The high tuition fees, low enrollment rates, and disappointing employment consequences led many to ask whether the college still fulfills its promises. Dozens of small institutions are closed or combined, and they are besieged between high costs and poor demand. These are not isolated failures. They are signals of a system that needs to be invented.

But the real challenge is not externally. It is a structure. And if higher education is to continue to continue with a post -industrial competitive economy, then it must turn from looking at himself as a stand -alone institution to recognize its role in a series of wider talent show.

This transformation requires more than just software modifications. It requires reconsideration of priorities.

Throughout the greatest part of the last century, colleges and universities have kept the industry a distance, and worked on the hypothesis that its goal is to develop knowledge for knowledge in itself. The theory was the king. Practical application is often treated as marginal, or worse than that, professionally. But the world has changed. As well as students’ expectations.

Today’s graduates face a labor market that requires flexibility and applied experience. Many enter the labor market burdened with debt and without the tools needed to contribute since the first day. Students and families started asking more difficult questions. The employers also began to lose their patience. We should not be surprised. Higher education has been late to correct the path.

In many institutions, the idea of ​​consensus is seen closely with the industry with caution. Some believe that this is a mitigation of the academic purpose or a threat to the independence of the teaching staff. Others are simply feared. But these objections make the goal.

Professional preparation should not come at the expense of intellectual accuracy. In fact, the most effective and prepared graduates of the labor market are those who can think critical, communicate effectively, and adapt to the complexity. These are not soft skills. It is the same features that the strict academic study is designed to develop. What we miss is experience.

At the University of Kitering, where I will head it, we have built a model that merges traditional learning with the deep organized participation in the workforce. Our cooperative program is not an addition. It is the basis of our model, and it has remained for more than a century. We do not look at students as customers. We look at them as young professionals. We do not deal with employers as donors. We treat them as partners.

Foundation was founded in 1919 under the name of the Car Trading School, then it became the Flint Institute of Technology before it was acquired by Kitering. General Motors In 1926 it was renamed to the General Motors Institute. Over the next five decades, it was the primary talent engine for General Motors, as it produced generations of engineering and administrative leaders through a deep -rooted cooperative model. In 1945, we added the requirement of the global thesis for the fifth year, to complete our development to a university donor to full degrees. General Motors was stripped in 1982, and in 1998 we became the University of Ketering, which was named after Charles F. Ketring, General Motors Research and one of the first defenders of vocational cooperative education. This legacy still determines our identity.

Today, every student at the University of Kitering takes Community for a 4.5 -year course between 11 weekly academic semesters and paid professional jobs for 11 weeks. They graduate with two and a half years of experience in a specific field, and their profits often exceed $ 100,000. We share more than 600 employers worldwide – including leading companies in the field of mobility, space and self -systems – to present this model on a large scale. Every year, nearly 100% of our graduates get a job within a few months, often with cooperative employers and often in leadership roles. More than 1500 graduates are currently working in executive positions in various industries, including executive positions in Fortune 500 companies.

Festing’s commitment to cooperative education is not limited to connotations only. It turns in the direction. In our model, the industry is the customer. The student is the product. Our mission is to develop this product in intellectual depth and practical ability.

The most effective way to do this is through cooperative education: official, directed, paid and guaranteed job opportunities in the academic evaluation. The concept is not new. This idea arose at the University of Cincinnati more than a century ago and has been supported by institutions such as North Estrene, Drexelle and Antioch. Recently, schools all over the country have started the experience of summer training and short -term employment to meet the increasing demand.

But not all cooperative models are equal. In order for these programs to be more than just lines of the CV, they must be based on a few basic principles.

First, it must be combined with academic content and connected to the field chosen by the student. Second: The work should be objective and supervisory, and not in writing. Third, it must be paid, and the employer must actively participate in the formation of the experiment. Fourth, there should be a sufficient repetition to build mastery, not just exposure.

This feature is not acquired at the expense of liberal arts. Sections in philosophy, communications, ethics, economics, and history are based on their professional preparation.

While companies adopt artificial intelligence on a large scale to automate more tasks at the level of beginners, expectations for human shareholders are high. Employers are now looking for graduates who can play complex roles that depend on the judgment immediately. The pressure on colleges will be more severe to produce graduates really ready.

The risks are real for the private sector. While facing industries for an increasing deficiency in talent, the separation between academic production and economic need is no longer just an educational issue. It is a national competitive issue. Recent federal initiatives, such as Chips, Science, and expanded NSF investments in science, technology, engineering and mathematics teaching, emphasize how much the national policy makers vision need to enhance the talent line.

Business leaders have a role they play here. By forming deeper partnerships with academic institutions, formulating cooperative programs, investing in student guidance, and supporting policies that stimulate applied learning, employers can help fill the preparation gap. This is not charity. It is a strategy.

The future of higher education will be determined by institutions that understand this transformation and act accordingly. As for those who have been bound by old assumptions, they will continue to lose the land. Those who adapt will not only survive, but will produce graduates ready to lead.

We are teachers. But we must also be educated. And now the lesson is clear: the suitability is not inherited. It happened.

The opinions mentioned in the comments of Fortune.com are only the opinions of their authors and do not necessarily reflect opinions and beliefs luck.