Category: Demographics

  • Engaging policy review to smooth lumpy futures into transformative higher education

    Engaging policy review to smooth lumpy futures into transformative higher education

    Hamish Coates, Ellen Hazelkorn, Hans de Wit, Tessa Delaquil, and Angel Calderon

    Hans de Wit, Ellen Hazelkorn and Hamish Coates are editors and Tessa DeLaquil is associate editor of Policy Reviews in Higher Education. Angel Calderon is a member of the PRiHE Editorial Board. This blog is based on their editorial for issue 2, 2025.

    It often feels like there is lots more ranting and moaning than imagining and evidencing around higher education these days. With excellent policy research, it does not have to be this way.

    The immediate post-millennium era was arguably a golden age for universities, with huge interest in massification, investment, especially in research, and institutional autonomy. But the global financial crisis followed a decade later by global pandemic shocked higher education into different worlds. Most countries still promulgate objectives for a sustainable and cost-efficient, equitable and accessible, high quality education system as the basis for growth. In OECD countries, however, assumptions that massification would on its own provide opportunities for everyone with mechanisms for social inclusion and social mobility are being heavily questioned. In developing and emerging economies, the challenge is meeting demand and being able to absorb graduates. Yet, too many countries and research-focused universities keep chasing ‘quick prestige’, leaving others to put up with disproportionately lower funding, as well as poorer facilities, resources and opportunities.

    Wealth and opportunity inequalities are increasingly greater within rather than between countries. At the same time, questions about educational outcomes such as employability, skills gaps and skills mismatches and over-qualification which have been long ignored by academic communities as irrelevant, are gaining public and policy traction. Governments and industries document the shift away from credentials towards greater focus on competencies – what people can do with what they know – and alternative accreditation processes.

    A few large countries are in the foothills of a demographic cliff, while others are (currently) privileged by demand. Traditional public systems in many countries face an identity crisis and appear too sluggish to grasp new opportunities. Parts of the private subsector are progressively active and more responsive to the needs of diverse and older learners and to competency-based learning, micro-credentials and other forms of just-in-time learning. Accordingly, the private sector is the fastest growing segment of postsecondary education worldwide.

    Countries vary considerably in their ability to cover costs associated with policy objectives due to revenue challenges and competitive demands elsewhere within society and the economy, alongside student and public unease about cost. Certain systems promote a laissez-faire or marketised approach whereby individual colleges and institutions (public and private) pursue their own agendas, while others grasp at opportunities for a more strategic state-led approach. Countries are beginning to examine the opportunities of a more joined-up post-secondary tertiary system (Hazelkorn, 2025). As Piketty has written, “it is access to skills and diffusion of knowledge that allow inequality to be reduced both within countries and at the international level” (2020: 534). But funding a mass system is very different from one catering to a small minority especially at a time when geopolitical/geoeconomic power shifts reshape the global landscape.

    Deglobalisation and populist nationalism are shaking these issues out differently around the world. In many countries, these tensions are contributing to a growing sense of people and communities being left behind, and to social unrest. The dominance of information technology over universities, challenging the value of graduates for entry-level work and of faculty, will spur heightened questioning of the value of higher education (Coates, 2017; The Guardian, 2025; Roose, 2025). While others look on in disbelief, there is a sense that this may not be a problem for higher education today, though it is likely to be so one day.

    It is too easy to blame governments and other external stakeholders. What role has higher education played itself, and what role can it play into the future? Is the sector, especially the public side, sufficiently strategic, forward-looking and adaptable? What are the implications for the governance of the system and of its many institutions? Or is it wandering unchained in the global wilds? Universities praise themselves as being one of the world’s oldest and most enduring institution, but as Darwin said: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”

    Once, such questions may have been ludicrous to provoke at the outset of a Policy Reviews in Higher Education (PRIHE) editorial. Not anymore. Accordingly, in the balance of this editorial we sketch frontier topics which higher education can embrace to drive positive reform, then current journal contributions (Figure 1). We conclude with a call to engage and transform.

    Figure 1: Current and frontier contributions

    Any higher education policy zealot who has read Arnold Lobel’s brilliant treatise on Owl’s strange bumps in the bed (in which the Owl is afraid to go to sleep because of two strange bumps at the bottom of his bed, which are, in fact, his feet) (Lobel, 1982) understands that fear is created by running scared and can be tackled by uncovering and addressing matters in ways that unlock innovation and progress.

    Policy Reviews in Higher Education plays this important role, though to date with fewer endearing drawings. Springing from inspiring intellectual dialogue with a member of the PRIHE Editorial Board and consequently guest author, Angel Calderon, we mark out a handful of narratives to carry forward policy research over the coming decades:

    • Moving beyond academic comfort communities
    • Handling looming demographic shifts and diversity
    • Addressing concerns about academic value
    • Creatively unpacking university clusterings and characteristics
    • Leaders who lead in smart ways.

    Higher education researchers must explore how universities and the academics who comprise them can move beyond comfort communities. This means finding ways to move beyond conservative research literatures and straightjacketing bibliometrics, beyond discipline and collegial communities, beyond the academic treadmill, beyond the subsector itself, and beyond naval-gazing research. A doctorate followed by decades toiling in the same institution is no prudent recipe for forging broader cognitive or tangible engagement with enterprise and industry (public and private) and the broader world. How can career trajectories be redefined to evoke and even provoke experimentation, fertilisation, and broader contribution?

    Policy researchers must find productive ways for helping universities handle looming demographic shifts. The Asian investment in higher education which has fuelled the last thirty years will plateau and in major instances decline. Smart countries and universities are already looking beyond increasingly risky ‘foreign and school-leaver markets’ at reconfigured alignments with career-inspiring work and adult life. As yet, however, few if any countries have policy and associated regulation or funding to spur new ventures and directions. Beyond the sensible need for regional or perhaps global ‘harmonisation’, what is the scope for more imaginative forward-thinking about the sort of institutional reconfigurations needed to deliver for societies in 2050? Also, universities continue to see international students as an alternative for demographic declines as well as for income generation, adopting imperialist approaches to new markets rather than anticipating global and local shifts. Internationalisation is still seen as an income source based on mobility flows, instead of as a possible change agent for innovation in education, research and service to society.

    Genuine political concerns about academic quality and value are unlikely to be assuaged by fluffing up the fame of elite researchers who typically have little to do with students or voting communities. Graduate outcomes and relevance are some of the most pressing challenges for all governments pushing people to question the value of higher education and ensure it translates into good jobs. Broadening rankings to include topics like sustainability, while useful, misses the more substantial need to focus on local engagement rather than global striving. It is folly to think that all the ~88,000 higher education institutions (UNESCO, 2022: 12) should aspire to look the same. Pursuit of ‘world-class’ sameness is no substitute for critical research and delivery of more robust and compelling public information on value, quality of educational delivery and outcomes, and at the same time nuanced differentiation of the difference each and every institution can make. And arguably rankings bear increasing responsibility for distorting funding allocations and institutional/government priorities across many post-secondary systems.

    Higher education sector growth in recent decades has spawned exciting, misunderstood and very important institutional and national configurations. There is an urgent need to creatively unpack university clusterings. Far too much time and money has been invested in studying groups characterised by bibliometric performance. More interestingly, there are university-defined groups, ranging from ‘presidents’ dinner clubs’ to disciplinary groups of nationally aligned associations. There are broader political, cultural and religious associations. There are groups connected through graduate or professional diasporas, or research connections. There is an emergent clustering of associations shaped by geopolitical/geoeconomic and national security imperatives. Ownership and tax-status has long been a means of shuffling universities into groups. What novel patterns and projections can be revealed?

    Leading universities and the sector in smart ways will be imperative to ensuring the sector’s promise does not demise. Finding effective leaders is an obvious necessary step, which surprisingly little research has clarified. Cultivating and developing leaders is an obvious next step, though it is tackled in so many perplexing ways. Diversity is important, of course, including in intellectual as well as manifest characteristics. Assuring value and delivery is paramount, with increasing suspicions but to date far too little warrant is given to importing governance techniques from other sectors. Strengthening institutional governance and management is required to ensure that the right leaders are appointed and that they have the capacity and capability to deal with more frequent and overlapping crises and conflicting externalities in uncertain circumstances. There should be willingness to find new ways to govern tertiary education sectors more robustly considering turbulence and increased uncertainty and the level of emergent discord between the public and universities. No doubt policy governance can be tricky, but it needs to be more strategic and forward thinking, willing to take innovative steps to ensure the education system meets the needs of all learners and society. Governance systems were designed based on periods of relative stability and the occasional minor disturbance. What can be done, for instance, to build more resilient leadership for public and private vocational and higher education, encouraging active engagement with each other and their communities beyond the campus? Is there renewed scope to refresh ‘old public management’?

    With the intent of curating even more purposeful contributions, PRIHErecently launched a call for experts around the world to curate cognate collections on a high-impact policy contributions. These contributions which relate to hot topics in higher education policy seek to engage a group of scholars around important themes, and work with the journal and related networks to convene hybrid global seminars and deliver substantial insights on consequential frontier issues. PRIHE’s Editorial Board and Editors have spotlighted six shaping themes which raise questions, insights and issues to be addressed by policy, drawing on experiences from around the world. These include:

    • Proving contributions: Restoring public trust in higher education and universities
    • Emerging formations: Transnational, online and private higher education, regulation, ethics
    • Geopolitical upheavals: Collaboration, sovereignty, nationalism, deregulation
    • Global challenges: Sustaining autonomy, academic freedom, purposeful research, independence
    • Lifelong learning: Valuing higher learning and skills across the lifespan, and
    • Valuing education: Raising the profile of large-scale teaching and learning.

    Higher education in many if not most countries is confronting strong headwinds and needs strident thinking and reform rather than rent-seeking complacency. Carving out intellectual architectures to stimulate dialogue from disorder creates tailwinds for the tough work then required to create and promulgate the evidence which may sway policy and reform practice. In this editorial we have advanced a handful of non-ignorable developments as a guide for authorship, deliberation, and reforming practice.

    Reference: Hazelkorn, E (2025) ‘Building a Unified Tertiary Education System. Trends and Propositions to Provoke Discussion, Trending Topics’ New Directions for Community Colleges  Forthcoming.

    Professor Ellen Hazelkorn is Joint Managing Partner, BH Associates. She is Professor Emeritus, Technological University Dublin.

    Hamish Coates is professor of public policy, director of the Higher Education Futures Lab, and global tertiary education expert.

    Hans de Wit is Professor Emeritus and Distinguished Fellow of the Boston College Center for International Higher Education, Senior Fellow of the international Association of Universities.

    Tessa DeLaquil is postdoctoral research fellow at the School of Education at University College Dublin.

    Angel Calderon is Director of Strategic Insights at RMIT University and expert on global tertiary education.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

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

    Source link

  • Higher Ed Join March on Wall Street to Defend DEI Programs

    Higher Ed Join March on Wall Street to Defend DEI Programs

    NEW YORK — The early morning mist hung over Lower Manhattan as buses began arriving from campuses across America. From Historically Black Colleges and Universities in the South to state flagships in the Midwest, from community colleges in New Jersey to Ivy League institutions in New England, students and faculty poured into New York City with a singular purpose: to stand with the Rev. Al Sharpton in defending diversity, equity and inclusion programs under siege.

    Thursday’s “March on Wall Street” drew thousands to Manhattan’s Financial District, but among the clergy, labor and community leaders were hundreds of higher education advocates who had traveled from every corner of the nation, transforming the demonstration into an unlikely convergence of campus and community activism.

    The 45-minute march through downtown Manhattan carried special significance, timed to coincide with the anniversary of the Civil Rights-era March on Washington in 1963. But this time, the target wasn’t the nation’s capital—it was corporate America’s headquarters.

    “We come to Wall Street rather than Washington this year to let them know, you can try to turn back the clock, but you can’t turn back time,” Sharpton said as the demonstration began at New York’s popular Foley Square. 

    For the academics who joined the march, Sharpton’s words resonated with particular urgency. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald J. Trump has successfully moved to end DEI programs within the federal government and warned schools to do the same or risk losing federal money.

    Dr. Harold Williams, an adjunct sociology professor from Philadelphia who had driven three hours with a van full of colleagues, clutched a handmade sign reading “Education is Democracy.”  

    “We’re watching the systematic destruction of everything we’ve worked to build,” said the 63-year-old educator, who was just one when his mother brought him to Washington, D.C. on August 28, 1963  to hear Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., deliver his famous “I Have a Dream” speech.  “They’re not just cutting programs, they’re cutting the pathways that opened higher education to an entire generation of students.”

    Among the crowd that gathered near the African Burial Ground—the largest known resting place of enslaved and freed Africans in the country—Dr. Michael Eric Dyson’s voice carried the weight of history and the urgency of the present moment.

    The prominent Vanderbilt University professor and public intellectual delivered a rousing address along with a litany of other activists including Marc H. Morial of the National Urban League, Maya Wiley of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers. 

    “Well, you know, people often ask, what was it like? They look at the grainy black and white photos of Martin Luther King Jr. and Ralph Abernathy and Rosa Parks and Ella Baker and Diane Nash and John Lewis. What was it like to be with them?” Dyson said in an interview with Diverse.  

    “Well, you know right now, these are the times that define us. These times to future generations will be remarkable. What did you do with the fascist presidency, with an authoritarian man, with an autocrat who was attempting to absorb for himself all the power that was not due him? Well, this is what it looks like.”

    Dyson’s words particularly resonated among the young activists in the crowd—students who had grown up during an era of increasing attacks on institutional knowledge and educational access.

    The logistics of moving academics from campuses nationwide told its own story of commitment. Many had used personal funds or organized fundraisers to join what some called an “academic pilgrimage” to stand with Sharpton and the broader civil rights community.  Howard University organized a busload from the nation’s capital.

    Jonah Cohen, 18, a freshman at City College of New York, said that he was energized by the public demonstration of activism.

    “This is our moment,” he said of the student turnout. “We are no longer accepting these attacks without a fight. We are fighting back against those who want to take us back to an uglier America. We see a better country.” 

    State Assembly Member Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic candidate in the upcoming New York City mayoral race, marched alongside some of the professors and students, embodying the coalition between academic and political leadership that advocates say is necessary to resist the rollbacks.

    The National Action Network’s strategy of encouraging consumer boycotts of retailers that have scaled back DEI policies resonated with many academics who said that they understood the connection between corporate and educational equity initiatives.

    “Corporate America wants to walk away from Black communities, so we are marching to them to bring this fight to their doorstep,” Sharpton said.

     

    Source link

  • National Urban League Report Examines Five Years After George Floyd: “A Movement, Not a Moment”

    National Urban League Report Examines Five Years After George Floyd: “A Movement, Not a Moment”

    The National Urban League has released a new report examining the progress and setbacks in the fight for racial justice in the five years since George Marc MorialFloyd’s murder, challenging Americans to view the ongoing struggle as “a movement, not a moment.”

    The report, titled “George Floyd Five Years Later: Was it a Moment or a Movement?” traces the trajectory of racial justice initiatives since May 25, 2020, when Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. It details how initial outrage and corporate pledges of more than $66 billion for racial justice programs have faced increasing backlash, culminating in recent executive orders eliminating federal diversity programs.

    “History will judge us – not by how we responded in the days after George Floyd’s death, but by what we are building five, ten, and twenty years later,” said Marc H. Morial, President and CEO of the National Urban League. “The fight for justice, safety, and dignity is far from over—and the stakes for our democracy could not be higher.”

    The report chronicles how Floyd’s murder ignited what it calls “one of the most significant calls for racial justice in generations,” with protests spanning from Minneapolis to Madrid demanding police accountability and government action to address systemic inequities.

    While the initial response was robust – with corporations, higher education institutions, philanthropy, and nonprofits pledging billions to confront systemic racism – the report documents how commitments have significantly eroded. Data revealed that DEI job postings declined 44% from 2022 to 2023, and major companies like Google and Meta scaled back programs supporting Black talent.

    The report details a pattern of progress and regression across several administrations. Under President Biden, the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, led by Kristen Clarke, convicted more than 180 police officers for civil rights violations and investigated 12 police departments. President Biden’s executive order on safe policing created a national database to track police misconduct and banned chokeholds for federal officers.

    In stark contrast, the report notes that the second Trump administration “eliminated all DEI initiatives across the federal government on Day One” and “froze all open DOJ civil rights investigations.”

    “Five years after George Floyd’s murder, we are living in a different America,” the report states. “As President Trump began his second term, he signed various executive orders gutting federal diversity programs and efforts. This led to corporations and institutions of higher education abandoning their commitments to racial justice and eliminating their diversity programs altogether.”

    The National Urban League’s response has been multifaceted. The organization established a new division, Equitable Justice and Strategic Initiatives (EJSI), to advocate for justice system reforms. It developed “21 Pillars for Redefining Public Safety and Restoring Community Trust” as a framework for police reform and created a “D3” platform based on three principles: Defend Democracy, Demand Diversity, and Defeat Poverty.

    In early 2025, the organization convened the Demand Diversity Roundtable, an emergency strategy session to confront threats posed by the new administration’s actions against civil and human rights. With partners, they filed a lawsuit challenging what they describe as “unconstitutional anti-equity executive orders.”

    “It is of the utmost urgency that we rise to defend not only the progress made in the years immediately after George Floyd’s murder, but of the last 60 years,” Morial emphasized in the report.

    Despite the setbacks, the report presents evidence that public sentiment still largely supports diversity efforts. It cites polling showing 61% of Americans believe diverse employees positively impact organizations, and 75% agree more needs to be done to guarantee everyone is advancing.

    “Despite challenges and headwinds coming our way, we are doubling down on the fight for a more equitable and just world, where our classrooms, offices, and boardrooms reflect who America is,” the report concludes.

    The 14-page report, designed with a striking red cover featuring Floyd’s name, includes a timeline of events from 2020 to 2025 and offers practical guidance for citizens wanting to protect their rights, including consistently checking voter registration status and supporting organizations fighting for equity.

    Morial’s message is clear: “As the moment of 2020 fades for some, we are positioned to lead the movement for a more just America where all Americans can live safe, full lives and thrive.”

    Source link

  • The Boycott That Could Shake Corporate America

    The Boycott That Could Shake Corporate America

    Reverend Al SharptonNEW YORK–

    The National Action Network (NAN) is preparing to launch a nationwide boycott against PepsiCo if the company doesn’t reverse its recent decision to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives within the next three weeks.

    In a powerful letter sent to PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta on Friday, Rev. Al Sharpton expressed “profound disappointment” that the company would abandon inclusion commitments that helped build its brand and fostered trust with millions of customers.

    “You have walked away from equity,” Sharpton wrote, arguing that removing DEI hiring and retention goals and dismantling community partnerships with minority organizations “are clear signals that political pressure has outweighed principle.”

    At the National Action Network Saturday Action Rally, Sharpton intensified his message:

    “This morning at the National Action Network Saturday Action Rally, I gave PepsiCo 21 days. Not to think about it, to reverse course on walking away from DEI. We helped to build their brand. We won’t fund our own exclusion. If they don’t respond, we begin the boycott. We will not be silent while our dollars are used against our dignity.”

    Sharpton announced plans for a major demonstration on August 28th, the annual commemoration of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr’s 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech.  “And on August 28th, we’re taking it to Wall Street. From the African Burial Ground in the financial district, we will show them what economic power looks like. We’re not asking. We’re organizing. We’re not your consumers. We are your conscience.”

    The boycott threat comes at a pivotal moment for PepsiCo. In a memo sent to employees in February, Laguarta announced the company would no longer set goals for minority representation in its managerial roles or supplier base.

    At the NAN convention held over the weekend, a panel of academicians and journalists discussed the implications of corporate retreats from DEI commitments. The panel, moderated by Dr. Jamal Watson of Diverse: Issues In Higher Education who is a professor and associate dean of graduate studies at Trinity Washington University, included Dr. Michael Eric Dyson of Vanderbilt University, Christina M. Greer of Fordham University, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Annette Gordon-Reed of Harvard (who is also president of the Organization of American Historians), and Natasha Alford of The Grio. The distinguished panel examined the historical context and potential consequences of corporations abandoning diversity initiatives under political pressure.

    What makes this particularly striking is PepsiCo’s historical position as a diversity pioneer. As Sharpton pointed out in his letter, in the 1940s and 1950s, PepsiCo hired some of the first Black sales and marketing executives in corporate America, and by the 1980s the company had created Black consumer advisory boards.

    “You did this not because it was easy — but because it was right,” Sharpton wrote. “That legacy is now in jeopardy.”

    Sharpton himself sat on PepsiCo’s African American advisory board in the early 2000s, giving him personal insight into the company’s previous commitments to diversity.

    A boycott of PepsiCo wouldn’t just affect supermarket shelves. It could send significant ripples across college and university campuses nationwide, many of which have exclusive contracts with PepsiCo to provide beverages and snacks.

    These exclusivity agreements often provide substantial revenue for educational institutions, with PepsiCo products filling vending machines, cafeterias, and campus convenience stores. Many colleges rely on these contracts not just for the direct financial benefits but also for sponsorships of campus activities and athletic programs.

    A successful boycott could force university administrators to choose between honoring student activism supporting diversity initiatives and maintaining lucrative corporate relationships. This potential conflict comes at a time when many academic institutions are already facing scrutiny over their own DEI policies. Several college presidents reached over the weekend have told Diverse that if a boycott goes into effect, they would consider canceling their contracts with the corporate giant. 

    Student activist groups across the country are likely to be energized by NAN’s boycott, potentially organizing their own campus-specific actions targeting PepsiCo products. This could create pressure points at universities that have traditionally been centers for social justice movements.

    PepsiCo’s rollback of DEI initiatives is part of a concerning trend. Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House earlier this year, U.S. government agencies, companies, and schools have scrambled to reevaluate policies and programs aimed at increasing diversity among employees and reducing discrimination against members of minority groups, women, and LGBTQ+ people.

    Trump ended DEI programs within the federal government and has warned schools to do the same or risk losing federal money. Large retailers like Walmart and Target have also phased out DEI initiatives since Trump took office.

    What makes PepsiCo’s position particularly notable is that it contrasts sharply with its major competitor, Coca-Cola, which recently reaffirmed support for its DEI efforts. In its annual report, Atlanta-based Coke warned that the inability to attract employees that reflect its broad range of customers could negatively affect its business.

    “Failure to maintain a corporate culture that fosters innovation, collaboration and inclusion… could disrupt our operations and adversely affect our business and our future success,” the company stated.

    As NAN’s deadline approaches, all eyes will be on PepsiCo’s response—and the potential ripple effects across corporate America if one of the country’s largest food and beverage companies faces a coordinated boycott over walking back its diversity commitments.

    Source link

  • One Million Behind Bars Now Have Access to Academic Research Through JSTOR

    One Million Behind Bars Now Have Access to Academic Research Through JSTOR

    In a significant development for educational access in correctional facilities, the JSTOR Access in Prison (JAIP) program has reached a remarkable milestone, now serving over one million incarcerated learners across the United States. This achievement represents a doubling of the program’s reach in just over a year.

    The program, which provides incarcerated individuals with access to scholarly materials including academic journals, books, and research papers, crossed this threshold in December 2024. Two pivotal agreements helped fuel this expansion: a new partnership with the Federal Bureau of Prisons that introduced JSTOR to two federal facilities, and an expansion of an existing arrangement with the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry (ADCRR).

    The ADCRR agreement is particularly noteworthy as it evolved from initially serving approximately 3,000 people enrolled in higher education programs to now reaching nearly 40,000 individuals in Arizona’s prison system, regardless of their educational enrollment status.

    “People in prisons use JSTOR the same way as people on the outside,” said Stacy Burnett, senior manager for the Access in Prison program. She explained that while many users pursue structured educational goals like degrees and certificates, others engage in self-directed learning, highlighting the diverse educational needs being met.

    The impact of this access extends far beyond traditional education. Users have reported that JSTOR has helped them build community connections, save money on research-related expenses, and gain new perspectives on their circumstances. In one remarkable case, research conducted through JSTOR led an incarcerated individual to request a health screening that ultimately saved that individual’s life.

    Some users have even leveraged their research to draft legislation supporting prison reentry programs, with one such proposal currently under consideration in North Carolina’s legislature.

    These success stories underscore the program’s value in developing academic research and analytical skills that can serve as important bridges to life after incarceration. “It’s a valuable reentry tool for civic engagement. It gets people to think more deeply,” Burnett explained.

    Since 2019, the program has seen dramatic growth, supported by grants from the Mellon Foundation and the Ascendium Education Group. Today, more than 95% of U.S. state and federal prison facilities provide access to JSTOR, with the program active in 24 countries worldwide.

    Building on this momentum, the JSTOR Access in Prison program has secured $800,000 in new funding commitments to support expansion into U.S. jails, which typically operate at local rather than state or federal levels.

    Despite the impressive one million user milestone, Burnett emphasizes that this represents just half of the incarcerated population in the United States and only 10% of those incarcerated globally. ITHAKA, JSTOR’s parent organization, has stated its ambition to eventually make educational resources available to all incarcerated individuals worldwide.

    As the program continues to grow, supporters add that it’s a powerful example of how access to educational resources can transform lives, even within the constraints of incarceration.

    Source link

  • From Small-Town Roots to National Honor: SC Native Receives State’s Highest Award

    From Small-Town Roots to National Honor: SC Native Receives State’s Highest Award

    From the small town of Lyman, South Carolina, Dr. James L. Moore’s journey to success is one he attributes to the steadfast support of his mother and the historical Dr. James L. Moore IIItrailblazers whose influence shaped his path to distinction.

    On Saturday, Jan. 25, Moore—a Distinguished Professor of Urban Education at The Ohio State University (OSU) and executive director of the Todd Anthony Bell National Resource Center—was awarded the Order of the Palmetto—South Carolina’s highest civilian honor established in 1971. The prestigious award is presented by the governor to individuals who have demonstrated extraordinary lifetime achievement, service, and contributions of national or statewide significance.

    “To be honored and to receive the highest honor to a civilian of South Carolina is so humbling,” said Moore in an interview with Diverse. “Service to humanity is the hallmark of philosophy, and in many ways, it shaped who I am and what I’m about in my day to day. All that I am and that I hope to be, has been shaped by my experience growing up in South Carolina.”

    Moore follows in the footsteps of other legendary leaders from South Carolina who’ve received the honor, many of whom broke down barriers throughout history, paving the way for him and others to succeed. Moore said that it’s not lost on him that he’s in the tradition of a long line of South Carolina humanitarians.

    “The state has a complex history, some of which is painful to reflect on, but it is where my family, some of whom arrived as enslaved Africans, created community from the most difficult of circumstances,” he said. “They built opportunities for people like me. South Carolina is special to me, not only for its rich and sometimes painful history, but because 10% to 15% of all Black Americans can trace their roots here.” 

    The state, he said, has produced a legacy of excellence, from singer James Brown and tennis great Althea Gibson to educator Mary McLeod Bethune. 

    “I just want to make sure that I forever acknowledge and recognize the contributions and the giants that I stand on their shoulders,” said Moore, who pointed to the late Dr. Benjamin Elijah Mays—the former president of Morehouse College—as a model for educational and humanitarian excellence.

    A nationally recognized education expert and leader, Moore has had a distinguished career in higher education and has been applauded for his work promoting educational excellence and access for all. Throughout his fabulous career, he has won numerous international and national accolades. 

    His research spans multiple disciplines, including school counseling, urban education, and STEM education. He has co-authored seven books and more than 160 publications, secured nearly $40 million in funding, and delivered more than 200 scholarly presentations globally. Moore’s contributions to education have earned him recognition, including being named one of Education Week’s 200 most influential scholars in the U.S. since 2018.

    Dr. Jerlando F.L. Jackson, Dean of the College of Education and Foundation Professor of Education at Michigan State University, praised Moore’s impact, citing the ripple effect his leadership has created within the American education system.

    “Dr. Moore’s influence extends far beyond his own accomplishments,” said Jackson, who has known Moore since their days as graduate students and have collaborated with him on a number of initiatives and projects, including the International Colloquium on Black Males in Education. “Through his leadership, he is empowering educators, policymakers, and community leaders to reimagine what is possible with South Carolina in mind,” Jackson said.  

    Moore’s focus on education access, preparation, innovation, and opportunities “has not only improved outcomes for today’s students but has also laid the foundation for a brighter future for generations to come,” Jackson added. “He is the kind of leader who sees potential in everyone, and he works tirelessly to help others realize their dreams, regardless of their backgrounds. Whether mentoring a young scholar or speaking at a community event, Dr. Moore connects with people in ways that are deeply inspiring and transformative.”

    Moore’s work has focused on closing opportunity gaps, increasing access to quality education, and addressing disparities that disproportionately affect educational vulnerable student populations. Through his research and leadership, Jackson said that Moore has not only informed policy, but also directly influenced educational practices that all have benefited from, including South Carolina.

    Dr. Eric Tucker, President & CEO of The Study Group, agrees.

    “His tireless dedication to inclusive excellence proves that one visionary can unite and uplift entire communities, sparking transformative educational change at the secondary and postsecondary levels,” said Tucker, who lauded Moore’s efforts to help undergraduate scholars secure prestigious fellowships, including the Rhodes and Truman Scholarships. As executive director of the Todd Anthony Bell National Resource Center on the African American Male, he reimagined OSU’s Early Arrival Program, offering mentorship and leadership opportunities to support young Black men and boys in their pursuit of higher education.

    “From a small-town upbringing to a national and international stage, Dr. Moore has used his expertise to bring fresh opportunities and shape educational transformation across the United States and other parts of the globe,” said Tucker. “His leadership and forward-thinking approaches demonstrate how determination can unite communities and open new doors for students in all zip codes, regions, and jurisdictions,” he added.

    And no matter how many times you ask Moore about his own influences and success, he never forgets his family and the village who raised him. As one of three siblings, he remembers his late mother Edna, whose sacrifices and love shaped her children’s lives in South Carolina.

    “My mother did everything for her three kids, and my mother was an inspiration to not only me, but for those who knew her,” Moore said. “And even though she’s not here with me, she lives inside me, and she always told me that ‘family lives inside of you, and everywhere you go, son, take family with you,’ So I can hear her. She was the best coach I ever had. This is for her,” he said.

    Source link