Building an AI-Ready America: Higher Education in the Age of AI

AI in Education and WorkforceHouse Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development · June 3, 2026 · 119th Congress
The House Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development held this hearing to examine how artificial intelligence is reshaping teaching, learning, and administration on college campuses, and what federal policy should do to support institutions while protecting students. Begins at ▶ 0:07:37
Transcript
Highlights

Title

House Higher Education & Workforce Development Subcommittee Hearing on AI in Higher Education

Purpose

The House Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development held this hearing to examine how artificial intelligence is reshaping teaching, learning, and administration on college campuses, and what federal policy should do to support institutions while protecting students. Four witnesses — from Florida State University, McGraw Hill, the University Innovation Alliance, and Harvard's Graduate School of Education — testified on AI literacy, workforce readiness, equity across well- and under-resourced institutions, and academic integrity. Members from both parties raised concerns about cognitive development, data privacy, bias, and the loss of federal oversight capacity even as they voiced support for AI adoption. Begins at▶ 0:07:37

Who spoke

• Chairman Burgess Owens (R-UT)▶ 0:07:37: Opened the hearing by describing AI's rapid spread across student, faculty, and administrative work▶ 0:07:37 and framed the challenge as requiring "thoughtful leadership" rather than prohibition or careless adoption▶ 0:09:19; later questioned witnesses on employer partnerships and institutional redesign▶ 0:34:54.

• Ranking Member Alma Adams (D-NC)▶ 0:10:29: Warned that the administration is weakening the Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, and educational technology offices even as it pushes AI expansion▶ 0:12:39; called for restored OCR capacity and coordinated federal guidance▶ 0:14:14; later pressed Dr. Burns on HBCU resource gaps▶ 0:39:21 and AI literacy integration▶ 1:03:36.

• Jonathan Fozard, CIO, Florida State University▶ 0:16:59: Outlined five national priorities including AI literacy as a workforce priority and strengthening the K-12-to-higher-ed pipeline▶ 0:19:09; described FSU's "RISE" framework and vendor agreements barring use of institutional data to train outside models▶ 0:35:47▶ 1:33:23; cited a 99% student-intern retention rate▶ 1:18:19.

• Dr. Dave Duke, Chief Product Officer for Higher Education, McGraw Hill▶ 0:20:48: Described a "proficiency dilemma" in which students have practical AI fluency but not cultivated professional competency, while restriction-focused institutions produce underprepared graduates▶ 0:21:37▶ 0:22:04; recommended treating AI proficiency as a core competency tied to accreditation▶ 0:23:50.

• Dr. Bridget Burns, CEO, University Innovation Alliance▶ 0:25:10: Said UIA's 19 universities produced over 180,000 additional graduates while increasing low-income graduates by 51% over 12 years▶ 0:25:37; cited ASU's open-sourced "triangulator" credit-transfer tool and Purdue's AI-literacy graduation requirement▶ 0:28:23▶ 0:28:49; repeatedly called for national coordinating infrastructure so lessons aren't duplicated campus by campus▶ 0:27:00▶ 1:12:58.

• Michael Horn, Author & Adjunct Professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education▶ 0:30:25: Compared AI adoption to early factories' slow gains from electricity until they redesigned around it▶ 0:30:55; argued colleges should redesign assessment (oral defenses, real-world projects) rather than just add AI as a tool▶ 0:31:52▶ 0:32:21; cited Western Governors University and UMass Global as AI-native redesign examples▶ 0:46:24.

• Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI), Chairman of the full committee▶ 0:44:12: Said the Chinese Communist Party "isn't waiting for us" and pressed Horn on what it means for a college to redesign itself around AI▶ 0:45:17; asked Fozard how universities should address student uncertainty about AI's employment effects▶ 0:47:25.

• Rep. Nado (D-CA)▶ 0:49:27: Highlighted UC Riverside's use of AI to teach writing rather than replace it and the campus's social-mobility record▶ 0:49:58; asked Dr. Burns whether such tools can narrow achievement gaps▶ 0:50:53.

• Rep. Harris (R-NC)▶ 0:54:39: Asked Dr. Duke how to translate student AI proficiency into workforce-ready skills▶ 0:55:50 and about the effect of the administration's AI executive order on campus innovation, prompting Fozard's example of a 24-hour cross-disciplinary "design sprint"▶ 0:58:03▶ 0:59:06.

• Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR)▶ 0:59:42: Cited Brookings scholar Rebecca Winthrop's concept of "cognitive stunting" from AI overreliance▶ 1:00:07 and UC Berkeley Law's new policy restricting AI in graded work▶ 1:01:03; asked Dr. Burns what safeguards should protect students from cognitive and privacy risks▶ 1:02:21.

• Dr. Andrew (R-MO)▶ 1:05:10: Cited a survey finding 64% of students use AI for coursework and 36% used it to write papers, and that only 22% of employers believe entry-level hires are workforce-ready▶ 1:05:36▶ 1:06:07; read aloud UC Berkeley Law's AI-restriction policy and asked Horn what policies prevent students from "outsourcing their thinking"▶ 1:07:12▶ 1:08:08.

• Rep. Holden (AZ)▶ 1:10:17: Warned that dismantled federal offices leave no clear entity accountable for discriminatory AI outcomes, citing a Stanford study on AI tools falsely flagging non-native English speakers for plagiarism▶ 1:11:12; pressed Dr. Burns on recourse pathways for students harmed by biased AI decisions▶ 1:14:42.

• Rep. Goffman (R-WI)▶ 1:15:21: Asked Horn how internships and apprenticeships build AI-era workforce skills▶ 1:15:50 and Fozard how FSU's IT internship program preserves human oversight▶ 1:17:56; raised concern about ideological bias creeping into AI outputs over time▶ 1:18:42.

• Dr. Sonier (D-CA)▶ 1:21:21: Raised concerns about AI's effects on adolescent cognitive and behavioral development, referencing a warning-label bill modeled on tobacco/alcohol labeling▶ 1:23:46 and a YouTube algorithm example linked to suicidal ideation among young girls▶ 1:26:15; asked Dr. Burns about "first do no harm" standards for AI▶ 1:22:42.

• Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL)▶ 1:26:41: Discussed his bill, HR 8747, the K-12 AI Literacy and Readiness Act▶ 1:27:59; asked Fozard how K-12 AI preparation affects readiness at Florida State▶ 1:28:03 and how universities can preserve critical thinking amid AI adoption▶ 1:29:44.

• Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA)▶ 1:31:48: Asked Dr. Burns how well-resourced institutions should disseminate AI lessons to under-resourced ones▶ 1:32:09, citing K-12's "EdSafe Alliance" as a possible model▶ 1:33:07; asked Fozard about data protection and racial discrimination safeguards in AI-assisted admissions▶ 1:34:17.

• Rep. Mullen (Guam)▶ 1:36:26: Asked Dr. Duke how McGraw Hill expands access to isolated territories like Guam▶ 1:36:53 and asked Horn about balancing AI-driven efficiency with human dignity in work, invoking a statement from Pope Leo▶ 1:38:36.

Key moments

• Dr. Burns testified UIA's 19 member universities produced 180,000+ additional graduates above stretch capacity over 12 years while raising low-income graduate numbers by 51%▶ 0:25:37.

• Horn's central argument: "AI alone will not improve higher education... What matters is whether colleges redesign their resources, processes and priorities around it," drawing on the electricity-adoption analogy▶ 0:30:25▶ 0:30:55.

• Duke described a "proficiency dilemma": students gain practical AI fluency through unsupervised use but not cultivated professional competency, while restriction-focused campuses produce graduates who avoid rather than understand AI▶ 0:21:37▶ 0:22:04.

• Adams and Owens sparred implicitly over federal role: Adams said the administration is "weakening the very institutions responsible for protecting students" including OCR and ed-tech offices▶ 0:12:39, while Owens framed the hearing around opportunity and institutional leadership▶ 0:09:19.

• Dr. Andrew cited survey data that 64% of students use AI for coursework, 36% for writing papers, and only 22% of employers think entry-level hires are workforce-ready▶ 0:05:36.

• Burns noted ASU was the first university to sign an enterprise-level contract with OpenAI and open-sourced its "triangulator" credit-evaluation tool, later adopted by seven UIA institutions▶ 0:28:23▶ 0:42:50.

• UC Riverside's AI-assisted Socratic writing tutoring was cited by Nado and Burns as improving learning without replacing student work, tied to UCR's ranking as a top school for social mobility▶ 0:49:58▶ 1:22:00.

• Bonamici cited UC Berkeley Law's new policy banning AI in conceptualization, revision, translation, and exams, quoting it directly as requiring that "thinking remains the sine qua non of good lawyering"▶ 1:01:03▶ 1:07:12.

• Sonier raised a YouTube algorithm example in which roughly 30% of targeted adolescent girls were shown content escalating toward suicidal ideation, using it to argue for AI safety regulation▶ 1:26:15.

• Burns repeatedly identified the absence of a national coordinating body — analogous to K-12's EdSafe Alliance — as the central structural gap preventing shared AI lessons across under-resourced institutions▶ 0:27:00▶ 1:33:07.

Metadata

CommitteeHouse Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development
Chamber / CongressHouse · 119th Congress
DateJune 3, 2026
TypeHearing
Witnesses
Mr. Michael Horn — Author & Adjunct Professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education
Mr. Michael Horn — Author & Adjunct Professor, Harvard Graduate School of Education
Mr. Jonathan Fozard — Chief Information Officer, Florida State University
Dr. Dave Duke — Chief Product Officer for Higher Education, McGraw Hill
Dr. Bridget Burns — CEO, University Innovation Alliance
Videoyoutube
Transcript285 caption blocks · 16,489 words · 1:46:29 runtime
EventCongress.gov 119338