By Jim Shimabukuro (assisted by Grok)
Editor
[Also see Ed Tech in Higher Ed: Three Issues & Strategies for Nov. 2025]
Introduction: In October 2025, these are the five most critical issues, in rank order, facing Educational Technology in higher education. For each, possible strategies and resources are suggested.
1. Ethical Integration and Governance of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The most critical issue is the ethical deployment of AI in teaching, learning, and administration, encompassing concerns like algorithmic bias, academic integrity (e.g., AI-generated plagiarism), data privacy, and equitable access to AI tools. As AI tools like generative models become ubiquitous for personalized learning, tutoring, and administrative automation, institutions face urgent pressure to develop governance frameworks to mitigate risks such as exacerbating inequalities or eroding trust in academic credentials. For instance, surveys show over 90% of higher ed leaders view AI as transformative, yet 70% cite ethical challenges as a barrier to adoption, with incidents of bias in AI grading tools disproportionately affecting underrepresented students. This tops lists due to AI’s rapid proliferation—expected to influence 80% of curricula by 2026—and its potential to either revolutionize or undermine higher education’s core mission of fair, evidence-based knowledge creation.
Strategy
A comprehensive strategic approach involves establishing institution-wide AI governance frameworks that incorporate ethical principles such as transparency, fairness, accountability, and inclusivity, drawing from models like the ETHICAL Principles AI Framework for higher education. This includes forming cross-functional committees with faculty, students, and administrators to develop policies on AI use in curricula and assessments, while mandating ongoing training programs to address biases and privacy concerns. Institutions should conduct regular audits of AI tools for algorithmic fairness, integrate student feedback into governance processes to ensure equitable outcomes, and collaborate with organizations like UNESCO for global best practices, aiming to foster responsible AI adoption that enhances learning without compromising academic integrity. By prioritizing these steps, universities can mitigate risks like plagiarism and bias, positioning AI as a tool for innovation rather than disruption.
Resources
Models: Stanford University stands out for embedding ethics and governance into AI curricula from the outset, including interdisciplinary programs that train students on bias mitigation and responsible deployment. MIT’s Schwarzman College of Computing exemplifies comprehensive AI governance through its dedicated ethics research and policy development, while the University of California, Berkeley, leads in open-source AI initiatives that prioritize equitable and transparent tools for educational use.
Consultants: Approach James Brusseau, Dyson Professor at Pace University, for philosophical and practical insights on AI’s societal impacts in education; his work bridges theory and implementation. For organizational guidance, consult Huron Consulting Group, which offers tailored responsible AI frameworks for higher ed, or the Wharton Accountable AI Lab at the University of Pennsylvania, a hub for regulatory and ethical AI research.
Articles: “Ethics Is the Edge: The Future of AI in Higher Education” (EDUCAUSE Review, 2025) provides a framework of eight ethical principles for AI implementation. “Ethical Challenges Associated with the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Universities” (Journal of Academic Ethics, Springer, 2025) analyzes student and faculty perceptions to inform policy development. “Ethical Integration of AI and STEAM Pedagogies in Higher Education” (Sustainability, MDPI, 2025) explores models aligning AI ethics with sustainability goals.
2. Cybersecurity Threats and Data Privacy Protection
Ranking second is the escalating vulnerability to cyberattacks and the imperative to safeguard sensitive student and institutional data, framed as a “matter of trust” in an era of sophisticated ransomware and state-sponsored threats. Higher ed institutions, often under-resourced compared to corporate sectors, reported a 25% rise in breaches in 2024-2025, costing millions in recovery and eroding public confidence amid 18+ state privacy laws and federal mandates like FERPA expansions. This issue is critical because edtech platforms (e.g., LMS, cloud-based SIS) handle vast personal data, and failures not only disrupt operations but also amplify the sector’s trust deficit—public confidence in higher ed has fallen to 36%. Proactive measures like AI-driven anomaly detection are essential, yet talent shortages leave many institutions exposed.
Strategy
To tackle this, institutions should adopt a zero-trust security architecture combined with AI-powered threat detection systems for proactive monitoring and rapid response to incidents, ensuring robust protection of student data across edtech platforms. This strategy entails implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA), strong password policies, and regular security assessments, while providing mandatory cybersecurity training for all users to build a culture of vigilance. Additionally, leveraging cloud-based backups and disaster recovery plans, along with vendor evaluations for compliance with privacy laws like FERPA, can enhance resilience against ransomware and breaches. Collaboration with external experts for penetration testing and policy updates will further strengthen defenses, ultimately rebuilding trust and minimizing financial losses from cyber events.
Resources
Models: Carnegie Mellon University is a pioneer in cybersecurity education and practice, with its CyLab integrating advanced threat detection into campus operations for robust data protection. MIT excels through its interdisciplinary cybersecurity programs that emphasize privacy-by-design in edtech tools, while Purdue University models proactive defenses via its comprehensive incident response training and FERPA-compliant systems.
Consultants: Engage experts from the SANS Institute, renowned for cybersecurity training tailored to higher ed professionals, or Cycurion, a firm specializing in threat protection for universities. For strategic consulting, reach out to ProCircular, which provides zero-trust architecture implementations focused on educational data safeguards.
Articles: “Building a Cybersecurity Culture in Higher Education” (Information, MDPI, 2025) proposes a framework for awareness and training to combat threats. “Cyber Security Threats to Educational Institutes: A Growing Concern for the New Era of Cybersecurity” (ResearchGate, 2025) identifies common attack vectors and mitigation strategies. “Cybersecurity in Higher Education: Don’t Let the Hackers Win” (EDUCAUSE Review, 2024) outlines benchmarks for vulnerability management.
3. Financial Sustainability and Affordability of Edtech Infrastructure
Third is the strain of funding edtech amid shrinking enrollments, rising operational costs, and uncertain federal aid, making it challenging to invest in sustainable, scalable technologies like cloud migrations or AI systems. With higher ed facing a projected $10-20 billion budget shortfall by 2026, 60% of CIOs report edtech as a top cost driver, exacerbated by legacy system maintenance and vendor consolidation. This criticality stems from its ripple effects: underfunded tech leads to outdated tools that hinder innovation, widen the digital divide, and contribute to mergers or closures. Exemplars like shared IT services show promise, but without affordable models, institutions risk falling behind in delivering “faster, better, and cheaper” education.
Strategy
A viable strategy focuses on data-driven financial planning to align budgets with strategic priorities, incorporating tools like modified strategic planning frameworks to forecast and optimize edtech investments. Institutions can pursue income diversification through public-private partnerships, grants, and alumni fundraising, while migrating to cost-effective cloud-based systems and automating administrative processes to reduce operational expenses. Emphasizing scalable, open-source edtech solutions and shared infrastructure models among consortia can lower costs, with regular audits to ensure affordability and sustainability. This approach not only addresses budget shortfalls but also supports long-term innovation by tying investments to measurable outcomes like enrollment growth and efficiency gains.
Resources
Models: Arizona State University demonstrates scalable edtech models through its adaptive learning platforms that reduce costs while boosting enrollment. Western Governors University serves as a competency-based pioneer, leveraging online tools for affordable, sustainable degree pathways. Southern New Hampshire University excels in diversified revenue via partnerships and micro-credentialing to offset infrastructure expenses.
Consultants: Consult BCG (Boston Consulting Group) for data-driven financial modeling in higher ed transformations, or Huron Consulting Group for analytics-driven optimization of edtech investments. Kennedy & Company offers expertise in enrollment and portfolio strategies to enhance fiscal resilience.
Articles: “Innovative Leadership and Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions” (International Journal of Management Education, ScienceDirect, 2025) introduces a vector model for adaptive financial governance. “Financial Sustainability Among Higher Education Institutions in the United States” (ResearchGate, 2025) examines budget challenges and diversification tactics. “Systematic Literature Review on the Sustainability of Higher Education Institutions” (Cogent Education, Taylor & Francis, 2025) reviews global integration of sustainable practices.
4. Addressing the Digital Divide and Equity in Technology Access
Fourth is ensuring equitable access to edtech, preventing AI and digital tools from widening gaps in outcomes for low-income, rural, or first-generation students. As hybrid learning expands—with over 50% of institutions planning growth by 2025—issues like device shortages, broadband inequities, and biased AI interfaces persist, affecting 30% of undergraduates who report tech barriers to participation. This ranks highly due to its alignment with DEI goals and regulatory scrutiny; unaddressed, it undermines higher ed’s social contract, as seen in retention drops of 15% among underserved groups during tech-dependent shifts. Solutions like subsidized microlearning platforms are vital to foster inclusive, competency-based models.
Strategy
An effective strategy requires a multi-pronged effort to bridge access gaps, starting with institutional assessments to identify barriers and providing subsidized devices, broadband stipends, and tech support for underserved students. This includes adopting inclusive digital design principles from frameworks like the 2024 National Educational Technology Plan, which addresses digital use, design, and access divides through professional development for educators on equitable tech integration. Partnerships with community organizations and governments can expand infrastructure in rural areas, while policies mandating accessibility features in edtech tools ensure fairness for diverse learners. Monitoring progress via equity audits will help sustain these efforts, ultimately improving retention and outcomes for marginalized groups.
Resources
Models: The City University of New York (CUNY) system leads with subsidized device programs and broadband initiatives for underserved students. University of Texas at El Paso models equity through culturally responsive edtech and partnerships for rural access. California State University implements inclusive design audits to ensure tools bridge access gaps for first-generation learners.
Consultants: Seek guidance from the EdTech Equity Project for product evaluations promoting fair tech adoption, or EAB (Education Advisory Board) for strategies closing equity gaps via data insights. Tech for All, Inc., specializes in inclusive technology consulting for higher ed accessibility.
Articles: “Digital Divide as an Explanatory Variable for Dropout in Higher Education” (International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, SpringerOpen, 2025) links access disparities to retention issues. “The Digital Divide in Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities” (ResearchGate, 2025) dissects contributing factors and solutions. “Digital Divides and Bridges: Equity Implications of EdTech in ESL Programs” (Frontiers in Education, 2025) assesses equity dimensions in diverse student populations.
5. IT Workforce Shortages and Professional Development
Least critical among the top five—but still pressing—is the talent gap in edtech specialists, including shortages in AI ethicists, cybersecurity experts, and instructional designers, amid competition from industry salaries. With 54% of IT staff considering leaving higher ed in 2025 surveys, institutions struggle to implement tools like XR for immersive learning or data analytics for retention, leading to stalled digital transformations. This issue’s importance lies in its foundational role: without skilled teams, other challenges amplify, as evidenced by delayed cloud adoptions taking 18+ months. Mission-driven retention strategies, like apprenticeships, are key to building resilient IT workforces.
Strategy
To resolve this, universities should implement talent management strategies that include cross-training existing staff, offering competitive incentives like flexible work arrangements, and establishing apprenticeships or upskilling programs in emerging technologies such as AI and cybersecurity. Forging industry partnerships for work-based learning and recruitment pipelines can attract skilled professionals, while integrating agile methodologies and analytics to align IT roles with institutional needs enhances retention. Investing in continuous professional development through online certifications and internal mentorship programs will build resilience, with a focus on innovative hiring tactics to compete with private sector salaries. This holistic approach ensures a robust IT workforce capable of supporting edtech advancements without operational disruptions.
Resources
Models: Temple College innovates with bold workforce training integrations, including apprenticeships in emerging tech. Northern Essex Community College exemplifies upskilling pipelines through industry-aligned IT certifications. Delta College leads in community-focused IT development, partnering for talent retention in edtech roles.
Consultants: Approach Huron Consulting Group for staffing crisis mitigation strategies in higher ed IT, or Boldyn Networks for outsourcing expertise to fill gaps. EDUCAUSE experts, via their workforce reports, provide data-backed recruitment insights.
Articles: “We Are Not Okay” (EDUCAUSE Review, 2025) details IT leadership shortages and retention challenges. “Understanding and Measuring Skill Gaps in Industry 4.0—A Review” (Technological Forecasting and Social Change, ScienceDirect, 2024) offers measurement tools for edtech talent deficits. “2025 Students and Technology Report: Shaping the Future” (EDUCAUSE, 2025) addresses tech workforce needs amid digital shifts.
Filed under: Educational Technology in Higher Education |
Educational Technology and Change Journal 
Leave a comment