How well did you keep up with this week’s developments in K-12 education? To find out, take our five-question quiz below. Then, share your score by tagging us on social media with #K12DivePopQuiz.
Key points:
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes an integral part of modern education, instructional coaches play a pivotal role in guiding teachers on its implementation, bridging the gap between emerging educational technologies and effective classroom practices.
As trusted mentors and professional development leaders, they guide teachers in implementing AI tools thoughtfully, ensuring that technology enhances student learning while aligning with pedagogical best practices. This article briefly synthesizes responses from instructional coaches regarding their experiences, challenges, and recommendations for integrating AI into K-12 education.
Ten instructional coaches, all with advanced degrees, had the following insights into the instructional use of AI in K12 education. They all have more than 10 years of experience in education and work across all three types of school environments: urban, suburban, and rural.
The coaches reported that AI is used for various instructional purposes. The most-cited applications included providing feedback on student work, creating professional development materials, supporting writing and content generation, creating course content, and enhancing accessibility for students with special needs. Many coaches note that AI tools assisted in grading assignments, offering real-time feedback, and supporting differentiated instruction. AI-powered feedback helps teachers provide more personalized responses without increasing their workload. Regarding professional development, AI is being used to generate training content for teachers, ensuring they stay updated on educational trends. Coaches are leveraging AI to curate research, synthesize best practices, and develop instructional strategies tailored to their schools. They encourage teachers and students to utilize AI for brainstorming, outlining essays, and improving writing mechanics.
Perceived impact of AI on instruction
The vast majority of instructional coaches expressed positive expectations regarding AI’s potential to reduce educator workload, create personalized learning experiences, and improve access for students with disabilities. However, perspectives on AI’s overall impact on education varied. While most believe AI has positively influenced instruction, a few remain cautious about its potential risks. One coach suggested that allowing students to utilize the tools in a structured setting and teaching them to use AI as a tool is one of the biggest potentials for generative AI in education. About three-fourths of coaches feel that AI will reduce teacher workload by automating repetitive tasks such as grading and data analysis.
Concerns about AI in education
While AI presents numerous benefits, instructional coaches also raised concerns about its potential drawbacks, including ethical dilemmas, student engagement challenges, and equity issues. Despite its advantages, instructional coaches identified several challenges and ethical concerns. They worry some students will use AI tools without critically engaging with the material, leading to passive learning and an overreliance on generative tools. Some had concerns that AI-generated content could reduce the need for creativity and independent thought. Coaches worry that AI makes it easier for students to plagiarize or rely on generated answers without truly understanding concepts which can negatively impact academic integrity. Coaches cite technical challenges as well. Educators face issues with AI tool reliability, compatibility with existing learning management systems (LMS), and steep learning curves. The coaches mentioned that some schools lack the infrastructure to support meaningful widespread AI integration.
Several ethical and privacy concerns were mentioned. AI tools collect and store student data, raising concerns about data privacy and security–particularly with younger students who may be less aware or concerned about revealing personally identifiable information (PII). They mention the need for clear guidelines on responsible AI use to prevent bias and misinformation.
Coaches emphasize the importance of verifying AI-generated materials for accuracy. They suggest teachers be encouraged to cross-check AI-produced responses before using them in instruction. They recommend robust integrating discussions on digital literacy, AI biases, and the ethical implications of generative AI into classroom conversations. Schools need to train educators and students on responsible AI usage. Some schools restrict AI for creative writing, critical thinking exercises, and certain assessments to ensure students develop their own ideas–an idea that coaches recommend. Coaches suggest embedding AI literacy into existing courses, ensuring students understand how AI works, its limitations, and its ethical implications.
Equity concerns are a serious issue for instructional coaches. Schools should ensure all students have equal access to AI tools. AI should be leveraged to bridge learning gaps, not widen them. Making sure all students have access to the same suite of tools is essential to create a level playing field for all learners. Instructional coaches generally agree that AI is not just a passing trend, but an integral part of the future of education. There is a concern that generative AI tools will reduce the human interaction of the teaching and learning process. For instance, interpersonal relationships are not developed with AI-based tutoring systems in the same way they can be developed and encouraged with traditional tutoring processes.
The integration of AI in K-12 education presents both opportunities and challenges. Instructional coaches largely recognize AI’s potential to enhance learning, improve efficiency, academic integrity, and maintain human-centered learning experiences. As AI continues to evolve, educators must be proactive in shaping how it is used, ensuring it serves as a tool for empowerment rather than dependency. Future efforts should focus on professional development for educators, AI literacy training for students, and policies ensuring equitable AI access across diverse school settings.
Many schools and higher education partnerships that support the teacher pipeline are starting to feel the brunt of a $600 million cut in “divisive” teacher training grants announced Feb. 17 by the U.S. Department of Education.
The cost-cutting measures by the Education Department are part of a broader effort throughout the federal government initiated by the Trump administration. The initiative led by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, reported this week that the Education Department is leading among other federal agencies for the most savings in total funding cuts.
Two of the most common federal grant programs impacted so far are the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant, said Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy, president and CEO of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. AACTE has been surveying its members to gauge the grant slashing effort’s reach.
Though the Education Department did not specify which teacher training grants programs were being cut, the agency said in its announcement that the reductions are targeting funds to institutions and nonprofits that were using training materials on topics such as critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion. The department added that “many of these grants included teacher and staff recruiting strategies implicitly and explicitly based on race.”
At American University in Washington, D.C., for instance, a Teacher Quality Partnership Program grant allowed the university to help paraprofessionals at Friendship Charter Public Schools earn a master’s degree in early childhood or special education, “which there is a real need for,” said Holcomb-McCoy, who previously served as dean of American University’s School of Education.
The multiyear federal grant — which covered the private university’s tuition for about 15 teacher candidates to get credentialed, Holcomb-McCoy said — was written to benefit Friendship Charter Public Schools, as well as to address special educator shortages throughout the city.. That funding was “essentially cut.”
“We talk about teacher shortages of special education, teacher shortages in subjects such as science and math and technology,” Holcomb-McCoy said. “Cutting these grants essentially is cutting off the pipeline for many aspiring educators to get into the profession, and it’s not helping us. It’s hurting K-12 districts in many ways.”
The grant also noted that it’s important to have a diverse representation of special education teachers trained in inclusive practices in Washington, D.C., schools, Holcomb-McCoy said. “The impact that that has on students with special needs is huge, and to stop that pipeline of people who aspire to work in that space is devastating to school districts and to communities and families.”
AACTE estimates that about 31 Supporting Effective Educator Development grants and as many as 75 Teacher Quality Partnership Program grants were recently canceled nationwide. The association is providing support to its members and plans to help them first appeal their cases to the Education Department.
AACTE is also exploring potential litigation options, Holcomb-McCoy said.
Many of the applications for federal grants that were cut were written to align with priorities related to diversity set by former presidential administrations. As a result, Holcomb-McCoy said, a lot of those grant programs intentionally sought to address issues over diversity, equity and inclusion.
Still, diversity in the teacher workforce has been a longstanding issue, she said. As the student population becomes more diverse, the hope has been to hire and keep teachers who are representative of their students.
The most recently available federal data on teacher demographics shows that in the 2020-21 school year 80% of teachers were White compared to 46% of students nationwide. Meanwhile, 28% of students were Hispanic and only 9% of teachers share the same background, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Black students also saw an underrepresentation of classroom instructors at 15% versus 6%, respectively, during the same period.
“We’ve seen a decline in the number of undergraduates who want to go into teaching over the years, and quite frankly, we’ve just had a hard time recruiting and retaining teachers in certain areas. And these grants were written to address the communities in which they are serving,” Holcomb-McCoy said.
A December analysis by the National Council on Teacher Quality found that teacher diversity grew slowly between 2014 and 2022. The percentage of teachers from historically disadvantaged racial groups rose nationwide from 18.3% to 21.1%. But the diversity represented among working-age adults with degrees is starting to outpace that of the teacher workforce, leading to concerns that people of color are opting out of education careers, the report said.
In addition to cutting teacher training programs, the Education Department also recently slashed $881 million in multiyear research contracts.
Those research funding cuts will also make it difficult to measure the success of newer interventions like grow-your-own programs and teacher apprenticeships when it comes to increasing access to much-needed, high-quality educators, Holcomb-McCoy said.
“If we do not have access to grant funds for rigorous research related to these new strategies, we still don’t know if it works or not, so it’s a workforce issue,” she said.
From 16-18 February 2025, a high-level delegation from the UK visited Egyptian universities: Ain Shams University, and European Universities in Egypt (EUE); with a planned visit to New Cairo Technological University, to explore possible collaborations between the two countries.
“Over the course of three enriching days, the education team in Egypt led a higher education mission that was launched in the New Administrative Capital, under the patronage of the Minister of Higher Education through the Supreme Council of Universities and the Egyptian Bureau for Cultural and Educational Affairs in London in collaboration with the British Council in Egypt, and the support of the British Embassy,” Heba ElZein, director of education at the British Council in Egypt told The PIE.
The delegation comprised representatives from prestigious UK universities, including Sheffield Hallam University, Loughborough University, the University of Essex, the University of East Anglia, the University of Exeter, and the University of Chester.
Universities UK International representatives were also in attendance, with Anouf El-Daher, policy officer for Africa and Middle East at UUKi, presenting at the British Embassy in Cairo and British Council Egypt, highlighting the value of international collaboration and the potential for long-term, mutually beneficial, EU-Egypt education relationships.
“Over three days, we visited higher education institutions across Egypt, gaining valuable insights into the local landscape and exploring opportunities for deeper collaboration. This mission allowed us to engage with key stakeholders, understand the evolving higher education landscape in Egypt, and witness the impact of UK-Egypt partnerships firsthand,” a LinkedIn post from UUKi read.
Over the course of three enriching days, the education team in Egypt led a higher education mission that was launched in the New Administrative Capital
Heba ElZein, British Council
The mission offered numerous networking opportunities, as well as joint meetings for Egyptian universities wishing to cooperate and discuss opportunities with their British counterparts.
The delegation’s primary focus was to foster academic exchange, establish international university branch campus opportunities, and strengthen research collaborations. One of the most significant outcomes of the visit was the signing of multiple Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) between UK and Egyptian universities.
During that high-profile participation, three MoUs were signed between the University of Essex and Ain Shams University, the University of East Anglia and Ain Shams University, and the University of Sheffield Hallam and the British University in Egypt.
These agreements are expected to facilitate joint programs, faculty exchanges, and shared research initiatives in the coming years.
Students in Egypt show a strong interest in TNE as the UK-affiliated programs offer tuition fees from £800 to £13,500, depending on the partnership model. And due to economic and currency challenges, Egyptians are increasingly likely to opt to study in Egypt on a TNE model, as well as inbound students to the country, primarily from Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Nigeria, and Iraq.
Thus, with a population of around 111 million, and a youthful median age of 24.3, Egypt leads the MENA region in TNE enrolments with 27,865 students in 2022-2023, making it the 5th largest UK TNE host country globally.
Egypt has emerged as a leading host of UK transnational education students in the MENA region, and the UK remains Egypt’s largest partner in higher education.
This delegation’s visit is part of a broader initiative to further deepen these ties and provide Egyptian students with greater access to high-quality British education.
Key points:
Professional growth is often at the top of New Year’s Resolution lists. As educators and education leaders plan for the year ahead, we asked some of the nation’s top female school district leaders to give fellow women educators the do’s and don’ts of climbing the professional ladder. Here’s what they said.
Do: Believe in yourself.
Though women make up 76 percent of teachers in K-12 school settings, just a small percentage of women hold the most senior role in a district. But the climb to leadership isn’t an easy one; women in educational leadership report a range of biases–from interpersonal slights to structural inequities–that make it difficult to attain and persist in top positions.
Professional groups like Women Leading Ed are working to change that by highlighting long standing gender gaps and calling for policies and practices to improve conditions at all levels. Female education leaders are also working to rewrite the narrative around what’s possible for women educators and encouraging their peers.
Among those education leaders is Shanie Keelean, deputy superintendent of Rush-Henrietta Central School District in New York. When asked to share advice to her peers, she said, “You just have to continually push yourself forward and believe in yourself. So very often women, if they don’t check all the boxes, they decide not to go for something. And you don’t have to check all the boxes. Nobody knows everything in every job. You learn things as you go. Passion and energy go a long way in being really committed.”
Nerlande Anselme, superintendent of Rome City School District in New York, agreed: “We have directors in this field, we have coordinators in this field, we have psychologists who are doing amazing work, but they will dim themselves and figure that they cannot get to the top. Don’t dim your light.”
Don’t: Keep your career goals a secret.
When you decide to pursue a leadership position, don’t keep it a secret. While it may feel “taboo” to announce your intentions or desires, it’s actually an important first step to achieving a leadership role, said Kathleen Skeals, superintendent of North Colonie Central School District in New York.
“Once people know you’re interested, then people start to mentor you and help you grow into the next step in your career,” Skeals said.
Kyla Johnson-Trammell, superintendent of Oakland Unified School District in California, echoed: “Make your curiosity and your ambition known. You’ll be pleasantly surprised how that will be received by many of the folks that you work for.”
Do: Find a strong mentor.
A strong mentor can make all the difference in the climb to the top, leaders agreed.
“Seek out a leader you respect and ask for a time where you could have a conversation about exploring some possibilities and what the future might bring to you,” said Mary-Anne Sheppard, executive director of leadership development for Norwalk Public Schools in Connecticut.
It’s especially helpful to connect with someone in a position that you want to be in, said Melanie Kay-Wyatt, superintendent of Alexandria City Public Schools in Virginia. “Find someone who’s in the role you want to be in, who has a similar work ethic and a life that you have, so they can help you,” she said.
Don’t: Be afraid to ask questions.
“Start asking a lot of questions,” said Keelean. She suggested shadowing a mentor for a day or asking for their help in creating a career map or plan.
And don’t be afraid to take risks, added Johnson-Trammell. “Could you get me 15 minutes with the superintendent or the chief academic officer?”
Do: Build your skill set and network.
“Increase your impact by developing relational skills and leadership skills,” said Rachel Alex, executive director of leadership development of Aldine Independent School District in Texas.
And cultivate a network, said Heather Sanchez, chief of schools for Bellevue School District in Washington. “We can’t do it alone. Find that network, cultivate that network.”
Don’t: Give up.
“People are always going to tell you no, but that does not stop you,” said Kimberley James. “Continue to live beyond the noise and the distractions and stay focused on what it is that you want to accomplish for our students.”
“I would say to any woman aspiring to any level of leadership that first of all, never sell yourself short,” said Sanchez. “You have it in you.”
Interviews were conducted as part of the Visionary Voices video series. Responses have been edited for clarity and brevity.
Educators in Ontario are setting the record straight about the cause of the province’s college funding crisis – the blame for which, they say, falls squarely on the Ontario provincial government.
“We currently see a wave of Ontario college program closures/suspensions sweeping across all of Ontario’s 24 colleges… This is just the tip of the iceberg and there will be many more to follow,” school educator and former college administrator David Deveau wrote in a letter to government officials.
“This letter aims to correct the media’s false assertion that these program suspensions are a direct result of the federal government’s restrictions on international student visa approvals and identify the actual reason for this alarming trend across the Ontario college system,” he continued.
The letter, which has been widely shared by sector stakeholders, lays the blame for Ontario’s college crisis on decades of underfunding from the provincial government, exacerbated by a 10% tuition fee reduction and freeze in 2019.
“Ontario’s higher education sector is in crisis due to chronic underfunding, tuition freezes, and a reliance on international student tuition as a financial lifeline,” said Chris Busch, senior international officer at the University of Windsor.
In 2001/02, Ontario’s colleges received 52.5% of their revenue from public funding, the second lowest of any province, according to Canada’s statistics agency.
By 2019/20, this figure had dropped to 32%, by far the lowest proportion across Canada’s provinces and territories, which, on average, provided 69% of college funding that year.
“Colleges and universities have had to attract talent from abroad, increasingly enrolling international student to help fill the funding gap,” said Vinitha Gengatharan, assistant VP of global engagement at York University.
This is particularly evident at the college level, where institutions have seen international student enrolment of 30-60%, compared to universities where it ranges from 10-20%, added Gengatharan.
Educators across Ontario’s college and university sector have spoken out in support of Deveau’s letter, calling for a long-term commitment to stable and adequate funding from the provincial government.
In recent weeks, Ontario’s 24 public colleges have made the headlines for sweeping budget cuts, course closures and staff layoffs.
Stakeholders have raised additional concerns about increased class sizes and deferred maintenance and tech upgrades eroding the quality of education and the student experience for all learners, including Ontarians, Busch maintained.
This week, Algonquin College announced the closure of its campus in Perth, Ontario, alongside the cancellation of 10 programs and the suspension of 31, citing “unprecedented financial challenges”.
It follows Sheridan and St. Lawrence colleges announcing course suspensions with associated layoffs, and Mohawk College cutting 20% of admin jobs.
The ability of Ontario’s universities to fulfil their mission – providing high-quality education, driving research, and fuelling the economy with talent – is at significant risk under current conditions
Chris Busch, University of Windsor
“What is currently happening within our colleges is a downward spiral that will hurt Ontarians, the labour market, and our economies in the end,” wrote Deveau, adding that it was especially important to be strong in the face of externally imposed tariffs from the Trump administration.
In the letter, Deveau said the tuition freeze – which continues to this day – is akin to a “chokehold suffocating the life out of the college system” that is eliminating vital programs, restricting career choices of Ontarians and “jeopardising the province’s economic future”.
He raised attention to the “domino effect” of program closures impacting students’ career prospects, faculty layoffs and damaging local economies.
“The ability of Ontario’s universities to fulfil their mission – providing high-quality education, driving research, and fuelling the economy with talent – is at significant risk under current conditions,” said Busch.
In March 2023, the Ontario government itself published a Blue-Ribbon Report recognising the need to increase direct provincial support for colleges and universities, “providing for both more money per student and more students” and raising tuition fees.
Last year, the Ontario government injected $1.3 billion into colleges and universities over three years to stabilise the sector’s finances, though critics are demanding systemic funding changes rather than “stop-gap” and “gimmicky” proposals, said Deveau.
Nationwide, Canada’s colleges were dealt another blow when the IRCC announced its new PGWP eligibility criteria, which stakeholders warned risked “decimating” Canada’s college sector.
It is feared that more Ontario colleges will face cuts before the province’s 2025 budget, expected in April.
The PIE News reached out to the Ontario government but is yet to hear back.
Conversations over students using artificial intelligence to cheat on their exams are masking wider discussions about how to improve assessment, a leading professor has argued.
Phillip Dawson, co-director of the Centre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning at Deakin University in Australia, argued that “validity matters more than cheating,” adding that “cheating and AI have really taken over the assessment debate.”
Speaking at the conference of the U.K.’s Quality Assurance Agency, he said, “Cheating and all that matters. But assessing what we mean to assess is the thing that matters the most. That’s really what validity is … We need to address it, but cheating is not necessarily the most useful frame.”
Dawson was speaking shortly after the publication of a survey conducted by the Higher Education Policy Institute, which found that 88 percent of U.K. undergraduates said they had used AI tools in some form when completing assessments.
But the HEPI report argued that universities should “adopt a nuanced policy which reflects the fact that student use of AI is inevitable,” recognizing that chat bots and other tools “can genuinely aid learning and productivity.”
Dawson agreed, arguing that “assessment needs to change … in a world where AI can do the things that we used to assess,” he said.
Referencing—citing sources—may be a good example of something that can be offloaded to AI, he said. “I don’t know how to do referencing by hand, and I don’t care … We need to take that same sort of lens to what we do now and really be honest with ourselves: What’s busywork? Can we allow students to use AI for their busywork to do the cognitive offloading? Let’s not allow them to do it for what’s intrinsic, though.”
It was a “fantasy land” to introduce what he called “discursive” measures to limit AI use, where lecturers give instructions on how AI use may or may not be permitted. Instead, he argued that “structural changes” were needed for assessments.
“Discursive changes are not the way to go. You can’t address this problem of AI purely through talk. You need action. You need structural changes to assessment [and not just a] traffic light system that tells students, ‘This is an orange task, so you can use AI to edit but not to write.”
“We have no way of stopping people from using AI if we aren’t in some way supervising them; we need to accept that. We can’t pretend some sort of guidance to students is going to be effective at securing assessments. Because if you aren’t supervising, you can’t be sure how AI was or wasn’t used.”
He said there are three potential outcomes for the impact on grades as AI develops: grade inflation, where people are going to be able to do “so much more against our current standards, so things are just going to grow and grow”; and norm referencing, where students are graded on how they perform compared to other students.
The final option, which he said was preferable, was “standards inflation,” “where we just have to keep raising the standards over time, because what AI plus a student can do gets better and better.”
Over all, the impact of AI on assessments is fundamental, he said, adding, “The times of assessing what people know are gone.”
The clock is running out on colleges as they mull how to respond to a sweeping federal order to end all race-based policies and programs.
In the face of an imminent Friday night deadline, college leaders are scrambling to determine how to navigate the Feb. 14 Dear Colleague letter issued by the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which declares all race-based educational programs and policies discriminatory and illegal. When they sent the letter on Valentine’s Day, department officials gave institutions two weeks to comply or face investigations and, possibly, the loss of federal funding.
For many colleges, the challenge is figuring out how to avoid drawing unwanted government attention without abandoning key services for underrepresented students and staff.
Institutions aren’t going to lose federal funding overnight. The investigative process is notoriously lengthy, and the Education Department has never revoked a college’s federal funding over civil rights concerns. The OCR may also be rendered impotent, at least temporarily, if a judge decides to halt enforcement while considering a lawsuit filed Tuesday challenging the letter.
But college leaders are anxious about the threat of federal funding cuts, which would be catastrophic for the majority of postsecondary institutions. Ray Li, who previously worked as an attorney at the Office for Civil Rights, said he expects the office to launch investigations shortly and that many colleges will buckle under the pressure, shedding practices that fostered campus diversity and belonging.
For now, colleges seem to be taking a slow and cautious approach, removing language about race and DEI buzzwords from the names of programs and launching internal policy reviews.
University of Nebraska president Jeffrey P. Gold said system campuses are in the midst of a comprehensive review of programs and policies, but no changes have been made yet. The Nebraska Board of Regents discussed possible tweaks to its bylaws at a recent board meeting, like removing references to “cultural diversity” and revising language on equal opportunity in employment, but no final decisions were made.
Gold said that as the review process continues, he doesn’t expect to “turn up anything that looks or feels like discrimination,” as the letter describes.
But it’s possible “we will turn up some things that require some language changes or possibly some changes in titles, changes in offices … that could be misinterpreted by the Department of Education just because of [the] use of specific terminology.”
He added that Nebraska banned affirmative action in 2008 and the state’s second attempt at an anti-DEI bill is pending in the Legislature, so “we have been changing websites [and] titles for years—that’s why I believe that there’s nothing substantive that we really have to change at this time.”
The University of Montana undertook a similar compliance review that tasked senior administrators with assessing whether their departments had any policies or practices at odds with the Dear Colleague letter.
“We made the decision to be as thorough as possible,” said Dave Kuntz, the university’s director of strategic communications. The review, however, led to “very minimal changes and really no changes at a programmatic or operational level.”
University leaders over all concluded that the institution was already in compliance, though some programs, like the Women’s Leadership Initiative, chose to tweak their webpages to clarify that they don’t bar anyone who wants to participate.
A spokesperson for the Education Department did not respond to multiple questions from Inside Higher Ed in time for publication.
Many institutions are responding by scrubbing their websites of words like “diversity” and “inclusion.” The University of Cincinnati, Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Alaska system and many more all did so after the Dear Colleague letter; some colleges had already begun revising their digital presence in response to Trump’s executive order on DEI in January.
The University of Colorado removed all references to a former DEI office and replaced them with a website for a new “Office of Collaboration.” The University of Pennsylvania scrubbed the websites for all 16 undergraduate and graduate schools of DEI keywords and removed references to diversity and affirmative action from its nondiscrimination policies.
Shaun Harper, a professor of education, business and public policy at the University of Southern California, said he’s been disappointed that higher ed leaders are heavily revising their institutions’ online presences in the hopes that it will appease the OCR—a project he believes will prove futile. In the Dear Colleague letter, acting assistant secretary for civil rights Craig Trainor specifically warned against using “proxies for race” and promised to investigate race-neutral programs that “discriminate in less direct, but equally insidious, ways.”
“Scrubbing websites, launching reviews—these are the easy things to do while colleges are in ‘wait and see’ mode, to find out if that will take the target off their backs,” said Harper, an Inside Higher Ed contributor who authored a blog post last week recommending ways colleges can fight back against the Dear Colleague letter. “I think it’s both weak and reckless.”
Some institutions have gone one step further. Colorado State University issued a statement in which leaders simultaneously maintained that its policies are already race-neutral and promised to do more to comply with the new federal directives.
“The new administration’s interpretation of law marks a change,” the statement reads. “Given the university’s reliance on federal funding, it is necessary to take additional steps.”
And one day before the deadline, Ohio State University president Ted Carter announced the institution would shutter two DEI offices and eliminate more than a dozen staff positions, some of the most dramatic measures a college has taken during the new Trump administration.
In a particularly telling move, OSU’s Office of Institutional Equity will be renamed the Office of Civil Rights Compliance to “more accurately reflect its work,” according to an email sent to students Thursday.
For a glimpse of how anti-DEI compliance battles might play out between institutions and policymakers, consider the red states that have passed laws mandating similar cuts to race-conscious programs.
In Texas and Florida, public colleges reacted to impending or newly signed anti-DEI laws by changing the names of university offices and campus resources, moving personnel to student support services, and removing DEI mentions from university materials and websites. But in both cases, lawmakers came down hard to ensure the institutions took more strident action, leading to significant layoffs, spending cuts and policy changes.
“We’ve seen the prequel to this film before in Texas,” Harper said. “When that Senate bill was looming, many institutions thought they were very smartly getting ahead of it by just renaming things. That proved to be a failed strategy, and I very comfortably predict that some version of that will also happen nationally.”
In some states, the “review and revamp” strategy for avoiding DEI crackdowns appeared to work for a while. The University of Arkansas eliminated its DEI office in June 2023 in part to pre-empt a bill that state lawmakers were considering to force spending cuts. And last year, the University of North Carolina system Board of Trustees passed an anti-DEI resolution just as legislation was gaining steam to mandate enforcement from the state; that legislation was never brought to a full vote.
But circumstances have changed as the Trump administration launches direct attacks on DEI. Arkansas governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed a law earlier this month that will “prohibit affirmative action and preferential treatment in state-supported institutions,” including public colleges like the University of Arkansas. Even in Texas, where public universities underwent broad layoffs and spending cuts in response to state legislation, lawmakers have threatened to cut $400 million in higher ed funding unless colleges do more to comply.
“If they don’t kick DEI out of their schools, they’re going to get a lot less,” Texas lieutenant governor Dan Patrick said at a policy forum last week.
Legal experts say it’s unclear what will happen after the OCR’s deadline passes. The Dear Colleague letter promised more detailed guidance, but none has materialized.
“We’re kind of all in agreement that [the letter] is really confusing and overbroad, and the timeline is really outrageous,” said Andrea Stagg, director of consulting services at Grand River Solutions, a company that works with colleges on legal compliance issues. She noted that many underresourced colleges don’t have in-house legal teams to assess their risk by the deadline.
“What actually happens after tomorrow? How fast will it be?” she said Thursday. “I don’t know.”
Typically, the Office for Civil Rights opens investigations based on complaints from students, families or legal advocates, but it can also launch its own direct investigations. Most cases end with a voluntary resolution, in which the institution agrees to make certain changes. But unresolved cases can be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for litigation.
Li believes the OCR will likely receive complaints from anti-DEI groups as well as open some direct investigations into higher ed institutions with race-based scholarships, affinity group graduation ceremonies or other practices called out by the letter, starting next week. (He pointed out that the current OCR has already launched some direct investigations into universities related to Title IX.)
But that doesn’t mean the day after the Dear Colleague deadline “schools are just going to lose all their federal funding”—assuming normal procedures are followed, he said. Such investigations can take months, even years.
An investigation reaching the point of litigation is also “an incredibly rare step that, under most administrations, pretty much never happens,” Li said. And the Department of Education taking away federal funding over an OCR investigation would be completely unprecedented.
“But, also, rare things are happening right now,” Li conceded.
Stagg said it’s hard to tell to what extent normal processes will be followed, or how much the Department of Government Efficiency’s reductions to the federal workforce could affect investigations.
“There is a real question as to who will do these investigations” and how the OCR will choose institutions to focus on, she said. “Is there going to be an AI tool to search [college] websites for certain terms, the way we saw with the flagging of grants? It could be that the president has a bad interaction at a meeting with a leader and then they are targeted for investigation.”
An Education Department spokesperson did not respond to questions about planned investigations, agency capacity and enforcement mechanisms in time for publication.
It’s also unclear how much resistance colleges will put up. Li believes there’s a strong case to be made that some of the practices targeted in the Dear Colleague letter are perfectly legal. Higher ed institutions under investigation could refuse to make changes and go head to head with the Department of Justice. But they’d be signing up for an onerous, likely expensive process that puts their funding in jeopardy.
“The question is, is anyone willing to litigate it?” Li said.
Even if the Dear Colleague letter is rescinded, Li said the Office for Civil Rights has clearly signaled its plans for the next four years, and he believes higher ed institutions will continue working to rid themselves of anything that could attract scrutiny.
“I think there’s going to be an overcorrection,” he said. “It is going to lead to some perfectly legal programs that support fostering racially inclusive communities on campus being taken away.”
A North Carolina woman will face up to 20 years in prison after admitting that she scammed the Department of Education out of $5 million in financial aid, USA Today reported.
Cynthia Denise Melvin pleaded guilty Wednesday to conspiring with dozens of “straw students” through an elaborate, seven-year scheme, federal court records show. Melvin applied to colleges on the students’ behalf, submitted the Free Application for Federal Student Aid for them, and even went so far as to impersonate the students so it appeared they were attending class and completing assignments, according to charging documents. All the while, she pocketed any leftover aid dollars, giving a small portion to the individuals she was impersonating.
Melvin was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud. In addition to her time in prison, she will face three years of supervised release and be required to pay a $250,000 fine, as well as restitution.
The scam is among the biggest “straw student” schemes in years, according to a USA Today review of Department of Justice news announcements.