In online nursing education, a “nest” is more than a metaphor—it is a learning environment where students feel safe, supported, and guided as they prepare to enter professional practice. Drawing on my experience as a nursing educator, I developed the NEST framework—Nurturing, Esteeming and Encouraging, Supporting with Sensitive Listening, and Trust-building—to help faculty of any discipline create virtual classrooms where can students thrive. This framework provides actionable strategies that foster engagement, confidence, and professional growth, ensuring students succeed academically while cultivating the values and skills essential not only for nursing but for any profession they pursue.
Nurturing: Creating Safety and Connection in Virtual Classrooms
Nurturing in online education involves creating conditions where students feel seen, valued, and supported. Practical strategies include:
Personalized reminders about assignments and deadlines
Recognition of standout work or consistent effort
Targeted assistance during challenging weeks
Mid-week check-ins at key points (weeks 3, 6, and near the end of the course)
Weekly announcements that reassure students they are not navigating the course alone and invite collaboration
These intentional acts convey: you matter, I care about you and your growth, and I am here to support you. By nurturing students online, faculty shift from simply delivering content to facilitating discovery and meaningful learning, helping students internalize that professional values—like compassion, competence, collaboration, and understanding—are essential in nursing and in any career they pursue.
Esteeming and Encouraging: Recognizing Strengths Online
Esteeming affirms each student’s value, while encouragement supports their belief in their ability to meet challenges. In virtual classrooms, this can include:
Highlighting thoughtful discussion board posts
Sending brief messages to recognize consistent effort
Acknowledging creative approaches to assignments
Reframing mistakes as opportunities for growth
Esteeming and encouraging students create a learning environment that feels less like a points-based performance and more like a journey of discovery. Students flourish when they feel recognized and supported—lessons they carry into professional nursing practice and other careers, where acknowledging the efforts of colleagues and clients enhances collaboration, engagement, and overall effectiveness.
Supporting and Listening: Meeting Students Where They Are
Support in online education involves being present and responsive. Sensitive listening attends to both spoken and unspoken concerns. Many nursing students balance coursework, clinical hours, employment, and family responsibilities. Practical strategies include:
Timely, compassionate responses to emails
Flexibility with deadlines when life circumstances intervene
Online opportunities for students to share experiences and reflect
Structured activities like mid-week check-ins, collaborative discussions, and reflective journaling
These strategies model sensitive listening and support—skills students carry into nursing and other professional settings, fostering trust, collaboration, and meaningful connections with colleagues, clients, and communities.
Trust-Building: The Cornerstone of Engagement in Online Learning
Trust is essential for engagement in online learning. Students participate fully when they believe instructors are fair, consistent, and invested in their success. Trust is fostered online through:
Clear, consistent communication
Well-structured, predictable course design
Timely feedback that reassures students they are supported
Avoiding inconsistencies in messaging or directions, which can undermine trust
By demonstrating reliability and responsiveness, faculty model behaviors students can emulate in professional practice, strengthening relationships with patients and colleagues.
Carrying the NEST Forward: From Online Classroom to Professional Practice
The NEST framework extends beyond online classrooms. Students carry lessons of being nurtured, esteemed, supported, listened to, and trusted into every professional interaction. Faculty who model NEST help students internalize not just knowledge and skills, but the values that define my field of nursing practice—such as compassionate care, encouragement, support, sensitive listening, and trust—valuable principles that apply across any discipline and profession.
Students may leave the online course, but they take with them habits of mind and heart cultivated in the nest: confidence from nurturing, resilience from encouragement, empathy shaped by listening, and integrity rooted in trust. By creating an online nest where learning flourishes, faculty prepare students not only to succeed academically but to enrich the lives of those they serve—whether colleagues, clients, or communities in any professional field.
Sandra L. Daisley, MSN, RN, is a nursing educator with extensive experience in online pre-licensure programs. She is passionate about creating student-centered learning environments that foster engagement, professional growth, and the development of compassionate, competent nurses. Sandy is the creator of the NEST framework, a practical model for supporting students in virtual classrooms.
In online nursing education, a “nest” is more than a metaphor—it is a learning environment where students feel safe, supported, and guided as they prepare to enter professional practice. Drawing on my experience as a nursing educator, I developed the NEST framework—Nurturing, Esteeming and Encouraging, Supporting with Sensitive Listening, and Trust-building—to help faculty of any discipline create virtual classrooms where can students thrive. This framework provides actionable strategies that foster engagement, confidence, and professional growth, ensuring students succeed academically while cultivating the values and skills essential not only for nursing but for any profession they pursue.
Nurturing: Creating Safety and Connection in Virtual Classrooms
Nurturing in online education involves creating conditions where students feel seen, valued, and supported. Practical strategies include:
Personalized reminders about assignments and deadlines
Recognition of standout work or consistent effort
Targeted assistance during challenging weeks
Mid-week check-ins at key points (weeks 3, 6, and near the end of the course)
Weekly announcements that reassure students they are not navigating the course alone and invite collaboration
These intentional acts convey: you matter, I care about you and your growth, and I am here to support you. By nurturing students online, faculty shift from simply delivering content to facilitating discovery and meaningful learning, helping students internalize that professional values—like compassion, competence, collaboration, and understanding—are essential in nursing and in any career they pursue.
Esteeming and Encouraging: Recognizing Strengths Online
Esteeming affirms each student’s value, while encouragement supports their belief in their ability to meet challenges. In virtual classrooms, this can include:
Highlighting thoughtful discussion board posts
Sending brief messages to recognize consistent effort
Acknowledging creative approaches to assignments
Reframing mistakes as opportunities for growth
Esteeming and encouraging students create a learning environment that feels less like a points-based performance and more like a journey of discovery. Students flourish when they feel recognized and supported—lessons they carry into professional nursing practice and other careers, where acknowledging the efforts of colleagues and clients enhances collaboration, engagement, and overall effectiveness.
Supporting and Listening: Meeting Students Where They Are
Support in online education involves being present and responsive. Sensitive listening attends to both spoken and unspoken concerns. Many nursing students balance coursework, clinical hours, employment, and family responsibilities. Practical strategies include:
Timely, compassionate responses to emails
Flexibility with deadlines when life circumstances intervene
Online opportunities for students to share experiences and reflect
Structured activities like mid-week check-ins, collaborative discussions, and reflective journaling
These strategies model sensitive listening and support—skills students carry into nursing and other professional settings, fostering trust, collaboration, and meaningful connections with colleagues, clients, and communities.
Trust-Building: The Cornerstone of Engagement in Online Learning
Trust is essential for engagement in online learning. Students participate fully when they believe instructors are fair, consistent, and invested in their success. Trust is fostered online through:
Clear, consistent communication
Well-structured, predictable course design
Timely feedback that reassures students they are supported
Avoiding inconsistencies in messaging or directions, which can undermine trust
By demonstrating reliability and responsiveness, faculty model behaviors students can emulate in professional practice, strengthening relationships with patients and colleagues.
Carrying the NEST Forward: From Online Classroom to Professional Practice
The NEST framework extends beyond online classrooms. Students carry lessons of being nurtured, esteemed, supported, listened to, and trusted into every professional interaction. Faculty who model NEST help students internalize not just knowledge and skills, but the values that define my field of nursing practice—such as compassionate care, encouragement, support, sensitive listening, and trust—valuable principles that apply across any discipline and profession.
Students may leave the online course, but they take with them habits of mind and heart cultivated in the nest: confidence from nurturing, resilience from encouragement, empathy shaped by listening, and integrity rooted in trust. By creating an online nest where learning flourishes, faculty prepare students not only to succeed academically but to enrich the lives of those they serve—whether colleagues, clients, or communities in any professional field.
Sandra L. Daisley, MSN, RN, is a nursing educator with extensive experience in online pre-licensure programs. She is passionate about creating student-centered learning environments that foster engagement, professional growth, and the development of compassionate, competent nurses. Sandy is the creator of the NEST framework, a practical model for supporting students in virtual classrooms.
College recruitment is a bit like hosting a dinner party. You might set the table beautifully, prep your best dish, and send out invitations. But if you forget dessert or serve something your guests did not actually want, you will still leave people hungry.
Email is king, but do not ignore texts and portals
Email is still king, and on this, families and colleges are totally in sync. Nearly all institutions rely on it to connect with prospective students and their families (98–100%), and approximately 90% of families consider it their top way to receive college updates (RNL, 2025; RNL et al., 2025). But that is not the end of the story: lower-income and first-generation families are more likely to prefer text messages, with about 30% say getting updates on their phones suits them best. And when it comes to college portals? Most families are not shy about their feelings. Seventy-seven percent call these hubs “invaluable” for keeping track of deadlines and details.
Here is the practical takeaway. If your family portal is still in beta, you are late. The portal is the digital front porch. Families want to step in. They do not want to just peer through a window.
However, this is where institutions often fall short.
Lower-income families:They may not have unlimited data plans or reliable Wi-Fi. For them, text updates are not just convenient. They are a lifeline. Use SMS for deadlines, aid reminders, and quick check-ins.
Multilingual families: A portal that exists only in English is a locked door. Translation tools, multilingual FAQs, or videos with subtitles are not extras. They are necessities.
Busy working families: They may read email at odd hours. Keep messages concise. Make them mobile-friendly. Pack them with links that get families directly to what they need. No scavenger hunt.
Email may be the king, but texts and portals are the court. Together, they make families feel included, informed, and respected. Income, language, and schedule should not become barriers to access.
Cost clarity: The non-negotiable
Families shout this from the rooftops. Show me the money.
Ninety-nine percent say tuition and cost details are essential. Seventy-two percent have already ruled out institutions based on the sticker shock (RNL et al., 2025).
Meanwhile, many institutions are still burying their net price calculators three clicks deep or waiting until after application to share the real numbers (RNL, 2025). That delay does not just frustrate. It eliminates your campus from consideration.
Here is the practical takeaway. Put cost and aid at the forefront. Homepage, emails, campus events. If families cannot find your numbers, they will assume they are bad.
Widen the lens for a moment.
Lower-income families:They do not just compare sticker prices. They seek reassurance that aid is real, accessible, and does not come with hidden strings.
First-generation families: Jargon like “COA” and “EFC” confuses them. Use plain explanations, visuals, or short videos to demystify the process.
Multilingual families: Cost info in English-only PDFs will not cut it. Translations, bilingual webinars, and multiple-language calculators build trust.
Busy working families:Parents reading on a break or late at night do not want to hunt. Make your cost breakdowns mobile-friendly. Spell it out: “Here is the average monthly payment after aid.” No guesswork.
Clarity is equity. Make costs easy to find, easy to understand, and easy to compare. If you do, you keep your institution in the game.
Portals: High demand, low supply
Only 45% of private and 38% of public institutions offer family portals (RNL, 2025). Seventy-seven percent of families consider portals “invaluable” during the planning process (RNL et al., 2025). That is not a gap. It is a canyon.
Here is the practical takeaway. Stop debating whether you need a portal. You do. Build one. Promote it. Keep it fresh. A portal is not just another login. It is a family’s command center.
Here is why the design matters:
Lower-income families: If they juggle multiple jobs or devices, the portal must be mobile-first. No exceptions.
First-generation families: Use the portal as a step-by-step guide through the admissions maze. Clear checklists and “what comes next” nudges make all the difference.
Multilingual families: A portal only in English is a locked gate. Multilingual menus, downloadable resources, and translated FAQs turn it into a real access point.
Busy working families: On-demand matters. Record sessions, post how-to videos, and archive key communications. Parents can catch up after a late shift.
Think of your family portal as the ultimate cheat sheet. If it answers questions before families even think to ask them, you have built trust.
Campus visits still rule the court
Institutions know visits are powerful. Families confirm it. Ninety-seven percent say seeing campus in person shapes their decision (RNL, 2025; RNL et al., 2025). First-generation families value them even more.
Here is the practical takeaway. Do not just host cookie-cutter tours. Offer tailored experiences for first-generation families, local students, or academic interest groups. If your best tour story is still “this is the library,” you are missing the emotional connection.
And do not forget the families outside the “traditional tour” box.
Commuter students:Show them where they will spend their days. Lounges, commuter lockers, meal plan hacks, parking solutions. These matter.
Students working 20 hours a week to pay tuition: Highlight flexible scheduling, evening classes, and campus jobs.
Busy working families: Are you offering evening and weekend options? Can families join virtual sessions during a lunch break? If not, you are leaving them out.
The real question: Are your campus experiences built for everyone, or just for the students who can spend a sunny Thursday afternoon strolling through your quad?
Families want in, not just students
Three out of four families want at least weekly updates or timely news when it matters (RNL et al., 2025). Institutions are trying, but too often, communication still feels like a one-size-fits-all t-shirt. Technically wearable. Not flattering.
Here is the practical takeaway. Treat families as partners, not sidekicks. Share updates in plain language. Offer Spanish-language options. Spotlight ways families can support their students. Yield is not just about students. It is about family buy-in.
And remember:
Lower-income families:They may not have time to comb through long emails. Keep communication concise. Highlight financial deadlines.
First-generation families:Spell out key milestones. Provide clear “what comes next” instructions.
Multilingual families: Translate emails, texts, and portal content.
Busy working families:Send reminders multiple times of day. Record webinars. Make resources on demand.
When communication feels clear, inclusive, and personal, families lean in. When it does not, they check out. Sometimes, they cross your institution off the list.
Mind the gaps: Equity and information access
Families across the board say cost, aid, program details, and outcomes are critical. Lower-income and first-generation families face significantly larger “information deserts” when searching for them (RNL et al., 2025). Yet institutions often double down on generic email campaigns or broad digital ads. They assume everyone is starting from the same place (RNL, 2025).
Here is the practical takeaway. Equity in outreach is not just a value statement. It is a recruitment strategy. Translate materials. Send proactive aid guides. Partner with community groups to get info where it is needed most.
And remember:
Lower-income families:Scholarships and payment plan info should not be three clicks deep. Put them front and center.
First-generation families:A one-page roadmap with plain-language admissions and aid steps can level the field.
Multilingual families: One brochure in Spanish is not enough. Provide translated FAQs, videos, and multilingual staff at info sessions.
Busy working families:Host virtual Q&As in the evenings. Record them. Make sure materials are mobile-friendly.
If families cannot find or understand what they need, they will assume you do not have it. Or worse, that you do not care.
Digital tools are only as good as the content behind them
Institutions love their toys. Chatbots, SEO, and retargeted ads. These tools can be powerful (RNL, 2025). But families are not impressed by bells and whistles if the basics are missing. They want clear, easily accessible information about costs, aid, programs, and outcomes. Too often, they click into a chatbot or portal and leave frustrated because the answers are not there (RNL et al., 2025).
Here is the practical takeaway. Do not let technology become window dressing. Audit your site from a family’s perspective. Can they find costs, aid, majors, and career outcomes in under two clicks? If not, no chatbot in the world can fix it. No amount of flash will.
Think beyond the default user.
Lower-income families: Spotty internet access means your site needs to be mobile-first, fast-loading, and crystal clear.
First-generation families: Chatbots must speak plain language, not acronym soup.
Multilingual families: Add multilingual chatbot capabilities or direct them quickly to translated resources.
Busy working families: On-demand support matters. Chatbots at midnight. Video explainers that can be paused and replayed. Not just a nine-to-five phone line.
Digital tools are not about looking modern. They are about making life easier. If your tech feels like another hoop to jump through, families will bounce. If it feels like a helpful hand, families will lean in.
The big picture
The alignment is clear on some fronts. Families want email, visits, and cost clarity, and institutions largely deliver. But the gaps, portals, aid communication, and equity in outreach are where recruitment wins or loses.
Families are not just support systems. They are decision-makers. Right now, they are asking colleges to meet them with transparency, respect, and practical tools that make a complicated journey a little simpler.
In other words, if institutions want families to stay at the table, they will need to stop serving what is easiest to cook and start serving what families ordered.
Talk with our marketing and recruitment experts
RNL works with colleges and universities across the country to ensure their marketing and recruitment efforts are optimized and aligned with how student search for colleges. Reach out today for a complimentary consultation to discuss:
Down on the Mile End Road in London, within the sound of Bow bells (and hence properly Cockney) you will find what used to be the People’s Palace, and is now Queen Mary University of London.
The institution we see today has four antecedents: the medical schools at the London and at St Bartholomew’s hospitals, Westfield College, and Queen Mary College. The name which survives is that of the last-founded college: as this is also the largest campus by far, it does confirm that possession is nine-tenths of the law.
The medical schools were the earliest to be founded: the London Hospital Medical College in 1785 and St Bartholomew’s Hospital Medical College in 1843 (although a lecture theatre had been in place in Barts since 1791). I’ve told a little of the story of medical education in London when I wrote about St George’s. At the end of the eighteenth century and into the nineteenth, hospitals were slowly putting medical education on a more formal footing, and the London Hospital was at the forefront.
Next to come on the scene was Westfield College. Established in 1882, Westfield was a residential college for women. I’ve written about it before for Wonkhe, so for now I’ll keep the focus on the East End.
And on 14 May 1887 Queen Victoria formally opened the People’s Palace on the Mile End Road. The picture below, from the Illustrated London News, shows the Great Hall, which was the only element which had been completed at the time. It had a capacity for 2000 people seated, and was most magnificent.
The People’s Palace would host art exhibitions and concerts, and would have library and reading rooms, gardens and a swimming pool. Associated with it was a technical institute which would teach higher skills associated with East London’s industries and crafts. The technical institute was to be funded by the Draper’s Company; the People’s Palace was built following public subscriptions, much of it coming from the great and the good.
(This, by the way, was the model for the technical and recreative institutes founded in south London soon thereafter, and which I wrote about in relation to London South Bank University.)
In 1896 the People’s Palace Technical Schools became East London Technical College. I can’t be certain about this, but I imagine it had by that time been taken over by the relevant London borough, following enabling legislation in the early 1890s. It was by then supporting people studying for the civil service entrance examinations, and also for the University of London’s BSc degree examinations. The first students graduated early in the twentieth century.
On 17 May 1907 the Morning Post reported that
The East London College has been admitted by the Senate as a school of the University [of London] in the Faculties of Arts, Science, and Engineering for period of three years on the understanding that the governing body of the school shall do their utmost to satisfy the Senate upon certain points of educational organisation and finance.
You’ll spot the associated name change – and this also gives us an earliest date for the picture on the postcard (look at the sign!).
In 1910 the membership of the university was renewed for a further five years, and in 1915 granted without time limit. East London College was properly a school of the University of London. It was strong in science and engineering, particularly in aeronautical engineering. It had a wind tunnel – which was very new technology then – and was the first department of aeronautical engineering in the UK.
The 1930s became a little exciting for the college, for good reasons and bad.
The bad reason was a fire in the early hours of Wednesday 25 February 1931, which destroyed the Great Hall of the People’s Palace. So the illustration from 1897 is, sadly, all you’ll get of this today.
But at a similar time, the college was considering seeking a royal charter, and it looks like the fire crystallised things. The Drapers’ Company facilitated the People’s Palace and the college becoming a single corporate body, and in 1934 a royal charter was granted. This was also the occasion for a change of name. East London College being felt by some, apparently, to be a bit déclassé. And so Queen Mary College – named for the then Queen, Mary of Teck – was born on 12 December 1934.
And on 13 February 1937 the rebuilt People’s Palace was opened by the new King George VI and Queen Elizabeth (who most readers will know of better as the late Queen Mother.) The full-page spread from the Illustrated London News below gives some of the flavour. I wonder whether this was part of a post-abdication-crisis public relations push to ensure that the new King was perceived in a positive light? The tale of Margaret Paxton, who gave flowers to the Queen, and was descended from the child who gave flowers to Queen Victoria in 1897, is a publicist’s dream, and will no doubt have taken a bit of work to manage.
Through the following decades Queen Mary College was forging links with the two medical schools – for example, a joint hall of residence was opened in Woodford in 1974. Further changes happened in the 1980s – firstly some changes to provision, when the University of London reshuffled. Queen Mary lost Classics and Russian, but gained lab science subjects from Westfield, Chelsea, Queen Elizabeth and Bedford colleges. This was only a precursor to the larger changes to come: in 1989 Westfield College merged with Queen Mary, which became Queen Mary and Westfield College. The merged college was based on the Mile End and associated campuses – the Westfield College buildings were sold off.
Ten years later the two medical schools merged with the college to form the Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry. This was simply one part of a general rationalisation of medical education in London which saw the small independent schools brought within the ambit of larger institutions.
Let’s add a couple of things to bring the story up to date.
Firstly, in 2012 Queen Mary joined the Russell Group, along with three other universities (pop quiz – without googling, can you name the other three?). It’s an unusual Russell Group in that its entry profile is much more reflective of its neighbourhood. It continues to do good things for the east London population.
Secondly, in 2013 it formally changed its name from Queen Mary and Westfield College to Queen Mary, University of London. Which is tricky for dinosaurs like me who still think of it as QMW (and while were at it, Royal Holloway continues in my head to be RHBNC). But I will need to learn to deal with modernity as it approaches.
Nine Nobel prize winners are connected with the college: six in physiology or medicine, one each in literature and physics, and one winner of the Nobel peace prize (pop quiz part two: again without googling, can you name the peace prize winner? I met them once…)
And finally, here’s a jigsaw of the postcard. The card was written and posted, but it seems to have been stuck in an album or scrap-book at some point so the back is half covered in the remnants of brown paper. Anyway, it was posted at Paddington to an address in the Regent’s Park neighbourhood of London. All I can make of the written message is
…before I left. I will certainly call and see you one day. I am not going ‘til next Tuesday…
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Dive Brief:
Saint Augustine’s University told the U.S. Department of Education that it wants to “participate in and help shape” the Trump administration’s proposed compact that seeks to control a range of academic and operational policiesin exchange for preferential access to federal funding.
However, leaders from the historically Black institution caveated their support over concerns that aspects of the compact as written “risk unintended consequences that would impede our ability to serve students effectively.”
“Despite these concerns, Saint Augustine’s University remains eager to participate as a constructive partner and early-engagement institution,” the leaders of the private North Carolina university said in a letter obtained by Fox News.They requested “a dialogue process” with the Education Department to facilitate “mission-sensitive accommodations” for HBCUs.
Dive Insight:
Last month, the Trump administration offered nine high-profile research colleges a deal — priority for federal grants in exchange for enacting a wide range of policies aligning with the president’s higher education goals.
Some of the compact’s terms, while unprecedented, are straightforward, such as freezing tuition rates for five years, requiring standardized testing for undergraduate applicants,and capping international students’ share of undergraduate enrollment at 15%.
Others go beyond cut-and-dry policy changes, such as publicly auditing the viewpoints of employees and students and potentially changing or ending campus units that purposefully “punish” or “belittle” conservative ideas.
Seven of the initially invited colleges rejected the deal, and, as of Thursday afternoon, the remaining two have yet to publicly accept or decline the offer.
But a few colleges have sought to take their place after President Donald Trump appeared to open the compact offer to all higher ed institutions.
Saint Augustine’s letter makes it the third college — and the first HBCU — to publicly express interest in the bargain.
The New College of Florida — in a move in line with its conservative makeover under Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis —became the first college to publicly volunteer to sign the compact on Oct. 27.The following day, Valley Forge Military College offered to accept the deal as well, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.
But unlike New College and the military college, Saint Augustine’s did not give the proposed compact a full-throated endorsement.
Neither the Education Department nor the university responded to questions Thursday.
Verjanis Peoples, the university’s newly appointed interim president, and Sophie Gibson, chair of its board of trustees, warned that the compact as written is “not compatible with the statutory mission and federal mandate under which HBCUs operate.”
“Because our mission is not ornamental but foundational, we cannot implement requirements that would directly conflict with our identity as a Historically Black University or undermine our ability to serve the populations for whom we were created,” they wrote in their letter,which Fox News reported as being sent to the Education Department on Wednesday.
Peoples and Gibson cited a handful of the compact’s provisions, including one requiring signatories to not consider race,sex, religion and other characteristics “explicitly or implicitly” in admissions or financial aid.
The pair said the restriction, “while well intentioned,” conflicts with Title III of the Higher Education Act, which in part provides colleges grant funding and establishes a program meant to strengthen HBCUs.The Trump administration’s proposed deal would also run contrary to “the explicit purpose of HBCUs to expand access for Black students and historically marginalized communities,” they said.
The compact said it would grant exceptions for religious and single-sex institutions to limit admissions based on religious belief and sex, respectively, but did not address HBCUs.
Other elements of the Trump administration’s proposal could also hinder HBCUs, Peoples and Gibson said.
These colleges typically maintain smaller endowments and would have a difficult time absorbing the costs of a tuition freeze.A cap on international enrollment would disproportionately hit HBCUs, which have “global partnerships across the African diaspora,” they said.
Saint Augustine’s leaders also flagged a compact provision that would require colleges to adopt definitions of gender and sex in step with Trump’s executive order saying the federal government would only recognize two sexes, male and female, that cannot be changed.These definitions have been rebuked by the scientific and medical communities.
HBCUs could face operational challenges if they adopt this language given their “inclusive campus policies shaped by both community needs and regulatory frameworks,” the letter said.
“Such provisions would unintentionally force HBCUs to choose between compliance and survival, a position that is neither feasible nor consistent with congressional intent,” Peoples and Gibson said.
Should the Trump administration take Saint Augustine’s up on its offer, the embattled university could gain a financial lifeline amidst ongoing operational turmoil.
The university’s accreditor, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, has raised concerns over its finances and governance.
American institutions occupy six of the top 10 slots on this year’s table. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is first for the second year in a row, followed by Stanford University in second, also retaining its 2025 position. The California Institute of Technology rose one spot to third place, and the University of California, Berkeley, debuts on the list in fourth position.
Duke University dropped from fifth to sixth rank this year, and the Georgia Institute of Technology appears on the list for the first time, coming in seventh.
On a country level, nearly a quarter of the top 100 institutions in the ranking are from the US, more than any other nation.
Launched in 2024 in association with Schmidt Science Fellows, the rankings were created to improve scientific excellence and collaboration across disciplines and to help universities benchmark their interdisciplinary scientific work
THE broadened the interdisciplinary scope of research for this year’s list to cover any project that comprises multiple scientific disciplines or one or more scientific disciplines combined with the social sciences, education, psychology, law, economics or clinical and health.
The U.S.’s performance in the rankings is driven by high scores for outputs metrics, which include the number and share of interdisciplinary science research publications, the citations of interdisciplinary science research, and the reputation of support for interdisciplinary teams.
“For more than 80 years, research universities have advanced our understanding of the world, leading to dramatic improvements in health, economic prosperity, and national security. That work fundamentally is done best when people ideate and collaborate without regard for disciplinary boundaries within and between scientific areas,” Ian A. Waitz, vice president for research at MIT, said in a statement.
“Scientific research that breaks down academic silos and crosses traditional disciplines is increasingly understood to be essential for the next generation of big breakthroughs and the key to solving the world’s most pressing problems,” said Phil Baty, THE’s chief global affairs officer.
“The world’s biggest challenges are highly complex and require cutting-edge knowledge and fresh ideas from a wide range of specialisms.”
Warning to Investors: Phoenix Education Partners (PXED) may present itself as a cutting‑edge solution in career-focused higher education, but it’s built on the same extractive infrastructure that powered the University of Phoenix. With nearly a million students still owing an estimated $22 billion in federal loans, backing PXED isn’t just a financial bet — it’s a moral and reputational risk.
PXED’s leadership includes powerful private-equity players: Martin H. Nesbitt (Co‑CEO of Vistria and PXED trustee), Adnan Nisar (Vistria), and Theodore Kwon and Itai Wallach (Apollo Global Management). Also in the mix is Chris Lynne, PXED’s president and a former Phoenix CFO intimately familiar with UOP’s controversial enrollment and marketing strategies. These are not educational reformers — they are dealmakers aiming to extract value from a student-debt pipeline.
Higher Education Inquirer’s College Meltdown Index highlights how PXED fits into a broader financialization of higher education. Rather than reforming the University of Phoenix, its backers have resurrected it under a new brand — one that continues to enroll vulnerable adult learners, harvest federal aid, and operate with considerably less public oversight.
Whistleblowers previously documented that Phoenix pressured recruitment staff to falsify student credentials, enrolling people who wouldn’t otherwise qualify for federal aid. Courses were allegedly kept deliberately easy — not to teach, but to keep students “active” enough to trigger aid disbursements. Internal marketing also exaggerated job prospects and corporate partnerships (e.g., with Microsoft and AT&T) to entice students.
PXED may lean on a three‑year default rate (often cited around 12–13%), but that number is deeply misleading. Many UOP students stay stuck in deferment, forbearance, or income-driven repayment, masking the real long-term risk of non-payment. This is not just a short-term liability — it’s a potentially massive, multiyear financial exposure for PXED’s backers.
There was a significant FTC settlement that canceled $141 million in student debt and refunded $50 million to some students. But the scale of harm far exceeds that payout. Untold numbers of borrowers still have unresolved Borrower Defense claims, and the reputational risk remains profound.
Beyond financial concerns, there’s a major ethical dimension. HEI’s Divestment from Predatory Education argument makes a compelling case that investing in companies like PXED — or in loan servicers that profit from student debt — is not just risky, but morally indefensible. According to HEI, institutional investors (including university endowments, pension funds, and foundations) are complicit in a system that monetizes students’ aspirations and perpetuates financial harm.
For investors, the message is clear: Phoenix is not merely an education play — it’s a high-stakes, ethically fraught extraction machine built on a legacy of indebtedness and regulatory vulnerability.
Unless PXED commits to real transparency, independent reporting on student outcomes, and accountability mechanisms — including reparations or debt relief — it should be approached not as a social-growth story, but as a dangerous gamble.
HEI. “The College Meltdown Index: Profiting from the Wreckage of American Higher Education.” Higher Education Inquirer
HEI. “What Do the University of Phoenix and Risepoint Have in Common? The Answer Is a Compelling Story of Greed and Politics.” Higher Education Inquirer
ALLOWAY TOWNSHIP, N.J., Nov. 20, 2025 — A local school board member’s Facebook post to community members about a tax hike should have started a conversation — instead, it led to censorship.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is suingthe commissioner of New Jersey’s Department of Education and members of the state’s School Ethics Commission to stop them from abusing a law to chill the speech of an elected school board member who used social media to seek her constituents’ input.
“I didn’t join the school board to be told to shut up,” said Gail Nazarene, an elected school board member, Navy veteran, and grandma in Alloway Township. “New Jersey officials claim the authority to punish me simply for asking folks questions about important issues, particularly when it affects their wallets. I should be free to communicate with constituents and get their views without being censored by state officials.”
In April, Gail used Facebook to discuss tax increases and other school issues with constituents. In one post, she asked, “As a resident of Alloway, I am wondering what other residents think about a 9-15% school tax increase?” She clarified in her later posts that she was asking in her personal capacity. But another school board member saw the posts and filed a complaint against her, claiming Gail had violated New Jersey’s School Ethics Act because she allegedly had spoken on the board’s behalf. The complaint is pending before the state’s School Ethics Commission.
“Americans deserve to know what their elected officials think about important issues,” said FIRE attorney Daniel Zahn. “New Jersey is muzzling elected officials and preventing them from talking with their community, the very people they were elected to represent.”
The state broadly interprets the School Ethics Act to bar elected officials from discussing issues relating to schools on social media. And this isn’t the first time it’s done so. The School Ethics Commission has previously warned elected officials against engaging with constituents on social media and previously interpreted the act to prevent elected school board members from discussing matters of public concern on social media and in op-eds.
But the First Amendment protects Gail’s right to speak freely on such issues.
Gail has stopped soliciting constituent feedback online. She fears any posts about school board issues will lead to punishment, including reprimand, censure, suspension, or removal. But she also is concerned about the loss of First Amendment freedoms for her and her constituents.
“When the state silences school board members, parents and taxpayers are kept in the dark,” said FIRE attorney Greg Greubel. “The School Ethics Act can’t be turned into an unconstitutional gag rule.”
Today’s federal lawsuit asks the court to declare New Jersey’s School Ethics Act unconstitutional as interpreted by the state and stop its use against elected officials speaking out about public issues.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.
This form is for ordering 2025 DataOnDemand (DOD) subscriptions ONLY. 2025 DOD subscriptions feature data collected in fall of 2024.
Access Expiration: Access to 2025 DataOnDemand subscriptions will expire at 12:01 a.m. ET on February 9, 2026.
User Access: Once payment is received in full, your institution’s chief HR officer (CHRO) or Primary CUPA-HR Contact will be able to assign access to authorized subscription users at your institution. See Manage DOD Access for details.
To pre-order 2026 DOD subscriptions — accessible February 12, 2026–February 8, 2027 — use our standard ordering system. 2026 DOD subscriptions feature data collected this fall.
Participation discounts on DOD subscriptions apply to the specific surveys (and survey years) in which your institution participated.
This week on the podcast we examine what the rise of Reform UK – and new insight into its prospective voters – might mean for universities, international education, and the wider public legitimacy of higher education.
Plus we discuss Skills England’s new guidance on local skills improvement plans – and the move to place higher education, up to postgraduate level, at the heart of local skills ecosystems – and a new study of student working lives that reveals how paid employment alongside full-time study is reshaping participation, wellbeing, and outcomes.
With Sam Roseveare, Director of Regional and National Policy at University of Warwick, Alex Favier, Director at Favier Ltd, Jen Summerton, Operations Director at Wonkhe and presented by Jim Dickinson, Associate Editor at Wonkhe.
