Changing Higher Ed

When the federal government freezes research funding, leaders tend to treat it as a budget problem: a number that was cut and might later be restored. The harder truth in this conversation is that much of the damage cannot be undone. Halted studies, shuttered labs, and departed early-career researchers do not simply resume when the money comes back. Research funding cuts are a strategic risk, not a line item. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Nick Dirks, President and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences and former chancellor of UC Berkeley. Dirks first joined the show in 2018, as the podcast's third guest, reflecting on the protests that had put Berkeley at the center of national attention over controversial speakers on campus. He returns to discuss what the current research funding cuts are doing to American science, where AI fits in higher education, and the choices facing presidents and boards. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and board members weighing how federal funding volatility, the loss of early-career research talent, and the rapid arrival of AI in the classroom should shape institutional strategy and risk planning. Topics Covered • Why frozen research funding cannot simply be switched back on, and what that means for biomedical studies, drug trials, and animal research • The damage to the early-career research pipeline, and why postdocs and graduate students are the most exposed • What current data shows about US scientists weighing whether to leave the country or the field • How the president's role has shifted from pleasing every constituency to making hard, unpopular choices • Why bringing higher education's costs down depends on faculty and administrators rebuilding trust Real-World Examples Discussed • Drug trials at Columbia that had to stop outright, ending years of work toward a potential cancer treatment that could not be restarted once funding returned • Animal research populations that universities could no longer afford to maintain, forcing some labs to shut down entirely • The mRNA vaccine effort spanning the University of Pennsylvania, Germany's BioNTech, and scientists originally from Turkey • A National Postdoctoral Association survey Dirks worked on, and a January 2026 AAU brief quantifying how far the talent loss has progressed • The calculator's arrival in the 1970s as a precedent for absorbing a disruptive new tool without banning it Three Key Takeaways for Leadership 1. Research funding cuts are a strategic risk, not a budget event. The damage to studies and to the people who run them often cannot be reversed once the money returns. 2. The early-career pipeline is where the loss compounds. Protecting graduate students, postdocs, and research associates is protecting the institution's long-term research capacity. 3. Hard institutional decisions require trust. Cost discipline and AI adoption both depend on boards, presidents, and faculty working together rather than against each other. This episode offers presidents and boards a clear-eyed look at how funding shocks, talent loss, and AI are reshaping higher education, and why the institutions that plan for these pressures will weather them better than those that wait. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/research-funding-cuts-are-a-strategic-risk-not-a-budget-problem/ #ResearchFunding #HigherEducation #HigherEdLeadership #HigherEducationPodcast

Higher education has spent years hearing that affordability, student debt, and public skepticism are putting pressure on colleges and universities. What is different now is that those pressures are shaping federal action in ways that will directly affect Title IV funding, graduate program financing, accreditation reform, and institutional decision-making before July 1, 2026. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Andy Vaughn, President and CEO of Alliant University and one of three higher education representatives on the 2025 Negotiated Rulemaking RISE Committee, about what the latest Neg Reg signals for colleges and universities and why institutions that have not started preparing are already behind. Drawing on Vaughn's firsthand experience in federal rulemaking and Dr. McNaughton's strategic perspective on higher education leadership, this conversation examines why this round of Neg Reg is different from prior cycles, why the One Big Beautiful Bill changed the operating landscape, and why the next major pressure point is likely to be accreditation reform tied to cost and value. The discussion also explores what these changes mean for graduate programs, why institutions need to involve faculty early in redesign decisions, and how leaders should be thinking now about financing, delivery costs, and institutional relevance in a rapidly changing environment. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, CFOs, trustees, graduate enrollment leaders, and others responsible for institutional planning, financial sustainability, and academic strategy in a time of federal change. Topics Covered: Why this Neg Reg is different from prior negotiated rulemaking cycles How the One Big Beautiful Bill changed the Title IV and regulatory landscape Why student debt is the political driver, but cost of delivery is the deeper issue Why the accreditation Neg Reg is likely to focus on cost, value, and specialty accreditors How graduate and professional programs may be affected by financing gaps Why institutions should be modeling risk and redesigning programs before July 2026 Why faculty and program leaders need to be involved early in institutional response How AI is shifting from a compliance concern to a program quality and workforce issue Real-World Examples Discussed How Alliant began tracking Title IV changes before the bill passed and started preparing early Why some graduate programs may face private lending gaps with no strong historical baseline Examples of specialty accreditor requirements that can lock in delivery costs, including supervision expectations, program length, and student-to-faculty ratios The institutional challenge of lowering tuition when accreditation structures still drive high-cost delivery Why some institutions are still treating AI primarily as a containment issue instead of a graduate-readiness issue Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Institutions should treat these federal changes as structural, not temporary, and plan accordingly. The real issue is not just tuition pricing. It is the cost of delivering programs under current academic and accreditation structures. Colleges and universities that start redesigning early, especially with faculty involved, will have more options than those that wait for the pressure to become financial damage. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/2026-neg-reg-and-title-iv-changes-in-higher-education/ #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #NegReg

AI in higher education is no longer just a technology issue. The larger question is whether colleges and universities will redesign learning so students develop judgment, critical thinking, and decision-making skills in a world where AI can already generate summaries, essays, and plausible answers on demand. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with France Hoang, Founder and CEO of BoodleBox, about how higher education leaders can think more clearly and more strategically about AI. Hoang explains why AI should be used to augment human capability rather than replace it, and why educators matter even more in a world where AI can get students only part of the way. Drawing on examples from the classroom and across campus operations, Hoang outlines how colleges can move from AI independent to AI enabled and eventually toward AI native models of learning and work. He also explains why colleges need to redesign assignments, rethink pedagogy, and focus more intentionally on the development of domain expertise, reflection, and higher-order thinking. This episode is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, boards, CIOs, and academic leaders who need to make decisions about teaching, student support, workforce preparation, and institutional implementation in an AI-enabled environment. Topics Covered Why AI is forcing higher education to rethink what students should learn when AI can already do much of the visible academic work Why AI often produces a B-minus answer and why domain expertise still matters How the loss of routine entry-level work may weaken the apprenticeship path for graduates Why colleges need to redesign assignments around judgment, application, and reflection How faculty can use simulations, case studies, and human-AI collaboration in the classroom What AI independent, AI enabled, and AI native mean for institutional strategy How AI can support advising, counseling, and career services without replacing human connection Why AI adoption is as much a training, culture, and change-management issue as it is a technology issue Real-World Examples Discussed A marketing course at Point Loma where students build an AI assistant from their own class notes and use it in case studies and simulations A writing program at Pikes Peak State College where students compare their own writing with AI-generated writing and reflect on the differences A reimagined history assignment that uses role-based simulation instead of a traditional reading-and-essay model Institutional examples that show how colleges can move toward more applied, AI-enabled, and AI-native learning environments Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders Leaders need to know where their institution currently sits on the AI continuum, from AI independent to AI enabled to AI native. AI adoption is as much a training and human resource issue as it is a technology issue, so institutions need to invest in people as much as platforms. A culture of innovation, experimentation, and collaborative implementation will outperform a purely top-down rollout. This episode offers a practical framework for higher education leaders who want to move beyond AI policy and think more seriously about how learning, assessment, student support, and institutional strategy need to change when AI can already do much of the lower-level work. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/ai-in-higher-education-teaching-human-judgement/ #HigherEducation #ArtificialIntelligence #HigherEducationPodcast

Accreditation is often treated as a compliance cycle, but SACSCOC is signaling a faster-moving, more transparent operating posture that will affect how institutions plan change, document quality, and explain outcomes to the public. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Stephen L. Pruitt, President of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), about substantive change reforms, standards revision planning, outcomes transparency, and what institutional leaders should be watching right now. Topics Covered Substantive change reforms approved in December, including eliminating more than half of existing categories, shifting others to presidential review, and reducing approval times to as little as one week Why SACSCOC is emphasizing student benefit as a decision lens for institutional change The vice president liaison model and how it supports institutional navigation of SACSCOC processes The planned three-member rapid response team concept and when it may be used Law or Lore and why written requirements versus institutional assumptions can create unnecessary friction Standards revision planning, including public drafts and how feedback is incorporated The dynamic public-facing dashboard planned for spring and what it may make more visible Torch Awards and how outcomes signals relate to public trust and accountability Workforce alignment, affordability pressure, and the pathways from high school through postsecondary to careers Credit transfer as a public trust issue and why it is often perceived as a money grab Serving working adults as a design requirement, not an add-on Real-World Examples Discussed Georgia film-industry growth and the need to stand up new majors and degrees quickly Gwinnett Tech's advising approach that helps students sequence coursework to earn certificates along the way Workforce shifts such as autonomous trucking pilots and how programs could expand beyond a single credential to broader skills Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leadership Faster change pathways increase the value of disciplined internal governance and clean documentation of readiness. Student benefit and measurable outcomes are becoming a more visible way institutions will need to justify change and demonstrate quality. Transparency tools and outcomes signaling will influence how stakeholders judge institutional credibility, affordability, and workforce relevance. Read the transcript https://changinghighered.com/sacscoc-accreditation-substantive-change-standards-2026/ #Accreditation #SACSCOC #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

Free speech on campus is not an abstract constitutional issue—it's a governance challenge for presidents and boards. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Dr. Sean Stevens, Chief Research Advisor at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), to examine the current state of campus free speech and what institutional leaders must do to protect open inquiry under increasing political and social pressure. Drawing on FIRE's national research and campus speech databases, Stevens outlines the sharp rise in government-involved attempts to sanction speech, the growing prevalence of self-censorship among faculty and students, and the structural pressures reshaping intellectual life on U.S. campuses. The conversation moves beyond partisan framing and focuses on leadership responsibility: preserving disciplined pluralism, reinforcing institutional neutrality, and ensuring that students graduate prepared to engage competing ideas with rigor and intellectual humility. Some of the key topics covered in this episode include: The increase in campus speech sanction attempts involving government actors Faculty and student self-censorship trends and what the data reveals Why exposure to competing perspectives is an educational obligation Institutional neutrality as protection for viewpoint diversity The distinction between protected speech and prudent speech in the social media era Practical steps presidents and boards can take to strengthen expressive rights policies Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards: Defend expressive rights consistently—even when doing so is politically uncomfortable. Leadership credibility depends on principled application. Recognize that sustained political and social pressure can narrow intellectual culture—and counter that contraction intentionally. Preserve disciplined pluralism as a core academic value. Students must be able to hear, analyze, and argue competing perspectives without fear. This episode provides a strategic lens for higher education leaders navigating campus speech controversies while protecting the fundamental mission of scholarship and inquiry. Listen now or read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/free-speech-in-higher-education-fire-on-institutional-integrity-and-mission/ #HigherEducation #FreeSpeech #CampusLeadership #AcademicFreedom #BoardGovernance #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

Agile change management in higher education is no longer optional. Institutions are navigating continuous disruption from AI, shifting student expectations, workforce pressures, and internal cultural resistance. The challenge leaders face is not how to implement change once, but how to build the institutional ability to adapt continuously. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Christine Janssen Founder and CEO of Edstutia, an immersive learning company focused on adult learning, about why higher education must move from traditional change models to an agile, iterative approach to leadership, teaching, and institutional strategy. Drawing on her experience in both higher education and entrepreneurial environments, Janssen explains why institutions struggle when they treat change as a project rather than an operating condition. McNaughton and Janssen outline how agile thinking, faculty adaptation, and a willingness to experiment have become essential leadership capabilities for presidents, boards, and faculty alike. Some of the Topics Covered: · Why traditional change management models no longer match today's environment · How agile, iterative approaches help institutions adapt faster than governance cycles · Why AI is exposing weaknesses in traditional teaching and assessment methods · The role of faculty culture as both a barrier and a solution to meaningful change · Why preparing students for uncertainty requires faculty to be comfortable with it · How institutions risk becoming the "yellow cab" in a world expecting "Uber-level" responsiveness Real-World Examples Discussed: · How AI forces faculty to redesign assignments and assessment methods · Why student evaluations often measure the wrong outcomes · How other industries were disrupted by ignoring customer expectations · Examples of leaders who prioritize faculty development and innovation Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. Institutions must change how they think about change before they can change behaviors. 2. Faculty partnership and professional development are essential to institutional adaptability. 3. The greatest risk to higher education is waiting to see what others will do. This episode offers higher education leaders a practical framework for understanding why many institutional struggles stem not from isolated issues, but from an outdated approach to change itself. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/agile-change-management-for-higher-education-leaders/ #HigherEducation #ChangeManagement #HigherEducationPodcast

Workforce readiness, hands-on learning, and flexible credentialing are no longer peripheral conversations in higher education. They are central to how institutions are being judged on value, relevance, and outcomes. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Jarred McNeely, Provost and Chief Academic Officer at Sonoran Desert Institute, about how applied, skills-based education can be delivered beyond traditional campuses without sacrificing rigor or quality. McNeely shares how SDI redesigned hands-on instruction for distributed learners by moving labs into students' homes, rethinking assessment around demonstrated competence, and investing heavily in faculty training and support. The conversation explores what these approaches mean not just for trade and technical programs, but for institutions across higher education facing increasing pressure around cost, completion, and workforce alignment. This episode is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and academic leaders evaluating how applied learning, credential flexibility, and faculty systems can evolve to meet today's student realities. Topics Covered Why hands-on learning does not require centralized labs How lab kits, video-based assessment, and staged progression support skill development What it takes to train and support faculty in distributed, applied programs How simulation and practicum models expand access without lowering standards Why stackable credentials better align with real career movement The role of critical thinking and problem identification in applied education Three Key Takeaways for Presidents and Boards Learning should be assessed by demonstrated competence, not physical presence Faculty training and support systems are the primary drivers of instructional quality Flexible, stackable credentials reduce student risk while supporting long-term engagement Read the transcript or extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/reduce-student-debt-risk-improve-employability/ #HigherEducation #WorkforceDevelopment #AppliedLearning #HigherEdLeadership #ChangingHigherEd

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Dan Predoehl, assistant dean of Extended Learning and director of the Emeritus Institute at Saddleback College, one of the nation's highest-performing community colleges. The conversation focuses on why enrollment challenges persist even at strong institutions and how treating enrollment as a shared responsibility—rather than a system with clear executive ownership—creates fragmentation across admissions, student services, academics, and outcomes. Dr. Predoehl explains the Chief Enrollment Management Officer concept and why a cabinet-level role is increasingly necessary to align enrollment strategy with institutional mission, student success, and long-term viability. Drawing on experience across community colleges and four-year institutions, the discussion examines how enrollment, retention, completion, workforce alignment, and equity outcomes are shaped by leadership structure—not just tactics. Topics Covered: Why enrollment is a system, not a department How diffused responsibility undermines retention and completion The limits of presidential oversight without executive enrollment ownership How workforce alignment strengthens enrollment strategy Why open access increases the need for strategic focus The role faculty partnership plays in sustainable enrollment management Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders: Enrollment outcomes reflect system design, not individual office performance Retention, completion, and workforce alignment are core enrollment responsibilities Institutions risk long-term instability when enrollment lacks clear executive ownership This episode is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, enrollment leaders, and senior administrators looking beyond short-term fixes toward structural solutions to enrollment pressure. Read the transcript and extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/chief-enrollment-management-officer-in-higher-education/ #HigherEducation #EnrollmentManagement #HigherEducationPodcast