Blog

  • It is up to all of us to stand up to bullies

    It is up to all of us to stand up to bullies

    In the northern part of the country of a thousand hills, amidst volcanoes and the freezing air, there resides a Catholic high school. My name is Anderson and this is my story. I went to study there right after finishing my primary school.

    The school was competitive; the smartest, most intelligent and most talented students were found there. It was a school of sciences and it used to be in the top five best high schools in the country. It had an amazing environment. Though strict academically, the teachers were among the best.

    When I arrived, it wasn’t that hard to fit in because my elder sister had studied there before me. Some senior students recognized the resemblance and helped me get used to the school. This also gave me the privilege of not being bullied.

    Normally, new students in S1 were bullied by seniors and couldn’t report it because they were scared of what might happen. The bullying was actually different based on gender. Boys were beaten severely, while girls were pressured into “dating” seniors. You might think dating sounds harmless, but it often involved bullying too.

    There was a male friend of mine who was told to sit on his fork (the one used when we are eating) and say his weight — if he didn’t, the other students would beat him badly. This was also ridiculous because a fork cannot be used to measure someone’s weight. Another was given a leaf from a tree and told to use it to call his parents — again, he was beaten. This was a type of bullying because obviously you can’t talk on the leaf; they wanted him to pretend that the leaf is the phone.

    On the other hand, my girlfriend was called out by senior boys, made to greet each one in a way they preferred and surrounded by a big circle of them. In summary, the first year was really hard for some students.

    The bullied become bullies

    By the second year, we were seniors to new students and some of us began to bully them. At this point, I understood the perspective of bullies — though it didn’t justify their actions. Seeing new students, you feel the tendency to assert your seniority and demand respect.

    Some classmates acted out of revenge, targeting new students for what they had endured. On my side, I welcomed them with kindness and tried to help them adapt, knowing how hard it had been.

    We used to have shows, which were my favorite part. I loved fashion and wanted to model in the shows, but I was always scared. During the shows, boys would often stand at the entrance, waiting to touch the girls’ bodies; breasts, buttocks, even private parts. Girls could complain, but some students and authorities argued that some girls “wanted to be touched.”

    Others said that if girls didn’t want it, they could avoid participating or avoid wearing revealing clothes. Though some authorities promised to investigate, they often ignored the problem. Shows were considered entertainment, so the school left the organization to students. At some point, students feared reporting, worried the school might ban shows entirely.

    It wasn’t only during shows. In class, we had a group of bullies we studied with. When the lights went out, girls would run outside immediately, because boys would touch them by force in the darkness.

    When harassment is condoned

    Once, I was sitting in class, my head on the desk, taking a nap. The lights went out and I didn’t notice. I woke up surrounded by boys. When I tried to leave, they blocked my way. One of them, called Chris, touched my breasts and others grabbed me as well. I felt scared, ashamed and angry. They were about to do more, but fortunately, other students started entering the class, and they left.

    I laid my head back on the desk and cried. When people asked what was wrong, I couldn’t say. I had few friends; just my twin sister and another girl. When I reached the dormitory, I cried the whole night. My friend checked on me and though I hesitated at first, she comforted me.

    I opened up and told her the story. To my surprise, she had also been harassed by the same boy, Chris. He was undisciplined and we didn’t know how to report him; there was no evidence and I wasn’t ready.

    I spent months blaming myself. I was ashamed, hated myself and even had suicidal thoughts. My heart felt broken into pieces and no day passed without crying. But my twin sister was there for me. We cried together and I felt comforted. She suggested that we learn karate so no boy would dare harass me again.

    We joined a karate club at school. It was amazing. The group was friendly, teaching discipline, teamwork and flexibility. Chris still mocked me, but I knew he was scared. In class, he never bullied me again. I continued learning karate even in other schools.

    Fighting harassment

    At other schools, I began my journey in leadership. I was voted Head Girl at two schools, started reading about feminism and realized I was a feminist. I began challenging unfair school policies that hindered one gender. On many campuses, girls were forced to do cleaning chores because culture expected them to be “decent” and “clean.”

    Boys were allowed privileges girls could not have, without clear reason. It was a hard battle because authorities were biased. When I finished high school, I was voted Minister of Gender Promotion at my campus.

    Reflecting on my high school experience, I realized many other girls knew stories of friends who were sexually assaulted and who couldn’t report it. Sometimes it was done to them by teachers or fellow students or authorities.

    Schools often silence reports to protect their reputation. I understand that, but it shouldn’t come at the cost of student safety. There weren’t reporting platforms in place, but when girls tried to report, they were sometimes blamed, told they “wanted it.”

    All of this motivated me to start a high school research project to assess the impact of school policies, sexual harassment and sextortion (this means when someone asks for sexual intercourse in exchange for a certain favor. In this context it may be to give you grades or other favors which you can get after having sex with that person offering it) on gender equality outcomes in high schools.

    I am still working on my proposal, applying feedback and hoping for approval. As a survivor, I want to help my younger sisters get justice. I want to ensure no other girl cries alone at night, hiding the trauma she endured. I want to be their voice and advocate for solutions as youth.

    This is my story — though it is still being written and it is far from over.

    Questions to consider:

    1. How can someone who is bullied become a bully?

    2. Where do you think that some people get the idea that sexual harrassment is acceptable?

    3. Have you ever been bullied or felt harrassed at school?

    Source link

  • SUNY enrollment grew 2.9% in fall 2025, continuing upward trend

    SUNY enrollment grew 2.9% in fall 2025, continuing upward trend

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

    Dive Brief:

    • The State University of New York’s fall 2025 enrollment rose 2.9% over last year, marking the third straight year of growth at the public system after a decade of steady student losses.
    • Enrollment in the 64-college system reached 387,363 students this fall. SUNY also experienced outsized first-time undergraduate enrollment growth this fall, with new students increasing by 3.1% to 70,401.
    • However, SUNY’s recent enrollment growth — up 6.5% since 2022 — is still well below the 500,000-student goal New York Gov. Kathy Hochul set that year.

    Dive Insight:

    From 2012 to 2022, SUNY’s enrollment steadily declined, losing more than a fifth of its students. Hochul has made changing SUNY’s fortunes, and the state’s public higher education more broadly, a policy priority since taking office in 2021.

    SUNY Fall Enrollment

    The university system lost roughly 100,000 students between fall 2012 and fall 2022.

    In that time, New York made completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid a high school graduation requirement beginning in the 2024-25 academic year, a move SUNY supported publicly.

    SUNY has also introduced direct admissions at community colleges and guaranteed admissions at its selective colleges. Direct admissions programs offer students college acceptance without them first needing to apply, whereas guaranteed admissions programs generally promise students a spot if they submit an application and meet certain conditions.

    In fall 2025, headcounts at SUNY’s 30 community colleges jumped 5% to 173,893 students. Their first-time enrollment also grew, rising 4.8% to reach 34,425 students.

    Hochul on Tuesday partly attributed the enrollment growth at the system’s community colleges to the SUNY Reconnect initiative, launched earlier this year. 

    The program, also known as the Opportunity Promise Scholarship, allows New York residents ages 25 to 55 with no prior degree to attend community college for free if they study certain high-demand fields, such as nursing and engineering.

    As of Nov. 13, 5,608 people enrolled at SUNY community colleges through Reconnect, according to institutional data. Hochul’s office said each student in the program saves an average of $2,000 per year.

    Transfer enrollment also increased at SUNY in fall 2025, up 4.7% to 26,301 students.

    Like overall enrollment, however, the number of transfer students, first-time students, and students at community colleges still fell well below 2015 numbers.

    In contrast to SUNY’s overall growth this year, international enrollment dipped amid federal attacks on foreign students and an increasingly complicated visa landscape.

    Overall international enrollment at SUNY’s colleges declined 3.9% to 20,608 students. 

    The recently released annual Open Doors report found that international enrollment in the U.S. reached an all-time high in fall 2024.  But its preliminary fall 2025 survey of 825 colleges shows their international enrollment dropped 1% this term, driven by a 12% decline in foreign graduate students.

    SUNY’s institutional data aligned with these findings. Declines were steepest at doctoral degree-granting universities, where enrollment fell 6.9% to 15,352 students. International graduate enrollment decreased 13.8% compared to fall 2024, according to Hochul’s office.

    Other institutional types — the system’s comprehensive and technology colleges — saw increases, though they only enroll a combined 2,216 international students. 

    Source link

  • The digital advantage in schools 

    The digital advantage in schools 

    Key points:

    When I first stepped into my role overseeing student data for the Campbell County School District, it was clear we were working against a system that no longer served us.

    At the time, we were using an outdated platform riddled with data silos and manual processes. Creating school calendars and managing student records meant starting from scratch every year. Grade management was clunky, time-consuming, and far from efficient. We knew we needed more than a patchwork fix–we needed a unified student information system that could scale with our district’s needs and adapt to evolving state-level compliance requirements. 

    Over the past several years, we have made a full transition to digitizing our most critical student services, and the impact has been transformational. As districts across the country navigate growing compliance demands and increasingly complex student needs, the case for going digital has never been stronger. We now operate with greater consistency, transparency, and equity across all 12 of our schools. 

    Here are four ways this shift has improved how we support students–and why I believe it is a step every district should consider:

    How centralized student data improves support across K-12 schools

    One of the most powerful benefits of digitizing critical student services is the ability to centralize data and ensure seamless support across campuses. In our district, this has been a game-changer–especially for students who move between schools. Before digitization, transferring student records meant tracking down paper files, making copies, and hoping nothing was lost in the shuffle. It was inefficient and risky, especially for students who required health interventions or academic support. 

    Now, every plan, history, and record lives in a single, secure system that follows the student wherever they go. Whether a student changes schools mid-year or needs immediate care from a nurse at a new campus, that information is accessible in real-time. This level of continuity has improved both our efficiency and the quality of support we provide. For districts serving mobile or vulnerable populations, centralized digital systems aren’t just convenient–they’re essential.

    Building digital workflows for student health, attendance, and graduation readiness

    Digitizing student services also enables districts to create customized digital workflows that significantly enhance responsiveness and efficiency. In Campbell County, we have built tools tailored to our most urgent needs–from health care to attendance to graduation readiness. One of our most impactful changes was developing unified, digital Individualized Health Plans (IHPs) for school nurses. Now, care plans are easily accessible across campuses, with alerts built right into student records, enabling timely interventions for chronic conditions like diabetes or asthma. We also created a digital Attendance Intervention Management (AIM) tool that tracks intervention tiers, stores contracts and communications, and helps social workers and truancy officers make informed decisions quickly. 

    These tools don’t just check boxes–they help us act faster, reduce staff workload, and ensure no student falls through the cracks.

    Digitization supports equitable and proactive student services

    By moving our student services to digital platforms, we have become far more proactive in how we support students–leading to a significant impact on equity across our district. With digital dashboards, alerts, and real-time data, educators and support staff can identify students who may be at risk academically, socially, or emotionally before the situation becomes critical. 

    These tools ensure that no matter which school a student attends–or how often they move between schools–they receive the same level of timely, informed support. By shifting from a reactive to a proactive model, digitization has helped us reduce disparities, catch issues early, and make sure that every student gets what they need to thrive. That’s not just good data management–it’s a more equitable way to serve kids.

    Why digital student services scale better than outdated platforms

    One of the most important advantages of digitizing critical student services is building a system that can grow and evolve with the district’s needs. Unlike outdated platforms that require costly and time-consuming overhauls, flexible digital systems are designed to adapt as demands change. Whether it’s integrating new tools to support remote learning, responding to updated state compliance requirements, or expanding services to meet a growing student population, a digitized infrastructure provides the scalability districts need. 

    This future-proofing means districts aren’t locked into rigid processes but can customize workflows and add modules without disrupting day-to-day operations. For districts like ours, this adaptability reduces long-term costs and supports continuous improvement. It ensures that as challenges evolve–whether demographic shifts, policy changes, or new educational priorities–our technology remains a reliable foundation that empowers educators and administrators to meet the moment without missing a beat.

    Digitizing critical student services is more than a technical upgrade–it’s a commitment to equity, efficiency, and future readiness. By centralizing data, customizing workflows, enabling proactive support, and building scalable systems, districts can better serve every student today and adapt to whatever challenges tomorrow may bring.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • MAGA Trump Influencers TARGET Gen Z in Extremist GOP TAKEOVER (Political Punk)

    MAGA Trump Influencers TARGET Gen Z in Extremist GOP TAKEOVER (Political Punk)

    The MAGA movement is recruiting a new generation… and they’re doing it through the manosphere. From Nick Fuentes to Andrew Tate, a growing army of Trump-aligned influencers is targeting Gen Z boys who feel left behind… promising power, purpose, and belonging while feeding resentment and hate. This isn’t random… it’s a strategy. The “alpha” pipeline is reshaping the Republican Party from the inside out, one lonely teenager at a time. Watch how these extremist influencers are using religion to turn alienation into political weaponry… and building Trump’s future GOP.

    Source link

  • UC System Reverses Decision to End Incentives for Postdocs

    UC System Reverses Decision to End Incentives for Postdocs

    UC may still implement some changes to the program, including a potential cap on the number of incentives supported.

    Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

    In a letter to system chancellors Tuesday, University of California system president James Milliken said he would not end financial support for hiring postdoctoral fellows out of the UC President’s Postdoctoral Fellowship Program. 

    A system spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed earlier this month that the UC office had decided to halt its $85,000 per fellow, per year, hiring incentives beginning with fellows hired as full-time faculty after summer 2025. 

    “Given the myriad challenges currently facing UC—including disruptions in billions of dollars in annual federal support, as well as uncertainty around the state budget—reasonable questions were raised in recent months about whether the University could maintain the commitment to current levels of incentive funding,” Milliken wrote in the Tuesday letter. 

    He said he considered a proposal to sunset the incentive program but ultimately decided against it. Still, he said, there may be some future changes to the program, including a potential cap on the number of incentives supported and changes to how they are distributed across system campuses. 

    “After learning more about the history and success of the program and weighing the thoughtful perspectives that have been shared, I have concluded that barring extraordinary financial setbacks, the PPFP faculty hiring incentive program will continue while the University continues to assess the program’s structure as well as its long-term financial sustainability.”

    Source link

  • We Must Build Structures That Make Collaboration the Default

    We Must Build Structures That Make Collaboration the Default

    During National Transfer Student Week, I had the opportunity to present my dissertation findings. I was eager to share insights and connect with others doing similar work. Yet my excitement quickly gave way to disappointment: Multiple organizations were hosting overlapping events. Would anyone attend my session if there were other opportunities?

    That moment clarified, for me, a larger truth about the transfer ecosystem. Despite our shared commitment to improving outcomes for transfer students, we often work in parallel rather than in partnership. True, sustained collaboration remains one of the missing links in creating a more coherent and equitable transfer experience.

    Some Context 

    Collaboration should be the connective tissue of the transfer ecosystem. No single institution, system or organization can solve the challenges of transfer alone. When institutions, state agencies, employers and organizations work together, they have a better chance of building workable and successful pathways. The literature has increasingly suggested this point. Aspen et al.’s Tackling Transfer initiative implies that isolated campus reforms will not be entirely successful. 

    It emphasizes strengthening partnerships and using shared data and goals to make improvements. Similarly, both versions of the Transfer Playbook advocate success via intentional, ongoing partnerships.

    Professional associations echo this message. For example, the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers’ new conference, called The Assembly, is rooted in collaboration across sectors and institutions to solve transfer and mobility problems. This shift positions the association as a platform for collaboration, not just a publisher of best practices. Likewise, the National Association of Higher Education Systems is spearheading initiatives in the transfer and mobility space because it understands the need to have system-level collaboration.

    These references send a clear message: Collaboration is an important strategy to improve the learner’s experience. This is a fundamental shift in our focus. When we center collaboration on the learner experience, rather than on the institution, it shifts the focus and the opportunities. Rather than designing projects around the interests of a single campus, foundation, or consulting contract, collaboration gives us the opportunity to ask, “What happens to the student through the educational journey that prevents successful transfer, and how do we solve that together?”

    Challenges and Opportunities

    As essential as it is, collaboration seems to be a challenge. To truly accomplish a collaborative network, institutions and agencies will need to look beyond their own boundaries. They need to be willing to pause their own goals to complement, support or provide an opportunity to another group. This has influential and financial implications, but it may end up being a better use of limited and shrinking dollars.

    Changing the nature of how we collaborate could afford more opportunities and have a big impact. Collaboration can be complicated for organizations whose funding depends on producing value through exposure, engagement or consulting revenue. Partnerships may overshadow individual organizational accomplishments and lead to future financial growth.

    For institutions, grant dollars for improving transfer are so highly competitive that they are sometimes impossible to obtain. More likely than not, funders are looking for the largest impact for their dollar, and that often translates into large-scale system- or statewide initiatives that will affect the most students or provide a large enough data set. That goal immediately eliminates small colleges from opportunities, further reducing the chance for improvement at the institutions that often need it the most.

    On campuses, the need for collaboration is just as clear. Advocating for transfer is not the job of a single person with “transfer” in their title. It requires coordinated action across admissions, advising, faculty governance, financial aid, registrar, student life and employer partnerships. AACRAO’s task force on transfer and the award of credit, for instance, highlights the importance of cross-functional teams in redesigning policies and communication so students experience a coherent—not conflicting—set of messages about how their credits move.

    Interestingly, the very reports we rely on for guidance point toward a different path. The Tackling Transfer work, for example, is grounded in multistate, cross-sector collaboration and explicitly calls for understanding the incentives and disincentives that shape institutional behavior around transfer. Lumina’s guidance on building local talent ecosystems emphasizes that durable change comes from coalitions willing to redesign systems together, not from one-off pilot projects.

    What If We …

    So, what might it look like to take collaboration seriously across the transfer ecosystem? Consider these collaborations:

    • Build shared agendas and calendars. National, regional and virtual events could be coordinated through a master calendar or hub so that transfer professionals aren’t forced to choose between overlapping webinars and conferences hosted by organizations that share the same goals.
    • Co-create tools and publications. Instead of each group producing its own tool kits and reports, organizations might collaborate on cross-branded resources that show how their frameworks align. Treat multiple opportunities as complements, not competitors.
    • Align state and regional efforts with institutional partnerships. The literature on national transfer reform emphasizes that systems and regions are critical units of change. State agencies, coordinating boards and foundations can use this insight to convene partnerships that bring institutions, employers and community organizations to the same table.
    • Elevate practitioners as collaborators, not just implementers. The most effective transfer-focused reports and research draw heavily on the expertise of people doing the day-to-day work of advising, curriculum design and transcript evaluation. Our collaborations should be built with, not just for, these practitioners.
    • Expand professional development and knowledge. Ideas could be to offer membership deals across organizations that support transfer students to engage more people in professional development opportunities amid decreasing budgets. Or, create a centralized repository or organization that can serve as a single source of information, rather than the plethora of sites, agencies, organizations and companies offering current professional development and resources.

    These aren’t small shifts. They require seeing ourselves not as competitors in the transfer space, but as collaborators of its progress.

    And So …

    If we truly want to strengthen the ecosystem, we must build structures that make collaboration the default and not the exception. Many of the publications we rely on and reference already pointing us there. The question is whether we will follow their lead, not just in language but in practice. By working together, we can move beyond fragmented efforts toward a shared vision of mobility, equity and opportunity for every learner who dares to transfer.

    Source link

  • Secretive Big Ten Deal Riles Trustees

    Secretive Big Ten Deal Riles Trustees

    Trustees at member institutions across the Big Ten are pushing back on a proposed $2.4 billion private equity deal that some argue has been too rushed, lacking transparency and proper vetting.

    Now, with trustee criticism mounting, the conference appears to be prolonging talks amid a push to finalize a plan to establish a for-profit arm of the Big Ten, which would control its media and sponsorship rights and sell a 10 percent stake of that entity to the investor. The deal would give members an immediate cash infusion, with a minimum $100 million disbursement across the league, while more prominent athletic programs would receive an even higher revenue share. That money is needed, even at wealthy institutions, as universities adjust to a changing world of college athletics, which includes direct payments for players that began earlier this year.

    The proposal would also maintain the current 18 universities as Big Ten members through 2046.

    Dissent among the Big Ten ranks seems to have prompted the potential investor—the University of California pension fund, or UC Investments—to slow down the deal.

    While UC Investments indicated in a Monday statement that it “remains very excited” about the offer, officials wrote they will work with members in the “coming months” to solidify the deal. (Prior reports indicated the conference hoped to put the deal to a league vote by mid-November.)

    “As we have continued to evaluate this opportunity over the past five months, we remain convinced that the unity of the 18 Big Ten university members is key to the success of Big Ten Enterprises,” Chief Investment Officer Jagdeep Singh Bachher wrote in the statement. “We also recognize that some member universities need more time to assess the benefits of their participation. UC Investments likewise requires some additional time to complete our due diligence as recent developments unfold and we continue to engage with the conference.”

    The CIO also lauded Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti and his team.

    “The process they have led has been rigorous, honest and fair—among the best we’ve seen. Recent misinformation has distorted some aspects of its effort,” Bachher wrote in the statement.

    But several trustees at Big Ten member institutions have raised concerns about a lack of transparency into the deal, saying they have received little information about the arrangement and yet been asked to rubber-stamp it on a compressed timeline.

    Trustee Dissent

    UC Investments announced a commitment to a unified process for making a deal just a few days after the American Council of Trustees and Alumni held an online meeting with individual board members representing five Big Ten institutions. The meeting, held Friday, included trustees from the University of Michigan, the University of Minnesota, the University System of Maryland, Pennsylvania State University and the University of Southern California, all of whom had concerns about the deal.

    Tom McMillen, a Maryland regent, said in the recorded meeting that “no trustee has been given a balanced view” of the pros and cons of the proposal, according to his conversations with other governing board members across the conference. He also called for third-party evaluations of the arrangement.

    “It’s shocking to me that a decision of this magnitude, there are no opposing views presented,” McMillen said.

    Michigan regent Sarah Hubbard echoed similar concerns on the ACTA call, arguing that there was a need for more oversight and for trustees to have a formal role in discussing the proposal. She also questioned the need to expedite the process with such limited information available.

    “This lack of transparency and information for the fiduciaries at our universities is unacceptable,” Hubbard said.

    Penn State trustee Jay Paterno questioned the need for secrecy around the potential investment. Given that the Big Ten is about to create “a for-profit company using what are essentially public dollars,” he argued, boards need to know more in order to be able to advise their institutions accordingly. Ultimately, Paterno said, he wanted to see the Big Ten put its cards on the table.

    “If it’s such a great deal, show us the deal and let’s go,” Paterno said.

    Outstanding Concerns

    UC Investments signaled it would work on the deal over the “coming months”—likely signaling a slowdown in the process—but it has offered no information about where things stand.

    A UC Investments spokesperson referred questions about trustee concerns to the Big Ten, which did not respond to a request for comment from Inside Higher Ed.

    But outside analysts echo many of the concerns raised by trustees. Armand Alacbay, chief of staff and senior vice president of strategy at ACTA, said the organization has no position on the proposal itself but got involved because of concerns about trustees being shut out of the deal.

    “Anyone we’ve heard from on this has said it’s not enough time, not enough information, not enough of anything to make this decision. Some have been told that it’s a nonvoting decision for them, that they don’t even have a right to make a decision because it’s the conference,” Alacbay said. “Well, I would say that the intellectual property and media rights of your athletic department are a significantly large asset of the institution and justify a level of board oversight.”

    Karen Weaver, an adjunct assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education, told Inside Higher Ed that while private equity has seeped into numerous areas of college athletics in recent years, the investment in a conference is a new approach. And what happens with the Big Ten will likely set the stage for other conferences.

    She said if the Big Ten can successfully navigate a maze of thorny legal and political concerns, then other athletic conferences will be more likely to follow in their footsteps. “But if they constantly get land mines and roadblocks thrown in the way,” others will be more hesitant, she said.

    Weaver also pointed to concerns lawmakers raised that could upend or complicate the deal.

    Last week U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, a Washington Democrat, issued warnings about the proposal in a statement and individual letters to both university and conference leadership. She argued that such a deal “may be counter to your university’s academic goals, may require the sale of university assets to a private investor, and may affect the tax-exempt purpose of those assets.”

    Cantwell also emphasized the different priorities of universities and private equity investors.

    “The primary goal of these companies is to make money for the firm, which is unlikely to align with the academic goals of your university or its obligations as a not-for-profit organization,” Cantwell wrote. “These investors will be focused on maximizing their investment, not on preserving and growing athletic and academic opportunities for student athletes.”

    Source link

  • Virginia Looks to Plug Brain Drain With More Internships

    Virginia Looks to Plug Brain Drain With More Internships

    The state of Virginia promised all undergraduate students a meaningful internship experience and partnered with Handshake to elevate opportunities.

    Internships can be a meaningful step in a college student’s career development. That’s why the commonwealth of Virginia is working to guarantee that undergraduates have a fair shot at paid experiential learning.

    The Virginia Economic Development Partnership announced a new collaboration today with the job board Handshake as part of the state’s effort to train and retain local talent through internship opportunities.

    Virginia has committed to giving all undergraduate students at least one form of meaningful work-based learning before graduation, said Megan Healy, senior vice president of talent and workforce strategy at VEDP. Overseen by the Virginia Talent and Opportunity Partnership, this work-based learning could include experiential learning or a paid internship.

    The partnership with Handshake is one layer of a multifaceted approach to increasing opportunities for entry-level applicants to break into local job markets, helping to reduce brain drain and encourage economic development for evolving local markets.

    State of play: Internships provide students with skills and experience for future careers, but for many of them paid internships remain out of reach. A 2024 report from the Business–Higher Education Forum found that nearly half of students who wanted an internship didn’t participate in one, and of those who did, only 70 percent said it was a “high-quality experience.”

    A 2025 Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab found that 38 percent of respondents believe their college should emphasize helping them find and access paid internships to enhance career services, and 30 percent want help making strong connections with potential employers.

    Virginia has recently seen a dramatic drop in available internship listings; when President Trump took office in January, he slashed the federal workforce, reducing available roles in the D.C., Maryland and Northern Virginia region. Internship postings dropped 36 percent in June 2025 compared to June 2024, according to Lightcast data—a 20-percentage-point-greater decline compared to similar metropolitan job markets.

    Brookings Institute

    VEDP’s partnership with Handshake includes data sharing within the platform and additional visibility into existing or future internship opportunities for students.

    Over 70 percent of colleges and universities in Virginia, representing 470,000 students, already connect to Handshake, said Christine Cruzvergara, the company’s chief education officer. In addition, 20,000 Virginia employers have posted more than 150,000 jobs and internships on the platform.

    Building better internships: One of Virginia’s goals is to develop opportunities for students outside of metropolitan hubs.

    “The state of Virginia is very diverse, and the majority of students that graduate from a lot of the Virginia schools end up going to Richmond or Northern Virginia—those are the two main hubs that most students go to,” said Cruzvergara, a former Virginia resident and college administrator herself. “But there are so many other regions of Virginia that also need amazing talent, and I think this particular initiative is going to help distribute more of that talent.”

    The state is partnering with local business in more rural areas—including near Virginia Tech in Blacksburg and in Charlottesville, where the University of Virginia is located—to establish more high-impact and paid internships to attract students from these universities.

    “We’re also looking at ways to connect students from those specific institutions,” Healy of VEDP said. “They also have the most out-of-state students because they’re very popular and very highly ranked.”

    To increase internship offerings across the state, VEDP hosts regular training sessions to help employers build meaningful internship experiences for students and assists them in listing jobs on Handshake. The state hopes that connecting students with employers on an already-trusted platform will help expand access to opportunities as well as meet talent demands in the commonwealth.

    Small businesses (employing 150 people or less) are also eligible for a grant program if they hire interns; the state will provide $7,500 in matched funds to compensate an intern for eight weeks and 120 hours making at least minimum wage.

    “I think this particular initiative is going to help distribute more of that talent, because they’re going to tap into the local economy and the local employers to create the internships and opportunities that will be needed to attract students and also help them see this could be a great place to live In Virginia,” said Cruzvergara.

    How is your college or university increasing opportunities for students to intern? Tell us more here.

    Source link

  • U-M Senior Learning Experience Designer

    U-M Senior Learning Experience Designer

    Are you searching for a learning designer, instructional designer or, as the University of Michigan calls the role, a learning experience designer? If so, your search is the perfect fit for Featured Gigs. Please reach out.

    Today’s opportunity, senior learning experience designer, is with higher education’s premier academic innovation team, U-M’s Center for Academic Innovation. Evan Ogg Straub, CAI’s learning experience design lead, has the answers to my questions about the gig.

    Q: What is the university’s mandate behind this role? How does it help align with and advance the university’s strategic priorities?

    A: Imagine being the person who turns bold ideas into learning experiences that reach thousands of learners across the globe. The University of Michigan’s commitment to life-changing education, a key pillar of our Look to Michigan vision, drives this role’s focus on expanding access to high-quality, equitable learning experiences for a global audience.

    The learning experience designer senior role advances the Center for Academic Innovation’s mission to collaborate across campus and around the world to create equitable, lifelong educational opportunities for learners everywhere. At CAI, we help translate Michigan’s academic excellence into scalable, learner-centered opportunities, both in our noncredit and for-credit portfolios. The learning experience designer senior role is at the forefront of our work.

    Designers at CAI don’t just build courses; they co-create learning experiences that merge research-informed design and empathy with faculty expertise. We ensure every online or hybrid course reflects Michigan’s commitment to excellence while reimagining how learning reaches people across every stage of life, whether they are traditional students, working professionals or lifelong learners.

    Q: Where does the role sit within the university structure? How will the person in this role engage with other units and leaders across campus?

    A: Reporting to the learning experience design lead, the learning experience designer senior operates within a highly cross-functional team that brings together experts in design, technology, data and media. We have a highly collaborative environment, both within the center and with our faculty and academic partners.

    As a learning experience designer senior, the ideal candidate will be collaborative and relationship-driven, working closely with faculty and academic unit leaders across the university’s schools and colleges to design meaningful online and hybrid learning experiences. We work in an environment that values experimentation, collaboration and continuous learning.

    Q: What would success look like in one year? Three years? Beyond?

    A: Our learning experience designers at CAI are connectors and translators. We turn teaching goals into actionable design strategies and align pedagogical vision with institutional priorities. In your first year, success looks like being a trusted connector who builds strong relationships across our team and with our academic partners. You’ll be shaping not only our courses but our culture, contributing your voice, curiosity and care to our thriving community.

    In three years, this role may become a recognized mentor, leader and thought partner in learning experience design across U-M. A person in this role would be recognized for advancing best practices in digital pedagogy, mentoring colleagues and contributing to the university’s growing portfolio of online and hybrid programs.

    Beyond that, success means lasting impact. The courses and programs you’ve helped build will keep reaching new learners, and the practices you’ve influenced will continue guiding our work long after any single project ends.

    Q: What kinds of future roles would someone who took this position be prepared for?

    A: This role offers the chance to develop strategic, creative and leadership skills that are highly transferable across higher education and beyond. Learning experience designers in this role gain experience with a diverse range of online and hybrid learning experiences, from degree programs, noncredit MOOCs and certificate-based stackable programs. This prepares our designers for roles that require both pedagogical expertise and operational agility.

    People who grow in this role are well positioned to step into leadership positions, including leading design teams, shaping instructional design strategy within academic units or moving into broader academic innovation–focused roles within or outside of higher education.

    Please get in touch if you are conducting a job search at the intersection of learning, technology and organizational change.

    Source link

  • Three hot takes you may have missed from the Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper.

    Three hot takes you may have missed from the Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper.

    This blog was kindly authored by Rose Stephenson, Director of Policy and Strategy at HEPI.

    It is the ninth blog in HEPI’s series responding to the post-16 education and skills white paper. You can find the others in the series here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

    There have been oodles of column inches already published about the Post-16 White Paper, and many have rightly focused on the headlines: increased tuition fees, a return of targeted maintenance grants funded by an international students levy and a move towards more specialist institutions.

    In this blog, I want to dive beyond these headlines, as the paper contains a number of further bold policy proposals, some of which could be transformational for the sector.

    Break points

    The White Paper places a strong focus on flexible learning, including a greater number of Level 4 and 5 qualifications. There is a specific target of at least 10% of young people going into Level 4 or 5 study, including apprenticeships, by 2040. Clearly, the Government wants to see more movement in this direction from the sector, adding:

    We need to build clear and well-understood pathways at these levels [4 and 5], underpinned by qualifications that are easier to study close to home, which are both modular and flexible.

    In terms of higher education providers, the Government sets out:

    We will expect providers to offer more flexible, modular provision and strengthen progression routes from further education into higher education, supported by transferable credits. We will consult on making student support for level 6 degrees conditional on the inclusion of break points in degree programmes. This marks a significant shift towards a more inclusive and adaptable model of learning, empowering individuals to tailor their educational journey.

    There is little detail, but it reads to me that the Government will consult on a proposal that students will only be able to access student loan funding for institutions that offer ‘break points’ at Level 4 and 5 of a full three-year degree.

    This was also a recommendation from the Augar report, which outlined:

    … providers with degree-awarding powers will be required to offer them [level 4 and 5 qualifications] as ‘exit’ qualifications if learners choose to leave a course early.

    In my experience, most institutions now do this. If a student wants or needs to finish their studies at the end of their first year, for example, (providing they have passed the required modules), the institution would offer to award them with the Level 4 qualification that recognises their learning to date – most likely a certificate of higher education. However, ‘CertHEs’ are only routinely awarded ‘mid-degree’ if a student withdraws, and many students don’t know that there is an option to take a qualification at the end of their first year. One might wonder if providers could maintain this ‘consolation prize’ status quo. However, the paper goes further, stating:

    The introduction of break points will ensure that learners are acquiring vital, usable skills in every year of higher education. It will give them the option to break down their learning, achieving a qualification at level 4 after the first year and level 5 after their second year of studies, while also ensuring institutions are incentivised to support those who wish to continue their studies. This will enable young people to ‘stay local and go further’ by connecting local provision at level 4 and 5 with internationally recognised degree-level providers, unlocking opportunity and ambition across every region.

    I am reading between the lines here, but it looks as though providers may be expected to award students at the end of each year of learning, increasing awareness of stackable, flexible learning, and potentially a knock-on increase in student mobility between institutions. As with much of this White Paper, we await the details.

    Accommodation

    The white paper outlines:

    We will work with the sector and others so that the supply of student accommodation meets demand, including increasing the supply of affordable accommodation where that is needed. We will work with the sector, drafting a statement of expectations on accommodation which will call upon providers to work strategically with their local authorities to ensure there is adequate accommodation for the individuals they recruit.

    Firstly, this statement is a little ironic given that the Renters Reform Act that has just passed through parliament is likely to reduce small (generally one to two bedroom) off-street student housing provision – as outlined by Martin Blakey in his blog.

    This feels woolly to me. What levers does the Government have to pull to increase the supply of affordable accommodation for students? If it does have any, why have these not been pulled already? The main driver of expensive student accommodation is that there are not enough houses (for the general population as well as students), allowing rents to be driven ever higher. Providers working strategically with local authorities won’t deliver more housing stock. (Unless the magic house bush grows alongside the magic money tree?)

    We’ve seen a ‘Statement of Expectations’ previously, delivered by the OfS in relation to sexual harassment prevention and response on campus. This was an evaluated stepping stone on the way to regulation. Could there be an increased expectation on institutions to provide affordable accommodation as part of future regulation? A sensible ideology, perhaps. After all, we know students want and need cheap places to live. But given the financial position of many institutions, the resulting pause in capital building projects, the increase in commuter students and the impending decline in 18-year-old population numbers, I can’t see many subsidised student flats being built anytime soon.

    Apprenticeship ‘units’

    We have known since before the 2024 General Election that Labour wanted to expand the Apprenticeship Levy to become the Growth and Skills Levy. We see some more detail about this in the paper:

    We want employers to be able to use the levy on short, flexible training courses.

    Currently, apprenticeships are funded by the apprenticeship levy. Businesses with a pay bill of over £3 million pay 0.5% of this into the levy ‘pot’. Businesses can then use the levy fund to cover the cost of training apprenticeships. Since the introduction of the levy, the number of apprenticeship starts has fallen, and the age profile of apprenticeships has changed. Since 2015, proportionately more apprenticeships have been started by those aged 25 or over.

    Source: Department for Education, Apprenticeships and traineeships data

    So – the apprenticeship levy was, unintentionally, a good policy for lifelong learning; businesses wanted to reinvest their levy costs into their business and found that an effective way to do this was to upskill colleagues already employed in their organisation, often on higher or degree apprenticeships. The flip side of this meant that the intended outcomes of the policy, supporting school and college-leavers into apprenticeships, were stymied.

    To tackle this, most Level 7 Apprenticeships were defunded, with the aim of pushing funding back towards younger learners and lower-level apprenticeships. So the move to ‘apprenticeship units’ feels undermining of this aim. Again, this is likely to be great for lifelong learning. Employers will be able to upskill their workforce, initially in ‘priority areas’ such as artificial intelligence, digital and engineering.

    There is a limited pot of growth and skills levy funding, which has been fully or overspent for the last two academic years. So if the Government wants to increase apprenticeships for younger learners, it will need to expand this pot, and potentially ring-fence some of this. The potential for a bigger pot is hinted at:

    We will work with businesses and employers over the coming months to ensure that the growth in skills levy author is developed to help meet their needs and incentivise further employer investment in training.

    However, ring-fencing is not mentioned. The Government will need to put some guardrails in place here if they want to meet their target of two-thirds of young people going to university, further education or a ‘gold standard apprenticeship’ by the age of 25.  

    Conclusion

    So, while some of these statements are bold, remember that White Papers set out proposals for future legislation; there is a long way to go before legislation is in place. Further, there are several places in the white paper where the Government doesn’t specifically propose legislation; instead, there’s a sense of just asking the sector nicely. This is all well and good, but in times of severe financial constraint, asking institutions nicely to take steps that will cost them money is unlikely to yield results.

    Source link