The one I found most interesting: "The Class of 2026". This piece offers an extended analogy of what the future of higher education will be to what Henry VIII and Gutenberg did to the British monasteries. With the important proviso that change to higher education will probably occur more slowly than many people forecast--it's what history suggests and is consistent with a view that entrenched special interests rarely give up quickly--I think this piece's forecasts have a good chance of coming true. I especially like the forecast that "Professors, in this model, become more like personal trainers. . . . This is more or less the Oxbridge tutorial model used at Oxford: the tutor doesn’t lecture the students, he suggests reading material for them, and then discusses it with them in depth in order to teach them how to deepen their own understanding on their own."
Related: "Will the university survive AI? Education is close to becoming a sham" and "Teachers Are Not OK".
A final note about "AI will change everything" predictions: I am old enough to remember when computers finally succeeded in beating the very best human chess players and lots of people predicted the Death of Chess. Who would play when a computer could always win? Well, I am not going to take the time to do a study of chess's relative popularity before and after, but I can say people are still playing chess, there is still a world's championship, and, interestingly, the game has changed somewhat, with more emphasis on "non-classical" chess games like blitz. One might call this clever, evolutionary adaptation rather than the forecast extinction.