Author: admin

  • Nepali students could shun India amid row over student’s death

    Nepali students could shun India amid row over student’s death

    A 20-year-old technology student was found dead in her hostel room at Odisha’s private deemed university, KIIT, allegedly after facing harassment from a fellow student.

    The incident sparked campus protests, forcing hundreds of students to leave after KIIT closed sine die for all Nepali international students on February 17.

    Though KIIT vice-chancellor Saranjit Singh issued a public apology later and action was taken against security officials and staff accused of abusing and physically harming protesting Nepali students, only a small percentage of students have returned. 

    With Nepali students comprising 28% of India’s international student population, the largest share, the recent incident has raised concerns that many students from Nepal might cancel their plans to study in India.

    “Students might reconsider their decision to study in India, and this incident could drive a policy shift in student recruitment. Obtaining an No Objection Certificate (NOC) might become mandatory for those aspiring to study in India, and a government-level grievance handling system could be introduced to address student concerns,” BK Shrestha, CEO, Study Global, a Kathmandu-based education consultancy, told The PIE News. 

    Though an NOC is mandatory for Nepali students wishing to study abroad, the open border and close ties between Nepal and India allow many Nepali students to study in the country without obtaining one.

    Despite this privilege, the Nepal government could restrict students from obtaining an NOC to study at institutions in Odisha if the KIIT incident is not resolved in a “justifiable and legal way,” according to Nepal’s Ministry of Science, Education, and Technology.

    Though India and Nepal have shared historically deep relations, the past decade has been marked by tensions, including allegations of a blockade on goods to Nepal, border disputes, and Nepal’s efforts to strengthen relations with China. 

    The recent incident at KIIT has only added fuel to the fire, prompting the Nepal Embassy in India to send officials to the campus to meet with agitating Nepali students. 

    Obtaining an NOC might become mandatory for those aspiring to study in India, and a government-level grievance handling system could be introduced to address student concerns
    BK Shrestha, Study Global

    Meanwhile, Nepal’s opposition and human rights body have urged the Indian government to conduct a “fair investigation” and ensure the safety of Nepali students.

    “The Nepalese government, including the Prime Minister and relevant ministries, took immediate action through the embassy, ensuring the safety of students,” said Mukesh Dhamala, member of education council, Confederation of Nepalese Industries. 

    “However, this incident has created diplomatic tensions, raised questions about the accountability of educational institutions, and sparked broader discussions about student welfare policies in host countries.”

    According to Dhamala, the student’s death has led to Nepali students and parents being more cautious, with a significant increase in inquiries about safety measures at Indian institutions.

    “Future students and parents may hesitate to choose Indian institutions unless there are strong safety measures in place,” stated Dhamala. 

    Moreover, domestic universities in Nepal have stepped up by offering returning students a chance to continue their studies. 

    Purbanchal University has announced that students reluctant to return to KIIT can continue their remaining courses at its affiliated colleges.

    “Any student who has returned to Nepal without completing their studies can continue through credit transfer,” the university stated, adding that students must meet the required criteria.

    Meanwhile, officials at Tribhuvan University, Nepal’s oldest and largest institution, have also expressed readiness to accommodate such students. 

    Many prospective students from Nepal are now rethinking their plans to study in India amid the row at KIIT. 

    “All of this has massively increased safety concerns for Nepalese students, especially female students. In fact, several of my friends have already canceled their upcoming admissions to very reputable Indian institutions because they no longer feel safe,” stated Sandesh Pokhrel, a Kathmandu-based student, who is planning to pursue his post-graduation studies abroad. 

    With many returning students from KIIT alleging that the university failed to take action against the accused despite the deceased student’s prior complaints, academic counsellors like Pragya Karki argue that stakeholders in Nepal should serve as the first point of contact for their students. 

    “KIIT’s initial response to the student’s case has been deeply concerning and raises serious questions about its commitment to student safety and well-being,” said Karki, an academic counsellor at Ullens School. 

    “We must go beyond just listening – we are advocates, allies, and a vital support system for students in distress. Proactive outreach is key: creating safe spaces, educating students on their rights, on how to recognise emotional distress, and ensuring they know where to seek help.”

    According to Dhamala, the recent incident has underscored the need for dedicated student support teams, ideally with Nepali staff, to address the concerns of Nepali students. He also emphasised the importance of Embassy monitoring on campuses to ensure their well-being.

    As part of its recent initiative, Nepal Rising, market entry firm Acumen brought many of its partner institutions from the UK, US, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and Malaysia to Nepal. 

    The goal was to better understand and improve the Nepali student experience, a critical move in light of the KIIT incident.

    “A structured pre-departure program is key, equipping students with insights into academics, culture, finances, and well-being. Many of our partner universities already offer culturally tailored orientation programs, mentor-mentee buddy systems, and Nepalese student clubs, ensuring a smoother transition,” stated Ritu Sharma, director, partner success, UK, Ireland, and ANZ, Acumen. 

    “A strong support system, including career workshops and mental health services, is vital for long-term success.”

    As per a report by ICEF, in the past five years, approximately one in every five Nepali students pursuing higher education chose to study abroad.

    Nepal’s outbound mobility ratio was 19% in 2021, compared with less than 2% for China and India, this despite the country being vastly smaller in population compared to its giant Asian neighbours. 

    Pushpa Raj Joshi, a senior scientist and neurobiologist at Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany, who writes monthly columns for The Kathmandu Post – a leading publication in Nepal – criticised the country’s lack of a “forward-thinking education policy.” 

    He argued that this drives many Nepali students to study abroad in large numbers, leaving them vulnerable and unprepared due to insufficient information.

    “This unfortunate incident underscores the urgent need for Nepal’s education authorities to reevaluate policies affecting students’ safety, dignity, and future abroad. More importantly, strengthening academic institutions is essential to retaining our students,” stated Joshi. 

    “Lack of seats in universities across Nepal and fewer post graduation courses have been age-old problems in Nepal, which prompts students to go to India or elsewhere.”

    As Nepal grapples with its policies around education, the recent incident is far from being resolved as the investigation into the B.tech student’s death intensifies. 

    The state government of Odisha has summoned four more KIIT officials for questioning, with the institute stating that it is “committed to a safe and uninterrupted learning environment for all students.”

    KIIT has not yet responded to questions from The PIE News.



    Source link

  • Teaching Public Speaking Skills for Our Remote Age With MindTap Bongo Present Activities

    Teaching Public Speaking Skills for Our Remote Age With MindTap Bongo Present Activities

    Reading Time: 4 minutes

    I remember that fateful day clearly, back in March 2020, when we were first told “Go home. We’re going remote.” On the way out the door, one of my colleagues said, “This changes everything.”  At the time, I thought they were overreacting. My focus was on health and safety. Naively, I thought the COVID-19 pandemic would pass quickly, and we would soon return to normal.

    Rarely have I been so wrong about so many things.

    As a communication professor for more than thirty years, I assumed public speaking meant speaking in-person, in public. At the beginning of remote learning, I instructed students to present speeches on Zoom in much the same way I had when our classroom was live, in-person. However, after several semesters of trial and error, I finally appreciated the truth of my colleague’s statement. Everything had changed. While many of the skills required for effective public speaking remotely were the same as public speaking in person, teaching additional skills was necessary.

    Public speaking skills: critical for career success

    Happily, I discovered learning these remote public speaking skills would not only support students’ academic success but would also support their long-term workplace success. According to research in Cengage’s Career Readiness eBook, 98.5% of employers think communication skills are very important. Additionally, LinkedIn ranked communication as No. 1 on their 2024 list of overall most in-demand skills. Ultimately, this is a skill that will only benefit students in the long run. So, how can students hone this skill?

    When it comes to public speaking in any environment, practice is always key. Experts often suggest students give practice presentations, paying close attention to things like their body language, tone of voice and breath control. Practicing in front of others can also be tremendously helpful when preparing.

    The challenge of incorporating peer feedback skills in remote teaching

    Providing constructive feedback is an essential skill for remote public speaking. Teaching my students how to provide constructive feedback had always been an integral part of my in-person public speaking curriculum.

    First, I would offer a lesson with guidelines on how to offer constructive feedback. Then, students would be responsible for completing a speech critique form of another student’s presentation. And finally, students would reflect on ways they could improve their performance based on the feedback they received. Research suggests this type of peer review process helps students to develop lifelong skills in assessing and providing feedback to others, while simultaneously equipping them with skills to self-assess and improve their own speeches.

    When I had a full class of face-to-face students, integrating these types of peer review experiences into my public speaking curriculum was relatively easy. However, I quickly learned that the remote learning environment presented a new set of peer review challenges. Just recording speeches to a viewing platform wasn’t enough to replicate the learning opportunities of the in-person experience. Ideally, students needed to be able to record their speeches for asynchronous viewing by the instructor and the assigned students, who would then offer written constructive feedback for the presenter and other peer reviewers to consider. These requirements seemed like a tall order but, amazingly, MindTap, Cengage’s online learning platform, provided me with exactly what I needed.

    Using MindTap to teach remote public speaking skills

    Prior to my public speaking courses shifting to remote learning, I had already been using online MindTap activities to supplement the print versions of my textbooks. After the pandemic, I began to rely more heavily on MindTap activities. I found using MindTap filled in some of what was lost from my students’ in-person experience, keeping them more engaged. Additionally, using the MindTap Bongo Present activities, which are available with many of the Communication Studies eBooks, solved a number of practical dilemmas including how to systematically evaluate their performance.

    Present Bongo activities, found in the MindTap learning path, help students become more comfortable with the act of speaking to a camera while being recorded to a screen through a variety of topic-specific, impromptu-style, low-stakes public speaking opportunities.

    Present activities can also be used as an effective delivery and evaluation system for more formal public speaking presentations, such as pre-planned informative or persuasive speeches. When students record their speech, in addition to receiving feedback and a grade from me, they can also receive feedback from other class members, either by a rubric-based peer review or live, real-time comments.

    Having the option to assign three or more reviewers for each speech provides additional benefits, for both the reviewer and the speaker. As reviewers, students get to see a wider range of work, and as speakers, they get more feedback on their presentations. If multiple reviewers make the same suggestion, a speaker may be more likely to take that suggestion to heart.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The pathway to public speaking success in a remote setting includes setting aside time to rehearse and record presentations and asking colleagues for constructive feedback. In much the same way, MindTap Bongo activities provide students the opportunity to practice their speaking skills, learn from the review/feedback process  and, ultimately, to succeed in our remote age.

    Written by Sheryll Reichwein, MA, Adjunct Professor of Communication at Cape Cod Community College

    Interested in exploring how MindTap Bongo Activities can help your students develop remote public speaking skills effectively?

    The post Teaching Public Speaking Skills for Our Remote Age With MindTap Bongo Present Activities appeared first on The Cengage Blog.

    Source link

  • It’s Time for Higher Education Leadership to Embrace ‘Good Trouble’

    It’s Time for Higher Education Leadership to Embrace ‘Good Trouble’

    Dr. Detris AdelabuOn the day of his death in 2020, an op-ed appeared in the New York Times, pre-written by Congressman John Lewis, urging Americans to stand up for justice and what he called “good trouble, necessary trouble.  Even in his death, Congressman Lewis fought for a more equitable America, where every individual recognizes their moral obligation to persist in the struggle for a more just nation.

    The recent Supreme Court decision striking down race-conscious admissions policies, followed by anti-equity legislation across more than 40 states and at the highest level of government, erodes decades of collective efforts to rectify a history of gross social and structural inequities. In higher education, these legislative attacks have led to a decline in Black and Latino student enrollment at selective colleges and universities and have prompted institutions to abandon their commitment to equity.  Universities such as Harvard, Rutgers, Northeastern, the University of Texas, and Louisiana State University are scrubbing their website of all references to diversity, equity, and inclusion, shuttering DEI offices and laying off staff, and scrutinizing the curriculum for any references to DEI.  If ever there was a time for “good trouble” in higher education, that time is now.  But can higher education leadership muster the political will to stand firm for equity?

    Institutional Responsibility and Moral Leadership

    Legislative setbacks to equity beckon colleges and universities to take bold and creative strategies to reaffirm their commitment to equitable access to resources and opportunities in education. Institutions can, for example, place greater emphasis on partnering with under-resourced high schools and expand outreach to marginalized communities to signal their commitment to equity. While such measures are imperfect, they signal a refusal to yield to a regressive interpretation of equity and justice.

    Higher education institutions can leverage their platforms to articulate their mission and commitment to equity beyond their campuses by working together to:

    1. Form Multi-Institutional Alliances to Challenge Anti-DEI Legislation: Colleges and universities can form alliances on a national scale to amplify their collective advocacy against policies that restrict access to resources and opportunities. Sharing strategies and best practices can strengthen collective efforts to promote equity. Dr. Felicity CrawfordDr. Felicity Crawford
    2. Invest in Community Partnerships: By deepening relationships with K-12 schools, particularly those in strategically under-resourced areas, institutions can create robust pathways for diverse talent. Mentorship programs, financial support, and academic preparation initiatives can help bridge gaps in access and opportunity.
    3. Prioritize Transparency and Accountability: By publishing detailed reports on their equity and diversity metrics, institutions can enhance accountability and demonstrate their progress towards equity.

    Upholding the Educational Mission of Higher Education

    The mission of higher education extends beyond the transmission of knowledge. It encompasses the cultivation of informed, engaged, and socially responsible citizens. Failing to prioritize equity undermines this mission, leaving graduates ill-equipped to navigate the complexities of a global society. Institutions that acquiesce to the erosion of equity risk not only their reputations but also their relevance in a rapidly changing world.

    Resisting harmful laws and policies that oppose equity is not without risks. Institutions may face political backlash, reduced funding, or legal challenges. However, the cost of inaction—both in terms of societal impact and institutional integrity—is far greater. By taking a principled stand, colleges and universities can position themselves on the right side of history, inspiring future generations to do the same. Equity, when implemented with fidelity, fosters diversity.

    The current sociopolitical landscape presents a defining moment for higher education. Gross social and structural inequities will not resolve themselves. Left unattended, they will continue to generate detrimental social and economic consequences for American society, with effects that can span generations. By developing innovative strategies, advocating for systemic change, and upholding their educational missions, institutions can resist attacks on progress and continue to serve as beacons of opportunity and justice. In doing so, they not only honor their moral and societal obligations but also preserve the transformative power of education for generations to come.Dr. Linda Banks-SantilliDr. Linda Banks-Santilli

    This moment calls for moral leadership in higher education that not only resists the immediate consequences of anti-DEI legislation but also envisions a more just and inclusive future. This moment calls for good trouble. To echo the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

    “In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.”

    Dr. Detris Honora Adelabu is a Clinical Professor at the Boston University Wheelock College of Education and Human Development

    Dr. Felicity A. Crawford is a Clinical Associate Professor at the Boston University Wheelock College of Education and Human Development

    Dr. Linda Banks-Santilli is a Clinical Associate Professor at the Boston University Wheelock College of Education and Human Development

    Source link

  • Open universities: between radical promise and market reality

    Open universities: between radical promise and market reality

    by Ourania Filippakou

    Open universities have long symbolised a radical departure from the exclusivity of conventional universities. Conceived as institutions of access, intellectual emancipation, and social transformation, they promised to disrupt rigid academic hierarchies and democratise knowledge. Yet, as higher education is increasingly reshaped by market logics, can open universities still claim to be engines of social progress, or have they become institutions that now reproduce the very inequalities they sought to dismantle?

    This question is not merely academic; it is profoundly political. Across the globe, democratic institutions are under siege, and the erosion of democracy is no longer an abstraction – it is unfolding in real time (cf EIU, 2024; Jones, 2025). The rise of far-right ideologies, resurgent racism, intensified attacks on women’s and LGBTQ+ rights, and the erosion of protections for migrants and marginalised communities all point to a crisis of democracy that cannot be separated from the crisis of education (Giroux, 2025). As Giroux (1984) argues, education is never neutral; it can operate as both a potential site for fostering critical consciousness and resistance and a mechanism for reproducing systems of social control and domination. Similarly, Butler (2005) reminds us that the very categories of who counts as human, who is deemed grievable, and whose knowledge is legitimised are deeply political struggles.

    Open universities, once heralded as radical interventions in knowledge production, now find themselves entangled in these struggles. Increasingly, they are forced to reconcile their egalitarian aspirations with the ruthless pressures of neoliberalism and market-driven reforms. The challenge they face is no less than existential: to what extent can they uphold their role as spaces of intellectual and social transformation, or will they become further absorbed into the logics of commodification and control?

    My article (Filippakou, 2025) in Policy Reviews in Higher Education, ‘Two ideologies of openness: a comparative analysis of the Open Universities in the UK and Greece’, foregrounds a crucial but often overlooked dimension: the ideological battles that have shaped open universities over time. The UK Open University (OU) and the Hellenic Open University (HOU) exemplify two distinct yet converging trajectories. The UK OU, founded in the 1960s as part of a broader post-war commitment to social mobility, was a political project – an experiment in making university education available to those long excluded from elite institutions. The HOU, by contrast, emerged in the late 1990s within the European Union’s push for a knowledge economy, where lifelong learning was increasingly framed primarily in terms of workforce development. While both institutions embraced ‘openness’ as a defining principle, the meaning of that openness has shifted – from an egalitarian vision of education as a public good to a model struggling to reconcile social inclusion with neoliberal imperatives.

    A key insight of this analysis is that open universities do not merely widen participation; they reflect deeper contestations over the purpose of higher education itself. The UK OU’s early success inspired similar models worldwide, but today, relentless marketisation – rising tuition fees, budget cuts, and the growing encroachment of corporate interests – threatens to erode its founding ethos.

    Meanwhile, the HOU was shaped by a European policy landscape that framed openness not merely as intellectual emancipation but as economic necessity. Both cases illustrate the paradox of open universities: they continue to expand access, yet their structural constraints increasingly align them with the logic of precarity, credentialism, and market-driven efficiency.

    This struggle over education is central to the survival of democracy. Arendt (1961, 2005) warned that democracy is not self-sustaining; it depends on an informed citizenry capable of judgment, debate, and resistance. Higher education, in this sense, is not simply about skills or employability – it is about cultivating the capacity to think critically, to challenge authority, and to hold power to account (Giroux, 2019). Open universities were once at the forefront of this democratic mission. But as universities in general, and open universities in particular, become increasingly instrumentalised – shaped by political forces intent on suppressing dissent, commodifying learning, and hollowing out universities’ transformative potential – their role in sustaining democratic publics is under threat.

    The real question, then, is not simply whether open universities remain ‘open’ but how they define and enact this openness. To what extent do they serve as institutions of intellectual and civic transformation, or have they primarily been reduced to flexible degree factories, catering to market demands under the guise of accessibility? By comparing the UK and Greek experiences, this article aims to challenge readers to rethink the ideological stakes of openness in higher education today. The implications extend far beyond open universities themselves. The broader appeal of this analysis lies in its relevance to anyone interested in universities as sites of social change. Open universities are not just alternatives to conventional universities – they represent larger struggles over knowledge, democracy, and economic power. The creeping normalisation of authoritarian politics, the suppression of academic freedom, and the assault on marginalised voices in public discourse demand that we reclaim higher education as a site of resistance.

    Can open universities reclaim their radical promise? If higher education is to resist the encroachment of neoliberalism and reactionary politics, we must actively defend institutions that prioritise intellectual freedom, civic literacy, and higher education for the public good. The future of open universities – and higher education itself – depends not only on institutional policies but on whether scholars, educators, and students collectively resist these forces. The battle for openness is not just about access; it is about the kind of society we choose to build – for ourselves and the generations to come.

    Ourania Filippakou is a Professor of Education at Brunel University of London. Her research interrogates the politics of higher education, examining universities as contested spaces where power, inequality, and resistance intersect. Rooted in critical traditions, she explores how higher education can foster social justice, equity, and transformative change.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • To tell a big story find one that’s small

    To tell a big story find one that’s small

    How do you get someone who lives in India to care about people in Uganda?

    That’s the challenge for journalists who try to tell stories about parts of the world that most of the press ignores. Correspondent Enock Wanderema is from Uganda and wants the world to know what happens there. 

    For a story about the widespread government corruption he focused on one woman, Aloikin Praise Opoloje. Wanderema tells us this story about Opoloje giving birth in a hospital that had been starved of resources because of government corruption. He writes: 

    …she watched the midwife try to manage multiple births at once. Opoloje could tell she was exhausted.  “One of the women was in critical condition, but the surgeon who was supposed to operate was nowhere to be found,” Opoloje said. “We tried calling him, but he wasn’t picking up.” 

    Wanderema used what we call an anecdote to help bring the complicated story of government corruption to life. Anecdotes are little stories about something that happened to someone. People tell little stories about themselves all the time. 

    Bring the story to life.

    In interviews savvy reporters will focus attention on these little stories and try to get as many details as they can. When did this happen? Where were you exactly? What time of day was it? Were there people around? What did it sound like? 

    A good reporter knows that the little details help make a story three-dimensional for readers or listeners. It helps place the reader there as it is happening. And if people feel like they are there, they will care. 

    High school student Helen Milito wrote about her experience spending a year studying in Italy with School Year Abroad. To show how different she felt and how much it took her out of her comfort zone she gave this story:

    We were split into two teams scrimmaging against each other. The boys I play with are competitive so there was the usual light trash talking, jersey pulling and agile foot skills. 

    We were playing friendly rules with no corner kicks. My teammate, Gugu, was fouled in the makeshift goalie box and dramatically fell to the ground yelling for a penalty kick. 

    None of us expected the coach to listen to him, but surprisingly he gave it to our team on the condition that I take the kick. All the players lined up around the box as I prepared to shoot, choosing to aim for the bottom right corner. 

    Two things you should know: First this is in Italy and I’m an American teenager who speaks little Italian. Second, I’m the only girl on the team.

    The coach blew the whistle. I confidently ran, kicking the ball with all my strength. It went soaring over the crossbar into the fence behind. I wanted to crawl into a hole and hide. 

    Note how she shows us visually what is happening through action: “there was light trash talking, jersey pulling and agile foot skills.” She includes the sound of the coach’s whistle. And she gives us emotion: “I confidently ran…”, “I wanted to crawl into a hole…”

    Telling other people’s stories

    Correspondent Leah Pattem felt compelled to report how people in Madrid were suffering from high rents. To do that, like Wanderema, she found one woman whose story she could tell. 

    Pattem wrote: 

    Now in her 80s, [Marjorie] Kanter is at the peak of her career, author of three books and an active member of Madrid’s writing community. “I don’t have many more years left, so I really want to enjoy being a successful writer for as long as I can,” she said.

    However, Kanter is facing a major setback. In September, a registered letter demanded she vacate her home at the end of October. A Galician vulture fund had purchased her apartment and didn’t offer her a new higher-priced rental contract. She suspects that means they will convert her home into a tourist flat.

    The thing is, people don’t offer up anecdotes without prompting. They don’t think reporters are interested in the little stories they tell their friends. And there is a general rule in interviewing that people won’t answer unasked questions. So to get the anecdote you need to tease it out of the person you interview question by question.

    Here are some questions that are useful in teasing out a little story:

    Can you remember the first time you did that? 

    Can you remember the scariest time? 

    Can you think of a time when that happened to you?

    Drilling down

    Ask questions to jog a person’s memory. They’ll say, “There was this one time that …”

    All the time, write down what they say and pester them for details. Imagine that the person is your grandfather and you are five years old. You will keep interrupting him to ask for details he doesn’t think is important but is important to a five-year old: What were you wearing? Was it cold? What did it smell like? Were you scared? Were you hungry? How old were you? How tall were you? 

    The key is to drill down. When someone says something, ask for specifics. When did that happen exactly? Where was that? Who else was there? No detail is too small or insignificant because to recreate a scene and you need to paint a complete picture.  

    Anecdotes are great ways to start articles. They grab the attention of readers and get them interested enough to read on. 

    After all, who doesn’t want to hear a good story?

     

    Three questions to consider:

    1. What is an anecdote?
    2. How can anecdotes help you tell a complicated story?
    3. Can you think of a little story you have told your friends or family about yourself?

     

    Source link

  • How will cutting NAEP for 17-year-olds impact postsecondary readiness research?

    How will cutting NAEP for 17-year-olds impact postsecondary readiness research?

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    With the U.S. Department of Education’s cancellation of the National Assessment of Educational Progress for 17-year-olds, education researchers are losing one resource for evaluating post-high school readiness — though some say the test was already a missed opportunity since it hadn’t been administered since 2012.

    The department cited funding issues in its cancellation of the exam, which had been scheduled to take place this March through May.

    Since the 1970s, NAEP has monitored student performance in reading and math for students ages 9, 13 and 17. These assessments — long heralded as The Nation’s Report Card — measure students’ educational progress over long periods to identify and monitor trends in academic performance.

    The cancellation of the NAEP Long-Term Trend assessment for 17-year-olds came just days before the Trump administration abruptly placed Peggy Carr, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics and as such, the public voice of NAEP, on paid leave.

    Carr has worked for the Education Department and NCES for over 30 years through both Republican and Democratic administrations. President Joe Biden appointed her NCES commissioner in 2021, with a term to end in 2027.

    The decision to drop the 2025 NAEP for 17-year-olds also follows another abrupt decision by the Education Department and the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to cut about $881 million in multi-year education research contracts earlier this month. The Education Department had previously said NAEP would be excluded from those cuts.

    Compounding gaps in data

    “The cancellation of the Long-Term Trend assessment of 17-year-olds is not unprecedented,” said Madi Biedermann, deputy assistant secretary for communications for the Education Department, in an email.

    The assessment was supposed to be administered during the 2019-20 academic year, but COVID-19 canceled those plans.

    Some experts questioned the value of another assessment for 17-year-olds since the last one was so long ago.

    While longitudinal studies are an important tool for tracking inequity and potential disparities in students, the NAEP Long-Term Trend Age 17 assessment wasn’t able to do so because data hadn’t been collected as planned for more than a decade, according to Leigh McCallen, deputy executive director of research and evaluation at New York University Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools.

    “There weren’t any [recent] data points before this 2024 point, so in some ways it had already lost some of its value, because it hadn’t been administered,” McCallen said.

    McCallen added that she is more concerned about maintaining the two-year NAEP assessments for 9- and 13-year-olds, because their consistency over the years provides a random-sample temperature check.

    According to the Education Department’s Biedermann, these other longitudinal assessments are continuing as normal.

    Cheri Fancsali, executive director at the Research Alliance for New York City Schools, said data from this year’s 17-year-olds would have provided a look at how students are rebounding from the pandemic. Now is a critical time to get the latest update on that level of information, she said.

    Fancsali pointed out that the assessment is a vital tool for evaluating the effectiveness of educational policies and that dismantling these practices is a disservice to students and the public. She said she is concerned about the impact on vulnerable students, particularly those from low-income backgrounds and underresourced communities.

    “Without an assessment like NAEP, inequities become effectively invisible in our education system and, therefore, impossible to address,” Fancsali said. 

    While tests like the ACT or SAT are other indicators of post-high-school readiness at the national level, Fancsali said they offer a “skewed perspective,” because not every student takes them.

    “The NAEP is the only standard assessment across states and districts, so it gives the ability to compare over time in a way that you can’t with any other assessment at the local level,” Fancsali said.

    Fancsali emphasized the importance for parents, educators and policymakers to advocate for the need for an assessment like NAEP for both accountability and transparency.

    LIkewise, McCallen said that despite the lack of continuity in the assessment for 17-year-olds, its cancellation offers cause for concern.

    “It represents the seriousness of what’s going on,” McCallen said. “When you cancel these contracts, you really do lose a whole set of information and potential knowledge about students throughout this particular point of time.”

    Source link

  • Test yourself on this week’s K-12 news

    Test yourself on this week’s K-12 news

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    How well did you keep up with this week’s developments in K-12 education? To find out, take our five-question quiz below. Then, share your score by tagging us on social media with #K12DivePopQuiz.

     

    Source link

  • This week in 5 numbers: Why the UT System offers microcredentials for free

    This week in 5 numbers: Why the UT System offers microcredentials for free

    How many higher education institutions are overseen by Florida’s university and college systems. This week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis launched the state’s own version of the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency and directed it to work with education officials to cut “unnecessary spending, programs, courses, staff, and any other inefficiencies.”

    Source link

  • AI in K-12 instruction: Insights from instructional coaches

    AI in K-12 instruction: Insights from instructional coaches

    Key points:

    As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes an integral part of modern education, instructional coaches play a pivotal role in guiding teachers on its implementation, bridging the gap between emerging educational technologies and effective classroom practices.

    As trusted mentors and professional development leaders, they guide teachers in implementing AI tools thoughtfully, ensuring that technology enhances student learning while aligning with pedagogical best practices. This article briefly synthesizes responses from instructional coaches regarding their experiences, challenges, and recommendations for integrating AI into K-12 education.  

    Ten instructional coaches, all with advanced degrees, had the following insights into the instructional use of AI in K12 education. They all have more than 10 years of experience in education and work across all three types of school environments: urban, suburban, and rural.

    The coaches reported that AI is used for various instructional purposes. The most-cited applications included providing feedback on student work, creating professional development materials, supporting writing and content generation, creating course content, and enhancing accessibility for students with special needs. Many coaches note that AI tools assisted in grading assignments, offering real-time feedback, and supporting differentiated instruction. AI-powered feedback helps teachers provide more personalized responses without increasing their workload.  Regarding professional development, AI is being used to generate training content for teachers, ensuring they stay updated on educational trends. Coaches are leveraging AI to curate research, synthesize best practices, and develop instructional strategies tailored to their schools.  They encourage teachers and students to utilize AI for brainstorming, outlining essays, and improving writing mechanics.  

    Perceived impact of AI on instruction 

    The vast majority of instructional coaches expressed positive expectations regarding AI’s potential to reduce educator workload, create personalized learning experiences, and improve access for students with disabilities. However, perspectives on AI’s overall impact on education varied. While most believe AI has positively influenced instruction, a few remain cautious about its potential risks.  One coach suggested that allowing students to utilize the tools in a structured setting and teaching them to use AI as a tool is one of the biggest potentials for generative AI in education. About three-fourths of coaches feel that AI will reduce teacher workload by automating repetitive tasks such as grading and data analysis.

    Concerns about AI in education 

    While AI presents numerous benefits, instructional coaches also raised concerns about its potential drawbacks, including ethical dilemmas, student engagement challenges, and equity issues. Despite its advantages, instructional coaches identified several challenges and ethical concerns. They worry some students will use AI tools without critically engaging with the material, leading to passive learning and an overreliance on generative tools. Some had concerns that AI-generated content could reduce the need for creativity and independent thought. Coaches worry that AI makes it easier for students to plagiarize or rely on generated answers without truly understanding concepts which can negatively impact academic integrity. Coaches cite technical challenges as well. Educators face issues with AI tool reliability, compatibility with existing learning management systems (LMS), and steep learning curves. The coaches mentioned that some schools lack the infrastructure to support meaningful widespread AI integration. 

    Several ethical and privacy concerns were mentioned. AI tools collect and store student data, raising concerns about data privacy and security–particularly with younger students who may be less aware or concerned about revealing personally identifiable information (PII). They mention the need for clear guidelines on responsible AI use to prevent bias and misinformation.

    Coaches emphasize the importance of verifying AI-generated materials for accuracy. They suggest teachers be encouraged to cross-check AI-produced responses before using them in instruction. They recommend robust integrating discussions on digital literacy, AI biases, and the ethical implications of generative AI into classroom conversations. Schools need to train educators and students on responsible AI usage. Some schools restrict AI for creative writing, critical thinking exercises, and certain assessments to ensure students develop their own ideas–an idea that coaches recommend. Coaches suggest embedding AI literacy into existing courses, ensuring students understand how AI works, its limitations, and its ethical implications. 

    Equity concerns are a serious issue for instructional coaches. Schools should ensure all students have equal access to AI tools. AI should be leveraged to bridge learning gaps, not widen them. Making sure all students have access to the same suite of tools is essential to create a level playing field for all learners. Instructional coaches generally agree that AI is not just a passing trend, but an integral part of the future of education. There is a concern that generative AI tools will reduce the human interaction of the teaching and learning process. For instance, interpersonal relationships are not developed with AI-based tutoring systems in the same way they can be developed and encouraged with traditional tutoring processes.

    The integration of AI in K-12 education presents both opportunities and challenges. Instructional coaches largely recognize AI’s potential to enhance learning, improve efficiency, academic integrity, and maintain human-centered learning experiences. As AI continues to evolve, educators must be proactive in shaping how it is used, ensuring it serves as a tool for empowerment rather than dependency. Future efforts should focus on professional development for educators, AI literacy training for students, and policies ensuring equitable AI access across diverse school settings.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Innovative K-12 staffing strategies are feeling the brunt of federal funding cuts

    Innovative K-12 staffing strategies are feeling the brunt of federal funding cuts

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Many schools and higher education partnerships that support the teacher pipeline are starting to feel the brunt of a $600 million cut in “divisive” teacher training grants announced Feb. 17 by the U.S. Department of Education.

    The cost-cutting measures by the Education Department are part of a broader effort throughout the federal government initiated by the Trump administration. The initiative led by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, reported this week that the Education Department is leading among other federal agencies for the most savings in total funding cuts. 

    Two of the most common federal grant programs impacted so far are the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant, said Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy, president and CEO of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. AACTE has been surveying its members to gauge the grant slashing effort’s reach.

    Though the Education Department did not specify which teacher training grants programs were being cut, the agency said in its announcement that the reductions are targeting funds to institutions and nonprofits that were using training materials on topics such as critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion. The department added that “many of these grants included teacher and staff recruiting strategies implicitly and explicitly based on race.”

    At American University in Washington, D.C., for instance, a Teacher Quality Partnership Program grant allowed the university to help paraprofessionals at Friendship Charter Public Schools earn a master’s degree in early childhood or special education, “which there is a real need for,” said Holcomb-McCoy, who previously served as dean of American University’s School of Education. 

    The multiyear federal grant — which covered the private university’s tuition for about 15 teacher candidates to get credentialed, Holcomb-McCoy said — was written to benefit Friendship Charter Public Schools, as well as to address special educator shortages throughout the city.. That funding was “essentially cut.” 

    “We talk about teacher shortages of special education, teacher shortages in subjects such as science and math and technology,” Holcomb-McCoy said. “Cutting these grants essentially is cutting off the pipeline for many aspiring educators to get into the profession, and it’s not helping us. It’s hurting K-12 districts in many ways.”

    The grant also noted that it’s important to have a diverse representation of special education teachers trained in inclusive practices in Washington, D.C., schools, Holcomb-McCoy said. “The impact that that has on students with special needs is huge, and to stop that pipeline of people who aspire to work in that space is devastating to school districts and to communities and families.”

    AACTE estimates that about 31 Supporting Effective Educator Development grants and as many as 75 Teacher Quality Partnership Program grants were recently canceled nationwide. The association is providing support to its members and plans to help them first appeal their cases to the Education Department. 

    AACTE is also exploring potential litigation options, Holcomb-McCoy said.

    A hit to diversifying the teacher workforce

    Many of the applications for federal grants that were cut were written to align with priorities related to diversity set by former presidential administrations. As a result, Holcomb-McCoy said, a lot of those grant programs intentionally sought to address issues over diversity, equity and inclusion.

    Still, diversity in the teacher workforce has been a longstanding issue, she said. As the student population becomes more diverse, the hope has been to hire and keep teachers who are representative of their students. 

    Source link