Beyond the Webinar: Key Takeaways on an Accreditor’s View of AI in Higher Education

Nuventive’s AI recap continues with a look at the second webinar in our 10-part series, exploring artificial intelligence in higher education through an accreditor’s lens.

Webinar Details: An Accreditor’s View of AI in Higher Education

Watch the full replay HERE. 
Date Recorded: December 16, 2023
Featured Speakers: Dr. David Raney, CEO, Nuventive; Dr. Belle Wheelan, President, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC)


Each week, we’ll distill key takeaways and share short clips from our conversations with presidents, provosts, and leaders in institutional research, assessment, and technology—turning big ideas into practical steps for improvement. This week, we look at An Accreditor’s View of AI in Higher Education.

The Current Landscape of AI in Higher Education

The view from an accreditor’s lens

Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer an abstract concept on the horizon—it is reshaping higher education. From classrooms to accreditation offices, institutions are navigating its promises, pitfalls, and implications for governance.

The central question is not if AI will impact higher education, but how institutions will adapt.

As Dr. Belle Wheelan, President, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) emphasized:

“AI is not going away. Our role is to figure out how to make it work for us, not against us.”

Accreditation standards remain unchanged, but the ways institutions demonstrate compliance and effectiveness may evolve. Dr. David Raney, CEO, Nuventive framed it this way:

“At Nuventive, we ask whether AI makes things better for individuals, groups, and institutions. If it doesn’t improve outcomes, it’s just noise.”

This webinar explored AI through the lens of accreditation and continuous improvement—placing the human element at the center of the discussion.

Dr. Wheelan’s Perspective on AI in Higher Education

AI is already everywhere

  • Students are using AI to write papers.
  • Admissions offices are exploring AI to support application reviews.
  • Presidents’ offices are considering AI for planning and decision-making.
  • Faculty are experimenting with AI in instruction and research

Accreditation Considerations

Top of mind questions from accreditors

  • Are institutional reports written with integrity if AI is used?
  • Are faculty trained to recognize and guide AI use in classrooms?
  • Are plagiarism and misuse policies up to date?
  • Are students being taught to ask better questions of AI tools?

View the video clip HERE. (1 minutes 56 seconds)

Institutional Promise and Risks

Promise

  • Instructional enhancement: Supporting research, personalized learning, and instructional design.
  • Operational efficiency: Turning large datasets into actionable insights for planning and accreditation.
  • Student engagement: Helping students learn how to evaluate sources, select better algorithms, and personalize pathways.

Institutional Promise and Risks

Risks

  • Finance and reporting: Errors in budgets or compliance reports could create major issues.
  • Data interpretation: Incorrect results from AI-driven analytics.
  • Student well-being: Risk of isolation as students lean on technology rather than human interaction.

As Dr. Raney discussed, “AI can deepen our personal connection with technology, but we can’t let it replace the human relationships at the core of education.”

Key Takeaways

Putting it all together

  1. AI is embedded in higher education – from admissions to instruction to presidential strategy. “AI is here to stay. We can’t pretend it’s a passing fad.” – Dr. Wheelan
  2. Accreditation standards remain constant – policies, outcomes, and integrity are the focus – whether AI is involved or not. “It’s not about creating new rules—it’s about applying the same ones consistently.” – Dr. Wheelan
  3. Promise and caution must be balanced – AI can improve efficiency and learning, but financial misuse, poor governance, and student well-being risks are real.
  4. Institutions should learn from one another – sharing successes and failures will accelerate adoption and confidence.
  5. Human oversight remains central – accreditation and improvement must remain people-driven, with AI as a support tool, not a replacement.

“AI should help us improve, not decide for us.” – Dr. Raney

Looking Forward

Check back next week for key takeaways from our third webinar in this series

From Congress to Campus: Discussions on the Impact of AI on Higher Education – Dr. José-Marie Griffiths, President, Dakota State University; and Dr. Michael J. Jabbour, Chief Innovation Officer, Microsoft Education.  Moderated by Dr. Jim Moran, Advisor to Nuventive.  Recorded December 5, 2023.  View the replay now.

Interested in learning more about the Nuventive Improvement Platform?