Greetings from a northeastern Virginia where the heat has been brutal. For several weeks we lived under temperatures reaching 100 ° F, while humidity sopped everything badly enough that the “feels like” reading hit 110. (And the Trump administration decided to federalize and militarize DC – that’s for another post.)
North of us, epic wildfires burned swathes of Canada. “‘It’s the size of New Brunswick, to put it into context,’ Mike Flannigan, a professor of wildland fire at Thompson Rivers University, told CBC News.” This is apparently the second worst fire year on record. Climate change has not only increased temperatures in that nation but dried out regions, making them tinder.
Parts of Europe are also suffering under horrendous heat waves. As a result the region is experiencing upticks in fires, heat exhaustion, and deaths. Temperatures are hitting the 30s and even 40s (centigrade; for Americans, this means upper 90s and over 100 F).
I’d like to explain about how these are predictable outcomes of the worsening climate crisis, how global warming is doing precisely what we thought it would do, but I’d also like to get in the habit of issuing shorter blog posts. Besides, I suspect my readers either get the point or have turned away by now.
What I wanted to focus on today was a recent connection made between Europe’s fierce summar, the climate crisis… and digital technology. Britain is suffering under drought conditions exacerbated by global warming, a drought so harsh that the government has assembled a National Drought Group to organize responses. (One of my shorthand expressions for thinking of climate change is that regions with too much water will receive more, while those with less, less. A kind of climate Matthew Effect. The UK drought is an exception for now.)
Yesterday the drought team issued a report on the crisis, summing up steps various local authorities are taking along with series of recommendations for Britons wanting to take actions against the drought. I’d like to draw your attention to one of them:
Fiery red box not in the original.
“Delete old emails and pictures as data centres require vast amounts of water to cool their systems.”
There’s much we can say or ask about that single line. Just how much of an impact does cloud computing hosting have on British water use? If this is aimed at residents, are businesses or the government taking similar measures? Should one use cloud services not colocated in drought-stricken areas?
At a broader level I wonder about the possibility that the growing anti-digital movement, which some call the techlash, might finally become focused on climate implications. Do we decide that advanced computing (think generative AI or bitcoin mining) has too large a footprint and must be curtailed? Or do we instead assess its climate benefits – crunching vast arrays of data, running simulations, generating new research – as outweighing these costs?
For years I’ve been asking audiences about the climate-digital connection. I’ve asked people to imagine individual and group choices they might have to make in the future as the crisis worsens and electricity becomes more fragile, more restricted. These are provocative, clarifying questions. Think of choosing between WiFi and air conditioning, or cloud computing versus refrigeration. And now we have a first glimpse of that future with the British government requesting Britons to cut back their digital memories. We can imagine new questions in that light. How would you choose between streaming video and potable water, or Zoom versus crop irrigation?
The Higher Education Inquirer reminds us of the higher education implications.
For colleges and universities, the connection between digital behavior and resource conservation is an opportunity to model sustainability. Digital housekeeping campaigns could encourage staff and students to purge outdated files, trim redundant email chains, and archive with intent. Institutions can audit cloud storage use, revisit data retention policies, and prioritize providers that invest in energy- and water-efficient infrastructure. These choices can be paired with curriculum initiatives that make students aware of the climate–digital nexus, grounding sustainability not just in labs and gardens, but in inboxes and servers.
Indeed. These actions are available to us, should we choose to take them.
Yet this is a difficult conversation to have now, at least in the United States, as the Trump administration attacks climate science even to the point of hurling a satellite out of Earth orbit. Businesses are walking back climate commitments. Journalists don’t mention the crisis very often. Democrats are falling silent. Yet, strangely enough, climate change continues, ratcheting up steadily. We must think and act in response. That means, among other things, rethinking our digital infrastructure and practices.
Student ambassadors are more than just friendly faces on a campus tour; they’re living, breathing stories of what it’s really like to study at your institution. Whether they’re current students or recent alumni, they give prospects something no brochure or ad campaign can match: authenticity.
Today, that authenticity is going digital. Many institutions are now recruiting digital student ambassadors who meet prospects where they already spend most of their time, on social media, in live chats, and across online communities.
So, why does this matter? Because ambassadors humanize your school’s brand. They answer questions honestly, share glimpses of daily life, and help prospects picture themselves as part of the community. For Gen Z, especially, that peer-to-peer connection is gold. A relatable student voice can often be far more persuasive than a polished marketing message.
As we’ll see, many of the qualities and characteristics of a student ambassador remain constant, but success in the digital realm also requires some special skills. Let’s start with the basics – what exactly does a student ambassador do, and how would we describe this role?
Struggling to stand out in a crowded market?
Boost enrollment with digital student ambassador strategies!
What Is a Digital Student Ambassador?
How would you describe a student ambassador? A student ambassador is a representative of their institution who shares authentic experiences, supports prospective students, and fosters a welcoming community. They act as a bridge between the school and its audience, answering questions, giving insights, and promoting campus culture through personal interaction, events, and digital engagement.
On digital channels, these ambassadors take on a new kind of role: becoming micro-influencers for your school. They showcase campus moments on Instagram Stories, upload vlogs to YouTube, or join discussion threads to help someone halfway around the world decide whether your school is the right fit.
And here’s where “digital” makes the difference. Traditional ambassadors focus on in-person tours, open houses, and campus events. Digital ambassadors bring that same personal touch into the online world. They host live Q&As, post blogs or videos, and respond to inquiries on platforms like Unibuddy, connecting with prospects who may never set foot on campus before applying. For international or out-of-town students, these online connections can be the deciding factor. The best blend is the warmth of a welcoming peer with the creativity and consistency of a skilled content creator.
Digital Student Ambassador Responsibilities:
Welcoming and Touring Visitors: Ambassadors guide campus tours, share personal stories, and help visitors envision themselves as part of the community. They may host “shadow days,” lead Q&A panels at open houses, or ensure new students feel at ease during orientation.
Outreach and Communication: Many connect directly with prospects through calls, emails, and social media. They answer questions, follow up with applicants, or even make congratulatory calls to admitted students. Some take over institutional Instagram accounts or host live Q&A sessions, providing candid insights into academics, housing, and student life.
Event Support and Promotion: Ambassadors often help plan and run recruitment events, student panels, and webinars. They may work with faculty to coordinate workshops or invite speakers from student services, bringing a student-led energy to every event.
Content Creation and Storytelling: Today’s ambassador programs frequently include content production. Students might write blogs, create videos, or manage social media takeovers to highlight campus life.
Peer Advising and Support: Beyond recruitment, ambassadors mentor new and younger students, answer parent questions, and direct peers to campus resources. In certain settings, such as K-12 schools or community programs, they may lead workshops or classroom discussions.
Bridge Between Students and Administration: Ambassadors also act as liaisons, communicating student feedback to staff and reinforcing institutional values within the student body. This two-way role supports a stronger campus culture and understanding.
Ultimately, the role is about representing the school’s values and culture through genuine, student-to-student engagement. As one Higher Education Marketing advisor explains, “Students want to see themselves in your school’s marketing material”, and ambassadors make that possible.
Whether volunteer or paid, ambassadors gain significant benefits: leadership and communication skills, valuable networking, and a stronger sense of belonging. Many describe the experience as a highlight of their education, one that builds confidence and allows them to give back to their community.
The Rise of the Digital Student Ambassador
The student ambassador role isn’t new, but the way it’s delivered has changed dramatically. Today, many of those warm, peer-to-peer conversations that once happened during campus tours now take place entirely online. That’s where the digital student ambassador comes in.
What is a digital ambassador? A digital ambassador is a student representative who promotes their institution online through social media, live chats, and virtual events. They share authentic experiences, answer questions, and create engaging content, helping prospects connect with the school community, even if they can’t visit campus in person.
The job is the same at its core: share genuine student experiences and help prospects imagine themselves at your school. But instead of shaking hands at an open house, digital ambassadors are hosting live virtual tours, answering questions in chat rooms and giving followers a real look at campus life through Instagram, TikTok, or YouTube. For many prospects, especially those researching from halfway around the world, this might be their very first interaction with your institution. That’s why the role is so powerful. Here are the top characteristics of a student ambassador:
Communication That Connects Through a Screen
Speaking to a room is one thing. Making someone feel welcome through a camera or a line of text is another. Digital ambassadors need to master both. They know how to keep responses clear, friendly, and relatable, whether that’s through a quick message in a DM, a 30-second Instagram Story, or a thoughtful blog post. They understand tone, timing, and even how the right emoji can make an online exchange feel personal.
Self-Motivation in a Flexible Role
Unlike traditional ambassadors who work during scheduled tours or events, digital ambassadors often manage their own hours. They might respond to a question late in the evening, keep up with multiple conversations across platforms, or check in with an international prospect in a different time zone. That means self-motivation is of extreme importance. The best digital ambassadors don’t wait for prompts. They’re proactive about reaching out, following up, and making sure no question goes unanswered.
Tech-Savvy and Adaptable
A digital ambassador’s toolkit can change from one day to the next. One moment they’re editing a TikTok video, the next they’re co-hosting a Facebook Live Q&A or answering questions in a university’s custom chat app. They’re comfortable switching platforms, solving small tech issues, and adapting quickly when something unexpected happens. They also understand how to use each channel’s strengths to create the most impact, whether that’s a quick selfie video for a personal touch or a detailed written reply for complex questions.
Bringing Energy Online
Here’s the challenge: online, you don’t have the buzz of an in-person conversation to carry you. That means enthusiasm has to work harder. The best digital ambassadors make their passion for the school shine through in every message, video, or post. Research backs this up: positive, genuine interactions between current and prospects are one of the biggest drivers of enrollment conversions.
To recap, what makes a good ambassador? A good ambassador is authentic, approachable, and knowledgeable, with strong communication skills. They represent their institution with enthusiasm, build trust through genuine connections, and adapt easily to different audiences and platforms, ensuring every interaction leaves a positive, lasting impression.
In essence, a digital student ambassador is more than a student with social media skills. They’re a trusted peer, a skilled communicator, and a tech-savvy connector who can make a prospect feel seen, heard, and excited, no matter the distance. Schools that invest in them aren’t just extending their reach; they’re deepening their influence from the very first interaction.
Key Qualities of a Great Student Ambassador
What separates a good student ambassador from a truly exceptional one? Whether they’re greeting visitors in person or connecting with prospects online, the standouts share a set of defining qualities that make them unforgettable.
Communication That Connects
Great ambassadors are master communicators. They’re equally skilled at chatting one-on-one with a shy high school student or presenting to a room full of parents. They don’t just speak; they listen. They pick up on unspoken concerns, ask clarifying questions, and tailor their responses so every prospect feels understood. In a digital context, this means writing with warmth and clarity; friendly enough to spark conversation, yet concise enough to respect attention spans. They adapt effortlessly: a casual tone on Instagram, a polished one in email, and an authentic voice in video.
Positivity That’s Contagious
An ambassador’s outlook shapes a prospect’s first impression of the school. The best ones radiate genuine enthusiasm, never forced, never “salesy.” Their love for the institution is real, and it shows in every conversation, every smile, and every story they share. Admissions teams often spot potential ambassadors by noticing who already volunteers for events or naturally promotes their campus. Enthusiasm is magnetic: when an ambassador talks about their favorite class or a beloved campus tradition, that excitement becomes impossible to ignore.
Initiative and Leadership in Action
True leaders don’t wait for instructions; they step in. Exceptional ambassadors are proactive, spotting the student standing alone at an event and striking up a conversation, or jumping in to answer an unanswered question in a group chat. They embody self-discipline, integrity, and the ability to make others feel welcome. For digital ambassadors, initiative is non-negotiable. They must work independently, manage their time, and seize every opportunity to engage.
Inclusivity and Empathy
Great ambassadors make every prospect feel like they belong. They’re culturally aware, sensitive to differences, and skilled at connecting across backgrounds. They know what it’s like to be the newcomer, uncertain, maybe even overwhelmed, and they respond with patience and understanding. Whether reassuring an international student about campus diversity or helping a first-generation applicant navigate the admissions process, they create an atmosphere of welcome and respect.
Professionalism You Can Count On
While the role is peer-driven and personable, it’s also a serious responsibility. Ambassadors represent the school’s brand, and reliability is key. That means showing up on time, honoring commitments, and maintaining a respectful, professional demeanor, even in casual interactions. Digital ambassadors, in particular, must be disciplined enough to manage their role without constant oversight, delivering the same level of professionalism online as in person.
Knowledge and Resourcefulness
Prospects ask everything: from residence life to program details to financial aid. Ambassadors aren’t expected to have all the answers, but they must be well-informed about the institution’s key offerings and know exactly where to find information when needed. The strongest ambassadors are resourceful problem-solvers, following up quickly and connecting prospects to the right campus contacts. This builds trust and leaves prospects feeling supported.
Digital Fluency (for Online Engagement)
For digital student ambassadors, tech skills aren’t optional; they’re foundational. They navigate social media platforms, live chat tools, and video conferencing software with ease, staying on top of online trends and knowing how to leverage each platform’s strengths. They understand digital etiquette, moderate discussions effectively, and troubleshoot minor tech issues without losing composure. In short, they bring creativity, adaptability, and technical confidence to the role, turning digital spaces into welcoming, interactive environments.
When you combine these student ambassador qualities: communication, positivity, initiative, inclusivity, professionalism, knowledge, and tech fluency. You get a student ambassador who doesn’t just represent the school… they embody it. They make every interaction feel personal, every prospect feel valued, and every conversation a step closer to enrollment.
Examples of Great Student Ambassador Programs
John Cabot University
John Cabot University, an American university in Rome, runs a robust student ambassador program that shows how ambassadors can touch many facets of campus life. John Cabot University’s ambassadors are actively involved in the orientation process, event planning, leadership, and student support.
Their profiles (complete with friendly photos and contact info) are featured on the school site to invite connections. This approachable public presence signals to new and prospective students that they have peer resources ready to help. John Cabot’s example underlines the importance of choosing outgoing, involved students – their ambassadors take on leadership in organizing events and mentoring newcomers, embodying the school’s warm, inclusive culture from the start.
Smaller career-focused colleges also leverage ambassadors. The Academy of Applied Pharmaceutical Sciences (AAPS) in Toronto uses student ambassadors in marketing-savvy ways by showcasing student and alumni success stories. AAPS regularly celebrates Student Success Stories: for example, posting when an alumnus lands a dream job in the pharmaceutical industry. These stories (often shared on AAPS’s website and social channels) let prospects “see themselves achieving their goals” at the college.
In essence, AAPS ambassadors become living proof points of outcomes, saying “look what our students achieve; you can join them.” Ambassadors share their journeys and tips (on Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn, etc.), adding authenticity to recruitment. The key is that AAPS selects enthusiastic storytellers proud of their field, so their posts come off as peer-to-peer endorsements of the college’s programs. This example shows that digital ambassador content doesn’t always mean live chats; even a series of student highlight posts with quotes and photos can serve as powerful testimonials.
Terry College of Business, University of Georgia (USA)
Business schools often rely on ambassadors to convey the program’s culture to applicants (for MBA or undergraduate business programs). The Terry College of Business at UGA has a team of Terry Ambassadors who exemplify leadership and community-building. Their mission statement: “Leading by example, ambassadors engage with students and alumni to build community within the college, increase understanding of opportunities available, and further the Terry legacy.”
This highlights how ambassadors at a business school not only assist with recruiting new students but also serve as connectors among current students and alumni – bridging different parts of the community. Terry Ambassadors are selected for attributes like strong academic records, interpersonal skills, and dependability. They uphold values such as integrity, respect, and servant leadership, acting as role models.
In practice, they host networking events, speak with prospective business majors about career opportunities, or welcome alumni back to campus. The benefit is two-fold: prospects get insiders’ perspectives on the program, and the ambassadors themselves gain networking and leadership experience (Terry explicitly notes ambassadors “develop a strong network of peers, alumni and professionals” as a benefit of the role. This example shows a slightly different angle – ambassadors not just for admissions, but for fostering pride and connections within a college community.
Specialized programs like language immersion schools use ambassadors. At Middlebury’s famed Language Schools, former students act as student ambassadors to share their experience with prospective enrollees.
For example, the Japanese Language School has student ambassadors listed with their emails so interested students can reach out to ask about the immersion program. These ambassadors answer questions like “What surprised you about your experience?” and “How much did your Japanese improve?”, giving honest testimonials about the intensive summer program. This helps prospects, who might be nervous about the immersion pledge, hear directly from peers who succeeded.
The ambassadors in this context need to be candid and reflective, able to articulate how they overcame challenges and why the program was worth it. Their enthusiasm for language learning and personal growth becomes a selling point for others. It’s a great example of how even non-traditional educational settings leverage peer ambassadors to build trust – after all, who better to convince someone to spend a summer speaking only Japanese than a student who did it and loved it?
Bishop O’Dowd High School
High schools also use student ambassadors, often in admissions tours or as “student hosts.” Bishop O’Dowd, a Catholic college-preparatory high school, actually has an army of nearly 400 student volunteers in its ambassador program – affectionately nicknamed the “Dragons” (after the school mascot). According to their admissions director, this large-scale program has been “transformative for the campus culture itself”. With so many students involved, it created “a culture of positivity and a willingness in students to truly engage” on campus.
Ambassadors at O’Dowd not only assist with tours and open houses, but by telling their personal stories to visitors, they have also become more reflective and positive about their own school experience. This is a powerful insight: a well-run ambassador program doesn’t just benefit the admissions office; it can fundamentally boost student morale and leadership school-wide. The key qualities for these youth ambassadors include being outgoing, responsible, and service-oriented – essentially, being proud “Dragons” who want to share that pride.
For younger students (high schoolers), being an ambassador also instills college and career-ready skills early on, such as public speaking and collaboration. Bishop O’Dowd’s example demonstrates how scale and inclusivity (hundreds of ambassadors representing all types of students) can amplify impact: every prospective family can meet a student who resonates with their child’s interests or background.
A great digital student ambassador is more than a smiling face on a brochure. They’re a communicator, a leader, a tech-savvy problem-solver, and, most importantly, a genuine student voice. They bridge the gap between your institution and prospects, turning formal marketing into an authentic human connection.
And the proof is in the results. When the University of Guelph launched its student social media ambassador program, engagement skyrocketed: 45% more interactions on Twitter and a 560% surge in Instagram likes, all in the first semester. Why? Because prospects trust real students sharing real experiences.
In conclusion, choose ambassadors who radiate positivity, connect easily with others, and navigate the online world with confidence. Give them the training they need, social media best practices, Q&A techniques, but don’t strip away their personality. Authenticity is their greatest asset, and when they’re free to speak in their own voice, it resonates far beyond what any scripted message can.
For students considering the role, here’s your sign to go for it. If you naturally talk about your school with enthusiasm, becoming an ambassador is simply channeling that passion into impact. You’ll build leadership skills, expand your network, and help future students feel at home before they even arrive.
In the end, the formula for a great digital ambassador is the same as for any ambassador: a sincere desire to help, connect, and inspire, supercharged by the reach of digital media. When schools and students partner in this way, everyone wins. Students grow as leaders, institutions gain their most credible advocates, and prospective learners get the authentic, peer-to-peer insight they crave. In an age where trust drives enrollment, investing in student ambassadors is investing in your most powerful recruitment asset: your own students.
Struggling to stand out in a crowded market?
Boost enrollment with digital student ambassador strategies!
Question: How would you describe a student ambassador? Answer: A student ambassador is a representative of their institution who shares authentic experiences, supports prospective students, and fosters a welcoming community. They act as a bridge between the school and its audience, answering questions, giving insights, and promoting campus culture through personal interaction, events, and digital engagement.
Question: What makes a good ambassador?
Answer: A good ambassador is authentic, approachable, and knowledgeable, with strong communication skills. They represent their institution with enthusiasm, build trust through genuine connections, and adapt easily to different audiences and platforms, ensuring every interaction leaves a positive, lasting impression.
Question: What is a digital ambassador?
Answer: A digital ambassador is a student representative who promotes their institution online through social media, live chats, and virtual events. They share authentic experiences, answer questions, and create engaging content, helping prospects connect with the school community, even if they can’t visit campus in person.
Five years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, academic recovery has stalled nationwide, and achievement gaps have widened, according to the State of Student Learning 2025 report from from Curriculum Associates.
The report offers one of the most comprehensive looks at Grades K–8 student performance in reading and mathematics, based on data from close to 14 million students who took the i-Ready Diagnostic assessment in the 2024–2025 school year.
The report shows that most students have not yet reached pre-pandemic achievement levels, and some are falling even further behind. The report does find some bright spots: Some historically underserved schools, especially majority-Black schools, are seeing modest, positive gains in both reading and mathematics. However, those gains have not yet translated into closing longstanding disparities.
“This report shows that disrupted schooling due to the pandemic continues to impact student learning, particularly for students who are in early grades, are lower performing, or are from historically underserved communities,” said Kristen Huff, head of measurement at Curriculum Associates. “Academic recovery has never been one-size-fits-all, and these results reaffirm the importance of nuanced, data-informed approaches. Above all, they underscore the vital work educators are doing every day to meet students where they are and help them move forward.”
Key findings
Academic progress has plateaued. Since spring 2023, national achievement has remained flat. While many students are growing at pre-pandemic rates, that growth isn’t closing the gap caused by pandemic disruptions.
The achievement gap has grown in many cases. Students who were already behind, particularly those scoring in the bottom 10th percentile, continue to fall behind, while top-performing students have often recovered or surpassed their pre-pandemic levels.
Younger students experienced greater learning losses. Even though they were not yet in school during the pandemic, elementary students, especially in Grades K and 1, saw the largest drops in achievement after the pandemic.
Vulnerable populations are experiencing uneven recovery. The report shows widening gaps between the nation’s highest and lowest performers. Across most grades, the differences between higher and lower percentiles have increased over time.
A data-driven, nationwide look
The 2025 report examines data through the critical years pre- and post-pandemic, from spring 2019 to spring 2025. Using a nationally representative sample of more than 11.7 million reading and 13.4 million mathematics assessments, the research examines:
Grade-level placement: how many students are performing at or below grade level
Scale scores by percentile: how learning differs across performance groups
Annual growth: whether students are making enough academic progress during the school year to recover lost ground
The findings reinforce that targeted support is needed to ensure every student can thrive academically, especially younger students, lower-performing students, and historically underserved communities.
eSchool Media staff cover education technology in all its aspects–from legislation and litigation, to best practices, to lessons learned and new products. First published in March of 1998 as a monthly print and digital newspaper, eSchool Media provides the news and information necessary to help K-20 decision-makers successfully use technology and innovation to transform schools and colleges and achieve their educational goals.
When the UK government unveiled its immigration white paper in May, my first reaction was simple: “A step in the right direction.”
Buried among the many proposals, five key policy reforms stood out for their potential to reshape international student recruitment for UK universities. The headline-grabber on social media was the shortening of the Graduate Route from 24 months to 18 months. But, truth be told, that’s not the change keeping universities awake at night.
The real shake-up comes from the Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) reforms, expected to roll out in September 2025, which will prove especially tough for smaller universities.
What’s changing?
From next year, UK universities sponsoring international students will face much stricter BCA benchmarks:
Visa success rate: At least 95% of students issued a CAS must obtain their visa (up from 90%).
Enrolment rate: Of those, 95% must enrol on their course (up from 90%).
Completion rate: At least 90% must complete the course (up from 85%).
On paper, these increases might look like small percentage rises. In practice, they’re a gamechanger.
Why this is big
For years, many universities in the UK, both modern and traditional alike, have operated just above the current BCA thresholds, leaving little leeway for the inevitable drop-outs, deferrals, or visa refusals, especially from high-risk regions such as South Asia and Africa.
According to a recent story published by The PIE, quoting analysis from ApplyBoard’s study on visa refusal rates between Q1 2024 and the same period in 2025, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh saw a notable decline in visa grant rates.
Pakistan’s visa grant rate fell from 82% to 74%, while the other two countries saw even sharper declines: Bangladesh dropped 15 percentage points from 78% to 63%, and Nepal fell by 14 percentage points from 98% to 84% during the same period.
But now, with the bar raised, there’s far less margin for error. To comply, universities will have to halve their visa refusal rate from 10% to 5% and simultaneously boost enrolment and completion rates. That means rethinking recruitment pipelines, especially in regions like South Asia and Africa, where volumes are high but visa risks can be significant.
The good news, though, is that some of the biggest countries in high-risk regions, such as India, Nigeria and Ghana, have seen a marginal increase in visa grant rates, providing a sigh of relief for universities heavily recruiting from these countries.
Why smaller universities are nervous
Large universities enjoy a buffer. Recruit 10,000 international students in an intake, and a 5% refusal rate gives you room for up to 500 refusals before you breach the threshold.
Small universities, however, don’t have that luxury. If you enrol fewer than 100 international students, even a handful of refusals could push you into the danger zone. This forces smaller institutions to be extremely selective, tightening quality control on applications and perhaps narrowing the recruitment pool altogether.
It’s worth considering whether the MAC and UKVI might allow different levels of flexibility for smaller institutions. Applying the same standards across the board could be unfair, as not all institutions recruit in the same way or at the same scale.
A small, specialist provider in creative or performing arts, for example, will naturally draw fewer students than a comprehensive university offering everything from anthropology to zoology. Even among smaller universities, subject mix matters, as one with business, engineering and computing courses is likely to recruit far more students than another of the same size focused on niche disciplines such as veterinary science or agricultural studies.
The bottom line?
While the Graduate Route change has stolen the spotlight, the new BCA rules may well prove the bigger disruptor. For universities in the UK and recruiters in India and South Asia, September 2025 isn’t far away. The scramble to adapt has already begun.
How the BCA could reshape international recruitment
The impact of these changes will likely be felt in four major ways.
First and foremost, managing recruitment agents will become significantly more crucial. With visa refusal rates coming under intense scrutiny, universities will increasingly demand stricter compliance and accountability from their recruitment partners.
This will likely lead to more thorough vetting processes for agents, more stringent contractual agreements, and widespread implementation of standards such as the Agent Quality Framework (AQF).
Agents with consistently poor performance, particularly those associated with high visa refusal rates, will face swift removal from university-approved lists.
While the exact timeline for these changes is not yet clear, the immigration white paper also suggested the possibility of introducing a public “traffic light” system to display the BCA data of the universities transparently.
It would therefore be reasonable to expect a similar public database for recruitment agents available in the public domain, allowing universities easier access to detailed track records of agencies. This increased transparency will empower institutions to make more informed decisions about which agents to collaborate with.
Second, admissions processes will become more selective. This means deeper scrutiny of financial documents, academic readiness, and genuine study intent before issuing a CAS. Universities may introduce additional pre-CAS interviews, English proficiency re-checks, or even conditional academic bridging programs to ensure higher completion rates.
Selective treatment may be reintroduced as a strategy once again. Historically, many global universities have adopted region-specific recruitment policies, tailoring their approaches to different cities or states within the same country. These variations are often influenced by factors such as past visa approval rates, the academic calibre of students from particular areas, and key market insights.
In a vast and diverse market like India, this approach becomes especially relevant. Universities tend to exercise greater caution when recruiting from certain states compared to others, reflecting the complex demographic, economic, and educational landscape of the country.
This nuanced strategy allows institutions to optimise their recruitment efforts by focusing resources where the chances of success are higher, while managing risks in regions with less favourable indicators.
Finally, market focuscould shift. Institutions heavily reliant on high-risk markets may diversify towards countries with stronger visa success rates, while in South Asia, universities may work more closely with fewer but higher-quality partners. In practice, this might mean fewer students being offered places, but with higher confidence that those who arrive will stay the course.
In essence, the proposed changes to the BCA thresholds signal a fundamental shift in how international student recruitment is approached. Rather than focusing primarily on sheer volume or the quantity of students recruited, the emphasis is moving decisively towards quality, ensuring that students admitted meet higher standards and contribute positively to the university community and the broader educational ecosystem.
This shift challenges universities to rethink their recruitment strategies, prioritising compliance, student success, and sustainable growth over simply hitting numerical targets. For institutions within the prestigious Russell Group as well as others across the sector, the ability to swiftly adapt to these new expectations will be critical.
Those that embrace the change and implement robust quality-focused recruitment processes will be the ones best positioned to maintain strong and healthy intake numbers in the evolving landscape. Ultimately, the future belongs to universities that recognise the importance of quality over quantity and act accordingly.
In education, we often talk about “meeting the moment.” Our current moment presents us with both a challenge and an opportunity: How can we best prepare and support our teachers as they navigate increasingly complex classrooms while also dealing with unprecedented burnout and shortages within the profession?
One answer could lie in the thoughtful integration of artificial intelligence to help share feedback with educators during training. Timely, actionable feedback can support teacher development and self-efficacy, which is an educator’s belief that they will make a positive impact on student learning. Research shows that self-efficacy, in turn, reduces burnout, increases job satisfaction, and supports student achievement.
As someone who has spent nearly two decades supporting new teachers, I’ve witnessed firsthand how practical feedback delivered quickly and efficiently can transform teaching practice, improve self-efficacy, and support teacher retention and student learning.
AI gives us the chance to deliver this feedback faster and at scale.
A crisis demanding new solutions
Teacher shortages continue to reach critical levels across the country, with burnout cited as a primary factor. A recent University of Missouri study found that 78 percent of public school teachers have considered quitting their profession since the pandemic.
Many educators feel overwhelmed and under-supported, particularly in their formative years. This crisis demands innovative solutions that address both the quality and sustainability of teaching careers.
What’s often missing in teacher development and training programs is the same element that drives improvement in other high-performance fields: immediate, data-driven feedback. While surgeons review recordings of procedures and athletes get to analyze game footage, teachers often receive subjective observations weeks after teaching a lesson, if they receive feedback at all. Giving teachers the ability to efficiently reflect on AI-generated feedback–instead of examining hours of footage–will save time and potentially help reduce burnout.
The transformative potential of AI-enhanced feedback
Recently, Relay Graduate School of Education completed a pilot program with TeachFX using AI-powered feedback tools that showed remarkable promise for our teacher prep work. Our cohort of first- and second-year teachers more than doubled student response opportunities, improved their use of wait time, and asked more open-ended questions. Relay also gained access to objective data on student and teacher talk time, which enhanced our faculty’s coaching sessions.
Program participants described the experience as “transformative,” and most importantly, they found the tools both accessible and effective.
Here are four ways AI can support teacher preparation through effective feedback:
1. Improving student engagement through real-time feedback
Research reveals that teachers typically dominate classroom discourse, speaking for 70-80 percent of class time. This imbalance leaves little room for student voices and engagement. AI tools can track metrics such as student-versus-teacher talk time in real time, helping educators identify patterns and adjust their instruction to create more interactive, student-centered classrooms.
One participant in the TeachFX pilot said, “I was surprised to learn that I engage my students more than I thought. The data helped me build on what was working and identify opportunities for deeper student discourse.”
2. Freeing up faculty to focus on high-impact coaching
AI can generate detailed transcripts and visualize classroom interactions, allowing teachers to reflect independently on their practice. This continuous feedback loop accelerates growth without adding to workloads.
For faculty, the impact is equally powerful. In our recent pilot with TeachFX, grading time on formative observation assignments dropped by 60 percent, saving up to 30 hours per term. This reclaimed time was redirected to what matters most: meaningful mentoring and modeling of best practices with aspiring teachers.
With AI handling routine analysis, faculty could consider full class sessions rather than brief segments, identifying strategic moments throughout lessons for targeted coaching.
The human touch remains essential, but AI amplifies its reach and impact.
3. Scaling high-quality feedback across programs
What began as a small experiment has grown to include nearly 800 aspiring teachers. This scalability can more quickly reduce equity issues in teacher preparation.
Whether a teaching candidate is placed in a rural school or urban district, AI can ensure consistent access to meaningful, personalized feedback. This scalable approach helps reduce the geographic disparities that often plague teacher development programs.
Although AI output must be checked so that any potential biases that come through from the underlying datasets can be removed, AI tools also show promise for reducing bias when used thoughtfully. For example, AI can provide concrete analysis of classroom dynamics based on observable actions such as talk time, wait time, and types of questions asked. While human review and interpretation remains essential–to spot check for AI hallucinations or other inaccuracies and interpret patterns in context–purpose-built tools with appropriate guardrails can help deliver more equitable support.
4. Helping teachers recognize and build on their strengths
Harvard researchers found that while AI tools excel at using supportive language to appreciate classroom projects–and recognize the work that goes into each project–students who self-reported high levels of stress or low levels of enjoyment said the feedback was often unhelpful or insensitive. We must be thoughtful and intentional about the AI-powered feedback we share with students.
AI can also help teachers see what they themselves are doing well, which is something many educators struggle with. This strength-based approach builds confidence and resilience. As one TeachFX pilot participant noted, “I was surprised at the focus on my strengths as well and how to improve on them. I think it did a good job of getting good details on my conversation and the intent behind it. ”
I often tell new teachers: “You’ll never see me teach a perfect lesson because perfect lessons don’t exist. I strive to improve each time I teach, and those incremental gains add up for students.” AI helps teachers embrace this growth mindset by making improvement tangible and achievable.
The moment is now
The current teacher shortage is a crisis, but it’s also an opportunity to reimagine how we support teachers.
Every student deserves a teacher who knows how to meaningfully engage them. And every teacher deserves timely, actionable feedback. The moment to shape AI’s role in teacher preparation is now. Let’s leverage these tools to help develop confident, effective teachers who will inspire the next generation of learners.
Dr. Alice Waldron, Relay Graduate School of Education
Dr. Alice Waldron leads Relay’s collective efforts to accelerate progress toward our mission and vision through meaningful innovation. With a focus on impact, values, and financial sustainability, she creates and leads processes to test and scale innovation initiatives to meet the evolving needs of schools and educators. Prior to this role, Dr. Waldron was the founding Dean of Relay’s Online Campus as well as Relay’s national Dean of Clinical Experience.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Ashley Kannan teaches 8th grade American History and African American Studies at Percy Julian Middle School in Oak Park, Ill. He is a 2025-26 Teach Plus Leading Edge Fellow.
One of America’s largest teachers’ unions recently announced it’s starting an artificial intelligence training hub for educators with funding from Microsoft, OpenAI and Anthropic. This news signals that AI in schools is real — something Aadhira already knows.
Aadhira is a rising 8th grader I will teach this fall. Toward the end of last year, I saw her sitting in the hallway, on her laptop. I asked her what she was doing.
“History homework. I’m using AI.”
I asked if her teachers knew she used AI.
“Mr. Kannan, teachers don’t know anything about this AI stuff.”
Ashley Kannan
Permission granted by Ashley Kannan
Aadhira is not wrong. As with most new technologies, most students know more about AI than most adults. But we’re early enough in the process that we have an opportunity: Teachers like me can design the AI experience alongside students like Aadhira and inform the development of projects like the AI training hub. Together, we can create a new and better school experience for our students.
In my 29-year career, I have seen education react late to technology over and over again. We were slow to the internet, smartphones, social media and remote learning. AI is already a part of Aadhira’s life, yet my school district is part of the 80% that lack AI guidance and policies.
Amidst this uncertainty, AI is a pathway for teacher leadership. By embracing AI in my teaching and determining its specific purpose, I can control how it achieves my purpose: advancing my students’ journeys toward scholarship.
I know my classroom and content, and I can speak to how AI tools fit in my teaching. My voice is needed, because I teach students like Aadhira who use AI every day. Since I see what is and is not working, I can successfully influence AI decision-making.
While Aadhira is right that teachers like me “don’t know much about this AI stuff,” I can respond by not only crafting how AI will help me make her a scholar, but also use that expertise to guide how it should look for all of our district’s students. I can be an AI influencer in my classroom and beyond.
AI literacy can be a journey of growth for my students and me. Aadhira will be my AI teacher. I plan on learning her hacks and shortcuts, peeking behind the curtain in drawing from her AI savvy, grasping what she uses AI for, and figuring out how AI can help her be a scholar.
Aadhira can learn from me, too.
For instance, I can teach her how AI tools work with large datasets, how they recognize patterns, and how she can construct better AI prompts. As Aadhira learns the art of developing precise prompts to feed into AI, her language and processing skills will grow. Instead of “Do my homework on the American Revolution,” she can more specifically put in, “I need help on understanding the main causes of the American Revolution.”
As Aadhira shows more precision in her commands, she will learn to better control the AI tool she’s using — something she will need in an AI world. Using AI in this way helps her understand concepts, challenges her thinking, and supports her in creating authentic work.
I can teach Aadhira how to effectively consume AI content. For example, what if she generated artifacts from AI about the causes of the American Revolution and then graded them with a rubric she and I co-created? Aadhira would be examining AI products as opposed to digesting them as unquestioned fact, thinking critically as a scholar as she assesses AI work.
I can also learn through conversations with Aadhira about her AI user experience. These can guide my leadership work, adding teacher and student voice to initiatives such as the AI instructional hub. Aadhira teaches me while I teach her, reflecting our shared AI learning journeys.
Aadhira and I can be pioneers in the birth of a collaborative school setting driven by student and teacher voice. If AI can enhance teacher leadership and develop transformative and worthwhile learning for students, it will permanently transform school into a space where teachers and learners have more voice, agency and, ultimately, power.
Aadhira is coming my way in the fall. As I shape how I want AI to help her be a scholar, I will be ready.
Leslie Ortega is pursuing her second bachelor’s degree in botany at a university in California. She earned her first degree in business administration back in December 2016. That was before U.S. President Donald Trump took office. The experience was much different then.
“Obama was president when I was in college from 2012-2016 and I remember how happy everyone was around me,” Ortega said. “There was an oblivious feel to it where we felt safe. Now being in school I notice that there is definitely more fear in classrooms.”
With Trump in office for a second term, Ortega said she sees a major shift. It is no longer easy to be blind to the realities of how so many lives are changing.
“Existing in a world where your neighbor or your favorite food vendor can be snatched off the street on the basis of their skin color and occupation is impossible to hide from,” she said. “This has always been happening even during Obama but we had rose colored glasses when he was in office.”
As someone who recently graduated two months ago with a bachelor of arts focused in ethnic studies, I have to agree with Ortega. I cannot ignore the current political state of the country, especially as students and universities remain potential targets of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids.
An attack on diverse perspectives
On top of that, conservatives are actively taking actions that threaten diversity, equity and Inclusion measures and certain subjects like critical race theory. My major, rooted in critical race theory, is deemed controversial by some because it teaches students to critically analyze information and question authority in a sense. Ethnic Studies courses are typically taught to engage people to uncover history from non-white perspectives, unveiling a legacy of imperialism and racism.
Actions that make it difficult to teach or learn these concepts are being enacted by people in power who seem to lack consideration for how marginalized communities will be affected.
At the California university I attended, two emails from the administration addressed the topic of immigration this past semester. The first was a letter from the interim president back in February 2025 which outlined guidance for university employees and students on how to interact with ICE officers if they ever showed up on campus.
It stated that since a large portion of the campus is open to the general public, it is therefore open to federal officers.
However, ICE agents could not enter areas not open to the public such as residence halls, confidential meeting rooms, employee offices or classrooms while the university was in session. This email also outlined resources students and staff could turn to such as the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and a new center for “Dreamers” – undocumented people who had been brought into the United States as children. It also explained how to create an immigration preparedness plan.
A second email was sent out two months later, with quick guide cards and a link to an immigration resources page on the university website.
Will campus be an unsafe haven?
It is currently summer. How the university will actually respond if ICE were to show up on campus is really up in the air. It is one thing to voice concern and another to actually intervene in the face of injustice to protect targeted individuals.
While I will not return to campus this fall, I have no doubt that it will be students and staff of color who will ultimately serve as the first line of defense. Given how the university has responded in the past to student activist efforts, I would not be surprised if the campus administration did little should ICE arrive.
Across the country, university students have watched the detainment of student activists by ICE agents. Merely advocating against Israel’s ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza, has been deemed a crime worthy of detention and deportation.
These detainees included Mohsen Mahdawi and Mahmoud Khalil from Columbia University and Rumeysa Ozturk from Tufts University. Khalil spent more than three months in detention before his release on 20 June.
The arrests of students simply for speaking out angers students like Ortega.
“It is infuriating to hear about student’s visas being revoked for their stance on supporting Palestine during a presidency that criminalizes opposition to the status quo,” Ortega said. “[This is] referring to anyone that critiques American ideology, the military complex or simply the American flag.”
Arrests in the City of Angels
Los Angeles has seen a surge of undocumented immigrants being arrested. According to the Los Angeles Times, nearly 2,800 people have been picked up by masked ICE agents on the streets, at job sites, Home Depot parking lots and even outside immigration court hearings since 6 June 2025.
Across the country these numbers could rise. In July, the U.S. Congress passed a national budget called the “Big Beautiful Bill” which will greatly increase the number of ICE agents and detention centers.
I view this bill as a way to cement discrimination against immigrants into the U.S. legal framework. We are already seeing the rapid construction and opening of detention centers such as Alligator Alcatraz in Florida – a tent city that can hold up to 3,000 people
According to public and internal data from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, as collected by NBC News, more than 56,000 people were being held in ICE detention centers as of 1 Aug. 2025.
All this has created a state of fear. I spoke to someone who lives in California and currently holds a student visa holder. I’m not identifying the person because of fear that doing so will make them a target. The student recently earned a master’s degree in education and is currently in the admission process to a teaching credential program.
“There’s a culture here [in the U.S.] that when they hear that you don’t have a social security number, they stop helping you as if you were a pariah,” the person said. “I couldn’t work on campus, I lost a lot of opportunities because I didn’t have a social security number. Sometimes I could get stipends or fellowships but it was because of people who understand immigrants.”
Silencing of student activism
They now have a work visa and hope to get permanent residency, but given all the threats the current presidential administration has made to student visa holders, they wonder about their prospects.
“The silencing of the student activists is sending a message to everyone that if you dissent, if you protest, if you do not agree with what’s going on right now, then there will be consequences,” they said.
They said they used to be politically active, but no longer feel safe to do so here, or at least to the same degree.
“There’s an executive order that says that the first thing they’re going to look at about you is your social media, so you cannot even post about what you think, what you defend,” they said. “You cannot talk about the ongoing genocide anymore, because then, all the money that you have invested in changing your migratory status will be thrown to the trash. You give all your money, that’s dispossession without violence, you make this enormous sacrifice and then you don’t want to lose it, right, so you are forced, you are silenced.”
I am choosing to censor the person’s name for the sake of their own safety and wellbeing, I can’t help but wonder if doing so represents yet another way immigrants are silenced.
Fighting desensitization
All of this is to say that being a person of color and a student during this presidential administration has been exceptionally difficult. That’s particularly true for someone like Ortega, who attends school in a predominantly White area.
“It is emotionally and mentally draining to be focusing on your safety existing on a campus that doesn’t support you if you choose to wear a keffiyeh or a patch in opposition of a felon as a president,” Ortega said.
I recognize that as a person of color, I might not have the same advantages as someone who is White. As an American citizen though, I have some sense of protection in speaking up. But it is my Mexican and Guatemalan heritage that fuels my fight.
My existence is a result of immigration; I would not be where I am today if it were not for my family members who chose to come to the United States.
While it can be easy to become desensitized, especially with a new devastating headline every day, I urge others to hold onto some sense of hope by leaning into community resistance. Only by letting go of the belief that “this doesn’t personally affect me, so I don’t care” can we truly begin to dismantle systems of power.
Only seven months have passed since Trump returned to the presidential office. As he continues to carry out his seemingly racist agenda that targets anyone who is low-income, disabled, queer or non-White, university campuses that are supposed to be havens for learning and connecting with new ideas, are now filled with fear and suspense.
Questions to consider:
1. Why are increasing numbers of university students in the United States afraid to speak out?
2. Why do you think the author feels she doesn’t have the same protections as a U.S. citizen as someone who is White?
3. Do you think that people who want to study in another country should be able to do so?
The Department of Defense now says that “consideration of race and ethnicity in admissions at the MSAs does not promote military cohesiveness, lethality, recruitment, retention, or legitimacy; national security; or any other governmental interest.”
Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
Students for Fair Admissions, the organization that successfully fought to end race-conscious admissions practices, settled with two military academies that were exempted from the 2023 Supreme Court ruling that ended affirmative action, The New York Times reported.
The Supreme Court ruled two years ago that military academies could continue to practice race-conscious admissions due to “potentially distinct interests” at such institutions. SFFA then sued, arguing such practices should be struck down. But on Monday, SFFA dropped its lawsuits against the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and the United States Air Force Academy.
As part of the agreement, the Department of Defense, which oversees military service academies, will no longer consider race and ethnicity in admissions, according to settlement details, which emphasize recruiting and promoting individuals based on merit alone. That settlement also backed away from the notion that it has an interest in a diverse office corps.
“The Department of Defense has determined, based on the military’s experience and expertise—and after reviewing the relevant evidence—that the consideration of race and ethnicity in admissions at the MSAs does not promote military cohesiveness, lethality, recruitment, retention, or legitimacy; national security; or any other governmental interest,” part of the settlement between SFFA and the Department of Defense reads. “The United States no longer believes that the challenged practices are justified by a ‘compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps.’”
Additionally, if an applicant lists race or ethnicity on an application, “no one with responsibility over admissions can see, access or consider” that information prior to a decision being made.
The Department of Justice said Tuesday that George Washington University was “deliberately indifferent” toward Jewish students and faculty who said they faced antisemitic harassment and had violated federal civil rights law that bars discrimination based on race and national origin.
The four-page letter signals that George Washington could be the next university in the Trump administration’s crosshairs. The DOJ sent a similar letter to the University of California, Los Angeles, late last month, and then various federal agencies froze more than $500 million in federal grants at the university. Since then, the Trump administration has demanded $1 billion from the UC system to resolve the dispute—a move the state’s governor called “extortion.”
GW was one of 10 universities that a federal task force to combat antisemitism had planned to visit and investigate. That list included UCLA and Harvard and Columbia Universities, which also have been targeted by the Trump administration.
Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the civil rights division, wrote in the letter that the department plans to enforce its findings unless the university agrees to a voluntary resolution agreement to address the agency’s concerns. She didn’t detail what such an agreement would entail or what enforcement might look like.
The department’s allegations largely center on how the university responded—or didn’t—to a spring 2024 encampment established to protest the war in Gaza. The university ultimately called in D.C. police to clear the demonstration after it persisted for nearly two weeks.
“The purpose of the agitators’ efforts was to frighten, intimidate, and deny Jewish, Israeli, and American-Israeli students free and unfettered access to GWU’s educational environment,” Dhillon wrote. “This is the definition of hostility and a ‘hostile environment.’”
She also wrote that university officials “took no meaningful action” in the face of at least eight complaints alleging that demonstrators at the encampment were discriminating against students because they were Jewish or Israeli.
George Washington spokesperson Shannon McClendon said in a statement that university officials were reviewing the letter.
“GW condemns antisemitism, which has absolutely no place on our campuses or in a civil and humane society,” McClendon said. “Moreover, our actions clearly demonstrate our commitment to addressing antisemitic actions and promoting an inclusive campus environment by upholding a safe, respectful, and accountable environment. We have taken appropriate action under university policy and the law to hold individuals or organizations accountable, including during the encampment, and we do not tolerate behavior that threatens our community or undermines meaningful dialogue.”
Research on community colleges has taken a hit amid the Trump administration’s ongoing war against the Ivy League.
The Community College Research Center, an independent organization based at Columbia University’s Teachers College, found out in March that four of its grantstotaling at about $12 million were immediately cancelled, despite being multiple years into their grant cycles. The remaining grant money expected from the Institute of Education Sciences amounted to at least $3.5 million. Four half-completed research projects relied on the funding. Now CCRC leaders are scrambling to find ways to continue the work.
The grants were swept up in the Trump administration’s slashing of $400 million in grants to Columbia University to cow the institution into agreeing to a set of demands. Columbia has since reached an agreement with the administration to restore its federal funding, but the deal only restored grants administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health. Education Department grants, like the CCRC’s, didn’t return.
The center, now almost 30 years old, conducts rigorous research into community college programs and practices, like guided pathways and dual enrollment, to help institutions improve the student experience and student outcomes.
The canceled grants funded two efforts focused on pandemic recovery, including a study into a program at Virginia community colleges to support adults earning short-term credentials in high-demand fields. CCRC researchers were also using IES money to evaluate the Federal Work-Study program and for a fellowship that placed doctoral students in apprenticeships at education agencies and nonprofits. Teachers College has agreed to take over funding for the fellowship program for at least the upcoming academic year.
Thomas Brock, CCRC’s director, worries the field of community college research—and its benefits for students—are at risk at a time when federal funding has grown more tenuous. He spoke with Inside Higher Ed about how the center is moving forward in the absence of these funds. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Q: How did you react when you first heard from the Education Department about the nixed IES grants?
A: It got us completely by surprise. We did not see that coming. The notification came on a Friday morning. We had to be finished with our work by the end of the day that Friday—we could have no further charges beyond that point. So, there was just no time to prepare. And all of our communications with IES until that point had been very positive. We were on track to complete the goals of our grants. We had been in frequent conversation with our program officers. So, there was simply no inkling that this would be coming.
Q: What was the extent of the funding loss for you?
A: The overall funding loss amounted to about $3.5 million. Most of the grants that we were working on were pretty far along. The total berth of the grants was well above $3.5 million, but that was about the amount we had remaining. Most of the work that was canceled was in the last year or two. It was all the more disappointing then, because we were so close to having results that we could share with the field. And that is important, of course, not just to CCRC but to the states and colleges that we partner with more broadly to accomplish our mission of informing community colleges, policymakers, practitioners about strategies that work to improve student outcomes.
Q: Going forward, what’s going to happen to projects funded by the canceled grants?
A: So, everything had to be put on hold. I will say we’ve been in discussion with some foundations about what they are calling last-mile funding to complete some of the IES-funded work. We don’t have the grants in hand just yet but invited proposals and ones we think have a good chance of funding.
We should hear news this fall about some of those. With the last-mile funding, we had to narrow the scope. Generally speaking, foundations don’t have the kinds of resources that the federal government does. So, most of these grants are just to really get out the final results and not putting as much emphasis on dissemination as we would have done with the federal funding. But nonetheless, we’re very grateful to have those opportunities.
We were lucky at CCRC. We’ve been around for a while. So, over many years, we’ve built up a reserve fund for rainy days, and we decided if this wasn’t a rainy day, we didn’t know what was. So, we have dipped into those reserves to keep many of our staff fully employed while they work on these proposals and to continue to have the ability to do the work if we get refunded. Those funds won’t last forever. We will have to make some tough decisions later this year about just what size of organization we can continue to support with foundation funds. And, I should note, we have already made a few layoffs and have had a couple of voluntary departures. So we are already smaller than we were, but we hope to maintain a critical core.
Q: Columbia recently reached an agreement with the Trump administration to have some of its research funds restored. Were you hopeful that your funds would be restored as well in that agreement?
A: We were, yes. We were not part of the negotiations. That was handled by Columbia University. And one of the complications here—really, going all the way back to the initial cancellation of our grants—was a misunderstanding, honestly, by the current administration of Teachers College’s relationship to Columbia. We are an affiliated institution, but we are independent—legally, financially, administratively. We have our own president, our own Board of Directors. We are a separate nonprofit organization, a separate 501(c)(3), so the affiliation we have is a loose one. It allows our students to cross-register and take courses at Columbia. But we do not benefit in any way from Columbia’s endowment or its wealth as an institution. Teachers College is a relatively poor stepchild within the Columbia University constellation.
So, when we first lost our grants, we appealed as we were instructed to do if we had an issue with the cancellation. The beginning of our appeal was just that we are a separate institution. Whatever complaints the administration may have about Columbia University and how it handled the student protests last year, that had no bearing on what happened at Teachers College. And indeed, we had no student protests. We had no actions that were of concern to the administration or to anyone. So, we hope, just on that basis, we might win on appeal.
Our appeals were acknowledged, but they have not ever been acted upon as the university went forward with its negotiations. We were hopeful that perhaps [the agreement] would benefit us as well. And when the settlement was reached, I had maybe 24 hours when I was I was really holding my breath. But unfortunately, as we looked at the details of the settlement, it only applied to grants made to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health. Department of Education grants were not included.
Q: You touched on this, but what comes next for the CCRC? How are you thinking about moving forward and how you might have to pivot?
A: In the near term, we will have to depend on foundation funding exclusively or primarily. We are fortunate in that we have a long history of foundation funding, so that’s not new, but our model has always involved a blending of federal and foundation resources. And that’s just very important to an organization like ours, because foundations and the federal government have typically funded different kinds of things. They both are really critical to advancing a research agenda.
What is the most important about the federal funding is, No. 1, the strong emphasis on scientific rigor. So, things like the randomized controlled trials that we’re doing on Federal Work-Study, it’s possible you could get a foundation to pick up a project like that, but that is much more in the bailiwick, or at least traditionally has been in the bailiwick of the U.S. Department of Education and its Institute of Education Sciences—not just randomized controlled trials but rigor in all ways, the emphasis on nationally representative samples on longitudinal research. IES funding has been really important for that.
A second way IES has been so critical is this emphasis on dissemination. IES has been criticized, and justifiably so, for the What Works Clearinghouse, for instance, being a bit indecipherable at first and having too much in it that really wasn’t showing effectiveness. But it’s come a long way in improving that resource and also really in encouraging grantees to get their findings out into the field. We depended heavily on federal funding for our website, for our social media efforts, for attending practitioner conferences. It was really vital support for those purposes. So, that is largely what concerns us. Perhaps some new foundation supporters will be interested in that kind of work. [It’s] not likely we will find the level of funding that was available through the federal government, but we hope at least enough to keep our essential communications and outreach efforts intact.
Our agenda will probably have to shift a little bit. This is also what’s disappointing about the Department of Education and IES stepping back—we could count on them to really help set the national agenda and things that were of importance to all 50 states and students in all parts of the country. It’s not to say foundations don’t have that interest, but it is much more typical with foundations to find that they are investing in particular places. There simply are not that many foundations with the resources to kind of take the national view, and that is a concern moving forward. So, it’s something that we’re addressing or trying to think about strategically, but it will be a challenge.
Q: How does the uncertainty with federal funding affect the broader field of community college research?
A: Well, obviously I am biased here. I think research matters, or I would not have entered this profession.
There have been major advances in how community colleges think about developmental education, for example. The models that were in place 20 years ago just turned out to be fundamentally wrong. Most community college students coming in were assessed and placed into developmental education courses that actually did them more harm than good. It was years of careful research that documented that fact and that then supported partnerships with community colleges interested in trying different strategies.
And thanks to all of that work, we now have multiple-measures assessment, where students’ high school grades and other indicators are used. It’s resulting in far fewer students being placed in developmental courses. We also have corequisite remediation, where students are placed in college-level work right away with extra support, as opposed to requiring them to do what was known as prerequisite remediation before starting college-level work. So, those are strategies that we would not have known about, but for this kind of investment, and strategies that have been widely picked up now by the field that are demonstrably leading to improve student outcomes.
So, I guess what I worry about is the cessation, or near cessation, of those kinds of research and development efforts that lead to new insights, that lead to new ways of doing business that really could be transformative for students. And if you think about today’s challenges, they are no different or less concerning.
Artificial intelligence is transforming education. What will it mean for community college students? How could institutions best harness those tools to really ensure students are learning and moving forward? That’s a big, big area that I think cries out for deeper investigation. Another big area of interest is short-term training. Congress is prepared to make Pell Grants available for short-term training. Past evidence has shown not much effectiveness there. But what are the program areas that do lend themselves to short-term training? How might community colleges focus these efforts so that they really do lead to a payoff for students and for taxpayers?
These are big questions that, if we don’t have some of the foundational work in place, we’re not going to have answers five or 10 years from now. And the field as a whole, students specifically, will suffer as a result.
