Every month we ask a poll question in our newsletters and on our social media in order to engage more fully with our current and future members. For the month of August 2025, we asked the poll question of:
Inspired by our recent summer series and webinar topic, let’s play: What is the one question you want to ask AI about the future of global education? Go ahead, write it here!
Well, here are the answers to our AI and Global Education questions! Answers have been provided by Claude - one of the AI platforms recently discussed in our summer series webinar.
1. "How can the industry of international education management in the United States restructure to pay its employees better salaries without sacrificing student experiences on study abroad programming?"
The international education industry can improve employee salaries by diversifying revenue streams beyond traditional program fees, such as developing corporate partnerships, consulting services, and scalable digital programming that generates income without proportional cost increases. Operational efficiency through technology automation and shared services models can reduce administrative costs while allowing staff to focus on high-value student support, creating room in budgets for better compensation. Moving toward value-based pricing that reflects the transformational nature of international education, rather than cost-plus models, enables organizations to invest in experienced staff as a quality differentiator that justifies premium pricing.
2. "Who among our government officials will regret their current negative stances on global education in the future and why?"
Government officials who currently oppose or underfund global education initiatives will likely face future regret as economic competitiveness increasingly depends on cross-cultural competency and international collaboration. Politicians who cut funding for international exchange programs, language education, or global citizenship curricula may find themselves defending these decisions when their constituents struggle to compete in an interconnected global economy where employers prioritize candidates with international experience and cultural fluency. Those who frame global education as unnecessary spending rather than strategic investment will particularly regret their stance as other nations that prioritize international educational exchanges and global competency development outpace the US in innovation, diplomacy, and economic partnerships, leaving American students and workers at a disadvantage in fields ranging from technology and healthcare to environmental science and international business.
3. "In an era of rapid geopolitical, technological, and environmental change, how can international education evolve to remain both relevant and resilient—while ensuring equitable access and meaningful cross-cultural engagement?"
International education must embrace adaptive programming that combines virtual and in-person experiences, enabling institutions to maintain connections even during crises while reducing costs and environmental impact to expand access to underrepresented populations. Programs should integrate real-time global challenges—such as climate change, migration, and technological disruption—as core learning themes that connect students across borders to collaborate on solutions, making education immediately relevant while building resilience through diversified partnerships and flexible delivery models. To ensure equity, the field needs innovative funding mechanisms like income-share agreements, employer partnerships, and technology-enabled micro-experiences that provide meaningful cross-cultural engagement without the traditional barriers of cost, time, or geographic mobility, while maintaining deep cultural immersion through extended virtual exchanges, community-based learning, and reciprocal hosting arrangements that distribute both costs and benefits more equitably across participating communities.
4. "Will we revert to education for the elite instead of the current ethos of education for the masses?"
The risk of reverting to elite-only education is real and growing, driven by rising costs, technological divides, and increasing inequality, but the momentum toward mass education is likely too strong to completely reverse due to economic necessity and democratic values. While we may see a bifurcation where premium educational experiences become increasingly exclusive—particularly in international education, private schools, and elite universities—the fundamental need for an educated workforce in a knowledge economy will maintain pressure for broad access to quality education, even if it takes different forms than traditional models. The more likely scenario is a stratified system where basic education remains universal but advanced opportunities, personalized learning, international experiences, and cutting-edge resources become increasingly concentrated among those who can afford them, creating a two-tiered system that maintains the rhetoric of "education for all" while delivering vastly unequal outcomes—making the fight for equitable access more critical than ever to prevent a de facto return to education as a privilege of wealth rather than a democratic right.
5. "What will be the long-term impact of AI on society and the environment?"
AI's long-term societal impact will likely be profoundly transformative, potentially solving critical challenges like disease, climate change, and resource optimization while simultaneously creating unprecedented risks around employment displacement, privacy erosion, and the concentration of power in the hands of those who control AI systems. Environmentally, AI presents a paradox: it could dramatically accelerate sustainable solutions through optimized energy grids, precision agriculture, and climate modeling, but its current trajectory of exponential computational growth threatens to consume vast amounts of energy and resources, potentially offsetting environmental gains unless we develop more efficient architectures and renewable energy infrastructure. The ultimate outcome will depend largely on governance decisions made in the next decade—whether we can establish international frameworks that ensure AI serves broad human welfare rather than concentrating benefits among tech elites, whether we can solve the alignment problem to keep AI systems working toward human values, and whether we can transition to sustainable AI development that enhances rather than degrades our planetary systems, making this a pivotal moment where our choices will determine whether AI becomes humanity's greatest tool or its greatest existential risk.
6. What can universities do to better build social license for international education?"
Universities can build social license for international education by demonstrating clear, measurable benefits to local communities and the broader public, such as showcasing how international partnerships bring research funding, create jobs, and address local challenges while highlighting how globally educated graduates contribute to regional economic development and innovation. They need to move beyond abstract claims about "global citizenship" to provide concrete evidence of impact through data on graduate employment rates, salary premiums, entrepreneurship outcomes, and community contributions, while actively engaging local stakeholders through public events, research collaborations, and service projects that make the value of international education visible and tangible. Most importantly, universities must address equity concerns by expanding access through need-based aid, community college partnerships, and alternative program models, while proactively communicating how international education strengthens rather than weakens national interests by producing citizens better equipped to compete economically, engage diplomatically, and solve transnational challenges—framing global engagement as patriotic investment in national competitiveness rather than elitist luxury.
7. "Will there come a time when AI manages all of the study abroad advising?"
While AI will likely handle increasingly sophisticated aspects of study abroad advising—such as program matching based on academic goals, real-time risk assessment, visa guidance, and even some crisis response—the complete replacement of human advisors is unlikely due to the deeply personal, culturally sensitive, and emotionally complex nature of international education decisions. AI excels at processing vast amounts of data to recommend programs, track compliance requirements, and provide 24/7 support for routine questions, but the nuanced work of helping students navigate family concerns, cultural anxieties, identity development, and life-changing decisions requires empathy, cultural competency, and the ability to read between the lines in ways that current AI cannot replicate. The more probable future is a hybrid model where AI handles the technical, administrative, and informational aspects of advising while human advisors focus on the high-touch, emotionally intelligent work of mentoring, crisis intervention, and helping students process transformative experiences—creating a more efficient system that leverages AI's strengths while preserving the irreplaceable human elements that make study abroad advising effective and meaningful.
8. "How can we encourage students (and ourselves) to be curious and comfortable with not knowing things in an era of quick answers?"
Cultivating curiosity and comfort with uncertainty requires deliberately designing learning experiences that reward the process of inquiry over quick resolution, such as assigning open-ended research projects with no clear answers, encouraging students to sit with ambiguous questions for extended periods, and modeling intellectual humility by regularly admitting when we don't know something and demonstrating how to pursue deeper understanding. We must resist the urge to immediately Google every question that arises, instead creating "wondering time" where questions are collected, explored through discussion, and investigated through multiple perspectives before seeking definitive answers—while teaching students to distinguish between questions that benefit from quick factual lookup versus those that require sustained reflection and exploration. This shift requires fundamentally changing our relationship with knowledge from consumption to creation, celebrating the questions students generate as much as the answers they find, and designing assessments that value intellectual risk-taking, hypothesis formation, and the ability to articulate what we don't yet understand—creating environments where uncertainty becomes a doorway to discovery rather than a problem to be immediately solved.
9. "Given the rise of nationalism across the world, what will global education look like in ten years?"
Global education in ten years will likely become more fragmented and politicized, with programs increasingly shaped by geopolitical tensions that limit student mobility between rival nations, create "education blocs" aligned with political alliances, and force institutions to navigate complex diplomatic relationships that affect partnerships, research collaborations, and even curriculum content. The field will probably adapt through greater emphasis on regional exchanges within politically aligned countries, increased virtual and hybrid programming that can transcend physical borders, and a shift toward "glocal" education that combines international perspectives with explicit attention to local and national identity—satisfying nationalist concerns while maintaining global connections. Despite these constraints, the fundamental human desire for cross-cultural connection and the economic necessity of global competence will likely sustain demand for international education, though it may manifest in more diverse, decentralized, and carefully curated forms that emphasize mutual respect, reciprocal benefit, and cultural exchange rather than one-way knowledge transfer, potentially making global education more equitable and less neo-colonial even as it becomes more politically complex to navigate.
10. "Will the increased use of AI decrease curiosity and interest in traveling to new cultures and places?"
AI may paradoxically both diminish and enhance interest in cultural travel, creating a bifurcated response where some people become satisfied with virtual cultural experiences and AI-generated travel content while others develop even stronger desires for authentic, embodied experiences that AI cannot replicate. The convenience of AI-powered virtual tours, language translation, and cultural simulation might reduce casual travel curiosity among those who mistake information consumption for genuine understanding, particularly as AI becomes more sophisticated at creating immersive virtual experiences that feel "good enough" for surface-level cultural exploration. However, AI's limitations in capturing the unpredictable, sensory, and deeply personal aspects of cultural immersion—the unexpected conversations, the disorienting moments of confusion, the physical sensations of being in a completely different environment—may actually heighten appreciation for real travel among those who recognize what AI cannot provide, making authentic cultural exchange feel more precious and necessary as people become increasingly aware of the difference between algorithmic prediction and lived experience. The key will be how we frame AI as a tool that can enhance rather than replace cultural curiosity, using it to prepare for deeper engagement rather than as a substitute for the irreplaceable human work of navigating difference, uncertainty, and genuine cross-cultural connection.
11. "How can we best leverage AI to take International Education to the next level for administrators as well as participants?"
AI can transform international education by automating administrative burdens like visa tracking and risk assessment while providing students with 24/7 personalized support through intelligent chatbots, adaptive cultural preparation, and real-time language assistance during programs. For administrators, AI enables data-driven decision making through predictive analytics about student outcomes and program effectiveness, while for participants, it creates scalable personalized experiences like customized pre-departure training, intelligent peer matching, and post-program career guidance that connects international experiences to professional opportunities. The key advantage is AI's ability to democratize high-touch, individualized support that was previously only available in premium programs, while freeing human advisors to focus on the complex emotional and cultural work that requires human empathy and expertise.
12. "Will it still be revenue driven in the future?"
International education will likely remain revenue-driven but evolve toward more sustainable models that balance profit with social impact, such as employer partnerships tied to graduate outcomes, subscription-based platforms, and income-share agreements. The shift will be from transactional program fees toward value-based pricing that measures success through learning outcomes and career advancement rather than simply maximizing profit margins. While financial sustainability will always be necessary, the industry may adopt more transparent, equitable funding models that align revenue generation with educational mission and social equity rather than pure profit maximization.
13. "Is the field of int'l education any more robust and resilient than it was when Covid 19 almost obliterated it?”
The international education field is modestly more resilient than pre-COVID but remains fundamentally vulnerable to similar disruptions, having made incremental rather than transformative changes to address its core structural weaknesses. While most programs have developed hybrid delivery models, improved digital infrastructure, and created more flexible programming options, the industry still relies heavily on physical mobility, tuition-dependent revenue streams, and just-in-time operational models that leave little buffer for crisis response. The field has gained some diversification through virtual exchanges, micro-credentials, and alternative program formats, but hasn't solved the underlying problems of high costs, limited accessibility, and dependence on geopolitical stability that made it so fragile during the pandemic—meaning another major global crisis could still cause severe disruption, though perhaps with faster recovery due to lessons learned about remote engagement and stakeholder communication.
