Category: Featured

  • A Wicked Perspective: Faculty and Leadership in Academia – Faculty Focus

    A Wicked Perspective: Faculty and Leadership in Academia – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • An early look at 2023–24 financial returns shows providers working hard to balance the books

    An early look at 2023–24 financial returns shows providers working hard to balance the books

    In most larger UK providers of higher education, the 2023–24 financial year ended on 31 July 2024.

    Five months and two weeks after this date (so, on or before 14 January 2025) providers are obliged to have published (and communicated to regulators) audited financial statements for that year.

    I’ve got a list of 160 large, well known, providers of higher education who should, by now, have made this disclosure – 43 of them are yet to do so. Of the 117 that have, just 15 (under 13 per cent) posted a deficit for that financial year (to be fair, this includes eight providers in Wales, where the deadline – for bilingual accounts – is the end of the month). This was as of the data of publication, there’s been a few more been discovered since then and I have added some to the charts below.

    If you’ve been aware of individual providers, mission groups, representative bodies, trade unions, regulators, and politicians coming together to make the case that the sector is severely underfunded this may surprise you. If you work in an institution that is curtailing courses, making staff redundant, and undergoing the latest in a long series of cost-cutting exercises, the knowledge that your university has posted a surplus may make you angry.

    But these results are not surprising, and a surplus should not make you angry (there are plenty of other reasons to be angry…) Understanding what an annual account is for, what a surplus is, why a university will pull out all of the stops to post a surplus, and what are the more alarming underpinning signals that we should be aware of will help you understand why we have what – on the face of it – feels like a counter-intuitive position in university finances.

    Why are so many results missing?

    There’s a range of reasons why a provider may submit accounts late – those who are yet to publish will already be deep in conversation with regulators about the issues that may have caused what is, technically, a breach of a regulatory condition. In England, this is registration condition E3. which is underpinned by the accounts direction.

    If you are expecting regulators to get busy issuing fines or sanctions for late submissions – you should pause. There’s a huge problem with public sector audit capacity in the UK – the big players have discrete teams that move on an annual cycle between higher education, NHS, and local government audit. You don’t need to have read too much into public finances to know that our councils are under serious pressure right now – and this pressure results in audit delays, hitting the same teams who will be acting as external university auditors.

    That’s one key source of delay. The other would be the complexities within university annual accounts, and university finances more generally, that offer any number of reasons why the audit signoff might happen later than hoped.

    To be clear, very few of these reasons are going to be cheerful ones. If a provider has yet to publish its accounts because they have not signed off their accounts, it is likely to be engaging with external auditors about the conditions under which they will sign off accounts.

    To give one example of what might happen – a university has an outstanding loan with a covenant attached to it based on financial performance (say, a certain level of growth each year). In 2023–24, it did not reach this target, so needs to renegotiate the covenant, which may make repayments harder (or spread out over a longer period). The auditor will need to wait until this is settled before it signs off the accounts – technically if you are in breach of covenant the whole debt is repayable immediately, something which would make you fail your going concern test.

    We’ve covered covenants on the site before – a lender of whatever sort will offer finance at an attractive rate provided certain conditions are met. These can include things like use of investment (did you actually build the new business school you borrowed money to build?), growth (in terms of finances or student numbers), ESG (are you doing good things as regards environment, society, and governance?) and good standing (are you in trouble with the regulator?) – but at a fundamental level will require a sense that your business is financially viable. If covenant conditions are breached lenders will be keen to help if they hear in advance, but your cost of borrowing (the interest rate charged, bluntly) will rise. And you will find it harder to raise finance in future.

    This is an environment where it is already hard to raise finance – and in establishing new borrowing, or new revolving credit (kind of like an overdraft facility) many universities will end up paying more than in previous years. This all needs to be shown in the accounts.

    Going concern

    When your auditor signs off your accounts, you would very much hope that it will agree that they represent a “going concern” – simply put, that in most plausible scenarios you will have enough money to cover your costs during the next 12 months. If your auditor disagrees that you are a going concern you are in serious trouble – all of the 117 sets of accounts I have read so far have been agreed on a going concern basis.

    This designation tells everyone from regulators to lenders to other stakeholders that your business is viable for the next year – and comes into force on the day your accounts are signed off by the university and external auditor. This is nearly always for a specific technical reason – additional information that is needed in order to make the determination. For some late publications, it is possible that the delay is a deliberate plan to make the designation last as far into the following financial years as possible. This year (2024–25) is even more bleak than last year – anything that keeps finance cheaper (or available!) for longer will be helpful.

    Breaking even and beyond

    So your provider had a surplus last year – that’s good right? It means it took in more money than it spent? Up to a point.

    In 2023–24 we got the very welcome news that Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) has been revalued and contributions reduced for both members and employers. From the annual accounts perspective, this will have lowered staff costs (very often one of the most significant costs, if not the most significant cost, for most) in USS institutions. Conversely, the increase in Teachers Pension Scheme (TPS) contributions will have substantially raised costs in institutions required by law (yes, really!) to offer that scheme to staff.

    That’s some of the movement in staff costs. However, for USS, the value of future contributions to the current calculated scheme debt (which is shared among all active employers in the scheme) has also fallen. Indeed, as the scheme is currently in surplus, it shows as income rather than expenditure This is not money that the university actually has available to spend, but the drop shows out in staff costs – though most affected separate this out into a separate line it also shows up in the overall surplus or deficit (to be clear this is the accounting rules, there’s no subterfuge here: if you are interested in why I can only point you to BUFDG’s magisterial “Accounting for Pensions” guidelines).

    For this reason, many USS providers show a much healthier balance than accurately reflects a surplus they can actually spend or invest. This gives them the appearance of having performed as a group much better than TPS institutions, where the increase in contributions has made it more expensive to employ staff.

    Here I show the level of reported surplus(deficit) after tax, both with and without the USS valuation effect. Removing the impact of valuation puts 35 providers (including big names like Hull, Birmingham, and York) in deficit based on financial statements published so far.

    [Full screen]

    And here I show underlying changes in staff costs (without the USS valuation effect). This is the raw spend on employing staff, including pay and pensions contributions. A drop could indicate that economies have been sought – employing fewer staff, employing different (cheaper) staff, or changes in terms and conditions. But it also indicates underlying changes in TPS contributions (up) or USS contributions (down) with respect to current employees on those schemes.

    [Full screen]

    Charts updated 11am 27 January to remove a handful of discrepancies.

    Fee income

    For most universities the main outgoing is staff costs, and the main source of income is tuition fees. Much has been made of the dwindling spending power of home undergraduate fees because of a failure to uprate with inflation, but this line in the accounts also includes unregulated fees – most notably international fees and postgraduate fees. The full name of the line in the accounts is “tuition fees and educational contracts”, so if your provider does a lot of bespoke work for employers this will also show up here.

    Both of these areas of provision have seen significant expansion in many providers over recent years – and the signs are that 2023–24 was another data point aligned with this trend for postgraduate provision. For this reason, the total amount of fee income has risen in a lot of cases, and when we get provider level UCAS data shortly it will make it clear that just how much of this is due to unregulated fees. International fees are another matter, and again we need the UCAS end of cycle data to unpick it, but it appears from visa applications and acceptances that from some countries (China, for example) demand has remained stable, while for others (Nigeria, India) demand has fallen.

    Here I show fee income for the past two years, and the difference. This is total fee income, and does not discriminate between types of fees.

    [Full screen]

    One very important thing to bear in mind is that these are figures for the financial year, and represent fees relating to that year rather than the total amount of fees per student enrolled. For example, if a student started in January (an increasingly common start point for some courses at some institutions) you will only see the proportion of fees that had been paid by 31 July shown in the accounts. If you teach a lot of nursing students who start at non-traditional times of the year this will have a notable impact, as will a failure to recruit as many international students as you had hoped to do in January 2024 (though this will also show up in next year’s accounts).

    And it is also worth bearing in mind that income from fees paid with respect to students registered at the provider but studying somewhere else via an academic partnership, or involved in a franchise arrangement (something that has seen a lot of growth in some providers) shows up in this budget line.

    Other movements

    Quite a number of providers have drawn down investments or made use of unrestricted reserves. This is very much as you would expect, these are very much “rainy day” provisions and even if it is not actually raining now the storm clouds are gathering. Using money like this is a big step though – you can only spend it once, and the decision to spend it needs to link to plans not to need to spend it in the near future. So even if your balance looks healthy, a shift like this speaks eloquently of the kinds of cost-saving measures (up to and including course closures and staff redundancy) that you may currently see happening around you.

    Similarly, a provider may choose to sell assets – usually buildings – that it does not have an immediate or future use for. The costs of running and maintaining a building can quickly add up – a decision to sell releases the capital and can also cut running costs. Other providers choose to hang on to buildings (perhaps as assets that can be sold in future) but drastically cut maintenance and running costs for this reason. Again, you can (of course) only sell a building once, and a longer term maintenance pause can make it very expensive to put your estates back into use. I should note that the overall condition of university estates is not great and is declining (as you can read in the AUDE Estates Management Report) , precisely because providers have already started doing stuff like this. If the heating seems to be struggling, if the window doesn’t open, that’s why.

    In some cases we have seen decisions to pause capital programmes – not borrowing money and not building buildings as was previously planned. Here, the university makes an on-paper saving equivalent to the cost of finance if it was going to borrow money, or frees up reserves for other uses if it was using its own funds. Capital programmes don’t just include buildings – perhaps investment in software (the kind of big enterprise systems that make it possible to run your university) has been paused, and you are left struggling with outdated or unsuitable finance, admissions, or student record systems.

    Where we are talking about pausing building programmes it is important to remember that these exist to facilitate expansion or strategic plans for growth. The “shiny new building” is often perceived as a vice chancellor’s vanity project – in reality that new business school and the recruitment it makes possible may represent the university’s best hope of growing home fee income faster than inflation.

    What’s next?

    We see financial information substantially after the financial year ends – and for most larger providers this comes alongside the submission of an annual financial return to their regulator. We know for instance that the Office for Students is now looking at ways of getting in year data in areas where it has significant concerns, but financial data (by dint of it being checked carefully and audited) is generally historic in nature.

    For this reason what is happening on your campus right now is something that only your finance department has any hope of understanding, and there may be unexpected pressures currently driving strategy that are not shown (or even hinted at) in last years’ accounts. Your colleagues in finance and planning teams are working hard to forecast the end of year result, to calculate the KFIs (Key Financial Indicators) that others rely on, and to plan for the issues that could arise in the 2025 audit. The finance business partners or faculty accountants – or whatever name they have where you work – will be gathering information, exploring and explaining scenarios, and anticipating pressures that may require a change in financial strategy.

    The data I have presented here is drawn from published accounts – the data submitted to regulators that eventually ends up on HESA may be modified and resubmitted as understanding and situations change – for this reason come the early summer figures might look very different than what are presented here (I should also add I have transcribed these by hand – for which service you should absolutely buy me a pint) – so although I have done my best I may have made transcription errors which I will gladly and speedily correct.

    However scary your university accounts may be, I would caution that the next set (2024–25 financial year) will be even more scary. The point at which the home undergraduate fee increase in England kicks in for those eligible to charge it (2025–26) feels a long way off, and we have the rise in National Insurance Contributions (due April 2025) to contend with before then.

    There are a small but significant number of large providers looking at an unplanned deficit for 2024–25, as you might expect they will already be in contact with their regulator and their bank. Stay safe out there.

    If you are interested in institutional finances, I must insist that you read the superb BUFDG publication “Understanding University Finance” – it is both the most readable and the most comprehensive explanation of annual university accounts you will find.

    Source link

  • Anatomy of a higher education merger – City St George’s, University of London

    Anatomy of a higher education merger – City St George’s, University of London

    Depending on how you look at it, mergers are either very common or very unusual in UK higher education.

    Dig deep enough into the annals of any institutional history and you will most likely find at some point that the institution as we know it today emerged from the combination or absorption of various nineteenth or twentieth-century mechanics institutes, colleges of teaching or technical colleges.

    But recent history of the sector has seen only a handful of mergers, most notably the merger of what was then Victoria University of Manchester and the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST) in 2004, and the merger of the University of Glamorgan and University of Wales, Newport, to become the University of South Wales in 2013. More recently we’ve seen the merger of the Institute of Education into University College London, the merger of Writtle College with Anglia Ruskin University, recounted in detail on Wonkhe here, and the merger in 2024 of City, University of London and the medical school St George’s, University of London to create City St George’s, University of London.

    The mergers paradox

    Seen from the birds-eye view of Whitehall the relative recent paucity of higher education mergers can be puzzling to some. In the private sector mergers and acquisitions are a well-trodden path to gaining market share, reducing overheads, and generally creating the kind of organisational powerhouse before which others cower and cringe. Arguably, larger institutions can support a wider breadth of education and research activity, can have a greater impact on their external landscape, and are more protected from external change and financial twists of fortune.

    But for higher education institutions there is much more to take into consideration than the goal of organisational heft and security – there is a public service mission, and the institution’s values and culture, which may be best served by remaining the same size or pursuing only modest growth. And there is the administrative complexity and effort of undertaking major organisational change, when in some cases, institutional leaders argue, the benefits of scale can be realised through strategic collaboration rather than full merger.

    While it may look from the outside like the UK has a puzzlingly large number of universities and other providers of HE compared to our geographical footprint and population, we’re not a global outlier in that regard. Prospective students enjoy a broad choice of large multi-faculty institutions with a wide range of extra-curricular services and opportunities, and smaller, cosier, and more specialist offerings – indeed, higher education policy in recent decades has trended towards increasing the numbers of higher education providers.

    Yet at times of financial challenge, such as those the sector is currently experiencing, talk inevitably turns to mergers and whether the sector as a whole would be more resilient if merger or acquisition was a more readily available tool in the financial sustainability arsenal. And here lies what might be termed the merger paradox – financially healthy institutions tend not to see a need for mergers or be motivated to pursue one even where a strategic business case might be made; whereas financially distressed ones are less likely to be an appealing prospect for a merger partner.

    In the case of both Writtle and St George’s, their governing bodies were astute enough to realise that their institutions would not thrive in the long term, and to start considering merger well before reaching a point of crisis.

    Being financially challenged is not the primary driver to merge with another institution,” says Richard Mills, Director, Head of Finance Consulting and lead for public sector M&A for KPMG in the UK. “Returns on investment take a long time to realise, and sometimes things get worse before they get better. The driver has to be strategic fit – for higher education a merger needs to be about strengthening the academic portfolio, and you need to be really clear on the vision and strategy for the merged organisation.”

    Having the strategy in place, and a plan for the legal and financial aspects of managing a merger is only the beginning. “You need to consider the implications of integrating systems, processes, and culture,” says Margaret Daher, Director and major higher education change specialist at KPMG. “The worst case scenario is a Frankenstein model of bolt-ons rather than one organisation emerging. The work of a merger is much greater than the initial negotiations and the creation of a new legal entity – but that initial work can be so consuming that you end up risking letting the dual running of two distinct entities under one institution become an unintentional status quo.”

    City St George’s story

    Elisabeth Hill, Deputy President and Provost at City St George’s, joined what was then City, University of London in September 2022, and was given responsibility for delivery – and realising benefits from – the planned merger with St George’s, University of London which was under discussion at that point.

    The merger was very much about strategy, not finances,” says Elisabeth. “City has always been a University focused on business and professional practice. When Anthony [Finkelstein] took up his post as President he saw the potential to expand the range of professions that we serve to include broader aspects of health as well as medicine. Being a larger institution gives us greater capacity, greater resilience, and a greater opportunity across a breadth of disciplines to leverage interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary work internally and have a greater impact externally. All six of our academic schools already had some kind of interesting relationship with health and medicine so you could see how strengthening the breadth of health and medicine could align with City.”

    At the very early stages of discussion, the governing bodies of both institutions had agreed some “red lines” – primarily to give security to the Council of St George’s that the institution’s long history would not simply be assimilated into City and disappear. The incorporation of St George’s into the new institution’s name was seen as essential, as was the idea that the merger was a combination of two universities rather than the incorporation of one by another, although it was agreed that in practice City’s structure and policies would become the reference point for subsequent work to establish the new institution.

    Once it was clear that there was a strategic rationale and appetite to pursue merger for both Councils, a lot of “due diligence” work was required to make sure that the new institution would have the finances, and the expertise, to function and would be compliant in legal and regulatory terms. While neither institution felt itself to be in immediate financial peril, neither had the luxury of a financial cushion to support major investment, and it had to be clear that the combined finances of the two institutions would be sufficient both to fund the merger itself and to realise its planned benefits. Taking on space in the midst of a hospital site meant that City’s Council and executive team had to do a lot of work to establish risks and compliance expectations around estates maintenance and health and safety to ensure that they would not be putting City at risk as a result of the envisaged merger.

    At this stage both institutions had to carefully manage their very distinctive relationship, i.e. having agreed to merge in principle, but not yet having merged. A tightly negotiated “transfer agreement” set out the conditions under which the merger would operate including the conditions whereby either party could legitimately back out and what information each was obliged to share, in some cases with reference to competition law. Also at this stage, work began with the Department for Education, Office for Students, Privy Council, and General Medical Council among others to work through the academic and legal governance issues of transferring powers and duties from one higher education institution to another. Further work was undertaken to understand the implications for students and prospective students and their likely response to the merger and any related impact.

    A key thing was that there was little in terms of pre-defined process for dealing with a university merger of this type,” reflects Elisabeth. “At times it felt like we were making it up – albeit in a very thoughtful and evidence-informed way – as we went along. It was especially helpful to have people with insights from other sectors on our Council that we could draw on where useful or relevant in our sector and context. External bodies were very supportive, and we drew on significant external support, which is an absolute necessity in this kind of work. I don’t know how you could effect something like this without broader insight, guidance and expertise.”

    Integration – two becoming one

    The new City St George’s, University of London formally came into being on 1 August 2024, but the work of integration is ongoing. “We decided to leave most of the integration work until after the formal point of merger,” says Elisabeth. “By that time, we had been talking about merging for two years and there was a sense that some people were tired of the discussion and needed to see that it was really happening. And on a pragmatic level it is much easier to work through the integration challenges when everyone is under one metaphorical roof, there’s one vice chancellor, one senior team – so we judged that this approach would provide certainty and signal an ability to move forward, replacing uncertainty with certainty. Once we had access to all the detail of the information about St George’s programmes it also became clear that we weren’t going to have to deal with a lot of overlap, which was helpful because it meant we could deliver on a cultural expectation that we would respect the St George’s heritage, which by implication is fundamentally about the academic programmes and research.”

    Key priorities for integration were about bringing together St George’s and City’s School of Health & Psychological Sciences into one academic unit, whose executive dean was appointed through an external recruitment process. There was also a mapping process to establish the university professional functions and roles, and assign some functions to the new school, and some to the university. An early priority was confirming directors of professional services for the merged institution, who were then tasked with managing the integration of their teams. This work is now underway.

    While that integration work continues, Elisabeth points out that City St George’s like most universities, has a whole range of other strategic change agendas on the go, including portfolio review, curriculum management, creation of a student services hub, and replacement of some university professional services systems. There is also a root and branch review of professional services under way, looking at the location and effectiveness of roles and functions. That means it’s harder to attribute impact specifically to the merger process, but it’s also harder for people to blame the merger as the sole cause of unpalatable disruption.

    There is active discussion at City St George’s Council about what above-baseline success measures for the merger should be. Some members of St George’s Council have joined an enlarged City St George’s Council and work is underway to establish the culture of the new institution and supporting processes, and the information needed by Council members to ensure their understanding of the combined institution and support informed decision making around strategic developments and operational priorities.

    Institutionally, leadership continues to think on a day-to-day basis about the kind of integrated community it wants to have at the level of both school and university and what sorts of interventions will help people forge that community. Leaders are taking care to have visibility across all university campuses, putting effort into building relationships, undertaking more formal “road shows” to share strategy, hosting talks, and holding informal sessions with different staff groups. The two students’ unions have also merged – a separate merger in its own right – and continue to maintain an active presence on both sites, strengthening student representation and opportunities from the outset.

    So what would Elisabeth say to another senior leader preparing for a merger? “It’s extremely intense, and for most people it starts outside your normal realm of expertise. You have to be prepared to run business as usual alongside all the additional work on merging, and you have to support staff and students to stay focused on the things they should be focusing on and not getting distracted either by opportunities for future alignment or deferring things to post-merger.”

    Perhaps the most important lesson for any leader considering merger is having to be prepared to navigate the challenge of sticking to institutional and professional values while actually achieving what can be an intensely challenging process on a human level:

    We always wanted to be respectful of context and history, to collaborate, be true to our values, and true to the commitments we made and the ethos of how the merger would be discussed and planned,” says Elisabeth. “But you can’t always be as collaborative as you might want to be – otherwise the risk is you fail to get to the point of merger agreement. At least one of the parties has to be pushing for progress and ensuring that decisions are made at any one time.”

    Seven merger fundamentals

    Having worked on the City St George’s merger, Margaret Daher and Richard Mills would strongly advise boards and executive teams to recognise that a merger is a serious strategic endeavour – it needs to be owned and delivered by resolute staff and managers. Their experience and studies of successful mergers highlights seven fundamentals which need to be got right, although they add that often these are still ignored.

    1. Create and communicate a strong, clear vision. From the start, all staff should be informed of the compelling strategic rationale behind the merger, the transition process and the expected changes, and encouraged to engage in two-way feedback to increase the sense of involvement.
    2. Select new leaders early and let them lead. By identifying and publicising the new leadership team, the merged entity can effectively cut links with past loyalties, provide clarity on leadership and lines of reporting, building cultural alignment and engagement.
    3. Place an emphasis on integration planning. Having a robust and long-term post-merger integration plan is essential to overcoming fragmented ways of working, legacy structures and cultural issues, thereby reducing the risk of indefinitely dual running.
    4. Do the due diligence. Giving proper consideration to short- versus long-term benefits, and carrying out robust due diligence to understand risks fully and test the plans will help the organisations set their sights on opportunities at an early stage, and incorporate anticipated issues into post-merger integration plans so they are monitored and addressed.
    5. Win over stakeholders and develop cultural alignment. Staff are the people that make services happen, so it is vital to overcome any resistance to change. A comprehensive change management approach needs to be adopted, “change champions” should be chosen at an early stage, and given the responsibility and authority to influence and motivate their colleagues. Understanding cultural differences and how to achieve alignment is critical.
    6. Develop both the structure and people. Make sure that the new merged organisation has the resources and the skills to manage the transition process by investing in suitable capability, as well as instituting structural and procedural changes such as mixed work schedules and cross-site working that can encourage collaboration and generate a new culture.
    7. Have patience to achieve long term objectives. Mergers are highly challenging and integration is unlikely to happen quickly. To succeed every level of the organisation requires dedicated resources, experienced people, and strong pre- and post-merger planning, all of which take time to develop and deploy.

    While there are obvious practical and cultural hurdles to overcome, what recent examples demonstrate is that with the right vision, case for change and supporting business rationale, a merger can be the strategic solution for long term sustainability.

    This article is published in association with KPMG as part of our Radical Efficiency series. You can view other articles in the series here.

    Source link

  • Across All Ages & Demographics, Test Results Show Americans Are Getting Dumber – The 74

    Across All Ages & Demographics, Test Results Show Americans Are Getting Dumber – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    There’s no way to sugarcoat it: Americans have been getting dumber.

    Across a wide range of national and international tests, grade levels and subject areas, American achievement scores peaked about a decade ago and have been falling ever since. 

    Will the new NAEP scores coming out this week show a halt to those trends? We shall see. But even if those scores indicate a slight rebound off the COVID-era lows, policymakers should seek to understand what caused the previous decade’s decline. 

    There’s a lot of blame to go around, from cellphones and social media to federal accountability policies. But before getting into theories and potential solutions, let’s start with the data.

    Until about a decade ago, student achievement scores were rising. Researchers at Education Next found those gains were broadly shared across racial and economic lines, and achievement gaps were closing. But then something happened, and scores started to fall. Worse, they fell faster for lower-performing students, and achievement gaps started to grow.

    This pattern shows up on test after test. Last year, we looked at eighth grade math scores and found growing achievement gaps in 49 of 50 states, the District of Columbia and 17 out of 20 large cities with sufficient data.

    But it’s not just math, and it’s not just NAEP. The American Enterprise Institute’s Nat Malkus has documented the same trend in reading, history and civics. Tests like NWEA’s MAP Growth and Curriculum Associates’ i-Ready are showing it too. And, as Malkus found in a piece released late last year, this is a uniquely American problem. The U.S. now leads the world in achievement gap growth.

    What’s going on? How can students here get back on track? Malkus addresses these questions in a new report out last week and makes the point that any honest reckoning with the causes and consequences of these trends must account for the timing, scope and magnitude of the changes.

    Theory #1: It’s accountability

    As I argued last year, my top explanation has been the erosion of federal accountability policies. In 2011 and 2012, the Obama administration began issuing waivers to release states from the most onerous requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. Congress made those policies permanent in the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act. That timing fits, and it makes sense that easing up on accountability, especially for low-performing students, led to achievement declines among those same kids.

    However,  there’s one problem with this explanation: American adults appear to be suffering from similar achievement declines. In results that came out late last year, the average scores of Americans ages 16 to 65 fell in both literacy and numeracy on the globally administered Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies. 

    And even among American adults, achievement gaps are growing. The exam’s results are broken down into six performance levels. On the numeracy portion, for example, the share of Americans scoring at the two highest levels rose two points, from 10% to 12%, while the percentage of those at the bottom two levels rose from 29% to 34%. In literacy, the percentage of Americans scoring at the top two levels fell from 14% to 13%, while the lowest two levels rose from 19% to 28%. 

    These results caused Peggy Carr, the commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, to comment, “There’s a dwindling middle in the United States in terms of skills.” Carr could have made the same comment about K-12 education —  except that these results can’t be explained by school-related causes.

    Theory #2: It’s the phones

    The rise of smartphones and social media, and the decline in reading for pleasure, could be contributing to these achievement declines. Psychologist Jean Twenge pinpointed 2012 as the first year when more than half of Americans owned a smartphone, which is about when achievement scores started to decline. This theory also does a better job of explaining why Americans of all ages are scoring lower on achievement tests.

    But there are some holes in this explanation. For one, why are some of the biggest declines seen in the youngest kids? Are that many 9-year-olds on Facebook or Instagram? Second, why are the lowest performers suffering the largest declines in achievement? Attention deficits induced by phones and screens should affect all students in similar ways, and yet the pattern shows the lowest performers are suffering disproportionately large drops.

    But most fundamentally, why is this mostly a U.S. trend? Smartphones and social media are global phenomena, and yet scores in Australia, England, Italy, Japan and Sweden have all risen over the last decade. A couple of other countries have seen some small declines (like Finland and Denmark), but no one has else seen declines like we’ve had here in the States.

    Other theories: Immigration, school spending or the Common Core

    Other theories floating around have at least some kernels of truth. Immigration trends could explain some portion of the declines, although it’s not clear why those would be affecting scores only now. The Fordham Institute’s Mike Petrilli has partly blamed America’s “lost decade” on economic factors, but school spending has rebounded sharply in recent years without similar gains in achievement. Others, including historian Diane Ravitch and the Pioneer Institute’s Theodor Rebarber, blame the shift to the Common Core state standards, which was happening about the same time. But non-Common Core states suffered similar declines, and scores have also dropped in non-Common Core subjects.

    Note that COVID is not part of my list. It certainly exacerbated achievement declines and reset norms within schools, but achievement scores were already falling well before it hit America’s shores.

    Instead of looking for one culprit, it could be a combination of these factors. It could be that the rise in technology is diminishing Americans’ attention spans and stealing their focus from books and other long-form written content. Meanwhile, schools have been de-emphasizing basic skills, easing up on behavioral expectations and making it easier to pass courses. At the same time, policymakers in too many parts of the country have stopped holding schools accountable for the performance of all students.

    That’s a potent mix of factors that could explain these particular problems. It would be helpful to have more research to pinpoint problems and solutions, but if this diagnosis is correct, it means students, teachers, parents and policymakers all have a role to play in getting achievement scores back on track. 


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    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

  • Florida Phone Ban in School Gets Mostly Positive Feedback from Administrators – The 74

    Florida Phone Ban in School Gets Mostly Positive Feedback from Administrators – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    School administrators provided mostly positive feedback to lawmakers curious about implementation of a 2023 law prohibiting students from using their phones.

    School officials provided the House Student Academic Success subcommittee feedback last week on HB 379, a 2023 law that prohibits phone use during instructional time, prohibits access to certain websites on school networks, and requires instruction to students to responsibly use social media.

    “It’s gone very very well in many of our classrooms, especially I would say it goes really well in our classrooms with struggling learners. The teachers have seen the benefit of that increased interaction with each other, the increased focus,” said Toni Zetzsche, principal of River Ridge High School in Pasco County.

    The law, introduced by Rep. Brad Yeager, a Republican representing part of Pasco County,  received unanimous support before serving as a sort of model legislation across the nation.

    “The first step of this process: remove phones from the classroom, focus on learning, take the distraction out. Number two was, social media, without just yanking it from them, try to educate them on the dangers. Try to help to learn and understand how social media works for them and against them,” Yeager said during the subcommittee meeting.

    An EducationWeek analysis shows Florida was the first state to ban or restrict phones when the law passed, with several other states following suit in 2024.

    Florida schools have discretion as to how they enforce the law, with some prohibiting cellphones from the beginning until the end of the day, while others allow students to use their phones during down times like lunch and between classes.

    Some teachers have taken it upon themselves to purchase hanging shoe organizers for students to bank their phones in during class, Yeager said.

    Since the law took effect in the middle of 2023, Zetzsche said, students in higher level college preparatory classes have partially struggled because of the self-regulating nature of the courses and the expectation that teachers give them more freedom.

    But for younger and lower-performing students, the law has been effective, according to Zetzsche and research Yeager used to gain support for the bill.

    “In some of our ninth and tenth grade classrooms, where the kids need a little more support, those teachers are definitely seeing the benefit,” Zetzsche said.

    Orange County Schools Superintendent Maria Vazquez said schools have combatted student complaints about not having their phones by filling down time, like lunch periods, with games or club activities.

    Zetzsche said she has seen herself and others use the phoneless time as an opportunity to get to know more students.

    “I know I’ve spoken with teachers, elementary teachers, middle school teachers, and high school teachers that have said, ‘I’ve had to teach students to reconnect and get involved or talk to people.’ They are doing a better job of focusing on that replacement behavior now, I think. I think we all are,” Zetzsche said.

    “I think, as a high school principal now, when I see a student sitting in the cafeteria and they’re on their cellphone watching a movie, I immediately want to strike up a conversation and say, ‘Hey, are you on the weightlifting team? Do you play a sport?’” Zetzsche said.

    Bell to bell

    Orange County schools decided not to allow phones all day, while Pasco County chose to keep phones away from students during instructional time, the extent the law requires.

    “It was surprisingly, and shockingly, pretty easy to implement,” Marc Wasko, principal at Timber Creek High School in Orange County, told the subcommittee.

    Rep. Fiona McFarland, a Republican representing part of Sarasota County and the chair of the subcommittee, encouraged further planning to better enforce the law.

    “I will tell you, because not everything we do up here is perfect, there are some schools that I’ve heard of where, even if the teacher has a bag, kids are bringing a dummy phone, like mom’s old iPhone, and flipping that into the pouch where they’ve got their device in their pocket or if you’ve got long hair, maybe you can hide earbuds,” McFarland said.

    “I mean, this is the reality of being policymakers, folks,” McFarland continued. “We make a law, we can make the greatest law in the world, which is meaningless if it’s not executed and enforced properly. We could pass a law tomorrow to end world hunger and global peace, but it means nothing if it’s not operationalized well and planned for well.”

    Yeager told the committee he does not plan to seek to ban phones outside of instructional time, although other lawmakers could push for further phone prohibitions.

    Department of Education obligation

    The law requires the Department of Education to make instructional material available on the effects of social media, required for students to learn under the law.

    “Finding the time to be able to embed that into the curriculum is really difficult. We are struggling with instructional minutes as it is, when we have things like hurricanes impact learnings,” Zetzsche said.

    “We are struggling to get through the content, so it would be nice to have something from the Department of Education that is premade that we can share with students, but maybe through elective courses or some guidance on how they would expect high schools, how they would feed that information to students.”

    Administrators said parental pushback has been limited, and Zetzsche added that parents have sought advice from schools about how to detach their kids from their phones.

    “When we struggle with the student who’s attached to their cellphone, the parents want to put things in place.
They just don’t know what to do,” Zetzsche said, calling for the department to provide additional information to parents.

    Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: [email protected].


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Source link

  • Old-school flip phones are making a comeback as some look for simpler lifestyle (CBS Mornings)

    Old-school flip phones are making a comeback as some look for simpler lifestyle (CBS Mornings)







    Higher Education Inquirer : Old-school flip phones are making a comeback as some look for simpler lifestyle (CBS Mornings)




    Source link

  • Transforming Education in the Age of AI: Challenges and Opportunities

    Transforming Education in the Age of AI: Challenges and Opportunities

    Today’s weekend reading was written by Dr Andrew Woon, Senior Lecturer in Strategic Management at Queen Mary, University of London.

    Generative AI is revolutionising industries, with education at the forefront of this transformation. Traditional models of knowledge acquisition are being challenged as AI redefines how we access and process information.

    As AI becomes more accessible and accepted by the public, its potential to reshape the majority of jobs in the market has become increasingly evident. Consequently, AI literacy has emerged as a foundational skill for careers and entrepreneurship. Given that universities are not only institutions of learning and development but also the cornerstone of a nation’s competitive advantage, the impact of AI on education attracts significant attention.

    As an educator, I believe that AI has lowered the barriers to accessing knowledge and education, enabling more students, especially those who previously lacked opportunities to benefit. On the other hand, AI has also raised the bar for teaching, as the accessibility of information and knowledge is transforming traditional teaching and learning paradigms. To excel as a teacher today, one must possess not only subject expertise but also advanced pedagogical skills and the ability to stay current with emerging trends.

    I echo the sentiments of computer scientist Professor Argamon, who views AI as a technology that can make education more human-centred rather than replacing teachers. AI enables educators to focus on the most critical aspect of their work—teaching and mentoring students rather than merely delivering courses. By leveraging AI, teachers can spend more time engaging with students and actively supporting their holistic development.

    AI should not simply be seen as a new complementary skill but as a driving force for educational transformation. Our education system must evolve from a focus on traditional knowledge-based learning outcomes to prioritising skill development, reflective thinking, and innovation-driven learning. This shift will better prepare students to adapt to future challenges and enhance their competitiveness.

    The Latin root of the word ‘curriculum’ is ‘currere’, meaning ‘to run’. In academic contexts, a curriculum is defined as a learning plan consisting of a series of activities and courses. Our education system has overly prioritised credit accumulation, often neglecting the ethos of lifelong learning and the importance of continuous self-improvement. Therefore, I advocate that education should not merely be a three- or four-year programme but rather the starting point of a lifelong journey encompassing both depth and breadth of learning in knowledge and skills.

    The rapid development of AI should serve as a catalyst for everyone to pursue personal growth. As Professors David Lefevre and David Shrier of Imperial College Business School have suggested, we need to refocus curricula on skills and capabilities that are challenging for AI to replicate. This shift aligns with a move toward more personalised, socially focused, and mentorship-driven education models. Such a transformation would fundamentally change traditional teaching and learning methods, equipping students to better face future challenges.

    The greatest value of universities lies in their role as intellectual hubs that foster curiosity, critical questioning and new creation. Universities should teach students to think independently rather than simply follow instructions. Our education system must stop producing “cookie-cutter” graduates who cannot compete with AI.

    With the rise of online education and the prevalent use of AI, traditional higher education models are facing unprecedented challenges. Higher education institutions are caught in a paradox: on one hand, they require significant resources to retrain staff in new pedagogies and upgrade facilities; on the other hand, they are grappling with the pressures of cost-cutting. Therefore, balancing cost-effective solutions with quality education remains one of the greatest dilemmas for higher education institutions.

    I believe fostering deeper collaboration with industry is a viable way forward to mitigate the financial pressures associated with AI investment. By engaging with industry-specific AI tools, students gain valuable exposure and hands-on learning experiences that better prepare them for employment. At the same time, employers benefit from graduates who not only meet their expectations but also possess the skills to excel in their roles.

    In conclusion, the mission of education must focus on cultivating well-rounded individuals equipped with critical thinking, adaptability, curiosity, and a strong sense of social responsibility. By embracing AI as a transformative force and equipping both staff and students with the right mindset and values, universities can empower their graduates to thrive in an ever-evolving world. This approach will ensure that education remains relevant, impactful, and aligned with the demands of the future.

    Source link

  • At Ohio universities, trustees are in charge, and students are customers (Ohio Senate Republicans)

    At Ohio universities, trustees are in charge, and students are customers (Ohio Senate Republicans)







    Higher Education Inquirer : At Ohio universities, trustees are in charge, and students are customers (Ohio Senate Republicans)




    Source link

  • MackinVIA Earns Prestigious Platinum Modern Library AwardFrom LibraryWorks For Its 10th Consecutive Yea

    MackinVIA Earns Prestigious Platinum Modern Library AwardFrom LibraryWorks For Its 10th Consecutive Yea

    Burnsville, MN – January 16, 2025 – Mackin, a leader in providing print and digital
    educational resources for PK-12, is proud to announce that its free digital content management platform, MackinVIA, has earned the Platinum Award in LibraryWorks’ 10th annual Modern Library Awards (MLAs). This prestigious accolade marks MackinVIA’s 10th consecutive win, solidifying its position as a top choice for digital content management in schools worldwide.

    The MLAs, which celebrate the best products and services in the library industry, are awarded based on an unbiased voting process involving over 80,000 librarians from public, K-12, academic, and special libraries. Judges evaluated submissions on a range of criteria, including functionality, value, and customer service. MackinVIA received an outstanding score of 9.25, a testament to its continued excellence and innovation.

    “We’re honored to receive the Platinum Award for the 10th year in a row,” said Troy Mikell, Director of Marketing and Communications at Mackin. “Since launching MackinVIA over a decade ago, we’ve continually focused on creating a powerful, user-friendly platform for educators and students. Our relentless drive for improvement and exceptional customer service has fueled MackinVIA’s success, and it’s thrilling to see that effort recognized once again.”

    MackinVIA is accessible by more than 9 million students worldwide, providing access to over 4 million eBooks, audiobooks, read-alongs, databases, and video resources. Its digital platform offers a dynamic and comprehensive solution for PK-12 schools looking to streamline content management and improve student engagement.

    Jenny Newman, Publisher and MLA Program Manager, noted, “MackinVIA’s consistent excellence in functionality and service is what has kept them at the forefront of the industry for over 40 years. Their innovative approach continues to break barriers and set new standards.”

    About Mackin
    For over 40 years, Mackin has provided PK-12 grade libraries and classrooms with access to nearly 4 million printed and digital titles. The 24-time, multi-award-winning, digital content management system, MackinVIA, along with divisions Mackin Classroom, MackinMaker, Mackin Learning, and the brand-new, whole school resource management system, MackinVision, help to create a truly unique and robust educational resource company that schools and educators have relied on, year after year. For more information, visit www.mackin.com or call 800-245-9540.

    About LibraryWorks
    LibraryWorks helps library administrators make informed decisions regarding technology, automation, collection management, staffing, and other key areas that support efficient library operations. Their resources empower libraries to implement best practices, monitor trends, evaluate products and services, and more.

    About the Modern Library Awards (MLAs)
    The MLAs recognize outstanding products and services that enhance library operations and improve the user experience. Entries are judged by library professionals based on their relevance, functionality, and impact on the library sector.

    eSchool News Staff
    Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

    Source link