Education
AI-Powered, Visual and Auditory-Based Video, and a Focus on the Learning Moment — Campus Technology
Stephen Laster at Panopto: AI-Powered, Visual and Auditory-Based Video, and a Focus on the Learning Moment
A Q&A with Stephen Laster
At Campus Technology, we’ve followed Stephen Laster’s career through more than two decades of senior leadership roles, “driving impact,” as he says, at organizations leading some of the most significant directions and change in the technology and education markets. His work has included positions at McGraw-Hill Education, Ellucian, Harvard Business School, and Babson College. Most recently, he was president of D2L. Here, we ask Laster for an update since taking the helm as CEO at Panopto this past May, 2025.
Mary Grush: For 20-plus years, you’ve worked in a diverse range of technology markets. About four months ago, you chose to move to Panopto. What makes Panopto a good fit for your career now?
Stephen Laster: That’s a great question. I always look at the opportunities and organizations I join through the lens of, “How can I bring what I do well to drive impact?“ And I’ve done that for my entire career.
Panopto resonates deeply, Mary, as we’ve shared in prior conversations about dyslexia. I personally learn differently, just as a lot of the world learns differently. I am very much a visual and auditory-based learner. I actually have a near-perfect visual memory, so I can see things from many, many years ago, but as a proud dyslexic, I don’t really learn that well from books.
The opportunity to join Panopto has come at a time when the world needs better access to education — now more than ever. I believe that Panopto allows institutions to reach learners with all kinds of learning styles and different ways of thinking, particularly visually and auditorily. I think that’s very important right now, and I’m happy that I can help make an impact on that front.
Grush: Video has been around for quite a while in education, of course, but is it becoming even more important to education? How is that reflected in Panopto’s mission?
Laster: To answer that I’d like to bring the conversation back to visual and auditory learners. Video has long been and continues to be very important, but let’s just break it down for a minute. Panopto was born to solve a really important problem: How do we capture, through video and through audio, what’s happened in the classroom? And then, how do we make use of that — to extend the classroom, or for remediation, or to create subsequent content to engage other learners who weren’t present? That mission remains incredibly important.
Further, the advent of AI has made doing all of that much more scalable. It’s allowed us to do things like better summarization, or better transcription at a lower cost, while breaking down barriers of language, culture, and learning style.
And now, we have the advent of Elai, which I’m very excited about. We’ve recognized that not everything happens in lecture anymore. There are some amazing ideas in learning institutions that are captured statically — in pictures, text, or PowerPoints. Through Elai, we’re able to unlock static content and turn it into avatar-driven video with feedback, and strikingly, with engagement.
Through Elai, we’re able to unlock static content and turn it into avatar-driven video with feedback, and strikingly, with engagement.
Again, the problem Panopto was created to solve is how to extend the classroom in ways that leverage visual and auditory-based learning. Is that still important today? It’s absolutely critical now, as, for example, it becomes more difficult for students to get to physical classrooms for various reasons, or as AI and other forces disrupt what it means to maintain a set of skills, causing people to go back for re-education. The ability to learn things through video, through visual and auditory-based learning, allows many, many more people to acquire the skills they need to be successful. I think that’s pretty cool.
Education
We cannot afford to dismantle Head Start, a program that builds futures, strengthens families and delivers proven returns
The first words I uttered after successfully defending my dissertation were, “Wow, what a ride. From Head Start to Ph.D.!” Saying them reminded me where it all began: sitting cross-legged with a picture book at the Westside Head Start Center, just a few blocks from my childhood home in Jackson, Mississippi.
I don’t remember every detail from those early years, but I remember the feeling: I was happy at Head Start. I remember the books, the music, the joy. That five-minute bus ride from our house to the Westside Center turned out to be the shortest distance between potential and achievement.
And my story is not unique. Every year, hundreds of thousands of children — kids whose names we may never know, though our futures depend on them — walk through Head Start’s doors. Like me, they find structure, literacy, curiosity and belonging.
For many families, Head Start is the first place outside the home where a child’s potential is nurtured and celebrated. Yet, this program that builds futures and strengthens families is now under threat, and it’s imperative that we protect it.
Years later, while training for high school cross-country meets, I’d run past the park next to the center and pause, flooded with memories. Head Start laid the foundation for everything that followed. It gave me structure, sparked my curiosity and built my early literacy skills. It even fed my short-lived obsession with chocolate milk.
More than that, Head Start made me feel seen and valued.
Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.
There’s a clear, unbroken line between the early lessons I learned at Head Start and the doctoral dissertation I defended decades later. Head Start didn’t just teach me my ABCs — it taught me that learning could be joyful, that I was capable and that I belonged in a classroom.
That belief carried me through elementary school, Yale and George Washington University and to a Ph.D. in public policy and public administration. Now, as part of my research at the Urban Institute, I’m working to expand access to high-quality early learning, because I know firsthand what a difference it makes.
Research backs up what my story shows: Investments in Head Start and high-quality early childhood education change lives by improving health and educational achievement in later years, and benefit the economy. Yet today there is growing skepticism about the value of Head Start, reflecting an ongoing reluctance to give early childhood education the respect it deserves.
If Head Start funding is cut, thousands of children — especially from communities like mine in Jackson, where families worked hard but opportunities were limited — could lose access to a program that helps level the playing field. These are the children of young parents and single parents, of working families who may not have many other options but still dare to dream big for their kids.
And that is why I am worried. Funding for Head Start has been under threat. Although President Donald Trump’s proposed fiscal 2026 budget would maintain Head Start funding at its current $12.3 billion, Project 2025, the influential conservative policy document, calls for eliminating the program. The administration recently announced that Head Start would no longer enroll undocumented children, which a group of Democratic attorneys general say will force some programs to close.
Related: Head Start is in turmoil
I feel compelled to speak out because, for our family, Head Start wasn’t just a preschool — it was the beginning of everything. For me, it meant a future I never could have imagined. For my mother, Head Start meant peace of mind — knowing her son was in a nurturing, educational environment during the critical developmental years. My mother, Nicole, brought character, heart and an unwavering belief in my potential — and Head Start helped carry that forward.
My mother was just 18 when she enrolled me in Head Start. “A young mother with big dreams and limited resources,” she recounted to me recently, adding that she had “showed up to an open house with a baby in my arms and hope in my heart.”
Soon afterward, Mrs. Helen Robinson, who was in charge of the Head Start in Jackson, entered our lives. She visited our home regularly, bringing books, activities and reassurance. A little yellow school bus picked me up each morning.
Head Start didn’t just support me, though. It also supported my mother and gave her tips and confidence. She took me to the library regularly and made sure I was always surrounded by books and learning materials that would challenge and inspire me.
It helped my mother and countless others like her gain insight into child development, early learning and what it means to advocate for their children’s future.
Twenty-five years after those early mornings when I climbed onto the Head Start bus, we both still think about how different our lives might have been without that opportunity. Head Start stood beside us, and that support changed our lives.
As we debate national priorities, we must ask ourselves: Can we afford to dismantle a program that builds futures, strengthens families and delivers proven returns?
My family provides living proof of Head Start’s power.
This isn’t just our story. It is the story of millions of others and could be the story of millions more if we choose to protect and invest in what works.
Travis Reginal holds a doctorate in public policy and public administration and is a graduate of the Head Start program, Yale University and George Washington University. He is a former Urban Institute researcher.
Contact the opinion editor at opinion@hechingerreport.org.
This story about the Head Start funding was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.
In April, the Trump administration announced drastic funding cuts to the National Endowment for the Humanities. Those cuts are harming education groups that rely on NEH grants — and students like me.
Among the organizations that lost funding was National History Day, a nonprofit that runs a half-century-old competition engaging some 500,000 students annually in original historical research. It also provides teachers with resources and training. For many schools, the annual event is cemented into the social studies curriculum.
The cuts sliced $825,000 from National History Day’s budget over several years, the group said. Meanwhile, more than half of its state-level competitions rely in part or entirely on funding from state humanities councils — which were also devastated by the cuts.
Without that money, National History Day’s leaders say some states will likely have to cancel their programs altogether, and the national event will be scaled back, too.
The loss of funding is discouraging to me, a high school senior in Texas who has witnessed the passage of legislation in my state and around the country in recent years limiting what can be taught in history and social studies classes. National History Day allowed me the chance to expand on what I felt was missing or inaccurate in my textbooks. The fact that there might no longer be a structured way for students to navigate incomplete curricula feels scary and is an intentional part of a broader effort by lawmakers to change how history is understood and what students can know about their past.
Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education.
At my sixth to 12th grade school in El Paso, Texas, History Day is an annual event that all middle school students participate in from September to January. They choose their topics and presentations and work to research and create a finished project as historians.
In February, we hold a schoolwide competition, a highly anticipated event in which high schoolers serve as judges and mentors for middle school projects, ultimately deciding which students advance. High schoolers automatically advance. We have become known locally as an “NHD school” and fostered a community of students who love history.
I have participated in local and state History Day fairs since seventh grade, and the program allowed me to grow as a writer and researcher. In my junior year, I wrote a paper about British imperialism and how it led to violence during the 1947 Partition between India and Pakistan, and the lasting divisions today.
I scoured dozens of oral histories of Partition survivors, including interviewing family members about their experiences. The self-guided nature of National History Day, the resources from my El Paso branch, and the support from my history teacher made my paper more than a project — but a connection with my Pakistani identity. I was able to go beyond just learning about the Partition, but also understanding how it shaped my family’s lives.
Related: A school district singled out by Trump says it teaches ‘whole truth history’
Many other students have had similar experiences with the program.
National History Day “is a way to explore a niche or smaller area of history that I wouldn’t be able to as deeply in a classroom,” said Tessa Kipnis, a high school senior at Westtown School in Pennsylvania, who wrote her project on the Rwandan genocide and France’s role in it. “It’s helped me to expand upon my passion for storytelling and self-motivated research.”
Added Kipnis: “It’s the student-led inquiry that is really going to dissipate with the funding being cut. And I feel with our current situation with the Department of Education and the funding and lack thereof, it’s hard not to view this funding being cut as part of a bigger piece.”
Many communities may be able to raise money to keep their local programs going. But even if my local or state National History Day programs continue, I know that not all communities will have the same resources. In turn, the national event will be missing vital perspectives of students, especially those from low-income and marginalized communities.
Part of what makes History Day so special is interacting with other projects and building community with other students. Now, it feels exclusive.
Anita Kuriakose, a high school junior at Academies at Englewood in New Jersey, told me she shares those concerns. “[NEH funding cuts] may cause other students to be cut from the research experience, and not be able to gain more insight into historical perspectives. Students won’t be given the chance to think creatively or research more about history outside the classroom.”
Related: Teachers struggle to teach the Holocaust without running afoul of new ‘divisive concepts’ rules
Lynne O’Hara, deputy director of educational programs at National History Day and a former social studies teacher, also told me that National History Day hinges on accessibility. “History Day is a program that should be available to all students,” she said.
“Sometimes in education, we’re just pushed to do so much and give students a little taste of all these things. But you get one topic that you really have control over and command over, and I think that really empowers students,” added O’Hara. “When I would ask my students on the last day, ‘What’s the thing you did that you were most proud of in this class?’ Ninety-nine percent of them said, ‘It was my History Day project.’”
O’Hara told me the sense of community at my school around National History Day is common among participating schools. “When teachers participate over the years, not only does it change the way they teach, but it also creates these school cultures.”
The idea that some students will not be able to experience History Day and the thrill that comes with choosing what they research is heartbreaking. Many history curricula already discuss the past in a way that doesn’t allow nuance, and National History Day gave me a path to explore the people, events and injustices that are traditionally ignored.
Organizations including the Oregon Humanities and the Federation of State Humanities Councils, the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association and the Modern Language Association have sued over the cuts. In August, a federal judge characterized the Trump administration’s abrupt cancellation of the grants as unlawful and allowed the case to proceed.
The theme for the 2025-26 National History Day event is “Revolution, Reaction, Reform in History.” I hope that in six months, I will be able to present at my local fair and that National History Day will continue to provide students nationwide with a necessary platform.
Marium Zahra is a high school senior and independent journalist based in El Paso, Texas. Her work covering social justice and youth has been published in outlets including The Nation, Prism Reports, Yes! Magazine and The Progressive.
Contact editor Caroline Preston at 212-870-8965, via Signal at CarolineP.83 or on email at preston@hechingerreport.org.
This story about National History Day was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.
editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links
to our partners.
Learn More
Anthropic has released its third Economic Index, a wide-ranging study of Claude AI usage across countries, US states, and enterprises. The September 2025 report shows coding still accounts for the largest share of activity worldwide, yet education and science are becoming more prominent.
The study also found that automation is increasingly common, with more users trusting Claude to complete entire tasks. Anthropic said the trend offers an early look at how AI is reshaping work and may determine which workers and regions gain the most from the technology.
From debugging code to classroom teaching
Software development remains Claude’s most common use case, making up more than a third of activity globally. But the kind of coding has shifted. New code creation doubled over the past eight months, while debugging declined, suggesting users rely on Claude for more advanced outputs in a single attempt.
Claude AI usage for education and science purposes also expanded. The share of educational tasks rose from about 9% at the start of 2025 to more than 12% by August. Scientific tasks climbed from 6% to over 7%. In contrast, business and financial operations fell from 6% to 3%, and management dropped from 5% to 3%.
Automation vs augmentation in AI tasks
Anthropic tracked not only what tasks Claude handled but also how people worked with the model. Conversations where users gave Claude a job and let it run with minimal input jumped from 27% in late 2024 to 39% in August 2025. For the first time, automation outweighed collaboration overall, making the balance of automation vs augmentation in AI tasks a central trend.
The AI company said two forces may explain the shift: improvements in Claude’s ability to deliver accurate results on the first try, and rising user confidence. That combination has made it more common for people to delegate complex tasks to the AI tool fully, rather than iterating step by step.
Global and enterprise patterns
The US accounted for 21.6% of global usage, far ahead of India, Brazil, Japan, and South Korea. Adjusted for population, smaller high-income countries led per capita. Israel, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea all used Claude far more than expected based on their working-age population.
Within the US, Washington, DC showed the highest per-capita usage, followed by Utah, California, New York, and Virginia. Anthropic said local economies shaped how people used the model, with IT-related requests most common in California and tourism tasks overrepresented in Hawaii.
Enterprise adoption leaned more heavily on automation than consumer use. About 44% of API traffic involved coding, compared with 36% on Claude.ai. Administrative tasks were also frequent, while education and creative work were far less common. Nearly eight in 10 business interactions were automated, showing companies are embedding Claude directly into workflows.
Anthropic said it will continue updating its Economic Index and releasing data to help researchers and policymakers prepare for AI’s economic effects. The findings point to an uneven but accelerating shift: coding still leads, but education, science, and automation are taking a growing share of AI’s early role in the economy.
Read about Anthropic’s recent decision to give Claude power to end harmful conversations and protect “model welfare.”
-
Business3 weeks agoThe Guardian view on Trump and the Fed: independence is no substitute for accountability | Editorial
-
Tools & Platforms1 month ago
Building Trust in Military AI Starts with Opening the Black Box – War on the Rocks
-
Ethics & Policy2 months agoSDAIA Supports Saudi Arabia’s Leadership in Shaping Global AI Ethics, Policy, and Research – وكالة الأنباء السعودية
-
Events & Conferences4 months agoJourney to 1000 models: Scaling Instagram’s recommendation system
-
Jobs & Careers3 months agoMumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoHappy 4th of July! 🎆 Made with Veo 3 in Gemini
-
Education3 months agoVEX Robotics launches AI-powered classroom robotics system
-
Education2 months agoMacron says UK and France have duty to tackle illegal migration ‘with humanity, solidarity and firmness’ – UK politics live | Politics
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoOpenAI 🤝 @teamganassi
-
Funding & Business3 months agoKayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries