Author: admin

It’s the higher education Christmas movie and TV guide

There’s nothing on the telly this Christmas.

There never is. Unless you’re searching for some hidden nuance in repeats of The Chase.

But if, like me, you have trouble switching off from work but also enjoy being slumped in front of the box with a tub of Quality Street, I have good news.

I’ve picked out ten films and TV shows released this year that either have something to say about higher education, are set on campus and/or depict contemporary student life.

You’ll laugh, you’ll cry, you’ll shell out for a VPN, you’ll get frustrated by torrent ratios, and you’ll almost certainly switch off, which is what the break is for – eventually.

It really was slim pickings this year from a UK perspective. Everyone talks a lot about how universities are portrayed “in the media”, but I think they mean on Newsnight or in the Telegraph. The sector will probably win more hearts and minds on Netflix, if anyone knows anyone that might be able to help.

Before you take to the comments, I’ve not put in books or podcasts. I do enough reading in this job, and I edit ours, so my appetite for either is fairly thin – but do pop suggestions below if there are any.

You’re welcome – and apologies in advance if you’re at work over the next couple of weeks.

If having worked in or around the sector you’ve not quite had your fill of toxic and manipulative relationships this year, the second season of Tell Me Lies is a good bet. Filmed largely on the picturesque campus of Agnes Scott College in Georgia, we’re whisked into a world of 2008 fashions, messy frat parties, tense dorm room interactions and academics’ office hours – all used to illustrate how central character Lucy Albright’s university experiences shaped her later life. It’s all a bit soapy, but the deep discomfort at having to hang out with your exes that campus life can require is very well played.

There are more depictions of dorm life in Sweethearts, a romantic comedy whose set-up centres on two friends breaking up with their girlfriends from home over a holiday weekend. It’s all a bit loaded lads retro – flying urine and a flaccid full-frontal give you a sense of the tone here – but treat it like gazing out of the window on a train, and you’ll take in some lovely interior scenes from Ramapo College in Mahwah, and some lush exterior shots from the Vermont College of Fine Arts.

This is a low-budget “feminist horror thriller” that follows a fraternity pledge who, during a brutal hazing ritual, is pressured to lose his virginity by leading a drugged girl upstairs at a party – something that has unexpected and increasingly disturbing consequences. It’s cleverly filmed, there’s a cracking soundtrack and it’s comically gruesome – until you remember that without the blood and gore of act three, it’s depicting an unsettlingly common scenario.

Yôji Minamimaru, the central character of Land of Tanabata, navigates all the typical challenges of being a student – academic life, social relationships, self-discovery, and a supernatural ability to create small holes in objects, something he shows off as the President of the New Skills Development Research Society. It’s an unlikely hook for a series, and the murder (of a professor) mystery that ensues is a struggle to stick with in this manga adaptation.

Two old friends enroll in an adult university, looking for adventure, love and fun. What could go wrong? Quite a lot, it seems, in this Dominican go at mature student life that drags up some particularly dated caricatures of women and LGBT+ people. I got about 15 minutes in before I was tired of the buffering.

What do you fancy watching. A drama? A rom-com? A thriller? An overdone Indonesian horror film based on a viral Twitter thread from 2016? On the assumption that it’s the latter, Dosen Ghaib: Sudah Malam atau Sudah Tahu (The Ghost Lecturer: Is It Night Already or Do You Already Know) follows four university students who fail the year and are required to enrol onto a catch-up module over the holiday, who pitch up only to get a message that the lecturer can’t make it – so who is the person already in the room? For clarity, it’s a murdery ghost man, not one of his PhD students.

You might remember a story from 2023 that involved an academic specialising in the social impacts of climate change avoiding air travel to minimise his carbon footprint – only to get sacked for doing so. The Researcher chronicles Gianluca Grimalda’s 40-day journey via trains, buses, and ships to reach his research site in Papua New Guinea. Maybe he was sacked for not using Key Travel to book it all.

Decades on from the end of apartheid, Afrikaans media is only just starting to break away from its historically conservative roots. Wyfie – opening up conversations about rape, sexuality and politics – caused quite a stir when it appeared in 2023, and this year’s second season of the show, about four mismatched university roommates at a womens’ residence at the fictional Eike University, takes things up a notch. It’s especially fascinating for the insights into university life – first-year initiation ceremonies, cheating on a test to maintain academic standing and a mother-and-daughter tea event all make it in, as does a whole bunch of drama over an annual photo of those in the halls. It’s especially good on both portraying and dramatising that “you befriend people that aren’t like you” cliche.

If all of these sensitive and revealing portrayals of student life are a bit woke for your liking, and you’ve never got around to reading The Coddling of the American Mind, you’ll be pleased to learn that you watch it now instead. The central conceit of the Lukianoff and Haidt viral article-cum-bestseller gains some visuals, voxpops and dramatic music here – but decent evidence for their claims, which to these eyes and ears is age-old generational indignation dressed up as science – is still in short supply. That said, the idea that pervasive racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia are merely bad ideas that a good debate will solve is at least in the solid tradition of Christmas TV escapism.

This is set in Kota, Rajasthan – a city known as a hothousing hub for coaching centers that prepare students for India’s highly competitive IIT-JEE entrance exams. Back for a darker yet compelling third season this year, there’s plenty to learn here about the coaching system’s human impact as the focus shifts a little to draw in the coaches themselves and the choices made between the gifted students and everyone else. If there’s a fault with it, it’s the season ending – a crowbarred bit of plotting presumably designed to hang out the prospect of a fourth run.

Admissions were quite a big story in the US in 2023 – the supreme court banned the use of affirmative action policies that had been in place for decades – and Bad Genius plays into the slipstream by overlaying some higher education race politics to a remake of a Thai blockbuster from 2017. The plot centres around a clever student who helps her friends cheat on their entrance exams to reflect the struggles of first-generation Americans pressured to support their immigrant families. If you’re a fan of the original you’ll be wondering why they bothered – but given you’ve not seen the original, this is a fun way to while away an afternoon if you’re into watching the underdog poor outmaneuvering the rich.

Finally, (and no I’m not including One Day), I won’t have a word said against Big Boys, which had a criminally under-celebrated season 2 this year. The search for student housing, mental health, student sex work and plenty of students’ union activity all feature at Brent University, where Jack and Danny’s decidedly uncool struggles with the second year manage to be both laugh-out loud funny, heart-wrenching and revealing often all in the same scene. Set somewhere near Watford (and filmed largely on the Harrow campus of the University of Westminster), it’s the polar opposite of glamorous, and all the better for it.

Source link

December 20, 2024
Higher education postcard: Christ Church, Oxford

We’re well into advent, so it seems apposite to look at Christmas and, in the context of higher education postcards, a college named after its eponymous protagonist.

We’ll start in 1002, which is well before there was a university at Oxford, let alone a college. King Æethelred had ordered a massacre of Danes within his kingdom, which took place on 13 November, St Brice’s day. Amidst the massacring, St Frideswide’s nunnery was destroyed (with, presumably, woeful consequences for the nuns). As a result of the massacre of the Danes – which Æethelred had apparently been advised would be an effective pre-emptive strike – the Danes, led by Sweyn Forkbeard, went on a bit of a rampage. This, by the way, was why Æethelred was the unrede – not “unready” but “badly advised”.

Anyway, back to the main story. Æethelred had St Frideswide rebuilt as a priory, and under Henry I this became an Augustinian foundation. Which rubbed along with the people of Oxford until in 1524 it was suppressed, by Cardinal Wolsey. He used the proceeds from the suppression of other priories, including Wallingford Priory, to repurpose the priory’s buildings and establish Cardinal College.

Which you may never have heard of, at least until now. And that’s because Wolsey had a spectacular fall from grace. Having failed to secure a divorce for psychopathic king Henry VIII, he was cast from the inner court. In 1530, ill with dysentery, he died in Nottingham as he was returning to London to face trial for treason.

Now Henry was not the sort of king to let bygones be bygones. He suppressed Cardinal College in 1531, and the following year re-founded it. As King Henry VIII’s College. He wasn’t a modest man.

And in 1546 he was a much richer man. Using the Protestant reformation as cover for personal aggrandisement, he broke from Rome, founded the Church of England with himself as its head (like I said, he wasn’t a modest man), and moved from dissolving priories to dissolving monasteries – far richer pickings. This enabled him to re-found King Henry VIII’s College as Christ Church College, and simultaneously made the priory church into the cathedral of the Church of England diocese of Oxford. The college’s full formal name reflects all of this: the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral Church of Christ in Oxford of the Foundation of King Henry the Eighth.

The buildings started by Wolsey were completed, and added to. Christoper Wren designed the Tom Tower, the one on the card. This holds the Great Tom bell, which is rung 101 times every night at 9pm Oxford time (yes, of course it has its own time zone), or about five minutes past 9pm Greenwich Mean Time.

Let’s fast forward to 1642. Supporters of Parliament were at war with supporters of the king; armies had been raised. A pitched battle had been fought at Edgehill; it was indecisive, enabling the king – Charles I, or Charles as he was known at the time – to continue his march on London. Realising London could not be taken by force, Charles retreated to Oxford, and made his base there. (In the meantime, parliamentarian forces had arrested the university’s vice chancellor, John Prideaux, an event which must, even today, give hope to people across higher education.)

Charles set up shop in Christ Church. He used the deanery as his royal apartments, and the college’s great hall became the meeting place for the parliament. (Parliament had not been dissolved before the outbreak of the war. Charles summoned it to Oxford. Most of the Lords attended, and about a third of the Commons. It met from January to April 1644 and again from October 1644 to March 1645. What did it do? We don’t really know, as its records were burnt in 1646 before parliamentary forces retook the city.)

Christ Church’s alumni include thirteen British Prime Ministers, although one of the them, William Pulteney, first Earl of Bath, held office for two (2) days only, and whether he actually ever was Prime Minister is now disputed by historians. The parliamentary history records that after his two-day prime ministership he “spent the rest of his life in retirement, consoling himself with the pleasures of avarice, to which he had always been notoriously, indeed scandalously, addicted.”

Alumni also include many politicians of ministerial rank (for example, Nigel Lawson, David Willetts, Chris Skidmore); monarchs (including Edward VII, although he transferred to Trinity Cambridge); scientists (such as Robert Hooke, Martin Ryle); a whole gaggle of top-drawer philosophers (such as John Locke, Freddie Ayer, Daniel Dennett, John Rawls, and a personal favourite, Gilbert Ryle); literary figures including Lewis Carroll, W H Auden, and John Ruskin; and, perhaps best of all, both Flanders and Swann.

There are a few additional points to cover before I wrap up this account.

Firstly, an epic disagreement between the former dean of Christ Church and the college. This long statement by the college sets out one side of the issue.

Secondly, what a wonderful set of buildings! They’ve inspired the buildings of the University of Galway, and have also, apparently, featured in the Harry Potter films, although as your correspondent has never seen any of these we have to take this on trust.

And finally, Christ Church’s arms: these are Cardinal Wolsey’s arms; properly described they are Sable, on a cross engrailed argent, between four leopards’ faces azure a lion passant gules; on a chief or between two Cornish choughs proper a rose gules barbed vert and seeded or. And its always good to see a chough, whether from Cornwall or anywhere else.

Here’s a jigsaw of the postcard, to give you a bit of festive diversion; and a bonus jigsaw of the college kitchen, which is a bit harder, should you need an excuse to spend more time secluded with your computer over the festive season.

And that’s it for 2024’s higher education postcards. I’ll be back in January with more; in the meantime, a very merry Christmas to you all.

Source link

December 20, 2024
Audit sheds light on state-issued credit card misuse in the Connecticut college system
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

Dive Brief:
- A state audit of employee spending practices at the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities system found several financial transactions that broke university policies or lacked adequate documentation.
- Comptroller Sean Scanlon detailed over $19,000 in spending on food by system Chancellor Terrence Cheng in fiscal years 2022 through 2024, by far the majority of spending on his institutional credit card. Violations included missing receipts, missing guest lists and purchases of restricted items like alcohol.
- Scanlon’s probe came at Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont’s request after CT Insider reported Cheng spent lavishly on meals with a state-funded credit card over the past few years.
Dive Insight:

The report from CT Insider alleged that Cheng had spent as much as $1,114 at restaurants in a week, and paid for private chauffeurs despite having access to a state-provided car at the time. Once, he spent nearly $500 for the service, the outlet reported.

Scanlon’s office concluded that “while not technically violating state or university policy, we found that, in the absence of sound, comprehensive policies, the Chancellor utilized poor [judgment] when making P-Card purchases that were especially troubling given the financial stress on the CSCU system.”

The audit zeroed in on spending on food and transportation by the chancellor. Meals designated as business meetings accounted for 70% of the spending on the official’s card, and some transactions exceeded the $50 meal limit for system employees, the audit found. It also found 18 food purchases with tips deemed excessive — above 22% — which the report noted “is not a policy violation but a questionable use of university funds.”

Of the chancellor’s food-related transactions reviewed by the comptroller’s office, 43% had either no itemized receipts or were missing receipts entirely.

Among other violations were 30 instances where Cheng paid sales tax. That’s a violation of policy because institutional credit cards — also known as P-cards — are exempt from sales tax but must go through a process with vendors to credit those taxes.

However, the comptroller found that Cheng did not technically violate policy because as chancellor he can “override the policy at his own discretion.”

As for chauffeur use, the report noted three times when Cheng — who lives in New York state — paid for a private car service with his P-card, including two trips even more expensive than the one reported by CT Insider. Scanlon determined that these services did not represent violations but said that they “are of note as the Chancellor was provided with a state vehicle for their use.”

In an emailed statement Thursday, Cheng said that he appreciated the audit’s thoroughness and that the system is “committed to implementing stronger controls, policies, and comprehensive training.”

The system review also found issues with P-card use by other leaders, including the interim president of Southern Connecticut State University, Dwayne Smith. The audit found that Smith’s P-card “shows a wide variety of infractions spanning almost every category of restricted purchasing and failure to follow many of the policy requirements for documentation and reporting of transactions.”

Specifically, the comptroller’s office faulted Smith for failing to keep receipts, as well as purchasing tickets to an outside football game without stating its business purpose, among other issues.

In an emailed statement, Smith thanked the comptroller for his analysis and recommendations, adding that many of his office’s P-card transactions relate to his community engagement activities.

“These meetings have yielded significant support for our scholarship programs, internships, mentoring, and ultimately, enhanced job opportunities for our graduates,” Smith said.

Scanlon’s audit found many other issues across the Connecticut college system’s staff. His office’s report lists 10 recommended changes the system should make, including reinstating internal audits, establishing a central policy for P-card use, creating accountability measures for card misuse and establishing a policy for vehicle use.

“Unfortunately, this audit revealed troubling gaps in oversight and questionable spending practices,” Scanlon said in a Wednesday statement. “Our recommendations provide a clear path forward with more comprehensive policies, consistent enforcement, and greater overall accountability.”

In his statement, Cheng said the recommendations would “support the goal of accountability and transparency across the system.”

He added, “The system has begun to take steps in this direction and over the next 100 days, I’ve instructed my team to implement recommendations to improve compliance and reporting.”

The system’s governing board this fall moved to increase oversight of spending in its central office. As part of that process, the system recently hired a new chief compliance officer and legal counsel.
Source link
December 20, 2024
VICTORY: FIRE lawsuit leads California to halt law penalizing reporters, advocates, and victims who discuss publicly known information about sealed arrest records

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 19, 2024 — A federal court, acting on a stipulation agreed to by the California attorney general and San Francisco city attorney, today halted enforcement of a California law that officials deployed to suppress journalism about a controversial tech CEO’s sealed arrest records.

Under the law, any person — including journalists, advocates, witnesses, and victims of crimes — faced a civil penalty of up to $2,500 for sharing public information. The court order results from a First Amendment lawsuit filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression in November, which led the California attorney general and San Francisco city attorney to agree not to enforce the law while the lawsuit is pending.

“The press and public have a constitutional right to discuss what’s publicly known,” said FIRE attorney Adam Steinbaugh. “Government officials can’t punish the press and public when officials fail to safeguard information. That responsibility starts and ends with the government.”

In October 2023, journalist Jack Poulson published articles about a controversial tech CEO’s arrest, sharing a copy of the arrest report sent to him by an unidentified source. The San Francisco Police Department had previously made that report public, even though the executive had successfully petitioned a state court to seal the record.

Almost a year after Poulson published the report, the city attorney of San Francisco — working with the tech executive — sent three letters to Poulson and his webhost, Substack, demanding they remove articles and the sealed report. Those letters threatened enforcement of California’s anti-dissemination statute, Penal Code § 851.92(c). The law imposes a civil penalty of up to $2,500 on any person (except the government officials charged with maintaining the secrecy of sealed records) who shares a sealed arrest report or any information “relating to” the report — even if the information is already publicly available.

Concerned by the implications of the statute, FIRE sued the San Francisco city attorney and the California attorney general on behalf of the Bay Area-based First Amendment Coalition, its Director of Advocacy Ginny LaRoe, and legal commentator Eugene Volokh. Each regularly comments on censorship campaigns precisely like the one the tech CEO and city attorney launched against Paulson and Substack. But the anti-dissemination statute prohibited them from covering the CEO story, even though the information has been publicly available for over a year.

Today, the court entered a preliminary injunction agreed to by both California and the city attorney that prohibits them from enforcing the law with respect to publicly available information.

The preliminary injunction protects not only FAC and Volokh, but anyone — including journalists like Poulson — who publishes information made available to the public.

“Discussing and sharing lawfully obtained information about arrests is not a crime — it’s a core First Amendment right,” said FIRE Staff Attorney Zach Silver. “The rich and powerful shouldn’t have the luxury of deploying the government to put their skeletons back in the closet. By standing up for their own rights, the First Amendment Coalition and Eugene Volokh have helped to protect others from facing legal action under California’s anti-dissemination law.”

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.

CONTACT:

Jack Whitten, Communications Campaign Specialist, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]

Source link

December 19, 2024
How Community Colleges Can Simplify the Student Enrollment Process
Key Takeaways:
- Community colleges play a vital role in addressing enrollment barriers, offering tailored support to first-generation and working students.
- Proactive strategies, such as early communication, community outreach, and wraparound services like food assistance and mental health support, help students navigate challenges and stay engaged.
- Leveraging technology like CRM systems and AI tools simplifies the student enrollment process and enhances conversion rates.
- Measuring success through metrics such as conversion rates, re-enrollment, and first-semester engagement lets colleges refine their strategies and better support student persistence and retention.
The enrollment journey at community colleges can be far from straightforward, as many students face barriers beyond academics—from concerns over affordability to balancing family and work responsibilities and navigating financial aid. For example, nearly 75% of public two-year college students work while enrolled, including 46% working full time, and two-thirds of people enrolled in community colleges are first-generation students, who often do not receive the guidance and support that other students might receive from within their support systems.

Community colleges are uniquely positioned to open doors for these students who might otherwise never step foot into higher education. By breaking down enrollment barriers, fostering early communication, and utilizing technology, community colleges can create an enrollment experience that meets students where they are. In turn, they can build pathways that lead to success, one student at a time.

Identifying Enrollment Barriers

For students new to the world of higher education, the student enrollment process can feel daunting. While community colleges are open-access institutions, this does not always translate to an easy path. Many students come from communities where attending college is not the norm, and some face resistance from family members or struggle with time constraints due to family responsibilities. Financial aid is also a common sticking point. Some students worry about taking on debt, while others have families unwilling to fill out the FAFSA due to privacy concerns, which adds to the complexity of obtaining financial assistance.

Community colleges that proactively identify these barriers can uncover solutions tailored to each student’s situation. For instance, understanding the unique financial, familial, or community pressures facing students can inform how colleges offer support. Identifying opportunities to become more transparent, such as having standardized institutional aid packages that allow students to see how much aid they would receive, exemplifies this shift toward recognizing and removing institutional barriers. By locating obstacles early, colleges can guide students more effectively throughout the enrollment process, keeping them on track and engaged.

Strategies for Eliminating Barriers in the Student Enrollment Process

Addressing these challenges often requires creative solutions that reach beyond academic support. A critical strategy lies in educating students—and, when possible, their communities—on the value of a college education. Many students find themselves questioning the worth of a degree, particularly in communities where traditional college education may be seen as unnecessary. To address this, some colleges have begun integrating community outreach programs that outline the tangible benefits of a college education, from career advancement to personal growth. Tracking college enrollment trends also offers insight into where additional guidance might be needed, ensuring that community colleges can adapt and refine their programs.

Community colleges can better aid students by offering wraparound services, such as food assistance, mental health counseling, transportation services, and financial literacy courses. Food insecurity, for example, is a widespread problem affecting 23% of community college students. Liaison’s IMPACT Grant, which champions initiatives such as on-campus food pantries, is an excellent example of how colleges can tackle this barrier head-on. By promoting awareness of available resources, colleges make sure students know where to find the support they need, allowing them to focus on their studies rather than their next meal or car troubles.

Free community college programs, now offered in 36 states, also alleviate the financial strain of pursuing a credential by removing student debt as a barrier to entry. As more colleges promote these programs, the cost of higher education becomes less intimidating, particularly for first-generation and low-income students who might otherwise forgo college due to cost concerns.

The Critical Role of Early Communication

Community colleges often enter the higher education conversation with prospective students later than four-year institutions, missing critical opportunities to provide guidance. While some universities engage students as early as their freshman year of high school, community colleges might not start outreach until a student’s senior year. This timing can make a significant difference: earlier communication lets students weigh all their options without feeling pressured by high tuition at traditional four-year colleges. It also opens up time to explore scholarships, grants, and other options.

Reaching students sooner can reduce enrollment anxiety, allowing them to explore programs that align with their financial needs and career goals. By actively promoting programs and resources through social media, local events, and high school partnerships, community colleges can position themselves as accessible, affordable, and valuable options for higher education.

Leveraging Technology to Support Enrollment Journeys

Innovative technology, such as CRM systems and AI-driven tools, plays a transformative role in simplifying the enrollment process. Liaison’s TargetX and Outcomes CRMs, for example, provide tailored platforms for managing student engagement and application processing. With tools for omnichannel marketing, application management, and progress tracking, these platforms allow students to communicate with advisors and gain clear guidance throughout the admissions process. As a result, institutions are able to improve conversion rates and enroll more best-fit students.

AI-powered chatbots, now integrated into these CRMs, also assist students in navigating questions and concerns in real-time. This technology offers immediate, practical support that keeps students on track toward enrollment and reduces logistical barriers.

Measuring Enrollment Success

To understand the impact of their enrollment strategies, community colleges must look at specific metrics that reflect student progress and satisfaction. Identifying conversion rates at each enrollment stage offers insight into where students might drop off and allows administrators to refine support systems accordingly. Once students are on campus, tracking their first-semester engagement—particularly through the crucial first four weeks—can highlight early challenges and help colleges design interventions to boost retention as well as persistence after the first year.

Examining re-enrollment rates from semester to semester is another key indicator of success. Demonstrating steady improvements in these areas reflects well on the effectiveness of a school’s holistic support and technology. Such data can also indicate how effectively institutions are offsetting the rate of community college enrollment decline, a pressing issue for those seeking to sustain their missions.

Community colleges serve as the best opportunity to access higher education for many students. By removing enrollment barriers, actively communicating early and often, and leveraging technology to simplify the admissions process, community colleges can create pathways that lead students to fulfilling educational journeys. The more colleges embrace these strategies, the more efficient and successful the enrollment journey becomes for all students, leading to an increasingly inclusive and accessible higher education landscape.

Liaison is committed to helping community colleges streamline admissions and improve student outcomes. Contact us today to learn more about our products and services.
Source link
December 19, 2024
O holy fight: New Hampshire Satanic Temple statue threatened by more than vandals

It’s the holiday season, when the lights are blinking, the bells are ringing, and families are lining up to see festive displays of the demon-god Baphomet in the town square.

But this year, citizens in Concord, New Hampshire, might not get to enjoy all the holiday cheer after vandals decapitated the Baphomet display set up by the Satanic Temple. In fact, the display has proven so controversial that city officials promised to review the display policy next year.

Concord’s government would do well to remember that any rules about expressive displays in public spaces must be viewpoint-neutral, meaning the Satanic Temple has the same right to put up a holiday display as any other group.

Protecting the Satanic Temple’s right to speak also protects the expressive rights of Christians — and Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, and everyone else.

‘Happy Hellidays!’ from the Satanic Temple

So what happened?

Concord’s City Plaza is open for unattended displays by private groups during the holiday season. In early December, the Satanic Temple — which describes itself as a religious organization with a mission to “encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, oppose injustice, and undertake noble pursuits” — put up a statue of the goat-headed deity Baphomet in Concord’s City Plaza, under a permit granted by the city.

Baphomet’s temporary neighbors included a nativity scene placed by a rural civic group and a Bill of Rights display put up by the Freedom From Religion Foundation. But just days after the Satanic Temple’s statue went up, it was vandalized — its goat head knocked off, its robed torso severed from its legs, and its tablet bearing the tenets of the Satanic Temple smashed to pieces. Police are investigating the vandalism, but the destroyed statue was taken down.

Then, earlier this week, a new statue went up, this time accompanied by a copy of the permit allowing its placement. In less than 48 hours, that statue, too, was destroyed. The police identified a suspect and said charges are forthcoming. That’s the proper response to vandalism of lawful displays: arrest and prosecute the vandals — don’t impose a “heckler’s veto” by censoring expression that provokes public hostility.

Social media post by WMUR reporter Ross Ketschke before the Satanic Temple’s statue of Baphomet was vandalized a second time in Concord, New Hampshire. (@RossWMUR / X.com)

City officials decry Satanic holiday display, promise review next year

But Baphomet’s future — and the First Amendment rights of citizens and groups to put up such displays — is threatened by more than just vandals in Concord.

Baphomet found his way to the city, because Concord created a public forum, where the government’s authority to restrict expression is strictly limited. Concord can impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on expressive activity there, including permit requirements for temporary installations, but viewpoint-based restrictions are unconstitutional.

You can’t allow one group to put up a nativity display but ban the Satanic Temple from putting up Baphomet. The same constitutional principles that protect the Baphomet statue also protect the civic group’s right to put up its nativity scene in the very same plaza.

Although we don’t yet know if the Satanic Temple and its supporters will put up a third Baphomet statue this year, FIRE commends Concord officials for approving the display in the first place, in line with their constitutional obligations.

For example, in 2017, Boston officials told Harold Shurtleff that he couldn’t raise a Christian flag during his event on City Hall Plaza, although the city regularly allowed other outside groups to fly flags of their choosing during events. Shurtleff sued the city, and in 2022, the Supreme Court weighed in and agreed the city violated Shurtleff’s First Amendment rights.

The city’s initial decision to grant the Satanic Temple a permit for the Baphomet display recognized its First Amendment obligations. In a Facebook post, the city explained, “Under the First Amendment and to avoid litigation, the City needed to choose whether to ban all holiday displays installed by other groups, or otherwise, to allow it. After reviewing its legal options, the City ultimately decided to continue the policy of allowing unattended displays at City Plaza during this holiday season and to allow the statue.”

However, some city officials were unhappy with the decision. Notably, Concord Mayor Byron Champlin opposed the permit, explicitly saying he would have preferred to risk a lawsuit rather than grant the permit “because I believe the request was made not in the interest of promoting religious equity but in order to drive an anti-religious agenda.”

Even as city officials explained why they had to approve the Satanic Temple’s request, they also said they planned to review the permit policy for unattended displays next year.

That left FIRE concerned that Concord may engage in viewpoint discrimination and deny applications in the future. So, we’re calling on city officials to reaffirm their commitment to their constitutional obligations.

As FIRE’s letter to the city explains:

Concord may not restrict displays simply because, in its view, they reflect an antagonistic or divisive ideology or perspective. Even if — in fact, especially if — the Satanic Temple put up the display, as Mayor Champlin believes, “in order to drive an anti-religious agenda” or as a “calculated political effort,” rather than to promote “religious equity,” the government may not disfavor “anti-religious” speech. The fact that Concord, or some of those through whom it acts, may believe a display is “a deliberately provocative and disturbing effigy” does not make it any less constitutionally protected, as “[g]iving offense is a viewpoint.”

The letter also highlights a recent Texas case involving holiday displays put up by private groups. In that case, Texas’ governor had the Texas State Preservation Board take down a previously-approved “Bill of Rights nativity” display in which cutouts of several Founding Fathers stood over a Bill of Rights in a manger. This decision violated the Constitution, and years of litigation ensued. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ultimately stated that it was “not seriously disputed . . . that the Board’s removal of the exhibit violated the First Amendment.” And the suit ultimately cost Texas and Texans almost $360,000.

Concord officials should take note of that Texas case when deciding whether to “accept the risk” of a lawsuit by engaging in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. Although we don’t yet know if the Satanic Temple and its supporters will put up a third Baphomet statue this year, FIRE commends Concord officials for approving the display in the first place, in line with their constitutional obligations.

Given the controversy surrounding the display, FIRE calls on Concord to affirm that it will continue to fulfill those obligations. After all, handing over the authority to restrict minority viewpoints sets a dangerous precedent.

Source link

December 19, 2024
OfS approves renaming of UCLan and University of Bolton

In two separate hearings published on December 19, the OfS granted approval for the University of Bolton to be renamed the University of Greater Manchester, and for the University of Central Lancaster (UCLan) to become the University of Lancashire.

The regulator permitted Bolton becoming the University of Greater Manchester despite objections from the University of Manchester that the change would be “very confusing and misleading”. Manchester Metropolitan University and the University of Salford also objected to the name change.

In a consultation on UCLan’s rebranding to the University of Lancashire, 90% of the 1,812 respondents said that the new name could be “confusing or misleading”, given that the existing Lancaster University carries the same official title.

During the ruling, the regulator considered the name change could be particularly confusing for international students “less familiar with contextual information” but concluded that it was “unlikely to lead to any material harm or detriment”.

The consultations in Bolton also garnered widespread opposition to the rebrand, with 64% of respondents saying the name change could cause confusion.

The OfS recognised that both instances could be confusing “for particular groups of stakeholders, including for example those for whom English is not their first language or who have difficulties in distinguishing or processing information”.

However, it concluded that “the range of contextual information that students use when applying to study” would help to prevent material harm arising from such confusion.

The name change is very good news for our students, very good news for the institution, very good news for the town and amazing news for jobs

Professor George Holmes, University of Greater Manchester

In both cases, the OfS ruled that its duties to protect the “institutional autonomy” of providers and “encourage competition” between universities weighted in favour of consenting to both new names.

In Bolton, the proposals to change the university’s name sparked backlash from local politicians and members of the public, with a motion put to Bolton Council in 2023 calling on the university to rethink the name change.

Announcing the news on December 19, vice chancellor Professor George Holmes told a group of staff members that he was “delighted” to announce the change.

“The name change is very good news for our students, very good news for the institution, very good news for the town and amazing news for jobs,” said Holmes, adding that it was “an important accolade to have the University of Greater Manchester based in Bolton”.

Professor Graham Baldwin, UCLan vice chancellor, also welcomed his institution’s new title, saying that it would “better reflect our regional economic importance and aid continuing efforts to raise brand awareness further afield.

“Locally the acronym UCLan was widely used but for many outside the region they didn’t know it was the title of a university nor where it was located,” said Baldwin.

On December 2, 2024 the OfS announced it was temporarily pausing the registration of new institutions, as well as suspending applications for an institution to change its name “where it already holds university title”. Applications already submitted would be completed, it said.

Source link

December 19, 2024
Poor Harvard Numbers Show Impact of SCOTUS Affirmative Action Ruling

No one feels like confirming nor denying how affirmative action’s death is destroying a sense of inclusion in higher ed.Emil Guillermo

But make no mistake, the destruction is under way.

Harvard College sent out letters to its early admits, but hasn’t disclosed what the demographics are yet for this year. Waiting until all the admits are sent out in the Spring buys them time to make excuses. But Harvard Law has issued its numbers and the alarm bells should be going off. There were just 19 first year Black students, 3.4 percent of the Harvard Law school class, according to data from the American Bar Association, as reported by the New York Times. It’s the lowest number since the 1960s, a period when affirmative action and civil rights was much more in vogue.

Woke wasn’t considered a disease back then. People were interested in fighting racist segregation. Inclusion and diversity weren’t institutionalized notions back then. They were the values we hoped would take us out of the darkness. But compare this years 19 Harvard Law admits with the 43 admits from the previous year, and you see the wounds have been reopened. David Wilkins, a Harvard Law professor who has kept tabs on these matters told the Times it was related to the Supreme Court ruling, and its “chilling effect.”

Since the 60s, the numbers have been around 50-70 a year. And then came this year’s 19. Hispanic students were also lower at 39, 6.9 percent of the class versus 63 students or 11 percent of the class in 2023.

The big winners in the admissions at Harvard Law? Whites and Asian American students, the latter, the principal plaintiffs in the suit before the court last year.

Now that we have diminished the game to numbers, the numbers don’t lie. When you can’t address the need of inclusion directly, we leave it up to chance.

This year at Harvard Law was not a good year. Harvard miscalculated by not settling with the anti-affirmative action SFAA front and going to court. But that allowed for a right-wing Supreme Court to set the precedent for all schools not just Harvard. Anti-affirmative action advocates will try to put a positive spin on the low numbers, saying it’s not as low as it sounds. They’ll talk about different recording standards set by the A.B.A. There’s also the issue of multi-race students, and those who decline to state.

But secretly opponents of affirmative action are gleeful. They got their way. Their court. And last November their president, elected by voters who believe that educational attainment, not race nor class, is the new dividing line in America. The less education the better. Who needs affirmative action? Let that sink in academia.

Consider the Harvard Law School numbers the first of many signs to come that will let us know just how fast we are an America in reverse.

Emil Guillermo is a journalist, commentator, and former adjunct professor.

Source link

December 19, 2024
FIRE to Congress: More work needed to protect free speech on college campuses

What is the state of free speech on college campuses? More students now support shouting down speakers. Several institutions faced external pressure from government entities to punish constitutionally protected speech. And the number of “red light” institutions — those with policies that significantly restrict free speech — rose for the second year in a row, reversing a 15-year trend of decreasing percentages of red light schools, according to FIRE research.

These are just a few of the concerns shared by FIRE’s Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward, who joined lawmakers, alumni groups, students, and stakeholders last week in a discussion on the importance of improving freedom of expression on campus.

Rep. Greg Murphy led the roundtable, along with Rep. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and Rep. Burgess Owens.

But the picture on campus isn’t all bad news. Tyler highlighted some positive developments, including: an increase in “green light” institutions — schools with written policies that do not seriously threaten student expression — along with commitments to institutional neutrality, and “more and more institutions are voluntarily abandoning their requirements that faculty and students submit so-called DEI statements for admission, application, promotion, and tenure review.”

Tyler noted the passage of the Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act in the House. The bill requires public institutions of higher education to “ensure their free speech policies align with Supreme Court precedent that protects students’ rights — regardless of their ideology or viewpoint.” Furthermore, crucial Title IX litigation has resulted in the Biden rules being enjoined in 26 states due to concerns over due process and free speech.

Lastly, Tyler highlighted areas of concern drawn from FIRE’s surveys of students and faculty on campus, including the impact of student encampment protests on free expression on college campuses.

WATCH VIDEO: FIRE Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward delivers remarks at Rep. Greg Murphy’s 4th Annual Campus Free Speech Roundtable on Dec. 11, 2024.

Students across the political spectrum are facing backlash or threats of censorship for voicing their opinions. Jasmyn Jordan, an undergraduate student at University of Iowa and the National Chairwoman of Young Americans for Freedom, shared personal experiences of censorship YAF members have faced on campus due to their political beliefs. Gabby Dankanich, also from YAF, provided additional examples, including the Clovis Community College case. At Clovis, the administration ordered the removal of flyers YAF students posted citing a policy against “inappropriate or offensive language or themes.” (FIRE helped secure a permanent injunction on behalf of the students. Additionally, Clovis’s community college district will have to pay the students a total of $330,000 in damages and attorney’s fees.)

VICTORY: California college that censored conservative students must pay $330,000, adopt new speech-protective policy, and train staff

Press Release

Federal court orders Clovis and three other community colleges to stop discriminating against student-group speech based on viewpoint.

Read More

Conservative students aren’t the only ones facing challenges in expressing their ideas on campus. Kenny Xu, executive director of Davidsonians for Free Speech and Discourse, emphasized that free speech is not a partisan issue. Citing FIRE data, he noted that 70% of students feel at least somewhat uncomfortable publicly disagreeing with a professor in class. “I can assure you that 70% of students are not conservatives,” he remarked. Kyle Beltramini from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, reinforced this point. Sharing findings from ACTA’s own research, he emphasized that “this is not a problem faced by a single group of students but rather an experience shared across the ideological spectrum.”

The roundtable identified faculty as a critical part of the solution, though they acknowledged faculty members often fear speaking up. FIRE’s recent survey of over 6,000 faculty across 55 U.S. colleges and universities supports this claim. According to the results, “35% of faculty say they recently toned down their writing for fear of controversy, compared to 9% who said the same during the McCarthy era.”

While this data underscores the challenges faculty face, it also points to a broader issue within higher education. Institutions, Tyler said, have a dual obligation to “ensure that speech rights are protected” and that “students remain free from harassment based on a protected characteristic.” Institutions did not get this balance right this year. But, ACTA’s Kyle Beltramini noted the positive development that these longstanding issues have finally migrated into the public consciousness: “By and large, policy makers and the public have been unaware of the vast censorial machines that colleges and universities have been building up to police free speech, enforce censorship, and maintain ideological hegemony in the name of protecting and supporting their students,” he stated. This moment presents an opportunity to provide constructive feedback to institutions to hopefully address these shortcomings.

FIRE thanks Rep. Murphy for the opportunity to contribute to this vital conversation. We remain committed to working with legislators who share our dedication to fostering a society that values free inquiry and expression.

Alumni are also speaking up, and at the roundtable they shared their perspectives on promoting free speech and intellectual diversity in higher education. Among them was Tom Neale, UVA alumnus and president of The Jefferson Council and the Alumni Free Speech Alliance, who highlighted the importance of connecting with alumni from institutions like Cornell, Davidson, and Princeton, since they’re “all united by their common goal to restore true intellectual diversity and civil discourse in American higher-ed.”

Other participants at the roundtable included members of Speech First, and Princetonians for Free Speech.

So what can be done? Participants proposed several solutions, including passing legislation that prohibits the use of political litmus tests in college admissions, hiring, and promotion decisions. They also suggested integrating First Amendment education into student orientation programs to ensure incoming undergraduates understand their rights and responsibilities on campus. Additionally, they emphasized the importance of developing programs that teach students how to engage constructively in disagreements — rather than resorting to censorship — and to promote curiosity, dissent, talking across lines of difference, and an overall culture of free expression on campus.

FIRE thanks Rep. Murphy for the opportunity to contribute to this vital conversation. We remain committed to working with legislators who share our dedication to fostering a society that values free inquiry and expression.

You can watch the roundtable on Rep. Murphy’s YouTube channel.

Source link

December 19, 2024
College faculty are more likely to self-censor now than at the height of McCarthyism

For a number of faculty members, the threat of censorship is so pervasive on campuses across America that not even the cloak of anonymity is enough to make them feel safe expressing their ideas.

This year, FIRE surveyed 6,269 faculty members at 55 major colleges and universities for “Silence in the Classroom: The 2024 FIRE Faculty Survey Report,” the largest faculty free speech survey ever performed.

What we found shocked even us here at FIRE. A deeply entrenched atmosphere of silence and fear is endemic across higher education.

We found that self-censorship on US campuses is currently four times worse than it was at the height of the McCarthy era. Today, 35% of faculty say they have toned down their written work for fear of causing controversy. In a major survey conducted in 1954, the height of McCarthyism, by the sociologists Paul Lazarsfeld and Wagner Thielens, only 9% of social scientists said the same.

Front page of The Michigan Daily newspaper on May 13, 1954.

In fact, the problem is so bad that some academics were afraid even to respond to our already anonymous survey for fear of retaliation. Some asked us by email, or in their free response replies, to keep certain details they shared private. Some asked us to direct all correspondence to a private personal email. Others reached out beforehand just to confirm the results would truly be anonymous. Still others simply refused to speak at all.

For some, the danger is clear and concrete. As one professor wrote, “I am not at liberty to even share anonymously for fear of retribution.”

For others, it’s more nebulous, but the fear is no less real.

“I almost avoided filling out the survey for fear of losing my job somehow‚” one professor told us, adding that they “waited about two weeks before getting the courage to take the risk.”

It is totally unacceptable that this is a reality on today’s campuses.

For what I’m paid to teach the courses that I do, it’s just not enough to outweigh the risk of potential public excoriation for wrong-think and its personal and professional impact on myself, my family, and my business.

We at FIRE even had to devise additional ways of disguising academics and their schools so others could not “out” them using their responses, including by describing certain schools in general terms such as “a flagship state university in the south.” As one professor remarked, “The fact that I’m worried about even filling out polls where my opinions are anonymous is an indication that we, as institutions and as society, have lost the thread concerning ideas.” This person isn’t wrong.

So the next time you’re talking politics with friends or having dinner conversation, remember this fact — four times as many faculty are scared to speak candidly than at the height of McCarthyism!

FIRE SURVEY: Only 20% of university faculty say a conservative would fit in well in their department

Press Release

A third of faculty say they self-censor their written work, nearly four times the number of social scientists who said the same in 1954 at the height of McCarthyism.

Read More

Few other university issues — arguably, few other issues in America, period — matter more. The exchange of ideas and information is the entire reason universities exist. As the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” For more than a third of faculty, that ending has already begun.

Consider this final heartbreaking message from an educator who told us they felt the urge to self-censor on the survey even though it was anonymous.

“I had already decided that this year will be the last one I teach at the university,” they reflected. “For what I’m paid to teach the courses that I do, it’s just not enough to outweigh the risk of potential public excoriation for wrong-think and its personal and professional impact on myself, my family, and my business.”

Read the full report and learn more about the full extent of what the climate of higher ed is doing to faculty’s search for truth in higher education today.

Source link

December 19, 2024