What China’s Workforce Challenge Can Teach Us About Talent Development

 

By William J. Rothwell (HOF 2023) 

 

When organizations expand globally, leaders often assume that technology transfer is mostly about systems, machines, and processes. But one of the most difficult forms of technology transfer is not technical at all. It is human.

A case study from China involving Motorola University and workforce learning initiatives dating back to the early part of this century illustrates a challenge that remains highly relevant today: organizations often underestimate the importance of transferring “soft skills technology” alongside technical expertise. The lessons from that effort have important implications not only for multinational corporations but also for organizations implementing artificial intelligence and other transformative technologies. In the case, an American professor—William Rothwell—wrote 10 graduate courses on Talent Development and delivered them by himself at Beijing University and Nankai University over an 18-month period in 1999 and 2000. The project costs were underwritten by 32 multinational companies, with Motorola leading the group. As part of the project, 4 Chinese professors (2 from each university) were given free seats to attend the event so they could learn how to teach the courses. All course materials prepared by Professor Rothwell were provided to the professors for use in teaching the 10 graduate courses at their universities going forward. It was essentially an effort to launch a state-of-the-art Talent Development Master’s degree program at 2 Chinese universities. Sixty-nine students participated from the 2 universities. Most were full-time students in MBA programs, but a few were selected high-potential staff from Motorola and other multinational companies.

The Real Challenge Was Never Just Technology

In the 1990s, multinational corporations operating in China faced a significant problem. They could find engineers and technical specialists, but they struggled to find professionals trained in workplace learning and performance (WLP), instructional design, training, and human resource development.

At the time, China had limited university infrastructure dedicated to these fields. As a result, companies had only a few options:

• Recruit talent away from competitors
• Train staff internally from scratch
• Hire Chinese nationals educated abroad
• Help build a local educational infrastructure

The fourth option was the most sustainable, but also the most difficult. It required patience, collaboration, and long-term thinking. In many ways, it challenged the short-term business mentality that dominates many organizations.

This issue is remarkably similar to what organizations face today with artificial intelligence (AI). Companies frequently invest heavily in AI systems while neglecting the human systems needed to support them. The result is predictable: impressive technology with disappointing organizational outcomes.

Why Soft Skills Matter More Than Ever

The China initiative recognized an important truth: technical systems succeed only when human systems evolve alongside them.

Motorola University and 31 other multinational companies working in China approached the problem strategically. They worked with Chinese universities, multinational training networks, and corporate leaders to develop awareness of the emerging field of workplace learning and performance. The effort was not merely educational; it was cultural.

The initiative followed six major steps:

1. Building awareness
2. Meeting immediate workforce needs
3. Delivering advanced certificates
4. Offering university-based certificate programs
5. Creating internships
6. Assessing long-term results

Motorola worked with Penn State University, Beijing University, and Nankai University to implement this change effort. This gradual approach acknowledged that workforce transformation cannot occur overnight. Sustainable change requires capability building at multiple levels simultaneously.

That lesson is particularly important now. Organizations implementing AI often focus almost entirely on the technology itself. They purchase software, automate workflows, and redesign systems. But they fail to consider how the introduction of new technology will change how people work together to achieve results, resulting in the well-known “the productivity paradox.”

Technology changes processes. But people determine whether those processes improve performance. Failing to consider the human side of the enterprise almost always leads to a failed change effort.

The Productivity Paradox Reappears

Economists and management scholars have long discussed the “productivity paradox,” the phenomenon in which organizations invest heavily in new technologies without achieving proportional gains in productivity.

One reason is simple: organizations frequently fail to redesign work around the technology.

The case of China demonstrates the opposite approach. Instead of merely importing training concepts, the project invested in local capability, cultural adaptation, and institutional development. It recognized that successful transfer requires more than technical replication. It requires integration into the social and organizational fabric of the workforce.

Today, many AI implementations repeat the same mistakes organizations made during earlier waves of technological change. Leaders assume that software adoption automatically creates value. Value emerges only when technology, leadership, structure, culture, and workforce capability align.

Without that alignment, organizations experience confusion rather than transformation. The result is often disappointed management expectations.

Building Capacity Instead of Dependency

One insightful aspect of the China initiative was its emphasis on localization.

Rather than depending indefinitely on expatriates or imported expertise, the strategy focused on developing local professionals who could sustain and expand the capability over time. This created long-term organizational resilience.

That principle matters enormously today.

Organizations should avoid creating permanent dependency on outside AI consultants or technology vendors. Instead, they should focus on developing internal capability:

• Managers who understand how AI changes workflows
• Employees who can work effectively alongside intelligent systems
• HR professionals who can redesign jobs and competencies
• Learning leaders who can support continuous adaptation

In other words, organizations must build learning ecosystems, not merely deploy tools. In the China case, the multinationals set out to work with Penn State to encourage local universities to establish and launch a new graduate program in Talent Development—sometimes called Training and Development.

Cultural Translation Is Essential

Another key insight from the China experience was the importance of cultural translation.

Technology transfer is never purely technical because all workplaces operate within cultural systems. Practices that work in one national or organizational culture may fail in another unless adapted thoughtfully.

The project recognized the importance of local facilitators, local partnerships, and sensitivity to Chinese educational and organizational traditions. That helped create trust and credibility.

Modern AI initiatives require similar sensitivity. Departments within the same organization may have different norms, fears, communication styles, and attitudes toward automation. Leaders who ignore these cultural realities often encounter resistance, disengagement, or passive noncompliance.

Successful transformation requires dialogue, participation, and trust-building.

Leadership Must Think Long-Term

Perhaps the most important lesson from the case is that transformational talent development requires long-term leadership commitment.

Short-term thinking often undermines strategic capability building. Executives may prioritize quarterly metrics over investments whose benefits emerge gradually. But sustainable organizational capability rarely develops quickly.

The China initiative invested in partnerships, education, and infrastructure because leaders understood that workforce capability is a strategic asset.

The same is true for AI transformation today.

Organizations that focus only on rapid automation may achieve temporary efficiencies while damaging long-term adaptability. By contrast, organizations that invest in workforce development, learning systems, and organizational alignment are more likely to achieve enduring success.

Final Thoughts

The Chinese workforce case is not simply a historical story about multinational business expansion. It is a reminder that organizational transformation is fundamentally human.

Technology alone does not create a competitive advantage. Human capability, organizational learning, and cultural adaptation determine whether technology produces meaningful results.

As organizations race to implement AI and other advanced technologies, leaders would do well to remember the lesson demonstrated decades ago in China: the most important technology transfer may be the transfer of knowledge, relationships, learning systems, and leadership practices that help people succeed together.

Organizations that integrate the human and technical sides will be the ones most likely to thrive in the future.

This blog post is a condensed and adapted version of a longer, full-length case study. Thoughts from other Hall of Fame members will be appreciated as the Hall celebrates its 30th anniversary and looks forward to how our field continues to adapt to AI and other changes in our professional environment.

 

References  

Reference

Yan, X., & Rothwell, W. (2006). Motorola University: Transferring skills through strategic alliance. In Harkins, P., Giber, D., Sobol, M., Tarquinio, M., & Carter, L. (Eds), Leading the global workforce: Best practices from Linkage, Inc. (pp. 171-182). Jossey-Bass.

 

 

IACEHOF 30th Anniversary Celebration 

The Hall of Fame is more than a recognition—it is a living record of the people and ideas that have shaped adult and continuing education globally

  

About the Author

William J. Rothwell (HOF 2023) is Distinguished Professor Emeritus and Academy Professor at Penn State University, University Park. He is an author and an internationally recognized expert in workforce development, leadership, human resource development, and organizational change. He has written and edited numerous books on talent management, succession planning, leadership development, and workplace learning. His work has influenced organizations and educational institutions worldwide through research, consulting, and executive education initiatives. He can be reached by email at wjr9@psu.edu or by phone at 814-441-4087.

 

 

Celebrating 30 Years of Global Leadership in Adult and Continuing Education

 

By Simone C. O. Conceição (HOF 2018) and Gary Miller (HOF 2004) 

International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame (IACEHOF) 1996–2026

For three decades, the International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame has recognized leaders whose work has shaped adult and continuing education worldwide. Since its first induction ceremony in 1996, the Hall has honored more than 400 members from over 45 countries whose scholarship, leadership, advocacy, and innovation have transformed the field during a period of remarkable social, technological, and global change.

As we celebrate the Hall’s 30th anniversary, we also celebrate the collective impact of the individuals and ideas that helped define adult and continuing education over the last generation. This anniversary is not only an opportunity to reflect on the past, but also to engage with the present and imagine the future of lifelong learning worldwide.

Over the past 30 years, the field has experienced major transformations. Lifelong learning emerged as a global framework guiding education, workforce development, and civic participation. Distance and online learning expanded access to education across geographic and institutional boundaries. More recently, artificial intelligence and digital technologies have begun reshaping how adults learn, work, communicate, and participate in society.

At the same time, adult educators have continued to address persistent challenges related to access, participation, workforce preparation, democratic engagement, and the changing needs of learners across cultures and generations. Throughout these changes, Hall of Fame members have played important roles as researchers, institutional leaders, policymakers, practitioners, and advocates of adult learning worldwide.

To commemorate this milestone, the Leadership Perspectives blog will feature a special anniversary series throughout 2026. The series will include reflections from Hall of Fame inductees, thematic essays, timeline-based historical perspectives, and future-oriented discussions about where adult and continuing education is heading next.

The series will include:

• “Voices of the Hall” reflections from inductees sharing significant moments from their careers and perspectives on how the field has evolved.
• Timeline reflection posts exploring key developments from 1996–2005, 2006–2015, and 2016–2026.
• Thematic essays on lifelong learning, digital transformation, workforce learning, online education, and artificial intelligence.
• “Looking Ahead” posts focused on the future of adult learning and the role of technology in shaping society and professional life.

More importantly, this anniversary series is intended to foster dialogue across generations and regions worldwide. The Hall’s strength has always been its international and interdisciplinary character. By bringing together diverse voices and experiences, the series seeks to create a living digital record of how adult and continuing education has evolved and where it may go in the future.

The Hall of Fame is more than a recognition—it is a living record of the people and ideas that have shaped adult and continuing education globally.

We invite Hall of Fame members and the global adult education community to share reflections, stories, and insights as part of this anniversary series. As we celebrate 30 years of leadership, we also look ahead to the next generation of challenges, innovations, and possibilities for lifelong learning.

Share your reflections

• Looking back on your own experience, what change in adult and continuing education has had the greatest impact on your work or community?
• What moment or experience best reflects your contribution to the field of adult and continuing education?
• What gives you the most hope about the future of lifelong learning?

The Hall of Fame is more than a recognition—it is a living record of the people and ideas that have shaped adult and continuing education globally

 

Continued Engagement of Adult Educators After Retirement: Pathways to Purpose, Legacy, and Impact

By Simone C. O. Conceição (HOF 2018) and Lilian H. Hill (HOF 2018)

The Paradox of Retiring from a Lifelong Learning Profession

Here is a question worth sitting with: Can someone truly "retire" from a profession built on the belief that learning never stops? For those of us who have spent careers in adult and continuing education, retirement brings a unique paradox. We have championed lifelong learning at every turn — and yet, when the formal chapter closes, many of us find ourselves asking, Now what?

That question is not a sign of loss. It is an invitation.

The members of the International Adult and Continuing Education (IACE) Hall of Fame represent some of the most accomplished people. Recognition, though, is not a conclusion — it is a platform. In this post, we want to make the case that retirement opens a new and arguably richer chapter of contribution. Drawing on research and our own reflections, we share four pathways for adult educators to keep shaping the field they love.

Why It Matters

Let’s be honest: when experienced adult educators disengage, decades of practice-based knowledge disappear. Much of what we know about how adults learn and how programs succeed lives in people, not textbooks (Merriam & Baumgartner, 2020). Continued engagement also benefits us—supporting purpose, connection, and well-being in later life (Casanova et al., 2026). Generativity helps explain this drive to contribute (McAdams et al., 1993).

Pathway 1: Mentoring Emerging Adult Educators

Mentoring is a natural post-retirement role. Retired educators offer time, experience, and perspective without institutional constraints (Zachary, 2011). Early-career faculty often juggle competing demands (Terosky & Gonzales, 2016), and a mentor with the space to listen can make a significant difference.

Pathway 2: Coaching Graduate Students and Working Academics

Mentoring shares knowledge; coaching develops it through structured, goal-oriented dialogue. Retired educators are well-suited for coaching: they bring expertise, independence from institutional politics, and time for sustained engagement. This may include dissertation support, research decisions, or career development for academics.

Retired adult educators are well-suited for this role. We bring deep knowledge of adult learning theory and practice. We are free from the institutional politics that sometimes make it hard for active colleagues to give truly candid feedback. And we have time — the kind of unhurried, consistent availability that effective coaching requires.

For graduate students, mentoring might look like coaching through dissertation development, research design decisions, or the quiet challenge of forming a scholarly identity. For working academics, it might mean helping someone think through a publication strategy, prepare for promotion, or simply rediscover their passion for the work.

Pathway 3: Teaching, Writing, and Thought Leadership

Retirement offers what active academics often lack: time. Lifelong Learning Institutes and Universities of the Third Age provide opportunities to teach and learn in collaborative environments (Casanova et al., 2026).

Writing is equally meaningful. The books we always meant to write, the policy briefs that need a credible voice, the op-eds that could shift a public conversation — all of this becomes possible when we are not buried under curriculum revisions and committee work. The IACEHOF? Leadership Perspectives blog is itself a living example of this pathway. The post you are reading right now is an act of continued engagement.

Pathway 4: Consulting and Association Involvement

The skills that define a strong adult educator — program evaluation, curriculum design, assessment, strategic planning, leadership development — are exactly what organizations across sectors struggle to find and afford. As consultants, retired adult educators offer something rare: deep credibility, genuine objectivity, and real commitment to mission. At the same time, it is important to avoid perpetuating the “working for free” mentality that is often expected of faculty. Continued engagement should be valued as a professional contribution, not assumed as voluntary labor, and should be compensated or recognized in meaningful ways.

Professional associations are another natural home. Free from institutional obligations, retired educators can take on sustained leadership — chairing committees, guiding conference programs, mentoring through association pipelines, and advocating at the policy level with credibility and without risk. The IACE Hall of Fame should build on this by creating structured, ongoing roles for its inductees — making their continued involvement visible, valued, and purposeful.

What Organizations Can Do

Sustained engagement requires intentional support—recruitment, recognition, and community (Casanova et al., 2026). Associations can offer reduced fees, governance roles, and recognition of post-retirement contributions. Universities can provide affiliate access, coaching roles, and consulting opportunities. Associations should consider reduced membership rates, dedicated governance roles, and awards that honor post-retirement contributions. Universities should formalize retired-faculty coaching programs, preserve library and email access through affiliate designations, and develop consulting pools for community partners. Without these structures, even the most motivated retired educator eventually fades from view, and that is a loss for everyone. Without such structures, valuable expertise is lost. Organizations must also avoid relying on unpaid contributions and instead recognize this work appropriately.

A New Chapter of Generativity

Retirement is not the end of our story. If anything, it is the beginning of its most honest chapter, one where we can choose engagement that is fully aligned with our values, our strengths, and our hopes for the field. We can mentor without rivalry. We can coach without a conflict of interest. We can write without fear and advocate without institutional permission. What matters most is knowing that our work continues to have an impact. The next generation needs the knowledge and skills we carry.

So, we leave you with this: What wisdom do you hold that the field cannot afford to lose? We would love to hear your thoughts in the comments below.

References

Casanova, G., Weil, J., & Cerqueira, M. (2026). Experiencing retirement through teaching: Productive engagement in later life across two cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 41(1), 4.

McAdams, D. P., de St Aubin, E. D., & Logan, R. L. (1993). Generativity among young, midlife, and older adults. Psychology and aging, 8(2), 221.

Merriam, S. B., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2020). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Rubinstein, R. L., Girling, L. M., De Medeiros, K., Brazda, M., & Hannum, S. (2015). Extending the framework of generativity theory through research: A qualitative study. The Gerontologist, 55(4), 548-559.

Terosky, A. L., & Gonzales, L. D. (2016). Re-envisioned contributions: Experiences of faculty employed at institutional types that differ from their original aspirations. The Review of Higher Education, 39(2), 241-268.

Zachary, L. J. (2011). The mentor's guide: Facilitating effective learning relationships. John Wiley & Sons.

 

 

 

Simone C. O. Conceição is a professor emerita at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and a learning design consultant at SCOC Consulting.

 Lilian H. Hill is a professor emerita at the University of Southern Mississippi and a certified life coach at SCOC Consulting.  

Three Decades of Innovation

 

  

As we gear up to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame, I am reminded that we are also celebrating three decades of what has come to be called “e-learning”—the delivery of undergraduate and graduate degrees and professional certificates through online platforms to adult learners around the world.

 

E-learning has evolved over the years as educators use new technologies to better serve students wherever they may be and, in the process, help build and sustain local workforce communities and industries. Its early predecessor—correspondence study—emerged in the 1890s during the Industrial Revolution, when the United States was dealing with the combination of major immigration and rapid industrial growth. The 1960s saw the significant institutional innovation around the development of television and the creation of open universities modeled after the British Open University and, in the United States and elsewhere, “telecourses” that replaced classroom lectures with half-hour video lessons broadcast on public television and cable outlets. 

 

The 1990s marked the start of a new era in technology-assisted adult education. It was in the 1990s that the Alfred E. Sloan Foundation began a multi-year project, led by the late Hall of Fame member Dr. Frank Mayadas (HOF 2007), that has helped many colleges and universities in the U.S. develop online courses and degree programs for students worldwide.  In the process, the Foundation created a community of institutions to share ideas for innovation and their own experiences in the new field. 

 

Today, the e-learning community is facing a new generation of technical innovation. The rapid development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its acceptance by institutions and individuals around the world mark the beginning of a new generation of e-learning that is already impacting education at all levels.

 

Many IACE Hall of Fame members have been involved in the decades of innovation in e-learning and are now experimenting with how best to incorporate AI into the higher education mainstream. The Hall’s 30th anniversary would seem to be an excellent time for us to share our thoughts on the future of adult and continuing education in the new age of AI.  I invite you to use the Hall of Fame’s Leadership Perspectives Blog to share your thoughts on the future of adult and continuing education as the new AI environment matures. 

 

Best wishes.

 

Gary Miller (HOF 2004) 

           

Frank Mayadas and the Foundations of Modern Online Learning

 

By Gary Miller (HOF 2004)

I suspect that many Hall of Fame members who read the Hall’s quarterly Newsletter have read about the recent passing of 2006 Hall of Fame inductee Dr. Frank Mayadas.

Frank has had a very important impact on continuing education over the past three decades.  As the Sloan Foundation’s lead advocate for online learning, he worked closely with colleges and universities that received Sloan Foundation grants to develop and deliver online degree programs. Frank understood that institutions would need to rethink some basic policy, administrative, and cultural issues to effectively create a permanent home for e-learning within the institution.  He took steps to bring institutions that received funds into a community where institutions could share their experiences and help create viable standards and expectations.

Many Hall of Fame members have had the opportunity to work with the Online Learning Consortium and the JALN journal over the past decades. As we look back on Frank’s contributions and the impact of e-learning on our institutions, I encourage Hall members to share your experiences and ideas for the future of our field, as well as perspectives on Frank’s contributions, in a post for Leadership Perspectives.  Let’s celebrate the impact that Frank and the Sloan Foundation have had on our field.

 

Mission Possible: Renewing Adult and Continuing Education Futures

 

By Professor Don Olcott, Jr., FRSA (HOF 2024)

 

Good Morning, Mr. Phelps: The world has seen some very turbulent times for adult and continuing education during the past decade. Political populism, public and employer disillusionment, increasing educational costs, and competing interests across institutions and sectors have created an uncertain future. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is for you and your PMF (Possible Mission Force) to seek out courageous and inspiring adult and continuing educators to bring forward new strategies, ideas, and best practices for sustaining a thriving and innovative future for adult and continuing education. If you or any members of your PMF team are captured, you and your team will be disavowed, and your Mission Impossible 8 complimentary theater tickets will be revoked – just kidding!

 

Leadership is Essential

Is the future of adult and continuing education secure and guaranteed? A rhetorical question, indeed. There are no guarantees for the future. Today, many educational leaders are advocating “future proofing” education against unanticipated change, geopolitical shifts, global crises, and natural disasters, and new normals (plural) that may or may not define future societal eras or Zeitgeists (Gast, 2022).

The problem with this conceptual approach is that it is reactive rather than building institution response scenarios that are agile, flexible, and responsive to any “new normal” or crisis. Visionary and creative leadership will make this happen, including reframing the possibilities ahead for adult and continuing education.

 

Adult and Continuing Educators are the Possible Mission Force (PMF)

We all need a touch of humor (thus the opening dialogue above) to help us navigate the challenges of the future. Regrettably, Tom Cruise may not ultimately save us from ourselves any more than artificial intelligence (AI) will be the panacea for all things educational. As adult and continuing educators, we must embrace the challenge and re-engage in the conversation to foster collaboration about what we can do to strengthen and expand the role of adult and continuing education for future generations.

 

State of the Profession

The OECD 2023 Report on Trends in Adult Learning provided a snapshot of current trends in adult learning. It is beyond the scope of this commentary to provide a detailed analysis. Here are some highlights from the report.

 

• Participation in many countries appears to be falling; more alarming is that overall participation is declining despite the gap between socio-economic groups narrowing.
• Formal education is playing a diminishing role in adult learning. The focus is increasingly on non-formal job training-related programs.  Countries with strong participation in formal adult learning programs tend to have higher non-formal learning engagement. Tertiary qualifications dominate formal education.
• Over 40% of non-formal job-related learning lasts one day or less. Unemployed adults tend to attend longer programs, given time availability and the need to develop meaningful employment skills.
• Improving job performance and employability is the main motivation for engaging in adult learning programs. Lack of time, family obligations, and cost remain primary barriers to participation.
• Participation tends to be highest when available in the workplace and supported by employers.
• Policy misalignment, where compliance with Lifelong Learning skill development is fragmenting the possible mission impacts of training 

 

Strategies for Success: Sharing the Experience

I want to invite my IACE Hall of Fame global colleagues to share their own ideas on how to renew and empower the profession for future generations of learners. Here are a few strategies of mine. They may stimulate some of your own ideas.

 

Storytelling

Do we tell our adult and continuing education story clearly to our multiple publics and stakeholders? Interestingly, in my own research (Olcott, 2024) recently on the future of open universities, I discovered some perplexing trends.

Governments, employers, and prospective students view open universities much the same way. The diversity, and by extension, capabilities of open universities to be innovative and unique got lost in translation despite distinguished leaders such as Sir John Daniel (2019) and experienced leaders such as Professors Alan Tait and Ross Paul (2019) noting the vast diversity. 

Telling our story better means articulating our value, our creativity, and our commitment to serving adult learners. The adult and continuing education profession inherently reflects a steadfast optimism built on empowerment, creativity, and commitment to human learning. Indeed, this is a noble endeavor, but there are many competing stories that remind us all that we must tell our story often and consistently better than the rest.      

 

Micro-Credentials:  Strategic Game Changer or Tactical Diversion

Micro-credentials are not new. Short-term adult education and continuing education training programs have been around for decades, particularly evident in vocational-technical professions and the military (McGreal & Olcott, 2022). Micro-credentials are unique today because of the rigor applied to assessing knowledge and skills, with skills/competencies validated and certified. 

 

Remember the days when we attended a one-day seminar on Saturday and received a certificate of completion or attendance. This was not validation of new skills and knowledge, and these short-term, less rigorous activities could not be stackable into formal qualifications. This renewed focus on assessment provides the conduit to validating non-formal training and educational activities and in-turn leverages the stackability and conversion of non-formal learning normative units or value to be applied to existing or new formal qualifications.

I try to articulate to institutional leaders that micro-credentials can be a strategic tool as well as a tactical training approach for program delivery. Educational organizations are often criticized for trying to be all things to all people and often doing some of this very poorly. Conversely, the strategic integration of micro-credentials can, in fact, change the fundamental mission and architecture of an institution in ways that are catalysts for better serving our diverse stakeholders. An example of this is our approach to lifelong learning.      

 

Lifelong Learning (LLL) – Walking the talk

Indeed, it is mindboggling trying to scan the range of keynotes, organizational documents, and formal publications on lifelong learning for the 21^st century. What is even more amazing is that nearly all of these are predicated on a fundamental strategy that lifelong learning really means some type of magical transformation that happens ONLY after a student gets a first degree. The assumption suggests that a degree in Shakespearean tragedies is much more valuable than a micro-credential in hospitality management that leads to a workplace internship and employment.

If we return to the idea that micro-credentials can be a strategic approach for organizations, this suggests that skills development and employment become central priorities. This, in and of itself, has significant implications for how organizations are funded, structured, staffed, and marketed, and for which credentials and qualifications (degrees, certificates, micro-credentials) can be combined. 

Lifelong learning in its purest form means that learning occurs across the lifespan and that an 18-year-old can start with micro-credentials first and then return for a degree later. It means no imposed chronology of credentials: you get a degree first, then lifelong learning begins. As it stands, we advocate lifelong learning as long as it fits within traditional organizational structures that have stood for decades but are clearly not serving the needs of students, employers, and societies. Reframing this misalignment between education and society is perhaps the greatest challenge we face in the next fifty years, particularly the challenges facing students and employers in the developing world. 

 

Summary – We are the Champions!

All of us are adult and continuing education’s Possible Mission Force (PMF). I’ve shared a few of my own strategies to renew our commitment to the future. We must tell our story and better communicate our value. Micro-credentials are strategic as well as for tactical program delivery. And finally, a true lifelong learning model is flexible and offers the maximum options for engaging in a synthesis of formal and non-formal educational activities based on the learner's needs, not the mandates of the system.    

What are your strategies for sustaining and nurturing the future of adult and continuing education, including the broader framework of lifelong learning? 

 

References

Daniel, J. S. (2019). Open universities: Old concepts and contemporary challenges. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i3.4035

Gast, A.  (2022).  Four ways universities can future-proof education. World Economic Forum.  https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/01/four-ways-universities-can-future-proof-education/ 

McGreal, R., & Olcott, D. J. (2022). A strategic reset: Micro-credentials for higher education leaders. Smart Learning Environment, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00190-1

OECD.  (2023). Trends in adult learning. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/trends-in-adult-learning_ec0624a6-en.html

Olcott, Jr., D. (2024). Open universities: Reinventing, repurposing, and reimagining innovative futures. Journal of Open, Distance, and Digital Education (JODDE), 1(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.25619/ntkvsz26  

Paul, R. & Tait, A. (2019). Special issue editorial: Open universities: Past, present and future. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4575

 

 

The Technology Revolution and the Future of Continuing and Adult Education

 

By Gary E. Miller (HOF 2004)

 

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Industrial Revolution spurred significant immigration and a shift of the U.S. population from rural to newly industrialized urban areas. These social changes, combined with the growth of a sustained industrial economy, revolutionized American higher education. State land grant universities opened to stimulate more productive agriculture; colleges expanded their curricula to prepare professionals for careers in new social science disciplines; and, as the postal service began to deliver mail to rural homes in the 1980s, a new delivery system—correspondence education—joined later by courses offered by radio and television emerged in many higher education institutions around the nation.

 

Today, we are at a turning point in the Technological Revolution. Over the past two decades, much has been done to use streaming media and other technologies to improve access to education at both the K-12 and university levels. However, the introduction of Artificial Intelligence is raising new questions about the skills and knowledge students across disciplines need to develop to function in an increasingly technology-driven culture.

 

Dr. Raymond Schroeder recently wrote an article entitled “Higher Education AI Transformation 2030.” He noted that, to make the best use of artificial intelligence and other new technologies, higher education professionals “... must first rethink the very foundations of our institutions. This is not about adding a few new apps to the learning management system. Rather, it’s about a fundamental re-architecture of how we operate, how we teach, and how we define the work of our faculty and students. Key factors include institutional strategy, pedagogy, and the future of work.”

 

Today, many young adults are increasingly reluctant to move quickly into higher education as they reach the end of their high school years. That, along with other educational needs brought about by the rapid development of technology, suggests some structural changes in the curriculum—already underway in some colleges and universities — that may ease the transition for new students. Here are a few:

 

1.             Dual Enrollment Courses—Today, many high school students are taking dual enrollment courses—college-level courses that allow them to earn both high school and college credit. Much of the general education curriculum is duplicated in high school and college. Encouraging students to take dual enrollment courses will allow colleges and universities to address better the changing structure of society in general education curricula.

2.             Micro-Credentials—This is a relatively new arena for professional continuing education that is well-suited to technology-based delivery. Don Olcott (HOF 2023) and Rory McGreal recently described micro-credentials as a “strategic reset” for higher education. They noted:

 

Micro-credentials are certified documents that provide recognized proof of the achievement of learning outcomes from shorter, less duration educational or training activities. They focus on validating competency-based skills, outcomes, and/or knowledge using transparent standards and reliable assessments, thereby enhancing graduates’ employability prospects. A micro-credential can be accepted for credit by an institution or organization or be an attestation for employers. A micro-credential attests to specific knowledge or skills competencies with defined learning outcomes and may or may not be stacked towards larger units of accreditation (Brown et al., 2021; Cirlan, & Loukkola, 2020; COL, 2019; Debiais-Sainton, 2020; Fong et al., 2016; Kato et al., 2020).

 

3.             A New Undergraduate Curriculum—Just as textbooks changed the dynamics of undergraduate education in the 20th century, AI and other technologies are creating new demands for what students need to learn. The introductory “survey” course is less important for non-technical subjects like history, literature, sociology, and psychology. A more productive approach might be to focus instead on themes of social and personal development within disciplines. John Meacham’s book, The Soul of America (2008) provides a good example. Rather than using course time to highlight the historical timeline, Meacham offers several chapters that focus on how the country responded to several historical issues over time as the nation evolved to meet the challenges of the Industrial Revolution. This approach could help redefine the social studies and humanities curricula.

 

Many Hall of Fame members are leading the way in how their institutions will respond to this new environment. Please feel free to add your perspectives to this blog to help our community lead as the Technology Revolution matures.

------

 

References

Brown, M., Giolla Mhichil, M.N., Beirne, E. & Mac Lochlainn, C. (2021, in press). The global micro-credential landscape: Charting a new credential ecology for lifelong learning. Journal of Learning Development, 8(2). https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d.

Cirlan, E. & Loukkola, T. (2020). European project MICROBOL: Microcredentials linked to the key Bologna commitments. European University Association (EUA), 1–63. https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/microbol%20desk%20research%20report.pdf.

Commonwealth of Learning (COL). (2019). Designing and implementing micro-credentials: A guide for practitioners. http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/3279.

Debiais-Sainton, V. (2020). European approach to micro-credentials. EADTU Innovating Higher Education 2020 Bridging Event (I-HE2020). https://www2.slideshare.net/EADTU/ihe2020-european-approach-to-microcredentials.

Fong, J., Janzow, P, & Peck, K. (2016). Demographic shifts in educational demand and the rise of alternative credentials. Washington, D.C.: UPCEA-Pearson. https://upcea.edu/upceapearson-survey-demographic-shifts-in-educational-demand-and-the-rise-of-alternative-credentials.

Kato, S., Galan-Muros, V., & Weko, T. (2020). The emergence of alternative credentials. OECD Education Working Paper No. 216. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 1–40. Paris: OECD. https://www.oecd.org/publications/the-emergence-of-alternative-credentials-b741f39e-en.htm.

Meacham, J. (2008). The Soul of America. Random House.

McGreal, R., Olcott, D. (2022). A strategic reset: micro-credentials for higher education leaders. Smart Learn. Environ. 9, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00190-1

Schroeder, R. (October 15, 2025). Higher Education AI Transformation 2030. Inside Higher Education.