Changing Higher Ed

Dr. Drumm McNaughton

Changing Higher Ed is dedicated to helping higher education leaders improve their institutions. We offer the latest in higher ed news and insights from top experts in higher education who share their perspectives on how you can grow your institution. Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a top higher education consultant, renowned leader, and pioneer in strategic management systems and leadership boards. He's one of a select group with executive leadership experience in academe, nonprofits, government, and business.

  1. 5d ago

    Workforce U: How Vincennes University Built a Nationwide Apprenticeship Model With Amazon

    When Amazon asked Vincennes University in 2019 to launch a four-year registered apprenticeship in a little over four months, the university, President Chuck Johnson says, had no apprentices, no equipment and no curriculum. It launched that September. Johnson says VU has leaned into apprenticeships and workforce-aligned credentials, counting industry certifications as a win even when they do not show up in degree counts. Those programs, he says, have kept growing while traditional numbers have suffered. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Chuck Johnson, President of Vincennes University. The conversation covers workforce development in higher education: the Amazon and Walmart partnerships, Workforce U, industry advisory councils, annual program metrics, a two-pronged faculty model and a teacher apprenticeship pilot. Johnson came to VU as provost in 2012 after roles at Bowling Green State University, in banking and at Purdue University's Krannert School of Management, and has been president since 2015. He walks through how Indiana's oldest college, a junior college since 1889 that now offers baccalaureate pathways, became a turnkey residential partner for national employers. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, boards, leaders in workforce and continuing education and anyone weighing how to respond to the enrollment cliff. Topics Covered Why Indiana's declining college-going rate and shrinking high school cohort are a "double whammy" Stackable, workforce-aligned credentials and why VU counts them as wins How a junior college with residence halls became a turnkey partner for national employers Industry advisory councils and a board drawn from the sectors the university serves Annual program metrics and cost per graduate alongside five-year program reviews A faculty model that caps tenure and adds full-time industry instructors Right-sizing campus facilities for more episodic, adult learning Real-World Examples Discussed Amazon's apprenticeship, launched in September 2019 with 44 associates, 43 of whom completed it A nationwide residential training model of about 12 weeks on VU's campus, which Johnson says has graduated some 1,200 apprentices since 2020 Workforce U, VU's trademarked name for its business and industry arm John Deere's equipment donations, close to $1 million a year by Johnson's account A teacher apprenticeship pilot in which associate degree holders work as paraprofessionals while finishing a bachelor's degree online Chuck Johnson's Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Stay close to the industries you want to serve, and bring their voice into your planning. Lean into your strengths instead of trying to become something you are not. Don't be afraid to try things outside the traditional academic box; not every workforce solution needs a degree program. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/workforce-development-in-higher-education/ #WorkforceDevelopment #Apprenticeships #HigherEducation #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

  2. Oct 22

    From Military Friendly to Military Supportive: Lessons From ASU's Pat Tillman Veterans Center

    Most universities, Shawn Banzhaf says, would be happy if 5% of their students were military-connected. At Arizona State University he puts the figure at about 13%, roughly 22,000 military-connected students. In his experience, serving them well takes more than processing GI Bill benefits: it takes understanding a different culture, making expectations explicit and building community from the first day. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Shawn Banzhaf, Executive Director of the Pat Tillman Veterans Center at Arizona State University. The conversation covers military culture training for faculty and staff, trauma-informed care, the hidden curriculum and the difference between being military friendly and military supportive. Banzhaf served 21 years in the Army National Guard, including a deployment to Iraq, before leading the Tillman Center. He walks through the programs ASU uses with its military-connected students, from a wilderness program whose participants, he says, stay through to the end of their degree about 90% of the time to a one-hour training that has reached thousands of faculty and staff. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, boards, enrollment leaders and student affairs teams that serve veterans, service members and military families. Topics Covered Who military-connected students are, and why they do not arrive like the ordinary student Why support for military students has to come from the top down Trauma-informed care as a baseline, and an asset mindset in place of a deficit mindset The hidden curriculum, and why veterans want the "operations order" spelled out Accommodation policies for students who are still serving Community and camaraderie as the keys to retention, persistence and graduation The difference between military friendly and military supportive Real-World Examples Discussed ASU's military activation form, which Banzhaf says lets a deployed student's classes pause and resume with no W on the transcript Treks for Vets, a four-day wilderness program whose participants, he reports, stay through to the end of their degree about 90% of the time The Proving Grounds, a one-hour military culture training that Banzhaf says has reached thousands of ASU faculty and staff Written accommodations for active-duty students, which he says give faculty cover to extend deadlines for those deployed TROOP, a new 10-day program to bring recently separated veterans together before their first class Shawn Banzhaf's Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Develop a military culture training and make it mandatory for faculty and staff. Build community milestones for military-connected students, starting with a veteran-specific orientation. Be more than military friendly: be military supportive, including helping those still serving earn credits toward promotion. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/veteran-student-success/ #StudentVeterans #StudentSuccess #HigherEducation #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

  3. Oct 13

    Faculty-Led AI at Scale: From UC Santa Barbara to the California Community Colleges

    At UC Santa Barbara, Kavitta Ghai recalls, students waited two days, on average, to get a question answered. For a student whose scholarship was just pulled or whose tuition is due tomorrow, that is too long, and at community colleges, she notes, most classrooms have no teaching assistant at all. She argues AI can now offer the round-the-clock support students have never had, if it is built and governed the right way. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Kavitta Ghai, CEO and Co-Founder of Nectir. The conversation covers why faculty-led adoption works, how to guardrail AI at the course level, and how to measure whether AI improves student outcomes. Ghai co-founded her company as an undergraduate at UC Santa Barbara and has worked with colleges and universities from Stanford's Graduate School of Business to the California Community Colleges. She explains why AI should draw on a course's own materials rather than the open internet, why student conversations with AI should stay private, and why an outright ban leaves students behind. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, boards, CIOs and faculty leaders deciding how AI should support students and who should control it. Topics Covered "Time poverty": how long students wait for answers, and why it matters for persistence Community as the core value proposition of college The teacher's role as a "curiosity facilitator" in an AI-enabled classroom Why technology adoption works best when faculty choose it Grounding AI in course materials, and setting guardrails at the class and campus level The AI policy "sandwich": administrative standards, faculty classroom policy and student privacy Measuring AI's effect on GPA, motivation, retention and course success Real-World Examples Discussed UC Santa Barbara's two-day average wait for students to get a question answered Hiring engineers and working out onboarding within 48 hours when UCSB went remote in 2020, with 20,000 students and faculty joining Studies of her company's tool that Ghai cites: a 20% GPA increase and a 36% boost in intrinsic motivation after one term in a published pilot, and a 7.5% average GPA increase at Los Angeles Pacific University among students who used it at least three times in a semester The California Community Colleges deploying AI to all 116 colleges with faculty-led adoption, as Ghai describes it Kavitta Ghai's Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Time is of the essence. AI can level the playing field so support no longer depends on whether a student can afford a tutor. Keep all three layers of AI policy in place, and choose a provider that meets the same criteria: student privacy, faculty-set guardrails and administrative standards such as FERPA, SOC 2 Type 2 and accessibility. Invest in training, professional development and ongoing support for faculty, staff, administrators and students. McNaughton notes the provider can be internal, such as the IT group, as long as it stays current. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/ai-for-student-success/ #AIinHigherEducation #StudentSuccess #HigherEducation #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

  4. Oct 6

    AI Guardrails for Universities: Why an AI Policy Needs a Tech Stack to Enforce It

    Most AI risk at a university does not start with a hacker. It starts with a student, a faculty member, or a researcher copying something out of the learning management system and pasting it into a personal AI account, where every safeguard written into the institution's enterprise licenses no longer applies. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dean Scontras, Vice President of SLED (State, Local Government, and Education) at Island. The conversation covers the three AI issues facing presidents: academic integrity, compliance around sensitive data, and responsible AI use aligned with institutional guidelines and mission. Scontras has spent his career bringing new security and identity technology into state government and higher education, with prior public sector leadership roles at Duo, Auth0, and Wiz. He explains why the visibility an institution needs is about safety rather than policing, why AI has become a board-level decision with more stakeholders than the CISO alone, and why a policy without the tools to enforce it cannot be enforced. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, CIOs, and research leaders deciding how much AI to allow, where to allow it, and how to enforce the line they draw. Topics Covered Why there is no single definition of academic integrity when AI policies vary by college, department, and professor Shadow AI and the first step of seeing which AI tools are in use, by whom, and with access to what data How personal AI accounts bypass the protections of sanctioned enterprise licenses Compliance exposure for CUI and CMMC-governed research data Reputational, financial, and research-funding risk from AI-related breaches The roles of state governments, technology firms, and institutions in AI safety Whether institutions should standardize on a single sanctioned AI platform Real-World Examples Discussed One institution reporting a roughly 30% increase in test scores, and a Berkeley study Scontras cites on a rise in A grades R1 and R2 research data governed by CUI and CMMC controls, where an unsanctioned AI tool can circumvent existing compliance A blog post by Auburn's CIO, "The Phantom Menace," on how personal AI use undoes enterprise license protections States passing AI policy, then asking what technology stack will implement it The California State University system contracting with a single AI vendor Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Establish an AI policy or playbook first. Every control depends on knowing what the institution allows, for whom, and where. Make sure the technology can implement the policy. A "no AI" rule without visibility into what tools are in use and what data they reach cannot be enforced. Educate users and the board, and partner with companies whose goals align with AI safety. AI decisions now involve more stakeholders than any single officer. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/ai-governance-in-higher-education/ #AIinHigherEducation #HigherEducation #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

  5. Sep 29

    FIRE's 2027 College Free Speech Rankings: What Actually Moves a School's Score

    Texas A&M holds a green light rating for its speech policies and still fell from 47th to 192nd in this year's College Free Speech Rankings. Harvard climbed from 245th to 71st without changing a single policy, a sign that how leadership responds to speech controversies matters more than what is written in the handbook. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Sean Stevens, Chief Research Advisor at FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. The conversation covers the seventh annual College Free Speech Rankings and why institutions with strong written policies can still see their free speech climate collapse. Stevens, a social psychologist specializing in political psychology and survey methodology, directs the rankings, which this year surveyed students at 261 institutions across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. He explains how the rankings score student self-censorship, comfort expressing ideas, political tolerance, and trust in administration, and how deplatforming attempts and punishments of faculty and students can weigh on a school's score for up to five years. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, and enrollment executives evaluating how their institution will respond to the next campus speech controversy or external pressure to censor. Topics Covered Why a green light policy rating does not protect an institution's free speech ranking How the rankings separate trait-based self-censorship from campus climate How speech controversy penalties are graded by severity and decay over four to five years The corporate HR model of managing speech controversies and the mixed messages it sends Syllabi review, course cancellations, and preemptive compliance with the DEI executive order The impact of the Charlie Kirk assassination on student attitudes toward violence and self-censorship FIRE's upcoming surveys of faculty, international students, and college administrators Real-World Examples Discussed Texas A&M's drop to 192nd after the firing of a senior lecturer and demotion of a dean following a student complaint Texas State University's fall of 147 places to a bottom-three finish Harvard's rise from 245th to 71st with no policy reform, driven by gains in student trust in administration UC Davis posting the largest improvement through policy reform and the decay of past penalties Barnard College and Columbia University moving up from the bottom two spots Dartmouth College and the University of South Carolina changing culture quickly under new leadership Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership State the institution's position on free speech and academic freedom clearly, then follow it when a controversy hits. Written policy without enforcement costs more than it protects. Stand up to pressure to censor, whether it comes from campus groups or state and federal government. Student trust in administrative resolve is a scored component that can move within two survey cycles. Build the capacity for difficult conversations through faculty modeling in the classroom and a substantive First Amendment module at student orientation. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/college-free-speech-rankings-leadership/ #FreeSpeech #AcademicFreedom #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

  6. Sep 22

    Washington Update: Title IV Risk, Neg Reg, and the Midterms

    Student loan default and repayment rates have continued to be calculated through years of dormant collections, and some institutions could soon face single-year default rates high enough to threaten their Title IV eligibility. That risk is arriving alongside final OB3 rules, sweeping accreditation proposals from the AIM negotiated rulemaking, and midterm elections that will reshape every committee governing higher education. In this Washington Update episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Tom Netting, President of TEN Government Strategies. The conversation covers the federal regulatory and political changes that put institutional Title IV eligibility at risk and how the 2026 midterms could change them. Netting has advocated before Congress, federal agencies, and state governments for more than 35 years on behalf of private institutions of higher education. He walks through the final OB3 rules on earnings accountability and graduate and professional loan limits, the AIM Neg Reg proposals on transfer of credit and accreditor independence, the diffusion of the Department of Education across other agencies, and the committee-by-committee stakes of the midterm elections. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, and enrollment executives evaluating their institution's exposure to default rate penalties, accreditation changes, and the next round of negotiated rulemaking. Topics Covered Why default and repayment rates calculated during dormant collections threaten Title IV eligibility The OB3 earnings accountability metric and the Department's push for early implementation Litigation over graduate and professional loan limits and the exclusion of nursing AIM negotiated rulemaking proposals on transfer of credit, outcomes assessment, legal compliance, and accreditor independence How the midterm elections could reshape the Senate HELP, House Education and the Workforce, Veterans' Affairs, and Appropriations committees Real-World Examples Discussed Borrowers who enrolled in 2017 or 2018 and have not made a single loan payment heading into 2026 Nursing programs left off the professional degree list, triggering litigation that has halted enforcement of the loan limits for those programs The House advancing ten bills to codify the Department of Education's dismantling while the Senate HELP Committee rejected the idea on a bipartisan basis Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Model your default and repayment rate exposure now, because no regulatory accommodation exists yet for rates calculated during years without collections. Review transfer credit policies and program-level outcomes, because accreditors will be responsible for enforcing both under the AIM proposals. Do not wait for the midterms to change the rules, because the Department plans post-election negotiated rulemaking on change of ownership, administrative capability, and financial responsibility regardless of the outcome. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-title-iv-risk-midterms-neg-reg/ #HigherEducationPolicy #NegReg #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

  7. Sep 15

    How Gies Gives Every Junior a Live Client Project

    Most institutions measure access at admission and affordability, then ration the experiences that actually change student outcomes to whoever finds them. The experiential learning that employers say they want gets delivered to honors cohorts and groups of thirty while everyone else gets the catalog. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. W. Brooke Elliott, Dean of the Gies College of Business at the University of Illinois. The conversation covers how Gies scaled experiential learning from a selective offering into a curricular requirement across every program, and what it cost on the staffing, funding, and governance side to make it hold. Elliott is starting her third year as dean in her twenty-fourth year at Gies, where the land-grant mission is expressed through a purpose statement committing the college to expanding access to business education. Her operational focus is on what accessibility means after enrollment: whether the live client projects, consulting engagements, and immersions inside a degree are reachable by a large share of learners rather than a selected few. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, and deans evaluating whether to scale experiential learning beyond pilot programs and selective cohorts. Topics Covered Redefining accessibility to include the experiences inside the degree, not just admission and price How Gies sources 300 to 400 live client projects a year to place every junior on a team Why undergraduate employer projects are free, and how project sourcing functions as the recruiting pipeline The staffing model: a dedicated experiential learning office paired with internal learning designers Embedding experiential capstones inside online graduate programs serving roughly 7,000 students Investing in faculty AI capability for 18 months before changing the curriculum The iMBA governance precedent that made current innovation move quickly Real-World Examples Discussed Business 301, Business in Action, a junior-year course placing every student on a live client project, and Business 401, Crafting Your Purpose, sending seniors into their local and home communities Illinois Business Consulting, in its thirtieth year, and the Disruption Lab, which pairs Gies and Grainger College of Engineering students on technology problems sourced from inside the college International immersions redesigned into domestic and then virtual formats, including a virtual immersion with a partner institution in Japan Replacing programming-language modules in the undergraduate core with modules on using AI to program, and launching the MSBAi with a first cohort of 30 Students correcting their assumptions about John Deere and Caterpillar by working the companies' actual problems Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Mission and purpose alignment only matters when it functions as a decision rule for resource allocation and program design. Learner-centric requires faculty first, because faculty deliver the experience. Invest in capability before expecting delivery. Leading authentically is what mobilizes people past what an org chart can compel, and disruption is where access expands if someone goes after it. Read the transcript:  Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/scale-experiential-learning-to-every-student/ #ExperientialLearning #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

  8. Sep 8

    Workforce Readiness: Why Higher Ed Struggles to Use Employer Support

    Workforce readiness is usually framed as a funding and program-design problem. In some states and at some institutions, the funding and the employer willingness already exist, and what is missing is a structure on the institution's side that can take the offer and act on it. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Brad Griffith, president of Buckeye Innovation, a central Ohio technology firm building custom software for nonprofits, local governments, and growing organizations. The conversation covers where the public-private partnership between employers and institutions breaks down, and what leaders can change on their own side of it. Griffith serves on a curriculum advisory committee at Central Ohio Technical College, hires apprentices through Columbus State Community College's IT Flexible Apprenticeship program, and ran six state-reimbursed interns this past summer. He guest lectures in a justice tech program at Ohio State and has helped commercialize university-developed technology, including a job-matching tool that came out of the OSU Wexner Medical Center. This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, deans, and career services leaders evaluating whether their institution can absorb employer, donor, and state investment in experiential learning at the speed those partners operate. Topics Covered State wage reimbursement programs for employers who host interns, and how the Ohio application and reimbursement process works in practice Donor-funded and institution-funded internship placements at outside employers Internal curriculum approval sequencing versus accreditor review as the source of curricular delay Writing course descriptions broadly enough that faculty can change technologies without reopening formal approval How curriculum advisory committees give two-year and technical colleges a structured way to bring in employer input Career fair pricing and participation structures that can screen out smaller local employers The start-to-finish work cycle, from conceptualizing a problem through launch and post-launch support Why commercializing university research calls for a different capability than developing it Real-World Examples Discussed VocFit, a job-matching tool for individuals with developmental disabilities developed at the OSU Wexner Medical Center, moved from mailed paper surveys and manual spreadsheet matching to deployed software now demonstrated in Italy and partnered with Cincinnati Children's Hospital and Colorado State University A University of Richmond student whose internship at an Ohio company was funded by his own institution An Ohio State justice tech program pairing engineering with the Moritz College of Law, where four student project teams on four technology stacks raised a real long-term support constraint Central Ohio Technical College's community advisory committee, which reviews courses and syllabi and names the skills employers see missing in graduates Apprenticeships through Columbus State Community College serving working adults changing careers, some with employer-funded certificates and stipends Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership Invite businesses in and build structures where outside perspectives are represented, including advisory boards and standing invitations for employers to participate. Make sure students graduate with real project work they can show, on a publicly visible portfolio rather than a transcript reference to coursework. Embrace AI while teaching its limits alongside its capabilities, so graduates can judge where it belongs, where it does not, and how to use it as a thought partner. Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/employer-engagement-in-higher-education/ #WorkforceReadiness #HigherEducation #PublicPrivatePartnership #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

See All (332)

5
out of 5
9 Ratings

About

Changing Higher Ed is dedicated to helping higher education leaders improve their institutions. We offer the latest in higher ed news and insights from top experts in higher education who share their perspectives on how you can grow your institution. Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a top higher education consultant, renowned leader, and pioneer in strategic management systems and leadership boards. He's one of a select group with executive leadership experience in academe, nonprofits, government, and business.

Information

  • Creator
    Dr. Drumm McNaughton
  • Years Active
    2018 - 2026
  • Episodes
    332
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Copyright
    © The Change Leader, Inc.
  • Show Website
    Changing Higher Ed

You Might Also Like