Category: News

  • International education sector reacts to new UK strategy

    International education sector reacts to new UK strategy

    Earlier this week, the UK government released its refreshed international education strategy (IES). While some stakeholders have welcomed its ambitions to grow education exports to £40 billion per year by 2030, others have dubbed it an export strategy rather than a roadmap for international education and raised important questions about the plan’s purpose and long-term direction.

    “The strategy puts sustainable international student recruitment at its heart, and we look forward to continuing to take a lead on working with the government to deliver this,” said Andrew Bird, chair of the British Universities International Association (BUILA).

    Unlike the 2019 international education strategy, the UK government’s latest iteration removes explicit targets for international student numbers. This marks a notable shift from the earlier strategy, which aimed for a 30% increase in international student enrolments by 2030.

    Bird said the strategy recognises the power of international education to “enhance the UK’s global standing and drive growth” and was pleased to see the government’s recognition of the Agent Quality Framework to drive improved standards in international student recruitment.

    Rob Grimshaw, CEO at StudyIn also welcomed the government’s strong support for the AQF noting that “high standards in student recruitment are vital to the long-term success of the UK’s higher education sector.”

    “For the UK to remain globally competitive, we must continue to make a compelling case for studying here – not just in terms of quality, but also trust, outcomes and student experience,” said Grimshaw.

    Mark Bennett, VP of research and insight at Keystone Education Group lauded the government’s strategy in its ability to articulate “an evolving vision for UK international education that, if successful, genuinely could see more people around the world benefit from the courses and resources offered by UK universities”.

    The strategy states the £40bn aim will be achieved across the “full breadth of the sector”, including TNE, English language training (ELT), and edtech, while broadly referencing existing trade missions, soft power networks and boosting financial support mechanisms.  

    The IES sets out an intention to grow the government’s leadership in TNE, as well as using the joint government-sector forum, the Education Sector Action Group (ESAG), to champion partnership opportunities and educating providers on the technical risks of operating overseas.

    The government’s new international education strategy sets out that each ESAG representative will lead on an action plan, published within the first 100 days of appointment to ESAG, outlining how their members will support delivery.

    Bennett highlighted the ways in which TNE expands access to international education, particularly for students unable to afford travel and study abroad. He also noted its appeal to countries seeking to retain more of their students – and graduates – at home.

    “And, of course, it appeals to anyone who would like international students to show up in figures for enrolments, but not immigration,” he added.

    However, Bennett raised that for some universities not already operating in the TNE space, what does it mean to have a strategy that refuses to give a target for traditional onshore enrolment?

    “if you ask me, it means the strategy can be called a success whether those enrolments rise by one or fall by 100,000 – and that’s important. Not everyone does TNE and TNE is not so easy to start doing,” he said.

    The new international education strategy is, in reality, an education export strategy
    Vincenzo Raimo, international higher education consultant

    Meanwhile, Vincenzo Raimo, international higher education consultant, puts it bluntly: “The new international education strategy is, in reality, an education export strategy.

    “There’s nothing wrong with that, but calling it an international education strategy risks obscuring what’s missing: a serious commitment to languages, outward mobility and the development of the UK’s own international capabilities in a way that equips people to understand the world, work across cultures, and thrive within it.”

    The PIE News’s own Nicholas Cuthbert notes in his analysis that the Home Office features only minimally in the strategy. He argues that excluding the Home Office from the ESAG risks repeating a familiar mistake: a disconnect between immigration policy and the UK’s education export ambitions.

    Elsewhere, Universites UK International director Jamie Arrowsmith described the strategy as an “important moment” for the sector and welcomed the “renewed commitment to fostering the global reach, reputation and impact of UK universities”.

    “The strategy reflects many of the priorities we set out in our Blueprint for Change, and represents a positive and holistic vision of the role universities play in the UK’s global success,” he said.

    Source link

  • 10 talking points on the UK’s new international education strategy

    10 talking points on the UK’s new international education strategy

    1. Growth is the target, but not from student recruitment
    The international education strategy sets out a bold ambition for the UK’s thriving education sector: to collectively grow education exports to £40 billion per year by 2030, but the plan makes it clear that will need to come from the broader education ecosystem including transnational education (TNE), ELT, skills and edtech.

    2. The government’s love affair with TNE continues
    The UK’s TNE boom – seen most evidently in India, with a slew of UK branch campuses opening over the next year or so – shows no sign of slowing down. The IES sets out an intention to grow the government’s leadership in TNE, as well as using the Education Sector Action Group (ESAG) to look out for partnership opportunities and educating providers on the technical risks of operating overseas.

    3. Soft power and diplomacy is an explicit focus
    The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has joined the Department for Education (DfE) and the Department for Business & Trade (DBT) as authors of the strategy and as a result soft power is a core feature. The strategy talks about ‘rolling out a new diplomacy‐led approach’, by appointing heads of missions to act as local education champions in priority countries. The upcoming HMG Soft Power Strategy will also dictate what global partnerships are a priority for the country.

    4. The ESAG will deliver action plans
    This reformed ministerially chaired forum will bring together industry, government, and representative bodies from across the education sector to tackle key concerns and identify opportunities for partnerships. Each representative will lead on an action plan, published within the first 100 days of appointment to ESAG, outlining how their members will support delivery of the three ambitions of this strategy. But who is ESAG? We’ve broken it down for you here.

    5. Sir Steve Smith continues his work with priority countries as international education champion
    Priority countries named in the strategy are still India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam, as per the 2019 IES and the work of Sir Steve Smith. Emerging economies such as Brazil, Mexico and Pakistan are mooted as wider opportunities without any further details given. Pakistan is an outlier given the recent problems with high asylum applications and visa delays.

    6. The levy and tough immigration policy is reaffirmed
    The publication of the strategy was delayed in response to the government’s immigration whitepaper and the Autumn Budget, which announced the international student levy. It remains to be seen how this will be applied to students – however, the strategy doubles down on reaffirming this policy and how the IES will adhere to wider government immigration policy.

    7. Cross-government collaboration welcome, but will bureaucracy slow delivery down?
    There is a clear effort to include all stakeholders in the process and direction, including the government’s vast overseas networks – but will many more stakeholders prevent the UK from being agile? Global competition is ramping up again as Australia has undertaken its own strategy review and the big four study destinations expand to the big 10. Read our analysis here.

    8. No new policy levers, tactics or funding included
    Despite the obvious challenges, there appear to be no new tactics being presented in the strategy to meet the growth target. Instead, the report reiterates the strength of existing scholarships and campaigning by The British Council. The UK’s return to Erasmus is a welcome feature mentioned in the document and a new development after the previous IES – but that was technically announced by the government at the end of 2025. TNE and innovation are expensive and at present there is no government support offered to kick-start activity.

    9. Sustainable recruitment is the name of the game, but are the Home Office official stakeholders?
    The need for sustainable international recruitment is a theme mentioned repeatedly in the latest IES, with a focus on attracting “high-quality” talent from overseas. Perhaps unsurprisingly given the government’s aim of controlling immigration to the UK, the aim seems to be to maintain the UK’s stellar reputation as a study destination without seeing the same post-pandemic surge in numbers. The Home Office is implicitly involved as guardians of the new BCA metrics to which sponsors must adhere, but it remains to be seen if the previous disconnect between the UKVI and the national education exports strategy has been resolved.

    10. Qualifications are a valuable export for the UK
    In keeping with a renewed government focus on skills after the publication of the post-16 education and skills paper last year, the IES hones in on the value of UK qualifications abroad. It also wants to open up new markets overseas by benchmarking international credentials against UK standards.

    Source link

  • The 3 learning advantages of 3D printing

    The 3 learning advantages of 3D printing

    Key points:

    It’s truly incredible how much new technology has made its way into the classroom. Where once teaching consisted primarily of whiteboards and textbooks, you can now find tablets, smart screens, AI assistants, and a trove of learning apps designed to foster inquiry and maximize student growth.

    While these new tools are certainly helpful, the flood of options means that educators can struggle to discern truly useful resources from one-time gimmicks. As a result, some of the best tools for sparking curiosity, creativity, and critical thinking often go overlooked.

    Personally, I believe 3D printing is one such tool that doesn’t get nearly enough consideration for the way it transforms a classroom.

    3D printing is the process of making a physical object from a three-dimensional digital model, typically by laying down many thin layers of material using a specialized printer. Using 3D printing, a teacher could make a model of a fossil to share with students, trophies for inter-class competitions, or even supplies for construction activities.

    At first glance, this might not seem all that revolutionary. However, 3D printing offers three distinct educational advantages that have the potential to transform K–12 learning:

    1. It develops success skills: 3D printing encourages students to build a variety of success skills that prepare them for challenges outside the classroom. For starters, its inclusion creates opportunities for students to practice communication, collaboration, and other social-emotional skills. The process of moving from an idea to a physical, printed prototype fosters perseverance and creativity. Meanwhile, every print–regardless of its success–builds perseverance and problem-solving confidence. This is the type of hands-on, inquiry-based learning that students remember.
    2. It creates cross-curricular connections: 3D printing is intrinsically cross-curricular. Professional scientists, engineers, and technicians often use 3D printing to create product models or build prototypes for testing their hypotheses. This process involves documentation, symbolism, color theory, understanding of narrative, and countless other disciplines. It doesn’t take much imagination to see how these could also be beneficial to classroom learning. Students can observe for themselves how subjects connect, while teachers transform abstract concepts into tangible points of understanding.     
    3. It’s aligned with engineering and NGSS: 3D printing aligns perfectly with Next Gen Science Standards. By focusing on the engineering design process (define, imagine, plan, create, improve) students learn to think and act like real scientists to overcome obstacles. This approach also emphasizes iteration and evidence-based conclusions. What better way to facilitate student engagement, hands-on inquiry, and creative expression?

    3D printing might not be the flashiest educational tool, but its potential is undeniable. This flexible resource can give students something tangible to work with while sparking wonder and pushing them to explore new horizons.

    So, take a moment to familiarize yourself with the technology. Maybe try running a few experiments of your own. When used with purpose, 3D printing transforms from a common classroom tool into a launchpad for student discovery.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Where will growth come from in the UK’s international education strategy?

    Where will growth come from in the UK’s international education strategy?

    The long-awaited strategy, released today (January 20), outlines the UK government’s target to reach an annual education export target of £40bn by the end of the decade – up from £32.3bn in 2022. 

    Notably, it removes international student recruitment targets, signalling a break from the 2019 strategy, which targeted the 30% growth of international levels by 2030. 

    “Success will mean hitting the target while operating sustainable levels of international student recruitment,” the document states, doubling down on the government’s overall aim of reducing net migration, as laid out in last year’s immigration white paper. 

    In an exclusive interview with The PIE News, Sir Steve said a focus on transnational education (TNE) was the “biggest change” in the sector in recent years, welcoming the “commitment across government for that pivot to TNE” and the importance of other areas including skills, early years, schools, edtech and special educational needs.

    “The first strategy was a child of that world. Now, it’s much more about moving towards bringing the strength of the UK’s education system across the board to the international market,” said Sir Steve.

    The strategy states the £40bn aim will be achieved across the “full breadth of the sector”, including TNE, English language training (ELT), and edtech, while broadly referencing existing trade missions, soft power networks and boosting financial support mechanisms.  

    It highlights the success of existing TNE initiatives, with exports across all sectors reaching £3bn in 2022. But it doesn’t set out the financials of how much TNE will contribute to the overall growth plan.  

    It recognises the “strong potential” of further overseas expansion and hails the “significant achievement” of Southampton University establishing the UK’s first India campus last year – though the financial impact of the expansion is yet to be realised.  

    The UK’s international education champion Sir Steve is spearheading many of the IES’ objectives, with the government prioritising partnerships in India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam, and recognising the “strategic importance” of China and Hong Kong.

    Sir Steve said the cost of travelling to study abroad in the UK was only accessible to a small percentage of students, and that the demand for TNE was coming from international governments.

    “What these governments want is UK quality, but at a price point that is more inclusive for their society, and what we do is work with the government of each of the countries where TNE is growing to make sure that fulfils the needs,” he told The PIE.

    Now, it’s much more about moving towards bringing the strength of the UK’s education system across the board to the international market

    Sir Steve Smith, UK international education champion

    Beyond higher education and TNE, the strategy spotlights the “dynamic” ELT sector, which generated £560m in 2022. It praises the quality of the UK’s English language teaching, assessment and teacher training, though doesn’t explicitly state how growth will be boosted. 

    Meanwhile, edtech and other educational services added £3.89bn to the UK economy in 2022, the strategy states, identifying online learning as another opportunity for growth.  

    While making clear that growth will not come from increased international recruitment targets, the strategy sets out measures to promote the UK as a study and research destination, including through the Study UK campaign partly funded by the British Council. 

    It makes much of leveraging the British Council’s existing diplomatic network “to build bridges across cultures and sectors, deepen global ties, and support strategic collaboration”, vowing to expand such partnerships across global trade, study abroad and skills.  

    The strategy highlights the value of previously announced policies, including the launch of the British Council’s new TNE strategy last year, the UK’s rejoining of Erasmus+, and existing scholarships including the renowned Chevening program. 

    “The UK is taking a new diplomacy-led approach,” states the strategy, which is co-owned by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), the Department for Education and the Department for Business and Trade (DBT). 

    As such, soft power is central to the strategy’s growth objectives, which looks ahead to the upcoming of the Soft Power Strategy that it says will support the IES, though it gives no details of the publication timeline.  

    Source link

  • Why K-12 educators need data literacy, not just data

    Why K-12 educators need data literacy, not just data

    Key points:

    Walk into any data meeting at a K-12 school today, and you’ll likely see a familiar scene: educators huddled around printed reports, highlighters in hand, trying to make sense of student data spread across multiple dashboards. If you’ve ever left one of these meetings feeling mentally exhausted without clear next steps, you’re not alone. The problem isn’t that we lack data in education, but rather that most dashboards show us the past–not the path ahead. It’s like trying to drive while only looking in the rearview mirror.

    The education sector sits on massive amounts of student data, yet most schools lack data maturity. They’ve committed to using data and may even have systems that centralize records. But they haven’t embraced what’s possible when we move from having data to using it well; from describing what happened to predicting what’s likely to happen if nothing changes.

    We have dashboards–now what?

    Every district has dashboards. We can see attendance rates, assessment scores, and demographic breakdowns. These tools tell us what happened, which is useful–but increasingly insufficient for the challenges facing K-12 schools. By the time we’re reacting to chronic absenteeism or declining grades, we’re already behind. And, when does an educator have time to sit down, pull up multiple dashboards, and interpret what they say about each student?

    The power of any data dashboard isn’t in the dashboard itself. It’s in the conversations that happen around it. This is where data literacy becomes essential, and it goes far beyond simply reading a chart or calculating an average.

    Data literacy means asking better questions and approaching data with curiosity. It requires recognizing that the answers we get are entirely driven by the questions we ask. A teacher who asks, “Which students failed the last assessment?” will get very different insights than one who asks, “Which students showed growth but still haven’t reached proficiency, and what patterns exist among them?”

    We must also acknowledge the emotional dimension of data in schools. Some educators have been burned when data was used punitively instead of for improvement. That resistance is understandable, but not sustainable. The solution isn’t to check professional expertise at the door. It’s to approach data with both curiosity and courage, questioning it in healthy ways while embracing it as a tool for problem-solving.

    From descriptive to predictive: What’s possible

    Let’s distinguish between types of analytics. Descriptive analytics tell us what happened: Jorge was absent 15 days last semester. Diagnostic analytics tell us why: Jorge lives in a household without reliable transportation, and his absences cluster on Mondays and Fridays.

    Now we get to the game-changers: predictive and prescriptive analytics. Predictive analytics use historical patterns to forecast what’s likely to happen: Based on current trends, Jorge is at 80 percent risk of chronic absenteeism by year’s end. Prescriptive analytics go further by helping the educator understand what they should do to intervene. If we connect Jorge’s family with transportation support and assign a mentor for weekly check-ins, we can likely reduce his absence risk by 60 percent.

    The technology to do this already exists. Machine learning can identify patterns across thousands of student records that would take humans months to discern. AI can surface early warning signs before problems become crises. These tools amplify teacher judgment, serving up insights and allowing educators to focus their expertise where it matters most.

    The cultural shift required

    Before any school rushes to adopt the next analytics tool, it’s worth pausing to ask: What actually happens when someone uses data in their daily work?

    Data use is deeply human. It’s about noticing patterns, interpreting meaning, and deciding what to do next. That process looks different for every educator, and it’s shaped by the environment in which they work: how much time they have to meet with colleagues, how easily they can access the right data, and whether the culture encourages curiosity or compliance.

    Technology can surface patterns, but culture determines whether those patterns lead to action. The same dashboard can spark collaboration in one school and defensiveness in another. That’s why new tools require attention to governance, trust, and professional learning–not just software configuration.

    At the end of the day, the goal isn’t simply to use data more often, but to use it more effectively.

    Moving toward this future requires a fundamental shift in how we think about data: from a compliance exercise to a strategic asset. The most resilient schools in the coming years will have cultures where data is pervasive, shared transparently, and accessible in near real-time to the people who need it. Think of it as an instructional co-pilot rather than a monkey on the back.

    This means moving away from data locked in the central office, requiring a 10-step approval process to access. Instead, imagine a decentralized approach where a fifth-grade team can instantly generate insights about their students’ reading growth, or where a high school counselor can identify seniors at risk of not graduating with enough time to intervene.

    This kind of data democratization requires significant change management. It demands training, clear protocols, and trust. But the payoff is educators empowered to make daily decisions grounded in timely, relevant information.

    Turning data into wisdom

    Data has been part of education from the very beginning. Attendance records, report cards, and gradebooks have always informed teaching. What’s different now is the volume of data available and the sophistication of tools to analyze it. K-12 educators don’t need to become data scientists, but they do need to become data literate: curious, critical consumers of information who can ask powerful questions and interpret results within the rich context of their professional expertise.

    The schools that harness their data effectively will be able to identify struggling students earlier, personalize interventions more effectively, and use educator time more strategically. But this future requires us to move beyond the dashboard and invest in the human capacity to transform data into wisdom. That transformation starts with data literacy, and it starts now.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • UK unveils new international education strategy

    UK unveils new international education strategy

    • Government aims to grow education exports to £40 billion per year by 2030, growth to come from TNE, ELT, skills and edtech
    • New strategy removes targets on international student numbers with focus on sustainable recruitment
    • Ministerial group known as the Education Sector Action Group (ESAG) to work with sector to deliver action plans tackling key concerns and identifying partnership opportunities

    The long-awaited document marks the first new UK international education strategy (IES) since 2019, which at the time revealed goals to grow international student numbers by 30% by 2030. Education is already one of the UK’s most important exports, bolstering the economy by £32bn per year, with the IES building on 2019’s stated ambition to grow its export value to £35 bn.

    However, after a post-pandemic boom, with international student numbers in the UK reaching 732,285 in 2023/24, the government has moved away from targetting increased enrolments, instead making clear that growth should come from areas such as English language training (ELT), transnational education (TNE) and edtech sectors – worth some £560m, £3bn and £3.89bn in exports respectively.

    The revamped IES outlines three main priorities for UK international education; to grow education exports to a collective $40bn per year, oversee sustainable overseas student recruitment and amplify the UK’s international standing through education – including a focus on cutting red tape for TNE partnerships abroad.

    Elsewhere, the government is drawing on expertise from the international education sector through a reformed ministerial group known as the Education Sector Action Group (ESAG) – a collective tasked with tackling key concerns and identifying partnership opportunities, as well as smoothing the path towards international alliances.

    Each representative will develop an action plan drawing on how its members will support the IES’s three main goals to be published within the first 100 days of their accession to ESAG. As yet it is unclear who will be included in the group.

    Meanwhile, Sir Steve Smith will stay on as the UK’s international education champion, with a remit to “remove barriers to education partnerships” by continuing to engage with India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam. Sir Steve is also looking into opportunities in “emerging economies” such as Brazil, Mexico, and Pakistan, the IES said.

    By expanding overseas, our universities, colleges and education providers can diversify income, strengthen global partnerships and give millions more access to a world-class UK education on their doorstep, all whilst boosting growth at home
    Bridget Phillipson, education secretary

    The document also signals the publication of more specific strategy documents in the future, including a Soft Power Strategy outlining plans to grow the UK’s global influence through its education, sports, science, governance, development and tech sectors.

    Expanding the UK’s soft power abroad is a key part of the IES, which recognises the power in education as a way to position the country as “a place of learning, openness, research and innovation – building life‐long alliances and deepening trust in the UK”.

    Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said that supporting international partnerships would help institutions to “diversity and strengthen their business models”.

    “By expanding overseas, our universities, colleges and education providers can diversify income, strengthen global partnerships and give millions more access to a world-class UK education on their doorstep, all whilst boosting growth at home,” she added.

    Minister for Trade Chris Bryant branded education exports as a “major UK success story”.

    “We’re on track grow the sector to £40 billion by 2030, powered by world leading providers driving digital learning, AI enabled innovation and future skills development,” he said. 

    Malcolm Press, president of Universities UK welcomed the new document, saying it “signals a renewed commitment to fostering the global reach, reputation and impact of our universities”.

    This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates on this emerging story…

    Source link

  • Basing K-12 Funding on California School Enrollment Could Bring Problems – The 74

    Basing K-12 Funding on California School Enrollment Could Bring Problems – The 74


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

    This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

    For years, California schools have pushed to change the way the state pays for K-12 education: by basing funding on enrollment, instead of attendance. That’s the way 45 other states do it, and it would mean an extra $6 billion annually in school coffers.

    But such a move might cause more harm than good in the long run, because linking funding to enrollment means schools have little incentive to lure students to class every day, according to a report released Tuesday by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. Without that incentive, attendance would drop, and students would suffer.

    If the Legislature wants to boost school funding, analysts argued, it should use the existing attendance-based model and funnel more money to schools with high numbers of low-income students, students in foster care and English learners.

    When it comes to attendance, money talks, the report noted. For more than a century, California has funded schools based on average daily attendance – how many students show up every day. In the 1980s and ’90s, the state started to look at alternatives. A pilot study from that time period showed that attendance at high schools rose 5.4% and attendance at elementary schools rose 3.1% when those schools had a financial incentive to boost attendance.

    This is not the time to ease up on attendance matters, the report said. Although attendance has improved somewhat since campuses closed during the pandemic, it remains well below pre-COVID-19 levels. In 2019, nearly 96% of students showed up to school every day. The number dropped to about 90% during COVID-19, when most schools switched to remote learning, but still remains about 2 percentage points below its previous high.

    Attendance is tied to a host of student success measurements. Students with strong attendance tend to have higher test scores, higher levels of reading proficiency and higher graduation rates.

    “It’s a thoughtful analysis that weighs the pros and cons,” said Hedy Chang, president of the nonprofit research and advocacy organization Attendance Works. “For some districts there might be benefits to a funding switch, but it also helps when districts have a concrete incentive for encouraging kids to show up.”

    True cost of educating kids

    Schools have long asked the Legislature to change the funding formula, which they say doesn’t cover the actual costs of educating students, especially those with high needs. The issue came up repeatedly at a recent conference of the California School Boards Association, and there’s been at least one recent bill that addressed the issue.

    The bill, by former Sen. Anthony Portantino, a Democrat from the La Cañada Flintridge area, initially called for a change to the funding formula, but the final version merely asked the Legislative Analyst’s Office to study the issue. The bill passed in 2024.

    A 2022 report by Policy Analysis for California Education also noted the risks of removing schools’ financial incentive to prioritize attendance. But it also said that increasing school funding overall would give districts more stability.

    Enrollment is a better funding metric because schools have to plan for the number of students who sign up, not the number who show up, said Troy Flint, spokesman for the California School Boards Association.

    He also noted that schools with higher rates of absenteeism also tend to have higher numbers of students who need extra help, such as English learners, migrant students and low-income students. Tying funding to daily attendance — which in some districts is as low as 60% — brings less money to those schools, ultimately hurting the students who need the most assistance, he said.

    “It just compounds the problem, creating a vicious cycle,” Flint said.

    To really boost attendance, schools need extra funding to serve those students.

    Switching to an enrollment-based funding model would increase K-12 funding by more than $6 billion, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Currently, schools receive about $15,000 annually per student through the state’s main funding mechanism, the Local Control Funding Formula, with an additional $7,000 coming from the federal government, block grants, lottery money, special education funds and other sources. Overall, California spent more than $100 billion on schools last year, according to the Legislative Analyst.

    Motivated by money?

    Flint’s group also questioned whether schools are solely motivated by money to entice students to class.

    “Most people in education desperately want kids in class every day,” Flint said. “These are some of the most dedicated, motivated people I’ve met, and they care greatly about students’ welfare.”

    Josh Schultz, superintendent of the Napa County Office of Education, agreed. Napa schools that are funded through attendance actually have lower attendance than schools that are considered “basic aid,” and funded through local property taxes. Both types of schools have high numbers of English learners and migrant students.

    “I can understand the logic (of the LAO’s assertion) but I don’t know if it bears out in reality, at least here,” Schultz said. “Both kinds of schools see great value in having kids show up to school every day.”

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • Trump’s admissions data collection strains college administrators

    Trump’s admissions data collection strains college administrators

    by Jill Barshay, The Hechinger Report
    January 19, 2026

    Lynette Duncan didn’t expect to spend 20 hours over the past two weeks digging through a mothballed computer system, trying to retrieve admissions data from 2019.

    Duncan is the director of institutional research at John Brown University, a small Christian university in northwest Arkansas, an hour’s drive from Walmart’s headquarters. She runs a one-person office that handles university data collections and analyses, both for internal use and to meet government mandates. Just last year, she spent months collecting and crunching new data to comply with a new federal rule requiring that colleges show that their graduates are prepared for good jobs.

    Then, in mid-December, another mandate abruptly arrived — this one at the request of President Donald Trump. Colleges were ordered to compile seven years of admissions data, broken down by race, sex, grades, SAT or ACT scores, and family income.

    “It’s like one more weight on our backs,” Duncan said. “The workload – it’s not fun.”

    Related: Our free weekly newsletter alerts you to what research says about schools and classrooms.

    John Brown University is one of almost 2,200 colleges and universities nationwide now scrambling to comply by March 18 with the new federal reporting requirement, formally known as the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement, or ACTS. By all accounts, it’s a ton of work, and at small institutions, the task falls largely on a single administrator or even the registrar. Failure to submit the data can bring steep fines and, ultimately, the loss of access to federal aid for students.

    After the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision banning affirmative action in college admissions, the Trump administration suspected that colleges might covertly continue to give racial preferences. To police compliance, the White House directed the Department of Education to collect detailed admissions data from colleges nationwide.

    The data collection was unusual not only in its scope, but also in its speed. Federal education data collections typically take years to design, with multiple rounds of analysis, technical review panels, and revisions. This one moved from announcement to launch in a matter of months.

    A rush job

    One tiny indication that this was a rush job is in the Federal Register notice. Both enforce and admissions are misspelled in a proposal that’s all about admissions enforcement. Those words are spelled “admssions” and “enforece.” 

    A December filing with the Office of Management and Budget incorrectly lists the number of institutions that are subject to the new data collection. It is nearly 2,200, not 1,660, according to the Association for Institutional Research, which is advising colleges on how to properly report the data. Community colleges are exempt, but four-year institutions with selective admissions or those that give out their own financial aid must comply. Graduate programs are included as well. That adds up to about 2,200 institutions. 

    Related: Inaccurate, impossible: Experts knock new Trump plan to collect college admissions data

    In another filing with the Office of Management and Budget, the administration disclosed that none of the five remaining career Education Department officials with statistical experience had reviewed the proposal, including Matt Soldner, the acting commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics. Most of the department’s statistical staff were fired earlier this year as a first step to eliminating the Education Department, one of Trump’s campaign promises. RTI International, the federal contractor in North Carolina that already manages other higher education data collections for the Education Department, is also handling the day-to-day work of this new college admissions collection. 

    During two public comment periods, colleges and higher-education trade groups raised concerns about data quality and missing records, but there is little evidence those concerns substantially altered the final design. One change expanded the retrospective data requirement from five to six years so that at least one cohort of students would have a measurable six-year graduation rate. A second relieved colleges of the burden of making hundreds of complex statistical calculations themselves, instead instructing them to upload raw student data to an “aggregator tool” that would do all the math for them. 

    The Trump administration’s goal is to generate comparisons across race and sex categories, with large gaps potentially triggering further scrutiny.

    Missing data

    The results are unlikely to be reliable, experts told me, given how much of the underlying data is missing or incomplete. In a public comment letter, Melanie Gottlieb, executive director of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, warned that entire years of applicant data may not exist at many institutions. Some states advise colleges to delete records for applicants who never enrolled after a year. “If institutions are remaining compliant with their state policies, they will not have five years of data,” Gottlieb wrote.

    The organization’s own guidance recommends that four-year colleges retain admissions records for just one year after an application cycle. One reason is privacy. Applicant files contain sensitive personal information, and purging unneeded records reduces the risk of exposing this data in breaches.

    In other cases, especially at smaller institutions, admissions offices may offload applicant data simply to make room for new student records. Duncan said John Brown University has all seven years of required data, but a switch to a new computer system in 2019 has made it difficult to retrieve the first year.

    Even when historical records are available, key details may be missing or incompatible with federal requirements, said Christine Keller, executive director of the Association for Institutional Research, which previously received a federal contract to train college administrators on accurate data collection until DOGE eliminated it. (The organization now receives some private funds for a reduced amount of training.) 

    Related: Chaos and confusion as the statistics arm of the Education Department is reduced to a skeletal staff of 3

    Standardized test scores are unavailable for many students admitted under test-optional policies. The department is asking colleges to report an unweighted grade-point average on a four-point scale, even though many applicants submit only weighted GPAs on a five-point scale. In those cases, and there may be many of them, colleges are instructed to report the GPA as “unknown.”

    Some students decline to report their race. Many holes are expected for family income. Colleges generally have income data only for students who completed federal financial-aid forms, which many applicants never file. 

    Ellen Keast, a spokeswoman for the Education Department, said in an email, “Schools are not expected to provide data they don’t have.” She added, “We know that some schools may have missing data for some data elements. We’ll review the extent of missing data before doing further calculations or analyses.”

    Male or female

    Even the category of sex poses problems. The Education Department’s spreadsheet allows only two options: male or female. Colleges, however, may collect sex or gender information using additional categories, such as nonbinary. 

    “That data is going to be, in my estimation, pretty worthless when it comes to really showing the different experiences of men and women,” Keller said. She is urging the department to add a “missing” option to avoid misleading results. “I think some people in the department may be misunderstanding that what’s needed is a missing-data option, not another sex category.”

    The new “aggregator tool” itself is another source of anxiety. Designed to spare colleges from calculating quintile buckets for grades and test scores by race and sex, it can feel like a black box. Colleges are supposed to fill rows and rows of detailed student data into spreadsheets and then upload the spreadsheets into the tool. The tool generates pooled summary statistics, such as the number of Black female applicants and admitted students who score in the top 20 percent at the college. Only the aggregated data will be reported to the federal government.

    At John Brown University, Duncan worries about what those summaries might imply. Her institution is predominantly white and has never practiced affirmative action. But if high school grades or test scores differ by race — as they often do nationwide — the aggregated results could suggest bias where none was intended.

    “That’s a concern,” Duncan said. “I’m hopeful that looking across multiple years of data, it won’t show that. You could have an anomaly in one year.”

    The problem is that disparities are not anomalies. Standardized test scores and academic records routinely vary by race and sex, making it difficult for almost any institution to avoid showing gaps.

    A catch-22 for colleges

    The stakes are high. In an emailed response to my questions, the Education Department pointed to Trump’s Aug. 7 memorandum, which directs the agency to take “remedial action” if colleges fail to submit the data on time or submit incomplete or inaccurate information.

    Under federal law, each violation of these education data-reporting requirements can carry a fine of up to $71,545. Repeated noncompliance can ultimately lead to the loss of access to federal student aid, meaning students could no longer use Pell Grants or federal loans to pay tuition.

    That leaves colleges in a bind. Failing to comply is costly. Complying, meanwhile, could produce flawed data that suggests bias and invites further scrutiny.

    The order itself contradicts another administration goal. President Trump campaigned on reducing federal red tape and bureaucratic burden. Yet ACTS represents a significant expansion of paperwork for colleges. The Office of Management and Budget estimates that each institution will spend roughly 200 hours completing the survey this year — a figure that higher-education officials say may be an understatement.

    Duncan is hoping she can finish the reporting in less than 200 hours, if there are no setbacks when she uploads the data. “If I get errors, it could take double the time,” she said.

    For now, she is still gathering and cleaning old student records and waiting to see the results… all before the March 18 deadline.

    Contact staff writer Jill Barshay at 212-678-3595, jillbarshay.35 on Signal, or [email protected].

    This story about college admissions data was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Proof Points and other Hechinger newsletters.

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-admissions-data-collection-strains-colleges/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

    <img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=114400&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-admissions-data-collection-strains-colleges/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • Teaching visual literacy as a core reading strategy in the age of AI

    Teaching visual literacy as a core reading strategy in the age of AI

    Key points:

    Many years ago, around 2010, I attended a professional development program in Houston called Literacy Through Photography, at a time when I was searching for practical ways to strengthen comprehension, discussion, and reading fluency, particularly for students who found traditional print-based tasks challenging. As part of the program, artists visited my classroom and shared their work with students. Much of that work was abstract. There were no obvious answers and no single “correct” interpretation.

    Instead, students were invited to look closely, talk together, and explain what they noticed.

    What struck me was how quickly students, including those who struggled with traditional reading tasks, began to engage. They learned to slow down, describe what they saw, make inferences, and justify their thinking. They weren’t just looking at images; they were reading them. And in doing so, they were rehearsing many of the same strategies we expect when reading written texts.

    At the time, this felt innovative. But it also felt deeply intuitive.

    Fast forward to today.

    Students are surrounded by images and videos, from photographs and diagrams to memes, screenshots, and, increasingly, AI-generated visuals. These images appear everywhere: in learning materials, on social media, and inside the tools students use daily. Many look polished, realistic, and authoritative.

    At the same time, AI has made faking easier than ever.

    As educators and school leaders, we now face urgent questions around misinformation, academic integrity, and critical thinking. The issue is no longer just whether students can use AI tools, but whether they can interpret, evaluate, and question what they see.

    This is where visual literacy becomes a frontline defence.

    Teaching students to read images critically, to see them as constructed texts rather than neutral data, strengthens the same skills we rely on for strong reading comprehension: inference, evidence-based reasoning, and metacognitive awareness.

    From photography to AI: A conversation grounded in practice

    Recently, I found myself returning to those early classroom experiences through ongoing professional dialogue with a former college lecturer and professional photographer, as we explored what it really means to read images in the age of AI.

    A conversation that grew out of practice

    Nesreen: When I shared the draft with you, you immediately focused on the language, whether I was treating images as data or as signs. Is this important?

    Photographer: Yes, because signs belong to reading. Data is output. Signs are meaning. When we talk about reading media texts, we’re talking about how meaning is constructed, not just what information appears.

    Nesreen: That distinction feels crucial right now. Students are surrounded by images and videos, but they’re rarely taught to read them with the same care as written texts.

    Photographer: Exactly. Once students understand that photographs and AI images are made up of signs, color, framing, scale, and viewpoint, they stop treating images as neutral or factual.

    Nesreen: You also asked whether the lesson would lean more towards evaluative assessment or summarizing. That made me realize the reflection mattered just as much as the image itself.

    Photographer: Reflection is key. When students explain why a composition works, or what they would change next time, they’re already engaging in higher-level reading skills.

    Nesreen: And whether students are analyzing a photograph, generating an AI image, or reading a paragraph, they’re practicing the same habits: slowing down, noticing, justifying, and revising their thinking.

    Photographer: And once they see that connection, reading becomes less about the right answer and more about understanding how meaning is made.

    Reading images is reading

    One common misconception is that visual literacy sits outside “real” literacy. In practice, the opposite is true.

    When students read images carefully, they:

    • identify what matters most
    • follow structure and sequence
    • infer meaning from clues
    • justify interpretations with evidence
    • revise first impressions

    These are the habits of skilled readers.

    For emerging readers, multilingual learners, and students who struggle with print, images lower the barrier to participation, without lowering the cognitive demand. Thinking comes first. Language follows.

    From composition to comprehension: Mapping image reading to reading strategies

    Photography offers a practical way to name what students are already doing intuitively. When teachers explicitly teach compositional elements, familiar reading strategies become visible and transferable.

    What students notice in an image What they are doing cognitively Reading strategy practiced
    Where the eye goes first Deciding importance Identifying main ideas
    How the eye moves Tracking structure Understanding sequence
    What is included or excluded Considering intention Analyzing author’s choices
    Foreground and background Sorting information Main vs supporting details
    Light and shadow Interpreting mood Making inferences
    Symbols and colour Reading beyond the literal Figurative language
    Scale and angle Judging power Perspective and viewpoint
    Repetition or pattern Spotting themes Theme identification
    Contextual clues Using surrounding detail Context clues
    Ambiguity Holding multiple meanings Critical reading
    Evidence from the image Justifying interpretation Evidence-based responses

    Once students recognise these moves, teachers can say explicitly:

    “You’re doing the same thing you do when you read a paragraph.”

    That moment of transfer is powerful.

    Making AI image generation teachable (and safe)

    In my classroom work pack, students use Perchance AI to generate images. I chose this tool deliberately: It is accessible, age-appropriate, and allows students to iterate, refining prompts based on compositional choices rather than chasing novelty.

    Students don’t just generate an image once. They plan, revise, and evaluate.

    This shifts AI use away from shortcut behavior and toward intentional design and reflection, supporting academic integrity rather than undermining it.

    The progression of a prompt: From surface to depth (WAGOLL)

    One of the most effective elements of the work pack is a WAGOLL (What A Good One Looks Like) progression, which shows students how thinking improves with precision.

    • Simple: A photorealistic image of a dog sitting in a park.
    • Secure: A photorealistic image of a dog positioned using the rule of thirds, warm colour palette, soft natural lighting, blurred background.
    • Greater Depth: A photorealistic image of a dog positioned using the rule of thirds, framed by tree branches, low-angle view, strong contrast, sharp focus on the subject, blurred background.

    Students can see and explain how photographic language turns an image from output into meaningful signs. That explanation is where literacy lives.

    When classroom talk begins to change

    Over time, classroom conversations shift.

    Instead of “I like it” or “It looks real,” students begin to say:

    • “The creator wants us to notice…”
    • “This detail suggests…”
    • “At first I thought…, but now I think…”

    These are reading sentences.

    Because images feel accessible, more students participate. The classroom becomes slower, quieter, and more thoughtful–exactly the conditions we want for deep comprehension.

    Visual literacy as a bridge, not an add-on

    Visual literacy is not an extra subject competing for time. It is a bridge, especially in the age of AI.

    By teaching students how to read images, schools strengthen:

    • reading comprehension
    • inference and evaluation
    • evidence-based reasoning
    • metacognitive awarenes

    Most importantly, students learn that literacy is not about rushing to answers, but about noticing, questioning, and constructing meaning.

    In a world saturated with AI-generated images, teaching students how to read visually is no longer optional.

    It is literacy.

    Author’s note: This article grew out of classroom practice and professional dialogue with a former college lecturer and professional photographer. Their contribution informed the discussion of visual composition, semiotics, and reflective image-reading, without any involvement in publication or authorship.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Iowa Teacher Committed Misconduct With His Anti-Kirk Facebook Posts – The 74

    Iowa Teacher Committed Misconduct With His Anti-Kirk Facebook Posts – The 74


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

    An administrative law judge has ruled that an Iowa school teacher committed job-related misconduct when he posted negative Facebook comments about conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

    Matthew Kargol worked for the Oskaloosa Community School District as an art teacher and coach until he was fired in September 2025. Kargol then filed for unemployment benefits and the district resisted, which led to a recent hearing before Administrative Law Judge David Steen.

    In his written factual findings of the case, Steen reported that on Sept. 10, 2025, Kargol had posted a comment to Facebook stating, “1 Nazi down.” That comment was posted within hours of authorities confirming Kirk had been shot and killed that day while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

    When another Facebook user commented, “What a s—-y thing to say,” Kargol allegedly replied, “Yep, he was part of the problem, a Nazi.”

    Steen reported that Kargol posted his comments around 5 p.m. and then deleted them within an hour. By 6 p.m., the district began fielding a number of telephone calls and text messages from members of the public, Steen found.

    According to Steen’s findings, the district’s leadership team met that evening and included Kargol via telephone conference call. District leaders asked Kargol to resign, and he declined, after which the district officials said they were concerned for his safety due to the public’s reaction to his comments.

    The district placed Kargol on administrative leave that evening, Steen found. The next day, district officials fielded roughly 1,500 telephone calls and received 280 voicemail messages regarding Kargol’s posts.

    “These calls required the employer to redirect staff and other resources from their normal duties,” Steen stated in his ruling. “The employer also requested additional law enforcement presence at school facilities due to the possibility of physical threats, which some of the messages alluded to. The employer continued to receive numerous communications from the public for days after the post was removed.”

    On Sept. 16, 2025, Superintendent Mike Fisher submitted a written recommendation to the school board to fire Kargol, with the two primary reasons cited as a disruption to the learning environment and a violation of the district’s code of ethics. Upon Fisher’s recommendation, the board fired Kargol on Sept. 17, 2025.

    According to Steen’s findings, the district calculated the cost of its response to the situation was $14,332.10 – and amount that includes the wages of the regular staff who handled the phone calls and other communications.

    As for the ethics-policy violation, Steen noted that the policy states that employees “are representatives of the district at all times and must model appropriate character, both on and off the worksite. This applies to material posted with personal devices and on personal websites and/or social media accounts.”

    The policy goes on to say that social media posts “which diminish the professionalism” of the district may result in disciplinary action, including termination, if it is found to be disruptive to the educational environment.

    The district, Steen noted, also has a policy on “employee expression” that states “the First Amendment protects a public employee’s speech when the employee is speaking as an individual citizen on a matter of public concern,” but that “even so, employee expression that has an adverse impact on district operations and/or negatively impacts an employee’s ability to perform their job for the district may still result in disciplinary action up to and including termination.”

    Based on the policies and Kargol’s conduct, Steen concluded the district fired Kargol for job-related misconduct that disqualified him from collecting unemployment benefits.

    The issue before him, Steen observed, wasn’t whether the district made a correct decision in firing Kargol, but whether Kargol is entitled to unemployment insurance benefits under Iowa law.

    In ruling against Kargol on that issue, Steen noted Kargol was aware of district policies regarding social media use as well as work rules that specifically state employees are considered representatives of the school district at all times.

    Kargol’s posts, Steen ruled, “reflected negatively on the employer and were against the employer’s interests.” The posts also “caused substantial disruption to the learning environment, causing staff at all levels to need to redirect focus and resources on the public’s response for days after the incident,” Steen stated.

    Kargol’s federal lawsuit against the school district, alleging retaliation for exercising his First Amendment right to expression, is still working its way through the courts.

    In that lawsuit, Kargol argues that in comments made last fall, Fisher made clear that his condemnation of Kargol’s Facebook posts “was rooted in his personal beliefs, not in evidence of disruption. Speaking as ‘a man of faith,’ Fisher expressed disappointment in the state of society and disapproval of Mr. Kargol’s expression. By invoking his personal religious identity in condemning Mr. Kargol’s speech, Fisher confirmed that his reaction was based on his own values and ideology, not on legitimate pedagogical concerns.”

    The district has denied any wrongdoing in that case. A trial date has yet to be scheduled.

    Several other lawsuits have been filed against their former employers by Iowa educators, a public defender and a paramedic, all of whom allege they were fired or sanctioned for online comments posted in the immediate aftermath of Kirk’s death.

    Earlier this week, two Iowa teachers sued the state’s teacher-licensing board and its executive director, alleging they improperly solicited complaints related to anti-Kirk social media posts.

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


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link