Blog

  • Q&A with Vanessa Walker – The Cengage Blog

    Q&A with Vanessa Walker – The Cengage Blog

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    We recently had the opportunity to talk with Vanessa Walker, new co-author of “Major Problems in American History, Volume I,” 5th edition. In this Q&A, Professor Walker discusses her background, why she’s thrilled to be a part of the “Major Problems” series and what sets this text apart from the crowd.

    Tell us a little bit about yourself and your background. 

    I am the Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History at Amherst College where I teach classes on US foreign relations, politics, social movements and the history and politics of human rights. I became interested in these topics as an undergraduate student at Whitman College, where I wrote my thesis on Carter’s human rights policy, a subject that became my dissertation topic at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I published my first book, “Principles in Power: Latin America and the Politics of US Human Rights Diplomacy” with Cornell University Press in 2020, and have written several articles on the Carter administration’s foreign policy and the role of nongovernment activists in influencing high level diplomacy. I live in Western Massachusetts with my husband, who is also a historian, and our two kids. I love to spend a lot of time outdoors hiking, skiing and swimming in lakes, especially in Vermont.

    Why were you excited to join the Major Problems in American History series as a co-author?

    I was excited to join the “Major Problems” series because I have used these volumes in the classroom, both as a student and as an instructor. As a student, I remember using them in my college history courses, relying on the competing perspectives in classroom debates, and combing through the documents and essays when writing my papers. When I began teaching, I turned to them again as a way to introduce my students to the ways historians think, and to help me curate and frame the core themes and ideas I wanted to integrate into my class. These volumes reflect the way I approach my teaching and learning, so I was excited to shape that for another generation of students and faculty.

    History encompasses such a vast array of topics. In what ways does your textbook offer something truly unique and differentiating to the field?

    I think one of the distinctive features of “Major Problems in American History” is in its name. Rather than synthesizing debates and interpretations, or offering a consensus position on a topic, this edition highlights the scholarly conversation and raw materials that comprise the fabric of producing historical knowledge. The text does not attempt to be comprehensive. Instead, by focusing on core debates within the field, it allows students to develop their own interpretations, and for teachers to challenge dominant or singular narratives and perspectives on complex topics and issues.

    Given the ever-evolving nature of history, how does your textbook discuss the complexities of current events and modern issues to remain relevant and impactful for students, and what are they?

    This edition engages with the creation of modern America. By studying its foundations and evolution, students unavoidably confront how many of the issues and debates we think of as contemporary problems have much deeper roots. The study of history is inherently one that involves change over time. Highlighting themes of gender, race, economic security and democratic inclusion, this volume invites students to consider major inflection points and persistent dynamics that have defined the modern United States.

    How do you see this textbook deepening students’ understanding of history and fostering a more active engagement with its core concepts?

    “Major Problems in American History,” by design, demands that students move away from the idea that history is the practice of memorizing names and dates. This text instead involves them in the process of integrating and prioritizing competing interpretations and arguments. Each chapter invites students to explore how different figures viewed critical moments and ideas, and really think about the assumptions and experiences that might give rise to divergent interpretations.

    With learners from diverse academic backgrounds, how does Major Problems in American History accommodate both those majoring in history and those encountering it through general education?

    Interpretation of sources—both primary and secondary—depends on a basic knowledge to frame and contextualize the issues at play. To support students regardless of their expertise, we have expanded the introductory essays to each chapter. We also provide a timeline for each chapter, highlighting key events and relevant dates. Additionally, we situate the secondary sources within broader themes and scholarly debates central to the chapter’s topic. These elements, together, empower students to explore primary and secondary sources, so they can become aware of their broader settings and the important dynamics at play.

    What do you hope instructors will take away from this textbook that will enhance their teaching?

    With this edition, we’ve given more focus to the idea of one or two “major problems” to shape the conversations around each chapter’s historical moment or theme. We hope this will provide instructors with the ability to go deeper into crucial topics, while also bringing in their own areas of expertise to broaden out the themes and ideas highlighted in each chapter. We’ve also included more primary sources that capture voices outside of government, which are often harder to find. Additionally, we’ve also increased the number of images to provide greater diversity of primary source materials.

    Lastly, what do you hope is the most significant takeaway students will carry with them after using your textbook?

    I hope that students will come away with an awareness that history, fundamentally, is about the ability to take in and explore different peoples’ perspectives, which might be radically different than their own. I believe that exercising critical thinking about the past can shed new light on assumptions and biases attached to current problems and issues. I believe that grappling with debates presented in the text will help students develop the skills and awareness necessary to apply these same approaches beyond their study of history. Additionally, I hope it will allow them to productively engage those who hold fundamentally different opinions, and use that as a foundation for pursuing their interests outside of the classroom.

     

    Vanessa Walker is the Gordon Levin Associate Professor of Diplomatic History at Amherst College, where she teaches classes on U.S. politics, foreign relations and human rights. She received her B.A. from Whitman College and her M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is the author of “Principles in Power: Latin America and the Politics of U.S. Human Rights Diplomacy” (Cornell University Press, 2020), and co-author of “Major Problems in American History, Volume I” 5e. She is currently working on a project exploring U.S. domestic human rights campaign as a response to the decline of the liberal state in the 1970s.

     

    Interested in learning more about “Major Problems in American History”? Explore this new edition for your history course.

     

    Source link

  • Bridging borders in knowledge: the internationalisation of Chinese social sciences

    Bridging borders in knowledge: the internationalisation of Chinese social sciences

    by Márton Demeter, Manuel Goyanes, Gergő Háló and Xin Xu

    The dynamics of Chinese social sciences are shifting rapidly. As policies aim to balance domestic priorities with global integration, the interplay between China’s academic output and its international reception highlights critical challenges and opportunities. In a recent study published in Policy Reviews in Higher Education, we analyzed 8,962 publications by the top 500 most productive China-affiliated scholars in Economics, Education, and Political Science between 2016 and 2020.

    Uneven impacts across disciplines

    Our analysis reveals that most Chinese-authored works in these disciplines are published in Western-edited journals. Political Science publications often focus on China-specific topics, creating what may be interpreted as intellectual silos.

    By contrast, Economics stands out for its significant global impact, with Chinese scholars’ publications frequently outpacing the citation rates of their Western peers. Meanwhile, Education and Political Science publications from China generally attract fewer citations compared to those from the U.S., U.K., and Germany.

    Why does Economics perform so well? The field’s emphasis on data-driven, globally relevant research – addressing topics like economic policy, market dynamics, and financial crises – positions it effectively within international discourse. Substantial funding and resources further strengthen Economics’ visibility and impact.

    In contrast, Education often highlights region-specific practices that may resonate less with a global audience, while Political Science is constrained by political sensitivities and limited opportunities for broad international collaboration.

    Patterns of collaboration

    Collaboration offers another perspective of Chinese academia’s strengths and limitations. Scholars in Economics and Education often engage in diverse partnerships, with strong connections to both Western and Asian institutions. In contrast, Political Science remains more insular, with most co-authorships occurring within mainland China. This inward focus may restrict the field’s integration into global academic conversations.

    At an institutional level, hybrid collaborations – combining domestic and international partnerships – highlight China’s strategic approach to bridging local and global aspirations. However, the predominance of Western collaborators, particularly from the United States, underscores a continued reliance on established academic hubs.

    The duality of “siloed internationalisation”

    A significant finding of our study is the duality evident in Political Science research: while these publications often appear in international journals, their focus on China-specific issues reflects a form of “scientific nationalism”. This approach limits their global engagement, confining them to niche scholarly communities rather than positioning them as contributors to broader, international dialogues.

    The “international in format but national in essence” approach underscores a broader challenge for Chinese academia. It must navigate the tension between adhering to global visibility standards while championing non-Western perspectives and priorities.

    Policy and practical implications

    Our findings also carry critical implications for policymakers, institutions, and global academic networks. For China, fostering more diverse collaborations – beyond traditional Western partners – can reduce overreliance on dominant paradigms and contribute to a more equitable global knowledge production system. Initiatives with an emphasis on partnerships with Asia-Pacific, Africa, and Eastern Europe, could play a key role in reshaping these dynamics.

    We believe that, for the global academic community, greater inclusivity requires deliberate efforts to decenter Western paradigms. Platforms that ensure equitable participation and strategies to protect collaborations from geopolitical tensions are vital for sustaining open and impactful scientific exchange.

    Looking forward

    The field of Economics exemplifies how targeted investment and international integration can amplify visibility and impact. To replicate this success in Education and Political Science, expanding international collaboration and addressing thematic silos are essential. At the same time, global academic networks must also embrace diverse perspectives to ensure that voices from regions like China enrich rather than merely adapt to dominant discourses.

    Importantly, in an era of geopolitical uncertainty, research can serve as a vital conduit for mutual understanding and collaboration. By prioritising equitable partnerships and sustaining global dialogue, we can work toward a more inclusive and, therefore, more resilient academic ecosystem.

    Our study offers practical guidance for addressing the challenges of internationalization in Chinese social sciences, providing valuable tools for scholars, institutions, and policymakers working to advance global knowledge production.

    For more details, explore our full paper:

    Demeter, M, Goyanes, M. Háló, G and Xu, X (2024) ‘The Internationalisation of Chinese Social Sciences Research: Publication, Collaboration, and Citation Patterns in Economics, Education, and Political Science’ https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2024.2438240.

    Márton Demeter is a Full Professor at the University of Public Service, Budapest at the Department of Social Communication, and he is the Head of Department for Science Strategy. He has extensively published on academic knowledge production in communication studies and beyond.

    Manuel Goyanes serves as Associate Professor of Research Methods at Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. His interdisciplinary work revolves around theoretically designing, and empirically testing, cutting-edge quantitative and qualitative methodological procedures to scientifically address challenging aspects of social science inquiry 

    Gergő Háló, an assistant professor at the National University of Public Service Budapest, specialises in socio-critical studies of geopolitical and gender inequalities in science, academic performance, research assessment frameworks, and higher education policies.

    Xin Xu is a Departmental Lecturer in Higher/Tertiary Education at the Department of Education, University of Oxford, and the deputy director of the Centre for Skills, Knowledge, and Organisational Performance (SKOPE). Her research focuses on tertiary education and the research on research.

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • What does Christmas shopping have to do with higher education?

    What does Christmas shopping have to do with higher education?

    For the time being, John Cater is the longest-serving Vice-Chancellor in UK higher education, having held his current post for approaching 32 years. He hands over the reins at Edge Hill University at the end of January 2025. In the blog below he finds parallels between what is happening in the high street and in the university sector…

    This week Mark Allen, the Chief Executive of Land Securities, announced that his company had paid £490m for a 92% stake in Liverpool One, the shopping centre. In quotes, he explained that the top one per cent of UK retail shopping destinations provide access to 30 per cent of all in-store retail spend, “which is why we continue to see brands focus on fewer but bigger and better stores in the best locations”.

    You may well ask, ‘What has this to do with higher education?’ First, there is a tangential link, in that Mark Allen is a former Chief Executive of Unite Students, the sector’s largest housing provider and a company that has, indeed, sought to maximise access to student residential spend and in the ‘best’ locations, typically cities with universities that are part of the perceptual elite.

    But are we seeing this in higher education too? Any graph of higher education participation since the removal of the student number cap in 2015 has seen an increasing bifurcation between high-tariff institutions and, initially, low and, more recently, mid-tariff institutions. If you’re in the latter categories and you look at the 2024 intake data, the new cohort is in the sector, just not, in all probability, in your institution.

    So, are we seeing Land Securities’ retail revolution, a race to the best locations, a clear focus of demand, in higher education? A decade of ‘spending’ decisions by each new intake, their friends, families and schools and colleges – ‘where do I go to draw down my loan?’ – says so. The UCAS 2024 End of Cycle data, as ever ably summarised by David Kernohan for Wonkhe, makes it clear that “higher tariff providers have been fishing in deeper waters”, with both lower tariff offers and a more flexible approach to clearing. And this is clearly understood by those making ‘purchasing’ decisions, with the exponential growth of self-release highlighting (perceived) trading-up.

    With no constraints on an institution’s numbers, this trend appears inexorable, whilst a constraint on numbers would constitute a significant reduction in choice. There may be a middle road, a managed market, with limitations on the pace of growth, possibly determined by discipline, but the howls of protest would reverberate, particularly in elements of the media, constituency postbags and selective schools. And, whilst the Department for Education has indicated that it is no longer using Russell Group entries as a measure of a school’s success, the Treasury has yet to mirror that action.

    The crunch is coming. With very few exceptions, university sustainability depends on two variables, number and price. The failure to secure, at least to date, a five-year index-linked settlement has curtailed price, and, with it, investment and forward planning. And a broadly static market, with no signs of an increase in all-age participation, is reflected in curtailed demand and fewer numbers.

    From 2030 the age cohort declines by one-sixth. Demand for traditional higher education is broadly static and increasingly differentiated by tariff. Innovation, be it Lifelong Learning or apprenticeships, has yet to grip the market.

    In retail investment has headed in two directions, niche providers in up-market ‘village’ style communities, whilst the big city retail brands, such as those in Liverpool One, acquire floor space and greater market penetration. Quoted companies pay nine figure sums for a piece of the big city pie, whilst non-niche players, the poor, the periphery, the ‘red wall’ towns, suffer.

    Is this relevant to higher education? I believe so. Demand for higher education is broadly static and increasingly concentrated in a smaller number of providers. In-migration is severely constrained and the number of UK-resident eighteen-year-olds is heading towards a cliff edge.

    I have written previously on the possible shape of higher education in the coming decade. Trifurcation: a three-way split. A perceptual elite offering three-year away from home residential degrees. Sub-regional providers closely tied to further education, anchor institutions in their communities. And, a (re-) emergence of global online players in the education marketplace, with strong brands and an almost uncapped resource; providers with the capacity, largely unfettered, to shape opinions and behaviours on whim.

    Source link

  • The class gap in the civic map

    The class gap in the civic map

    Albert Hill Working Men’s Club and Institute has played an important role in my life.

    It’s the place where my parents had their wedding reception. My christening party was held in its concert room. Friends of mine, uncles, and acquaintances, have had their wakes with luke warm pork-pies and pints of Magent in the bar. The day I got my membership to the club was a milestone into adulthood and at thirty one I suspect I am still the youngest member.

    Temperance and temperament

    The working man’s club emerged through colliding strains of the temperance movement as an alternative to the gin bars of the 1800s, the rise of the industrial working classes and their desire for betterment, and as a hub for leisure, sports, lectures, and other recreational activity. In university parlance we often talk of local catalysts but Albert Hill has maintained a generation of allotments for leek growing competitions, brought money into local economies through the touring domino tournaments, and kept hundreds if not thousands of self-employed singers, caterers, and turns in business.

    And they would not be pretentious enough to call themselves it but it is a civic institution. As the writer Devika Rao has said on the decline of these kinds of third spaces that are neither home nor work “Where do you go if you are not at school, work or home? For some, the answer is, well, nowhere.” The civic agenda does not quite know how to deal with these kinds of third spaces.

    It’s not that universities are not doing things which directly benefit the drinkers of Albert Hill. Universities are providing nursery places, improving school performance, supporting sustainability projects, and much more between. These things are exceptionally valuable, if executed well will change a place, and in an era of constrained university spending are admirable. At the same time, like the temperance campaigners of the 1800s, projects can sometimes feel like telling a general population to know what is good for them. As recent polling by Public First demonstrates a plurality of the public know not much or very little about what their local university does for the local area.

    Further research by Public First shows people see the place where they live as the locus of their identity. Not the United Kingdom, not England, and certainly not Europe, but the actual places they live. The very idea of levelling up (remember that) is tied to both a desire to revitalise a place and an industrial heritage in places that have been left ashore with the tides of globalisation.

    People and their place

    The challenge is that universities are not just local institutions but global ones. Inevitably, this means that they will do things which are unfamiliar to populations that are less internationally mobile. David Goodhart, once darling of the liberal media now feted immigration sceptic, may argue this is the divide between nowheres and somewheres. The somewheres being people rooted in their local places, often not university educated, with small c conservative views. The nowheres being the mobile, less rooted, and highly educated. If the civic agenda is anything it is an attempt to bridge the education faultline through the university.

    This also means that universities do university coded things in their civic agenda. There is not a focussed civic university agenda about revitalising and supporting working men’s clubs, snooker halls, pubs, places of worship, community centres, small music venues, local football teams, or, to a lesser extent, saving the local high street. It’s legitimate to argue that this isn’t the business of universities but this is no more or less true than partnering with the local museum, art gallery, or literature festival.

    And this is perhaps the second challenge. Value, and the things worth spending public money on that aren’t education and teaching, are often middle class coded. This isn’t to say universities aren’t minded of their impacts on working-class communities. From supporting a just transition, to school programmes, free nursery places, and so on, they clearly are. It’s more that the kind of intangible, culturally coded, doing nice things for an area, can feel middle class.

    Again, to be absolutely clear, it’s not that working-class people don’t enjoy literature, art, and culture. This is obviously the case and it’s tedious to suggest otherwise. It’s more about the range of things universities choose to invest in. And, whisper it, it’s because many of these working-class spaces are also full of people who share views that are anathema to universities. They are often less in favour of immigration, less socially liberal, and more opposed to high levels of public spending on the things universities do. To organise in those spaces is to not organise with people that aren’t aware of universities but with people that are aware of universities and simply don’t always like them that much.

    Pot and trench leeks

    This leaves the fundamental challenge of the extent to which universities responsibility extends to areas where they have no direct mission, with individuals that may never join in their activity, and with activities they do not have the cultural cache to do authentically. Even if universities thought maintaining a working-class culture was their role it’s not even that clear what they would actually do.

    Ambiguity doesn’t mean universities can vacate the space. The politics of young white men is flipping the political map. We know there is an increasing pull toward the far right, they are less likely to receive a university education than nearly any other group, and they are more likely to stay in the places they were born. To entirely leave this space is to say universities have no place in their lives which is to tacitly acknowledge that universities’ civic commitments are partial.

    Universities also cannot dictate the civic institutions they have. It’s not their role to tell their populations where to work, live, love, study, enjoy their time, and just hang out. The role of the civic university agenda is not to extend the university into the world but to extend the world into the university. The people who have the most to gain from universities being civically involved are often the least likely to know what the university is or what it does.

    The civic agenda has spurred universities toward a greater consciousness of their places and achieved practical things. The way activities are coded is not to say that these activities are not valuable but it is to say that the authorial intent of civic agendas of economic growth and cultural enrichment hit the reality of communities that feel alienated from institutions generally not just the university.

    If universities are to lead on growth and capture momentum with this new government they have to demonstrate they can support growth everywhere. The success of the civic agenda is not just about days spent in museums, hours of tutoring, or student spending. It is also whether the people that once felt like their university had nothing for them now does.

    Source link

  • Universities need leaders at every level

    Universities need leaders at every level

    It may be the season for giving. However, it looks unlikely that universities will find a gift-wrapped solution to their financial worries under the tree anytime soon.

    There are busy times ahead for the higher education sector, what with boosting the economy, solving the evils of social injustice, and restoring civic accord to our troubled nation – as the government appears to expect. Realistically, however, most higher education institutions will be operating with reduced numbers of employees and leaner resources, for the foreseeable future. So, it is not entirely clear how this all adds up.

    In a “more for less” environment, the institutions that will survive, perhaps even thrive, will be those that are able to get the very best out of each individual. What universities urgently need, therefore, is outstanding, engaged leadership.

    Beyond the executive suite

    But just to be clear, when I say “leadership”, I am not talking about stronger, tougher, more detailed decision-making at the top. With the best will in the world, the ten people who sit in the executive suite on a Tuesday morning with a pot of coffee can only do so much.

    However, what can have a transformative impact on organisations is a willingness to mobilise, align and empower a distributed network of leaders at every level of an organisation to motivate, support and develop their staff, so that everyone can achieve more.

    This isn’t a new idea. From Peter Drucker in the 1960s, through to more recent work by Martin Seligmann, Michael West, Brené Brown, and many others, the published wisdom on organisational psychology tends to show that command-and-control styles of directive authority are less effective than positive and collaborative methods of leading that harness knowledge and creativity across an organisation. This is especially so when responding to cultural issues and “wicked problems”. We might have a few of those.

    This is not to say that everyone should get a vote on everything all the time. Nevertheless, the working principle that, within agreed limits, decisions should be taken as close as possible to the actual activity is a good one – and might well save time, money and trouble.

    Leadership skills

    Nobody says this is simple. Devolving decision-making calls for high levels of trust, skill and communication across leadership teams and for attention to personal development. The Institute of Leadership, a membership organisation with 75 years of experience in this game, identifies 49 principles of leadership, ranging from adaptability, and dealing with conflict, to ethics, managing upwards and resilience. (Anyone who has ever chaired a department meeting will probably have required most of these abilities before reaching item four on the agenda.)

    Cappfinity, a global talent lifecycle management company, deeply embedded in global industry with 20 years of research, lists no fewer than 80 key workspace skills, highlighting eight “altitude leadership” strengths: agile thinking, relationship navigation, accountability, self-insight, inclusive leadership, courage, strategic vision and change facilitation. Surely, more of these things in daily university life could only help, whatever the next big policy change might be.

    As a sector, and with some external prompting, universities and other higher education providers have recently become much better at articulating, assessing and developing employability skills for students.

    However, there’s still some way to go on helping staff to identify, understand and optimise their technical, cognitive and behavioural strengths (to borrow a taxonomy from Cappfinity). Of course, some colleagues already display these skills; others clearly need to learn them. All too often, people in our organisations do have remarkable qualities and abilities, but don’t have the opportunities or the motivation to use them. These unrealised strengths constitute a potentially rich resource for universities, especially when other kinds of resource are in short supply.

    Abi Parker of Cappfinity points out that tapping into these abilities can make a profound difference:

    With skills development, at every level, everything starts with self-insight. What’s special about leadership development is that any positive movement is amplified, meaning that as a lever for improving organisational effectiveness, leadership development is a great place to start. This is especially true in difficult times.

    The marzipan layer

    If only there was a pan-institutional network of experienced colleagues able to communicate effectively, to take responsibility at local level, to promote strategic objectives, to motivate and support employees, and to innovate appropriately without excessive investment or risk.

    Ah, yes. Right. So, the good news is that universities already have these highly developed internal structures in both academic and professional services teams, in the form of deans, directors, heads, section leads and their deputies. The bad news is that our large, bureaucratic institutions can sometimes ignore and elide what is going on at this level, or these leaders can end up overwhelmed and discouraged, unsure how to manage the apparently competing demands of their own staff and the senior team.

    As Mark Smith, vice chancellor at the University of Southampton, observes:

    The crucial layer of leadership in an institution is the senior leadership of academic departments and professional service directorates. If this layer is not trusted, empowered and sufficiently skilled there is relatively little those further up can do to bring about change.

    This “marzipan layer”, as governance adviser Seamus Gillen of Value Alpha has memorably described it, may become more important than ever as universities navigate the more-for-less maze that lies ahead.

    Not everyone loves marzipan, I know, but something has to hold together the crusty royal icing and the crumbly yet delicious fruit cake – just as someone has to localise change initiatives and restructures, to support individuals through difficult contract negotiations, to locate and realise efficiencies, to manage workloads, to resolve conflicts, and to ensure that somehow, against all odds, students continue to get the best possible education.

    Thinking more expansively, if universities really are going to play a greater role in society, boost economic growth, drive new knowledge and be more active in cities and regions – I believe and hope they can – then it will be at the level of local leadership that new partnerships will be maintained, inequalities will be gradually eroded, and innovative models for education delivery will evolve.

    As Gillen observes, for some people, the marzipan is the best bit:

    Just because it’s squeezed in the middle doesn’t mean it’s all bad. If Deans and ‘Heads of’ could be empowered, and feel empowered, they could, would and can transform an institution’s future.

    So, as you cut yourself a festive slice, consider that nurturing leadership competencies and behaviours at all levels of our knowledge industry might be the smart place to put your time and energy in the year ahead. Developing teams and individuals won’t provide a quick solution, but it will create the conditions from which future solutions for the sector can emerge. After all, we’re in the education business. Enabling and empowering people is what we do.

    Source link

  • Podcast special: Writing for Wonkhe

    Podcast special: Writing for Wonkhe

    In this special seasonal edition of the Wonkhe Show, we discuss how you can contribute to the higher education debate by writing for the site.

    Plus we discuss the importance of communicating academic and professional insights to wider audiences, and we take you inside our editorial process – which is all about clear arguments and diverse perspectives.

    With Adam Matthews, Senior Research Fellow at the School of Education at the University of Birmingham, Michael Salmon, News Editor at Wonkhe, David Kernohan, Deputy Editor at Wonkhe and presented by Debbie McVitty, Editor at Wonkhe.

    Higher Education Policy into Practice (Online) PGCert

    Writing for Wonkhe

    Source link

  • LAWSUIT: Videographers sue to overturn National Parks Service arbitrary permit scheme

    LAWSUIT: Videographers sue to overturn National Parks Service arbitrary permit scheme

    JACKSON HOLE, Wy. Dec. 18, 2024 — Picture three people standing next to each other in Yellowstone National Park. One’s an ordinary tourist, one’s a news reporter, and the third’s a documentary filmmaker. They’re all filming Old Faithful, using the exact same iPhone, and without disturbing anyone around them.

    Under federal law, the tourist and the reporter are doing nothing wrong. But the documentarian could face heavy fines — even jail time.

    That’s why the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression today filed a lawsuit on behalf of nature and sports photographers and filmmakers Alexander Rienzie and Connor Burkesmith. FIRE’s suit aims to overturn the National Park Service’s onerous, arbitrary, and unconstitutional permit-and-fee scheme that charges Americans for the right to film in public spaces.

    “The national parks belong to the American public,” said FIRE Chief Counsel Bob Corn-Revere. “If you have a right to be there, you have a right to film there. The federal government can’t tax Americans to exercise their constitutional rights.”

    Joining FIRE’s lawsuit as co-counsel and co-plaintiffs is the National Press Photographers Association, which represents thousands of visual journalists, including Alex and Connor. Although the NPS exempts filming for “news-gathering” from its permit scheme, the NPPA has for years argued that the law imposes an unfair burden on photographers and filmographers, who can’t always know ahead of time who they plan to sell their work to, or even if they plan to sell it at all.

    “For decades, the National Press Photographers Association has been working to support the rights of visual journalists and other photographers to document the beauty of our natural resources and the people who visit and care for them in our national parks,” said NPPA President Carey Wagner. “It is unfortunate that the actions and policies of the National Park Service have never fully respected the First Amendment rights of photographers, and it’s even more disappointing that it has become necessary to take the Park Service to court in order to resolve our members’ concerns. NPPA is enormously grateful to FIRE for taking on this case on behalf of all photographers.”

    Alex and Connor wanted to film in Grand Teton National Park in September to document an attempt by an athlete to break the record for the fastest climb up the Grand Teton. They planned to have only two or three people, using small handheld cameras and tripods, on the 16-mile route for the shoot. In fact, to keep up with the fast pace of the speedrun, they would carry less gear than the typical climber going up the mountain.


    But under current law, whether a filmmaker needs a permit to film in a national park doesn’t depend on the amount of gear they bring or how disruptive filming might be. The only thing that matters is whether their purpose is “commercial.” The rule could apply to filming a big blockbuster movie near the Grand Canyon (where the scale of the project might justify a permit requirement), but also to a small-time YouTuber who posts a video of their jog through the National Mall.

    “Congress wanted to keep big Hollywood productions from taking over the parks and keeping others from enjoying their natural beauty,” said FIRE attorney Daniel Ortner. “But the current law wasn’t written for a world where anyone with a smartphone has a film studio in their pocket.”

    Alex and Connor knew they might use the footage to produce a documentary film, so they filed for a permit and explained how small their impact would be. But NPS employees have wide and unquestioned discretion under the law to deny permits. NPS denied the permit on the grounds that it could turn the speedrun into a “competitive event”— and pocketed the non-refundable $325 application fee.

    “Independent filmmakers don’t have the resources of the big production companies,” said Connor. “It’s a gut punch every time we throw down hundreds of dollars, only to be denied permits for reasons that are vague, arbitrary, and unfair. As someone who needs to film outdoor sports where they happen, it’s a threat to my livelihood.”

    COURTESY PHOTOS OF ALEX AND CONNOR FOR MEDIA USE

    Alex and Connor were forced to choose between risking prosecution, or letting a potentially historic event go undocumented. For dedicated documentarians like themselves, it was an easy choice: They filmed without the permit in September.

    “In the entire time we were up there, we didn’t get in the way of anyone else’s enjoyment of Grand Teton,” said Alex. “To us, the Grand is a very special mountain that we’ve spent countless hours exploring.”

    An NPS spokesperson later announced they had determined that Alex and Connor’s actions didn’t meet all the criteria for charges—but if their work had been featured “in a commercial or a catalog or something like that,” it would be “less of a gray area.” Far from settling the issue, the NPS statement effectively signaled that Alex and Connor could still face charges if they ever sell or use their footage.

    FIRE and the NPPA are seeking an injunction in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming to prevent that outcome, and to put a permanent end to a system where individual park employees can deny Americans their First Amendment rights on a whim.

    “I chose this line of work because I love the national parks,” said Connor. “Photographers and videographers are the best advocates the parks have; the more people see and understand their unique value, the stronger their desire to protect them. It’s time for the Park Service to stop throwing up roadblocks and work with us, not against us.”

    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.

    CONTACT:

    Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]

    Source link

  • We answer your free speech questions

    We answer your free speech questions

    FIRE staffers take your questions on the TikTok ban, mandatory
    DEI statements, the Kids Online Safety Act, Trump vs. the media,
    and more.

    Joining us:

    • Ari Cohn, lead counsel for tech policy

    • Robert Shibley, special counsel for campus advocacy

    • Will Creeley, legal director

    This webinar was open to the public. Future monthly FIRE Member
    Webinars will not be. Become a paid subscriber today
    to receive invitations to future live webinars.

    If you became a FIRE Member
    through a donation to FIRE at thefire.org and would like access to Substack’s paid
    subscriber podcast feed, please email [email protected].

    Timestamps:

    00:00 Intro

    00:52 Donate to
    FIRE    !

    02:49 TikTok ban

    10:01 Ari’s work as tech policy lead counsel

    12:03 Mandatory DEI statements at universities

    15:19 How does FIRE address forced speech?

    18:17 Texas’ age verification law

    24:35 Would government social media bans for minors be a First
    Amendment violation?

    33:48 Online age verification

    35:17 First Amendment violations while making public comments
    during city council/school board public meetings

    37:25: Edison, New Jersey city council case

    39:48 FIRE’s role in educating Americans

    41:55 If social media addiction cannot be dealt with like drugs,
    how can it be dealt with?

    43:34 “Pessimists Archive” Substack and moral panics

    45:27 Trump and the media

    51:23 Gary Gadwa case

    52:49 How to distinguish the freedom of speech versus freedom
    from social consequences?

    55:53 Free speech culture is a “mushy concept”

    57:58 ABC settlement with Trump

    01:01:27 Nico’s upcoming book!

    01:02:32 FIRE and K-12 education

    01:04:40 Outro

    Show notes:

    “TikTok Inc. and ByteDance LTD. v. Merrick B. Garland, in his
    official capacity as attorney general of the United States    ”
    (D.C. 2024)

    “Opinion: The TikTok court case has staggering implications for
    free speech in America    ” L.A. Times (2024)

    H.B. No. 1181 (Tex. 2023; Texas age-verification
    law)

    “The Anxious Generation” Jonathan Haidt (2024)

    S. 1409 – Kids Online Safety Act (2023-2024)

    American Amusement MacH. Ass’n v. Kendrick (Ind.
    2000)

    “Edison Township, New Jersey: Town Council bans props, including
    the U.S. flag and Constitution, at council meetings    ” FIRE
    (2024)

    “LAWSUIT: Arizona mom sues city after arrest for criticizing
    government lawyer’s pay    ” FIRE (2024)

    “President Donald J. Trump v. J. Ann Selzer, Selzer & Company,
    Des Moines Register and Tribune company, and Gannett Co.,
    Inc.    ” (2024)

    “Trump v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.”
    (2024)

    “New Jersey slaps down censorship with anti-SLAPP
    legislation    ” FIRE (2023)

    “FIRE defends Idaho conservation officer sued for criticizing
    wealthy ranch owner’s airstrip permit    ” FIRE (2023)

    “On Liberty” John Stuart Mill (1859)

    “Home Depot cashier fired over Facebook comment about Trump
    shooting    ” Newsweek (2024)

    “Free speech culture, Elon Musk, and Twitter” FIRE
    (2022)

    “Questions ABC News should answer following the $16 million
    Trump settlement    ” Columbia Journalism Review (2024)

    “Appellants’ opening brief — B.A., et al. v. Tri County Area
    Schools, et al.    ” FIRE (2024)

    Transcript:

    *Unedited transcript and edited transcript for Substack will
    be available later in the week!

    Source link

  • Free Social Skills Worksheets (2024)

    Free Social Skills Worksheets (2024)

    The following free social skills worksheets are designed to help children, people with learning disabilities, clients, and even adults to actively reflect on their skills in social situations.

    The worksheets cover various scenarios and sub-skills, including:

    • Conversation starters
    • Listening skills
    • Personal space
    • Social problem-solving
    • Giving and receiving compliments

    When printing, you might want to select “shrink to fit” to ensure an optimal output.

    License and Terms of Use: All printables are provided for non-commercial personal and classroom use only, not for resale or distribution. All rights reserved.

    Social Skills Worksheets

    check mark Designed by Chris

    Conversation Starters Worksheet

    Use this version for getting students to actively reflect on how to start a conversation and interact appropriately with others verbally.

    social skills worksheet

    check mark Designed by Chris

    Listening Skills Worksheet

    Use this version to get students to think about active listening skills and brainstorm the best ways to respond to people when listening to them in order to absorb what they’re saying.

    social skills worksheet

    check mark Designed by Chris

    Personal Space Worksheet

    Use this version to help people to understand how to give people personal space and maintain an appropriate distance in various social situations.

    social skills worksheet

    check mark Designed by Chris

    Social Problem Solving Worksheet

    This version is ideal for helping people to deal with scenarios where someone may lose their temper. The scenarios discuss various appropriate ways to respond to potentially hairy situations.

    social skills worksheet

    check mark Designed by Chris

    Giving and Receiving Compliments

    Use this piece to brainstorm ways to give and receive compliments in various situations. Students must sort between various potential responses to compliment and ways to give compliments.

    social skills worksheet

    check mark Designed by Chris

    Social Skills Checklist

    This checklist gets students to reflect on social skills they’ve used in the past week, and then to think about their strengths and areas for improvement.

    Thanks for checking out these worksheets. If you want to brainstorm different examples of social skills, read this blog post.


    Chris

    Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

    Source link

  • DHS Issues Final H-1B Modernization Rule

    DHS Issues Final H-1B Modernization Rule

    by CUPA-HR | December 18, 2024

    On December 18, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a final rule to modernize the H-1B visa program, finalizing changes first proposed in October 2023. The rule will take effect on January 17, 2025, introducing significant updates aimed at clarifying the requirements of the H-1B program and improving program efficiency, providing greater benefits and flexibility for petitioners and beneficiaries, and strengthening program integrity measures.

    The final rule responds to comments from a variety of stakeholders, including concerns raised by CUPA-HR and others in a multi-sector joint comment letter signed by 74 organizations and a higher education-focused letter led by the American Council on Education (ACE). Both letters advocated for changes to the definition of a “specialty occupation” and other key areas to ensure the regulations better align with workforce needs. The final rule incorporates feedback from stakeholders and aims to provide clarity while maintaining program integrity.

    Below are highlights of some noteworthy provisions in the final rule and next steps.

    Revised Definition and Criteria for H-1B Specialty Occupations

    The final rule modifies the definition of an H-1B specialty occupation in response to public comments, including those CUPA-HR signed onto in a multi-sector joint comment letter and a higher education-focused letter. DHS clarified that a degree or its equivalent must be “directly related” to the duties of the position, with “directly related” defined as having a logical connection between the degree and the job duties. This change addresses concerns raised in comments that the proposed language could have been misinterpreted to require adjudicators to focus solely on a beneficiary’s specialized studies.

    The rule also permits a range of qualifying degree fields, provided that each field is directly related to the position’s duties. Additionally, DHS removed references to specific degree titles such as “business administration” and “liberal arts” to avoid undue reliance on degree titles. This recognizes that degree titles can vary between institutions and evolve over time, emphasizing the relevance of the degree’s content rather than its name. These changes align with the requests made in the joint comment letter, ensuring that the definition of a specialty occupation is practical and reflective of modern workforce realities.

    Codification of the Deference Policy

    The final rule codifies DHS’s current deference policy, providing greater clarity on how U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjudicators should approach petitions involving the same parties and underlying facts. Under the codified policy, adjudicators are generally required to defer to a prior USCIS determination of eligibility when adjudicating a subsequent Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker. However, deference will not apply if a material error in the prior approval is discovered, or if new material information or a material change impacts the petitioner’s or beneficiary’s eligibility.

    Elimination of the Itinerary Requirement

    The final rule eliminates the itinerary requirement, which previously required petitioners to provide an itinerary detailing the dates and locations of services or training when filing Form I-129. This change addresses concerns that the requirement was largely duplicative of other information already provided in the petition. Eliminating this requirement simplifies the filing process, reducing administrative burdens for petitioners. The change is particularly beneficial for individuals in roles such as medical residencies under H-1B, where work may occur at multiple sites, as it removes unnecessary procedural hurdles without impacting USCIS’s ability to assess eligibility.

    Expanded H-1B Cap Exemptions for Nonprofit and Governmental Research Organizations

    The final rule modestly broadens the scope of H-1B cap exemptions for nonprofit and governmental research organizations, as well as nonprofits affiliated with institutions of higher education. The revised definitions recognize that qualifying organizations may have multiple fundamental activities or missions beyond just research or education. Under the updated regulations, organizations can qualify for a cap exemption if research or education is one of their fundamental activities, even if it is not their primary activity or mission. These changes better align the cap exemption criteria with the diverse roles and structures of modern nonprofit and governmental entities.

    Enhanced Cap-Gap Protections for F-1 Students

    The final rule extends cap-gap protections for F-1 students transitioning to H-1B status. Under the new provision, F-1 students who are beneficiaries of timely filed, nonfrivolous H-1B petitions will receive an automatic extension of their F-1 status and employment authorization through April 1 of the following calendar year. This extension provides up to six additional months of status and work authorization, reducing the risk of lapses in lawful status or employment eligibility while awaiting approval of the change to H-1B status.

    Codification of Site Visit Authority

    The final rule codifies and strengthens the USCIS site visit program, which is administered by the Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) unit. DHS clarifies that refusal to comply with a site visit may result in the denial or revocation of a petition. Additionally, the rule explicitly authorizes DHS to conduct site visits at various locations connected to the H-1B employment, including the primary worksite, third-party worksites, and any other locations where the employee works, has worked, or will work. This provision formalizes long-standing practices and enhances USCIS’s ability to monitor compliance with H-1B program requirements.

    Next Steps

    The rule takes effect on January 17, 2025, just days before the next presidential inauguration. While it is unclear if the incoming Trump administration will seek to modify or withdraw the regulation, the codification of key provisions, such as the deference policy, makes them more difficult to rescind without formal rulemaking.

    Employers should also prepare for the required use of a new edition of Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, on the rule’s effective date. Because there will be no grace period for accepting prior editions of the form, employers should review the preview version, which will be published soon on uscis.gov, to prepare for the transition.



    Source link