Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Covering the War in Iran? TCU has Experts that Are Getting National Coverage

As the war against Iran continues to unfold, global media coverage has intensified, with major news organizations providing near-constant reporting on the conflict and its geopolitical implications. From live battlefield updates to analysis of regional alliances, energy markets, and international diplomacy, the story has become one of the most closely followed developments in international affairs. Networks such as CBS News are dedicating significant airtime to helping audiences understand the rapidly evolving situation and the broader implications for global stability. To provide credible context and insight, these outlets often turn to academic experts who specialize in Middle East politics and international relations. Experts like Ralph Carter from Texas Christian University (TCU) are among those providing research-based analysis that helps explain the historical roots of the conflict, the motivations of the key actors involved, and what developments could come next. Their expertise allows journalists to translate complex geopolitical dynamics into clear, accurate information for audiences trying to make sense of a fast-moving global crisis. Professor Ralph Carter teaches introductory courses in political science and international politics as well as advanced courses in Middle East conflicts, U.S. foreign policy and Russian foreign policy. He is the author or editor of eight books and the author or co-author of over 50 journal articles, book chapters, and other professional publications. His research agenda focuses on the making of U.S. foreign, trade, and defense policy, with a particular emphasis on the roles played by members of Congress. Recently, Professor Carter's expertise was sought out by CBS News in Dallas/Fort Worth as journalists were updating Americans on the current situation in the war in Iran. Ralph Carter is available to speak with the media about the ongoing war in Iran - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

AI in the classroom: What parents need to know

As students return to classrooms, Maya Israel, professor of educational technology and computer science education at the University of Florida, shares insights on best practices for AI use for students in K-12. She also serves as the director of CSEveryone Center for Computer Science Education at UF, a program created to boost teachers’ capabilities around computer science and AI in education. Israel also leads the Florida K-12 Education Task Force, a group committed to empowering educators, students, families and administrators by harnessing the transformative potential of AI in K-12 classrooms, prioritizing safety, privacy, access and fairness. How are K–12 students using AI in classrooms? There is a wide range of approaches that students are using AI in classrooms. It depends on several factors including district policies, student age and the teacher’s instructional goals. Some districts restrict AI to only teacher use, such as creating custom reading passages for younger students. Others allow older students to use tools to check grammar, create visuals or run science simulations. Even then, skilled teachers frame AI as one tool, not a replacement for student thinking and effort. What are examples of age-appropriate tools that enhance learning? AI tools can be used to either enhance or erode learner agency and critical thinking. It is up to the educators to consider how these tools can be used appropriately. It is critical to use AI tools in a manner that supports learning, creativity and problem solving rather than bypass critical thinking. For example, Canva lets students create infographics, posters and videos to show understanding. Google’s Teachable Machine helps students learn AI concepts by training their own image-recognition models. These types of AI-augmented tools work best when they are embedded into activities such as project-based learning, where AI supports learning and critical thinking. How do teachers ensure AI supports core skills? While AI can be incredibly helpful in supporting learning, it should not be a shortcut that allows students to bypass learning. Teachers should design learning opportunities that integrate AI in a manner that encourages critical thinking. For example, if students are using AI to support their mathematical understanding, teachers should ask them to explain their reasoning, engage in discussions and attempt to solve problems in different ways. Teachers can ask students questions like, “Does that answer make sense based on what you know?” or “Why do you think [said AI tool] made that suggestion?” This type of reflection reinforces the message that learning does not happen through getting fast answers. Learning happens through exploration, productive struggle and collaboration. Many parents worry that using AI might make students too dependent on technology. How do educators address that concern? This is a very valid concern. Over-reliance on AI can erode independence and critical thinking, that’s why teachers should be intentional in how they use AI for teaching and learning. Educators can address this concern by communicating with parents their policies and approaches to using AI with students. This approach can include providing clear expectations of when AI is used, designing assignments that require critical thinking, personal reflection and reasoning and teaching students the metacognitive skills to self-assess how and when to use AI so that it is used to support learning rather than as a crutch. How do schools ensure that students still develop original thinking and creativity when using AI for assignments or projects? In the age of AI, there is the need to be even more intentional designing learning experiences where students engage in creative and critical thinking. One of the best practices that have shown to support this is the use of project-based learning, where students must create, iterate and evaluate ideas based on feedback from their peers and teachers. AI can help students gather ideas or organize research, but the students must ask the questions, synthesize information and produce original ideas. Assessment and rubrics should emphasize skills such as reasoning, process and creativity rather than just focusing on the final product. That way, although AI can play a role in instruction, the goal is to design instructional activities that move beyond what the AI can do. How do educators help students understand when it’s appropriate to use AI in their schoolwork? In the age of AI, educators should help students develop the skills to be original thinkers who can use AI thoughtfully and responsibly. Educators can help students understand when to use AI in their school work by directly embedding AI literacy into their instruction. AI literacy includes having discussions about the capabilities and limitations of AI, ethical considerations and the importance of students’ agency and original thoughts. Additionally, clear guidelines and policies help students navigate some of the gray areas of AI usage. What guidance should parents give at home? There are several key messages that parents should give their children about the use of AI. The most important message is that even though AI is powerful, it does not replace their judgement, creativity or empathy. Even though AI can provide fast answers, it is important for students to learn the skills themselves. Another key message is to know the rules about AI in the classroom. Parents should speak with their students about the mental health implications of over-reliance on AI. When students turn to AI-augmented tools for every answer or idea, they can gradually lose confidence in their own problem-solving abilities. Instead, students should learn how to use AI in ways that strengthen their skills and build independence.

AI gives rise to the cut and paste employee

Although AI tools can improve productivity, recent studies show that they too often intensify workloads instead of reducing them, in many cases even leading to cognitive overload and burnout. The University of Delaware's Saleem Mistry says this is creating employees who work harder, not smarter. Mistry, an associate professor of management in UD's Lerner College of Business & Economics, says his research confirms findings found in this Feb. 9, 2026 article in the Harvard Business Review. Driven by the misconception that AI is an accurate search engine rather than a predictive text tool, these "cut and paste" employees are using the applications to pump out deliverables in seconds just to keep up with increasing workloads. Mistry notes that this prioritization of speed over accuracy is happening at every level of the organization: • Junior staff: Blast out polished looking but unverified drafts. • Managers: Outsource their ability to deeply learn and critically think in order to summarize data, letting their analytical skills atrophy. • Power users: Build hidden, unapproved systems that bypass company oversight. A management problem, not a tech problem "When discussing this issue, I often hear leaders blame the technology. However, I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership," Mistry said. "When already overburdened employees who are constantly having to do more with less are handed vague mandates to just use AI without any training, they use it to look busy and produce volume-based work. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." "I believe that blaming the tech is missing the point; I see it as a failure of leadership. Because many companies still reward the volume of work produced rather than the actual impact, employees naturally use these tools to generate slick but empty deliverables." The real costs to organizations and incoming employees Mistry outlines three risks organizations face if they don’t intervene: 1. The workslop epidemic "These programs allow people to generate massive amounts of workslop, which is low-effort fluff that looks good but lacks substance. It takes seconds to create, but hours for someone else to decipher, fact-check, and fix," Mistry notes. "This drains money (up to $9 million annually for large companies) and destroys morale. As an educator, researcher, and a person brought into organizations to help fix problems, I for one do not want to be on the receiving end of a thoughtless, automated data dump, especially on tasks that require real skill and deep thinking." 2. Legal disaster He also states, "When the cut and paste mentality makes its way into professional submissions, the risks to the organization are real and oftentimes catastrophic. Courts have made it perfectly clear: ignorance is no excuse. If your name is on the document, you own the liability. Recently, attorneys have faced severe sanctions, hefty fines, and case dismissals for blindly submitting fake legal citations made up by computers." 3. A warning for incoming talent For new graduates entering this environment, Mistry offers a warning: Do not rely on AI to do your deep thinking. "If you simply use AI to blast out polished but unverified drafts, you become a replaceable 'cut and paste' employee," he says. “To truly stand out, new grads must prove they have the discernment to review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes. The hiring edge is no longer just saying, 'I can do this task,' but 'I know how to leverage and correct AI to help me perform it.'" Four ideas to fix it To survive and indeed thrive with these new tools and avoid the unintended consequences of untrained staff, organizations should: 1. Reinforce the importance of fact-checking and editing: Adopt frameworks that teach employees how to show their work and log how they verified computer-generated facts. 2. Change the incentives: Stop rewarding busy work, useless reports, and massive slide decks. Evaluate employees on accuracy and results. 3. Eradicate superficial work: Don’t use automation to speed up ineffective legacy processes. Instead, use it to identify and eliminate them entirely. 4. Make time for editing: Give yourself and your employees the breathing room to actually review, tweak, and challenge what the computer writes instead of accepting the first draft. Mistry is available to discuss: Why AI is causing an epidemic of corporate "workslop" (and how to spot it). The leadership failure behind the "cut and paste" employee. How to rewrite corporate incentives to measure impact instead of volume in the AI era. Strategies for implementing safe, effective AI policies at work. How new college graduates can avoid the "workslop" trap in their first jobs. To reach Mistry directly and arrange an interview, visit his profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested reporters can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

MEDIA RELEASE: CAA Survey Reveals Canadians Remain Eager to Travel, but Rising Costs, Global Instability, and Shifting U.S. Attitudes Are Reshaping How and Where They Travel

Manitobans are still eager to travel, but how and where they’re going is changing, and so are the risks they may not see coming. New survey findings released as part of CAA Manitoba’s Travel Wise Week show a clear shift toward staying closer to home. Sixty per cent of Manitobans prefer travelling within Canada, while just 20 per cent are planning a trip to the United States.  Global uncertainty, rising costs, and changing perceptions about international destinations are influencing those decisions. “We’re seeing more Manitobans choosing Canada because it feels familiar and safe,” said Susan Postma, Regional Manager, CAA Manitoba. “But that sense of comfort can lead people to underestimate the financial risks that can still come with travelling, even within our own borders.” Staying in Canada and Leaving Coverage Behind While Canadians feel confident travelling within their own country, many assume “home turf” means low risk. This misconception leaves millions exposed to unexpected costs when trips don’t go as planned. The survey found that 64 per cent of Canadians did not have travel insurance for their most recent trip within Canada. Provincial health coverage often provides only limited protection when travelling outside your home province, and in some cases, does not cover services such as air ambulances, extended hospital stays, or trip interruption costs. Recent media stories have highlighted Canadians facing unexpected medical bills, emergency transportation costs, or sudden trip changes, all during trips that never left the country. “People are often surprised to learn how quickly expenses can add up if something goes wrong,” says Postma. “A simple injury on a hiking trail or a family emergency back home can turn a short trip into a major financial stress.” With recent geopolitical incidents in Cuba, Mexico and the Middle East, CAA’s Travel Wise Campaign is focused on helping Canadians understand risk, avoid misinformation, and make decisions grounded in facts rather than fear or speculation. Here are some tips:  Understand what an “avoid non-essential travel” advisory really means: Travel advisories reflect real-time safety risks, and an “avoid non-essential travel” signal indicates rapidly changing conditions that may change quickly, and support may be limited.  Know that advisories can affect your insurance and your exit options: Travelling against government advice can limit your travel insurance, including medical care or emergency evacuation. Coverage must be in place before conditions deteriorate.  Flexibility is essential; review cancellation and change policies now: Travellers should proactively confirm cancellation deadlines, refund eligibility, rebooking options for all reservations and understand the limits of credit card protections, employee benefits, and pension coverage benefits.   Stay connected to Canada while abroad: Canadians should monitor official updates from Global Affairs Canada and register with the Registration of Canadians Abroad service before departure or while on location if something arises.  Rely on reputable sources and be cautious of misinformation online: Canadians should rely on official government sources, established travel organizations, and verified news outlets for travel guidance.  Additionally, the CAA Air Passenger Help Guide helps you understand your rights when faced with common flight disruptions, such as delayed or cancelled flights or lost bags. The guide can be found at CAA.ca/AirPassengerHelpGuide. For more information on travel insurance and how to stay protected, visit www.caamanitoba.com/travelwise The online survey was conducted by DIG Insights from September 29 – October 8, 2025, with 2,0210 Canadian travellers aged 25 to 64 who have travelled outside their province of residence in the past three years and plan to travel again in the next five years, out of which 137 travellers were from Manitoba or Saskatchewan. Based on the sample size of n=2,021 and with a confidence level of 95%, the margin of error for this research is +/- 2%.) 

MEDIA RELEASE: CAA Survey Reveals Canadians Remain Eager to Travel, but Rising Costs, Global Instability, and Shifting U.S. Attitudes Are Reshaping How and Where They Travel

Canadians remain passionate about exploring new destinations, but changing global dynamics are reshaping how and where they travel. According to CAA’s Travel Wise survey, more than half of Canadians (51 per cent) now say geopolitical and economic factors, such as instability abroad, a perception of the U.S. as being less welcoming, and rising travel costs, are influencing where Canadians choose to travel.  Shifting Destinations and Attitudes Travel patterns are evolving. The survey conducted in 2025 shows that only 22 per cent of Canadians planned to visit the U.S., an 11 per cent drop from 2024. Instead, many are opting to stay within Canada (40 per cent) or explore international destinations. The perception of the U.S. as less welcoming, coupled with rising travel costs and global instability, is prompting Canadians to reconsider their travel plans.  "Canadians are adventurous by nature, but today’s travellers are having to make thoughtful decisions," says Kaitlynn Furse, Director of Corporate Communications. "We’re seeing a clear trend toward exploring closer to home and seeking out new international experiences, all while keeping an eye on safety and value." Travel Insurance: A Critical, Yet Overlooked, Safeguard While Canadians feel confident travelling within their own country, many assume “home turf” means low risk. This misconception leaves millions exposed to unexpected costs when trips don’t go as planned. The survey found that 64 per cent did not have travel insurance on their most recent trip when travelling within Canada.  “Recent stories have highlighted Canadians facing unexpected medical bills, trip interruptions, and emergency expenses while travelling within Canada, often because they didn’t realize their regular provincial health coverage or credit card benefits had limits,” says Furse. “If something were to happen, provincial healthcare only partially covers you outside of your home, and sometimes, not at all, covering only basic emergency medical services when travelling in another province.”   Among those who travelled uninsured, 44 per cent believed coverage wasn’t needed, and 29 per cent thought their provincial government’s health plan would suffice. However, provincial healthcare only partially covers emergency medical services in other provinces, and sometimes not at all.  “One of the biggest misconceptions we see is the idea that travelling within Canada comes with less risk,” says Furse. “Unexpected medical costs, trip interruptions and emergencies can happen anywhere, and many travellers are surprised to learn they’re not fully covered.” With recent geopolitical incidents in Cuba, Mexico and the Middle East, Travel Wise is focused on helping Canadians understand risk, avoid misinformation, and make decisions grounded in facts rather than fear or speculation. Here are some tips:  Understand what an “avoid non-essential travel” advisory really means: Travel advisories reflect real-time safety risks, and an “avoid non-essential travel” signal indicates rapidly changing conditions that may change quickly, and support may be limited.  Know that advisories can affect your insurance and your exit options: Travelling against government advice can limit your travel insurance, including medical care or emergency evacuation. Coverage must be in place before conditions deteriorate.  Flexibility is essential; review cancellation and change policies now: Travellers should proactively confirm cancellation deadlines, refund eligibility, rebooking options for all reservations and understand the limits of credit card protections, employee benefits, and pension coverage benefits.   Stay connected to Canada while abroad: Canadians should monitor official updates from Global Affairs Canada and register with the Registration of Canadians Abroad service before departure or while on location if something arises.  Rely on reputable sources and be cautious of misinformation online: Canadians should rely on official government sources, established travel organizations, and verified news outlets for travel guidance.  For many travellers, cancelled or delayed flights remain a top concern. CAA’s Air Passenger Help Guide offers a straightforward resource for travellers facing disruptions. The online survey was conducted by DIG Insights from September 29 – October 8, 2025, with 2,0210 Canadian travellers aged 25 to 64 who have travelled outside their province of residence in the past three years and plan to travel again in the next five years. Based on the sample size of n=2,021 and with a confidence level of 95%, the margin of error for this research is +/- 2%.)

AI In Action Symposium

The AI In Action Symposium, hosted by the LSU E. J. Ourso College of Business, brings together expert voices at the heart of the AI revolution to explore how they have successfully navigated this evolving landscape. The 2026 symposium focuses on the practical implications of AI in business, including hiring AI-ready talent, ensuring responsible and ethical use, and exploring the challenges of implementing AI across both large enterprises and small startups. Speakers Attendees will hear from Louisiana leaders and national AI experts, including… Secretary Bruce Greenstein of the Louisiana Department of Health April Wiley, Senior Vice President at Community Coffee Robert Veit and Julian Tandler from Scale Team Six, a San Francisco-based business accelerator Dr. Tonya Jagneaux, who leads medical analytics at the Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady Health System (FMOLHS) Hunter Thevis, president and co-founder of Lafayette-based S1 Technology …and many more! Details March 20, 2026, 8:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. Registration deadline is March 15. Held on the LSU A&M Campus, in the LSU Student Union Register at lsu.edu/business/ai-symposium Discount available for LSU System employees

U.S. Has a “Checkered History” of Toppling Authoritarian Regimes

In a Newsday article about Long Island Iranian-Americans’ reactions to recent developments involving Iran’s leadership, Dr. Paul Fritz, associate professor and chair of Hofstra’s Department of Political Science, discussed the history of the United States toppling authoritarian regimes, which, he said, rarely leads to new democracies or stable leadership without extensive American support. “The Trump administration is banking on the people rising up and demanding some change to the regime,” Dr. Fritz said. “Foreign imposed regime change doesn’t work very often.”

Is writing with AI at work undermining your credibility?

With over 75% of professionals using AI in their daily work, writing and editing messages with tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot or Claude has become a commonplace practice. While generative AI tools are seen to make writing easier, are they effective for communicating between managers and employees? A new study of 1,100 professionals reveals a critical paradox in workplace communications: AI tools can make managers’ emails more professional, but regular use can undermine trust between them and their employees. “We see a tension between perceptions of message quality and perceptions of the sender,” said Anthony Coman, Ph.D., a researcher at the University of Florida's Warrington College of Business and study co-author. “Despite positive impressions of professionalism in AI-assisted writing, managers who use AI for routine communication tasks put their trustworthiness at risk when using medium- to high-levels of AI assistance." In the study published in the International Journal of Business Communication, Coman and his co-author, Peter Cardon, Ph.D., of the University of Southern California, surveyed professionals about how they viewed emails that they were told were written with low, medium and high AI assistance. Survey participants were asked to evaluate different AI-written versions of a congratulatory message on both their perception of the message content and their perception of the sender. While AI-assisted writing was generally seen as efficient, effective, and professional, Coman and Cardon found a “perception gap” in messages that were written by managers versus those written by employees. “When people evaluate their own use of AI, they tend to rate their use similarly across low, medium and high levels of assistance,” Coman explained. “However, when rating other’s use, magnitude becomes important. Overall, professionals view their own AI use leniently, yet they are more skeptical of the same levels of assistance when used by supervisors.” While low levels of AI help, like grammar or editing, were generally acceptable, higher levels of assistance triggered negative perceptions. The perception gap is especially significant when employees perceive higher levels of AI writing, bringing into question the authorship, integrity, caring and competency of their manager. The impact on trust was substantial: Only 40% to 52% of employees viewed supervisors as sincere when they used high levels of AI, compared to 83% for low-assistance messages. Similarly, while 95% found low-AI supervisor messages professional, this dropped to 69-73% when supervisors relied heavily on AI tools. The findings reveal employees can often detect AI-generated content and interpret its use as laziness or lack of caring. When supervisors rely heavily on AI for messages like team congratulations or motivational communications, employees perceive them as less sincere and question their leadership abilities. “In some cases, AI-assisted writing can undermine perceptions of traits linked to a supervisor’s trustworthiness,” Coman noted, specifically citing impacts on perceived ability and integrity, both key components of cognitive-based trust. The study suggests managers should carefully consider message type, level of AI assistance and relational context before using AI in their writing. While AI may be appropriate and professionally received for informational or routine communications, like meeting reminders or factual announcements, relationship-oriented messages requiring empathy, praise, congratulations, motivation or personal feedback are better handled with minimal technological intervention.