A colleague of ours recently attended an AI training where the opening slide featured a list of all the ways AI can revolutionize our classrooms. Grading was listed at the top. Sure, AI can grade papers in mere seconds, but should it?
As one of our students, Jane, stated: “It has a rubric and can quantify it. It has benchmarks. But that is not what actually goes into writing.” Our students recognize that AI cannot replace the empathy and deep understanding that recognizes the growth, effort, and development of their voice. What concerns us most about grading our students’ written work with AI is the transformation of their audience from human to robot.
If we teach our students throughout their writing lives that what the grading robot says matters most, then we are teaching them that their audience doesn’t matter. As Wyatt, another student, put it: “If you can use AI to grade me, I can use AI to write.” NCTE, in its position statements for Generative AI, reminds us that writing is a human act, not a mechanical one. Reducing it to automated scores undermines its value and teaches students, like Wyatt and Jane, that the only time we write is for a grade. That is a future of teaching writing we hope to never see.
We need to pause when tech companies tout AI as the grader of student writing. This isn’t a question of capability. AI can score essays. It can be calibrated to rubrics. It can, as Jane
said, provide students with encouragement and feedback specific to their developing skills. And we have no doubt it has the potential to make a teacher’s grading life easier. But just because we can outsource some educational functions to technology doesn’t mean we should.
It is bad enough how many students already see their teacher as their only audience. Or worse, when students are writing for teachers who see their written work strictly through the lens of a rubric, their audience is limited to the rubric. Even those options are better than writing for a bot. Instead, let’s question how often our students write to a broader audience of their peers, parents, community, or a panel of judges for a writing contest. We need to reengage with writing as a process and implement AI as a guide or aide rather than a judge with the last word on an essay score.
Our best foot forward is to put AI in its place. The use of AI in the writing process is better served in the developing stages of writing. AI is excellent as a guide for brainstorming. It can help in a variety of ways when a student is struggling and looking for five alternatives to their current ending or an idea for a metaphor. And if you or your students like AI’s grading feature, they can paste their work into a bot for feedback prior to handing it in as a final draft.
We need to recognize that there are grave consequences if we let a bot do all the grading. As teachers, we should recognize bot grading for what it is: automated education. We can and should leave the promises of hundreds of essays graded in an hour for the standardized test providers. Our classrooms are alive with people who have stories to tell, arguments to make, and research to conduct. We see our students beyond the raw data of their work. We recognize that the poem our student has written for their sick grandparent might be a little flawed, but it matters a whole lot to the person writing it and to the person they are writing it for. We see the excitement or determination in our students’ eyes when they’ve chosen a research topic that is important to them. They want their cause to be known and understood by others, not processed and graded by a bot.
The adoption of AI into education should be conducted with caution. Many educators are experimenting with using AI tools in thoughtful and student-centered ways. In a recent article, David Cutler describes his experience using an AI-assisted platform to provide feedback on his students’ essays. While Cutler found the tool surprisingly accurate and helpful, the true value lies in the feedback being used as part of the revision process. As this article reinforces, the role of a teacher is not just to grade, but to support and guide learning. When used intentionally (and we emphasize, as in-process feedback) AI can enhance that learning, but the final word, and the relationship behind it, must still come from a human being.
When we hand over grading to AI, we risk handing over something much bigger–our students’ belief that their words matter and deserve an audience. Our students don’t write to impress a rubric, they write to be heard. And when we replace the reader with a robot, we risk teaching our students that their voices only matter to the machine. We need to let AI support the writing process, not define the product. Let it offer ideas, not deliver grades. When we use it at the right moments and for the right reasons, it can make us better teachers and help our students grow. But let’s never confuse efficiency with empathy. Or algorithms with understanding.
Dennis Magliozzi & Kristina Peterson, University of New Hampshire’s Writers Academy
Kristina Peterson and Dennis Magliozzi have been teaching English since 2008. Kristina has a master’s degree in teaching and over a decade of experience mentoring teachers. Dennis holds an MFA in poetry and a PhD from the University of New Hampshire. Together, they co-teach in the University of New Hampshire’s Writers Academy and Learning Through Teaching program. Their work on generative AI’s impact in the classroom is highlighted on Heinemann’s blog, and in their forthcoming book, AI in the Writing Workshop: Finding the Write Balance.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
July 28, 2025, by Dr. Chet Haskell: The headlines are full of uncertainty for American higher education. “Crisis” is a common descriptor. Federal investigations of major institutions are underway. Severe cuts to university research funding have been announced. The elimination of the Department of Education is moving ahead. Revisions to accreditation processes are being floated. Reductions in student support for educational grants and loans are now law. International students are being restricted.
These uncertainties and pressures affect all higher education, not just targeted elite institutions. In particular, they are likely to exacerbate the fragility of smaller, independent non-profit institutions already under enormous stress. Such institutions, some well-known, others known only locally, will be hard hit particularly hard by the combination of Trump Administration pressures and the developing national demographic decline for traditional-age students.(https://www.highereddive.com/news/decline-high-school-graduates-demographic-cliff-wiche-charts/738281/) These small colleges have been a key element of the American higher education scene, as well as for numerous local communities, for many decades.
It is widely understood that the vibrancy of American higher education comes, in part, from the diversity of its institutions and educational goals. The rich mixture of American colleges and universities is a strength that many other nations lack. Students have opportunities to start and stop their educations, to change directions and academic goals, to move among different types of institutions.
Smaller undergraduate colleges play important roles in this non-systemic system. They provide focused educational opportunities for younger adults, where they can build their lives on broad principles. Impressively large percentages of small college graduates go on to graduate education for various professions. Small colleges provide large numbers of graduates who enter PhD programs and eventually enter the professorate.
There are approximately 1179 accredited private institutions with enrollments of fewer than 3000 students. Of these, 185 have between 3000 and 2000 students. Another 329 have enrollments below 2000 but above 1000. A final 650 institutions have enrollments below 1000. These 1179 institutions students include few wealthy colleges such as Williams, Amherst, Carleton or Pomona, as well as numerous struggling, relatively unknowns.
A basic problem is one of scale. In the absence of significant endowments or other external support, it is very difficult to manage small institutions in a cost effective manner. Institutions with enrollments below 1000 are particularly challenged in this regard. The fundamental economics of small institutions are always challenging, as most are almost completely dependent on student enrollments, a situation getting worse with the coming decline of traditional college age students. There are limited options available to offset this decline. Renewed attention to student retention is one. Another is adding limited graduate programs. However, both take investment, appropriate faculty and staff capacity and time, all of which are often scarce.
These institutions have small endowments measured either in total or per student value. Of the 1179. There are only 80 with total endowments in excess of $200 million. While a handful have per student endowments that rival the largest private universities, (Williams, Amherst and Pomona all have per student endowments in excess of $1.8 million), the vast majority have per student endowments in the $40,000 range and many far less.
Most of these schools have high tuition discount rates, often over 50%, so their net tuition revenue is a fraction of posted expense. They are all limited by size – economies of scale are difficult to achieve. And most operate in highly competitive markets, where the competition is not only other small schools, but also a range of public institutions.
So, what is the underendowed, under resourced small college to do?
The most common initiatives designed to address these sorts of challenges are consortia, collaborative arrangements among institutions designed to increase student options and to share expenses. There are numerous such arrangements, examples being the Colleges of the Fenway in Boston, the Five Colleges of Western Massachusetts, the Washington DC Metropolitan Area Consortium, and the Claremont Colleges in California, among others.
The particulars of each of these groups differ, but there are commonalities. Most are geographically oriented, seeking to take advantage from being near each other. Typically, these groups want to provide more opportunities for students through allowing cross-registrations, sharing certain academic programs or joint student activities. They usually have arrangements for cost-sharing or cost reductions through shared services for costs like security services, IT, HR, risk management options, pooled purchasing and the like. In other cases (like the Claremont Consortium) they may share libraries or student athletic facilities. Done well, these arrangements can indeed reduce costs while also attracting potential students through wider access to academic options.
However, it is unlikely that such initiatives, no matter how successful, can fundamentally change the basic financial situation of an independent small college. Such shared services savings are necessary and useful, but usually not sufficient to offset the basic enrollment challenge. The financial impact of most consortia is at the margins.
Furthermore, participating institutions have to be on a solid enough financial basis to take part in the first place. Indeed, a consortium like Claremont is based on financial strength. Two of the members have endowments in excess of $1.2 billion (Pomona’s is $2.8 billion.) The endowments of the others range from a low of $67 million (Keck Graduate with 617 students) to Scripps with $460 million for 1100 students.) The Consortium is of clear value to its members, but none of these institutions is on the brink of failure. Rather, all have strong reputations, a fact that provides another important enrollment advantage.
One important factor in these consortia arrangements is that the participating institutions do not have to give up their independence or modify their missions. Their finances, alumni and accreditation are separate. And while the nature of the arrangement indicates certain levels of compromise and collaboration, their governance remains basically unchanged with independent fiduciary boards.
At the other end of the spectrum are two radically different situations. One is merging with or being acquired by another institution. Prep Scholar counts 33 such events since 2015. (https://blog.prepscholar.com/permanently-closed-colleges-list). Lacking the resources for financial sustainability, many colleges have had no choice but to take such steps.
Merging or being acquired by a financially stronger institution has many advantages. Faculty and staff jobs may be protected. Students can continue with their studies. The institution being acquired may be able to provide continuity in some fashion within the care of the new owner. Endowed funds may continue. The institution’s name may continue as part of an “institute” or “center” within the new owner’s structure. Alumni records can be maintained. Real estate can be transferred. Debts may be paid off and so forth. There are multiple examples of the acquiring institution doing everything possible along these lines.
But some things end. Independent governance and accreditation cease as those functions are subsumed by the acquiring institution. Administrative and admissions staffs are integrated and some programs, people and activities are shed. Operational leadership changes. And over time, what was once a beloved independent institution may well fade away.
The end of a college is a very sad thing for all involved and, indeed, for society in general. Often a college is an anchor institution in a small community and the loss is felt widely. The closure of a college is akin to the closure of a local factory. As Dean Hoke and others have noted, this is a particular problem for rural communities.
Are there other possible avenues, something between a consortium and a merger or outright closure?
One relatively new model has been organized by two quite different independent institutions, Otterbein University and Antioch University, that came together in 2022 to create the Coalition for the Common Good. Designed to be more than a simple bilateral partnership, the vision of the Coalition is eventually to include several institutions in different locations linked by a common mission and the capacity to grow collective enrollments.
At its core, the Coalition is based on academic symbiosis. Otterbein is a good example of the high-quality traditional undergraduate residential liberal arts institution. It has been well-run and has modest financial resources. Facing the demographic challenges noted earlier (in a state like Ohio that boasts dozens of such institutions), it developed a set of well-regarded graduate programs, notably in nursing and health-related fields, along with locally based teacher education programs and an MBA. However, despite modest success, they faced the limitations of adult programs largely offered in an on-campus model. Regardless of quality, they lacked the capacity to expand such programs beyond Central Ohio.
Antioch University, originally based in Ohio, had evolved over the past 40 years into a more national institution with locations in California, Washington State and New Hampshire offering a set of graduate professional programs to older adults mostly through distance modalities in hybrid or low-residency forms. Antioch, however, was hampered by limited resources including a very small endowment. It had demonstrated the capacity to offer new programs in different areas and fields but lacked the funds necessary for investment to do so.
Within the Coalition, the fundamental arrangement is for Antioch to take over Otterbein’s graduate programs and, with Otterbein financial support, to expand them in other parts of the country. The goal is significant aggregate enrollment growth and sharing of new revenues. While they plan a shared services operation to improve efficiencies and organizational effectiveness, their primary objective is growth. Antioch seeks to build on Otterbein’s successes, particularly with nursing programs. It already has considerable experience in managing academic programs at a distance, a fact that will be central as it develops the Otterbein nursing and health care programs in a new Antioch Graduate School of Nursing and Health Professions.
It is assumed that additional new members of the Coalition will resemble Otterbein in form, thus further increasing opportunities for growth through enhanced reach and greater scale. New members in other geographic locations will provide additional opportunities for expansion. One early success of the Coalition has been the capacity to offer existing Antioch programs in Central Ohio, including joint partnerships with local organizations, health care and educational systems. Crucially, both institutions remain separately accredited with separate governance and leadership under a Coalition joint “umbrella” structure.
This is not to assert that this model would work for many other institutions. First, many schools with limited graduate programs will be reluctant to “give up” some or all these programs to another partner in the same fashion as Otterbein has with Antioch. Others may not fit geographically, being too remote for expansion of existing programs. Still others may not wish to join a group with an avowed social justice mission. Finally, as with some consortia, the Coalition arrangement assumes a certain degree of institutional financial stability – it cannot work for institutions on the brink of financial disaster, lest the weakest institution drag down the others.
Are there other organizational variants that are more integrated than consortia, but allow the retention of their independence in ways impossible in a merger or acquisition model? What can be learned from the Coalition initiative that might help others? How might such middle-ground collaboration models be encouraged and supported?
How can philanthropy help?
This is an opportunity for the segments of the philanthropic world to consider possible new initiatives to support the small college elements of the education sector. While there will always be efforts to gain foundation support for individual colleges, there will never be enough money to buttress even a small portion of deserving institutions that face the financial troubles discussed above
Philanthropy should take a sectoral perspective. One key goal should be to find ways to support smaller institutions in general. Instead of focusing on gifts to particular institutions, those interested in supporting higher education should look at the multiple opportunities for forms of collaborative or collective action. Central to this effort should be exploration of ways of supporting diverse collaborative initiatives. One example would be to provide sufficient backing to a struggling HBCU or women’s college to enable it to be sufficiently stable to participate in a multi-institutional partnership.
As noted, institutional consortia are well established as one avenue for such collaboration. Consortia have existed for many years. There are consortia-based associations that encourage and support consortia efforts. However, every consortium is unique in its own ways, as participating institutions have crafted a specific initiative of a general model to meet their particular situations and need. Consortia can be important structures for many institutions and should be encouraged.
But there is a large middle ground between consortia arrangements and mergers and acquisitions. The Coalition for the Common Good is but one such arrangement and it is still in its early stages. What has been learned from the experience thus far that might be of use to other institutions and groups? How might this middle ground be explored further for the benefit of other institutions?
One thing learned from the Coalition is the complexity of developing a new model for collective action. Antioch and Otterbein separately pursued individual explorations of options for two or more years before determining that their partnership together should move forward. It then took a full year to get to the point of announcing their plans and another year to complete negotiations and sign completed legal documents and to obtain the necessary accreditor, regulator and Department of Education approvals. The actual implementation of their plans is still in a relatively early stage. In short, it takes time.
It also takes tremendous effort by leadership on both sides, as they must work closely together while continuing to address the daily challenges of their separate institutions. Everyone ends up with at least two major jobs. Communication is vital. Boards must continue to be supportive. The engagement of faculty and staff takes time and can be costly.
What is often referred to as “fit” – the melding of cultures and attitudes at both the institutional and individual levels – is essential. People must be able to work together for shared goals. The burdens of accreditation, while necessary, are time-consuming and multifaceted. There are many things that can go wrong. Indeed, there are examples of planned and announced mergers or collaborations that fall apart before completion.
Philanthropic institutions could support this work in numerous ways, first for specific initiatives and then for the sector, by providing funding and expertise to facilitate new forms of coalitions. These could include:
Providing financial support for the collaborative entity. While participating institutions eventually share the costs of creating the new arrangement, modest dedicated support funding could be immensely useful for mitigating the impact of legal expenses, due diligence requirements, initial management of shared efforts and expanded websites.
Providing support for expert advice. The leaders of two institutions seeking partnership need objective counsel on matters financial, legal, organizational, accreditation and more. Provision of expertise for distance education models is often a high priority, since many small colleges have limited experience with these.
Funding research. There are multiple opportunities for research and its dissemination. What works? What does not? How can lessons learned by disseminated?
Supporting communication through publications, workshops, conferences and other venues.
Developing training workshops for boards, leadership, staff and faculty in institutions considering collaborations.
Crafting a series of institutional incentives through seed grant awards to provide support for institutions just beginning to consider these options.
These types of initiatives might be separate, or they might be clustered into a national center to support and promote collaboration.
These and other ideas could be most helpful to many institutions exploring collaboration. Above all, it is important to undertake such explorations before it is too late, before the financial situation becomes so dire that there are few, if any, choices.
Conclusions
This middle ground is not a panacea. The harsh reality is that not all institutions can be saved. It takes a certain degree of stability and a sufficient financial base to even consider consortia or middle ground arrangements like the Coalition for the Common Good. Merging with or being acquired by stronger institutions is not a worst-case scenario – there are often plenty of reasons, not just financial, that this form of change makes great sense for a smaller, weaker institution.
It is also important for almost all institutions, even those with significant endowment resources, to be thinking about possible options. The stronger the institution, the stronger the resistance to such perspectives is likely to be. There are examples of wealthy undergraduate institutions with $1 billion endowments that are losing significant sums annually in their operating budgets. Such endowments often act like a giant pillow, absorbing the institutional challenges and preventing boards and leaders from facing difficult decisions until it may be too late. Every board should be considering possible future options.
In the face of likely government rollbacks of support, the ongoing demographic challenges for smaller institutions and the general uncertainties in some circle about the importance of higher education itself, independent private higher education must be more creative and assertive about its future. Also, it is essential to remember that the existential financial challenges facing these institutions predate the current Presidential Administration and certainly will remain once it has passed into history.
Just trying to compete more effectively for enrollments will not be sufficient. Neither will simply reducing expense budgets. New collaborative models are needed. Consortia have roles to play. The example of the Coalition for the Common Good may show new directions forward. Anyone who supports the diversity of American higher education institutions should work to find new ways of assuring financial stability while adhering to academic principles and core missions.
Chet Haskell is an independent higher education consultant. Most recently, he was Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and University Provost at Antioch University and Vice President for Graduate Programs of the Coalition for the Common Good.
International students are not responsible for sky-high rental price hikes, according to the latest analysis produced by Australia’s central bank, the Reserve Bank of Australia.
In its latest bulletin assessing the role international students play in Australia’s economy, it estimated a AUS$50bn net gain from students and underlined their value as employees too.
Spending by international students was also an important contributor to growth in consumer demand in Australia following the pandemic, it declared.
“In periods of strong inflows of students, such as just after borders reopened after the pandemic, this likely had an important effect on aggregate demand in the economy.”
And the report pointed out that international students constitute the second largest group of temporary visa holders with work rights in Australia after New Zealand citizens.
“A greater share of international students work in accommodation and food, as well as retail, compared with the share of the total labour force,” detailed report authors.
“Further, an increasing share of students are now working in health care, consistent with strong labour demand in this sector.”
The report noted this contribution was important in helping businesses in these sectors facing labour shortages in the tight labour market that emerged post-pandemic.
The timing of the report is useful, as new ESOS legislation is considered and the government is facing calls from the sector to stop stifling international student demand – with the latest calls relating to the new visa application fee which is killing demand from short-term students.
When it comes to the political hot potato of international student populations squeezing out domestic renters or contributing to accommodation price surges, RBA was dismissive of that thesis.
The rise in international student numbers is likely to have accounted for only a small share of the rise in rents since the onset of the pandemic Reserve Bank of Australia
Models of the housing market used by the RBA suggest that a 50,000 increase in population would raise private rents by around 0.5 per cent compared with a baseline projection. The marginal effect of an additional renter may be greater in periods where the rental market is tight and vacancy rates are low, such as occurred post-pandemic.
“Nonetheless, the rise in international student numbers is likely to have accounted for only a small share of the rise in rents since the onset of the pandemic, with much of the rise in advertised rents occurring before borders were reopened.”
One area where higher international student numbers have generated a supply response has been in purpose-built student accommodation, noted the report, with rapid growth in building approvals for such projects in recent years.
Note the gov plan to expand cap for insttutions investing in PBSA.
Another interesting fact shared was that International students make up around one-third of Australia’s permanent resident intake – around 30 per cent of international students went on to apply for temporary graduate visas in the five years to 2022, said the report citing 2022 data.
There is less expected flow into temporaray labour market now – “this is because the recent tightening in visa policy has targeted groups of students who were more likely to be seeking to work” explained RBA.
“That is, those international students who do receive visas going forward are less likely to be focused on employment opportunities in Australia on average,” said the report, citing Andrew Norton.
In sum, “rapid growth in the international student stock post-pandemic likely contributed to some of the upward pressure on inflation from 2022 to early 2023, especially as arriving students frontloaded their spending as they set up in Australia and took time to join the labour market. However, the increase in international students was just one of many other forces at play in this time that drove demand above supply in the economy, and hence higher inflation. For instance, supply-side factors were the biggest driver of the increase in inflation in 2022 and 2023 (RBA 2023; Beckers, Hambur and Williams 2023) while strong domestic demand arising from supportive fiscal and monetary policy also played an important role.”
State lawmakers across the country filed more bills to restrict or protect libraries and readers in the first half of this year than last year, a new report found.
The split fell largely along geographic lines, according to the report from EveryLibrary, a group that advocates against book bans and censorship.
Between January and July 2025, lawmakers introduced 133 bills that the organization deemed harmful to libraries, librarians or readers’ rights in 33 states — an increase from 121 bills in all of 2024. Fourteen of those measures had passed as of mid-July.
At the same time, legislators introduced 76 bills in 32 states to protect library services or affirm the right to read, the report found.
The geographic split among these policies is stark.
In Southern and Plains states, new laws increasingly criminalize certain actions of librarians, restrict access to materials about gender and race, and transfer decision-making power to politically appointed boards or parent-led councils.
Texas alone passed a trio of sweeping laws stripping educators of certain legal protections when providing potentially obscene materials; banning public funding for instructional materials containing obscene content; and giving parents more authority over student reading choices and new library additions.
Tennessee lowered the bar to prosecute educators for sharing books that might be considered “harmful to minors.”
A New Hampshire bill likewise would’ve made it easier for parents or the state attorney general to bring civil actions against school employees for distributing material deemed harmful to minors, but it was vetoed by Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte.
In Nebraska, a new law allows for real-time alerts for parents every time a student checks out a book. South Dakota requires libraries and schools to install filtering software. New laws in Idaho heighten the requirements to form library districts and mandate stricter internet filtering policies that are tied to state funding.
In contrast, several Northeastern states have passed legislation protections for libraries and librarians and anti-censorship laws.
New Jersey, Delaware, Rhode Island and Connecticut have each enacted “freedom to read” or other laws that codify protections against ideological censorship in libraries.
Connecticut also took a major step in modernizing libraries in the digital age, the report said, becoming the first state in the nation to pass a law regulating how libraries license and manage e-books and digital audiobooks.
Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at [email protected].
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: [email protected].
Fewer than 52% of Indiana high school graduates from the Class of 2023 went directly to college, according to the latest data quietly released by the Indiana Commission for Higher Education.
Just 51.7% of 2023 graduates, about 39,000 students, enrolled in college within a year of finishing high school, data showed. That’s down from a steady 53% between 2020 and 2022, and far below the state’s peak of 65% a decade ago.
Around 36% of all graduating seniors enrolled in one of Indiana’s public four-year institutions, followed by 8% who chose a private college or university.
Another 7.6% went to a school outside of Indiana, according to the data.
The figures, posted to the agency’s website earlier this month, reflect concerns state leaders have long expressed about Indiana’s declining college-going culture, especially as the state shifts focus toward career credentials and work-based learning.
“The startling drop in our college-going rate yet again can be credited to the lack of two things: money and morale,” said Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, in a statement released Wednesday.
“While our governor has been taking a victory lap for getting our state universities to freeze tuition, he has failed to guarantee that his move will not decrease financial aid and scholarship opportunities,” DeLaney continued. “Any lack of opportunity for tuition support will lead to more Hoosiers not being able to afford college and being forced to choose a different path.”
The 2023 numbers come just six months after the higher education commission approved sweeping changes to Indiana’s high school diploma, set to take effect statewide in 2029, that emphasize work-based learning and career readiness over traditional college preparation.
High schoolers will be required to earn at least one “diploma seal” to graduate, including options for employment or postsecondary readiness. While some seal options are specifically geared toward college-bound students, graduates will no longer be required to complete all the coursework or meet other criteria typically expected for college admission.
Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, sits in the House Education Committee on Wednesday, Feb. 12. (Casey Smith/Indiana Capital Chronicle)
DeLaney maintained that Republican leaders “have been devaluing the opportunities that our colleges and universities can offer students.”
“At the same time, the supermajority has made attacking colleges and universities the centerpiece of their culture war agenda — from policing what can be taught in the classroom, to forcing institutions to eliminate hundreds of degree options, to creating an entirely new high school diploma that emphasizes the path directly into the workforce,” the lawmaker said.
“Trying to bury this report in a website and not send a press release is a telling sign that the Commission on Higher Education knows this does not look good, and does not act to fix it,” DeLaney added. “It simply isn’t important enough to them. They are busy eliminating college courses and creating new tests. This is what the legislature has asked them to do.”
CHE has not issued a press release on the latest data and did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
Indiana’s college-going rate has dropped more than any other state tracked by the National Center for Education Statistics over the past 15 years.
Previously, Indiana reached a college-going rate of 65%.
“We set a goal to get it back when it slumped,” DeLaney recalled. “Now, it doesn’t seem like we care to address the issue. That is a shame for our students, a shame for our economy, and a shame for our state.”
“The supermajority has been in power for 20 years and this is their achievement,” DeLaney said. “At some point we have to ask ourselves: is a declining college-going rate not the result they want?”
By the numbers
According to the numbers published on CHE’s online college-going dashboard, the vast majority of 2023 grads who continued their education earned some form of college credit while still in high school: 85.6% of college-goers took and passed an Advanced Placement exam; 64.6% earned dual credit; 90.7% earned the Indiana College Core diploma, which comes with a block of 30 general education credits that can be transferred to and accepted at colleges across the state; 86.3% earned as associate’s degree; and 63.6% earned another type of credential.
A quarter of postsecondary enrollees, 25%, are seeking STEM-related degrees, while:
17.8% enrolled in business and communications programs
16% enrolled in health programs
11% enrolled in social and behavioral sciences and human services programs
9.9% enrolled in arts and humanities programs
7.4% enrolled in trades programs
5.8% enrolled in education programs
7% were undecided
College-going among male students dropped to 45%, compared to 59% for female students — widening an existing gender gap.
Among racial groups, Asian and white students had the highest college-going rates, at 70.7% and 54%, respectively. The college-going rates among other racial groups lagged, though, at 45.5% for Black students, and 41.7% for Hispanic students.
The rate for students from low-income backgrounds — as measured by eligibility for free or reduced lunch — was 38.7%, compared to about 60% for their higher-income peers.
More than 78% of college-bound graduates from the 2023 cohort were part of Indiana’s 21st Century Scholars program, according the the new data. The scholarship fund covers full tuition and fees at Indiana colleges and universities for low-income students, who enroll in the 8th grade.
Also previewed in the data was an update on the Class of 2022.
The CHE dashboard showed 53% of the 2022 cohort that enrolled in a postsecondary program within a year after high school graduation met all three early college success benchmarks: they did not need remediation; they completed all courses they attempted during their first year of enrollment; and they persisted to their second year of schooling.
According to the latest numbers, 77.5% of the 2022 cohort that enrolled in a postsecondary program persisted to the second year.
Indiana Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: [email protected].
Child care worries have been made worse this summer by federal cuts and depleting pandemic funds, and they aren’t expected to ease by the first day of school. While their kids might have gotten a rest, parents reported longer commutes and newfound stress.
A dozen parents from across the state told Mississippi Today about summer child care plans for their toddlers and elementary school-aged children. They shared a mix of anxiety about finding care and frustration with existing options.
Parents have had more reasons to be anxious about those options this summer than in previous ones. A loss of federally funded summer programming for youth, added fees for day care tuition and the loss of vouchers to subsidize tuition costs have changed the landscape of child care.
Shequite Johnson poses with newborn Noah on a work trip in Jackson, Miss., on Feb. 12, 2025. (Shequite Johnson)
For Shequite Johnson, a professor at Mississippi Valley State University, it has meant driving 45 minutes in the opposite direction of her job for day care.
“I’ve had to leave my 13-year-old with my 4-year-old,” she said. “And you’re put in a situation where you have to make these decisions. Some are even leaving their babies at home by themselves for five hours and checking on them during lunch hour.”
She had to pull her 4-year-old boy from a day care in her hometown because of excessive fees. She was charged a $20 late fee at pickup, a $100 registration fee for each of her two boys, and a $150 supplies fee that was announced in June on top of the $135 weekly fee.
The Mississippi Department of Human Services recently announced a cutback on vouchers that subsidize child care costs. Without Johnson’s child care voucher, her nearby options were limited to a city-run program in an unsafe neighborhood and three programs in aging facilities.
Delta Health Alliance runs free and reduced summer programming for elementary-aged children. But Johnson makes more than the income cut-off.
“It’s a crisis right now in Mississippi,” said Carol Burnett, executive director of Mississippi Low-Income Child Care Initiative. “The lack of affordable child care prevents employers from keeping their workforce. And yet the state of Mississippi wants people to go back to work.”
“Parents are having to make choices. And none of them are good,” she added.
The Child Care Initiative operates a program that connects single moms with higher-paying jobs and covers the costs of child care during the transition. The organization is also advocating for the Mississippi Department of Human Services to spend some of the $156 million in unspent Temporary Assistance for Needy Families on Mississippi’s Child Care Payment Program.
The Child Care Development Fund, which nationally supports these voucher state programs, relied on pandemic-era funding that ran out in September. The Department of Human Services asked the Legislature for $40 million to continue serving the same number of families – but received $15 million.
In April, the department put a hold on renewals for child care vouchers except for deployed military parents, parents who are TANF recipients, foster children guardians, teen parents, parents of special needs children and homeless parents. As a result, 9,000 parents lost child care assistance.
The department will keep the hold until the number of enrollees drops to 27,000 or its budget goes below $12 million in monthly costs. As of Friday, it had no further update but said it will have an announcement in the next couple of weeks.
Using TANF funds unspent from past years regardless of whether they were allocated for child care assistance is prohibited, according to federal guidance. However, the TANF state office can use the leftover funds to form a direct payment program. Ohio and Texas enacted this policy.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services regional manager Eric Blanchette shared this idea with Mississippi Department of Human Services Early Childhood Director Chad Allgood, according to an email obtained as part of a records request filed by Mississippi Today into communication regarding TANF funds. As of Friday, there were no plans to enact a similar policy in Mississippi.
A second rent
Monica Ford pays nearly $1,600 in monthly child care costs for three kids. She works as a Shipt delivery driver in addition to her day job as a Magnolia Guaranty Life Insurance Co. auditor. She, her husband and their children recently had to move in with his parents.
Monica Ford poses with children Tahir, 7, Kian, 4, Nuri, 1, at Freedom Ridge Park in Ridgeland, Miss., July 19, 2025. (Monica Ford)
“It’s more than I’ve paid in rent,” she said. “It’s why I live with my family now.”
She uses a Jackson day care that charges $10 per minute for late pickup. The fees must be paid by the next morning.
Nearly all of the single mothers interviewed said they take on extra work to cover the rising costs of child care in their area. It’s extra work that sees them spending less time with their children.
Ashley Wilson’s child care voucher wasn’t renewed in the spring. She works 55 hours a week at a bingo hall and at Sonic Drive-In.
“We don’t get help. That’s what I don’t understand,” said Wilson, an Indianola parent.
Her preferred day care option in Indianola charged $185 per week and $20 late fees, which Wilson could not afford. Her sister was able to afford monthly costs because of an arrangement with an Angel – a benefactor who helps local families with tuition at day care providers.
Wilson tried other day cares in town. Several were in dangerous neighborhoods with staff that left milk bottles to spoil. Her toddler came home wet some afternoons and with cuts another. She gets help from family when she can.
Whitney Harper lost her child care voucher in April. She is lucky when a relative is willing to watch her 2-year old. Lately, she has considered hiring a sitter off care.com, a website that connects parents with local babysitters. In Jackson, where she lives, the hourly rate is $14 per hour.
Most of the day cares in the Jackson metro area charge between $150 and $250 per week, which is more than she can afford as a sales associate at Home Depot.
“It has been harder this year. They won’t work around my schedule, but I need the job,” she said of her employer.
‘This is the worst I have seen it’
Day care centers are left on the brink when families lose child care vouchers. Making up the lost revenue has meant higher tuition and fees for some centers and reaching out to private donors for others.
“These are small businesses,” Burnette said. “The big story in child care is how much it costs to run it. It requires adequate public investment.”
Level-Up Learning Center leadership team poses in front of their Greenville, Miss., location on July 26, 2024. Left to right are Chief Operating Officer Adrienne Walker, CEO Kaysie Burton and COO/Athletic Director Kwame Malik Barnes. (Level Up Learning Center)
This week, Level Up Learning Center owner and CEO Kaysie Burton visited Greenville’s Walmart, seeking to persuade the manager to sponsor his employees’ child care tuition. She submitted two grant applications and is working on at least three others. Burton’s business survived flooding and relocation. But the latest voucher cutback could shut her banner-adorned doors to the community
At Level Up Learning Center, 75% of parents rely on child care vouchers. In the last three months, 20 Learning Center parents have lost their child care vouchers yet most have stayed. Burton has a policy of not turning parents away if they are willing to contribute a portion of the weekly rate. She has not increased her tuition or instituted punishing fees.
But making up the lost revenue can be a challenge. Since the cutback, she has let seven teachers go, or roughly a third of her staff.
“We’re down to skin and bones right now,” Burton said. “I am willing to take anybody that is willing to come partner with us and help us help parents so that their kids can keep coming in.”
When Burton started her business during the COVID-19 pandemic, she saw the need in the Mississippi Delta for affordable, quality child care. She remains committed to helping prepare a future generation of Greenville leadership.
“We’re in the thick of it with our parents,” Burton said. “And we all just need help and we need prayer.”
SunShine Daycare owner Barbara Thompson has greeted each parent at the door since she started babysitting neighbors’ kids in her living room. The former banker has long had a passion for raising neighborhood children regardless of their parents’ status or income. She raised her seven siblings when her mother died when Thompson was 12.
But for the first time in 30 years of running a business in Greenville, Thompson is losing families by the dozen as well as longtime staff. She has leaned heavily on prayer and has reached out to state representatives for help. She fears more departures and the downsizing of her business.
In the last two months, 12 parents pulled their kids from SunShine. She will have to let three teachers go as a result.
“We won’t have any children if this continues,” Thompson said.
She regularly informs parents of the child care voucher waitlist and of the process for renewals. Besides caring for children, Thompson advises many young parents in her community. She noticed that state agencies communicate primarily through email, which a lot of her parents don’t check regularly.
Children who leave her stoop festooned with cartoon characters can face hours alone without parental supervision. Some children will sit and watch television with their grandparents. For Thompson, child care is about raising children to be “productive citizens.” The youngest years are some of the most important, she stressed.
“They didn’t take it from us,” Thompson said. “They took from the children. That’s the world’s future.”
Waitlisted
Vennesha Price is waitlisted at nearly every day care in Cleveland, where she lives. She’s been on some of the lists for eight months.
“If you haven’t been a resident for five years and you haven’t navigated the waiting list for five years, it’s harder to find a spot,” she said.
She found it difficult to both have a productive work day and watch her elementary-aged children. Eventually, she found a day care that was 40 minutes away. She wakes up an hour earlier to make the commute in time before work.
“I’m a single mother so it’s very difficult,” Price said. “After my grandmother went on to the Lord, it became a struggle trying to get to the day care in time.”
She started factoring late fees into her monthly budget. She’s also including the gas money needed for the extra legs of her commute. Her child care costs doubled for June and July.
“It’s almost like private school tuition now,” she said.
Agencies in at least 28 states and the District of Columbia have issued guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in K-12 schools.
More than half of the states have created school policies to define artificial intelligence, develop best practices for using AI systems and more, according to a report from AI for Education, an advocacy group that provides AI literacy training for educators.
Despite efforts by the Trump administration to loosen federal and state AI rules in hopes of boosting innovation, teachers and students need a lot of state-level guidance for navigating the fast-moving technology, said Amanda Bickerstaff, the CEO and co-founder of AI for Education.
“What most people think about when it comes to AI adoption in the schools is academic integrity,” she said. “One of the biggest concerns that we’ve seen — and one of the reasons why there’s been a push towards AI guidance, both at the district and state level — is to provide some safety guidelines around responsible use and to create opportunities for people to know what is appropriate.”
North Carolina, which last year became one of the first states to issue AI guidance for schools, set out to study and define generative artificial intelligence for potential uses in the classroom. The policy also includes resources for students and teachers interested in learning how to interact with AI models successfully.
In addition to classroom guidance, some states emphasize ethical considerations for certain AI models. Following Georgia’s initial framework in January, the state shared additional guidance in June outlining ethical principles educators should consider before adopting the technology.
In the absence of regulations at the federal level, states are filling a critical gap, said Maddy Dwyer, a policy analyst for the Equity in Civic Technology team at the Center for Democracy & Technology, a nonprofit working to advance civil rights in the digital age.
While most state AI guidance for schools focuses on the potential benefits, risks and need for human oversight, Dwyer wrote in a recent blog post that many of the frameworks are missing out on critical AI topics, such as community engagement and deepfakes, or manipulated photos and videos.
“I think that states being able to fill the gap that is currently there is a critical piece to making sure that the use of AI is serving kids and their needs, and enhancing their educational experiences rather than detracting from them,” she said.
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: [email protected].
A freeze on federal education funding that prompted two lawsuits has been lifted, and states will be able to access the money next week, the U.S. Department of Education announced Friday.
The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which argued that districts were spending the money to advance a “radical left-wing agenda,” has completed its review of five different programs totaling $5.5 billion, said Madison Beidermann, spokeswoman for the department.
The funds support education for English learners and migrant students and pay for staff training and extra instructional positions. The news came a week after the administration released over $1.3 billion for summer and afterschool programs, which was also held up for review.
The department alerted states June 30, one day before they expected to receive the money, that the review was in process, forcing programs to cut staff and end summer programs early. Congress appropriated the funds for this coming school year, and President Donald Trump signed the budget in March.
The release of the funds, announced just hours before Education Secretary Linda McMahon was scheduled to meet with the nation’s governors in Colorado Springs, Colorado, comes as superintendents nationwide were preparing to eliminate services like literacy and math coaches, according to a survey conducted by AASA, the School Superintendents Association. Half of the 628 chiefs who responded from 43 states said they would have to lay off staff who work with special education students if the funds weren’t released. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten brought the message to attendees at the union’s annual TEACH conference in Washington, D.C.
“The administration backed down and we are getting the money,” she said to a cheering audience. “Those of you who lobbied yesterday, thank you. Those of you who brought the lawsuit, thank you.”
Attorney generals from 24 blue states and the District of Columbia sued on July 14 over the freeze, arguing that the administration’s actions were harming schools. School districts, parents, unions and nonprofits filed a second challenge on July 21, saying that OMB has never stood in the way of the department’s practice of releasing the funds in two steps, first on July 1 and the rest on Oct. 1. Republican senators joined their Democratic colleagues in pressuring the administration to free up the money.
Friday’s announcement doesn’t mean the legal fight is over. In a statement, Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is handling the second case, said the legal team would “continue to monitor the situation and work in court to ensure the administration fully complies with the law and that these resources reach the schools and students who need them most.”
Districts can now start the school year without the shortfall, but that doesn’t mean advocates’ worries are over about future disruptions to funding. The July 1 distribution date is a longstanding practice, not something written into the law.
Tara Thomas, government affairs manager for AASA, said her organization wants to “have additional conversations” with Congress or the administration to “ensure that this type of uncertainty at the last minute doesn’t happen again. Districts need to continue to rely on stable, timely, reliable federal funding.”
Another fight over education funds could also be ahead. The White House is reportedly preparing another recissions package that would target education funding. Thomas said she didn’t know what might be included, but it could be cuts that the Department of Government Efficiency made to grant programs.
On Friday, Trump signed a recissions package, pulling back $9 billion in funds from public television and foreign aid.
The new associated campus, which is being launched in collaboration with Vijaybhoomi University in Karjat, a town near Mumbai, and its business education arm, the Jagdish Sheth School of Management, will initially offer a bachelor in business administration program starting September 2025.
The collaboration with Vijaybhoomi aligns perfectly with our vision to nurture global leaders with a strong foundation in innovation and ethics Alexandre de Navailles, KEDGE
To be eligible for the undergraduate program, students must have completed or be currently enrolled in grade 12, India’s equivalent of the final year of high school, and either have a minimum SAT score of 1300 or pass KEDGE’s internal entrance exam.
“In line with its mission to educate future leaders in their local contexts, KEDGE already operates associated campuses in Abidjan and Dakar (Africa), as well as in Shanghai and Suzhou (China),” read a statement by the grande école.
“This new strategic partnership in South Asia, established with Vijaybhoomi University and its JAGSoM Business School, will enable the joint development of innovative programmes. These will combine KEDGE’s academic expertise with the evolving needs of the Indian market in areas such as sustainable management, the creative industries, sport, entrepreneurship and innovation.”
As its associated campus prepares to introduce a BBA program within the next two months, KEDGE’s collaboration with Vijaybhoomi University will also lead to the launch of several master of science programs in areas such as sports management, arts and creative industries, sustainable transformation, luxury management, entrepreneurship and innovation, and design.
These programs are expected to launch in September 2026 and will be delivered at the Vijaybhoomi University campus, with select modules featuring remote lectures from KEDGE faculty based in France.
According to a report by Careers360, an executive MBA and a PhD program tailored for working professionals are also expected to be introduced in the coming years.
Moreover, a dedicated India operations team appointed by KEDGE will oversee all academic affairs related to the associated campus.
“This partnership is a testament to KEDGE’s mission to extend its global footprint and bring top-tier education closer to students worldwide. The collaboration with Vijaybhoomi aligns perfectly with our vision to nurture global leaders with a strong foundation in innovation and ethics,” stated Alexandre de Navailles, general manager, KEDGE.
KEDGE’s India plans build on the success of its ventures in other parts of Asia and Africa.
In China, the school has established two Franco-Chinese institutes – both recognised by the Chinese Ministry of Education – focused on art, design management, humanities, and social sciences, together welcoming over 300 high-potential Chinese students each year.
Meanwhile in Africa, its Dakar campus in Senegal, operational since 2008, offers bachelor’s and master’s programs in management along with executive education. The Abidjan campus in Côte d’Ivoire, launched in 2020, reflects the school’s ambition to grow its footprint across the continent.
Though French institutions have previously been encouraged to establish fully fledged campuses in India, Campus France has been actively exploring joint campus opportunities, a focus highlighted during The PIE Live India 2025.
Moreover, it’s not just KEDGE, ranked among the top 10 business schools in France, that is expanding its presence.
ESCP, another leading French business school, has partnered with IIT Bombay and IIT Madras to facilitate student and faculty exchanges, joint research, and the integration of emerging technologies in sustainability, entrepreneurship, and AI.
Universities across the MENA region have made significant strides in the latest 2026 QS World University Rankings (WUR), reflecting a sustained push in attracting international institutions and students.
From a previous list of 88 institutions featured in the rankings last year, the numbers increased to a total of 115 in 2026, with the region’s most notable climb being that of King Fahad University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia, which has been listed in the top 100 globally at a rank of 67 – a historic record for institutions in the region.
The 16 MENA countries also added 27 new entries from across nine countries, second as a region only to Asia, which added 54 new institutions from across 19 countries.
Among these, the University of Tripoli marked Libya’s debut in the QS WUR. Apart from Libya, only two other countries, Guatemala and Honduras, entered the rankings for the first time this year, each with one institution.
When examining year-on-year changes, some 53% of institutions in the MENA region either maintained or improved their global ranking, while only 23% saw a decline.
This is the lowest proportion of declining institutions among all global regions, outperforming Europe, where the maintain/improve versus decline rate stands at 52% to 44%, and Australia and New Zealand (AUNZ), where the rate is 36% to 61%.
Countries that are part of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, all share a common approach in making significant investments in research and education, aligned with bold national visions.
Collectively, GCC countries outperform the MENA region average across all nine QS World University Rankings indicators. Their institutions particularly excel under the global engagement lens, which looks at internationalisation indicators such as international faculty ratio (IFR), international student ratio (ISR), and international research network (IRN). This reflects their strong global appeal in attracting international talent and fostering cross-border academic collaboration.
Saudi Arabia leads MENA region
Among the top 25 countries by number of ranked institutions, Saudi Arabia leads the MENA region – with 22 universities featured in the QS WUR 2026, six more than in 2024. The overall average score of Saudi institutions increased by 38%, from 20.7 to 28.5, over the past two editions.
These advancements are arguably a result of Saudi’s 2030 Vision, as the country promised to have at least five of its universities among the top 200 universities in international rankings, thus budgeting for substantial funding for research, university-industry collaboration, and global partnerships.
The rankings come as Dubai expands its international branch campus ecosystem, aiming to host 50% international students by 2030 as a part of its Education 33 strategy, positioning itself as an international education hub.
Qatar also finds itself in a similar position, as Qatar University moved 10 places up to reach 112 globally. The country’s investment in research infrastructure and faculty recruitment has improved its performance in citations per faculty – a key QS metric.
The Qatar National Vision 2030 aims to establish a world-class education system aligned with labour market needs, offering high-quality, accessible learning for all stages of life. It emphasises the development of independent and accountable institutions, robust public-private research funding, and active global engagement in cultural and scientific domains.
Meanwhile, outside the GCC, four other countries have shown particularly impressive performances: Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. These countries rank among the top six in the MENA region in terms of ranked institutions, sharing the spotlight with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
According to QS’s Best Student Cities rankings, Jordan’s capital, Amman, is now the best city in the Middle East. Additionally, Jordan saw multiple universities ranked in the WUR this year, with the University of Jordan, Jordan University of Science and Technology, and the German Jordanian University improving in previous years.
While none have yet reached the global top 400, the country is investing in STEM-focused faculty and expanding regional collaborations, especially with the Gulf.
Meanwhile, Egypt now has 13 institutions featured in QS rankings, with Cairo University, Ain Shams University, and The American University in Cairo (AUC) leading the way.
And in Lebanon, the American University of Beirut remains the top Lebanese institution and one of the top institutions in the MENA region.
Despite geopolitical tensions in Lebanon, a surprise improvement occurred as the Lebanese University (LU) climbed from 577 globally in 2024 to 515 in the WUR 2026. And after the Lebanese American University placed round 701-710 globally in 2025, in 2026 it projected to 535 on the list.
What’s next?
Stakeholders discussed the potential reasons why universities from the MENA region have shown such a marked jump in the ranking yea on year.
“From my perspective, key drivers include stronger institutional strategies around internationalisation, improved research output, and increasing collaborations with global partners,” Gulf Medical University academic quality assurance & institutional effectiveness specialist, Salaheldin Mostafa Khalifa, told The PIE News.
“We can expect continued upward momentum for MENA universities in global rankings. Many institutions are investing heavily in research infrastructure, international collaborations, and faculty development,” he added.
Meanwhile, QS broke down the “sustained progress” that universities in the regions have seen over the past year.
We can expect continued upward momentum for MENA universities in global rankings. Many institutions are investing heavily in research infrastructure, international collaborations, and faculty development Salaheldin Mostafa Khalifa, Gulf Medical University
“There are clear signs of upward momentum,” said product and research advisor at QS, Wesley Siquera, noting that the umber of ranked MENA institutions had jumped from 84 to 115 between the QS WUR 2024 and 2026 editions.
“Finally, national development strategies provide strong indicators of where future progress may come from,” he added. “Several of the regional ‘visions’ explicitly set goals for placing domestic universities among the world’s top institutions. If these targets are met, we could see by 2030: three Omani universities in the top 500, five Saudi universities in the top 200, and seven Egyptian universities in the top 500.”
