The Rant

Are OPM's Dead & Other Ed Tech Predictions - A Conversation with Phil Hill

January 16, 2024 Eloy Oakley/Phil Hill Season 2 Episode 11
The Rant
Are OPM's Dead & Other Ed Tech Predictions - A Conversation with Phil Hill
Show Notes Transcript

In this episode, I talk with Phil Hill, Ed Tech market watcher and writer of the Phil on Ed Tech newsletter. We discuss Short-Term Pell and get into the OPM industry. Will 2U survive? Tune in to hear Phil's take on the finances of the OPM giant, 2U. We also discuss the growth of online enrollments in community colleges and what advice he would give the Under Secretary of Education.

Eloy:

Hi, I'm Eloy Ortiz Oakley and welcome back to the rant, the podcast where we pull back the curtain and break down the people. The policies and the politics of our higher education system. In this episode, I get to sit down with Phil Hill, writer of the On EdTech newsletter, and well known EdTech marketplace watcher. we'll get into all things EdTech here in a few minutes, and we'll also talk about my recent favorite topic, OPMs, or Online Program Management Companies. But before we do all that, let me welcome Phil. Welcome to the rant, Phil. Welcome to the rant.

Phil:

Well, thank you. I'm very much looking forward to this.

Eloy:

All right. Well, it's great to have you, Phil. I've had the pleasure of reading your musings over time listening to you talk about the online education marketplace, ed tech marketplace, and really value the analysis that you do. I find myself at times disagreeing with you, but that's, that's okay. it's great to have your perspective as part of everybody's education and what's going on because those of us who come from the public side or at least grew up in the public side of things, you know, rarely venture out of our cocoons and look to see what's actually going on outside of the public system, which is especially today is critically important. So. Before we, we talk about all the work that you're doing and, you know, you've been covering the edtech market for some time. You are a big promoter of online learning. You've done a lot of consulting and covered the edtech marketplace for more than 20 years. But before we jump into all of that, I'd love for our listeners to get to know Phil Hill better. So tell us about your education journey and edtech marketplace.

Phil:

I've I've got an engineering background, electrical engineering, but I've never really fit in straight engineering. I was always like on the business side of engineering or between engineers and how things actually get used. And I've thought about actually I had somebody asking me recently about like why I'm so particular about writing given that I'm an engineer and I have no good answer for that. It's just in me. But the way I got into ed tech was I should write a business book about this. My last real job pre consulting, I was working for an embedded software company, built hardware and software real time image processing. And I attempted a hostile takeover of the company. So I had an outside finance partner. I was inside head of engineering and we tried to take over the company. Long story on why that was needed, but I discovered the Very important lesson. that if you try a hostile takeover and you fail You don't tend to keep your job. So, that's going to be my book. But so I just did consulting initially just to pay the mortgage. But as I got into it, I started realizing, wait, this actually suits my style. I like to look at a complex situation and sort of find the non linear core issues that are really driving what's happening. So I just said, hey, maybe this is it for me. But, being that it was niche consulting, I needed a market where my clients knew each other. And, so I asked a couple of clients I'd already picked up, you know, for feedback, and Education Ed Tech was the one where I got the best feedback. And there's a huge benefit of working in a space where you actually care. about what happens is in contrast, I did some work for a warehouse management system company, and that's great. I'm glad logistics works, but that's not my passion. So I fell into ed tech. And then I've been doing that consulting for, as you said, over 20 years at this point.

Eloy:

Wow. Well, that's a, that's a great story and I think you, you hit on the part that sort of drives us all who, who remain in this industry because it is quite a frustrating industry. But, but it does make a difference in, in people's lives. So I think that's, that's what keeps us coming back to this. Let me jump into a few questions for you, and I'd love to start with some of the most recent news the recent news from the Hill, no pun intended, but there's been a lot of discussion over the last year and a half, two years about short term Pell, and there's recently been a bipartisan effort, I know, It's hard to believe that I can actually say that right now, but there is a bipartisan effort in the House, particularly in the House Workforce and Education Committee, and they've come up with a bipartisan bill to expand the Pell program by creating a short term Pell program aimed at financing and supporting the attainment of short term credentials. How do you see this effort impacting The EdTech world particularly since a lot of EdTech companies, online programs are targeting, are targeting these short term credentials.

Phil:

Well, I find, I have to say, I find it ironic on the rant that we start out with one of these cases of, as you pointed out, bipartisan agreement. I mean, it's hard to rant when it's like, you mean Congress is actually doing something and they're doing it together.

Eloy:

well, they're not, they're not done yet. So there's

Phil:

Okay. Okay. Give it a chance. You make an excellent point there. But I actually do think that is part of the story is the fact that it's bipartisan. It is. And. Okay. And, you know, there's a good, well, we'll find out if it goes all the way through the House and it gets signed, but it certainly points the way to what we need because we need to get out of these executive orders and negotiating, not out of them completely, but doing legislating through these other mechanisms. So I think part of it is just the fact that it's, it's important for the progress being made and could help in future efforts to. Reauthorize the Higher Education Act. On the topic itself, part of the reason it's bipartisan is there is an understanding of hey, we need to be broader in our thinking of what students need to get value out of an educational experience and so this topic of short term credentials that are valued in the workplace and then expanding Pell meaning that you're really saying let's help disadvantaged or lower income students be able to do this. It makes a lot of sense. So it's overall positive. I think it's good that it included online education in the option because at one point that was people were trying to exclude that. What does it mean for EdTech? Well, there's been so much talk about non degree work, certificates, credentials. But if you go in that field, it's such a fragmented distorted field, and it's very hard to come up with sustainable models. So it's chaotic. I don't think it's going away, but I think that it's just not at all what a lot of people hope that it is, and there's too much hype behind it. So I think the short term Pell will put some momentum behind true usage with real value coming to a greater number of students. So it'll push it forward, not to the point where the degree is dead and, you know, we never have to deal with that. But it'll make non degree work a lot more sustainable in nature, and more of a real area, and hopefully, it'll make it easier for schools to offer these programs as well. So overall, I'm optimistic about the whole notion, assuming that it goes through.

Eloy:

I agree. I'm optimistic as well when we first started talking about short term Pell, It started in the Senate. It started with people like Senator Tim Kaine and others. So that's why I'm hopeful. you rarely get something that's bipartisan coming out of the House into the Senate where there was already support. So we'll see what happens. But to your point, I do think it is, it is time for Congress to ensure that We're thinking about those workers, those individuals who have not always had the greatest access to a great post secondary education. In the, in an economy that's ever changing demanding more and more skills and competencies from the workforce. This is a great way to target those workers. I get the consumer protection piece. I just had a conversation with Rachel Fishman from New America. And there is a lot of concern around the consumer protection side, but but I think it's time for, for us to recognize all these people in the workforce that need to gain access to quality skills and competencies and employers who are demanding more and more. So we'll see what happens. Mm

Phil:

I would add one more piece as long as we're at it. It adds the element, the 70 percent completion rate requirements for these programs that also pushes us in a good direction of focusing more on outcomes of educational experiences and less on the inputs to the system. So I think that's also a positive move that's going to help in general.

Eloy:

Well, my, my friends over at the Department of Education, we appreciate that you acknowledging the work that they've done around gainful employment. We'll see how those those regs impact the outcomes. But at least we're, we're talking about the right issues, and I think we're, we're finally having the right conversations. So, speaking of having the right conversations about specific issues, let's turn our attention to OPMs, which you've written a lot about recently. And I appreciate your, your coverage of this issue. It's, it's really interesting to me, you know, earlier in the year, we spent a lot of time on the rant talking about the Department of Education's moves to change the definition of a third party servicer, to change the Dear Colleague letter that addressed revenue share agreements. And, there was no secret that they were going after the OPM industry, and other predatory practices that they saw popping up. In, in the marketplace. And so, as I was having those conversations, it was interesting to me how very few people were paying attention to OPMs, other than the big stories that they read about the USC Social Work Program. Very few people in, you know, particularly in, in my side of, of the industry, institutional leaders, particularly in the public's. Had very little understanding of OPMs. I mean, fortunately, good, bad, or indifferent, all this commotion has, has centered a lot of attention on OPMs. But you've certainly written a lot about them. You've been paying a lot of attention to them. And recently the OPM that probably has driven me nuts the most over the last several years, not because I, I don't support. Or see the need for an OPM. I think they are filling a valuable space in the marketplace where colleges and universities that don't have the core capacity to launch these programs can go out and find a partner to do that, but for for several other reasons, they've driven me nuts. But, to you specifically has recently had some challenging news about their future and with the unceremonious departure of their CEO. Based on what you're seeing, what do you believe will be the fate of 2U going forward?

Phil:

I should probably clarify and remind people sort of in my role of, as you described it, a watcher of the industry. My primary role is to say, here's what's happening and here's what's likely to happen in the future. Second, obviously I have opinions, but that's secondary. As I look at what's happening with 2U right now, I think, well, first of all, when I wrote a big article pointing out their financial situation, that this was not just they're making the news, it's not just the departure of the CEO. If you really look at their finances, they're facing potential bankruptcy and not necessarily, and this is stunning because they were the face of the OPM market. They were the. Fastest growing, the biggest name brand, elite schools, you know, how will you ever get in trouble when you're serving you and USC, there is an answer to how you can get in trouble with them, but UNC Syracuse, Yale, all these others, elite schools, it was the face of the OPM market. So the fact that they're facing potential bankruptcy. Which doesn't mean they'll stop operating. It means they need a way to manage their debt and can't do it through normal operations. That's stunning, and it tells us something. And part of what it tells us is the fact that we're in the end of the free money era.

Eloy:

Mm hmm.

Phil:

So separate from bad news, separate from regulations, part of what's happening is the financial environment has changed. And for the longest time we had almost zero interest rates for corporate borrowing. So essentially money was free. The OPM and the revenue sharing model is based on losing money the first few years of every program, which could be a couple million dollars, and then you'll make it up in long term prospects. And the way you grow and finance, quite often, was taking on debt. Well, if you take on debt and now all of a sudden, You don't have free money anymore. Now you have, and 2U specifically has debt that matures over the next two, two, two plus years, that if you go through the math, there's no way they can actually pay off that debt from normal business operations. And, but that means they have to either refinance or they have to use bankruptcy to manage their debt. So, I, one of those two things has to happen in 2024. It's just, it's simple math, whether you like them or not. But part of what that also reflects is the fact that, okay, we might have tried to, the industry or the market might have tried to swing too much for the home runs and not take the growth that was much more realistic. So there's a whole bunch of stuff that's going on, but I actually consider the financial environment to be a bigger factor. currently hitting 2U than the regulations. The regulations might then just be the second blow that blows up the industry, but but right now it's mostly a financial, so they're either going to refinance or they're going to go bankrupt as part of managing the debt. But either way, there's going to be additional layoffs. There's going to be challenges on continuing the same level of operations. It's going to cause schools to say, Ooh, how safe am I with a partner who's on shaky ground themselves and they're built on longterm contracts. So it's going to be a challenging road for them to move forward. And that's one of the big stories to watch next year is how do they manage this transition that's going on. So they'll still be in business. I could, I see it less likely that they sell in the way that Pearson and Wiley sold their OPM businesses. I could see them shedding a unit here or there to raise money. But here's another way to look at it. The debt holders are in control of the company. It's not the stock price. Management obviously has input, but what are the debt holders going to require in order to refinance or to allow them to do a managed bankruptcy? They're going to have conditions behind what they do. It's not just going to be clever negotiating. So a lot of turmoil, big story to watch next year.

Eloy:

I agree. being from California and, and watching the MOOC industry grow up over the years, it'd be interesting to see what happens to edX. I think you know, whether or not they, they shed edX and, and, and somebody else

Phil:

I don't think they can shut edX. They've integrated that too tightly and their whole story now is based on we're going to reduce the cost of the acquisition of a, you know, cost of acquiring a customer CAC because of edX and the millions of registered learners. I, that's one piece of the business. I don't think they can shut. It's too central to who they are.

Eloy:

let me ask you this, given what's happening with 2U and, and its impact on the OPM industry, since they are such a huge gorilla in that industry. And that, and yes, there are other OPMs, other LPMs actually doing pretty decent work out there. what Do you think happens to the industry as a whole, and who do you see emerging as a, as a leader in the industry going forward?

Phil:

Well, it's interesting for a while, and this is some of the writing and the graphics that we've put out is it was really known as having the big four and which was to you, Pearson, Wiley academic partnerships, Coursera with their degrees business does its own opium business and that's grown up to the point where you could really say, okay, it's the big five. Well, consider this. Of the big five, only Coursera and Academic Partnerships are in stable position. Pearson sold their OPM business for 1. Wiley sold their OPM, they've agreed to sell their opium business to academic partnerships for a very low amount. CEO left the company, so, they're becoming much smaller and part of AP and then the two you who's shedding things and facing potential bankruptcy or refinancing. So out of the big five, only two are in a strong position. So who's emerged? Academic Partnerships is emerged as sort of the leader of this field, which I think is surprising to a lot of people. You know, if you had said. two Years ago, who will be the leading OPM provider in a broad basis? I don't think I would have guessed academic partnerships, but they seem to have managed themselves the best and by their acquisition of Wiley, assuming it gets approved that puts them as a surprise leader in the area, if you will. And Coursera is doing very well too. So those two companies.

Eloy:

I agree with that. I think both for different reasons have been able to just continue plugging along and they've emerged as the last individual standing on the island. So we'll see what

Phil:

Yeah. Yeah. Well, the island, as you know, is very shaky because there's still the pot. What happens with bundled services? I think the TPS guidance, which, you know, that I've actually not just written about it, but been highly critical of it. But if it comes back, they're promising, they're updating the guidance for early in the year. If it takes even somewhat similar form, I don't think, that just adds bureaucracy and overhead. So I don't think it blows up the industry. Just adds overhead and a lot more documents collected. I think smaller companies will suffer, not the big ones. But, the bundled services exception, if the Department of Ed chooses to rescind that, And I'll look at your face to see if you have any inside knowledge. But if they rescind that, which gets rid of tuition revenue sharing, that's essentially blowing up the market. And the need is still there, but it'll force the market to almost, not start from scratch, but redefine itself very quickly. So that's one of the, I know we're stealing ahead to like, what do you see in the coming year? Will the Department of Ed rescind the bundled services exception and cause everybody to rethink or get away from revenue sharing?

Eloy:

that's, that is, that is the big one. And, you know, I guess it all depends on what other fires or Supreme Court rulings happen between now and the spring to see when that actually happens. but it is certainly something that. That they're saying we should expect. I think there's been a lot of education on both sides of the issue about the rev share, about, you know, what is a predatory practice, what isn't. The main target has been, and I'm sure will continue to be spend on marketing versus other, other student services. I think if they can nuance that, then I think you'll see the good industry players, the, whether it's an OPM, whether it's a guild or an in stride that has some type of rev share mechanism continuing to hum along, the TPS issue, I think you'll see an expanded definition, but much more narrow than it was when it first came out. So we'll see, you never know what, what, what will come out, but,

Phil:

And I you know, we'll say another point I would add is this is getting on my secondary hat of my opinion, not just what I see happening, but it's, it's a good thing to focus on the question of how much money is going into marketing. And is that really? How we want our education dollars being spent and without something happening more and more money, I'm using the old school names, kept going to Google and Facebook for marketing costs. Is that really what's right for the industry? And I, what I don't see, it's not as much of a predatory issue for me, but it's a very valid question of, hey, come on, this is not the intention of education is to spend on marketing. And so what's a more sustainable model? And that is a good thing that's happening overall is a focus more on marketing.

Eloy:

I would agree. I think Google and Meta have fared very well under the previous way of doing business. So,

Phil:

Yes.

Eloy:

well, we just touched on on, the Department of Ed, but But let me, let me touch on another issue, with regard to how, how you see the OPM market going forward. Your partner, Glenda Morgan recently wrote about the growth in online enrollments in community colleges. And that's certainly something I saw, you know, as chancellor of the system here in California, one day we were railing. At the campuses to increase online enrollments and everybody was saying how that's impossible. All of a sudden you have a pandemic and overnight everybody's talking about online enrollments. And I think a lot of community colleges have finally started to see that some combination of hybrid fully online is their path to sustainability in the current environment. Do you see that trend continuing growth in online enrollments in community colleges? And do you see this as a potential market opportunity for the OPMs?

Phil:

Let me answer that in reverse just to get the first one out, the second one out of the way. No, I don't see this as a big opportunity

Eloy:

Mm hmm.

Phil:

Just the economics involved, the low tuition rates, and if you just run the math, there's just very little opportunity to have a primary partner, particularly Revshare, to work in the community college space. And the times that you do see it, such as Eastern Gateway Community College and you know, you tend to say, okay, there was a lot of bad math or bad acting underneath there. So no, I don't think it's a big opium market. Will online continue its growth and, and community college? Yes. And the short answer is because so much of a community college is serving non traditional students, students with families, working adults, busy lives, et cetera, et cetera. And that's what online is really tuned for, is meeting people where they are as workers. And so the mission of community college to reach so much of the student population. Online has to be part of the picture. So I view the pandemic as not creating much. It just, it got people over the idea of it's just a sideline issue. I think now a lot more administrators say we've got to have a strategy around online and not just react. And given our challenging economic. picture for community

Eloy:

Mm hmm. Mm

Phil:

We've got to find our own models that are not going to match what you see in the, you know, in the, certainly in master's programs. But, so again, that's why, no, I don't think OPMs, but I think online is real. I'm actually working with a statewide system, the community college system in Colorado, and they're moving to more, they've done online for a quarter century now, but they're moving to a course sharing option to get the state colleges cooperating, collaborating on online offerings. So it's not as simple as here's an internal OPM. I think some groups look at, but community colleges, it will grow, but they need their own models for the most part, and it's, it's challenging. It's not easy models either.

Eloy:

Oh, I, I, I understand. you, you, you're familiar with, model near and dear. That is near and dear to my heart. Uh, Calbright college, I think. There was a guy named Phil Hill who called a dead man walking once, but uh,

Phil:

I was wondering if you would bring that up.

Eloy:

well, the dead man's still walking and growing so. Yes,

Phil:

the online CBC online education initiative in California California. And I mean, to your credit, there's trying new models specific for community colleges on. What does this mean? How do we make it sustainable? So yeah, that's those are important initiatives. the biggest thing I would say is it's a real need in community colleges, but you can't, you can't think of it just like the public or private four years. The other thing you can't do is keep comparing it to Southern New Hampshire. It's so many people could say, Oh, we've got a. Stop Southern New Hampshire from stealing our students and we need to come up with them how to compete with them It's like no you can't compete with them come up with your own model and solve a real need that students need They're a national brand different dynamics. So there I had to get on my own mini

Eloy:

that's, that's great because you yanked on a chain that's been gnawing at me for some time. I was very close to Brandman University. Gary Brown was my neighbor for several years here. course, the whole notion of creating UMass Global was to compete with Southern New Hampshire.

Phil:

And it's a pure affiliate agreement, so there's questions of governance and control to make it really work too,

Eloy:

Well, that could, that could be a whole episode unto itself, but, uh,

Phil:

Yes.

Eloy:

the one thing, though, that I do want to highlight that you mentioned, which a lot of people don't think about, is when community colleges are talking about creating online programs, they typically start with sort of the lower level credential programs, the non credit programs, the challenge with creating online programs And you mentioned this briefly transfer level courses, is you've got to get the state colleges, state university systems to accept those credits, particularly in STEM. And that's still a fight that most people don't, don't understand is happening behind the scenes. there's still this notion that at these universities look down at the senates at the community colleges and, and don't want to just fully embrace those courses.

Phil:

Yeah. And there's even just the normal bureaucracy around that, even if technically you can get credit, it's going to take you so much. It's so complicated or it's going to take you so long. Students lose those credits anyway.

Eloy:

So, we, we talked about the Department of Ed and the influence that they've had on the industry that you watch closely if somebody came to you, Phil, and said, if the Department of Education called you tomorrow and said, Phil, what advice would you have? How do we maintain a healthy marketplace? How do we maintain Healthy innovation in the edtech space at the same time ensure that we are protecting consumers because we've seen the detrimental impacts of predatory practices, you know, we We've seen the corinthians of the world shut down overnight and leave a lot of learners hanging how would you answer that question? What advice would you have for them?

Phil:

Well, the first thing I do is write a newsletter that they asked me that question because it would, it would catch me so off guard. But if I had to say a single piece of advice, it would actually gets to the issue about consumer protection. I think, in my view currently, There's clear goals, like we talked about reducing the money going into marketing. But then there's also, you know, there are other regulations looking at how do we make sure students have good outcomes. And the consumer protection angle can get in the way of that, and actually does in my opinion. So my biggest thing would be Would be to say, keep your focus on outcomes completion rates you know, jobs earned lack of default, the outcomes of what's happening and make the consumer protection secondary. I think the conflict between those is what's causing a lot of the problems right now. It's, there's such a zeal behind the, we've got to get the bad actors that they forget. or they're not going after the primary goal, which is more, Hey, we want to have less student debt, more manageable student debt. We want to have better program outcomes, et cetera. So if I had one piece of advice, it would be take that balance of outcomes and consumer protection, do both, but switch the priority of them. And. Again, you know, we could look at it. You mentioned gainful employment earlier, you know, gainful employment and financial value transparency, which is a huge under reported part of that, that gets well beyond gainful employment programs into reporting data on all colleges in university programs. That's another huge shift towards let's start measuring the outcomes and let's stop focusing so much on the input to the system. And that's important and we gotta avoid losing that for, you know, for other reasons. And the other one is a little bit of hubris on what data is available and what we know. And so in other words, understand we only have data to this level, therefore only propose regulations that are based on something solid. So I think we need to do a much better job of As things get proposed based on solid data and acknowledge where the data is not there, like we're talking gainful employment, there's an enormous number of programs, depending on which field of like 85 percent that the data is not available to do gainful employment measurements, and so they get a free pass. It's passed by exclusion for those programs. Well, that that are not. offers so many unintended or some disincentives to the system. Wait, so if I keep my program at 29 completers each year instead of 30 or more, I get a free pass. And so there, we need to be aware of the limitations of the data and craft regulations based on what's real and making sure that we don't create disincentives. But first and foremost, I would have written that newsletter post saying, Hey, they want to have, my feedback.

Eloy:

that is great advice, Phil, and I, let you know that several of uh, friends in the department do watch the rant. So I assure you that, uh, they're going to hear this advice. So

Phil:

Yeah. Well, good. Well, and I, and I really appreciate the conversation too. I mean, I think we need to do you and I, we didn't agree on Calbright, but I mean, it's good to talk about things. So, I mean, I think we need this as we work through these issues and maybe we'll find more of the opportunities like the short term pal where, you know. People will come up with what appears to be bipartisan solutions, so I'm sounding too optimistic now. We need to

Eloy:

is, that is sort of the whole point to why we even started the rant, is just to have these varying perspectives and uh, to have a chance to just rant about things that annoy me. So that was the whole

Phil:

Yes. So it's cathartic, is what

Eloy:

That's right. I have all this pent up frustration over the years, and now I can release, but um, as we begin to wrap up here and you've answered some of the basis for this question,

Phil:

going down

Eloy:

beyond the OPM issue, beyond the issue of um, the Department of Education letting us know what's going to happen to Revshare, what's going to happen to third party servicer definitions. What else will you be keeping your eye on in 2024? Mm hmm.

Phil:

community colleges in particular have gone down. Then obviously the pandemic affected it with sort of a artificial jolt to the system. And we're starting to get to steady state, but in the fall, we saw enrollment increase, but not across the board. There were troubling signs, but they went up. So one of the biggest things is. 2024, we're going to have a much better view of what is our new normal. What is the new steady state of enrollments? And because obviously low enrollments, it's a revenue issue, but it's also a sign that you're not really meeting student needs. It's going to cause a lot of turmoil. So the enrollment story in 2024 is crucial and it'll get us past the pandemic and here's what to expect moving forward. The second thing is is generative AI. I think this is different in nature. You know, when the MOOCs come along back in 2011, 2012, and people were saying, this changes everything, and I didn't buy it for a second. I thought there was something important there, but it was way overstated and not transformative. It just Interesting idea. It's led to Coursera, which has developed a nice, healthy business. It's led to edX. It's led to others, but it didn't transform education, other than getting administrators paying attention to it. I think generative AI is different in nature that it has the potential to truly transform the underpinnings of a lot of education. And in particular, the content generation side, the ability to generate content. And right now people are too much focus on. Oh, it's the greatest thing ever. It's going to destroy education, you know, that kind of thing, but they're not looking at it in terms of a I can democratize the generation of content so it can actually put educational content. even closer into the hands of practitioners, educators, faculty members, people supporting students, students themselves. So that's but one example. I, that's something to watch because I think that we are going to see some transformative moves with AI in a way that we didn't with some of the other. Hyped technologies in the past. So that, so that's the other thing that I'm going to be watching. I don't know what the answer is going to be. I just see it as got some of the nature. Could it be a much bigger deal than people are describing right now or in a different way than people are describing? Yeah,

Eloy:

hit on all the major issues. Enrollment, AI, uh, I think institutions, whether they be brick and mortar, residential college university, or whether they be a community college, those institutions that wrestle with these issues and that actually present an answer that appeals to today's students. learner, uh, learners that a lot more agency than they did just five years ago, I think we'll succeed, and those that don't, we'll see them continuing to, to struggle, so love to have you back sometime in 2024, and we can circle, circle back on those questions, and, and see where we land.

Phil:

well, it sounds great. This has been a great conversation. I appreciate the invite.

Eloy:

Well, Phil, thanks for joining me, really appreciate your work, your analysis, and for those of you who are not following Phil Hill, Uh, what's the best to, to find your newsletter, Phil?

Phil:

just search on EdTech by Phil Hill and Associates. If it's on edtech. philhillaa. com, but if you do a search, you'll be able to find it. Subscribe free option. You can see what we're writing about. If you want to go deeper, you have the options in front of you.

Eloy:

Well, I definitely recommend Phil's newsletter, a lot of in depth analysis of the tech marketplace. So Phil, appreciate your work. And I really appreciate you coming on the podcast. It was great to talk to you.

Phil:

Yeah. Likewise. Enjoy the new year.

Eloy:

right. Thanks everyone for joining me here on the Rant. I hope you enjoyed my conversation with Phil Hill. If you enjoyed this episode, hit the like button uh, continue to follow us on this YouTube channel, and of course continue to find us on all of your favorite podcast platforms. thanks for joining me, everybody, and we will see you again soon. Bye bye.

Uh, uh