Follow-Up: What Tech Leaders Need to Know About Federal Policy and Higher Ed

Sophie White: Hello, everyone! I'm Sophie White, I'm a host for the EDUCAUSE Shop Talk podcast, and we have a special discussion for you today. This is a follow-up to a conversation that we recorded at the EDUCAUSE Annual Conference in Nashville related to federal policy in higher education. We had a few fantastic audience questions during the discussion that we didn't get time to answer, so today we are having a conversation with Jarrett Cummings and John O'Brien about the latest updates on higher education and federal policy, and responding to those audience questions that you all had asked. So we'll jump right into it. This is part of the EDUCAUSE Shop Talk podcast again. Our first question from the audience, I'll direct this one towards John.

What opportunities do you see to collaborate with Europe and other continents? For example, maybe with more transatlantic policy dialogue around things like cybersecurity, AI ethics, or interoperability frameworks?

John O'Brien: Yep, well, there's a lot of, I just got back from a conference in Japan. The organization is called AXIES, and actually, before my time, EDUCAUSE helped them create themselves. So we have a close friendship with them, and it's always amazing to me when I go to meet with other peers doing the work we do in other countries, just how similar and also how different things are. So, in particular, I think what's very interesting right now is as the current administration moves away from regulating AI and vacating the executive order that President Biden had in place. I think a lot of us are looking to European potential regulation that could

sort of step in in that gap, and the EU AI Act is one example that, that, that I talk about quite a bit, that, that like, maybe like GDPR, is going to be relevant to a lot of institutions that have international students, for example, so I think it's important that we continue to talk to organizations internationally, and that is something that we continue to do.

Because we're not working in isolation. And when it comes to benchmarking and, you know, there are, I'm actually in the middle of, of planning what I'm sort of unofficially calling a benchmarking summit to come together with all these other organizations around the world that are doing some kind of higher education benchmarking, and let's see, because we're in the process of sort of reimagining our benchmarking work. How might we come even closer together? So there's a lot of potential for those conversations, and I think I'm curious what Jarrett would add to what I said, or feel free to do one of those, what John meant to say.

Jarret Cummings: Well, I think there's, as there has been historically, I think there's tremendous opportunity for institution-level exchanges and higher education, community-level exchanges through associations like EDUCAUSE and organizations, in Europe and in other countries. But in terms of national policy, the United States is clearly on a different path than the EU, and we're seeing, a willingness by, the current administration to use economic policy, particularly tariff policy, as well as, to a lesser extent, but equally important, national security policy, to try to push, countries in Europe, not to, regulate U.S. firms, particularly in the AI space, just as the administration's trying to arrange, to the extent it can, to push states in the United States not to regulate AI. So it's a fairly complicated picture. I mean, I agree with John that, for institutions that are serving students in the EU in particular, they're, you know, definitely going to have to consider how European law and regulation applies to their operations, how far across the pond those regulations may or may not reach. But in terms of, the broader higher education space, I think we have to look to the kinds of relationships that EDUCAUSE fosters with other international organizations and that our institutions foster in terms of their exchanges with other institutions to kind of build on, relevant practices and, institutional policies, in the absence of, guiding national policy.

John O'Brien: And I know we're going to move on, but also say there's also another dimension of all of this, which has to do with state policies as well, which is another sort of dimension of this sort of work as well.

Jarret Cummings: That's gonna be really… I'm sorry, Sophie, go ahead.

Sophie White: Oh, no, I was gonna say, for anyone listening, we talk about that in the larger podcast that we recorded at the annual conference. Jarret, I think you had some great points about state policies, and even how things like tech companies who are based in California and are, you know, have to use the state policies related to AI that California mandates actually might have effects on all of us, just because of the use, the widespread use of those technologies. So the state frameworks are also fascinating, I think, for all of us to keep an eye on as time goes forward.

John O'Brien: So when you see Jarrett's eye twitching, you now know why.

Sophie White: There's a lot to keep track of. I don't know how you do it.

Jarret Cummings: Yeah, a lot of people use Botox to make themselves look younger. I use it to keep my eyes from twitching. It's fairly disconcerting for people when your eyes twitch, so…

Sophie White: Or go without caffeine, there are techniques, Botox, whatever you need.

Jarret Cummings: Serenity now. But I was gonna say, sorry, apparently I got something stuck in my throat at the absolute worst time.

But, we're expecting before the end of the year that the Trump White House is going to release an executive order attempting to leverage executive authority where it can, to force states not to regulate AI. And the legal underpinnings of that are dubious, as has been the case with a number of executive actions.

And so, it's gonna be very interesting to see how quickly California gets to a federal courthouse to file suit to block that executive order. But first, we need to see it. And, it could be a Christmas present, so stay tuned.

Sophie White: Alright, something to stay tuned for in 2026. So, to narrow the aperture a little bit to technology and higher education, the next audience question we got was related to:

Assuming that high cost is a reason for concern about the value of higher ed, what can technologies do to reduce costs? So, how can technology leaders and professionals help alleviate those costs that folks are concerned about related to higher ed.

John O'Brien: I'll take a swipe. My comments at the annual conference at the opening general session were really suggesting adding some new recent data suggesting that the loss of confidence in higher education might be changing in the positive direction. Actually, Jarrett just shared, I think, yesterday or today, a Higher Ed Dive report of a CNU study showing that, actually when you ask employers for their confidence in higher education, it's quite strong. 73% believe that a college degree is definitely or somewhat worthwhile. So, just put that off to the side.

I do think that there is an awful lot of consideration this year about ways that technology can actually reduce costs, and it goes without saying that AI is at the top of that list. I remember talking to a CIO at a community college a few years back. You're just simply using

chatbot technology to allow students to reset their multifactor authentication passwords when they need to, and it was a substantial reduction in staff time, so those staff could be freed up to do other things, and that is exactly the kind of productivity gains that are needed. I mean, that's a hot topic right now, the degree to which AI is actually improving productivity and so forth, but there are certain use cases that are just pretty hard to argue. And I think that is very much the conversation for 2026, is how can we not only use technology to reduce costs and increase productivity because we need it, but be able to tell that story and document it better than we've ever been able to.

Sophie White: Absolutely. Jarret, anything you wanted to add to that one before we move on?

Jarret Cummings: Well, I would just say that, you know, federal policy is definitely drifting, in the direction of trying to highlight where value is returned and where value is not from higher education. And so the, accountability measures that were incorporated in the budget reconciliation bill over the summer, what's known as the One Big Beautiful Bill are really setting out a framework where, at the program level programs that are not programs whose graduates are not earning more than the average high school graduate in a state are going to face, some significant pressure and possibly lose access to federal funding. At the graduate level, programs that aren't returning value such that a graduate degree earner is making more money than an average undergraduate in the state, will face some potential restrictions and ultimately could lose access to federal funding. So, the focus on value for the money is very much a high priority within the context of federal policy, and so I think it just adds to the points that John raised about, focusing on where technology can help to enhance that value, because institutions are definitely going to be looking for it.

Sophie White: Absolutely. If anyone hasn't read the 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10, there's some great discussion about that as well.

And let's close out the discussion. It's kind of interesting as we're thinking about, you know, the year ahead. 2025 in particular has been a period of really unpredictable change for the world and for higher education. Should we expect this to be the new normal? Is this unpredictability the world that we live in now? What do you think, Jarrett?

Jarret Cummings: Well, I think, the degree to which the, Supreme Court has interpreted executive power has really changed the dynamic between Congress and the White House over ability to drive policy, and we've also seen the limits of the court system in terms of the speed with which, it can, rectify potential overreach from one branch of government or the other. And the willingness of the courts to allow, to give deference to, executive actions pending, a final judgment from the courts. And so that really, I think, enhances the pendulum swing that's somewhat normal in our political system. I mean, certainly not to the extent we're seeing now, but, historically, it is not at all unusual to have significant shifts in policy but they just take place on a more predictable timetable and over a greater period of time. So I think these shifts in how the relative authority of the different branches for different functions has occurred. Yeah, we're really looking at a situation where the next president is going to come in probably with much greater authority over what used to be considered independent federal agencies, a much broader array of options for executive action, and that's going to really drive some pretty significant shifts in a relatively short period of time.

The flip side of that, however, and this is where we're seeing, even with this current administration and this current Congress, the limits of that type of executive action. At the end of the day, if you can't get Congress to pass it into law and get the Supreme Court to uphold it, then the next president can come in and rapidly change those executive orders. And so, there still is a significant role for Congress, and I think we're going to see much more clearly what that looks like after next year's midterm elections.

Sophie White: Absolutely. Yeah, and for our EDUCAUSE colleagues, it really challenges that change management, all that learning that we've been doing for years and years, related to technology and higher ed, so we will stay tuned.

Thank you both for the fantastic answers. Thank you to our audience who came to our session at the annual conference and submitted these questions. We will see you all in 2026.