Hello, everyone, and welcome back to the kitchen! This is where we put on our chef hats to deconstruct the complex, sometimes confusing, world of higher education. As I have mentioned it before, this blog series isn’t about giving you a single, perfect recipe; it’s a collection of my reflections and learning from my Ed.D. program. Today’s entry in my culinary journal is a reflection of what I’m cooking up in my “Organizational Theory in Complex Organizations” class and it was inspired by a particularly savory read, “School improvement in high-capacity schools: Educational leadership and living systems ontology” by Coral Mitchel and Larry Sackney.

It got me thinking about the “University of the Future” and how we, as chefs in the kitchen of higher education, need to evolve alongside our K-12 partners to serve up opportunities for all students.

For a long time, the American university was a classic steakhouse—a “managed system” with a fixed menu. Students were expected to come in, order a specific four-year meal, and leave with a diploma. This model, while reliable, wasn’t built for a world that’s constantly changing. It was like trying to prepare a five-course meal with only a single, well-used recipe book.

But the world has changed. The best institutions are now running a vibrant, adaptive kitchen—a “living paradigm.” This isn’t about throwing out the menu entirely; it’s about making sure our pantry is stocked with fresh, flexible, and personalized ingredients. This approach allows students to learn at their own pace, to mix and match courses, and to develop the skills they’ll need for jobs that don’t even exist yet.

---

The shift to this living paradigm isn’t just an American trend; it’s a global movement with some incredible examples to learn from. Countries are pioneering systemic changes that impact education from kindergarten all the way through to higher education (K-20).

Starting in the 1970s, Finland embarked on a multi-decade reform to create a more equitable and student-centered system. By the 1990s, they had a model where standardized testing was minimal and teachers were trusted professionals given autonomy over curriculum and assessment. Their philosophy is that children should learn at their own pace and that the purpose of education is to foster well-being and a love of learning. This system has consistently produced some of the world’s highest literacy and numeracy scores, proving that a focus on student well-being, rather than rigid testing, can lead to incredible success.

In the mid-1990s, Estonia launched the “Tiger Leap” program, an ambitious plan to bring internet access and computers to every school. This early investment laid the foundation for a fully digital education system. Today, Estonia’s schools are largely “in the cloud,” with a digital ecosystem that makes it easy for students and teachers to access resources and for the government to collect data for evidence-based policy decisions. This digital fluency is integrated throughout the K-20 system, making Estonian students some of the most digitally literate in the world and allowing for a seamless transition to online learning during a crisis.

More recently, Singapore began its “SkillsFuture” movement in 2014, a national effort to promote lifelong learning and skills mastery. It recognizes that a single degree is no longer enough to succeed in a rapidly evolving economy. Through the program, citizens receive credits to pay for thousands of pre-approved courses, from data analytics to new-age digital marketing. The initiative is a powerful example of a living system that views education not as a finite period in one’s life, but as a continuous journey from the early grades all the way through adulthood.

These international recipes have shown us that a successful shift requires a cohesive, strategic approach that addresses the entire educational ecosystem.

We don’t have to look overseas for inspiration; some of the most delicious new recipes are being cooked right here at home, in the USA.

The shift to this living paradigm began in earnest in the early 2010s, as a handful of visionary institutions started experimenting with technology and data to better serve their students. Among the first was Purdue University, which introduced its “Course Signals” system around 2010. The system was like a high-tech kitchen timer, using data analytics to give students and faculty an early warning. A predictive algorithm analyzed student data to display a “traffic light” (red, yellow, or green) alerting students if they were at risk of failing. This wasn’t a scolding; it was a powerful nudge to get help sooner. In early implementations, this proactive approach led to students with a “red” light being more motivated to change their behavior, and research showed that a significant number of students who engaged with the system had higher grades and were more likely to persist.

Just a year or so later, Arizona State University (ASU) began a large-scale transformation with its own adaptive courseware. Their goal was to use technology to address high failure rates in foundational math courses. ASU’s system identified where each student was struggling in real-time and provided a customized learning path. This personal touch proved to be a key ingredient in helping students master concepts. In some of their introductory courses, student success rates—defined as earning a C or better—soared from around 50% to over 80%. This allowed ASU to produce more successful graduates while also creating a model for faculty innovation, as instructors could now focus more on mentoring and less on remedial instruction.

The next major leap came in 2014 when Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) launched its ground-breaking Online Master of Science in Computer Science (OMSCS) program. This initiative was a massive step beyond traditional distance learning. It was designed to bring a top-ranked graduate degree to a massive global audience at a fraction of the cost. The program’s design, which uses AI to handle routine student questions and a collaborative online community, has been wildly successful. In just a few years, it has produced over 10,000 graduates, proving that a high-quality education can be delivered affordably and at scale. The program’s success has also pushed faculty to innovate new ways of teaching and has shown that high-quality, high student satisfaction, and no compromise on academic rigor can all coexist in a living system.

The shift to a living system is about creating a symbiotic relationship where technology, pedagogy, and institutional goals are aligned to ensure students are set up for success from the moment they apply to long after they graduate. These institutions started a movement that shows the American kitchen can serve up a delicious, accessible, and personalized feast for all.

So, what is the final recipe for a “living” university? It’s not a single dish, but a feast of interconnected components, each requiring a fundamental shift in how we operate.

The first shift is from a fixed curriculum to a personalized, modular education. In a living system, a student’s education is no longer a rigid, sequential path. Instead, it is a dynamic journey composed of stackable credentials, micro-certifications, and flexible degrees that a student can earn over a lifetime. This allows the student to be the author of their own educational story, a change that requires us to move away from a one-size-fits-all approach and embrace a “60-year curriculum” that supports continuous learning.

The second shift is from a faculty as a sole expert to a faculty as an architect and facilitator. In this new paradigm, the role of the professor goes beyond just delivering content. They are designers of learning experiences, mentors, and partners in a student’s journey. This requires new models of faculty roles, from instructional-focused positions to hybrid roles that combine teaching with research. For this to work, we must move away from a tenure-only system and create new performance-based career pathways that reward innovation and student success.

Finally, the third shift is from periodic, compliance-based governance to continuous, data-driven strategy. For the university to be truly adaptive, its leaders must move beyond a five-year plan and embrace an ongoing cycle of improvement. This means using data, like Purdue’s Course Signals, to make real-time decisions about student support and institutional resources. It also requires a change in accreditation, moving away from a high-stakes, periodic review to a continuous, supportive partnership that uses data to ensure quality and value. This is how we ensure that our institutions are not just surviving, but thriving, in a world that never stops changing.