For millenia, medical students have taken the Hippocratic Oath, solemnly pledging to prioritize the well-being of patients and “abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous.” But unfortunately, schools such as the University of Connecticut have recently created their own versions of the oath that prioritize politics at the expense of the First Amendment.
In August, UConn required the incoming class of 2028 to pledge allegiance not simply to patient care, but to support diversity, equity, and inclusion. The revised oath, which was finalized in 2022, includes a promise to “actively support policies that promote social justice and specifically work to dismantle policies that perpetuate inequities, exclusion, discrimination and racism.”
This practice is a grave affront to students’ free speech rights. In January, FIRE called the medical school to confirm that the oath is mandatory; an admissions staff member told us it was. We are asking them to confirm this in writing.
As a public university, UConn is strictly bound by the First Amendment and cannot compel students to voice beliefs they do not hold. Public institutions have every right to use educational measures to try to address biases they believe stymie the healthcare system. But forcing students to pledge themselves to DEI policies — or any other ideological construct — with which they may disagree is First Amendment malpractice. This is no different than forcing students to pledge their allegiance to a political figure or the American flag.
When we raised concerns in 2022 about the University of Minnesota Medical School’s oath, which includes affirming that the school is on indigenous land and a vow to fight “white supremacy,” the university confirmed that students were not obligated to recite it.
In the 1943 landmark case West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, the Supreme Court declared that students could not be made to salute the American flag, saying, “if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”
Justice Jackson, writing for the majority, emphasized that the First Amendment protects the individual’s “sphere of intellect and spirit” from governmental or institutional control. Just as UConn cannot force its medical students to express support for socialized medicine or vaccination mandates, it cannot compel them to pledge fealty to its preferred set of political principles.
University of Minnesota Medical School swears off compelled speech in white coat ceremony
News
After FIRE criticized the medical school for appearing to force students to profess political views, the university affirmed the oath was not required.
More broadly, these nebulous commitments could become de facto professionalism standards, and students could face punishment for failing to uphold them. (After all, they took an oath.) What, exactly, must a medical student do to “support policies that promote social justice”? If a student disagrees with UConn’s definition of “social justice” or chooses not to promote it in the prescribed way, could she be dismissed for violating her oath?
FIRE has repeatedly seen administrators of professional programs — including medicine, dentistry, law, and mortuary science — deploy ambiguous and arbitrarily defined “professionalism” standards to punish students for otherwise protected speech.
UConn isn’t alone in making such changes to the Hippocratic Oath. Other prestigious medical schools, including those at Harvard, Columbia, Washington University, Pitt Med, and the Icahn School of Medicine, have adopted similar oaths in recent years. However, not all schools compel students to recite such oaths. When we raised concerns in 2022 about the University of Minnesota Medical School’s oath, which includes affirming that the school is on indigenous land and a vow to fight “white supremacy,” the university confirmed that students were not obligated to recite it. That’s the very least UConn could do to make clear that it puts medical education — and the law — ahead of politics.
The Government have opened a consultation on the regulation of franchise provision, proposing that all franchisees (delivery partners) with more than 300 students should be regulated by the Office for Students (OfS). Smaller providers will not need to be regulated; larger providers that the OfS does not register in time will not be able to access student finance.
Regulating delivery partners is a positive step forward and the sector should welcome the Government’s proposals. Indeed, my colleagues and I called for just such a move in a recent HEPI report. But whether these proposals will work in practice depends on at least three different aspects of implementation: registration; quality; and duplication of regulation.
Registration
The Government propose delivery partners will need to have successfully registered with the OfS by September 2027 for their 2028/29 courses to be designated for student finance. In theory, given the Government’s final approach will be confirmed in the summer of 2025, delivery partners ought to have two years in which to meet the OfS’s conditions of registration.
However, the practice is likely to be very different. The OfS advise its timescale for registering a new provider is in the range of 41-to-50 weeks, implying delivery partners would need to apply no later than September 2026. But controversially the OfS have temporarily closed applications for registration and changes to the category of registration, including acquiring Degree-Awarding Powers and University Title. Applications are expected to reopen in August 2025, but the OfS is keeping this under review. When applications do reopen, the OfS will stagger recommencing existing cases. It is likely to face an influx of new applications too. Moreover, the sector’s financial pressures, which forced the temporary closure in the first place, will not have gone away. So, there is a very real concern that the OfS will be unable to admit franchisees to the Register quickly enough.
The consequences of not registering a larger delivery partner in time are potentially catastrophic. Even though existing students would retain access to student finance, some delivery providers would simply be unable to continue operating. This kind of failure would be catastrophic for students and for some franchisors (lead partners). If implemented in the wrong way, the Government’s proposals would simply introduce new and equally serious concerns for the financial sustainability of institutions.
There is an alternative, and one which would give stability to students and institutions. The OfS could open a new section of the Register for delivery partners – a probationary register – with more limited initial conditions of registration. This would enable the OfS to meet the Government’s intended timeframe and, critically, start engaging with delivery partners early, setting and agreeing action plans, for example. Delivery partners would then need to move from the probationary register to the full Register within a defined period – two years, for instance.
Quality
Many delivery partners operate in geographic and demographic cold spots. As the Minister for Skills, Baroness (Jacqui) Smith, puts it in the consultation:
good quality franchising has the potential to help more students access higher education, reaching areas under-served by other providers and tailoring delivery models to meet diverse needs.
At my University, delivery partners typically recruit an under-served population segment: 95% are mature entrants; two-thirds are from IMD quintiles 1 or 2. These partners therefore serve a striking demographic intersection. We know that continuation rates across the whole sector are affected by these factors: the OfS data dashboard indicates they suppress continuation rates by 8 percentage points and 5 percentage points respectively. Assuming these factors are independent, the probability of a mature entrant from quintiles 1 or 2 continuing is around 71%, much lower than the OfS threshold.
Registering with the OfS rightly involves an assessment of quality and standards, but the OfS’s current model of quality is too rigid for those operating within such niche demographics. To assess delivery partners, the OfS will need to reconsider carefully how it approaches quality.
Duplication of Registration
The Government’s proposals also include another element which is welcome, that which seeks to remove duplicate regulation. Where a delivery partner is already regulated, state-funded schools or further education colleges, for example, the Government proposes they would not also need to register with the OfS.
There are questions here too about the detail of implementation. Is it right, for example, that those Police and Crime Commissioners who are also delivery partners, need no further regulation in respect of quality and standards? But mostly what is worrying about this aspect of the proposals is the suggestion that delivery and lead partners should both be accountable for delivery. This seems straightforwardly an area of duplicated regulation and it is not clear how it would work in practice. Instead, the OfS should consult with delivery and lead partners to identify those aspects of delivery appropriate for dual accountability and those to which either the lead or the delivery partner will be held accountable.
Summary
In sum, the sector should welcome these proposals. The Government has clearly listened to the argument that franchise provision, when done well, brings many benefits, and has endorsed that position. There is still a need for a robust, sector code of practice; and the implementation of the Government’s ideas will be critical. But if it continues to listen during the consultation phase we should have every expectation that good quality franchise provision will continue to be supported and the concerns of stakeholders properly addressed.
Los Angeles, CA — As students navigate an increasingly complex world defined by artificial intelligence, social media, and rapid technological change, the need for essential life skills has never been greater. The Edge, an innovative, research-based social-emotional and life skills curriculum, creates a dynamic and effective learning environment where middle and high school students can build the social-emotional and life-readiness skills needed to succeed in school, relationships, and life.
Designed in collaboration with educators and aligned with the CASEL framework, The Edge is the first curriculum to meet educators’ demands for high-quality instructional materials for SEL and life-skills readiness. The curriculum helps students cultivate communication, problem-solving, and self-awareness, as well as essential life skills like entrepreneurship, negotiation, financial literacy, and networking, to boost their academic abilities.
“The Edge represents a paradigm shift in education,” says Devi Sahny, Founder and CEO of The Edge and Ascend Now. “It’s not just about helping students excel academically—it’s about helping them understand themselves, connect with others, and develop the resilience to face life’s challenges head-on.”
By combining bite-sized lessons with project-based learning, The Edge creates a dynamic and effective learning environment with ready-to-use, adaptable resources educators use to help students develop both hard and soft skills. Its advanced analytics track student progress whilesaving valuable preparation time. Designed to enable educators to adapt as needed, the curriculum is flexible and requires minimal preparation to support all learning environments—asynchronous and synchronous learning, even flipped learning.
Key highlights include:
Integrated Skill Framework: A robust curriculum featuring 5 pillars, 24 essential skills, and 115 modules, blending SEL with employability and life skills such as negotiation, financial literacy, and digital literacy, all aligned with CASEL, ASCA, and global educational standards.
Educator-Friendly Design: With over 1,000 customizable, MTSS-aligned resources, The Edge saves teachers time and effort while allowing them to adapt materials to meet their unique classroom needs.
Hard Skill Development Meets SEL: By engaging in activities like entrepreneurship, critical thinking, and leadership training, students develop technical proficiencies while enhancing communication, empathy, and resilience.
Real-Time Analytics: Advanced data tools provide administrators with actionable insights into student progress, enabling schools and districts to measure outcomes and improve program alignment with educational goals.
Compelling Content.The curriculum features engaging content that integrates the latest insights from learning sciences with professional writing from skilled authors affiliated with SNL, Netflix, and HBO Max. This combination guarantees that the material is educationally solid, relevant, and thought-provoking.
The Edge immerses students in real-life, complex scenarios that challenge them to think critically, collaborate effectively, and apply social-emotional learning (SEL) to everyday situations. For example, one lesson about conflict resolution uses an actual problem that Pixar faced when allocating resources for new movies.
Early adopters of The Edge have reported remarkable results. The Edge was used by rising high school seniors during a three-week summer college immersion program (SCIP) at Georgetown University, which prepares high school students from underserved backgrounds to apply for college. At the end of the program, 94% reported learning important skills, and 84% said they discovered something new about themselves.
ABOUT THE EDGE
The Edge is the latest innovation from Ascend Now US, dba The Edge, a US-based education startup committed to increasing both college and career readiness for all students. Sahny founded The Edge in the US after building and scaling Ascend Now Singapore, which has provided personalized academic and entrepreneurship tutoring to over 10,000 students and 20+ international schools over the last decade.
eSchool Media staff cover education technology in all its aspects–from legislation and litigation, to best practices, to lessons learned and new products. First published in March of 1998 as a monthly print and digital newspaper, eSchool Media provides the news and information necessary to help K-20 decision-makers successfully use technology and innovation to transform schools and colleges and achieve their educational goals.
No wonder U.S. President Donald Trump wants it for the United States. A purchase price would be steep. Based on past purchases of territory and Greenland’s economic potential, it is estimated that the price of Greenland could be anywhere between $12.5 billion and $77 billion. And he only has to convince the 56,000 people who live there that they would prosper under U.S. rule.
Greenland is a former Danish colony that still relies heavily upon Denmark for its economy.
Trump made an offer in December, called “absurd” by Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen. It was the second time he broached this subject, having first spoken of it during the lead up to his first presidential term.
This time, he said he won’t rule out using economic or military force to buy the world’s biggest island based on the logic that Greenland is necessary for “national security and freedom” of the United States. Greenland and the United States are separated by about 2,289 kilometers (1,422 miles) of water between the two closest points — Grand Manan in the U.S. state of Maine and Nanortalik in Greenland.
Much of the world has been laughing at Trump’s demand but it is no laughing matter for Denmark. This week, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen visited German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron and NATO General Secretary Mark Rutte, to talk about strengthening the EU’s security and defence and to further prioritise the Arctic.
In the meantime, Greenlanders are feeling their value to Denmark has risen.
Greenland was a Danish colony until 1953, when it became a self-governing region of Denmark. This means that it has its own local government and two seats in the Danish parliament. The relationship also means that Greenlanders are citizens of the European Union, with the benefits that come with that.
A fractured relationship
The relationship between Greenland and Denmark is still recovering from that colonial past. The majority of Greenlanders support full independence from Denmark despite its deep reliance on the Danish government.
Denmark is still responsible for Greenland’s foreign, security and defence policy, and provides Greenland an annual financial aid of DKK 3.9 billion (roughly €522 million), which makes up around 20% of Greenland’s gross domestic product. That’s the value of all the goods and services a country produces and it is used as a measurement of a nation’s economic health.
The scars of colonialism are still fresh for many Greenlanders. In 1953 Denmark allowed the forced relocation of an Indigenous population from the Dundas area in Greenland, for a U.S. military base. The Thule tribe had been semi-nomadic catchers in the Dundas area for thousands of years. Their relocation took place over just a few days.
Later, in the 1960s and 70s, Danish health authorities fitted thousands of Inuit women and girls the IUD contraceptive device, many without proper notification or consent. An investigation into the procedure suggests that its aim was to curb a growing population — which worked. Many of these women went on to suffer health issues due to the IUD.
Now Greenlanders are being told that their future is theirs to decide.
There’s green beneath the ice.
What does Trump want with Greenland?
Greenland’s ice sheet covers nearly 80% of the country, which is losing mass at a rate of around 200 gigatonnes per year due to climate change. That seems like an incomprehensible amount. It is the equivalent of 200 billion metric tons or, according to NASA, if you could picture it, two million fully-loaded aircraft carriers.
Trump has framed his interest in Greenland as a matter of national security and freedom. By this, he points to the island’s strategic value: its untapped reserves of rare earth minerals and fossil fuels, as well as emerging trade routes enabled by retreating ice.
Greenland’s mineral reserves are largely untouched. The island harbors significant deposits of rare earth elements, essential for various high-tech applications, including electronics, renewable energy technologies and defence systems.
Owning Greenland would ease U.S. concerns over China’s dominance in the rare earth market, with China currently controlling 70–80% of the world’s critical rare earth minerals. Acquiring access to Greenland’s mineral reserves could serve to diversify and secure the U.S. supply chain, reducing reliance on Chinese exports.
Controlling the Arctic
Exploiting Greenland’s mineral wealth still presents considerable challenges. The island’s harsh climate and limited infrastructure means large start-up costs for mining projects.
Having control over new trade routes in the Arctic is also appealing, as well as having an expanded military presence in the region to monitor Russian navy vessels and nuclear submarines.
Is it possible to buy another country?
This isn’t the first time the United States has offered to buy Greenland. In 1946, President Harry Truman offered Denmark $100 million for the island. Denmark rejected the proposal but permitted the construction of the Pituffik Space Base which is responsible for missile warning systems and monitoring of satellites in space.
But for an exchange from Greenland to the United States to happen, both Denmark and Greenland would need to agree to the sale, with an Act on Greenland Self-Government stating that the people of Greenland have a right to self-determination.
And right now, Greenlanders don’t want to be under anyone’s rule but their own.
The international news service Reuters reported 29 January that a poll commissioned by the Danish paper Berlingske, found that 87% of Greenlanders would turn down Trump’s offer and another 9% are undecided.
But they’re not telling the United States to go away. While Greenland’s Prime Minister Mute Egede said that his country is not for sale, Greenlanders are open to cooperating with the United States on defence and exploration of its minerals.
And then there’s golf. With all that melting ice, maybe Trump is picturing a fabulous par-72 resort. Right now Greenland only has two courses. Just picture those sand traps on the edge of the Arctic.
Three questions to consider:
1. How would the United States benefit from controlling Greenland? 2. What’s Greenland’s relationship with Denmark? 3. If you were a Greenlander, would you vote to become part of the United States? Why?
This blog builds on my presentation at the BERA ECR Conference 2024: at crossroads of becoming. It represents my personal reflections of working in UK higher education (HE) professional services roles and simultaneously gaining research experience through a Masters and Professional Doctorate in Education (EdD).
Professional service roles within UK HE include recognised professionals from other industries (eg human resources, finance, IT) and HE-specific roles such as academic quality, research support and student administration. Unlike academic staff, professional services staff are not typically required, or expected, to undertake research, yet many do. My own experience spans roles within six universities over 18 years delivering administration and policy that supports learning, teaching and students.
Traversing two tracks
In 2016, at an SRHE Newer Researchers event, I was asked to identify a metaphor to reflect my experience as a practitioner researcher. I chose this image of two train tracks as I have often felt that I have been on two development tracks simultaneously – one building professional experience and expertise, the other developing research skills and experience. These tracks ran in parallel, but never at the same pace, occasionally meeting on a shared project or assignment, and then continuing on their separate routes. I use this metaphor to share my experiences, and three phases, of becoming a professional services researcher.
Becoming research-informed: accelerating and expanding my professional track
The first phase was filled with opportunities; on my professional track I gained a breadth of experience, a toolkit of management and leadership skills, a portfolio of successful projects and built a strong network through professional associations (egAHEP). After three years, I started my research track with a masters in international higher education. Studying felt separate to my day job in academic quality and policy, but the assignments gave me opportunities to bring the tracks together, using research and theory to inform my practice – for example, exploring theoretical literature underpinning approaches to assessment whilst my institution was revising its own approach to assessing resits. I felt like a research-informed professional, and this positively impacted my professional work, accelerating and expanding my experience.
Becoming a doctoral researcher: long distance, slow speed
The second phase was more challenging. My doctoral journey was long, taking 9 years with two breaks. Like many part-time doctoral students, I struggled with balance and support, with unexpected personal and professional pressures, and I found it unsettling to simultaneously be an expert in my professional context yet a novice in research. I feared failure, and damaging my professional credibility as I found my voice in a research space.
What kept me going, balancing the two tracks, was building my own research support network and my researcher identity. Some of the ways I did this was through zoom calls with EdD peers for moral support, joining the Society for Research into Higher Education to find my place in the research field, and joining the editorial team of a practitioner journal to build my confidence in academic writing.
Becoming a professional services researcher: making the tracks converge
Having completed my doctorate in 2022, I’m now actively trying to bring my professional and research tracks together. Without a roadmap, I’ve started in my comfort-zone, sharing my doctoral research in ‘safe’ policy and practitioner spaces, where I thought my findings could have the biggest impact. I collaborated with EdD peers to tackle the daunting task of publishing my first article. I’ve drawn on my existing professional networks (ARC, JISC, QAA) to establish new research initiatives related to my current practice in managing assessment. I’ve made connections with fellow professional services researchers along my journey, and have established an online network to bring us together.
Key takeaways for professional services researchers
Bringing my professional experience and research tracks together has not been without challenges, but I am really positive about my journey so far, and for the potential impact professional services researchers could have on policy and practice in higher education. If you are on your own journey of becoming a professional services researcher, my advice is:
Make time for activities that build your research identity
Find collaborators and a community
Use your professional experience and networks
It’s challenging, but rewarding, so keep going!
Charlotte Verney is Head of Assessment at the University of Bristol. Charlotte is an early career researcher in higher education research and a leader in within higher education professional services. Her primary research interests are in the changing nature of administrative work within universities, using research approaches to solve professional problems in higher education management, and using creative and collaborative approaches to research. Charlotte advocates for making the academic research space more inclusive for early career and professional services researchers. She is co-convenor of the SRHE Newer Researchers Network and has established an online network for higher education professional services staff engaged with research.
As we welcome a new year, educators and industry leaders are excited to discover the biggest education trends for 2025. The past few years have been characterized by fresh and innovative solutions for learning, as well as transformative, technology-forward approaches to education.
Each year, we like to look ahead and anticipate the biggest upcoming education trends. There are many topics education professionals can expect to be at the center of the conversation in 2025–from new perspectives on artificial intelligence for education to the emergence of nontraditional school models amid an increasingly competitive enrollment environment.
For 2025, schools and districts are focused on making learning more engaging for students, creating a more positive environment for educators, and transforming school culture to meet the diverse needs of the school community. As schools work to accomplish these goals, we expect to see an expansion of AI and other emerging technologies in the classroom, enhanced professional development and support for teachers, and more individualized learning opportunities for students.
Here are five of the biggest education trends for 2025:
1. Nontraditional school models
Everything from career opportunities, technology, and the world around us has changed significantly over the past decade, yet the traditional model of public schools in the U.S. has remained largely unchanged for generations. As this industrial-age school model persists, many students feel bored and disengaged with their learning.
When the COVID-19 pandemic caused school interruptions in 2020, many families decided it was time to pivot to new and nontraditional learning opportunities for their children. Since 2019, over 1 million students–the equivalent of one student from every class in the country–have left the conventional classroom to seek out different educational approaches and more innovative learning environments. The National Center for Education Statistics projects that public schools, including public charter schools, will lose an additional 2.4 million students by 2031.
Today’s students desire more individualized learning approaches, which empower them to use their creativity, explore their passions, and engage with their peers in more collaborative ways. In 2025, we will see a greater emergence of nontraditional school models that center student engagement, collaboration, and creativity, and prepare learners to graduate into a continually-evolving workforce.
Some of these emerging nontraditional education models include microschools, online and hybrid learning programs, and project-based or student-led schools, as well as long-established nontraditional school programs such as homeschooling, Montessori, and career and technical education schools. In 2025, we also anticipate that public schools will step up to meet the diverse needs of students through innovative approaches, mirroring some of the elements of these nontraditional school models in order to maintain enrollment, enhance engagement, and equip students with applicable career-ready skills.
2. Expanded use of AI in education
As we predicted last year, artificial intelligence (AI) has become prevalent in the educational space, and this emerging technology shows no sign of stopping its rapid growth as we make our way into 2025. This year, we expect the conversation around AI to shift, reflecting a more widespread acceptance of the technology as a beneficial tool to enhance education and productivity.
In 2025, schools will continue to integrate more AI into the curriculum, guiding students to use it appropriately to enhance their learning. Many schools and districts have already developed formal AI school policies and modified student codes of conduct to ensure safe, effective, and ethical use of AI tools in the classroom.
Furthermore, many educators are now taking the initiative to incorporate AI tools into their lesson plans to help students build familiarity with the technology. Introducing students to AI in a safe and controlled environment enables them to learn how to use it effectively and ethically. Equipping students with foundational skills in AI is already regarded as an essential skill set for college and many careers.
Because AI is a fairly new technology for everyone, including educators, we anticipate that more schools will implement AI professional development opportunities this year, enabling teachers to deliver more effective AI instruction. Some schools are also beginning to employ AI tools for administrative productivity, which will require training and guidance to ensure educators and staff can successfully integrate these tools into their work.
3. Targeted support for educators
Over the past five years, many districts have been focused on allocating Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funding to implement new educational programs and tools, support student wellbeing, and overcome learning loss. Now that the final ESSER deadline has passed, 2025 will see schools and districts shift their attention to providing targeted support directly to educators.
With all of the new technology, refreshed learning spaces, and updated curriculum districts have recently introduced, professional development is essential to ensure effective implementation of these enhancements. In 2025, schools will incorporate new professional development programs that empower educators to foster engaged learners. By providing the tools and resources teachers need to be successful, schools can help educators improve their productivity and attain professional goals, while still keeping teacher wellbeing as a top priority.
Teachers are the primary influencers of the K-12 educational experience, so supporting educators is a holistic approach that benefits the entire school community. To address rising workloads, schools will implement new tools and strategies to support teacher efficacy and wellbeing. Some schools are even piloting automated and AI-powered technologies to take repetitive and administrative tasks off teachers’ plates, freeing up invaluable time for them to connect with students and focus on teaching.
Additionally, districts have begun to recognize the importance of a healthy work-life balance, as many teachers have left the profession over the past several years. In 2025, districts will continue to explore ways to cultivate a more positive job experience for teachers. Teachers want solutions for student behavioral issues, more attentive leadership teams, and more manageable workloads. Schools will work to improve these matters, while maintaining aspects of the job teachers value most, including school culture, opportunities for professional learning and certifications, and STEM and arts programs.
4.A focus on school and district culture
With a growing list of education options, students and their families are seeking out learning environments that not only provide high-quality curriculum and resources, but also align with their values and prioritize school-home communication. In this increasingly competitive enrollment environment, cultivating a positive culture and connected school community are the qualities that make schools stand out.
Funding and resources are directly related to the number of students at each school, so cultivating an inviting school culture is key. In 2025, schools and districts will take time to refine their school brand in order to attract and maintain students. School leaders will focus on creating more opportunities to engage with students and families, implementing new communications tools, initiatives, and events that bring the school community together.
In the past few years, some K-12 administrators have piloted mobile teaching stations to increase their visibility and daily impact throughout their school. We anticipate more school leaders will embrace this approach in 2025, enabling them to build stronger relationships with students and teachers. By working from mobile workstations, administrators can directly engage with students and staff, making face-to-face connections on a daily basis. Frequent positive interactions with school leadership help students, teachers, and families stay engaged with the school community, promoting a culture of connection and support.
5. Universal design for learning
Today’s students are making more choices about how and where they want to learn than ever before. Universal design for learning (UDL) promotes achievement among diverse student bodies by giving each student access to resources and environments that help them learn. Accessibility goes far beyond ADA compliance, and schools are recognizing this through the application of UDL across the learning experience. Understanding the diverse needs of students is crucial for creating learning experiences that are inclusive and supportive.
In 2025, UDL will be at the center of creating comfortable and engaging learning environments that accommodate all students’ needs. For instance, more schools are implementing sensory spaces, ensuring neurodiverse learners have a safe and comfortable space to self-regulate throughout the school day. These spaces don’t just serve neurodivergent students–all students benefit from having areas at school that are dedicated to supporting wellbeing.
As in previous years, accessibility and equity will continue to be prominent topics in 2025, but the conversation will pivot to focus on ways UDL can positively impact curriculum. UDL emphasizes providing students with multiple, flexible types of engagement, different ways of presenting information, and multiple ways to demonstrate their understanding in the classroom. This practice supports students who are neurodivergent and/or experience learning challenges, but also improves the learning experience for neurotypical students.
Dr. Christina Counts, MiEN Environments
Dr. Christina Counts, VP of Education at MiEN Environments, is a proven leader with over 17 years of experience transforming learning spaces. Her background includes roles as a teacher, district leader, school administrator, and innovative learning designer. She currently leads a team supporting schools transitioning to flexible, collaborative, student-centered environments. Dr. Counts holds a doctorate in K-12 Educational Leadership, is National Board certified, and an Accredited Learning Environment Planner (ALEP).
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
During the 2016-2017 school year, the Brothers to Sisters Club at Compton College reserved a portion of their meetings for “Real Talk.” This allowed students to share their current feelings and experiences. During one of these meetings, two students spoke up and shared that they were homeless. This moment inspired Joshua Jackson and Dayshawn Louden, then student leaders at Compton College, to begin campaigning and advocating for student housing and increased basic needs on campus.
“Immediately, Dayshawn and I went into planning,” says Jackson,
Eight years later, Compton College is breaking ground on a 250+ bed housing facility, becoming the first community college in Los Angeles County to offer campus housing to its students.
CCCD Student Housing RenderingCompton College President and CEO Dr. Keith Curry says Jackson and Louden were worried about their peers’ lack of basic needs and immediately brought their concerns to him.
“It was a great conversation when they first brought it forward, and their question was, ‘How do we do it,” says Curry in an interview with Diverse. “I give them the credit for it because they got me to think about it differently and what we could do. I’m a former student activist, so seeing student activists seeing what we need was good.”
Jackson and Louden had just begun their roles as Compton College’s Associated Student Body President and Vice President when they approached Curry.
“We were motivated, and I think we felt that space gave us the courage to believe that we could create change,” says Jackson. “Our roles also gave us the conviction that we should.”
Rallying The Community
After their conversation with Curry, the student leaders called on their community at Compton College for support. Under Curry’s leadership, their efforts grew into a larger task force committed to addressing housing, food, and basic needs for the student body. Their next step was to identify Compton College students who identified as homeless.
“We took it upon ourselves,” says Louden. “I recall me and Joshua going into classrooms to say, ‘hey, utilize your voice,’ because the school can’t address a problem if there’s no need for it.”
Louden says that their roles as campus leaders positioned them to advocate for their fellow students and the longevity of the institution.
“Housing was like a five-to-six-year plan, but to address the needs that we could see that Compton College had, we pushed for a pantry, opening the showers that were going unused by the football team, and supplying bathroom kits and supplies,” he says.
Within weeks, Compton College began implementing additional programs designed to serve students’ needs.
Dr. Keith Curry“It’s not just about a lack of physical space to live. It’s about the absence of opportunity, the absence of safety, the absence of stability,” says Louden. “This was not just about providing resources. This was about fostering community and belonging.”
Curry, who previously served as the Dean of Student Services at Compton College and has been instrumental in the college’s growth, success, and rebuilding, says that his role in this process was to also be courageous.
“I announced at one of our professional development days the need to build student housing, and I think people were like, ‘What is he talking about,’” he recalls. “I said, ‘we’ll be the first ones to build housing,’ and sometimes you have to dream. Sometimes you have to say stuff and get people united because you said it.”
Curry also became one of the founding chairpersons of the Chief Executive Officers of the California Community Colleges’ Affordability, Food & Housing Access Taskforce in spring 2018. This group provides system-wide recommendations to address housing and food insecurities for California Community College students.
“I was advocating statewide for basic needs, so then I was able to fold in that advocacy to include food and also housing,” says Curry.
Once Compton College gathered all of the data and support they needed, college leaders submitted a proposal. Curry, however, was intentional about the request. “I think the most important piece to this was we didn’t ask for the planning grant,” remembers Curry. “We went directly for the project funding grant. We went for the entire dollar amount, and that was the strategic plan.”
Over the course of about five years, what began as a conversation in a student club meeting eventually became a reality.
Celebrating In Community
In June 2022, California lawmakers moved to include a student housing grant totaling $80,389,000 in the 2022-2023 State Budget for the Compton Community College District to build their proposed 250+ bed student housing facility.
“We proved our critics wrong,” says Curry, who has emerged as a national thought-leader on community colleges. “When we’re talking about student housing and having conversations, we were able to take a dream that some people thought was not possible and made it possible for the community that we serve.”
The Compton College Housing Project Groundbreaking Ceremony took place last month, a win that those involved hope to share with the entire Compton community and Compton Community College District (CCCD).
“We’re serving Black and Brown individuals within our community, and for me, it gives these students hope,” says Curry. “They can see a college campus that looks like a four-year college with new facilities but also with student housing. That means that they will not be looked at as less than.”
Phase one of the 86,000-square-foot building will include three floors of affordable student living quarters with 100 percent occupancy designated for students in need. The facility will provide three types of living configurations: 50 double-room units with access to shared bathrooms and common spaces, 50 double-suite units with bathrooms and access to common spaces, and 50 studio units for single occupants. The student housing will also include study areas, lounges and shared kitchens.
“We’re showing other colleges that this can be done,” says Curry. “Compton is the model for that. When you think about our history, we’re the first community college in the state of California whose accreditation was revoked, and to go from that in 2006 to be where we’re at now and to be on the cutting edge, that tells you that transformation can happen, but transformation can happen in communities where we look like the students.”
Curry marks this moment as one of hope, not just for Compton but for communities of color all over the country.
“We’re always criticizing what we don’t do in our communities. Now we see what we can do, and that gives people hope that change is coming,” he says. “But also, this gives the students the opportunity to say look at my backyard, and my community college matters.”
Big things have been on the horizon for Compton College for some time now. Just last year, rapper Kendrick Lamar surprised 2024 Compton College graduating students as their graduation speaker.
“If you look at our video from graduation, you can see the words from Kendrick Lamar where he talks about the value of our degree and how important it is and what it means to be a Compton College graduate,” says Curry. “It gives our students hope. When you’re told you’re not good enough, and now you see a college in your community that is doing stuff that makes you proud, that means you know you’re a part of something that’s bigger than us.”
Phase one is just the beginning of Compton College 2035, a comprehensive master plan outlining the college’s plans to provide students with state-of-the-art facilities, including a physical education complex and a visual and performing arts complex, over the next decade and beyond.
“The city is already going up, as you can imagine why, but this is another notch to add under the belt of why Compton is just a historic and beautiful place,” says Jackson.
Serving As A Model For Other Community Colleges In California And Beyond
In addition to Compton College being the first community college in LA County to have student housing, the housing project is also the first prefabricated modular student housing project that is design-approved by the California Division of the State Architect.
A prefabricated modular means that most of the building will be built thousands of miles away.
“It’s a unique project,” says David Lelie, senior project manager with Gafcon, the construction management company managing the project. “They’re going to build them in a factory in Idaho, and then they’re going to ship them by truck to our site and use a crane to place them.”
This model is designed to decrease construction time and disruptions.
“What we’re saving is sustainability and time nuisance for the students,” says Lelie. “So, instead of bugging students for two years, you’re dropping all those modules into place in two weeks.”
Once the building is placed on campus, the exterior and final touches will be completed, which is projected to be done by May 2027. This will save about six months of traditional construction time.
“It’s a seed, and eventually other campuses will use this idea and this method of prefab modular in order to build their student housing,” says Lelie. “Yes, we’re housing 250 students, but now other colleges, especially in California, can take this model and replicate it, and every time you replicate it, it’s like a car, they get less and less expensive.”
HPI, which is the architecture company responsible for some of the first non-modular student housing on community college campuses, took on this project to continue building cutting-edge experiences and homes for community college students.
They wanted the design to provide not only a place to sleep but also academic support and integration into the broader campus.
“As we learned about how to deliver modular student housing, it was really taking the program that [Compton College] had already established in terms of number of beds and the types of beds and then looking at how we could do that in a way that created community,” says Larry Frapell, principal and president of HPI architecture.
“We wanted the amenities to be easy to get to, a combination of both indoor and outdoor spaces, and a sense of security.”
HPI has a long history of serving higher education and, specifically, larger community colleges.
“We have a good understanding of not only the need for housing but how housing relates to community college students and how to integrate that in a community college campus,” says Frapell. “It’s part of a greater campus and part of a greater community, so we hope that this becomes a home for students and that this is a desirable place to live.”
Jackson and Louden are proud of the legacy they left to be continued for generations to come. Jackson says that he recently spoke with the two students who inspired the project’s advocacy.
“They’re housed, and they’re happy,” he says. “So, I’m grateful to be a part of history in this regard. I’m grateful for what I call following a tradition of activism that’s taking place at Compton College and just through our history as Black folks generally. We didn’t know it at the time, but that’s what we were doing. We just wanted to help.”
Louden believes now, more than ever, that Compton’s faith in humanity is one of its superpowers.
“Compton made that choice as an institution to restore faith in humanity,” says Louden, “and in the words of Compton College’s late great Dr. Joseph Lewis, ‘Compton makes the world go around.’”
Most American college students attend broad-access institutions, or public colleges and universities that admit at least 80 percent of applicants. Yet millions of people live in communities without one of these institutions nearby—and millions more live in areas with only one option, according to a new report from the Institute for College Access and Success.
The report, released today, shows stark disparities in higher ed access based on students’ geography and how some broad-access institutions are single-handedly serving whole regions. It also highlights communities with nearby colleges located across state lines, an understudied college-access issue, higher ed leaders say.
Researchers analyzed different “commuting zones,” or clusters of counties workers commute between, to see which communities have broad-access institutions within a reasonable commuting distance.
Nicholas Hillman, an education professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and co-author of the report, believes it’s critical to understand students’ geographical contexts.
He said conversations about higher ed access often revolve around “informational problems”—whether students know about different college options and understand the college admissions process. But his previous research shows most students, even if well-informed, choose to stay close to home for college. That’s why he wanted to take a deeper look at where residents do or don’t have broad-access institutions within reach.
“Maybe some of the problems in college access and opportunity are that there aren’t colleges nearby, or that there are not appropriate transportation infrastructures in place for students to access colleges … or that there are cost-prohibitive options nearby,” said Hillman, who also directs the university’s Student Success Through Applied Research Lab. When studying college access through a geographic lens, “you see problems differently. You might come up with a very different set of policy solutions.”
He also sees the report as a “love letter” to broad-access institutions, especially those that are the only ones in their communities.
“They’re doing the lion’s share of the work,” Hillman said. “They’re the blue-collar colleges out there, doing the heavy lifting in higher education, serving the most students and doing so oftentimes with the least amount of financial resources and under some of the most pressure.”
The Findings
To identify broad-access institutions, the report drew on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, with the caveat that IPEDS doesn’t account for all branch campuses.
And then researchers used data from Pennsylvania State University’s Labor-sheds for Regional Analysis tool to measure commuting zones around the colleges. Finally, the report looked at how nearby these institutions were in “large-population commuting zones,” like urban or metropolitan areas, and “small-population commuting zones,” less populous areas, like rural communities.
The report found that more than 831,000 people living in more populous commuting zones don’t have a local broad-access institution, and another 9.7 million had only one of these colleges nearby. That means about one in 16 people don’t have a broad-access institution nearby or just one, even in the country’s largest local labor markets.
The issue was even more stark in less populous or rural local labor economies, where 2.8 million people don’t have a single broad-access institution in their area. Another 5.9 million live in areas with only one such institution. Meanwhile, among students who go to college in these less populous areas, 70 percent attend broad-access institutions, meaning these colleges “play an outsized role in creating opportunities and meeting local educational needs” in these communities, the report says.
Riley Acton, an assistant professor of economics at Miami University in Ohio, said it’s important to differentiate between college access issues in the two types of regions, as the report did, because “what it means to have access, to have something nearby, can be really different in rural and urban environments.” In a rural area, a college might be miles away but easy to travel to by car, while in an urban area, a college could be close by but hard to reach via public transportation, she said, so the report opens up a conversation about those distinctions.
Hillman added that a granular look at the data might surprise people. For example, some large metropolitan areas, like Chicago, are known for prominent private universities but have relatively few broad-access institutions for residents.
“Local markets are just very different, depending on where you live, and I think that it’s important to put that out there, just to help remind ourselves that there’s no typical place or experience or market that every student experiences,” Hillman said.
The report also highlights that some regions have broad-access institutions nearby but they’re across state borders, meaning they may not provide in-state tuition or could be harder to reach. There are 63 small-population commuting zones that cross state borders, which collectively have 77 broad-access institutions and serve about 190,000 students. The report also found 65 large-population zones that cross state lines with a total of 249 broad-access institutions enrolling roughly 1.3 million students.
Acton said broad-access institutions that draw students from multiple states are an “understudied angle” in understanding students’ geographical contexts and what barriers could be getting in the way of their going to college.
The Policy Implications
To expand students’ access to these colleges, the report recommends that states offer nearby out-of-state students tuition discounts and that local leaders explore ways to improve transportation infrastructure, among other policy suggestions.
Hillman emphasized that it’s also important to ensure broad-access institutions that are the only ones in their communities are well resourced. He suggested these colleges have a special federal or state designation that comes with extra financial support.
“Sometimes a college is … serving a great need and is really an anchor for that community,” he said.
Particularly in rural areas, broad-access institutions often do so much more for their communities than confer degrees, said Cecilia Orphan, associate professor of higher education at the University of Denver and founding co-director of the Alliance for Research on Regional Colleges. In some cases, these campuses provide local internet access and serve as major employers, among other services. Western Carolina University, for example, is home to its community’s power plant and has police officers that serve its surrounding area.
“It’s very tempting for policymakers to simply look at enrollment numbers … and to ask themselves whether or not that institution is needed,” Orphan said. “But if you think about the broader services that institution likely provides a local community, closing it could be catastrophic.”
Acton noted that limited access to broad-access institutions can especially hurt some of the most vulnerable students.
She previously conducted research with a team of economists focused on how community college proximity affected Texas high school students’ college-going decisions. They found that Black, Hispanic and lower-income students without a community college nearby were less likely to pursue higher ed, while white, Asian and upper-income students were more likely to travel to go to college.
She agrees higher ed decision-makers need to think carefully about what a college means to particular communities when they make policy choices.
“Where do we open new colleges? Where do we close colleges? Where do we merge colleges?” she said. If an institution closes, “what are the other options for the people in this area? Are the people who are in this area ones who would be able to travel and go to something further away? … Those are conversations for state policymakers and institutional leaders to be having.”
Students at Florida State University can cheer on the Seminoles across multiple sports, but they can no longer learn about the namesake tribe of Indigenous Americans as part of FSU’s general education offerings after the Florida Board of Governors approved sweeping curriculum changes Thursday.
Florida colleges have spent months rethinking their general education requirements following a change in state law. Thursday’s vote marked the final step in a contentious and controversial process that brought significant changes to all 12 state universities. Critics accuse the board and system officials of taking a heavy-handed approach and targeting specific topics or courses, while state officials have argued revisions were necessary both to simplify the curriculum and to strip it of “indoctrination.”
Now, American History 583: The Seminoles and the Southeastern Indians is one of hundreds of courses across Florida’s public universities that will no longer count toward general education credit as part of the extensive overhaul. Neither will Black Women in America or LGBTQ History, both of which were previously included as general education offerings at FSU. Those are just three of numerous courses touching in some way on race, gender or sexuality that institutional boards voted in recent months to drop from general education. All 12 Boards of Trustees then submitted a pared-down list of classes to FLBOG for approval. Three Bible courses remain eligible for general education credit at FSU.
(An FSU spokesperson noted in an email to Inside Higher Ed that American History 583, which currently has about 150 students enrolled this semester, will now be offered as an elective. Pressed on the rationale for why the course was dropped from gen eds, FSU did not respond.)
Florida State University’s Board of Trustees dropped a course on Seminole history from the list of general education offerings, but fans can still cheer on the Seminoles.
Chris Leduc/Icon Sportswire/Getty Image
State lawmakers required colleges in 2023 to review general education classes in an effort to cut “courses with curriculum based on unproven, speculative or exploratory content,” according to materials shared with the Board of Governors in a presentation for Thursday’s vote.
The Florida Board of Governors unanimously approved the new suite of gen ed classes Thursday, though some members tried to downplay the notion that the state was trying to limit knowledge.
“We are not prohibiting universities from offering courses,” Timothy Cerio, chair of the Academic and Student Affairs committee, said at the meeting. Instead, he emphasized that those courses are just being removed from general education curriculum and will remain available as electives.
State University System of Florida chancellor Ray Rodrigues depicted the vote on general education as stripping indoctrination from curricular offerings. Rodrigues argued that the American public has lost faith in higher education, citing a recent Gallup poll that noted shrinking public confidence in the sector. Among the reasons for that diminished confidence, particularly among Republican respondents, is the belief that colleges push liberal agendas.
“The general education curriculum that was approved today makes Florida the only state in the nation to address the No. 1 reason why the American people have lost confidence in higher education,” Rodrigues said during the meeting. “We can confidently say that our general education courses that students have to take in order to graduate will not contain indoctrinating concepts.”
‘Political Overreach’
But critics allege administrators have overstepped, as curriculum has traditionally been the faculty’s purview. They also worry that removing courses from general education will cause enrollment in such classes to plummet, limiting the number of students who will be introduced to certain majors like sociology—a discipline state officials have taken aim at for an allegedly liberal tilt—which will subsequently weaken academic departments and potentially decrease staffing levels.
United Faculty of Florida, a union representing 25,000-plus professors, denounced the move toward scaled-back general education offerings.
“Florida is at the forefront of an assault against public education, restricting the subjects students can study from K-12 to the colleges and universities,” UFF declared in a news release ahead of Thursday’s vote, casting FLBOG’s actions as “bureaucratic and political overreach.”
“General education courses are the foundation of critical thinking and informed citizenship, and censoring them limits not only what students can learn but also what they can become. These proposed cuts are an insult to our students and to the world-class faculty that instruct and guide them,” UFF president Teresa M. Hodge said in a Monday webinar ahead of the meeting.
Hodge argued that the courses being targeted were just “words and numbers on a spreadsheet” to the Florida Board of Governors, but “for the rest of us, they are the future of our students, our jobs, and our democracy” and the “foundation of critical thinking” and “informed citizenship.” She also accused Republican governor Ron DeSantis, who pushed for the legislation that led to the changes, of prioritizing “his personal political ambition” over students.
Robert Cassanello, a history professor at the University of Central Florida, argued on the call that it was lawmakers—not professors—who were attempting to indoctrinate students.
“They tell us that classes have to be removed from the curriculum that focus on race, gender and sexuality, but at the same time, they want courses and lessons on the centrality of Western civilization, free-market libertarianism and patriotic histories of this country infused into the general curriculum and life on our campuses,” Cassanello said.
Students on the call also noted that general education courses set them on career pathways.
Tessa Barber, a graduate student at the University of South Florida, began college as a biology major but is now working toward a doctorate in politics and international relations. She attributed that change to general education courses in anthropology and political science that pushed her in a different direction. She expressed concern about “political interference” in the education of undergraduates.
Some speakers at Thursday’s meeting also pushed back on the gen ed overhaul.
Jono Miller, president of NCF Freedom, a group that has been critical of the state’s conservative takeover of New College of Florida, alleged that the overhaul of its core curriculum was “rushed and chaotic” with “minimal faculty input” and a “lack of transparency.” Miller argued that “telling faculty what to teach translates directly to telling students what to think.”
Thursday’s vote followed prior action on general education courses from the State Board of Education, which oversees the 28 institutions in the Florida College System. Earlier this month that board removed 57 percent of FCS general education courses, according to state officials.
During his first 10 days in office, President Trump signed a plethora of executive orders to combat so-called woke ideology, reversed a long-standing immigration policy that barred ICE officers from raiding college campuses and sought to freeze federal grants that don’t align with his agenda—a move blocked by a federal court.
So far, his actions have had few immediate consequences for higher ed, and policy experts say more guidance is necessary to understand their implications. But the president has certainly created chaos and confusion, raising concern among university administrators across the country and inciting pre-emptive responses from some.
Throughout the past two weeks, higher ed experts have told Inside Higher Ed they are trying to walk the thin line between necessary caution and undue alarm.
Many of Trump’s initial actions will take time to enforce and may face intervention from the courts. And while the president has nominated former wrestling mogul Linda McMahon as secretary of education and former University of Florida vice president Penny Schwinn as deputy, neither has a confirmation hearing scheduled. Trump has yet to nominate an under secretary—the highest-ranking official overseeing colleges and universities. So it will likely be at least a few weeks, if not more, until the department reaches full capacity.
Until then, it will be run by acting secretary Denise Carter, who was already working in the department as head of the Office of Federal Student Aid, and a collection of 10 appointees who do not require confirmation. Of the 10, four have previously worked with the America First Policy Institute, a pro-Trump think tank that McMahon formed in 2021.
Though the department is not yet fully staffed, the small landing team has leaped into action. In a Jan. 23 new release, department officials said they had removed or archived hundreds of documents, dissolved councils and canceled service contracts that go against the president’s “ongoing commitment to end illegal discrimination and wasteful spending.”
✔ Empower Parents and Students Through School Choice ✔ Put an End to Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schools ✔ Combat Antisemitism on College Campuses ✔ Make Education Great Again
The president signed a record number of executive orders on his first day in office and has added to the tally nearly every day since. But the three that hold the most weight for colleges and universities concern DEI, “gender ideology” and antisemitism. Higher ed, free speech and civil rights advocates predict all three will create a significant chilling effects on campuses.
“Gender Ideology”
Signed on Inauguration Day, the first order declares that there are only two sexes, which the White House defines as “male” and “female.” The order also mandates that federal agencies use those definitions when “interpreting or applying statutes, regulations, or guidance and in all other official agency business, documents, and communications” and bans the federal funding of any program that goes against those definitions or defends transgender and nonbinary students.
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
The executive order Trump signed the following day, Jan. 21, tackled all things DEI, though unlike the first order, it never defined the term. Instead, it broadly ordered agencies—including the Education Department—to “enforce our longstanding civil-rights laws and to combat illegal private-sector DEI preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities.”
The document instructs the department to provide guidance for colleges and universities on how to comply with the 2023 Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action. It also designates all institutions that receive federal financial aid as subcontractors and says that as such, they “shall not consider race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin” in their programs or hiring decisions. Finally, it commissions the department to conduct an investigation of up to nine colleges with endowments worth more than $1 billion to scrutinize compliance.
Antisemitism
The most recent order, signed Wednesday, piggybacks on the tensions over recent campus protests and vows “forceful” measures to combat antisemitism. Its four main components define antisemitism, direct the Office for Civil Rights to reconsider closed investigations on ethnic and religious discrimination, encourage the Department of Justice to take action, and allow immigration officers to deport international student “sympathizers” who support antisemitic groups.
“Sympathizers” — so, in practice, anyone even perceived to be pro-Palestine. I cannot overstate how chilling this is for students and faculty: sweeping orders to report and suss these speakers out, opaque investigatory reviews, tethered to overbroad definitions of anti-Semitism. https://t.co/tBSWdj0ueb
DEI, LGBTQ+ and pro-Palestinian advocates, along with free speech and academic freedom groups, are pushing back against the order, and some are even encouraging colleges and universities not to comply unless pressured to do so.
But several colleges have already taken pre-emptive actions in an attempt to avoid financial penalties. For example a conference at Rutgers University about registered apprenticeships and historically Black colleges and universities was canceled last week, and Michigan State University canceled a Lunar New Year event this week. Rutgers officials, however, say calling off the conference wasn’t a university decision. Rather, it was canceled because the organizers, a group outside the university, received a stop work order from the Department of Labor.
Immigration Actions
Although less directly targeted at institutions of higher ed, the president has also taken executive actions related to immigration. He attempted (and failed) to strip the children of undocumented immigrants of birthright citizenship; rescinded guidance that prevented immigration arrests at schools, churches and colleges; and signed the Laken Riley Act into law, potentially putting the approval of some U.S. visas into the hands of state attorneys general.
The first executive action might have impacted some students’ access to in-state tuition or financial aid but would have had no direct implication on the colleges themselves. But the latter two could force university administrators to decide whether they will assist in deportation efforts and may impact the enrollment and hiring of international students and scholars.
Funding Freeze
Perhaps the most direct cause of chaos and concern among colleges, however, was the product of an internal Office of Management and Budget memo leaked Monday, which directed all federal agencies to pause thousands of grants and loans in order to conduct a “comprehensive analysis” and ensure they align with the president’s priorities.
The unprecedented guidance specifically exempted Social Security, Medicare and other programs that provide direct financial assistance to individuals. But initially many institutions feared the mandate would strip students of access to the Pell Grant and federal loans. The White House clarified that was not the case in a press conference and in follow-up memos, but colleges, universities and higher education nonprofit groups were still concerned.
ACE President Ted Mitchell: This is bad public policy, and it will have a direct impact on the funds that support students and research. The longer this goes on, the greater the damage will be. Full statement: https://t.co/Eee0IChlJo
Policy experts warned that even if temporary, lack of access to grants could impact minority-serving institutions, college preparation programs, childcare for student parents, food banks, student retention and graduation initiatives, campus hospital systems, and more. Multiple legal challenges quickly followed, and on Tuesday afternoon a federal judge in Washington blocked the freeze, just hours before it was scheduled to take effect.
Since then, the Trump administration has rescinded the original memo, although it has criticized news organizations for saying the freeze was reversed entirely. Instead, officials argued in a news release—titled “Another Day, More Lies”—that the analysis of all programs is ongoing and Trump’s order remains “in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented as the administration works to root out waste, fraud, and abuse.”
This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze.
It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo.
Why? To end any confusion created by the court’s injunction.
The President’s EO’s on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.
Pauses on research grant applications through the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation that started prior to the OMB memo remain in place. The agencies are responsible for billions of dollars in research funding at universities across the country, and faculty members are still largely concerned that the stoppage will interfere with critical STEM research projects, including those that have advanced treatments for common diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer’s.
