With the ever-evolving technological landscape, higher education finds itself at a crossroads, facing mounting pressure to adapt. In the face of fast-paced change, AI advancements and shifting workforce needs, the traditional models of learning and teaching are challenged.
The University of Tennessee’s College of Emerging and Collaborative Studies launched its monthly webinar Navigating Tomorrow, Today in Higher Education, a dynamic series that provides meaningful discussion on the latest trends, innovations, and advancements in higher education. Each session provides a platform for leaders, industry experts, and academic pioneers to navigate the evolving landscape of emerging technology and research and its impact on institutions and students alike.
On February 14, the webinar A Discussion on the Future of Higher Ed provided a much needed discussion on the future of higher education, the workforce needs of the future, and the impact of innovation.
The webinar was moderated by Dr. Deborah Crawford, Vice Chancellor for Research, Innovation, and Economic Development at the University of Tennessee, and featured a panel of esteemed professionals: Dr. Ozlem Kilic, Vice Provost and Founding Dean of the College of Emerging and Collaborative Studies; Dr. Stephen Harmon, Executive Director of the Center for 21st Century Universities at Georgia Tech; and Dr. Art Recesso, co-founder of The Skill Bridge Foundation.
To begin the discussion, Crawford noted that higher education stands at a pivotal moment, driven by rapid technological advances, shifting societal expectations, and increasing financial pressures. She then invited the panelists to share their perspectives on where higher education is headed amid rapid change.
Recesso emphasized that the future of learning is already here and is marked by a sense of chaos. Amid all the uncertainty, one thing is clear: the way people learn is evolving just as rapidly. While higher education reexamines its systems — structural models, funding structures, institutional identity, and the vision for the future — it’s crucial to not overlook that the “train has already left the station” when it comes to how people are learning.
In a knowledge-intensive economy, people must constantly upscale and rescale. It is critical for higher education to understand its role moving forward in a world of ever-evolving learning.
Harmon added that what is catching people off guard is not the change itself, but rather the speed of change. He applied the concept of the “half life of knowledge” when examining the way people are learning.
“I was recently reading up again on sort of the half life of knowledge,” Harmon said. “But for some time now, half life of knowledge is how long before half of a body of knowledge becomes obsolete for some time. I’ll say an engineering degree has a half life of two and a half to five years. So, if you’re an undergrad engineering student by the time you graduate half of what you learned is already obsolete with that and that pace is accelerated for that.”
Therefore, how people learn is evolving — but biologically, the human brain hasn’t changed. What is really shifting is how people should and can learn. The problem is that higher education has fallen behind in its teaching methods and adaptation processes.
Kilic built on the points made, adding that it is not just how people learn, it’s also who is learning and why. As the motivations and demographics of learners change, so must the systems of higher education. Everything from how people live to work is undergoing change, and while this disruption is not new, the pace is unfamiliar. So, higher education is not just responding to change, but also racing to keep up.
Crawford shifted the discussion to the role of technology in learning, highlighting Harmon’s background at Georgia Tech and the significant online programs offered.
Harmon shared that about 10 years ago, they reflected on how a Georgia Tech education could be more accessible. With a growing reputation as a selective university, exclusivity was not part of the mission. So, they turned to technology.
“We started asking ourselves, ‘How can we scale the Georgia Tech education to as many people as possible?’” Harmon said. “And we hit upon sort of the modified version of MOOCs, which are massive online open courses. We knew we couldn’t scale physically because we just can’t fit that many people in our campus so we had to do it in an online format but we didn’t want to deteriorate or degrade the quality of our education at all, so we were very, very careful as we began to do this to figure out how can we maintain this same quality.”
Building on that idea of systemic impact, Recesso reflected on his early experiences as a tutor, where he saw firsthand the power of personalized instruction.
“It goes back to my first job as a tutor and learning about the power and value of individualized instruction and work with the students with disabilities,” Recesso said.
He spent years exploring how to scale those strategies, including early work in intelligent tutoring systems. However, the technology of the past made it difficult. Now, with today’s computing power and generative AI tools like Chat GPT and Nvidia, Recesso notes that the work of the past is being revisited.
“Now all of a sudden I’m looking back at all that work and I’m calling friends of mine going, ‘Hey, we got to get that stuff back online that we did 20 years ago,’” Recesso said. “People thought we were nuts then.”
Kilic emphasized the opportunities emerging from the convergence of technology.
“I think the beauty of the time we’re in is the convergence of all these technologies and tools enabling so many things,” she said. “We’re seeing that with AR/VR too. It’s come and gone, come and gone, never really finding footing. But now I’m more encouraged. The bandwidth is there, the chips are cheaper, the products are easier to use.”
She believes this shift will lead to a growing expectation for personalized learning, meaning that higher education must prepare.
Students will expect more personalization which will in turn, affect the how, where and when of teaching. It is crucial that higher education is geared up for this coming wave. As access grows, higher education will need to evaluate its conventional structures.
Kilic reflected on how access to information has changed, reminiscing on a time when there were card catalog drawers at the library. Now, information is readily available.
“It’s on our fingertips and we are expecting it to be at our fingertips 24/7, so I think we’re going to have to gear towards that change coming and reassess the value,” Kilic said.
She added a word of caution: increasing access can also widen divides.
“The greatness of this access is also causing some divide as well. Because who is getting and advantage? Who’s able to take advantage and develop? And it needs to be accessible to all students on campus, not the STEM-oriented students, because a huge impact will actually happen in the non-STEM domain where it’s not tapped enough. So while access is increasing, we need to be mindful of the gap that may happen behind the scenes.”
Crawford shifted the discussion toward market demand from employers, mentioning that many are moving away from requiring degrees and instead emphasizing skills, often through micro-credentials, boot camps and stackable certificates. She asked the panelists to discuss how they see this evolution playing out for employers, higher education and students.
Kilic noted that the rapid evolution — perhaps even revolution — taking place across higher education was a major reason behind the launch of the College of Emerging and Collaborative Studies.
As learner demographics shift — many students now being over 40, with about 30% acting as caregivers — she stressed that flexibility and personalization must become a foundational element of higher education.
To address these changes, CECS is focused on offering stackable certificates that allow students to explore different areas without committing to a full degree up front. These smaller credentials can be combined to build a full, customized degree aligned with students’ interests and goals. Launching a new, one-of-a-kind, college offered a rare opportunity to build a curriculum from the ground up, one that is responsive to real-world needs.
Kilic highlighted the shared responsibility between higher education institutions and employers in shaping the future of the workforce. She concluded that the shift presents an exciting opportunity to reinvent cemented structures and practices within higher education.
Recesso emphasized that curriculum relevance is more important than ever due to the fast-changing economy and job market. He cautioned against oversimplifying the conversation into just “skills,” arguing that what employers truly value are advanced cognitive abilities like problem-solving.
He explained that higher ed must use rigorous methods to deconstruct what professionals know and do, revealing that transdisciplinary knowledge is increasingly vital. For example, someone might learn data science but apply it to healthcare or supply chain problems.
Higher education faces the challenge of understanding what students need to learn and maintaining current curriculums. AI could play a role in this process. Another major issue is that higher education still operates in siloed disciplines, which doesn’t reflect the interdisciplinary skills that students need in the workforce.
Harmon echoed Kilic and Recesso’s sentiments, pointing out a contradiction in the current conversation around skills-based hiring. While many states and companies claim to prioritize skills over degrees, employers often still hire candidates with traditional degrees.
This is because degrees often prompt “durable skills”— like critical thinking, communication and problem solving — that hold up over time, especially as technology and job requirements change. With workforce turnover rising and roles evolving rapidly, Harmon argued that education should focus less on tasks AI can handle and more on cultivating human strengths like judgment and wisdom.
Kilic chimed in, adding that in a future shaped by AI, anything that follows clear rules will be automated so individuals must develop an entrepreneurial mindset.
“I think for each individual to have a rewarding career in the future, AI is going to automate anything that has perfect rules,” Kilic said. “We all need to have an entrepreneurial spirit. We all need to assess our strengths and interests, and align them with the skills that we want to develop.”
Crawford built on Kilic’s point to transition into the next topic: the role of different types of higher education institutions. Expanding on the concept of overcoming disciplinary silos, Crawford shifted the focus to the institutional divides between community colleges, technical colleges, and four-year universities. How will each of these distinct types of institutions contribute to the future of higher education, and how can they evolve to meet the changing needs of students and the workforce?
Kilic highlighted that community colleges offer a powerful model for four-year institutions to learn from. They have long prioritized access and adaptability, welcoming students from diverse backgrounds and aligning closely with employer needs.
Their ability to evolve quickly, especially in emerging skill areas, makes them ideal partners. Kilic noted as tuition costs rise, higher education should rethink traditional pathways, using partnerships with community and technical colleges to build more affordable, customizable four-year degrees.
Harmon shared that higher education needs to steer away from tradition to stay relevant. He explained that partnerships with community and technical colleges are essential, but so is rebuilding public trust. Higher education must move beyond the “ivory tower” and demonstrate real, accessible contributions to society and the workforce.
Crawford mentioned the business model of higher education, particularly at four-year institutions, has been relatively unchanged for decades. She asked the panelists to build on how higher education’s business model will evolve with the changes previously discussed.
Harmon explained that business models in education are complex. For example, Georgia Tech’s online master’s programs offer an efficient, content-driven experience at a lower cost, but they lack the networking opportunities and career fairs of more traditional, expensive programs.
Recesso remarked that the demand for self-driven knowledge development is skyrocketing. Harmon built onto Recesso’s point, adding that for adult learners, friction is the biggest barrier. For example, adult learners are asked to jump into subjects like calculus after years away from math. It’s an overwhelming experience that undermines the potential for successful reentry into education.
Kilic highlighted that CECS is actively addressing the critical issue of speed. At many institutions, launching a new degree program can take over a year, but with AI evolving so quickly, faculty must be willing to question long-established processes and structures to keep pace with change.
“We should be comfortable questioning our own processes and structures at this point,” Kilic said. “And have an open conversation, be humble about what has worked so far, what may not work going forward, and embrace that.”
As the webinar concluded, the panelists discussed the role of AI in education and how it can enhance human-centric teaching. Harmon emphasized AI’s potential in assisting professors by conducting preliminary assessments, allowing them to focus more on student interaction. Recesso added that AI could alleviate faculty workload, enabling more hands-on, lab-based teaching. He also highlighted AI’s role in authentic assessments, particularly performance-based evaluations.
The conversation shifted to the challenges of scaling AI-driven personalized teaching in large classes. Harmon discussed the importance of building personalized AI tutors by understanding students’ needs and backgrounds, while also acknowledging privacy concerns. He stressed the need to rethink faculty roles, moving away from traditional lecture-based models and utilizing technology in fresh ways.
Kilic agreed, suggesting that AI should free faculty from routine tasks, allowing them to focus more on interactive and problem-solving learning experiences. Recesso stressed that institutions need to differentiate by offering experiences, such as immersive, team-based learning, that are difficult to replicate elsewhere. He highlighted the importance of experiential learning in a campus setting.
The discussion concluded with a final question for Kilic about whether the CECS model should be adopted across the university. She clarified that while specialization remains important, there should be greater flexibility for faculty to work across disciplines in a way that encourages collaboration without disrupting existing structures.
To learn more about the College of Emerging and Collaborative Studies, visit cecs.utk.edu. To register for upcoming webinars or watch previous webinars on demand, visit the CECS webinar page.