Blog

  • Which UK regional economies are most reliant on international students?

    Which UK regional economies are most reliant on international students?

    Join HEPI for a webinar on Thursday 11 December 2025 from 10am to 11am to discuss how universities can strengthen the student voice in governance to mark the launch of our upcoming report, Rethinking the Student Voice. Sign up now to hear our speakers explore the key questions.

    This blog was kindly authored by Emma Prodromou, Global Business Expansion and Immigration Manager, the Mauve Group.

    The quiet engine driving local prosperity

    Across the United Kingdom, international students have quietly become a vital source of regional economic strength. Those who come to the UK to further their education go on to bolster local economies and public services.

    In fact, recent research reveals that UK regions now depend on international talent to a degree few policymakers fully appreciate.

    The growing economic footprint of international students

    The economic impact of international students in the UK surged from £31.3 billion in 2018/19 to £41.9 billion by 2021/22. On average, every parliamentary constituency in Britain benefits by £58 million.

    Some regions rely more heavily than others on this influx of global talent. In Sheffield, for example, international students contribute around £770 million annually to the city’s economy, while across Yorkshire and the Humber, that total exceeds £2.9 billion. In cities such as Leicester, Exeter, Nottingham, and Dundee, universities are among the leading exporters, accounting for up to 15% of total local exports.

    These figures show how universities serve as economic anchors, especially outside the Southeast. International students contribute through tuition, housing, local spending, and by supporting jobs in retail and hospitality.

    Policy pressures and looming challenges

    However, this success story faces rising challenges. Recent government policy changes, including visa restrictions and caps on dependents, threaten to undermine the financial stability of regional institutions. Such measures may disproportionately impact towns where universities are at the heart of the economic life.

    At the same time, course closures are accelerating — nearly a fifth in agriculture and food studies, and around 10–12% in sciences and social sciences. These cuts expose a structural issue: as universities adapt to funding pressures and shifting demand, they risk losing expertise vital to regional and national priorities.

    Competing for global talent

    Faced with financial uncertainty and increasing global competition, UK universities are adopting new strategies to attract international students. Many of these initiatives draw inspiration from the government’s broader Industrial Strategy.

    At the University of Southampton, a £4.35 million investment was secured through the Global Talent Fund, part of a £54 million initiative by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). The aim is to recruit top global researchers to strengthen the UK’s research base and reinforce its global reputation for excellence.

    Building regional innovation hubs

    Other regions are leveraging academic expertise to foster innovation ecosystems. Swansea University has played a central role in developing a semiconductor cluster in South Wales. This reflects Wales’s growing profile on the global stage. In 2022, just 21% of prospective international students noted familiarity with Wales as a study destination. By 2025, that figure had more than doubled to 44%, especially in key markets such as India and the United States.

    To help close skills gaps and boost innovation, Wales has opted to pass on the UK’s new 6% levy to international students. Welsh institutions are well-positioned to attract global talent, though graduates must still navigate the post-graduate visa landscape and local compliance rules when it comes to employment.

    The rise of ‘dynamic pricing’ and scholarships

    In an increasingly competitive global education market, British universities are also adopting more flexible pricing models to attract international students.

    The University of Birmingham, Birmingham City University, and Sheffield Hallam University offer regional discounts targeted at applicants from India and Southeast Asia. Keele University automatically awards £5,000 scholarships to undergraduates who exceed entry requirements, while the University of the West of England (UWE) provides a £3,000 annual Global Success Scholarship for students who complete a set number of ambassador duties throughout the academic year.

    These initiatives reflect a more entrepreneurial approach to recruitment, focused on affordability and global reach.

    Education as soft power

    Beyond economics, international education remains one of the UK’s most effective instruments of soft power. By attracting students from across the world, British universities build lasting global networks of alumni who go on to hold influential positions in business, government, and academia.

    Amid mounting financial pressures, many universities are expanding overseas through international branch campuses, exporting British education while diversifying income. In India, institutions like York, Aberdeen, and Bristol plan local campuses, aligning with the UK–India Free Trade Agreement expected to add $34 billion in annual trade.

    A delicate balance ahead

    As the UK reshapes its immigration and higher education policies, it must balance fiscal restraint with global engagement. Excessive restrictions could damage universities and the regional economies that depend on international students.

    International education is crucial to economic resilience, both locally and nationally, as well as to regional regeneration and global influence. As the data show, from Sheffield to Swansea, Leicester to Dundee, the UK’s prosperity is deeply intertwined with its ability to attract and retain top global talent.

    Source link

  • Transparency, collaboration, and culture, are key to winning public trust in research

    Transparency, collaboration, and culture, are key to winning public trust in research

    The higher education sector is focussing too much on inward-facing debates on research culture and are missing out on a major opportunity to expose our culture to the public as a way to truly connect research with society.

    REF can underpin this outward turn, providing mechanisms not only for incentivising good culture, but for opening up conversations about who we are and how we work to contribute to society.

    This outward turn matters. Research and Development (R&D) delivers enormous economic and societal value, yet universities struggle to earn public trust or support for what they do. Recent nation-wide public opinion research by Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) has shown that while 88 per cent of people say it is important for the Government to invest in R&D, just 18 per cent can immediately think of lots of ways R&D benefits them and their family. When talking about R&D in public focus groups, universities were rarely front of mind and are primarily seen as education institutions where students or lecturers might do R&D as an ancillary activity.

    If the university sector is to sustain legitimacy – and by extension, the political and financial foundations of UK research – we must find new ways to make our work visible, relatable, and trusted. Focusing on the culture that shapes how research is done may be the most powerful way to do this.

    Why culture matters

    Public opinion is not background noise. Public awareness, appetite and trust all shape political choices about funding, regulation, and the role of universities in national life. While CaSE’s work shows that 72 per cent of people trust universities to be honest about how much the UK government should invest in R&D, the lack of awareness about what universities do and how they do it leaves legitimacy fragile.

    This fragility is starkly illustrated by recent polling from More in Common: when asked which government budgets they would most like to see cut, the public didn’t want funding cuts for R&D, yet placed universities third on the list for budgets that they would be happy to be cut (alongside foreign aid and funding for the arts).

    Current approaches to improving public opinions about research in our sector have had limited success. The sector’s instinct has been to showcase outputs – discoveries, patents, and impact case studies – to boost public awareness and build support for research in universities. But CaSE polling evidence suggests that this approach isn’t cutting through: 74 per cent of the public said they knew nothing or hardly anything about R&D in their area. This lack of connection does not indicate a lack of interest: a similar proportion (70 per cent) would like to hear more about local R&D.

    Transparency

    Evidence from other sectors shows that opening up processes builds trust. In healthcare, for example, the NHS has found that when patients are meaningfully involved in decisions about their care and how services are designed, trust and satisfaction increase – not just because of outcomes, but because people can see and influence how decisions are made.

    Research from business and engineering contexts shows that people are more likely to trust companies that are open about how they operate, not just what they deliver. Together, these lessons reinforce that we should not rely on showcasing outputs alone: legitimacy comes from making visible the processes, people and cultures that underpin research.

    Universities don’t just generate knowledge; they develop the individuals who carry skills and values into the wider economy. Researchers, technicians, professional services staff and others who enable research in higher education bring curiosity, collaboration and critical thinking into every sector, both through direct collaboration and when they move beyond academia. These skills fuel innovation and problem-solving across the economy and public services, but they can only develop and thrive in supportive, inclusive research cultures. Without attention to culture, the talent pipeline that government and industry rely on is put at risk.

    Research culture makes these processes and people visible. Culture is about how research is done: the integrity of methods, the openness of data, the inclusivity of teams, the collaborations – including with the public – that make discoveries possible. These are the very things the public are keen to understand better. By opening up the black box of research and showing the culture that underpins it, we can make university research more relatable, trustworthy, and visible in everyday life.

    The role of REF in shifting the conversation

    The expansion of the old Environment element of REF to encompass broader aspects of research culture offers an opportunity to help shift from an inward to a more outward looking narrative and public conversation. The visibility and accountability that REF submissions require matters beyond academia: it gives the sector a platform to showcase the values and processes that underpin research. In doing so, REF can help our sector build trust and legitimacy by making research culture part of the national conversation about R&D.

    Openness, integrity, inclusivity, and collaboration – core components of research culture – are values which the public already recognise and expect. By framing research culture as part of the story we tell – explaining not just what our universities produce but how they produce it – we can build a stronger connection with the public. Culture is the bridge between the abstract notion of investing in R&D and a lived understanding of what universities actually do in society.

    Public support for research is strong, but support for universities is increasingly fragile. Whatever the REF looks like when we unpause, we need to avoid retreating to ‘business as usual’ and closing down this opportunity to open up a more meaningful conversation about the role universities play in UK R&D and in the progress of society.

    Source link

  • Why Personalized Video Is Changing Student Recruitment

    Why Personalized Video Is Changing Student Recruitment

    How one-to-one storytelling turns information into enrollment

    Students are saturated with content in their daily lives, and video is a huge part of what they see and consume. However, as the 2025 E-Expectations Report reveals, students are also no longer impressed by one-size-fits-all marketing. They want outreach that feels personal, relevant, and authentic (RNL, Halda, & Modern Campus, 2025). What resonates with them is personalization that shows colleges see them and not just another applicant.

    And when a personalized video connects those dots, combining storytelling, emotion, and data, something powerful happens: curiosity turns into commitment.

    Why personalization works

    Personalization amplifies engagement with students.

    This is clear. When students see themselves reflected in a story, they engage more deeply and feel a stronger sense of belonging.

    Zhao and colleagues (2024) tested this through a creative experiment involving personalized animated films. Participants watched short stories where their moods and habits shaped the life of a little corgi trying to reach the moon. The results? Viewers not only enjoyed the video, but they also identified with it. Some even started calling the character “me.” That sense of recognition is exactly what colleges aim to spark when they send a personalized admit or financial aid video.

    Banerjee et al. (2023) found similar effects in the education technology sector. When apps delivered recommendations based on individual interests, student engagement increased, especially among those who typically ignored recommendations. The message for higher education marketers is clear: those who ignore your emails or skip your events may simply be waiting for the right message at the right moment.

    Finally, Deng et al. (2024) showed that personalization is not just about what content appears; it is also about how it appears. TikTok’s algorithm, for example, predicts which segments you will watch and preloads them for a frictionless experience. When it comes to personalized video for students, the same principle applies. A message that loads quickly, feels smooth, and speaks directly to their needs earns attention and trust.

    Real results from personalized video campaigns

    You can see the full potential of personalization when colleges put it into practice, especially with the channel students use the most: video. Institutions across the country are using personalized video to make complex information clear, emotional moments unforgettable, and online discovery truly interactive. We work with our partners Allied Pixel, the pioneer in personalized video technology, to help campuses make that personalized connection that drives enrollment.

    Personalized financial aid videos: Turning confusion into clarity

    At Coastal Carolina University, affordability became an opportunity for connection. Through Personalized Financial Aid Videos (PFAVs), the university walked students and families through their aid packages in plain English and Spanish, helping them understand what college would actually cost. The outcome was remarkable:

    • Students who viewed their PFAV were nearly twice as likely to enroll as those who did not
    • More than 75% of students who clicked an action button after watching enrolled.
    • Coastal Carolina credits the videos as a major factor in enrolling a record-breaking incoming class.

    What could have been a confusing moment became one of clarity and confidence.

    Admit hype videos: Building emotional momentum

    Once affordability is clear, emotion takes center stage. The University of Cincinnati used Personalized Admit Hype Videos as part of its “Moments That Matter” campaign, designed to celebrate admitted students in a way that felt deeply personal.

    The results spoke for themselves: over 1,200 students confirmed their enrollment after watching their personalized video. One student shared, “It made me feel like I’ve found a new home. Thank you for putting this together!” A parent commented, “This is the absolute coolest thing I’ve seen in college recruiting, and this is my third child. Well done!!!”

    It is hard to imagine a clearer example of how belonging drives yield.

    Real-time web videos: Personalization in 30 seconds or less

    Before a student ever inquires, colleges like Aquinas College are using Personalized Real-Time Web Videos to create immediate engagement. Visitors to the Aquinas website can build their own video in under 30 seconds, featuring content relevant to their interests.

    Over 70% of visitors choose to create their own personalized clip, an extraordinary engagement rate. Even better, the form captures names, emails, and optional phone numbers, providing the admissions team with high-quality leads while offering students a memorable first touchpoint.

    These examples show that personalization is not just a creative flourish. It is a measurable driver of engagement, confidence, and enrollment.

    What personalized video means for enrollment leaders

    For enrollment and marketing teams, personalized video has shifted from a novelty to a necessity. The results are too compelling to ignore. Here is what to focus on next:

    • Start with data. Use CRM or application data to personalize content around major, aid status, or next steps.
    • Make it one-to-one. Include each student’s name, major, and relevant details so it feels like their story.
    • Keep it short. The sweet spot is 30–60 seconds, enough to inform without overwhelming.
    • Guide with purpose. End every video with one clear call to action: confirm, apply, schedule, or log in.
    • Measure and refine. Track engagement and conversion metrics to keep improving.
    • Build belonging. Blend data with empathy, because personalization is about people, not just platforms.

    When done right, personalized video meets both emotional and practical needs. It answers questions and builds confidence, but it also sparks joy, pride, and a sense of belonging. That is the sweet spot where conversion happens.

    So, if you want students not just to watch, but to feel seen, do not just write it, film it. Keep it short, real, and personal. Because when a few seconds can change a student’s decision, the most powerful word in recruitment might just be their name.

    Want to see the full picture?

    Find out how personalized video can create powerful engagement at every stage of the enrollment journey. Watch our webinar, How to Ramp Up Student Engagement Through Personalized Videos, to learn how you can add personalized videos to your marketing and recruitment efforts.

    You can also download the 2025 E-Expectations Trend Report to see the full findings on how today’s high-school students explore, evaluate, and choose colleges, plus what they expect from every click, video, and message.

    References:
    • Banerjee, R., Ghosh, A., Nanda, R., & Shah, M. (2023). Personalized Recommendations In Edtech: Evidence From A Randomized Controlled Trial. Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Learning at Scale. ACM.
    • Deng, W., Fan, Z., Fu, D., Gong, Y., Huang, S., Li, X., Li, Z., Liao, Y., Liu, H., Qiao, C., Wang, B., Wang, Z., & Xiong, Z. (2024). Personalized Playback Technology: How Short Video Services Create Excellent User Experience. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia. Advance online publication.
    • RNL, Halda, & Modern Campus. (2025). 2025 E-Expectations Report. Ruffalo Noel Levitz.
    • Zhao, X., Lee, J., Maes, P., & Picard, R. (2024). A Trip To The Moon: Personalized Animated Movies For Self-Reflection. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 8(CSCW2), 1–27.

    Source link

  • A NEST for Online Learning: Supporting Students in Virtual Education – Faculty Focus

    A NEST for Online Learning: Supporting Students in Virtual Education – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • A NEST for Online Learning: Supporting Students in Virtual Education – Faculty Focus

    A NEST for Online Learning: Supporting Students in Virtual Education – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Where Colleges Meet Prospective Family Expectations in Recruitment

    Where Colleges Meet Prospective Family Expectations in Recruitment

    College recruitment is a bit like hosting a dinner party. You might set the table beautifully, prep your best dish, and send out invitations. But if you forget dessert or serve something your guests did not actually want, you will still leave people hungry.

    That is the story unfolding when we compare two recent sets of data: the 2025 Marketing and Recruitment Practices Report (RNL, 2025) and the 2025 Prospective Family Engagement Report (RNL, Ardeo, & CampusESP, 2025). Together, they show where colleges are feeding families exactly what they want, and where they are still serving mystery meat.

    Email is king, but do not ignore texts and portals

    Email is still king, and on this, families and colleges are totally in sync. Nearly all institutions rely on it to connect with prospective students and their families (98–100%), and approximately 90% of families consider it their top way to receive college updates (RNL, 2025; RNL et al., 2025). But that is not the end of the story: lower-income and first-generation families are more likely to prefer text messages, with about 30% say getting updates on their phones suits them best. And when it comes to college portals? Most families are not shy about their feelings. Seventy-seven percent call these hubs “invaluable” for keeping track of deadlines and details.

    Here is the practical takeaway. If your family portal is still in beta, you are late. The portal is the digital front porch. Families want to step in. They do not want to just peer through a window.

    However, this is where institutions often fall short.

    • Lower-income families: They may not have unlimited data plans or reliable Wi-Fi. For them, text updates are not just convenient. They are a lifeline. Use SMS for deadlines, aid reminders, and quick check-ins.
    • Multilingual families: A portal that exists only in English is a locked door. Translation tools, multilingual FAQs, or videos with subtitles are not extras. They are necessities.
    • Busy working families: They may read email at odd hours. Keep messages concise. Make them mobile-friendly. Pack them with links that get families directly to what they need. No scavenger hunt.

    Email may be the king, but texts and portals are the court. Together, they make families feel included, informed, and respected. Income, language, and schedule should not become barriers to access.

    Cost clarity: The non-negotiable

    Families shout this from the rooftops. Show me the money.

    Ninety-nine percent say tuition and cost details are essential. Seventy-two percent have already ruled out institutions based on the sticker shock (RNL et al., 2025).

    Meanwhile, many institutions are still burying their net price calculators three clicks deep or waiting until after application to share the real numbers (RNL, 2025). That delay does not just frustrate. It eliminates your campus from consideration.

    Here is the practical takeaway. Put cost and aid at the forefront. Homepage, emails, campus events. If families cannot find your numbers, they will assume they are bad.

    Widen the lens for a moment.

    • Lower-income families: They do not just compare sticker prices. They seek reassurance that aid is real, accessible, and does not come with hidden strings.
    • First-generation families: Jargon like “COA” and “EFC” confuses them. Use plain explanations, visuals, or short videos to demystify the process.
    • Multilingual families: Cost info in English-only PDFs will not cut it. Translations, bilingual webinars, and multiple-language calculators build trust.
    • Busy working families: Parents reading on a break or late at night do not want to hunt. Make your cost breakdowns mobile-friendly. Spell it out: “Here is the average monthly payment after aid.” No guesswork.

    Clarity is equity. Make costs easy to find, easy to understand, and easy to compare. If you do, you keep your institution in the game.

    Portals: High demand, low supply

    Only 45% of private and 38% of public institutions offer family portals (RNL, 2025). Seventy-seven percent of families consider portals “invaluable” during the planning process (RNL et al., 2025). That is not a gap. It is a canyon.

    Here is the practical takeaway. Stop debating whether you need a portal. You do. Build one. Promote it. Keep it fresh. A portal is not just another login. It is a family’s command center.

    Here is why the design matters:

    • Lower-income families: If they juggle multiple jobs or devices, the portal must be mobile-first. No exceptions.
    • First-generation families: Use the portal as a step-by-step guide through the admissions maze. Clear checklists and “what comes next” nudges make all the difference.
    • Multilingual families: A portal only in English is a locked gate. Multilingual menus, downloadable resources, and translated FAQs turn it into a real access point.
    • Busy working families: On-demand matters. Record sessions, post how-to videos, and archive key communications. Parents can catch up after a late shift.

    Think of your family portal as the ultimate cheat sheet. If it answers questions before families even think to ask them, you have built trust.

    Campus visits still rule the court

    Institutions know visits are powerful. Families confirm it. Ninety-seven percent say seeing campus in person shapes their decision (RNL, 2025; RNL et al., 2025). First-generation families value them even more.

    Here is the practical takeaway. Do not just host cookie-cutter tours. Offer tailored experiences for first-generation families, local students, or academic interest groups. If your best tour story is still “this is the library,” you are missing the emotional connection.

    And do not forget the families outside the “traditional tour” box.

    • Commuter students: Show them where they will spend their days. Lounges, commuter lockers, meal plan hacks, parking solutions. These matter.
    • Students working 20 hours a week to pay tuition: Highlight flexible scheduling, evening classes, and campus jobs.
    • Busy working families: Are you offering evening and weekend options? Can families join virtual sessions during a lunch break? If not, you are leaving them out.

    The real question: Are your campus experiences built for everyone, or just for the students who can spend a sunny Thursday afternoon strolling through your quad?

    Families want in, not just students

    Three out of four families want at least weekly updates or timely news when it matters (RNL et al., 2025). Institutions are trying, but too often, communication still feels like a one-size-fits-all t-shirt. Technically wearable. Not flattering.

    Here is the practical takeaway. Treat families as partners, not sidekicks. Share updates in plain language. Offer Spanish-language options. Spotlight ways families can support their students. Yield is not just about students. It is about family buy-in.

    And remember:

    • Lower-income families: They may not have time to comb through long emails. Keep communication concise. Highlight financial deadlines.
    • First-generation families: Spell out key milestones. Provide clear “what comes next” instructions.
    • Multilingual families: Translate emails, texts, and portal content.
    • Busy working families: Send reminders multiple times of day. Record webinars. Make resources on demand.

    When communication feels clear, inclusive, and personal, families lean in. When it does not, they check out. Sometimes, they cross your institution off the list.

    Mind the gaps: Equity and information access

    Families across the board say cost, aid, program details, and outcomes are critical. Lower-income and first-generation families face significantly larger “information deserts” when searching for them (RNL et al., 2025). Yet institutions often double down on generic email campaigns or broad digital ads. They assume everyone is starting from the same place (RNL, 2025).

    Here is the practical takeaway. Equity in outreach is not just a value statement. It is a recruitment strategy. Translate materials. Send proactive aid guides. Partner with community groups to get info where it is needed most.

    And remember:

    • Lower-income families: Scholarships and payment plan info should not be three clicks deep. Put them front and center.
    • First-generation families: A one-page roadmap with plain-language admissions and aid steps can level the field.
    • Multilingual families: One brochure in Spanish is not enough. Provide translated FAQs, videos, and multilingual staff at info sessions.
    • Busy working families: Host virtual Q&As in the evenings. Record them. Make sure materials are mobile-friendly.

    If families cannot find or understand what they need, they will assume you do not have it. Or worse, that you do not care.

    Digital tools are only as good as the content behind them

    Institutions love their toys. Chatbots, SEO, and retargeted ads. These tools can be powerful (RNL, 2025). But families are not impressed by bells and whistles if the basics are missing. They want clear, easily accessible information about costs, aid, programs, and outcomes. Too often, they click into a chatbot or portal and leave frustrated because the answers are not there (RNL et al., 2025).

    Here is the practical takeaway. Do not let technology become window dressing. Audit your site from a family’s perspective. Can they find costs, aid, majors, and career outcomes in under two clicks? If not, no chatbot in the world can fix it. No amount of flash will.

    Think beyond the default user.

    • Lower-income families: Spotty internet access means your site needs to be mobile-first, fast-loading, and crystal clear.
    • First-generation families: Chatbots must speak plain language, not acronym soup.
    • Multilingual families: Add multilingual chatbot capabilities or direct them quickly to translated resources.
    • Busy working families: On-demand support matters. Chatbots at midnight. Video explainers that can be paused and replayed. Not just a nine-to-five phone line.

    Digital tools are not about looking modern. They are about making life easier. If your tech feels like another hoop to jump through, families will bounce. If it feels like a helpful hand, families will lean in.

    The big picture

    The alignment is clear on some fronts. Families want email, visits, and cost clarity, and institutions largely deliver. But the gaps, portals, aid communication, and equity in outreach are where recruitment wins or loses.

    Families are not just support systems. They are decision-makers. Right now, they are asking colleges to meet them with transparency, respect, and practical tools that make a complicated journey a little simpler.

    In other words, if institutions want families to stay at the table, they will need to stop serving what is easiest to cook and start serving what families ordered.

    Talk with our marketing and recruitment experts

    RNL works with colleges and universities across the country to ensure their marketing and recruitment efforts are optimized and aligned with how student search for colleges.  Reach out today for a complimentary consultation to discuss:

    • Student search strategies
    • Omnichannel communication campaigns
    • Personalization and engagement at scale

    Request now

    References
    • RNL. (2025a). 2025 Undergraduate Marketing and Recruitment Practices Report. Ruffalo Noel Levitz. https://www.ruffalonl.com/practices2025
    • RNL, Ardeo, & CampusESP. (2025b). 2025 Prospective Family Engagement Study. Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

    Source link

  • Higher education postcard: Queen Mary University of London

    Higher education postcard: Queen Mary University of London

    Down on the Mile End Road in London, within the sound of Bow bells (and hence properly Cockney) you will find what used to be the People’s Palace, and is now Queen Mary University of London.

    The institution we see today has four antecedents: the medical schools at the London and at St Bartholomew’s hospitals, Westfield College, and Queen Mary College. The name which survives is that of the last-founded college: as this is also the largest campus by far, it does confirm that possession is nine-tenths of the law.

    The medical schools were the earliest to be founded: the London Hospital Medical College in 1785 and St Bartholomew’s Hospital Medical College in 1843 (although a lecture theatre had been in place in Barts since 1791). I’ve told a little of the story of medical education in London when I wrote about St George’s. At the end of the eighteenth century and into the nineteenth, hospitals were slowly putting medical education on a more formal footing, and the London Hospital was at the forefront.

    Next to come on the scene was Westfield College. Established in 1882, Westfield was a residential college for women. I’ve written about it before for Wonkhe, so for now I’ll keep the focus on the East End.

    And on 14 May 1887 Queen Victoria formally opened the People’s Palace on the Mile End Road. The picture below, from the Illustrated London News, shows the Great Hall, which was the only element which had been completed at the time. It had a capacity for 2000 people seated, and was most magnificent.

    The People’s Palace would host art exhibitions and concerts, and would have library and reading rooms, gardens and a swimming pool. Associated with it was a technical institute which would teach higher skills associated with East London’s industries and crafts. The technical institute was to be funded by the Draper’s Company; the People’s Palace was built following public subscriptions, much of it coming from the great and the good.

    (This, by the way, was the model for the technical and recreative institutes founded in south London soon thereafter, and which I wrote about in relation to London South Bank University.)

    In 1896 the People’s Palace Technical Schools became East London Technical College. I can’t be certain about this, but I imagine it had by that time been taken over by the relevant London borough, following enabling legislation in the early 1890s. It was by then supporting people studying for the civil service entrance examinations, and also for the University of London’s BSc degree examinations. The first students graduated early in the twentieth century.

    On 17 May 1907 the Morning Post reported that

    The East London College has been admitted by the Senate as a school of the University [of London] in the Faculties of Arts, Science, and Engineering for period of three years on the understanding that the governing body of the school shall do their utmost to satisfy the Senate upon certain points of educational organisation and finance.

    You’ll spot the associated name change – and this also gives us an earliest date for the picture on the postcard (look at the sign!).

    In 1910 the membership of the university was renewed for a further five years, and in 1915 granted without time limit. East London College was properly a school of the University of London. It was strong in science and engineering, particularly in aeronautical engineering. It had a wind tunnel – which was very new technology then – and was the first department of aeronautical engineering in the UK.

    The 1930s became a little exciting for the college, for good reasons and bad.

    The bad reason was a fire in the early hours of Wednesday 25 February 1931, which destroyed the Great Hall of the People’s Palace. So the illustration from 1897 is, sadly, all you’ll get of this today.

    But at a similar time, the college was considering seeking a royal charter, and it looks like the fire crystallised things. The Drapers’ Company facilitated the People’s Palace and the college becoming a single corporate body, and in 1934 a royal charter was granted. This was also the occasion for a change of name. East London College being felt by some, apparently, to be a bit déclassé. And so Queen Mary College – named for the then Queen, Mary of Teck – was born on 12 December 1934.

    And on 13 February 1937 the rebuilt People’s Palace was opened by the new King George VI and Queen Elizabeth (who most readers will know of better as the late Queen Mother.) The full-page spread from the Illustrated London News below gives some of the flavour. I wonder whether this was part of a post-abdication-crisis public relations push to ensure that the new King was perceived in a positive light? The tale of Margaret Paxton, who gave flowers to the Queen, and was descended from the child who gave flowers to Queen Victoria in 1897, is a publicist’s dream, and will no doubt have taken a bit of work to manage.

    Through the following decades Queen Mary College was forging links with the two medical schools – for example, a joint hall of residence was opened in Woodford in 1974. Further changes happened in the 1980s – firstly some changes to provision, when the University of London reshuffled. Queen Mary lost Classics and Russian, but gained lab science subjects from Westfield, Chelsea, Queen Elizabeth and Bedford colleges. This was only a precursor to the larger changes to come: in 1989 Westfield College merged with Queen Mary, which became Queen Mary and Westfield College. The merged college was based on the Mile End and associated campuses – the Westfield College buildings were sold off.

    Ten years later the two medical schools merged with the college to form the Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry. This was simply one part of a general rationalisation of medical education in London which saw the small independent schools brought within the ambit of larger institutions.

    Let’s add a couple of things to bring the story up to date.

    Firstly, in 2012 Queen Mary joined the Russell Group, along with three other universities (pop quiz – without googling, can you name the other three?). It’s an unusual Russell Group in that its entry profile is much more reflective of its neighbourhood. It continues to do good things for the east London population.

    Secondly, in 2013 it formally changed its name from Queen Mary and Westfield College to Queen Mary, University of London. Which is tricky for dinosaurs like me who still think of it as QMW (and while were at it, Royal Holloway continues in my head to be RHBNC). But I will need to learn to deal with modernity as it approaches.

    The college has a good site on its history if you want to read more.

    Nine Nobel prize winners are connected with the college: six in physiology or medicine, one each in literature and physics, and one winner of the Nobel peace prize (pop quiz part two: again without googling, can you name the peace prize winner? I met them once…)

    And finally, here’s a jigsaw of the postcard. The card was written and posted, but it seems to have been stuck in an album or scrap-book at some point so the back is half covered in the remnants of brown paper. Anyway, it was posted at Paddington to an address in the Regent’s Park neighbourhood of London. All I can make of the written message is

    …before I left. I will certainly call and see you one day. I am not going ‘til next Tuesday…

    Source link

  • St. Augustine’s expresses interest in Trump compact — with big caveats

    St. Augustine’s expresses interest in Trump compact — with big caveats

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Saint Augustine’s University told the U.S. Department of Education that it wants to “participate in and help shape” the Trump administration’s proposed compact that seeks to control a range of academic and operational policies in exchange for preferential access to federal funding.
    • However, leaders from the historically Black institution caveated their support over concerns that aspects of the compact as written “risk unintended consequences that would impede our ability to serve students effectively.”
    • “Despite these concerns, Saint Augustine’s University remains eager to participate as a constructive partner and early-engagement institution,” the leaders of the private North Carolina university said in a letter obtained by Fox News. They requested “a dialogue process” with the Education Department to facilitate “mission-sensitive accommodations” for HBCUs.

    Dive Insight:

    Last month, the Trump administration offered nine high-profile research colleges a deal — priority for federal grants in exchange for enacting a wide range of policies aligning with the president’s higher education goals.

    Some of the compact’s terms, while unprecedented, are straightforward, such as freezing tuition rates for five years, requiring standardized testing for undergraduate applicants, and capping international students’ share of undergraduate enrollment at 15%. 

    Others go beyond cut-and-dry policy changes, such as publicly auditing the viewpoints of employees and students and potentially changing or ending campus units that purposefully “punish” or “belittle” conservative ideas.

    Seven of the initially invited colleges rejected the deal, and, as of Thursday afternoon, the remaining two have yet to publicly accept or decline the offer.

    But a few colleges have sought to take their place after President Donald Trump appeared to open the compact offer to all higher ed institutions. 

    Saint Augustine’s letter makes it the third college — and the first HBCU — to publicly express interest in the bargain.

    The New College of Florida — in a move in line with its conservative makeover under Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — became the first college to publicly volunteer to sign the compact on Oct. 27. The following day, Valley Forge Military College offered to accept the deal as well, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

    But unlike New College and the military college, Saint Augustine’s did not give the proposed compact a full-throated endorsement.

    Neither the Education Department nor the university responded to questions Thursday.

    Verjanis Peoples, the university’s newly appointed interim president, and Sophie Gibson, chair of its board of trustees, warned that the compact as written is “not compatible with the statutory mission and federal mandate under which HBCUs operate.”

    “Because our mission is not ornamental but foundational, we cannot implement requirements that would directly conflict with our identity as a Historically Black University or undermine our ability to serve the populations for whom we were created,” they wrote in their letter, which Fox News reported as being sent to the Education Department on Wednesday.

    Peoples and Gibson cited a handful of the compact’s provisions, including one requiring signatories to not consider race, sex, religion and other characteristics “explicitly or implicitly” in admissions or financial aid. 

    The pair said the restriction, “while well intentioned,” conflicts with Title III of the Higher Education Act, which in part provides colleges grant funding and establishes a program meant to strengthen HBCUs. The Trump administration’s proposed deal would also run contrary to “the explicit purpose of HBCUs to expand access for Black students and historically marginalized communities,” they said.

    The compact said it would grant exceptions for religious and single-sex institutions to limit admissions based on religious belief and sex, respectively, but did not address HBCUs.

    Other elements of the Trump administration’s proposal could also hinder HBCUs, Peoples and Gibson said. 

    These colleges typically maintain smaller endowments and would have a difficult time absorbing the costs of a tuition freeze. A cap on international enrollment would disproportionately hit HBCUs, which have “global partnerships across the African diaspora,” they said.

    Saint Augustine’s leaders also flagged a compact provision that would require colleges to adopt definitions of gender and sex in step with Trump’s executive order saying the federal government would only recognize two sexes, male and female, that cannot be changed. These definitions have been rebuked by the scientific and medical communities.

    HBCUs could face operational challenges if they adopt this language given their “inclusive campus policies shaped by both community needs and regulatory frameworks,” the letter said.

    “Such provisions would unintentionally force HBCUs to choose between compliance and survival, a position that is neither feasible nor consistent with congressional intent,” Peoples and Gibson said.

    Should the Trump administration take Saint Augustine’s up on its offer, the embattled university could gain a financial lifeline amidst ongoing operational turmoil.

    In recent years, Saint Augustine’s has had its accreditation revoked, then reinstated, then revoked again. The university is operating as an accredited institution this fall because of a preliminary court injunction temporarily reversing the latest revocation.

    The university’s accreditor, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, has raised concerns over its finances and governance.

    Saint Augustine’s has attempted different tactics to address its ongoing budget issues, including pursuing land lease deals, taking out loans and drastically cutting its workforce.

    Source link

  • How Software Interoperability Enables Truly Flexible Learning Environments

    How Software Interoperability Enables Truly Flexible Learning Environments

    Educational institutions are under increasing pressure to deliver adaptable learning experiences Yet many legacy systems weren’t built to work well enough together to support this.

    When tools don’t communicate or assessments won’t transfer between platforms, each new integration feels like a problem waiting to happen. As hybrid learning, digital access, and new assessment formats become the new norm, this disjointedness can delay change, increase IT issues, and disrupt the learner experience.

    Below, we uncover how solution interoperability solves these challenges, and how a standards-driven approach can help you build scalable, future-proof, flexible learning environments.

    Key Takeaways

    • Interoperability supports flexible learning environments across devices, platforms, and locations by ensuring all digital tools work together seamlessly.
    • Open standards—such as LTI, PCI, and the QTI standard—ensure system compatibility and reduce vendor lock-in.
    • Benefits of interoperability include scalability, reduced vendor dependency, consistency in user experience, and a future-proofed digital learning ecosystem.
    • To adopt interoperability, institutions should choose tools that adhere to 1EdTech standards, minimize proprietary integrations, and continue to monitor and improve once systems are in place.

    What Is Interoperability? 

    Interoperability is the ability of different systems, tools, and applications to work together and transfer data and content easily without custom fixes.

    For example, in an educational context, this could mean that a test created on one tool can be delivered on another.

    In short, interoperability allows your “digital ecosystem” to operate as a single, unified environment, rather than a mismatch of disconnected tools.

    What Interoperability Means in Modern Education

    When systems are interoperable, students and administrators can easily move between devices, platforms, and learning locations. In an increasingly hybrid educational context, this is necessary to future-proof education and learning.

    Similarly, institutions can pick and choose the tools they use, streamlining interchangeability without worrying about tiresome technical issues. As a result, this also lowers the strain on IT departments, who can spend a lot of time maintaining and fixing custom integrations.

    Overall, interoperability turns technology into an enabler of a high-quality, flexible learning environment by allowing users to enjoy a consistent experience, regardless of the device they’re using or their location.

    How Open Standards Enable Flexible Learning Environments

    Open standards are technical rules and specifications created by trusted organizations, such as 1EdTech, that help different tools work together and “speak the same language”—even if they’ve been developed by different companies. 

    Platforms designed around these standards are easier to integrate and evolve. This increases flexibility and ensures institutions can continue adopting new technologies without unnecessary disruption.

    Open standards therefore play a key role in supporting the interoperability of educational systems. Let’s take a closer look at some important examples.

    The QTI (Question and Test Interoperability) standard

    The QTI standard is a universal, 1EdTech–certified format for creating, sharing, and delivering assessment content. It defines a common structure for questions, response types, scoring rules, metadata, and test layouts so that items can move smoothly between different authoring tools, assessment platforms, and learning systems. 

    By standardizing how questions are described and exchanged, QTI eliminates the need to recreate items for each new platform, thus preserving instructional intent, reducing duplication of effort, and lowering long-term maintenance costs. 

    Educators and assessment providers can author content once and deploy it anywhere that supports the standard. QTI also supports accessibility, multimedia, and advanced interaction types, ensuring that modern assessments can be delivered consistently and equitably across systems. As a result, QTI forms the backbone of interoperable digital assessment ecosystems.

    Portable Custom Interaction (PCI)

    The PCI standard makes it possible to create advanced, interactive questions for online assessments that work across different testing systems using the QTI and APIP (Accessible Portable Item Protocol) standards. PCIs are a type of Technology Enhanced Item (TEI) that move beyond traditional question types and offer a better way of assessing 21st-century skills. 

    Complex question formats—such as virtual labs, drawing or annotation tasks, or simulations —are supported and all assets and data can be easily transferred between standards-based platforms seamlessly.

    Learning Tools Interoperability (LTI)

    Learning Tools Interoperability refers to a standard “plug-in system” for educational technology. It connects tools to learning management system (LMS) platforms—such as Moodle or Canvas—securely and quickly. 

    LTI also allows students to move easily between systems, encouraging a smoother user experience and enabling new apps or tools to be added easily.

    If LTI didn’t exist, each tool would need a custom-built integration, which could result in increased technical faults and glitches, causing more issues than it solves. As a result, LTI is ideal for institutions managing large technological ecosystems.

    Mathematical Markup Language (MathML)

    If written in plain text, complex mathematical symbols such as fractions and square roots can become corrupted when displayed on different devices or screen sizes. MathML is the solution, offering a standardized format for math notation that all platforms and systems can read and display correctly. Put simply: It’s the universal language of math for the internet.

    OpenID Connect (OIDC)

    OpenID Connect provides a “secure single sign-on” for all systems. This eliminates the need for multiple usernames and passwords, making sign-in easier and, in turn, saving both money and time that would otherwise be spent contacting help desks for password resets.

    Security issues are also reduced, as OIDC supports multi-factor authentication—such as 2FA or biometric security—helping to safeguard sensitive data.

    OneRoster

    OneRoster is a 1EdTech standard designed to simplify how schools and districts exchange class rosters, course information, enrollment data, and grades between their various learning systems. Without a common data format, institutions often rely on manual uploads or custom integrations that are time-consuming and prone to errors. 

    By providing a consistent, secure way to share student and classroom information, OneRoster ensures that learning platforms, SISs (Student Information Systems), and assessment tools always have the correct data—automatically and in real time. This reduces administrative workload, minimizes data mismatches, and accelerates the setup of new digital tools. 

    Because OneRoster is vendor-neutral and widely adopted, institutions gain the flexibility to choose from a broad ecosystem of applications without worrying about whether those tools can “talk to” their existing systems. In this way, OneRoster strengthens interoperability and contributes directly to more streamlined digital learning environments.

    Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT)

    Computer Adaptive Testing is an assessment approach in which the difficulty of each question adjusts dynamically based on a student’s performance. To make CAT possible across different platforms, systems must be able to exchange item data, scoring logic, metadata, and test results reliably and consistently. 

    The 1EdTech Computer Adaptive Testing standard provides a way to streamline interoperability between adaptive testing engines, item banks, and assessment delivery platforms, effectively eliminating the need for proprietary development. 

    When these systems share a common language, adaptive testing becomes more scalable and cost-effective for institutions. Schools can mix and match content providers, analytics tools, and test delivery systems while maintaining a seamless experience for students and educators. This flexibility ultimately supports richer, more personalized assessment strategies aligned to modern learning needs.

    Benefits of Interoperability for Educational Institutions

    Here are some of the main advantages for educational institutions that adopt interoperability.

    Multi-device and multi-context delivery

    Interoperability supports remote, hybrid, and in-person learning across multiple devices, without duplicating content or manually tweaking systems. As a result, students can expect the same smooth learning experience whether they’re using a tablet at home or working on a computer in the classroom. 

    Streamlined access through SSO

    When systems follow open standards, tools can be launched directly from platforms educators and students already know, such as their LMS, without extra passwords, unfamiliar portals, or confusing navigation. 

    Using standards like OpenID Connect (OIDC) and LTI, institutions can offer secure single sign-on, allowing test-takers to begin an exam with one click and administrators to manage access seamlessly. This reduces disruption, eliminates confusion, and minimizes support requests related to login issues, making the entire assessment experience smoother and more reliable.

    Supports diverse learners and SEND requirements

    When all tools and technologies work well together, learning is more consistent and adaptable. This is especially important for students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), who may rely on different devices or assistive technology more frequently. Interoperability ensures test-taker accommodations and accessibility settings “travel with them” across systems, reducing barriers to learning.

    Less involuntary lock-in

    Interoperability frees institutions from rigid, closed ecosystems, making it easier to adopt the right tools on their own terms. Because data and content can easily move between systems, there is less dependency on a single vendor and institutions are less vulnerable to price increases or limited feature sets.

    Better scalability
    As more students join, new tools are added, and programs inevitably grow, interoperable systems can scale with ease. There’s no need for costly custom integrations, and new apps can be added to existing workflows quickly and safely.

    Future-proofed infrastructure

    As technology advances, you might worry that your digital infrastructure may become outdated. However, interoperability ensures your systems remain compatible, even if new tools, formats, or devices emerge. 

    Less strain on IT departments

    Without the need for custom integrations to make your educational systems mesh, tools are much less likely to break. In turn, IT departments can focus on the important, bigger-picture tasks rather than constant troubleshooting. 

    How Institutions Can Adopt Interoperability Successfully

    To develop an interoperable technological landscape, institutions should adopt the following approach.

    Choose platforms built to connect easily with others

    Prioritize systems with a modern and demonstrable application programming interface (API) that aligns with industry-recognized open standards. These platforms are designed for flexibility, reducing the friction and cost often associated with integrating new tools into your existing stack.

    Require proof of adherence to 1EdTech standards

    Request that vendors supply proof of certification (e.g., LTI Advantage or the QTI standard) before adopting any new potential systems. This provides an independent guarantee that the tool is technically compliant and will operate reliably with your other standards-aligned systems. 

    Tools such as TAO—known for supporting QTI, PCI, LTI, OneRoster, MathML, and other open standards—show how a standards-first approach can make digital learning ecosystems more stable and adaptable.

    Avoid custom and proprietary integrations 

    Steer clear of custom fixes—such as rewriting formatting rules or using local plugins—as these are high-risk, require ongoing patching, and are highly likely to break every time systems update.

    Avoiding proprietary integrations—such as eBooks that only work on certain readers, or content libraries that only display inside a specific LMS—also helps reduce your reliance on a single vendor or its developers.

    Educate staff

    Interoperability is a cultural shift as much as a technical one. Thorough training and education for staff that focuses on why interoperability matters and how it supports adaptive and effective learning is key to ensuring successful compliance. 

    Test, monitor, and improve

    Implement rigorous testing of tools in a sandbox environment before going fully live. Once systems have been launched, continue to monitor their integrity and effectiveness, using analytics to confirm that all tools are working together seamlessly and reliably.

    By following these steps, you can build a strong, sustainable foundation for digital transformation.

    Conclusion

    Interoperability is fundamental in building flexible, modern, and future-proofed learning environments.

    When institutions use interoperable systems, they lay the foundations for a stronger digital ecosystem—without being constrained by outdated systems. By choosing tools that prioritize and follow 1EdTech-aligned standards, institutions can reduce vendor dependence, lower long-term costs, and create seamless, enjoyable experiences for both students and teachers.

    Learn more about interoperability assurances by reading our step-by-step guide, or find out more about TAO’s certification in open standards. 

    Get Started With an Interoperable Assessment Ecosystem

    As a standards-driven open platform, TAO gives you the flexibility to streamline operations and develop a future-proofed digital learning strategy—all without being locked in.

    Explore authoring tools that let you create rich, interactive items with ease, intuitive reporting features that turn assessment data into clear insights, and reliable delivery capabilities that support scalable testing across different devices and learning environments.

    If you want to evolve your digital assessment ecosystem, schedule a demo with TAO today and see what true interoperability looks like in practice.

    FAQs

    What is interoperability, and why is it important?

    Interoperability refers to different technology systems that can connect, share information, and work together easily without custom fixes. This makes tools easier to use, reduces technical problems, supports flexible learning across devices, and allows institutions to switch vendors without losing any content or data.

    What are flexible learning environments?

    Flexible learning environments are learning setups that allow students to learn anywhere, anytime, and on any device. This can include online, hybrid, self-paced, or on-the-go learning. Interoperability is a key component in providing this, as flexible learning environments work best when technology systems connect smoothly.

    What is an example of learning tools interoperability?

    A simple example of learning tools interoperability is connecting an external learning app—such as a quiz platform or digital textbook—to an LMS such as Canvas, Blackboard, or Moodle. For example, when a student uses a learning tool such as a quiz app via LTI, the score they earn in that tool is automatically sent back to the LMS and appears in the gradebook.

     

    Source link

  • U.S. Remains Leader in Interdisciplinary Science

    U.S. Remains Leader in Interdisciplinary Science

    Science-focused U.S. institutions take the top spots in THE’s interdisciplinary science rankings.

    U.S. colleges and universities lead the world in interdisciplinary science research according to the Times Higher Education Interdisciplinary Science Rankings 2026 (THE is Inside Higher Ed’s parent company). 

    American institutions occupy six of the top 10 slots on this year’s table. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is first for the second year in a row, followed by Stanford University in second, also retaining its 2025 position. The California Institute of Technology rose one spot to third place, and the University of California, Berkeley, debuts on the list in fourth position. 

    Duke University dropped from fifth to sixth rank this year, and the Georgia Institute of Technology appears on the list for the first time, coming in seventh. 

    On a country level, nearly a quarter of the top 100 institutions in the ranking are from the US, more than any other nation. 

    Launched in 2024 in association with Schmidt Science Fellows, the rankings were created to improve scientific excellence and collaboration across disciplines and to help universities benchmark their interdisciplinary scientific work

    THE broadened the interdisciplinary scope of research for this year’s list to cover any project that comprises multiple scientific disciplines or one or more scientific disciplines combined with the social sciences, education, psychology, law, economics or clinical and health.

    The U.S.’s performance in the rankings is driven by high scores for outputs metrics, which include the number and share of interdisciplinary science research publications, the citations of interdisciplinary science research, and the reputation of support for interdisciplinary teams. 

    “For more than 80 years, research universities have advanced our understanding of the world, leading to dramatic improvements in health, economic prosperity, and national security. That work fundamentally is done best when people ideate and collaborate without regard for disciplinary boundaries within and between scientific areas,” Ian A. Waitz, vice president for research at MIT, said in a statement. 

    “Scientific research that breaks down academic silos and crosses traditional disciplines is increasingly understood to be essential for the next generation of big breakthroughs and the key to solving the world’s most pressing problems,” said Phil Baty, THE’s chief global affairs officer.

    “The world’s biggest challenges are highly complex and require cutting-edge knowledge and fresh ideas from a wide range of specialisms.”

    Source link