted content, gaining a competitive edge.
Other key findings from the research include:
- Page one still matters: 82 percent of prospects are more likely to consider programs that appear on the first page of results.
- Search is diversifying: 84 percent use search engines, 61 percent use YouTube, and 50 percent use AI tools as they would Google.
- AI credibility is rising: 32 per cent of prospects trust AI tools for program research
“These findings confirm what we see every day. Without visibility in AI search, institutions risk being overlooked,” said Paula French, director at AI SEO agency Search Influence. “Strong SEO and AI-focused strategies are the connective tissue linking prospects from search results to trusted university websites and, ultimately, to enrollment decisions.”
“This research shows that AI-powered search is transforming how students discover programs and rewriting the enrollment playbook,” added Bruce Etter, senior director of research and consulting at UPCEA. “Colleges and universities that adapt their visibility and messaging to this shift will be the ones that succeed in connecting with the next generation of learners, which is imperative as more institutions view online education as the avenue to balancing institutional books.”
The study was conducted in March 2025 and surveyed 760 qualified adults between the ages of 18 and 60. Participants represented diverse educational and employment backgrounds, making the results broadly applicable to institutions focused on adult learners.
The release of this research comes at a pivotal time for higher education marketers. As students move fluidly between AI platforms, search engines, and video-based resources such as YouTube, institutions must ensure their content performs across platforms, so their programs appear where prospects search most often.
The 2025 AI Search in Higher Education Research Study is now available to download. A companion webinar on October 23 and a series of AI Search Strategy Labs (October 28 and 30) will offer additional insights and tactical recommendations. Registration details are available here.
About Search Influence:
Search Influence is an AI SEO-focused higher education digital marketing agency that helps institutions drive prospects into and through the recruitment funnel with analytics-backed strategies, including organic and AI SEO and paid digital advertising. Founded in 2006, Search Influence’s core purpose is to optimize potential. The agency collaborates with institutions nationally and in its home city of New Orleans. Clients include: Tulane University, Tufts University College, LSU Online & Continuing Ed, and Maine College of Art & Design. Search Influence experts frequently speak at higher ed and industry conferences, and the agency’s work has earned recognition from the US Search Awards, US Agency Awards, and Inc. 5000.
About UPCEA:
UPCEA is the online and professional education association. Its members continuously reinvent higher education, positively impacting millions of lives. The association proudly leads and supports them through cutting-edge research, professional development, networking and mentorship, conferences and seminars, and stakeholder advocacy. Its collaborative, entrepreneurial community brings together decision makers and influencers in education, industry, research, and policy interested in improving educational access and outcomes.
Shifting Student and Employer Priorities Create Opportunities for Higher Education
Interest and innovation in workforce-related programming and credentials continue to surge, emerging as one of the fastest growing markets in higher education. Two-thirds of colleges and universities are making significant investments in this area, with more than one-third also embedding professional certifications into their online degree and nondegree programming Emerging research by the Rutgers Education and Employment Research Center (EERC) is demonstrating that learners eager to grow their career favor targeted workforce programs. Nearly three out of four adults without degrees say that industry certifications are “very” or “extremely” valuable.
A 2023 study by UPCEA and Collegis Education found that employers have a strong interest in engaging with higher education institutions to develop and deliver non-degree credentials, citing the quality of the content from institutions.
With strong interest from students and employers, what is keeping institutions from capitalizing on this opportunity? First and foremost, higher education institutions are not known for their agility or prowess in cultivating university to business relationships. Often institutions get in their own way with a lack of strategic vision and purpose around engaging employers holistically. In addition, the space of workforce training and non-degree credentials requires institutions to adopt a demand-driven approach to program identification and development versus the more common supply-driven model of faculty driving program suggestions. To achieve success, institutions must take a strategic approach, considering both student and employer perspectives over a much broader timeline, recognizing that learners will need upskilling and reskilling throughout their career.
Maximizing Audience Lifetime Value
Institutions have historically focused on more traditional learners but with the shifting demographics of today’s learner, this focus must expand to consider learners across a continuum. In fact, the lines between traditional and non-traditional students have blurred over the past several years to the point where age is no longer a predictor of preferred learning pathway. According to a 2025 study of the Modern Learner conducted by EducationDynamics, nearly half (47%) of students enrolled in classroom programs considered fully online program options and an astounding 59% of online undergraduate students would consider classroom programs. These students are motivated by multiple factors, led by cost and the return on their investment.
Institutions must view students not as one-time enrollees but as lifelong learners and advocates. This is a new concept in higher education but is commonplace in business. Institutions must define “audience lifetime value” and consider learner needs at various phases of their educational journey. Learners are seeking opportunities to build their skills throughout their career. Even the traditional undergraduate student is seeking opportunities to demonstrate skills and knowledge that will allow them to stand apart in the job market upon graduation. As their career progresses, students will be seeking opportunities to upskill and reskill to help with upward mobility. This is particularly true when talking about students enrolled in credential programs; 82% of whom intend to re-enroll in future programs and apply their current studies to future credentials.
Institutions have an opportunity to strategically engage learners beyond a single credential, by deliberately designing programs to help students to “learn and earn” throughout their lifetime. This includes offering credentialing opportunities to existing students while developing continuing education programs to attract new learners and to bring students back as they progress in their career. Providing upskilling and stackable credential pathways focused on building necessary skills will provide on and off-ramps as needed. Engaging employers and alumni in the design of these programs will ensure relevance, reinforce the institutional brand, and signal quality. Offering alumni discounts and/or other exclusive offers will provide value and help to ensure they continue to return.
Leverage Institutional Reputation
Leveraging institutional reputation may sound simple when in reality, it requires a disciplined approach to market evaluation, recognition of the institution’s unique strengths, and a commitment to serving the nearby community.
It is critically important to align credential offerings with institutional mission and areas of expertise. What is your institution known for? What draws students to your programs? What do your alumni do upon graduation? Answering these questions is critical to maximizing the value of your brand. All too often institutions consider developing programs in “hot” areas when they do not align to their strengths.
Institutions must use labor market data and employer feedback to shape programs. Labor market data is available through free sources such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics and paid sources such as Lightcast. A combination of tools will provide foundational data on skills gaps in the workplace and emerging careers.
Geography plays a key role as well. Local schools own their local markets – most students enroll at schools within 50 miles of campus. This is even more relevant for credential students and those that may be returning for repeat engagement. As you conduct market analysis, it is important to consider the regions currently being served and those you wish to serve in the future. Brand awareness will be greatest in your region and learners are drawn to institutions that are close by, even if they never attend classes on campus.
Leveraging Alumni Networks in Credential Design
We work with numerous member institutions and consistently find that alumni are not being engaged in program planning. There are many reasons for this, primarily that Alumni and Engagement offices play a key role in outreach and want to ensure that alumni are not inundated with outreach. However, by playing that gatekeeping role, those offices often exclude the offices of online and professional continuing education from connecting with alumni and offering an opportunity for alumni to help shape program offerings.
Alumni are your institution’s greatest brand ambassadors. Alumnae are proud of their alma mater, and want to give back in ways beyond donating. There are several key ways to engage your alumni to ensure credential success.
- Ask alumni for their input. Alumni are not only loyal to the institution, they are working professionals with needs for continuous learning for career mobility. Additionally, they are often in leadership positions, managing teams of people that also need professional development and skill building. Alumni are uniquely positioned to provide valuable insights to help shape program offerings.
- Leverage alumni to promote credential programs and attract learners. Ask them for testimonials and to tell their personal stories, highlighting how the institution has helped them along their educational journey. Establish alumni referral programs and/or discounts for alumni to encourage participation in credential programs.
- Consider co-branded initiatives with alumni as employer partners. Alumni have a tremendous amount of credibility because they speak from their personal experience. That can help to reinforce the quality of your credential offerings and build trust in your programs.
The Impact of Corporate Partnerships on Revenue and Reputation
Institutional partnerships with employers can drive enrollment and build credibility. As noted, employers want to be included in the design of credential programs. They have first-hand insight into the skills needed by their workforce and involving them in designing courses and programs will ensure that their needs will be met by the program.
For the institution, partnerships such as these help us to grow our learner audience while we also strengthen the relationship with the employer partner. This also helps to ensure that there is demand from learners for the program. Employers that are actively engaged are committed to having their employees complete the program. This helps to ensure revenue to off-set development costs and allows the institution to gain valuable insights into ways to attract other learners.
Employers benefit from programming that is aligned to their unique needs. They have confidence that their employees will gain the necessary skills and this helps to ensure they receive a return on the investment in training.
Another positive impact of these partnerships is that they push institutions to be more agile and responsive. Employers provide the budget that institutions often need to move more quickly to respond to the rapidly changing needs of the workforce. Employers simply cannot wait for institutions to follow traditional program development timelines of months to years. They need upskilling and reskilling to be just-in-time.
Lastly, prominently featuring employer partnerships builds institutional reputation. These partnerships highlight the innovation and focus for the institution, while demonstrating the employer’s commitment to development of their workforce. The partnerships help to attract other employers who may be seeking targeted skill development for their employees as well. It is truly a win-win for both.
The University of South Florida shared an interesting case study about their successful turnaround of their continuing education unit into a revenue generating part of the institution. A key part of their strategy was focusing on the workforce needs in their region and partnering with key employers to develop targeted, skills-based training.
Marketing Strategy/Recommendations
While recruiting career focused students can leverage many of the same strategies and tactics regardless of the type of credential, there are some special considerations for marketing to students considering credential programs. Perhaps the most important consideration is where to invest to maximize your return on investment. With a lower average lifetime value cost per enrollment, credential programs can’t afford to waste limited advertising dollars on ineffective and inefficient marketing strategies.
Invest in brand awareness
Students pursuing enrollment in credential programs emphasize the same factors that appeal to all Modern Learners: cost, career outcomes and convenience. Students today turn to the brands they trust more than ever, and a majority (58%) begin their search at the institutional level, even before they search for programs. This makes brand awareness not only an efficient use of your limited advertising budget, but also a critical channel to your success.
Discoverability is Key and your website remains the hub of your brand
49% begin their search on Google or a similar search engine, while another 27% turn directly to your website. In an era of rapidly shifting online behavior, this means your website and web presence is more critical than ever. Your website is your most critical marketing asset and the hub of your brand.
The Search Engine Results Page (SERP) experience has dramatically changed in 2025, and will continue to evolve as AI-generated responses become more prevalent. While total traffic has declined for most websites, a website that simply exists as an online brochure is a missed marketing opportunity. Traditional SEO, while foundational, falls short of delivering in an online ecosystem where the rules are being rewritten almost constantly. Offering multiple engagement and communication channels through your website, including live chat, AI-powered chatbots, forms and video, provides your visitors options and opportunities to engage on their terms. Credential students are often also working professionals, meaning they are searching for and researching programs outside of your (and their) normal working hours. Your website and related resources are powerful tools that work while you aren’t.
There is another key new audience that you must now address: the AI agents that are delivering results and information that users would previously search over multiple websites. These agents are delivering information on your brand and program in platform – be that in the SERP experience via AI Mode or Search Generative Experience, or within the chatbots themselves. Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) is a critical strategic imperative that you cannot afford to ignore. Your website serves as a critical source of information for answer engines like Chat-GPT, Google Gemini and Perplexity and your strategy should include serving this new important audience. When a future student turns to Chat-GPT to learn more about career-advancing education, you want to be a source of information driving the answer results. Go ahead and turn to your AI agent of choice and ask it about advancing a career related to your credential program of choice and you’ll see the power of GEO.
Digital Advertising has Evolved
The world of paid search advertising has been transformed by AI user experiences and AI-powered advertising tools that are being built into advertising platforms. In this new reality, search is no longer only a tool to generate leads, it is a reputation and visibility builder as well. The lines between paid and organic search are blurred and the two cannot operate in silos. Legacy paid search strategies hyper-focused on narrow and isolated keywords are outdated and fail to capitalize on the nuanced triggers uncovered by the latest AI-driven campaigns. Evolving your campaign strategy from a list of keywords and narrow ad placements elevates this critical channel to one that both influences and capitalizes on brand visibility while also driving enrollments.
Continue to Nurture and Engage Your Audience
We tend to think of a CRM as a piece of software that we purchase and use to store student data, but to effectively market credential programs, you need the right strategy, processes and staff to leverage your data and engage prospective students. If you have earned your way into a prospective student’s consideration set (or better yet, have a prior relationship with a returning student) you have already done the hard part. Email remains the gold standard for communication, along with telephone and text messaging. Effective CRM database marketing requires personalized messaging that delivers the right message at the right time. Prospective credential students are likely to care deeply about career outcomes and return on investment, but they also want to know that you know them. Segmentation strategies that leverage demographic data like alumni status, career role and employer build trust, while delivering deeper information based on behaviors help inform and overcome objections before they are raised.
Measuring the Metrics that Matter
For all the promise of credential programs, there are no guarantees of success. Continuously monitoring, managing and optimizing based on metrics that matter will give you, and your students, the best chance at success. We recommend focusing on a few key performance indicators and avoiding the vanity metrics that show a lot of activity, but do little to deliver insights that improve outcomes. These metrics should be compared regularly against both historic data within programs and against other similar credential programs rather than against legacy academic programs.
- Student Metrics – Evaluate your program first on student-driven metrics like completion rate, enrollment rates and lead-to-enrollment rates. If you have a low or flagging program completion rate in relatively short credential programs, it is likely that the students are losing belief that the program is delivering the learning outcomes required for their desired career outcomes. Meanwhile, a low lead or inquiry-to-enrollment ratio suggests that you have a leaky enrollment funnel. There is a disconnect between your initial marketing promise and the follow up messaging. This could be because you are bringing poorly matched prospects into the funnel or you are not communicating the program value to highly qualified candidates.
- Constituent Metrics – Particularly for credential programs, your audience extends well beyond the students enrolled in your program. It is critical that you pay attention to and respond to metrics around employer satisfaction and endorsement rates and alumni engagement rates. While there may be many reasons employers pull enrollments, slowing enrollment from an employer (or employer pool) may be an early sign that they may not value. Similarly, alumni engagement is an excellent indicator of social proof and the strength of a program’s reputation.
- Financial Metrics – Credential programs operate on tight margins that require optimal resource allocation. Primary among those resources are financial and human capital. Closely monitor your return on investment at the marketing and program level. However, guard against the temptation to measure marketing ROI at a channel level and instead consider your entire marketing mix from brand awareness to inquiry generation and enrollment. Placing too much emphasis in inquiry and enrollment attribution at the channel level risks undervaluing critical brand and reputation-building activities and channels.
Your KPIs related to human capital in the form of program managers and instructors are among your most critical. These costs may be fixed in the short term, and those allocated differently in a program break-even analysis. However, the indirect and hidden opportunity costs of managing and teaching under-utilized programs weigh down performance of your entire program portfolio. The nature of credential programs allow for rapid reallocation of resources to higher performing programs that are delivering outcomes the market demands.
Conclusion
In an era where credentials are increasingly abundant, standing out requires more than just delivering quality education, it demands thoughtful marketing and powerful partnerships. By aligning your credential offerings with clear market needs, communicating their value proposition effectively, and aligning with your institution’s brand, you don’t just raise awareness, you multiply impact.
- Invest in data and storytelling to show how your credentials pay off—for learners, for employers, and for your institution.
- Don’t go it alone: partnerships with industry, community organizations, and employers can extend your reach, enhance credibility, and unlock new pathways for learners.
- Be intentional about consistency: branding, messaging, and delivery should reinforce each other, building trust over time.
- Finally, measure what matters. Track outcomes—not just enrollments but employability, skills attainment, and long-term value—and let those metrics guide future strategy.
In short, maximizing credential value is a journey, not a checkbox. With the right strategy, you can ensure your credentials don’t just exist—they lead, influence, and endure.
Eric McGee is the Senior Director of Marketing & Corporate Communication for EducationDynamics. Prior to joining EducationDynamics, he spent 12 years in various positions in higher education, including positions in higher education consulting, edtech organizations, and as the Director of Continuing & Professional Education at University of South Carolina. To learn more about EducationDynamics, contact [email protected].
Stacy Chiaramonte is the Senior Vice President of Operations and Strategy for UPCEA’s Research & Consulting division. Prior to joining UPCEA, she spent 13 years at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, most recently as the Associate Vice President of Graduate and Professional Studies. To learn more about UPCEA, contact [email protected].
Innovation attracts attention, and not all of it good. Protecting data, students, and credibility now means securing every AI experiment before it secures you.
The Bright Side, and the Blind Spots, of AI in Higher Ed
AI is higher ed’s new favorite partner and, like any power couple, it comes with complications. It’s rewriting essays, running analytics, personalizing lessons, and wowing leadership with shiny dashboards.
But every plug-in, pilot, and partnership adds one more crack in the wall. Student data now flows through tools few people fully understand, let alone control. The question isn’t should we use AI? It’s do we even know where it’s being used and what it’s exposing?
When “Smart” Gets Shady: Deepfakes, Data Leaks, and AI-Assisted Misconduct
Remember when plagiarism was about copying text? Cute. Now, students can clone their writing voice or their actual voice. Deepfakes blur truth itself, and “authentic” work can be faked in seconds.
This isn’t academic dishonesty anymore. It’s identity theft wrapped in a term paper. When the boundaries between student and system blur, institutions must decide what they really mean by integrity and whether their policies can survive an AI arms race.
AI vs. AI: Fighting Fire with Fire on the Cyber Frontier
AI is also the best weapon we’ve ever had for defense. It can spot phishing attacks faster than any human, trace anomalies no one would notice, and predict threats before they land.
But let’s not kid ourselves: AI makes mistakes, too. It can lock down legitimate users, misread behavior, or turn bias into policy. Automation without oversight is just faster failure. If you’re going to let AI guard the gates, you’d better be sure it’s not opening them too.
The Human Firewall: Because Every Breach Starts with a Click
Every breach starts with a click and usually not a smart one. Faculty and staff remain the easiest targets, because most haven’t been trained to spot a deepfake dean or a chatbot pretending to be IT support.
You can’t secure a campus with software alone. People need to understand the game they’re in. The real firewall is human awareness, not another security subscription.
Innovation Without Exposure: Moving Fast Without Breaking Trust
Innovation isn’t optional. But neither is responsibility. Campuses that rush to “AI-enable everything” without building governance, policy, and accountability frameworks will learn the hard way that trust, once lost, doesn’t reboot.
AI and cybersecurity have moved in together. The question now is whether campus leadership can keep the relationship healthy, or watch innovation sleep with the enemy
Jeff Angle is Head of Academic Partnerships at ISACA. These ideas were presented at the 2025 Convergence conference, with George Washington University and the National CyberWatch Center.
About ISACA
ISACA helps colleges and universities embed globally recognized IT credential content into IS, IT, and non-IT degree programs. With credential-ready curriculum, built-in support, and global credibility, ISACA’s Academic Partnerships help institutions prepare students for careers, not just graduation. Learn more at ISACA Academic Partnerships.
September 17, 2025 marked UPCEA’s first-ever Virtual Forum on Employer Engagement and Credential Innovation. The event, curated by Amy Heitzman, Ph.D., UPCEA’s Deputy CEO and Chief Learning Officer, brought together senior leaders in professional, continuing, and online education to examine how institutions can strengthen partnerships with employers and scale credentialing strategies that align with workforce needs.
Framing Employer Engagement
The first spotlight session introduced an emergent University-to-Business (U2B) Engagement Framework, co-created by UPCEA Peer Learning Leaders as part of a Walmart-funded project on workforce-critical programming. This framework serves as the backbone for a new five-module course launched this fall to help institutions strengthen their employer engagement strategies. The conversations that followed reinforced a central truth: employers are most interested in the skills learners bring, not the labels on their transcripts. Building sustainable partnerships requires trust, shared investment, and long-term commitment, and institutions must communicate their value proposition in ways that resonate with business partners.
Institutional Cameos
Presentations from several Peer Learning Leaders including Brandon Chavez, University of California San Diego, Jocelyn Widmer, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Kristen Vanselow, Florida Gulf Coast University, illustrated these ideas in practice. The team highlighted its six-month development process for a course on Employer Engagement using human-centered design in U2B partnerships. Participants described anchor partnerships that helped reduce barriers and build credibility with employers. These institutional “cameos” gave attendees a sense of the creativity and variety already underway across the UPCEA community.
Breakout conversations followed and surfaced key themes:
- Employer Needs & Credential Value: Employers prioritize skills over labels.
- Anchor Partners & Organizational Barriers: Trust, investment, and long-term relationships are essential.
- Frameworks & Engagement: Structured approaches help reduce internal barriers.
- Value Proposition & Market Research: Institutions must clearly communicate their worth to employers.
Building the Ecosystem
The second half of the forum turned outward, featuring leaders from UPCEA’s Convergence 2025 promotional partners, each tackling different pieces of the learn-and-work ecosystem. Holly Zanville introduced the Learn & Work Ecosystem Library, which curates resources, glossaries, and even a new crossword puzzle series designed to demystify the often-confusing terminology of skills-based hiring. Naomi Boyer from Education Design Lab described the Lab’s efforts to bridge the language gap between higher education and employers, including the development of the Learning Mobility Framework. Michelle Van Noy from Rutgers University presented research on non-degree credential data, emphasizing the need for robust systems to track outcomes and prepare for Workforce Pell. And Gillian Walsh from the Digital Credentials Consortium shared updates on open-source solutions for verifiable digital credentials, including work on Open Badges 3.0 and AI-supported credential design.
Despite their differences in focus, the four organizations converged on common themes: making skills visible, reducing friction between systems, building trust in data and technology, and creating infrastructure that allows credentials to be both portable and credible. Together, they represent complementary pillars of the ecosystem, content, design, data, and technology, which are all essential for scaling adoption and sustaining employer confidence.
“The dialogue and insights shared during this forum reaffirm the essential role of higher education in shaping the talent economy. By deepening partnerships with employers and advancing credential innovation, we are not simply responding to change—we are defining the future of learning, workforce development, and opportunity.”
— Amy Heitzman, Ph.D., Deputy CEO and Chief Learning Officer, UPCEA
Reflections and Next Steps
Attendees expressed particular appreciation for shared resources such as the Learn & Work Ecosystem Library, which was described as transformative in its ability to centralize expertise. The discussions underscored how microcredentials can provide employers with clearer signals about learner skills, and how higher education can strengthen its value proposition by embracing new tools, frameworks, and technologies. Participants appreciated the chance to explore these resources in depth, and left with renewed energy for how these innovations can shape the future of work.
Looking ahead, UPCEA will continue to curate resources while Peer Learning Leaders will facilitate the inaugural offering of the U2B course, with future iterations planned for the spring. Those interested in engaging with employers are encouraged to explore the wealth of resources available on UPCEA’s website as well as those introduced during the session:
- UPCEA Study: Alternative Credentials – Business and Program Models
- UPCEA Playbook: Accelerating the Growth of Credential Innovation in Higher Education
- JFF: Budget Bill Expands Pell Eligibility
- SHRM Foundation: Skills First Futures
- Learn & Work Ecosystem Library
- LAISER (George Washington University)
- e-Literate: Digital Credentials, Workforce, and AI
- Research Article: Community Colleges and Workforce
The forum demonstrated that while institutions and partners are working on different pieces of the puzzle—whether through libraries, labs, frameworks, or open standards—the shared goal is unmistakable: to build trusted, scalable, employer-aligned credential ecosystems that prepare learners for the future of work.
Is your institution ready to deliver, comply, and compete?
This update is intended to highlight key portions of the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) that affect colleges and universities. The goal is not to offer opinion, but to bring clarity around the law’s implications—especially the arrival of Workforce Pell.
The OBBB is a broad, multi-issue legislative package that includes provisions on energy, immigration, national security, agriculture, and education. While much of the public conversation has focused on its political significance, it also contains several policy shifts with real operational implications for higher education institutions—most notably, the expansion of Pell Grant eligibility to short-term workforce training programs.
The full bill is available here: Text – H.R.1 – 119th Congress (2025-2026): One Big Beautiful Bill Act
Workforce Pell Is Here
Section 2011 of H.R.1 expands Pell Grant eligibility to include certain short-term career training programs—an option that did not previously exist. Students can now use Pell Grants to pay for training programs—like IT certificates, skilled trades, or healthcare credentials—as long as those programs meet specific criteria. Your school will receive federal funding for eligible learners enrolled in these short-term, job-focused programs—just as you would for traditional degree-seeking students.
To qualify, a program must:
- Be at least 150 clock hours in length and span a minimum of 8 weeks
- Be offered by an eligible institution of higher education
- Provide training aligned with in-demand, high-wage, high-skill occupations
- Lead to a recognized postsecondary credential
- Be reviewed by a state workforce board, recognized accreditor, or appropriate federal agency
- Report student outcomes, including completion rates, job placement, and median earnings
- Be non-transfer-oriented, meaning it is not primarily designed for credit transfer into a degree program
This marks a shift in federal financial aid policy, extending support to workforce-focused learners in short-duration programs.
The Grant Award Details
- Prorated Awards: Workforce Pell Grants will be prorated based on program length and intensity (i.e., clock hours and weeks of instruction). Shorter programs will result in smaller awards. For example, a 300-hour program over 10 weeks may yield approximately $1,800–$2,500, depending on the institution’s cost of attendance formula.
- Award Cap: The maximum Pell Grant for 2024–2025 is $7,395. Workforce Pell recipients will not receive the full amount unless enrolled in a full-time, year-long program—most short-term programs will result in partial awards.
- No Dual Use: Students cannot receive a Workforce Pell Grant and a regular Pell Grant concurrently. They must be exclusively enrolled in a qualifying short-term program to access Workforce Pell funds.
- Lifetime Limit Applies: Workforce Pell counts toward the student’s 12-semester Pell Grant lifetime limit, meaning it reduces the amount of Pell funding available for future degree-seeking enrollment.
Opportunity
Institutions now have the ability to serve non–degree-seeking students—including adult learners, career switchers, and upskillers—with approximately $2,000–$4,000 in federal aid per qualifying program, depending on the program’s length and structure.
This opens a new funding stream for short-term, job-aligned training programs that historically operated outside the federal aid system. It creates an opportunity to build or expand standalone credential offerings designed specifically for workforce development, without requiring students to commit to a full degree pathway.
Risks
Institutions should also be aware of risks, including administrative burdens, delays in federal guidance, and equity concerns for smaller colleges. With implementation rules still pending, strategic preparation is essential.
What Higher Ed Leaders Should Be Thinking About
As implementation guidance develops, institutional leaders may want to assess:
- Eligibility: Do any of our existing programs meet these new criteria?
- Readiness: Are our systems set up to report on required outcomes like job placement and earnings?
- Pipeline: Do we have shovel-ready ideas in workforce development, tech-enhanced learning, or access expansion?
- Mission Fit: How do these changes align with our goals for adult learners, upskilling, and regional impact?
- Platform Delivery: Are we equipped to deliver short-term, career-aligned programs in a flexible, scalable format that supports both access and learner outcomes?
Timing and Eligibility
To qualify for funding when Workforce Pell goes live in July 2026, programs must already be operating for at least one year by mid-2025. That means decisions made this fall will determine whether you’re in—or left out—of the first round of eligibility.
Next Steps (or maybe Preparation Starts Now?)
The Department of Education will release more guidance, but the clock is already ticking. Now is the time to:
- Assemble an internal cross-functional task force
- Review and map program pipelines for eligibility
- Evaluate delivery infrastructure for flexibility and compliance
- Engage strategic partners for curriculum, reporting, and platform support
Read the full article: Key Timing Alert: When to Act on Workforce Pell
Workforce Pell expands federal aid to short-term programs, offering new opportunities for learners and institutions. With implementation set for 2026, colleges will need to weigh readiness, compliance, and mission fit as they decide how to engage.
Kamilah Lewis is a recognized thought-leader in higher education strategy, bringing more than 20 years of experience at the intersection of brand management, edtech, and student-centered marketing. She helps universities reimagine how to engage today’s mission-driven, tech-aware learners by treating the student as the true end user. Prior to joining Noodle, Lewis served as a Principal at EAB, where she co-architected the Agency’s digital strategy offering. A certified Facilitator and classically trained brand manager, her consulting portfolio spans Fortune 500 companies, series-funded startups, and leading institutions.
Noodle is the leading tech-enabled strategy and services partner for higher education. A certified B corporation, Noodle (founded in 2013) has developed infrastructure and online enrollment growth for some of the best academic institutions in the world. Noodle empowers universities to transform the world through life-changing learning. It offers strategic consulting to advise partners as they navigate their futures, provides services tailored to meet their growth aspirations, and deploys technology, tools, and platforms that integrate for scale, making our partners more resilient, responsive, efficient, and interconnected.
Advocacy piece serves as a guide for institutional leaders to navigate challenging times
WASHINGTON, D.C., ISSUED OCTOBER 6, 2025…UPCEA, the online and professional education association, today announces the release of its latest advocacy piece, “The Future Is Now: Essential Conversations for Building Tomorrow’s University Today.”
Designed to raise awareness of critical questions every campus leader must ask, the guide encourages a conversation about the rapidly evolving role of online and professional education in serving today’s learners.
Specifically, the resource focuses on three pressing realities reshaping higher education:
- It’s a Buyers’ Market: Students are increasingly choosing institutions based on ROI, flexibility, and relevance; institutions can no longer rely on a steady stream of students from traditional sources.
- Business Models Are Evolving: Traditional structures are under pressure, prompting a new way of thinking about enrollment, partnerships, and institutional differentiation.
- Entrepreneurial Leadership Is Key: Institutions must become more adaptive and consider leadership models that embrace flexibility and innovation.
With each reality, key questions are offered, providing an opportunity for thoughtful discussion and creative problem-solving for institutions and their leaders. Additionally, the guide demonstrates occasions for collaboration between traditional academic departments and online and professional continuing education units.
“Our association has a unique responsibility to help guide campus leaders on the potential of online and professional education to help shape the future of higher learning,” said Robert Hansen, CEO of UPCEA. “’The Future Is Now’ is meant to advance a shared vision and inspire transformative and critical dialogues across campuses.”
Dave Cillay, Ph.D., chancellor of the Global Campus at Washington State University, commented, “As a university leader, I know how important it is to anticipate the evolving needs of our students. This resource positions us well for this work. It encourages strategic dialogue that our leadership team must engage in to stay relevant and responsive. UPCEA has long been a valued partner to higher education, helping our industry adapt and innovate. This resource continues that tradition in a way that directly benefits our institution.”
“Smart institutions know that their professional, continuing, and online (PCO) divisions, often overlooked internally, are in this time of enormous change their best source of innovation, entrepreneurship, and new business and delivery models,” added Paul LeBlanc, president emeritus of Southern New Hampshire University. “’The Future is Now: Essential Conversations for Building Tomorrow’s University Today’ offers a template for leveraging the rich resources already in their PCO divisions.”
The UPCEA resource experienced a limited release last week, when it was made available at Convergence: Credential Innovation in Higher Education, an event held in partnership between UPCEA and AACRAO, a non-profit organization that supports higher education professionals, from September 29 through October 1 in Arlington, Virginia.
For more information or to access the full guide, please visit https://upcea.edu/conversations.
ABOUT UPCEA
UPCEA is the online and professional education association. Our members continuously reinvent higher education, positively impacting millions of lives. We proudly lead and support them through cutting-edge research, professional development, networking and mentorship, conferences and seminars, and stakeholder advocacy. Our collaborative, entrepreneurial community brings together decision-makers and influencers in education, industry, research, and policy interested in improving educational access and outcomes. Learn more at https://UPCEA.edu and follow @UPCEA on social media.
CONTACT:
Molly Nelson, UPCEA VP of Communications, [email protected]
Nicole Joy Hales, PRfirst, 617-947-7983, [email protected]
An artifact of the race to the top in Artificial Intelligence (AI) is that mistakes inevitably occur in refining the models that are under continuous development. One of those many mistakes apparently led to hallucinations in outputs.
We all are witness to the incredibly frenetic race to develop AI tools that publicly kicked off on November 30, 2022, with the release of ChatGPT by OpenAI. While the race was well underway prior to the first public release, we have been able to follow, version by version, the updates from OpenAI (GPT), Google (Gemini) and Anthropic (Claude) which are among the many versions of AI for personal and commercial use. This competition has been fast and furious. One of the most disturbing issues that has surfaced along the way has been the proclivity of GenAI to hallucinate.
in 2023, IBM dug into the hallucination issue:
Generally, if a user makes a request of a GenAI tool, they desire an output that appropriately addresses the prompt (that is, a correct answer to a question). However, sometimes AI algorithms produce outputs that are not based on training data, are incorrectly decoded by the transformer or do not follow any identifiable pattern. In other words, it “hallucinates” the response. The term may seem paradoxical, given that hallucinations are typically associated with human or animal brains, not machines. But from a metaphorical standpoint, hallucination accurately describes these outputs, especially in the case of image and pattern recognition (where outputs can be truly surreal in appearance).
Roland Moore-Colyer reported in Live Science earlier this year that instances of hallucinations seemed to become more difficult to detect as the prompts became more advanced:
However, AI hallucinations present a problem when it comes to delivering accurate and correct information, especially if users take the information at face value without any checks or oversight. “This is especially problematic in domains where decisions depend on factual precision, like medicine, law or finance,” Watson said. “While more advanced models may reduce the frequency of obvious factual mistakes, the issue persists in more subtle forms. Over time, confabulation erodes the perception of AI systems as trustworthy instruments and can produce material harms when unverified content is acted upon.” And this problem looks to be exacerbated as AI advances. “As model capabilities improve, errors often become less overt but more difficult to detect,”
A variety of attempts were made to correct the hallucination issue. Most notable was that many AI models added an architecture to optimize and enhance AI responses titled Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG). IBM explains in this article:
RAG allows GenAI models to access additional external knowledge bases, such as internal organizational data, scholarly journals and specialized datasets. By integrating relevant information into the generation process, chatbots and other natural language processing (NLP) tools can create more accurate domain-specific content without needing further training.
On September 14, OpenAI researchers published a not-yet-peer-reviewed paper “Why Language Models Hallucinate” on arXiv. Gemini 2.5 Flash summarized the findings of the paper:
Key Findings from the Paper
Systemic Problem: Hallucinations are not simply bugs but a systemic consequence of how AI models are trained and evaluated.
Evaluation Incentives: Standard evaluation methods, particularly binary grading systems, reward models for generating an answer, even if it’s incorrect, and punish them for admitting uncertainty.
Pressure to Guess: This creates a statistical pressure for large language models (LLMs) to guess rather than say “I don’t know,” as guessing can improve test scores even with the risk of being wrong.
Fundamental Flaw: The paper highlights a fundamental flaw in the industry’s approach to evaluating AI progress, prioritizing raw accuracy over reliability and factual correctness.
This is much like the test-taking strategy in certain standardized tests, for which subjects are advised to “guess” rather than not answering a question for which they don’t have a reliable answer. Hence, in order to achieve the best outcome, models “invent” answers that could be plausible, but for which they don’t have solid evidence. That, of course, undermines the validity of the response and the credibility of the tool.
This, clearly, is unsatisfactory. With the realization of this shortcoming in the training protocol for the models, the companies have begun tweaking their products to respond that they are unable to answer. However, we are also seeing the increasing prevalence of “deep research” capable models such as GPT-5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro. These are able to dig deeper and deeper, uncovering more and more sources that can hold the desired answer.
Here’s an example that is prompted by my lifelong enthusiasm for baseball. In previous Online: Trending Now columns, I have advocated we all provide more context and greater detail in our prompts. But, in this case, I presented a simple one sentence prompt without context to three leading frontier GenAI apps. “Who called a players’-only meeting during a rain delay on a Wednesday night in Cleveland?” I included no mention of what sport, what team, what season, etc. Claude Sonnet 4 responded:
I’d need more context to answer this question accurately. There have been many baseball games with rain delays on Wednesday nights in Cleveland over the years, and players’-only meetings during such delays aren’t always widely reported or memorable events.
Could you provide more details about:
-
- What year or approximate timeframe this occurred?
- Which team(s) were involved?
- Any other context about the situation or why this meeting was significant?
With more specific information, I’d be better able to help identify who called the meeting and the circumstances surrounding it.
Note that Claude, without deep research, did not hallucinate. It did recognize this was likely baseball, and it said it needed more information. Certainly, that is better than making up an answer such as we might have seen in previous months and years.
GPT-5 thought for 11 seconds and came up with the right answer in a succinct response.
Gemini 2.5 Pro thought for about the same length of time, digging through multiple sources, found the answer and confirming sources, then responded in more detail:
Jason Heyward Rallied Cubs with Players’-Only Meeting During Historic World Series Rain Delay
During a tense rain delay in the decisive Game 7 of the 2016 World Series, Chicago Cubs right fielder Jason Heyward called a players’-only meeting that has since become a legendary moment in the franchise’s storied history. The brief stoppage in play occurred on a Wednesday night in Cleveland after the ninth inning, with the Cubs and the then-Cleveland Indians locked in a tie. With the weight of a 108-year championship drought on their shoulders, Heyward gathered his teammates in the weight room behind the visitor’s dugout at Progressive Field…. Following the delay and Heyward’s impromptu meeting, the Cubs came out in the top of the tenth inning and scored two runs. The Indians would rally for one run in the bottom of the frame, but the Cubs ultimately held on to win 8-7, securing their first World Series title since 1908.
Know that hallucinations are fading from GenAI. We can be more confident in the recently released deep research models. This provides the kind of reliable research that we depend upon in higher education.
This column was originally published in Inside Higher Ed.