Category: Data

  • Canada rejects nearly two in three study permit applicants 

    Canada rejects nearly two in three study permit applicants 

    Government figures obtained by The PIE show 62% of applicants were refused a study permit from January to July this year, with record-high volumes “raising urgent questions about transparency and application readiness,” said ApplyBoard.  

    Despite a decade of relatively stable approval ratings hovering around 60%, rates have plummeted to 38% so far this year, down from 48% in 2024 following the implementation of Canada’s study permit caps. 

    “It’s clear that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) is applying far greater scrutiny to new applications,” Jonathan Sherman, vice president of sales & partnership at BorderPass told The PIE, pointing to a “fundamental shift” in government processing.

     

    Data: IRCC

    Indian students – who comprise 40% of Canada’s international student population – have been hardest hit by soaring refusals, with four out of five Indian students receiving rejections in Q2 2025, according to BorderPass.  

    Stakeholders have pointed to a glimmer of hope in overall approval ratings rising modestly this spring, though without a “dramatic shift,” Canada will only reach one fifth of the government’s international student target for the year, Sherman warned.  

    With institutions bracing for severe declines, ApplyBoard analysis has found the most common reason for reason for rejection in 2024 was the perception by IRCC officers that students wouldn’t leave Canada after their studies, cited in over 75% of cases.  

    “While reviewers at IRCC understand that some future students hope to gain work experience in Canada after graduation… the extensive use of this reason last year suggests that many are perceived as having permanent residency as their primary purpose, instead of study,” stated the report. 

    Financial concerns drove three of the top five refusal reasons, after Canada more than doubled its proof-of-funds requirements from $10,000 in 2023 to $20,635 in 2024.  

    Specifically, in 53% of cases, IRCC officers said they were unconvinced that applicants would leave Canada based on financial assets, alongside doubts about insufficient resources for tuition and living expenses.  

    “While new policy caps played a role, our full-year data points to recurring applicant challenges, particularly around financial readiness and immigration intent that are preventable with the right guidance and documentation,” said ApplyBoard.  

    The report highlighted the continuing decline of unspecified reasons for refusal, following IRCC adding officer decision notes to visa refusal letters last month, which was welcomed as a much-needed step in improving transparency.  

    Other reasons for refusal include the purpose of visit being inconsistent with a temporary stay and having no significant family ties outside Canada.  

    The data comes amid a major immigration crackdown in Canada, with temporary resident targets included in the latest Immigration Levels Plan for the first time, which aims to reduce temporary resident volumes to 5% of the population by the end of 2027 – a year later than the previous government’s target.

    Many are perceived as having permanent residency as their primary purpose, instead of study

    ApplyBoard

    Approval rates are also below average for other temporary resident categories, but none so drastically as study permits, with just under half of all visitor visas approved so far this year, compared to a ten-year average of 64%.  

    After more than 18 months of federal policy turbulence, changing eligibility rules have likely contributed to the rise in study permit rejection rates.  

    Pressure to reduce IRCC backlogs and reach ambitious government targets could also be playing a role, according to immigration lawyers speaking to the Toronto Star. 

    As of July 31, over 40% of Canada’s immigration inventory was in backlog, including 56% of visitor visas, 46% of work visas and 23% of study visas, according to official data.  

    Following a swathe of new IRCC officer hires, Sherman said he expected to see improvements in consistency, though “processing backlogs may get worse before they get better,” he warned.  

    Amid the challenges, educators and advisers are doubling down on what applicants and institutions can do to ensure the best chance of success, with ApplyBoard warning that any incomplete or ineligible documentation can be grounds for refusal.  

    Source link

  • In training educators to use AI, we must not outsource the foundational work of teaching

    In training educators to use AI, we must not outsource the foundational work of teaching

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    I was conferencing with a group of students when I heard the excitement building across my third grade classroom. A boy at the back table had been working on his catapult project for over an hour through our science lesson, into recess, and now during personalized learning time. I watched him adjust the wooden arm for what felt like the 20th time, measure another launch distance, and scribble numbers on his increasingly messy data sheet.

    “The longer arm launches farther!” he announced to no one in particular, his voice carrying the matter-of-fact tone of someone who had just uncovered a truth about the universe. I felt that familiar teacher thrill, not because I had successfully delivered a physics lesson, but because I hadn’t taught him anything at all.

    Last year, all of my students chose a topic they wanted to explore and pursued a personal learning project about it. This particular student had discovered the relationship between lever arm length and projectile distance entirely through his own experiments, which involved mathematics, physics, history, and data visualization.

    Other students drifted over to try his longer-armed design, and soon, a cluster of 8-year-olds were debating trajectory angles and comparing medieval siege engines to ancient Chinese catapults.

    They were doing exactly what I dream of as an educator: learning because they wanted to know, not because they had to perform.

    Then, just recently, I read about the American Federation of Teachers’ new $23 million partnership with Microsoft, OpenAI, and Anthropic to train educators how to use AI “wisely, safely and ethically.” The training sessions would teach them how to generate lesson plans and “microwave” routine communications with artificial intelligence.

    My heart sank.

    As an elementary teacher who also conducts independent research on the intersection of AI and education, and writes the ‘Algorithmic Mind’ column about it for Psychology Today, I live in the uncomfortable space between what technology promises and what children actually need. Yes, I use AI, but only for administrative work like drafting parent newsletters, organizing student data, and filling out required curriculum planning documents. It saves me hours on repetitive tasks that have nothing to do with teaching.

    I’m all for showing educators how to use AI to cut down on rote work. But I fear the AFT’s $23 million initiative isn’t about administrative efficiency. According to their press release, they’re training teachers to use AI for “instructional planning” and as a “thought partner” for teaching decisions. One featured teacher describes using AI tools to help her communicate “in the right voice” when she’s burned out. Another says AI can assist with “late-night lesson planning.”

    That sounds more like outsourcing the foundational work of teaching.

    Watching my student discover physics principles through intrinsic curiosity reminded me why this matters so much. When we start relying on AI to plan our lessons and find our teaching voice, we’re replacing human judgment with algorithmic thinking at the very moment students need us most. We’re prioritizing the product of teaching over the process of learning.

    Most teachers I talk to share similar concerns about AI. They focus on cheating and plagiarism. They worry about students outsourcing their thinking and how to assess learning when they can’t tell if students actually understand anything. The uncomfortable truth is that students have always found ways to avoid genuine thinking when we value products over process. I used SparkNotes. Others used Google. Now, students use ChatGPT.

    The problem is not technology; it’s that we continue prioritizing finished products over messy learning processes. And as long as education rewards predetermined answers over curiosity, students will find shortcuts.

    That’s why teachers need professional development that moves in the opposite direction. They need PD that helps them facilitate genuine inquiry and human connection; foster classrooms where confusion is valued as a precursor to understanding; and develop in students an intrinsic motivation.

    When I think about that boy measuring launch distances with handmade tools, I realize he was demonstrating the distinctly human capacity to ask questions that only he wanted to address. He didn’t need me to structure his investigation or discovery. He needed the freedom to explore, materials to experiment with, and time to pursue his curiosity wherever it led.

    The learning happened not because I efficiently delivered content, but because I stepped back and trusted his natural drive to understand.

    Children don’t need teachers who can generate lesson plans faster or give AI-generated feedback, but educators who can inspire questions, model intellectual courage, and create communities where wonder thrives and real-world problems are solved.

    The future belongs to those who can combine computational tools with human wisdom, ethics, and creativity. But this requires us to maintain the cognitive independence to guide AI systems rather than becoming dependent on them.

    Every time I watch my students make unexpected connections, I’m reminded that the most important learning happens in the spaces between subjects, in the questions that emerge from genuine curiosity, in the collaborative thinking that builds knowledge through relationships. We can’t microwave that. And we shouldn’t try.

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    For more news on AI in education, visit eSN’s Digital Learning hub.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Has Canada reached a “turning point” in study permit approvals?

    Has Canada reached a “turning point” in study permit approvals?

    • After months of high study permit refusal rates, stakeholders welcome a more successful second quarter of 2025.
    • But concerns remain about the overall volume of approvals – especially as students from key market India continue to struggle to secure study permits.
    • Meanwhile, approvals from Ghana surge over 200% compared to Q1 of 2025.

    The IRCC data, compiled by BorderPass, showed that while Canadian study permit applications dipped in Q2 2025, the number of approvals increased by 4,450 – leading to a 10% increase in the overall approval rating. 

    “The encouraging sign is that June saw the highest approval rate of the year at 39%, which could point to a modest improvement in the second half of the year,” Jonathan Sherman, vice-president of sales & partnerships at BorderPass told The PIE News. 

    After record low approval ratings in Q1, stakeholders have welcomed the rise in approvals, though serious concerns remain about overall volumes.  

    “Just 31,580 permits were approved in the first half of 2025. IRCC’s published target for the year is about 300,000, which means at the current pace we will only reach around 20% of the goal unless there is a dramatic shift,” warned Sherman.  

    After Canada’s implementation of the study permit cap in 2024, the approval rate dropped from 67% in 2023 to 45% in 2024. So far in 2025, approvals for new study permits (excluding extensions) are tracking at 31%.  

    One of the most striking trends is India’s continued decline, with data showing study permit approvals falling another 7% in Q2 to just 20%, reflecting a “fundamental shift in how IRCC is assessing these applications”, said Sherman.  

    This stands in sharp contrast to the more than 80% approval rates for Indian students just a few years ago, “reflecting a fundamental shift in how IRCC is assessing these applications”, said Sherman.  

    The widening gap between universities and colleges also stood out in the data, a difference that Sherman said was “reshaping the international education market in Canada”.  

    Among the top 20 institutions by volume, university approvals have dropped from 63% in 2024 to 53% so far in 2025, but colleges have seen a steeper fall from 60% to 28%.  

    Colleges have felt the heaviest impact of federal policy changes, including the study permit cap and the new field of study restrictions for post-graduation work permits.  

    Despite a major win for the college sector in March this year when PGWP eligibility was expanded for degree students at colleges, these institutions have still been the hardest hit by the changes, with many of their programs no longer eligible for a work permit.  

    “That said, colleges that are focusing on programs with clear labour market outcomes such as health, technology, and skilled trades are showing better results,” noted Sherman.  

    “The institutions that carefully vet applicants for immigration quality and program alignment are also proving more resilient,” he advised.  

    At the current pace we will only reach around 20% of IRCC’s published target unless there is a dramatic shift

    Jonathan Sherman, BorderPass

    Alongside students from India, Iranian students also experienced volatility, with the country’s approval rating falling by more than 50% from Q1. In contrast, Ghana saw its approval rating surge by 225% on the previous quarter. 

    The approval rating for Chinese students – who make up Canada’s second largest international student cohort – saw stable growth, surpassing 65% approval, and South Korea remained a consistent top performer with approvals at more than 85%.  

    “Smaller markets like Vietnam, Nepal and Nigeria are also moving – some positively, some unpredictably – creating both new opportunities and risk. For many DLIs, this means rethinking region-based strategies in real time,” advised the BorderPass report. 

    As well as seeing variations across institution type and source market, a large number of IRCC officers were hired and trained in the first half of 2025, which Sherman said had “introduced some inconsistency in decision making as new processing are applied”. 

    “On this note, we are hearing that processing backlogs may get worse before they get better,” he warned.

    Overall: “It is clear that IRCC is applying far greater scrutiny to new applications,” said Sherman, with the gap between high- and low-performing institutions becoming ever wider.  

    Specifically, by investing in application intelligence, thoroughly reviewing documents, confirming travel readiness and working with legally backed partners, some institutions have seen approval rates more than double the national average, according to Sherman.  

    Source link

  • The silent hero of modern learning

    The silent hero of modern learning

    Key points:

    Education is undergoing a profound digital transformation. From immersive AR/VR learning in science labs to hybrid classrooms, real-time collaboration platforms, and remote learning at scale, how students learn and educators teach is changing rapidly. These modern, data-intensive applications require far more than basic connectivity. They demand high bandwidth, ultra-low latency, and rock-solid reliability across every corner of the campus.

    In other words, the minimum requirement today is maximal connectivity. And this is where Optical LAN (OLAN) becomes a game changer.

    The challenge with traditional LANs

    Most schools and universities still rely on traditional copper-based local area networks (LANs). But these aging systems are increasingly unable to meet the demands of today’s digital education environments. Copper cabling comes with inherent speed and distance limitations, requiring rip-and-replace upgrades every 5 to 7 years to keep up with evolving needs.

    To increase network capacity, institutions must replace in-wall cables, switches, and other infrastructure–an expensive, time-consuming and highly disruptive process. Traditional LANs also come with large physical footprints, high maintenance requirements, and significant energy consumption, all of which add to their total cost of ownership (TCO).

    In a world that’s demanding smarter, faster, and greener networks, it’s clear that copper no longer makes the grade.

    Built for the campus of the future

    Optical LAN is a purpose-built solution for both in-campus and in-building connectivity, leveraging the superior performance of fiber optic infrastructure. It addresses the limitations of copper LANs head-on and offers significant improvements in scalability, energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

    Here’s why it’s such a compelling option for education networks:

    1. Massive capacity and seamless scalability

    Fiber offers virtually unlimited bandwidth. Today’s OLAN systems can easily support speeds of 10G and 25G, with future-readiness for 50G and even 100G. And unlike copper networks, education IT managers and operators don’t need to replace the cabling to upgrade; they simply add new wavelengths (light signals) to increase speed or capacity. This means educational institutions can scale up without disruptive overhauls.

    Better yet, fiber allows for differentiated quality of service on a single line. For example, a school can use a 1G wavelength to connect classrooms and dormitories, while allocating 10G bandwidth to high-performance labs. This flexibility is ideal for delivering customized connectivity across complex campus environments.

    New School Safety Resources

    2. Extended reach across the entire campus

    One of the standout features of OLAN is its extended reach. Fiber can deliver high-speed connections over distances up to 20–30 km without needing signal boosters or additional switches. This makes it perfect for large campuses where buildings like lecture halls, research centers, dorms, and libraries are spread out over wide areas. In contrast, copper LANs typically max out at a few dozen meters, requiring more switches, patch panels and costly infrastructure.

    With OLAN, a single centralized network can serve the entire campus, reducing complexity and improving performance.

    3. Energy efficiency and sustainability

    Sustainability is top-of-mind for many educational institutions, and OLAN is a clear winner here. Fiber technology is up to 8 times more energy-efficient than other wired or wireless options. It requires fewer active components, generates less heat and significantly reduces the need for cooling.

    Studies show that OLAN uses up to 40 percent less power than traditional LAN systems. This translates into lower electricity bills and a reduced carbon footprint–important factors for schools pursuing green building certifications.

    In fact, a BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) assessment conducted by ENCON found that deploying OLAN improved BREEAM scores by 7.7 percent, particularly in categories like management, energy, health and materials. For perspective, adding solar panels typically improves BREEAM scores by 5-8 percent.

    4. Simpler, smarter architecture

    Optical LAN significantly simplifies the network design. Instead of multiple layers of LAN switches and complex cabling, OLAN relies on a single centralized switch and slim, passive optical network terminals (ONTs). A single fiber cable can serve up to 128 endpoints, using a fraction of the physical space required by copper bundles.

    This lean architecture means:

    • Smaller cable trays and no heavy-duty racks
    • Faster installation and easier maintenance
    • Fewer points of failure and lower IT footprint

    The result? A network that’s easier to manage, more reliable, and built to grow with an education institution’s needs.

    5. Unmatched cost efficiency

    While fiber was once seen as expensive, the economics have shifted. The Association for Passive Optical LAN (APOLAN) found that POL saved 40 percent of the cost for a four-story building in 2022. Even more, Optical LAN now delivers up to 50 percent lower TCO over a 5-year period compared to traditional LAN systems, according to multiple industry studies.

    Cost savings are achieved through:

    • Up to 70 percent less cabling
    • Fewer switches and active components
    • Reduced energy and cooling costs
    • Longer lifecycle as fiber lasts more than 50 years

    In essence, OLAN delivers more value for less money, which is a compelling equation for budget-conscious education institutions.

    The future is fiber

    With the rise of Wi-Fi 7 and ever-increasing demands on network infrastructure, even wireless connectivity depends on robust wired backhaul. Optical LAN ensures that Wi-Fi access points have the bandwidth they need to deliver high-speed, uninterrupted service.

    And as educational institutions continue to adopt smart building technologies, video surveillance, IoT devices, and remote learning platforms, only fiber can keep up with the pace of change.

    Optical LAN empowers educational institutions to build networks that are faster, greener, simpler, and future-proof. With growing expectations from students, faculty, and administrators, now is the perfect time to leave legacy limitations behind and invest in a fiber-powered future.

    After all, why keep replacing copper every few years when operators can build it right once?

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • How Pakistani students are reshaping global mobility

    How Pakistani students are reshaping global mobility

    A new study from ApplyBoard has shown the number of students leaving Pakistan to join universities in countries such as the UK and US has grown exponentially in the past few years, with student visas issued to Pakistani students bound for the ‘big four’ nearly quadrupling from 2019 to 2025.

    “One of the most striking findings is just how rapid and resilient Pakistan’s growth has been across major study destinations,” ApplyBoard CEO Meti Basiri told The PIE News.

    “The rise of Pakistani students is a clear signal that global student mobility is diversifying beyond traditional markets like India and China,” he said.

    The question is, why?

    A large factor is Pakistan’s young population – 59%, or roughly 142.2 million people, are between the ages of five and 24, making it one of the youngest populations in Asia.

    Additionally, due to economic challenges faced by Pakistan, many young people see international education as a necessity in order to succeed financially, even with Pakistan’s economic growth and gradual stabilisation – which has a possibility of slightly decreasing the overall movement between countries in the future.

    The UK has remained the most popular destination for Pakistani students even through Covid-19, with Pakistan rising to become the UK’s third largest source country in 2024.

    Visas issued to Pakistani students have grown from less than 5,500 to projected 31,000 this year, an increase of over 550% from 2019 to 35,501 in 2024.

    Some 83% of students chose postgraduate programs, with the most popular being business courses, but in recent years statistics show a shift towards computing and IT courses.

    This trend aligns with the growth of the UK’s tech sector, which is now worth more than 1.2 trillion pounds, with graduates set to aid further growth in the coming years.

    “In the US, F-1 visas for Pakistani students are on track to hit an all-time high in FY2025,” said Basiri, with STEM subjects the most popular among the cohort.

    This aligns with the US labour market, where STEM jobs have grown 79% in the last 30 years.

    Basiri highlighted the “surprising” insight that postgraduate programs now make up the majority of Pakistani enrolments, particularly in fields of IT, engineering and life sciences. “This reflects a deliberate and career-driven approach to international education,” he said.

    Such an approach is true of students across the world, who are becoming “more intentional, choosing destinations and programs based on affordability, career outcomes, and visa stability, not just brand recognition,” said Basiri.

    The rise of Pakistani students is a clear signal that global student mobility is diversifying beyond traditional markets like India and China

    Meti Basiri, ApplyBoard

    Canada, unlike the US and UK, has welcomed far fewer Pakistani students, most likely due to the introduction of international student caps. ApplyBoard also suspects Pakistani student populations to drop further in the coming years, it warned.

    Similarly, the amount of visas issued to Pakistani students has also dropped in Australia after high demand following the pandemic.

    Germany, however, has experienced rising popularity, a 70% increase in popularity over five years amongst Pakistani students.

    One of the biggest factors for this is their often tuition-free public post secondary education, according to ApplyBoard, as well as the multitude of engineering and technology programs offered in Germany.

    What’s more, though smaller in scale, the UAE has seen a 7% increase in Pakistani students in recent years, thanks, in part to “geographic proximity, cultural familiarity and expanding institutional capacity,” said Basiri.

    Source link

  • Number of Chinese undergrads accepted to UK unis surges by 13%

    Number of Chinese undergrads accepted to UK unis surges by 13%

    According to UCAS data released today to coincide with A-level results day, the number of international students accepted to UK institutions has risen to 52,640 – up 2.9% on 2024 when this figure stood at 51,170.

    In just a year, the number of students from China accepted into university via the UCAS system went up a whopping 13% – with a total of 12,380 acceptances.

    Meanwhile, 2025 has proven to be a year of success for domestic students in the UK – with 28.3% of all grades being A or A* for students across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, according to the BBC.

    Commenting on the numbers, UCAS chief executive Jo Saxton pointed out the huge achievement of this year’s students, whose education was hit hard by the Covid-19 pandemic.

    “This year’s students were just thirteen when the pandemic hit, and their secondary schooling was turned upside down,” she said. “It’s great to see these applicants securing a university place in record numbers, seeking more education and investing in their futures. I am equally delighted to see how universities across the country have responded to their ambition.”

    Undergraduate international students have also found success this year despite some universities prioritising domestic students due to a focus on financial stability.

    According to a recent BBC article, Saxton explained that some UK universities were focussing on enrolling domestic undergraduates because of “uncertainty” around international students.

    She also pointed out that some institutions could accept a greater number of domestic students this year even if they did not meet the exact conditions of their offer because offering places to UK students, as opposed to international students, was more likely to result in financial stability for the institution.

    It’s great to see these applicants securing a university place in record numbers, seeking more education and investing in their futures
    Jo Saxton, UCAS

    It comes amid a turbulent time for the international education sector in the UK – with upcoming compliance changes forcing some universities to stop recruiting for certain courses or from some countries rather than risk falling foul of tightened BCA metrics.

    Many UK universities are currently facing financial difficulties, with around four in 10 universities currently at a deficit, according to a report by the Office for Students.

    Of the courses chosen by students, the most popular in the UK this year were Engineering and Technology, up 12.5% from last year at 30,020 acceptances, Mathematics with 9,220 acceptances and Law with 27,150.

    Source link

  • UK unis could take £620m hit from international student levy

    UK unis could take £620m hit from international student levy

    Based on the latest HEPI data, the Institute estimates the levy could “hamper universities’ ability to compete with institutions in other countries,” said independent researcher Mark Fothergill, who compiled the data. 

    The proposed 6% levy on international students’ tuition fees was first introduced in the government’s highly anticipated immigration white paper, coming as a surprise to many in the sector.  

    HEPI has warned that the policy will hit both large internationally engaged universities and smaller specialist institutions. According to the analysis, the largest financial losses are expected to hit big metropolitan universities with high proportions of international students.  

    Namely, University College London (UCL), which derives 79% of its fee income from non-UK students, could be faced with financial losses of £42m. 

    Meanwhile, Manchester University and King’s College London (KCL) could also be hit with heavy losses of £27m and £22m respectively, with 19 institutions paying at least £10m. 

    Stakeholders have pointed out that while the levy is intended to raise money for the “higher education and skills system”, it is unclear if all the money will come back out of the treasury, and how it will be spent if it does. 

    “International students are the backbone of our higher education system, contributing over £10 billion in fees to English universities – around £4.50 of every £10 of fee income,” Fothergill said. 

    “No wonder the 6% levy is seen as a tax on one of the country’s best-performing sectors,” he added.  

    With more details expected in the autumn budget, universities are left with two options: pass the cost onto students and become less competitive or absorb the costs and leave less funding for teaching and research, HEPI suggested.  

    While universities haven’t announced to what extent they would try to absorb the extra costs, a reduction in international student numbers – whose fees subsidise university research – would also hamper sector finances.  

    Speaking at a conference last month, the UK skills minister Jacqui Smith maintained the government was “not levying international students directly”, suggesting it would help show students’ economic contribution to local communities.  

    The levy is a shadow looming large over universities as they prepare for the next academic year

    Nick Hillman, HEPI

    “Threatening an expensive new tax on one of the country’s most successful sectors with only a rough idea of how the money will be used seems far from ideal,” said HEPI director Nick Hillman.  

    “Currently, the levy is a shadow looming large over universities as they prepare for the next academic year,” he added.  

    Amid policy volatility in other markets, the UK has increasingly been cited by students as the most stable of the ‘big four’ study destinations, with stakeholders keen to preserve this reputation.

    “There are good reasons why Australia opted not to implement a levy when it was proposed there a couple of years ago,” warned Fothergil.  

    With the UK higher education sector already facing severe financial headwinds, Hillman said university leaders were worried the levy will be “yet another weight dragging them down in the struggle to remain globally competitive”. 

    According to OfS data, 72% of providers could be in deficit by 2025/26, with a sector-wide deficit totalling £1.6bn.  

    Alongside the levy, the government’s white paper proposed shortening the graduate route visa from two years to 18 months, and tougher Basic Compliance Assessments (BCA), with the latter set to be introduced in September.  

    Source link

  • More comprehensive EDI data makes for a clearer picture of staff social mobility

    More comprehensive EDI data makes for a clearer picture of staff social mobility

    Asking more granular EDI questions of its PGRs and staff should be a sector priority. It would enable universities to assess the diversity of their academic populations in the same manner they have done for our undergraduate bodies – but with the addition of a valuable socio-economic lens.

    It would equip us more effectively to answer basic questions regarding how far the diversity in our undergraduate community leads through to our PGT, PGR and academic populations, as well as see where ethnicity and gender intersect with socio-economic status and caring responsibilities to contribute to individuals falling out of (or choosing to leave) the “leaky” academic pipeline.

    One tool to achieve this is the Diversity and Inclusion Survey (DAISY), a creation of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion in Science and Health (EDIS) and the Wellcome Trust. This toolkit outlines how funders and universities can collect more detailed diversity monitoring data of their staff and PGRs as well as individuals involved in research projects.

    DAISY suggests questions regarding socio-economic background and caring responsibilities that nuance or expand upon those already in “equal opportunities”-type application forms that exist in the sector. DAISY asks, for example, whether one has children and/or adult dependents, and how many of each, rather than the usual “yes” or “no” to “do you have caring responsibilities?” Other questions include the occupation of your main household earner when aged 14 (with the option to pick from categories of job type), whether your parents attended university before you were 18, and whether you qualified for free school meals at the age of 14.

    EDI data journeys across the sector

    As part of an evolving data strategy, UCAS already collects several DAISY data points on their applicants, such as school type and eligibility for free school meals, with the latter data point is gaining traction across the university sector and policy bodies as a meaningful indicator for disadvantage.

    Funders are interested in collecting more granular EDI data. The National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), for example, invested around £800 million in the creation of Biomedical Research Centres in the early 2020s. The NIHR encouraged the collection of DAISY data specifically on both the researchers each centre would employ and the individuals they would research upon, in the belief (see theme four of their research inclusion strategy) that a diverse researcher workforce will make medical science more robust.

    The diversity monitoring templates attached to recent UKRI funding schemes similarly highlight the sector’s desire for more granular EDI data. UKRI’s Responsive Mode Scheme, for example, requires institutions to benchmark their applicants against a range of protected characteristics, including ethnicity, gender, and disability, set against the percentage of the “researcher population” at the institution holding those characteristics. The direction of travel in the sector is clear.

    What can universities do?

    Given the data journeys of UCAS and funding bodies, it is sensible and proportionate, therefore, that universities ask more granular EDI questions of their PGRs and their staff. Queen Mary began doing so, using the DAISY toolkit as guide, for its staff and PGRs in October 2024, alongside work to capture similar demographic data in the patient population involved in clinical trials supported by Queen Mary and Barts NHS Health Trust.

    While we have excellent diversity in our undergraduate community, we see less in our PGR and staff communities, and embedding more granular data collection into our central HR processes for staff and admissions processes for PGRs allows us to assess (eventually, at least, given adequate disclosure rates) how far the diversity in our undergraduate population leads through to our PGT, PGR and academic population.

    Embedding the collection of more granular EDI data into central HR and admissions systems required collaboration across Queen Mary’s Research Culture, EDI, and HR teams, creating new information forms and systems to collect the data while ensuring it could be linked to other datasets. The process was also quickened by a clinical trials unit in our Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry who had piloted the collection of this data already on a smaller scale, providing a proof of concept for our colleagues in HR.

    EDI data and the PGR pipeline

    Securing the cooperation of our HR and EDI colleagues was made easier thanks to our doctoral college, who had already incorporated the collection of more granular EDI data into an initiative aimed at increasing the representation of Black British students in our PGR community: the STRIDE programme.

    Standing for “Summer Training Research Initiative to Support Diversity and Equity”, STRIDE gives our BAME undergraduate students the opportunity to undertake an eight-week paid research project over the summer, alongside a weekly soft skills programme including presentation and leadership training. Although the programme has run annually since 2020 with excellent outcomes (almost 70 per cent of the first cohort successfully applied to funded research programmes), incorporating more granular EDI questions into the application form for the 2024 cohort of 425 applicants highlighted intersectional barriers to postgraduate study faced by our applicants that would have been obscured had we only collected basic EDI data.

    Among other insights, 47 per cent of applicants to STRIDE had been eligible at some point for free school meals. This contrasts with our broader undergraduate community, 22 per cent of whom were eligible for free school meals. Some 55 per cent of applicants reported that neither of their parents went to university, and 27 per cent reported that their parents had routine or semi-routine manual jobs. Asking questions beyond the usual suite of EDI questions allows us here to picture more clearly the socio-economic and cultural barriers that intersect with ethnicity to make entry into postgraduate study more difficult for members of underrepresented communities.

    The data chimed with internal research we conducted in 2021, where we discovered that many of the key barriers to our undergraduates engaging in postgraduate research were the same as those who were first in family to go to university, namely lack of family understanding of a further degree and lack of understanding regarding the financial benefits of completing a postgraduate research degree.

    Collecting more granular EDI data will allow us to understand and support diversity that is intersectional, while enabling more effective assessment of whether Queen Mary is moving in the right direction in terms of making research degrees (and research careers) accessible to traditionally underrepresented communities at our universities. But collecting such data on our STRIDE applicants makes little sense without equivalent data from our PGR and academic community – hence Queen Mary’s broader decision to embed DAISY data collection into its systems.

    The potential of DAISY

    As Queen Mary’s experience with STRIDE demonstrates, nuancing our collection of EDI data comes with clear potential. Given adequate disclosure rates, collecting more granular EDI data makes possible more effective intersectional analyses of our PGRs and staff across our sector, and helps understand the social mobility of our PGRs and staff with more nuance, leading to a clearer image of the journey that those from less privileged social backgrounds and/or those with caring responsibilities face across our sector.

    More broadly, universities will always be crucial catalysts of social mobility, and collecting more granular data on socio-economic background alongside the personal data they already collect – such as gender, ethnicity, religion and other protected characteristics – is a logical and necessary next step.

    Source link

  • Data, privacy, and cybersecurity in schools: A 2025 wake-up call

    Data, privacy, and cybersecurity in schools: A 2025 wake-up call

    Key points:

    In 2025, schools are sitting on more data than ever before. Student records, attendance, health information, behavioral logs, and digital footprints generated by edtech tools have turned K-12 institutions into data-rich environments. As artificial intelligence becomes a central part of the learning experience, these data streams are being processed in increasingly complex ways. But with this complexity comes a critical question: Are schools doing enough to protect that data?

    The answer, in many cases, is no.

    The rise of shadow AI

    According to CoSN’s May 2025 State of EdTech District Leadership report, a significant portion of districts, specifically 43 percent, lack formal policies or guidance for AI use. While 80 percent of districts have generative AI initiatives underway, this policy gap is a major concern. At the same time, Common Sense Media’s Teens, Trust and Technology in the Age of AI highlights that many teens have been misled by fake content and struggle to discern truth from misinformation, underscoring the broad adoption and potential risks of generative AI.

    This lack of visibility and control has led to the rise of what many experts call “shadow AI”: unapproved apps and browser extensions that process student inputs, store them indefinitely, or reuse them to train commercial models. These tools are often free, widely adopted, and nearly invisible to IT teams. Shadow AI expands the district’s digital footprint in ways that often escape policy enforcement, opening the door to data leakage and compliance violations. CoSN’s 2025 report specifically notes that “free tools that are downloaded in an ad hoc manner put district data at risk.”

    Data protection: The first pillar under pressure

    The U.S. Department of Education’s AI Toolkit for Schools urges districts to treat student data with the same care as medical or financial records. However, many AI tools used in classrooms today are not inherently FERPA-compliant and do not always disclose where or how student data is stored. Teachers experimenting with AI-generated lesson plans or feedback may unknowingly input student work into platforms that retain or share that data. In the absence of vendor transparency, there is no way to verify how long data is stored, whether it is shared with third parties, or how it might be reused. FERPA requires that if third-party vendors handle student data on behalf of the institution, they must comply with FERPA. This includes ensuring data is not used for unintended purposes or retained for AI training.

    Some tools, marketed as “free classroom assistants,” require login credentials tied to student emails or learning platforms. This creates additional risks if authentication mechanisms are not protected or monitored. Even widely-used generative tools may include language in their privacy policies allowing them to use uploaded content for system training or performance optimization.

     

    Data processing and the consent gap

    Generative AI models are trained on large datasets, and many free tools continue learning from user prompts. If a student pastes an essay or a teacher includes student identifiers in a prompt, that information could enter a commercial model’s training loop. This creates a scenario where data is being processed without explicit consent, potentially in violation of COPPA (Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act) and FERPA. While the FTC’s December 2023 update to the COPPA Rule did not codify school consent provisions, existing guidance still allows schools to consent to technology use on behalf of parents in educational contexts. However, the onus remains on schools to understand and manage these consent implications, especially with the rule’s new amendments becoming effective June 21, 2025, which strengthen protections and require separate parental consent for third-party disclosures for targeted advertising.

    Moreover, many educators and students are unaware of what constitutes “personally identifiable information” (PII) in these contexts. A name combined with a school ID number, disability status, or even a writing sample could easily identify a student, especially in small districts. Without proper training, well-intentioned AI use can cross legal lines unknowingly.

    Cybersecurity risks multiply

    AI tools have also increased the attack surface of K-12 networks. According to ThreatDown’s 2024 State of Ransomware in Education report, ransomware attacks on K-12 schools increased by 92 percent between 2022 and 2023, with 98 total attacks in 2023. This trend is projected to continue as cybercriminals use AI to create more targeted phishing campaigns and detect system vulnerabilities faster. AI-assisted attacks can mimic human language and tone, making them harder to detect. Some attackers now use large language models to craft personalized emails that appear to come from school administrators.

    Many schools lack endpoint protection for student devices, and third-party integrations often bypass internal firewalls. Free AI browser extensions may collect keystrokes or enable unauthorized access to browser sessions. The more tools that are introduced without IT oversight, the harder it becomes to isolate and contain incidents when they occur. CoSN’s 2025 report indicates that 60 percent of edtech leaders are “very concerned about AI-enabled cyberattacks,” yet 61 percent still rely on general funds for cybersecurity efforts, not dedicated funding.

    Building a responsible framework

    To mitigate these risks, school leaders need to:

    • Audit tool usage using platforms like Lightspeed Digital Insight to identify AI tools being accessed without approval. Districts should maintain a living inventory of all digital tools. Lightspeed Digital Insight, for example, is vetted by 1EdTech for data privacy.
    • Develop and publish AI use policies that clarify acceptable practices, define data handling expectations, and outline consequences for misuse. Policies should distinguish between tools approved for instructional use and those requiring further evaluation.
    • Train educators and students to understand how AI tools collect and process data, how to interpret AI outputs critically, and how to avoid inputting sensitive information. AI literacy should be embedded in digital citizenship curricula, with resources available from organizations like Common Sense Media and aiEDU.
    • Vet all third-party apps through standards like the 1EdTech TrustEd Apps program. Contracts should specify data deletion timelines and limit secondary data use. The TrustEd Apps program has vetted over 12,000 products, providing a valuable resource for districts.
    • Simulate phishing attacks and test breach response protocols regularly. Cybersecurity training should be required for staff, and recovery plans must be reviewed annually.

    Trust starts with transparency

    In the rush to embrace AI, schools must not lose sight of their responsibility to protect students’ data and privacy. Transparency with parents, clarity for educators, and secure digital infrastructure are not optional. They are the baseline for trust in the age of algorithmic learning.

    AI can support personalized learning, but only if we put safety and privacy first. The time to act is now. Districts that move early to build policies, offer training, and coordinate oversight will be better prepared to lead AI adoption with confidence and care.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Strategic planning pays off for MENA region in QS rankings

    Strategic planning pays off for MENA region in QS rankings

    Universities across the MENA region have made significant strides in the latest 2026 QS World University Rankings (WUR), reflecting a sustained push in attracting international institutions and students.

    From a previous list of 88 institutions featured in the rankings last year, the numbers increased to a total of 115 in 2026, with the region’s most notable climb being that of King Fahad University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia, which has been listed in the top 100 globally at a rank of 67 – a historic record for institutions in the region.

    The 16 MENA countries also added 27 new entries from across nine countries, second as a region only to Asia, which added 54 new institutions from across 19 countries.

    Among these, the University of Tripoli marked Libya’s debut in the QS WUR. Apart from Libya, only two other countries, Guatemala and Honduras, entered the rankings for the first time this year, each with one institution.

    When examining year-on-year changes, some 53% of institutions in the MENA region either maintained or improved their global ranking, while only 23% saw a decline.

    This is the lowest proportion of declining institutions among all global regions, outperforming Europe, where the maintain/improve versus decline rate stands at 52% to 44%, and Australia and New Zealand (AUNZ), where the rate is 36% to 61%.

    Countries that are part of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, all share a common approach in making significant investments in research and education, aligned with bold national visions.

    Collectively, GCC countries outperform the MENA region average across all nine QS World University Rankings indicators. Their institutions particularly excel under the global engagement lens, which looks at internationalisation indicators such as international faculty ratio (IFR), international student ratio (ISR), and international research network (IRN). This reflects their strong global appeal in attracting international talent and fostering cross-border academic collaboration.

    Saudi Arabia leads MENA region

    Among the top 25 countries by number of ranked institutions, Saudi Arabia leads the MENA region – with 22 universities featured in the QS WUR 2026, six more than in 2024. The overall average score of Saudi institutions increased by 38%, from 20.7 to 28.5, over the past two editions.

    These advancements are arguably a result of Saudi’s 2030 Vision, as the country promised to have at least five of its universities among the top 200 universities in international rankings, thus budgeting for substantial funding for research, university-industry collaboration, and global partnerships.

    The rankings come as Dubai expands its international branch campus ecosystem, aiming to host 50% international students by 2030 as a part of its Education 33 strategy, positioning itself as an international education hub.

    Qatar also finds itself in a similar position, as Qatar University moved 10 places up to reach 112 globally. The country’s investment in research infrastructure and faculty recruitment has improved its performance in citations per faculty – a key QS metric.

    The Qatar National Vision 2030 aims to establish a world-class education system aligned with labour market needs, offering high-quality, accessible learning for all stages of life. It emphasises the development of independent and accountable institutions, robust public-private research funding, and active global engagement in cultural and scientific domains.

    Meanwhile, outside the GCC, four other countries have shown particularly impressive performances: Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. These countries rank among the top six in the MENA region in terms of ranked institutions, sharing the spotlight with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

    According to QS’s Best Student Cities rankings, Jordan’s capital, Amman, is now the best city in the Middle East. Additionally, Jordan saw multiple universities ranked in the WUR this year, with the University of Jordan, Jordan University of Science and Technology, and the German Jordanian University improving in previous years.

    While none have yet reached the global top 400, the country is investing in STEM-focused faculty and expanding regional collaborations, especially with the Gulf.

    Meanwhile, Egypt now has 13 institutions featured in QS rankings, with Cairo University, Ain Shams University, and The American University in Cairo (AUC) leading the way.

    And in Lebanon, the American University of Beirut remains the top Lebanese institution and one of the top institutions in the MENA region.

    Despite geopolitical tensions in Lebanon, a surprise improvement occurred as the Lebanese University (LU) climbed from 577 globally in 2024 to 515 in the WUR 2026. And after the Lebanese American University placed round 701-710 globally in 2025, in 2026 it projected to 535 on the list.

    What’s next?

    Stakeholders discussed the potential reasons why universities from the MENA region have shown such a marked jump in the ranking yea on year.

    “From my perspective, key drivers include stronger institutional strategies around internationalisation, improved research output, and increasing collaborations with global partners,” Gulf Medical University academic quality assurance & institutional effectiveness specialist, Salaheldin Mostafa Khalifa, told The PIE News.

    “We can expect continued upward momentum for MENA universities in global rankings. Many institutions are investing heavily in research infrastructure, international collaborations, and faculty development,” he added.

    Meanwhile, QS broke down the “sustained progress” that universities in the regions have seen over the past year.

    We can expect continued upward momentum for MENA universities in global rankings. Many institutions are investing heavily in research infrastructure, international collaborations, and faculty development
    Salaheldin Mostafa Khalifa, Gulf Medical University

    “There are clear signs of upward momentum,” said product and research advisor at QS, Wesley Siquera, noting that the umber of ranked MENA institutions had jumped from 84 to 115 between the QS WUR 2024 and 2026 editions.

    “Finally, national development strategies provide strong indicators of where future progress may come from,” he added. “Several of the regional ‘visions’ explicitly set goals for placing domestic universities among the world’s top institutions. If these targets are met, we could see by 2030: three Omani universities in the top 500, five Saudi universities in the top 200, and seven Egyptian universities in the top 500.”

    Source link