Blog

  • A Guide to Accessibility (for Educators)

    A Guide to Accessibility (for Educators)

    With the DoJ’s April 24, 2026 deadline approaching mandating all digital tools be accessible, every educator across the US (and Canada) is rushing to make their course materials accessible.

    An Incomplete Guide to Accessibility (for Educators) is for instructors, professors, or TAs that need help approaching digital accessibility. In plain language, we’ll demonstrate how to update learning materials to meet compliance—without treading all over your painstakingly-planned pedagogy. It’s important to emphasize that accessibility is ultimately about breaking barriers for people with disabilities, and this guide will strive to keep that in mind.

    Accessibility isn’t easy

    It’s important not to downplay the work needed to ensure digital materials are well-designed for everyone, without discrimination. 

    But… accessibility really isn’t that hard, either. 

    While more complex solutions can be harder to implement, the basics of accessibility are fairly easy to understand and action on. Start there, and grow over time. 

    It’s a skill. It takes practice. But it’s not rocket science, or evaluating 100 student essays on the diction of Shakespeare, either. Every week, educators share ideas and concepts with students, which, with any luck, germinate into critical thinking skills. Teaching is a much harder thing; accessibility is simple by comparison.

    As a digital product designer with over 20 years experience, I know the effort it takes to push accessibility forward. In 2020, Top Hat’s product and engineering team worked to make our platform more accessible for any student.

    The goal of this guide is to help you navigate this work, too.

    This guide is evolving

    The “incomplete” title of this guide is intentional. Members of the Top Hat team will add to this guide over time, but accessibility standards change. In software, compliance drift can happen as companies make updates to their little corner of the web. The very browser you’re using to read these words has likely been updated dozens or hundreds of times since this guide was written. 

    Obligatory legal note (sorry): Please don’t mistake this guide as legal advice or counsel. Consider this work an incomplete and imperfect list of suggestions from our experience, nothing more.

    We appreciate feedback 

    Both good and constructive feedback (what my cat’s therapist calls “bad” feedback) are encouraged. If you spot any gaps or errors in the guide, please let us know and we’ll remediate. Just send us an email to [email protected].

    Chapter 1: Making Sense of Compliance

    Awareness of the law is important, but don’t get lost

    It’s easy to get overwhelmed by all the accessibility laws flying about. Federal, DOJ, State. How do they measure up against each other? What do you need to care about?

    TLDR: WCAG 2.1 Level AA 

    WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the standard to follow. If you know what that alphabet salad means, you can probably skip this chapter. 

    It’s the W3C standard this guide (and Top Hat) uses. 

    A wave of legislation

    Here is a list of accessibility policies from the US. I recommend glossing over it, unless you enjoy sifting through rats nests of legalese for reasons I won’t ask about:

    Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Arizona (digital accessibility standards in statewide IT policy), Arkansas (Act 1227 of 1999), California (multiple government code sections), Colorado (House Bill 21-1110), Connecticut (Universal Website Accessibility Policy), Delaware (State Digital Accessibility Policy), Georgia (digital properties accessibility), Idaho (Web Publishing Guidelines), Illinois (Illinois Information Technology Accessibility Act), Indiana (Code 4-13.1-3), Iowa (Website Accessibility Standard), Kansas (Information Technology Executive Council Policy), Maine (Digital Accessibility and Usability Policy), Maryland (Information Technology Nonvisual Access Regulatory Standards), Massachusetts (Enterprise Information Technology Accessibility Policy), Michigan (Digital Accessibility Standard), Minnesota (Digital Accessibility Standard), Missouri (RSMo. 161.935), Montana (state code 18-5-605), Nebraska (Accessibility Policy), Nevada (ADA Technology Accessibility Guidelines), New Hampshire (Web and Mobile Application Accessibility Standards), New Jersey (NJ A4856), New York (NYS-P08-005 and Senate Bill S3114A), Ohio (Administrative Policy, Website Ability), Oklahoma (Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Law), Pennsylvania (Information Technology Policy), Rhode Island (World Wide Web Consortium Priority 1 Checkpoints), Texas (Web Accessibility Standards and Administrative Code), Utah (accessibility standards for executive branch agencies), Virginia (Information Technology Access Act and Accessibility Standard), and Washington (USER-01 Accessibility Policy). 

    You might have noticed not all states are listed. Some states decided to spare us the headache of adding more to this list. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)—the big kahuna of federal legislation—still applies.

    Real risk

    If your legal department puckers up at the word accessibility, you should know it’s because the risk to your school is real. The ADA publishes “settlements” on its website, which is a public list where complainant(s) have filed discrimination suit(s) against a corporation and settled. A good chunk of them are against educational institutions (K-12, community colleges, and big institutions alike).

    State and federal policy is not written for you

    Its job is to provide the judicial system the right to pursue action against anyone caught discriminating, and to make you aware that they can (and might) do that. Less discrimination is good for everyone. We like that idea. 

    But knowing there are arcane words hanging above every slide deck and document you decide to share with your student body is scary. There’s pressure here to Do The Right Thing.™

    Good news: There’s a simple way to meet state and federal legislation: WCAG. Protip: It’s pronounced wug-ka-guh.

    WCAG: One Standard to Rule them All 

    Bad news: WCAG is written by engineers, but don’t hold that against it. 

    WCAG stands for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. It’s managed by the World Wide Web Consortium, otherwise known as “W3C,” which is a wizardly-sounding name, if you ask me. Most policies across the US and Canada list it as a standard to meet for digital accessibility (the only reason I’m not saying ALL policies is because I haven’t read them all, but I’m fairly certain everyone is just copying each other’s homework here).

    Understanding the WCAG Alphabet Salad: Versions and Levels

    There are levels to the WCAG standard, but it’s very simple to unpack.

    Which WCAG version?

    Because almost all legislation focuses on WCAG 2.1 Level AA, we’ve focused this guideline on that. 

    Why not WCAG 2.2? 

    WCAG 2.2 adds more consideration to its framework for mobile devices and form factors. Top Hat follows 2.2, because our product supports mobile apps. 

    This isn’t as applicable for educators, so we’re focusing on 2.1 for this guide.

    What are WCAG levels?

    Within each version of WCAG there are “levels” of compliance denoted by A, AA, and AAA. Level AA is where most software vendors and digital services will hang out. 

    There’s no extra credit for meeting AAA. Generally speaking, AA will be a better choice for delivering great learning materials to students. The scuttlebutt on the street (the youth are all aflutter about this) is that AAA is for banks and government institutions.

    Note for Canadians

    Canadians will be expected to adhere to the Accessible Canada Act (ACA). Ontario, British Columbia, and Newfoundland and Labrador have their own laws, too.

    In most cases WCAG 2.1 Level AA will meet the letter of these laws, too.

    This guide follows: WCAG 2.1, Level AA

    This guide follows WCAG 2.1, Level AA standard, and so does Top Hat’s content and platform.

    If your institution uses another level, or something other than WCAG, this guideline may not be useful to you.

    It’s helpful to think of content and software together, but separate

    In addition to ensuring the form and fit of the software you use is up to standard, educators have an obligation to make sure the content and materials of a course are compliant, too.

    • If the software presenting your slides can’t be navigated by a user using assistive technology? That’s a violation. 
    • If the reading order of your slides isn’t correct? Violation. 
    • If you use an image to convey information that doesn’t have alt-text or a long description? Violation (every physics instructor will be hit especially hard by that last one).

    All of it needs to meet WCAG 2.1 AA compliance.

    For your own sanity, it will be helpful to keep both software and content in mind when navigating accessibility.

    Full disclosure: This article is published by Top Hat

    The goal of this article isn’t to woo you into using Top Hat. Top Hat is an ed tech platform that has features to help make educational content accessible, but it’s important to us that this guide will be useful for as many educators as possible.

    Throughout the chapters, where possible, we’ll provide accessible considerations for content both with and without use of the Top Hat platform. As you’ll see in this guide: where content is authored and shared with learners alters the choices you need to make to ensure your stuff works.

    Let’s go!

    Now that the standards are out of the way let’s get into the fun stuff: making your course and materials accessible. 

    Next Chapter: Text Alternatives for Educational Images and Visual Aids

    Source link

  • The Right-Wing Takeover of K-12 Education (Second Thought Staging)

    The Right-Wing Takeover of K-12 Education (Second Thought Staging)







    Higher Education Inquirer : Slop School Is Here: The Right-Wing Takeover of K-12 Education (Second Thought Staging)




    Source link

  • Wales stands firm against international fee levy, minister says

    Wales stands firm against international fee levy, minister says

    During a a visit to the University of South Wales’s (USW) Pontypridd campus, Wales’s minister for further an higher education Vikki Howells reaffirmed that the country will not introduce the levy – details of which were set out in last week’s Autumn Budget.

    Instead, Howells reiterated that international students coming to Wales would find a warm welcome. “We want to send a clear message that Wales is open, inclusive, and committed to providing an outstanding student experience,” she said after the visit.

    “International students are an integral part of our higher education community. They not only boost our economy but also bring cultural diversity and global outlooks that benefit all of us. Wales is proud to be a place where students from around the world feel welcome and supported,” said Howells.

    We want to send a clear message that Wales is open, inclusive, and committed to providing an outstanding student experience
    Vikki Howells, member of the Senedd

    Louise Bright, USW’s pro vice-chancellor for enterprise engagement and partnership, added: “Our international students contribute enormously to the life of our universities and of Wales. Their skills, insights and experiences help us create a stronger, more outward-looking and connected nation.”

    Universities Wales said the move underscored the Welsh government’s commitment to supporting international education in Wales.

    It comes just a weeks after Howells recorded a video for international students assuring them that they would find “a place where you’ll truly belong” if they chose Wales as a study destination. The country has been positioning itself as a regional hub for international education – with interest in studying in Wales rising most sharply in Indian and American students.

    According to HESA data, Wales was home to some 27,795 international students in the 2023/24 academic year, with most of those coming from non-EU countries.

    The University of South Wales had the most, with 6,635 international students, followed by Cardiff University with 6,480 and Swansea University with 4,780.

    The international student levy – which will come into force in England in 2028 – has been controversial, with stakeholders warning that it could severely impact international enrolments.

    Large metropolitan universities stand to lose the most money from the policy, which will see a £925-per-student flat fee for all institutions in England with more than 220 international students. The cash raised will be used to fund domestic maintenance grants.

    According to the latest available HESA data, University College London would have to pay the most money – over £25 million – followed by the University of Manchester and the University of Hertfordshire.

    Source link

  • Let’s have no locks on learning

    Let’s have no locks on learning

    At News Decoder we believe that information should flow across borders and that you shouldn’t need money to access it. That’s why we’ve created resources for both young people and educators that are open access — they are free and available to anyone. It is our mission, after all, to inform, connect and empower young people to be engaged citizens and changemakers locally, nationally and globally.

    These free resources include articles, podcasts and videos that offer young people tips on writing and reporting and information they need to be media literate such as guides for fact-checking news stories and verifying the accuracy of information. We also make publicly accessible our Decoder Dialogues —  in which we gather young people from different countries together with experts to talk about an important topic. You can watch our latest Decoder Dialogue on how young people speak out and stand up that took place 2 December. 

    For a great read on how some places are addressing the problems of paywalls on academic and scientific research, check out Charissa Eggers recent article for News Decoder. 

    Below are a series of useful guides for student journalists or for anyone who wants to become a better storyteller. 

    And check out more of our open access learning resources. 

    https://news-decoder.com/top-tips-can-you-be-the-bearer-of-good-news/ 

     

    Source link

  • GEDU’s Kevin McCole on scaling sustainable development training

    GEDU’s Kevin McCole on scaling sustainable development training

    Over 70 delegates will travel to the UK to agree a comprehensive capacity building programme that will help achieve the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

    GEDU’s managing director for external relations and sustainability, Kevin McCole, is also the director of UNITAR’s London Centre, one of 33 Centres, spanning every continent.

    The mission of these Centres is to deliver training and capacity building across the SDGs. 

    The PIE News sat down with Kevin McCole to understand the work of the UNITAR network, GEDU’s particular priorities, and what will be achieved in the coming days in London. 

    Kevin, this sounds like a critical week for you and your colleagues. Can you tell us what will happen and why it matters?

    It is an important week. It’s exciting too. It’s not every day that a UK education business hosts a delegation led by an assistant UN secretary general and includes other senior UN officials, as well as business, academic and municipal leaders from around the world. It’s a truly global gathering.

    UNITAR and its network come together once a year, and part of the programme in London will be internal – we’ll share best practice, identify areas for collaboration in 2026, consider how UN 2.0 and the Pact for the Future will shape the UN’s development agenda beyond 2030, agree ambitious targets and how to achieve them.

    We’ve also got important external engagement too, including with representatives of the UK government, parliamentarians and businesses.

    While we are discussing global challenges, it’s important to focus on the local too. So we will be hosting the delegation at the Global Banking School campus in Greenford where we will engage local politicians and council officials.

    What role do universities play in the UNITAR network?

    Of the 33 Centres across the world, most are led by universities. In London next week there will be senior figures from York University in Canada, Newcastle University in Australia, and more from all continents in between.

    GEDU’s contribution to UNITAR is global too – it’s not limited to London. With 13 institutions across 15 countries – from Toronto and Tampa in the Americas, across Europe and the Middle East and India, to Brisbane in Asia-Pacific – we are able to bring a global perspective and have a global impact.

    Universities can help achieve the SDGs in a range of ways. Through their curricula and extra-curricula activity. Let’s take just three examples from GEDU institutions.

    MLA College recently launched 17 byte sized courses – one on every SDG – in partnership with UNITAR.

    Shiller International University, with campuses in Heidelberg, Paris, Madrid and Tampa offer the Seeds of Peace Scholarship to support students from conflict-affected regions.

    And ICN Business School, a triple accredited creative business school with campuses in Paris, Berlin and Nancy, is an active member of the United Nations Global Compact, the Principles for Responsible Management Education initiative, the Collectif pour l’Intégration de la Responsabilité Sociétale et du Développement Durable dans l’Enseignement Supérieur (CIRSES), and the Conférence des Grandes Écoles network on sustainable development

    Of course, universities can’t succeed in isolation. That’s why UNITAR’s general approach, and the specific programme in London, involve national and local governments, parliamentarians, businesses, and civil society. We all need to work together.

    We hear about sustainability a lot, but it’s more than just environmental, isn’t it?

    Yes, from the UN and UNITAR perspective we look at all 17 of the sustainable development goals.

    Many are environmental, for example climate action, life on land, life below water, and affordable and clean energy. But the SDGs also include peace, justice and strong institutions, reduced inequalities and eliminating poverty and hunger.

    So we have a broad and important agenda in London next week.

    It’s also important to say that the UNITAR programme is giving us at GEDU the opportunity to consider the contribution we can make collectively and as individual institutions.

    For instance, how do we best deploy our time and expertise to work in partnership with governments, businesses and NGOs around the world? 

    We understand GEDU will be making an announcement as well? 

    That’s correct. We’re going to release our inaugural GEDU sustainability report at an event in the House of Commons.

    The report will detail the work being done by all our institutions to address all of the SDGs, including in the SDG that they have adopted and lead on for GEDU. It will also outline our ambitions for 2026 and beyond.

    I have to say, preparing this report has been a real eye opener for me – I hadn’t realised just how much our institutions are doing that aligns to the SDGs. And it’s been really encouraging to learn that they all have ambition to contribute even more.

    About the author: Kevin McCole is GEDU managing director, external relations and sustainability. Kevin, who has a passion for education and international partnerships, joined GEDU Global Education in March 2025 and leads the group’s external relations, public relations and sustainability activities. Before joining GEDU Global Education, Kevin spent 16 years as managing director of the UK India Business Council, where he worked closely with governments and organisations in both countries on the UK-India FTA and, more broadly, to bring UK investors to India and strengthen the business, education and people-to-people links between India and the UK. Prior to this, Kevin spent 19 years in the UK’s diplomatic service, where he served in The Netherlands, Malta, Romania, India, and in various London postings. In India, Kevin spent three years at the British Deputy High Commission in Kolkata helping strengthen the UK’s partnership with East and North East India. 

    Source link

  • Test yourself on the past week’s K-12 news

    Test yourself on the past week’s K-12 news

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    How well did you keep up with this week’s developments in K-12 education? To find out, take our five-question quiz below. Then, share your score by tagging us on social media with #K12DivePopQuiz.

    Source link

  • Some districts reverse school closures despite declining enrollment

    Some districts reverse school closures despite declining enrollment

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Some school boards have recently rejected their districts’ school closure plans at a time when declining student enrollment continues to plague district budgets nationwide. As districts push for closures amid the dwindling enrollment numbers and budget deficits, board members say they need more time to consider plans that would cause major disruptions to their communities. 

    In Pennsylvania, for instance, 6 of 9 board members at Pittsburgh Public Schools voted on Nov. 25 against the district’s proposal to close nine schools by the end of the 2027-28 school year. The vote came a day after the school board held a three-hour public hearing on the possible closures with a majority of speakers denouncing the district’s plan, according to CBS Pittsburgh.

    Gene Walker, the board’s president, said during a Nov. 25 meeting that “in the short-term” he would vote against the closures after hearing public feedback on the issue. Walker added that he thinks the board will need more time to decide on closures, especially as several new board members were set to be sworn in the coming days.

    “It’s my personal opinion that we are not in a space where we can properly support the superintendent and his team in this work,” Walker said. 

    The district recommended the school closures as it faces a projected budget deficit of nearly $11.4 million for the 2025-26 school year. Pittsburgh Public Schools also expects its total expenditures to continue to outpace its total revenue in the coming years. If the district closed the nine schools, Pittsburgh Public School administrators said it could have also saved nearly $103 million by 2031. 

    The district’s enrollment has steadily decreased over the past five years, dipping from 19,159 students to 17,937 between the 2021-22 and 2025-26 school years. Two decades ago, the number of enrolled students was much higher at 32,529, according to the Allegheny Institute, a nonprofit research and education organization.  

    Pittsburgh Public Schools Superintendent Wayne Walters said in a Wednesday statement to K-12 Dive that he does not fully agree with the “path” the district’s school board is on right now, but he respects its decision and is committed to finding a “responsible, equitable path forward” with board members. 

    “Without action, we remain a system unable to deliver the consistent academic and enrichment opportunities our children deserve — one where access too often depends on the building a student attends,” Walters said. “At the same time, our financial stability continues to decline as we stretch limited resources across too many buildings.”

    Elsewhere, the school board for Alaska’s Anchorage School District rejected plans on Nov. 18 to close two elementary schools. In a board recap post, the district noted that it’s already had to close five schools since 2015 due to lowering student enrollment. While Anchorage School District has the capacity to serve 50,000 students, only 42,000 are currently enrolled, according to the district.  

    In Wisconsin, the Eau Claire Area School District said in November that it was no longer considering a proposal to consolidate several elementary schools, according to WEAU 13 News. 

    The district said on its website that it was planning to consolidate the schools as it continues to see elementary enrollment decline because of lower birthrates and demographic shifts.That planning process began earlier this year. An October report from the district’s Superintendent Mike Johnson shows student enrollment has dropped from 10,267 to 9,910 students between the 2017-18 and 2025-26 school years. 

    Still, Johnson told WEAU 13 News that the enrollment challenges aren’t going away. “For next year, our second largest class in the district is our 5th grade class,” Johnson said. “If the trends occur the way they have been, when those students exit and go to middle school, we’ll be down 110 students.”

    The changed course for Eau Claire Area School District came after families organized to push back against the proposed consolidation plans through a “Save Our Neighborhood Schools” campaign. 

    Source link

  • What would education’s omission as a ‘professional degree’ mean?

    What would education’s omission as a ‘professional degree’ mean?

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Pursuing a doctoral degree in the social justice for education program at the University of San Diego was an opportunity that second-year student Reyan Warren long thought would never be afforded to her.

    So when Warren — who also currently teaches high school English in a rural school community in Adelanto, California — heard that the U.S. Department of Education is proposing the omission of education from programs considered to be a “professional degree,” she said the proposal made her feel sad. 

    A negotiating committee convened by the Education Department agreed to a proposal this month that excludes education — among other programs — from being considered a “professional degree,” according to the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators. 

    A lowered cap on federal student loans available to certain graduate students was approved in the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” which established the term “professional degrees” to be used internally by the agency to distinguish programs that qualify for higher student loan limits, according to an Education Department fact sheet released Nov. 24. The law also directed the Education Department to identify “professional degree” programs that will be eligible for the higher federal lending limits.

    The definition as it applies to those federal loan limits is not final and will be open for discussion and public comment when a proposed rule is published in the Federal Register as the agency finalizes the regulation early next year, according to the department.

    Only graduate and doctoral students pursuing professions under this proposed definition — such as medicine, dentistry or law — would be eligible for higher federal lending limits capped at $200,000. Students outside of those defined professions would be capped at $100,000 in federal loans for their graduate or doctoral programs. 

    The new limits will begin in July 2026 for new borrowers, with an annual cap at $20,500 for graduate students and $50,000 for professional students.

    Undergraduate students would “generally” not be affected by these new lending limits, the Education Department said in its fact sheet. 

    How this could impact the K-12 pipeline

    During the 2022-23 school year, there were 90,710 bachelor’s degrees in education conferred nationwide compared to 143,669 master’s degrees, according to an analysis of federal data by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. 

    A separate AACTE analysis of the most recent federal data from 2019-20 found that doctoral students in education are the most likely to borrow near or over the proposed $100,000 federal loan cap. Doctoral students in the 75th percentile of borrowers typically took out about $89,000 in cumulative loans, while the 90th percentile took out $115,000. 

    For those pursuing education master’s degrees in 2019-20, students in the 75th percentile borrowed nearly $39,000 in total graduate school loans, compared to $61,500 in the 90th percentile, according to AACTE. 

    Still, the median amount borrowed five years ago was well below the new $100,000 limit for all graduate and doctoral students in the 50th percentile of borrowers, AACTE found. 

    The proposed exclusion of education from being considered a professional degree could jeopardize the pipeline for high-quality teachers as well as school and district leaders, said Jacqueline King, consultant for research, policy and advocacy at AACTE. 

    Warren agreed with that concern and said the proposed loan limits could also lead to “fewer candidates, fewer future leaders, fewer diverse voices, fewer doctoral students, fewer highly educated and highly prepared educators in our classrooms.” Warren added that her incurred loans since graduate school alone are also encroaching on a total of roughly $100,000. 

    Data from the Education Department also shows that 90% of education graduate students borrow below the annual loan limit and would not be affected by the caps, the agency told K-12 Dive on Tuesday. 

    Source link

  • Yale expects layoffs as leaders brace for $300M in endowment taxes

    Yale expects layoffs as leaders brace for $300M in endowment taxes

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Yale University is bracing for layoffs as it prepares to pay the government hundreds of millions of dollars in endowment income taxes.
    • In a public message, senior leaders at the Ivy League institution said that Yale’s schools plan to take steps such as delaying hiring and reducing travel spending to save money. But they warned workforce cuts were on the horizon. 
    • “Layoffs may be necessary” in some units where cutting open positions and other reductions are insufficient, the university officials said. They expect to complete any downsizing by the end of 2026 barring “additional significant financial changes.”

    Dive Insight:

    One of Yale’s top financial headaches is the higher endowment tax rate passed by Republicans this summer in their massive spending and tax law. The increased tax — which is much lower than what House Republicans initially proposed — will have an upper tier of 8% on the investment income of the wealthiest endowments, up from the current rate of 1.4% established during the first Trump administration. 

    That new 8% tax bracket includes Yale, in Connecticut. As of June 30, the end of the 2025 fiscal year, its endowment’s net assets totaled $44.2 billion in value after it allocated $2.1 billion to the university for student aid, teaching, research and other functions that year. 

    The tax hike means Yale will be paying the government around $300 million a year starting in 2026, officials said. 

    “To illustrate its scale, this new expense exceeds our yearly budget for undergraduate financial aid,” the senior leaders — Provost Scott Strobel, CFO Stephen Murphy and Senior Vice President for Operations Geoffrey Chatas — said in their message Wednesday. They noted the amount is also larger than the combined annual budget of more than half of Yale’s 15 schools. 

    Additionally, the leaders pointed to the Trump administration’s efforts to limit federal funding for research overhead costs and overall spending on research. “Cuts to these crucial funding sources would pose a significant threat to research conducted across the university,” they said. 

    While four major federal agencies have attempted to cap reimbursement for research overhead, federal courts have blocked those efforts so far. However, some of those rulings are under appeal. 

    For now, though, the university’s grant and contract income remains robust at $1.3 billion in fiscal 2025, up nearly 7% from the year before.

    As they prepare for new financial pressures ahead, Yale officials are instituting austerity measures, as many other universities are as they navigate financial disruption under the Trump administration and a Republican Congress. 

    Earlier in the year, the university paused hiring, deferred building projects, cut nonsalary expenses by 5% and offered early retirement buyouts to administrative staff. But the looming endowment tax and federal funding uncertainty will mean steeper cuts, the senior leaders said. Schools and units are currently ironing out their budgets.

    “As units implement their plans, our community can expect to see additional organizational, service, and program changes,” the senior leaders said. “While some of these adjustments will occur in the coming months, we anticipate they will continue over the next two years.” 

    In explaining the need for workforce cuts, they pointed out that nearly two-thirds of Yale’s expenses are tied to compensation and benefits for employees.  

    “We are hopeful that most reductions can be accomplished by eliminating open positions and through regular turnover and retirement incentives,” the officials said.

    Source link

  • Solving the staffing crisis is key to the Science of Reading movement

    Solving the staffing crisis is key to the Science of Reading movement

    Key points:

    As someone who’s dedicated my career to advancing the Science of Reading movement, I’ve seen firsthand what it takes to help every child become a strong, fluent reader. We’ve made incredible strides in shifting the conversation toward evidence-based instruction, but I know we’re at a critical inflection point. While we–obviously–continue our work helping schools and districts adopt SOR, there’s an issue that stands in the way of real, sustained, progress: the staffing crisis and leadership churn that are leaving our educators overwhelmed and skeptical toward “change.” Without addressing these deeper structural issues, we risk stalling the momentum we’ve worked so hard to build.

    The hidden costs of constant turnover

    The data on teacher and leader turnover is bleak, and I’ve seen how it undermines the long-term commitment needed for any meaningful change. Consider this: Roughly 1 in 6 teachers won’t return to the same classroom next year, and nearly half of new teachers leave within their first five years. This constant churn is a massive financial burden on districts, costing an estimated $20,000 per teacher to recruit, hire, and onboard. But the real cost is the human one. Every time a new leader or teacher steps in, the hard-won progress on a literacy initiative can be jeopardized.

    I’ve watched districts spend years building momentum for the Science of Reading, providing extensive training and resources, only to see a new superintendent or principal arrive with a new set of priorities. This “leader wobble” can pull the rug out from under an initiative mid-stream. It’s especially frustrating when a new leader decides a program has had “plenty of professional learning” without taking the time to audit its impact. This lack of continuity completely disrupts the 3-5 years it takes for an initiative to truly take hold, especially because new teachers often arrive with a knowledge gap, as only about one-quarter of teacher preparation programs teach the Science of Reading. We can’t build on a foundation that’s constantly shifting.

    Overwhelmed by “initiative fatigue”

    I know what it feels like to have too much on your plate. Teachers, already juggling countless instructional materials, often see each new program not as a solution but as one more thing to learn, implement, and manage. Instead of excitement, there’s skepticism–this is initiative fatigue, and it can stall real progress. I’ve seen it firsthand; one large district I worked with rolled out new reading, math, and phonics resources all at once.

    To prevent this, we need to follow the principle of “pull weeds to plant flowers.” Being critical, informed consumers of resources means choosing flowers (materials) that are:

    • Supported by high-quality, third-party research
    • Aligned across all tiers of instruction
    • Versatile enough to meet varied student needs
    • Teacher-friendly, with clear guidance and instructional dialogue
    • Culturally relevant, reflecting the diverse backgrounds of students

    Now, even when a resource meets these standards, adoption shouldn’t be additive. Teachers can’t layer new tools on top of old ones. To see real change, old resources must be replaced with better ones. Educators need solutions that provide a unified, research-backed framework across all tiers, giving teachers clarity, support, and a path to sustainable student progress.

    Building a stable environment for sustained change

    So, how do we create the stable environment needed to support our educators? It starts with leadership that is in it for the long game. We need to mitigate turnover by using data to understand why teachers are leaving and then acting on that feedback. Strengthening mentorship, clarifying career pathways, and improving school culture are all crucial steps.

    Beyond just retaining staff, leaders must foster a culture of sustained commitment. It’s not enough to have a few “islands of excellence” where a handful of teachers are getting great results.

    We need system-wide adoption. This requires strong leaders to balance support and accountability. I’ve seen how collaborative teams, engaged in problem-solving and data-based decision-making, can transform a school. When teachers see students as “our students” and not just “my students,” shared ownership grows.

    A leader’s job is to protect and sustain this vision, making sure the essential supports–like collaborative planning time, ongoing professional development, and in-classroom coaching–are in place. But sustaining change goes beyond daily management; it requires building deep capacity so the work continues even if leadership shifts. This means hiring, training, and retaining strong educators, investing in future leaders, and ensuring committed advocates are part of the implementation team. It also requires creating a detailed, actionable roadmap, with budgets clearly allocated and accountability measures established, so that any initiative isn’t just a short-term priority but a long-term promise. By embedding these structures, leaders can secure continuity, maintain momentum, and ensure that every step forward in literacy translates into lasting gains for students.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link