As AI systems draft emails, analyze data, and even generate code, employers say the skills they struggle most to find are not technical—they are human.
National employer surveys consistently show strong confidence in higher education’s ability to prepare students for work. Yet those same surveys reveal a persistent disconnect between what employers value and how prepared they believe graduates actually are, particularly in regard to communication and teamwork skills.
At the center of that gap is a cluster of competencies often described as social-emotional learning (SEL)—including empathy, self-regulation, perspective-taking, and the ability to collaborate across differences. Once associated primarily with K-12 education, social-emotional learning is increasingly being embedded in college curricula. Institutions are adopting contemplative practices, structured dialogue programs, and compassion training as deliberate strategies to improve student success and workforce readiness in an economy increasingly shaped by automation.
A new national survey released by the Association of American Colleges and Universities found that 70% of employers report a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in U.S. higher education, and 85% say colleges are doing a good job preparing students for the workforce. Nine in 10 employers say it is important for students to develop AI-related skills, and 81% express confidence that colleges are helping build competencies aligned with workplace AI applications.
That confidence, however, does not erase concerns about graduates’ foundational skills. According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), employers and students agree that communication and teamwork are among the most important career-readiness competencies. But NACE’s 2024 Student Survey and Job Outlook 2025 data show a substantial gap in perceived capabilities. For areas such as critical thinking and communication, the difference between students who rate themselves proficient and employers who agree with them is roughly 25 percentage points.
In other words, students often believe they are ready to collaborate, persuade, and problem-solve. Employers are less convinced.
That gap has material consequences. In highly automated environments, entry-level roles increasingly require judgment, cross-functional coordination, and client interaction rather than routine task execution. When communication falters or team dynamics break down, productivity slows, conflict escalates, and retention suffers. For institutions under pressure to demonstrate return on investment, closing the interpersonal skills gap is not cosmetic—it is economic.
Research on SEL in higher education suggests these competencies can be intentionally cultivated. A review published in Education Sciences describes SEL as an integrated model of human intelligence and learning that supports academic performance while fostering empathy, social awareness, and relationship skills. The review reports that the implementation of SEL-informed strategies is associated with improved communication skills, greater understanding and acceptance of differences, and stronger social awareness.
The research emphasizes that emotion and cognition are not separate tracks. Supportive learning environments and emotional intelligence practices can enhance academic engagement and foster empathy by breaking down barriers. In practice, that means institutions must design classrooms where students practice attention, reflection, and dialogue alongside disciplinary content.
Across the country, universities are testing how to do that systematically.
At the University of Virginia, the Contemplative Sciences Center frames its mission as fusing contemplation, connection, and research to enhance human flourishing. Housed in the university’s Contemplative Commons, the center integrates mind-body practices into academic and community life to support social, emotional, physical, and professional development.
One initiative, the Civic Cornerstone Fellowship, makes the workforce connection explicit. In today’s polarized political climate, the fellowship brings undergraduates and graduate students together for structured conversations across diverse perspectives. The program combines dialogue skill-building, mindfulness practices to support self-regulation and authentic communication, and knowledge of the American political landscape.
The model treats calm attention and reflective listening not as wellness accessories but as prerequisites for effective civic and professional engagement. Students practice staying present in difficult conversations, managing emotional reactivity, and articulating positions with clarity and respect. In workplaces where collaboration increasingly spans geography, culture, and ideology, those capabilities are not abstract virtues—they are operational necessities.
Dialogue-based programs similarly position communication across difference as a learnable skill set. At the University of Denver, Student Affairs uses “Voices of Discovery” dialogues modeled on the University of Michigan’s intergroup dialogue approach. According to program materials, a multi-year national research study has demonstrated the efficacy of intergroup dialogue for engaging with social issues and developing critical thinking skills. The initiative also explicitly connects the work to employer expectations that graduates be able to communicate and work in groups across differences.
Scholarship from the University of Michigan characterizes intergroup dialogue as a “critical-dialogic” teaching and learning approach structured to engage difference, inequality, and social identity. Rather than avoiding contentious topics, the pedagogy creates facilitated spaces where students examine assumptions, practice perspective-taking, and develop collaborative problem-solving skills.
Such programs move beyond generic group projects. They teach students how to recognize power dynamics, repair misunderstandings, and sustain engagement when disagreement surfaces. Those are precisely the moments when teamwork either matures or fractures.
Some institutions are drawing from contemplative traditions and behavioral science to strengthen empathy and prosocial behavior more directly. At Emory University, the Center for Contemplative Science and Compassion-Based Ethics describes its work as educating “both heart and mind through a research-based approach.” The center collaborates with undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs and investigates compassion science through seminars and academic partnerships.
At Stanford University’s Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education, training has been examined in peer-reviewed research. A randomized controlled trial published in the Journal of Happiness Studies evaluated the effects of a compassion-cultivation program, contributing to a growing body of literature examining whether compassion and empathy can be systematically developed.
Broader research supports the relevance of such interventions for university populations. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials found that mindfulness-based training for university students improved distress, anxiety, depression, and well-being with small to moderate effect sizes shortly after completion.
While mental health is not synonymous with workforce readiness, emotional regulation and attentional control are foundational to effective communication and collaboration. Students who can manage stress and remain present during conflict are better positioned to contribute constructively in team settings.
These initiatives share a common premise: interpersonal competence is not innate and fixed. It can be taught, practiced, and assessed.
