Stop Being Lazy And Put The SAT Down

Send us Fan MailThe SAT is creeping back into the University of California conversation and we think it’s the clearest sign that the debate has drifted away from the real problem. I’m Eloy Ortiz Oakley, and I’m digging into why a small slice of faculty concern about math preparedness is turning into a push for a high-stakes standardized test, even after UC moved to test-blind admissions for solid reasons.We zoom out and ground this in what makes UC different: it’s a public research university built to serve California’s communities under the California Master Plan for Higher Education. That mission isn’t about finding the easiest way to screen people out. It’s about building a talent pipeline, investing in student success, and using evidence to guide UC admissions policy. I also connect the readiness conversation to the COVID-19 era, when students lost access to in-person learning, advising, and stable support, and explain why it shouldn’t shock anyone to see preparedness bumps ripple into today’s college classrooms.Then we get specific about outcomes and incentives. UC’s own data shows diversity has increased while retention, course completion, and graduation rates have stayed stable or improved since 2020. Meanwhile, even reopening the SAT debate triggers a familiar chain reaction: families, counselors, and paid coaches shift time and money toward test prep instead of real learning. I make the case for multiple measures, better use of modern data, stronger placement and support, and deeper collaboration with K-12 to address math preparation at the source.If you care about equity in higher education, college readiness, and what public universities owe the people who fund them, subscribe, share this episode, and leave a review. Where do you think UC should draw the line on measuring preparedness?

Send us Fan MailThe SAT is back in the Regents’ conversation at the University of California, and I’m not convinced we’re asking the right question. When a small group of faculty points to “math preparedness” and reaches for a high-stakes standardized test as the solution, it can sound reasonable on the surface. But UC is a public research university funded by Californians, built to create talent and knowledge for the state. That public mission changes what “merit” should mean and how UC admissions should work.I walk through what’s driving the new pressure, including the reality that many current students came through high school during COVID-era disruption, lost access to teachers and counselors, and faced a very different learning environment. Then I bring it back to the evidence: UC moved away from the SAT for a reason, and UC’s institutional data since 2020 shows diverse classes and stable (or slightly improved) outcomes in course completion, retention, and graduation. If student success isn’t falling, why are we racing toward a tool that mostly rations seats and fuels a test-prep marketplace?I also lay out what a real, modern alternative can look like: data-driven admissions that use multiple measures, smarter readiness signals, and serious collaboration with the K-12 pipeline to diagnose gaps instead of cutting students off at the door. If you care about college readiness, standardized testing, and the future of public higher education in California, listen through and tell me where you land. Subscribe, share the show with a friend, and leave a review so more people can find the conversation.

Send us Fan MailMost people feel federal higher education rules as a surprise email from financial aid or a sudden compliance deadline. We wanted to show you the machinery behind those moments and why negotiated rulemaking is where so many high-stakes decisions actually take shape. I sit down with Kristen Holtquist, founder of HCM Strategists, and Dr. Andy Vaughn, president and CEO of Alliant University, fresh off their work inside recent negotiated rulemaking committees. We break down what negotiated rulemaking is, how the Department of Education turns legislation into regulations, and why the “bumpers” set by Congress matter more than most outsiders realize. You’ll hear how Workforce Pell moved from a long-advocated idea to real regulatory design, and why the new accountability baseline is being sold as common-sense consumer protection for learners, especially first-generation students who need clear signals about program value. We also get into graduate student loan limits, the Graduate PLUS debate, and why “denial is not a strategy” for campus leaders. Andy explains how showing up with facts, data, and a coalition can change outcomes, while Kristen shares what surprised her most about federal policy, including the system’s obsession with time as a proxy for quality. We talk accreditation reform as the next big lever, especially for professional licensure programs with specialty accreditation requirements that drive costs. If you care about Title IV, student debt, accountability, and how to influence federal higher education policy before it becomes your next emergency, this conversation is your roadmap. Subscribe, share this with a colleague, and leave a review with the question you want us to tackle next.

Send us Fan MailNegotiated rulemaking is where higher education policy turns into the rules that hit your campus, your budget, and your students. We sit down with higher ed policy expert Kristin Hultquist of HCM Strategists and Dr. Andy Vaughn, president and CEO of Alliant University, to explain how the U.S. Department of Education writes federal regulations after Congress passes a major bill and why the people in the room can shape outcomes that last for years. We get specific about what each committee tackled, from Workforce Pell and its completion and in-field job placement requirements, to the new accountability floor that asks a simple question: do graduates earn more than a high school graduate a few years after completion? Kristin walks through how negotiators navigate tight statutory constraints, caucus sessions behind closed doors, and the constant push and pull between stakeholder demands and learner-centered consumer protection. Andy shares what it looks like to “lean in” as an institutional leader when Title IV changes and graduate student loan limits threaten real programs. He breaks down how facts, data, and coalition-building helped influence the professional designation list, and why waiting for politics to change is a losing strategy. We also dig into the next big frontier: accreditation reform, especially for graduate licensure programs where specialty accreditors can drive costs in ways colleges cannot solve alone. If you care about college affordability, federal student aid, Workforce Pell, graduate student debt, and accountability metrics that define program value, this conversation will help you understand what’s coming and how to respond. Subscribe, share this episode with a colleague, and leave a review so more higher ed leaders can find it.https://www.alliant.edu/https://hcmstrategists.com/[email protected]

Send us Fan MailCollege was never meant to be the center of a working adult’s life and pretending otherwise is one reason so many learners stall out. We talk with Dr. John Wood, chief academic officer and provost of the University of Phoenix, as the university marks 50 years of building higher education around working learners who juggle full-time jobs, caregiving, and everything else life throws at them.We get specific about what learner-centered design actually means: mobile-friendly coursework, support that works outside 9 to 5, and faculty who are real-world practitioners. Then we dig into one of the biggest shifts in online education and workforce alignment right now: skills-based learning. John explains how Phoenix mapped its curriculum to job skills using Bureau of Labor Statistics data, industry advisory councils, programmatic accreditors, alumni feedback, and faculty expertise, then turned that work into visible skills profiles, micro-credentials, and digital badges that students can share with employers.We also cover how to measure economic mobility in ways that go beyond marketing, why transfer credit mobility matters for cost and time, and what partnership can look like with community colleges. From competency-based education to AI in higher education, we explore what changes when every graduate is expected to be AI fluent and when AI is used to improve service, efficiency, and learning outcomes without replacing human judgment.If you care about adult learners, workforce skills, credential transparency, and what the next version of higher ed should be, hit play. Subscribe, share this with a colleague, and leave a review with the one change you think would make college work better for working adults.

Send us Fan MailUniversity of Phoenix has been a lightning rod in higher education for decades, but its 50-year milestone raises a more useful question than reputations: what does it look like to design a university around working adults who are balancing jobs, caregiving, and everything else life throws at them? I sit down with Dr. John Wood, Chief Academic Officer and Provost, to talk about what “working-learner first” means in day-to-day practice and why that mindset matters for every college staring down shifting demographics and rising expectations.We get specific about skills-based education and the push toward skills-based hiring. John walks through how Phoenix mapped its curriculum to workforce skills using Bureau of Labor Statistics data, industry advisory councils, programmatic accreditors, alumni feedback, and practitioner faculty experience. We also dig into micro-credentials and digital badges that let students communicate what they can do, not just what they completed, plus how skills profiles can connect learners to real job postings while they are still in school.From there, we hit the accountability questions: how to measure economic mobility, what outcomes data will look like under new regulations, and how alumni feedback can reveal whether programs deliver on the promise. We also talk transfer partnerships with community colleges, transfer-friendly degree design, competency-based education models that save time and money, and the growing need to teach durable human skills alongside technical skills.AI is the throughline, too: AI policy that must keep evolving, AI fluency embedded across programs, and AI tools that improve service and learning support without pretending there’s a single “silver bullet.” Subscribe, share this conversation with a colleague, and leave a review with your biggest takeaway or your toughest question about skills, outcomes, or AI in higher [email protected]

Send us Fan MailThree million calls a month is not a marketing flex. It’s a signal that higher education is moving into a new operating model, where AI can expand student support without pushing humans out of the picture. I sit down with Ruben Harris and Timor Maester, co-founders of Outrival (and previously Career Karma), to unpack what they mean by a “digital workforce” and why outbound AI agents are becoming a real tool for admissions, advising, retention, and re-enrollment. We get specific about how colleges and universities can deploy agentic AI in ways that are measurable and responsible. Ruben explains why treating AI like an intern with a job description and a clear objective helps leaders move past vague pilots and into outcomes you can track. Timor shares use cases that work on the ground, from proactively reaching stop-outs months after they’ve gone silent to re-engaging applicants who started the process and then disappeared, all while giving students the option to connect to the right human at the right time. We also talk about what most vendors gloss over: performance management, experimentation, and compliance. Dashboards, text-based feedback loops, call reviews, and even A/B testing voices and scripts can help teams improve the quality of conversations while respecting policies and outreach rules. We close with a five-year vision of real personalization at scale, where a student can text their college 24/7 and feel known, guided, and supported. Subscribe, share this episode, and leave a review so more higher ed leaders can learn what’s actually working with AI right now.

Send us Fan MailAI in higher education is everywhere right now, but most of what schools hear is theory, hype, or another vendor promise. We wanted something more concrete, so I sat down with Ruben Harris and Timur Meyster, co-founders of Outrival (and previously Career Karma), to talk about what it looks like to deploy a real “digital workforce” that supports students at scale without pushing humans out of the loop.We get specific about outbound AI agents that call and text proactively across the student lifecycle, from enrollment to retention and re-enrollment. Ruben and Timur share why they avoid one-size-fits-all bots and instead give each digital worker a clear job description tied to measurable goals like meaningful conversations, contact rates, persistence, and ROI. We also dig into practical use cases colleges can start with quickly, including reaching out to stop-outs, following up with prospective students who went quiet, and helping learners navigate complex steps like financial aid and missing documents, all while integrating with systems like Slate and Salesforce.Then we talk about what leaders actually need to manage this well: student feedback via text surveys, dashboards that surface patterns across thousands of conversations, and a real supervision model that includes training, objection handling, tone and voice tuning, and ongoing compliance considerations like FERPA and responsible outreach. We also preview Ruben and Timur’s new series, The New Normal, focused on institutions using AI in production at scale.Subscribe, share this episode with a colleague, and leave a review if it helped you think more clearly about AI strategy that actually shows results.https://www.outrival.com/https://www.outrival.com/blog/[email protected]

Send us Fan MailMost higher ed systems still treat the “typical” student like someone with a wide-open schedule and a campus life built around them. That assumption falls apart the moment you meet a working parent, a service member with deployment orders, or a community college transfer juggling rent, kids, and a job while trying to move up. I’m joined by Dr. Mark Milliron, president of National University, to talk about what it looks like to design for those learners on purpose. Mark calls them “Anders” because they are students and employees, students and parents, students and deployed. We get into National University’s Navy-rooted history, why short four- and eight-week courses can lower cognitive load, and how program design, student support, and real-world experiences have to work together if we want adult learners to finish strong and see real economic mobility. We also dig into affordability and access: tuition strategy, scholarships, emergency aid, and a clear pathway for community college transfers, including how Pell-eligible ADT students can see tuition effectively covered. Then we go head-on at AI in higher education, including National’s cross-functional AI council, the “about, with, and beyond” learning framework, and Raise Five, a simple rubric that makes AI expectations clear for every assignment while pushing faculty to rethink what learning should look like now. If you care about working learners, military-connected students, and practical innovation that keeps humans at the center, you’ll take a lot from this conversation. Subscribe, share this with a colleague, and leave a review with the one change you think colleges should make [email protected]

Send us Fan Mail$4.4 trillion is a hard number to even picture, so we bring it down to earth. We’re unpacking new California economic impact research created with the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, focused on what happens if the state reaches 70% postsecondary attainment for working age adults with credentials that actually pay off in the labor market. Think certificates, associate degrees, and bachelor’s degrees that lead to higher wages, stronger careers, and real economic mobility.We talk through the stakes behind Governor Gavin Newsom’s 70% attainment goal, starting from where California sits today and why “average progress” is not enough if entire regions and demographic groups are left behind. You’ll hear how the analysis estimates $4.4 trillion in economic opportunity, how that benefit shows up for individuals and public budgets, and why the ripple effects can reshape communities over generations. We also face the cost question head on: what additional investment could be required, when returns can start to pay back, and why alignment between higher education and workforce demand is the difference between a credential and a cul-de-sac.Then we zoom out to the deeper point: if the pathway to college and training depends on random luck, the system is failing the very people it claims to serve. We connect the data to the lived reality of Californians who do not see the California dream as reachable, and we lay out what redesigned, flexible pathways for today’s learners could look like, especially for working adults.If you care about California higher education, workforce development, economic equity, and the future of opportunity, listen now, share it with someone who debates the value of college, and subscribe and leave a review so more people can find the conversation.