Your piece makes a strong case that universities are cracking because their core functions—teaching, sorting, certifying, and signaling—no longer map cleanly onto the world AI is creating. If we accept that, what does a credible ‘University 2.0’ actually look like? What functions must it preserve, what should it discard, and what new structures would be needed to provide trust and evaluation in a world where individuals can produce meaningful work without institutional credentials?
Excellent article, Kyle. Universities certify, sort, and signal. At least those are some of the goods and services colleges and universities sell. The prevailing business model sells a bundle of goods and services all twirled together, perhaps unable to be unbundled.
LLM Ai is forcing a ton of questions. Chief among them are penetrating questions: what are the goods and services, what value do they have, and how different must the future of higher ed be?
At a personal level, just about everything I've been doing for the past 20 years is no longer doable without dramatic change.
I just quick-read the collapsing-value-prop article. I will give it a thorough read again. I agree with everything I read. Tell me what you think about these thoughts: (1) the certification service may become third-party, much like the CPA exams or the bar exams; (2) the only people who attend a college or university will be people who truly want the learning experience they find there, much like a gym membership --- only those who are serious will pay the price; (3) the factory model of higher ed is a dead man walking; (4) what survives in higher ed will be expensive; (5) weak, uninteresting courses will vanish; (5) Ai will be completely integrated in whatever learning activities teachers include in their courses; (6) teachers will necessarily be domain experts with tons of experience and stories to draw on.
Well, yes. In fact, that's their primary business model; the stuff about learning is at best secondary.
Here's a simple thought experiment. Suppose a university announced that it was getting out of the business of certifying, sorting, and signaling. Instead, all classes would be non-credit, there would be no grades, and no degrees, certificates, or diplomas. Just pure learning! What would happen to such an institution? Certainly some people would like to take some classes just for the sake of it. But it's very doubtful that those people would be willing to pay the current sticker price for such an experience, and the university would quickly become financially unsustainable.
It turns out that certifying, sorting, and signaling is what people are paying for when they attend a university. And there's nothing wrong with that! Universities have always served to certify, sort, and signal, and every modern society needs to have some sort of credentialing mechanism.
To me, this is the real problem with AI and higher learning: AI corrodes the ability of universities to certify, sort, and signal, but this is an important social function and the core added value that justifies their costs. Once that's lost, it's hard to see what role these schools have.
Your piece makes a strong case that universities are cracking because their core functions—teaching, sorting, certifying, and signaling—no longer map cleanly onto the world AI is creating. If we accept that, what does a credible ‘University 2.0’ actually look like? What functions must it preserve, what should it discard, and what new structures would be needed to provide trust and evaluation in a world where individuals can produce meaningful work without institutional credentials?
Excellent article, Kyle. Universities certify, sort, and signal. At least those are some of the goods and services colleges and universities sell. The prevailing business model sells a bundle of goods and services all twirled together, perhaps unable to be unbundled.
LLM Ai is forcing a ton of questions. Chief among them are penetrating questions: what are the goods and services, what value do they have, and how different must the future of higher ed be?
At a personal level, just about everything I've been doing for the past 20 years is no longer doable without dramatic change.
I just quick-read the collapsing-value-prop article. I will give it a thorough read again. I agree with everything I read. Tell me what you think about these thoughts: (1) the certification service may become third-party, much like the CPA exams or the bar exams; (2) the only people who attend a college or university will be people who truly want the learning experience they find there, much like a gym membership --- only those who are serious will pay the price; (3) the factory model of higher ed is a dead man walking; (4) what survives in higher ed will be expensive; (5) weak, uninteresting courses will vanish; (5) Ai will be completely integrated in whatever learning activities teachers include in their courses; (6) teachers will necessarily be domain experts with tons of experience and stories to draw on.
That sounds right. I don't know if you saw this article of mine, but it resonates with you're saying here: https://kylesaunders.substack.com/p/the-collapsing-value-proposition
Great article, so interesting and I agree with you! 🤓
"Universities certify, sort, and signal."
Well, yes. In fact, that's their primary business model; the stuff about learning is at best secondary.
Here's a simple thought experiment. Suppose a university announced that it was getting out of the business of certifying, sorting, and signaling. Instead, all classes would be non-credit, there would be no grades, and no degrees, certificates, or diplomas. Just pure learning! What would happen to such an institution? Certainly some people would like to take some classes just for the sake of it. But it's very doubtful that those people would be willing to pay the current sticker price for such an experience, and the university would quickly become financially unsustainable.
It turns out that certifying, sorting, and signaling is what people are paying for when they attend a university. And there's nothing wrong with that! Universities have always served to certify, sort, and signal, and every modern society needs to have some sort of credentialing mechanism.
To me, this is the real problem with AI and higher learning: AI corrodes the ability of universities to certify, sort, and signal, but this is an important social function and the core added value that justifies their costs. Once that's lost, it's hard to see what role these schools have.