About a decade ago, discussions of grit and enhancing it in students were everywhere in the higher education student success news and literature. It was the hot topic of the time and one area where institutions could invest to improve student outcomes. As I turn my attention to building institutional resilience in this week’s issue, I think I’ll revisit some of those articles about grit to see if there are additional lessons to be learned for our institutions. After that, we look at increasing public confidence in higher education before closing with a data-based discussion of how students are using AI.  

After reading today’s issue, share your thoughts about how your institution is building a culture of resiliency in the comments! 

Institutional Resiliency 

From Building Institutional Resilience to Adapt and Thrive in Times of Uncertainty | EDUCAUSE Review 

A framework developed by members of the community can help guide the work to make colleges and universities more resilient.

Our Thoughts 

Higher education continues to navigate through a period of prolonged volatility. Between demographic cliffs, public skepticism, political polarization, shifting student expectations, and accelerating technology disruptions, institutions are being challenged to adapt faster than ever. In this context, institutional resilience is now a strategic necessity, allowing institutions to adapt, recover, and evolve in ways that safeguard their missions and strengthen their value to students and communities. 

What I appreciate most about this article is that it doesn’t stop at theory. It offers practical guidance that institutions can start applying right now—no matter their size, budget, or sector. EDUCAUSE outlines clear, incremental steps to get started. Perhaps more importantly, it treats resilience as an ongoing transformation process and not a one-time fix. That framing aligns with how many of us are approaching digital transformation. This isn’t a project with a start and end date. It’s a mindset and operational shift that requires leadership, iteration, and long-term commitment.  

As someone who works at the intersection of technology and institutional strategy, I was especially drawn to the article’s focus on data fluency as a key pillar of resilience. At Evisions, we see every day how good data, that is accessible, trusted, and understood, enables better decision-making across the institution. Data fluency isn’t just a technical skillset; it’s a cultural competency. Resilient institutions empower faculty, staff, and leaders to use data strategically and ethically to anticipate change, respond quickly, and measure progress. In uncertain times, it’s the institutions that can translate insight into action that will thrive. 

Increasing Public Confidence 

From For Once, Public Confidence in Higher Ed Has Increased | The Chronicle of Higher Education 

According to a new Lumina Foundation-Gallup education survey, public confidence in higher education has increased for the first time in a decade.  

Our Thoughts  

I want to be cautiously optimistic about a six-percentage point gain over the past year, especially considering confidence has been falling for the better part of a decade. I want to believe that these results reflect not just a statistical bump, but a shift. After prolonged attacks on higher ed, more Americans are starting to recognize the real value our institutions provide. Research conducted at colleges and universities has shaped nearly every part of modern life–from GPS and the internet to lifesaving medicine. And while plenty of U.S. citizens may feel ambivalent about higher education, our system remains the envy of much of the world, with over one million international students competing for a spot each year.  

However, we also can’t ignore the survey’s reminder that polarization is still the sector’s Achilles’ heel. Thirty‑eight percent of skeptics cite political indoctrination as their chief complaint, and only 45 percent of respondents believe higher ed fosters tolerance and compassion. Even with a six‑point uptick among Republicans, just one in four expresses confidence. That tells me the goodwill we’ve gained is fragile; a single high‑profile campus controversy could erase it overnight. Sustaining this momentum will require continuous, transparent communication about institutional neutrality, viewpoint diversity, and academic freedom. 

The good news? Community colleges are having a moment. Confidence in two-year colleges now sits at 56 percent, a sign that they’ve become trusted hubs for workforce development and regional economic recovery. Four-year institutions should pay attention to the growing trust in community colleges and look to strengthen partnerships and clarify academic pathways as a way to rebuild public confidence. 

In short, this survey offers a cautiously optimistic snapshot, but it also hands us a checklist: keep tuition and ROI front and center, tell stronger stories about research and the public good, prioritize ideological balance, and work across sectors. If we do those things well, this year’s bump might just be the first rung on a longer climb back to real, lasting confidence. 

Student AI Use 

From How Are Students Really Using AI? | The Chronicle of Higher Education 

Derek O’Connell examines the available data on how students are using AI to offer a more holistic picture of their engagement with these tools.  

Our Thoughts 

As a researcher, I enjoy any piece that attempts to replace stories and anecdotes with real data. By stitching together more than a dozen studies, O’Connell shows that student use of large-language-model tools now sits somewhere between one-half and two-thirds of all undergraduates. Usage is climbing fast and differs sharply by level and major. Those details matter when we’re trying to decide whether a blanket AI policy makes sense or whether differentiated guidance for STEM, business, and humanities courses will be more effective.  

Equally important is the article’s warning about “the illusion of competence.” Students may feel like they’re learning while actually outsourcing the cognitive heavy lifting. That should push us to move beyond plagiarism detectors and start measuring how AI is reshaping the learning process itself. It also means we need more rigorous research, beyond classroom anecdotes, that evaluates how these tools impact learning outcomes, cognition, and student development.  

Additionally, this article lands at a moment when institutions feel pressure from multiple directions to move beyond improvisation and on to governance of AI. Fewer than 40 percent of institutions report having a formal acceptable-use policy for generative AI, even as new state-level bills press for clearer guardrails, and the U.S. Department of Education inventories its own AI use cases. In that context, having updated adoption data and evidence of student ambivalence gives faculty senates, CIOs, and provosts something firmer than fear and headlines to work with. It’s the kind of grounding we need for smart policy and meaningful professional development. In short, O’Connell’s piece gives us both the data baseline and the cautionary perspective we need to keep human learning at the center of whatever comes next.