Blog

How Colleges and States Can Make Workforce Pell a Reality

Community colleges secured a massive legislative win earlier this month after more than a decade of advocacy. Workforce Pell, at long last, is en route to become a reality.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law July 4, extends Pell Grants to low-income students enrolled in eligible short-term programs, between eight and 15 weeks long. The policy shift is expected to put money in the pockets of hundreds of thousands of students per year to help them afford these quicker, increasingly popular programs—and bring an influx of funds to the institutions that offer them.

But realizing those gains will take some time, and with the policy scheduled to get off the ground next summer, some experts are worried a year won’t be long enough to parse the program’s details and ensure a smooth rollout.

Lawmakers in Congress and colleges have been working toward some form of workforce Pell since former senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana pushed it forward as a part of the JOBS Act in 2014.

Since then, multiple attempts to enact the Pell expansion have failed even as the idea gained more bipartisan support. And for a moment in late June, workforce Pell seemed dead in the water when a nonpartisan Senate official, known as the parliamentarian, claimed it violated the rules of the Senate’s reconciliation process. Senators ultimately kept it in their version of the bill but limited the new Pell funds to accredited providers, appeasing the parliamentarian.

“We’re very thankful to the persistence of our champions in Congress on this legislation from both parties in both chambers, for the commitment they made to this legislation,” said David Baime, senior vice president of government relations at the American Association of Community Colleges, noting that while the bill was partisan, support for this provision has been “bipartisan all down the line.”

Community college leaders are “extremely enthusiastic” about the policy change after the immense “political effort that’s gone into this,” he added. “We consistently hear reports from our campuses about the importance of finding financing sources for low-income students to participate in these programs.”

Others, however, feel trepidation, as workforce Pell is on the precipice.

Wesley Whistle, project director for student success and affordability at New America, a liberal think tank, said for-profit colleges and online program managers, which set up short-term online programs for community colleges and other institutions, have also been eagerly awaiting the policy shift. Despite safeguards built into the legislation, such as job-placement rates, he worries students will still be lured into subpar programs at for-profits or slapdash, mass-produced online programs also eligible for the funds.

“I hope I’m wrong,” he said. “We’re talking about our most vulnerable students.”

Despite the bill’s passage, debates over workforce Pell are hardly over. Now, the hard work of planning for implementation begins.

What Happens Next

Workforce Pell is slated to take effect next July. But for that to happen, numerous details need to be hashed out by the U.S. Department of Education, states and program providers in the coming months.

Under the legislation, short-term programs need to meet a set of standards to be eligible for Pell money. And the task of making sure programs meet the qualifications is divvied up between states and the federal government.

The Education Department is responsible for checking that programs have existed for at least a year, boast completion and job-placement rates of at least 70 percent, and charge tuitions below graduates’ median “value-added earnings,” or the degree to which their income exceeds 150 percent of the federal poverty line three years out of the program.

State governors must ensure short-term programs prepare students for high-skill, high-wage or in-demand jobs. The resulting credentials also must be “stackable and portable across more than one employer,” unless preparing students for jobs with just one recognized credential. Credentials need to count toward academic credit for a certificate or degree program, as well.

Still, many questions linger about how workforce Pell will operate—likely to be answered through negotiated rule making, a lengthy process by which the Education Department creates rules and regulations by convening and listening to key stakeholders and experts, as well as public comment.

“There isn’t a lot of meat on the bones of the outline of what implementation would look like,” said Katie Spiker, chief of federal affairs for the National Skills Coalition, a research and advocacy organization focused on workforce training. “A whole lot of decisions and next steps … that will ultimately decide how impactful and effectively short-term Pell rolls out are still left to be determined.”

For example, some states already have quality frameworks in place for short-term programs and have spent more than $5 billion subsidizing these programs; it’s unclear how federal workforce Pell will work alongside these existing state-level initiatives. The legislation also doesn’t say who’s involved in deciding how “high-skill, high-wage or in-demand” jobs are defined. Spiker hopes those decisions draw on input from business leaders, education providers and state workforce agencies to make “public workforce and education systems better aligned.”

Whistle agreed some of the guardrails need ironing out. He was heartened to see a tuition limit based on graduates’ salaries—a new addition since earlier versions of the policy—but he finds aspects of the requirement murky. For example, bachelor’s degree holders qualify for workforce Pell under the law, so he worries their higher salaries could throw off the metric, intended to ensure tuitions are reasonable relative to what graduates will earn. The measure is also based on graduates’ earnings three years down the line, raising questions about how to ensure programs younger than three years don’t rip students off, he said.

Colleges’ To-Do List

As the department works through the policymaking process, colleges will also have their own work to do to get workforce Pell ready.

Higher ed institutions that want to participate will need to collect the data to prove they meet eligibility metrics, said Jennifer Stiddard, senior director of government relations at Jobs for the Future, an organization focused on the intersection between education and the workforce. If they don’t have that data, they’ll need to build up the reporting infrastructure.

In addition to measuring completion and job-placement rates, “do they think they have the data to prove a program is in demand?” Stiddard said. “Are they going to be able to demonstrate that the program articulates for credit?”

She expects community college systems in some states will be more ready than others to answer those questions, based on their states’ existing investments in short-term programs. For example, Virginia community colleges already have outcomes data on hand because of the FastForward program, which offers short-term training for jobs locally in high demand, with the state covering much of the cost. Institutions in other states, like Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, North Carolina and Texas, may have a head start, as well, she said. And some colleges that are further behind could decide it’s not worth it.

Baime, of AACC, said the association plans “to work as closely as we can with the administration to ensure that institutions are able to make their programs eligible as soon as possible.”

Among community college leaders, “the overwhelming feeling, of course, is positive,” he added, “but there are issues of implementation that need to be ironed out sometime hopefully before next July 1 so we can get this program up and running.”

An ‘Aggressive’ Timeline

Some experts guffawed at the yearlong timeline set for implementing workforce Pell.

Karishma Merchant, associate vice president of policy and advocacy at Jobs for the Future, called the July 2026 deadline “aggressive” but “possible” if the department gets started immediately. (Workforce Pell is just one item on the department’s task list for the next year, and experts are skeptical that the agency can get all the work done.)

Even if the process could be done in a year, Spiker believes it shouldn’t be. She said a year doesn’t seem like an “effective and reasonable” amount of time to solicit feedback from different stakeholders and disentangle how the program aligns with the patchwork of existing state investments in short-term training.

“We will be encouraging the department and states to take the time to be able to do a successful implementation that enables short-term Pell to grow over time and to serve more students and more workers, instead of pushing just to meet a relatively arbitrary timeline,” Spiker said.

She emphasized that the process comes on the heels of drastic staff cuts at the Education Department and a larger plan to dismantle the agency, which so far includes shifting career and technical education and adult basic education programs to the Department of Labor.

These changes are “taxing already on the agency,” she said, “and then to be spearheading an implementation simultaneous with all of those huge shifts … just makes the path forward even more difficult.”

Source link

July 17, 2025
Morningside University to Absorb St. Luke’s College

Morningside University in Iowa is absorbing nearby St. Luke’s College, officials announced.

St. Luke’s, which is focused on nursing and other health-care professions, is part of Unity Point Health, a hospital system with locations in Illinois, Iowa and Wisconsin. It will merge with Morningside in a deal that is expected to be finalized in late 2026, pending regulatory approvals.

The two institutions have previously collaborated on bachelor’s degrees in radiologic technology and respiratory therapy, according to the announcement. Now Morningside will expand its health-related degree offerings as part of the merger, adding associate degrees in the above fields, an associate of science in nursing and an accelerated bachelor of science in nursing.

Morningside, the larger of the two institutions, enrolled 2,056 students last fall. Nursing is one of the university’s most popular majors with 113 students in that field, according to its fact book.

“Our commitment to excellence in nursing education is stronger than ever as we prepare to greet the talented students of St. Luke’s College,” said Jackie Barber, dean of the Nylen School of Nursing and Health Sciences at Morningside, in a news release. “We are excited to expand our program and offer these students support to help their academic journeys.”

Morningside interim president Chad Benson called the merger “pivotal” for the nursing program.

Source link

July 17, 2025
Closed Limestone University Owes Students Money

Limestone University, which shuttered abruptly in May after years of financial woes and a failed fundraising effort, owes nearly $400,000 to students affected by the closure, The State reported.

Tuition refunds reportedly promised by university officials have not yet been disbursed.

Altogether, Limestone owes $381,405 to 281 students, according to a report submitted to the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education by a consulting firm managing the university’s assets. A representative from that firm, Aurora Management Partners, declined to tell the newspaper when students may be reimbursed, noting that their agreement was confidential.

While students are due an average of more than $1,350 each, some are owed more.

Michael Thielen, a former graduate student affected by the closure, told the newspaper that Limestone owes him more than $4,000, but he hasn’t heard from officials in almost two months. He bemoaned the university’s lack of accountability and transparency.

“Everyone has washed their hands of this,” Thielen said.

The private Christian university was one of the more jarring closures of the year, given how quickly it folded amid clear warning signs of financial distress, as noted in its latest audit.

In April, Limestone officials punted on the closure decision, indicating they were in talks for a $6 million lifeline that would keep the university open. But that funding source never materialized, prompting a reversal from leadership and the abrupt closure of the 180-year-old institution.

Former employees also sued Limestone recently over how it handled mass layoffs.

Source link

July 17, 2025
Ideological Agendas Undermine Effective Governance (opinion)

Higher education has reached its canary-in-a-coal-mine moment: The recent resignation of the University of Virginia president under intense political pressure isn’t just another leadership transition but an indicator of hazards ahead, with similar pressures mounting George Mason University. Higher education governing boards cannot ignore these urgent warning signs that signal peril for the governance structures that have supported our universities and colleges for centuries.

U.S. higher education is built on a unique model of governance in which independent citizen trustees exercise fiduciary oversight, set policy, safeguard institutional autonomy, support fulfillment of the mission and act in the best interests of the university or college as stewards of the public trust. This model of self-governance has preserved the academic freedom and driven the innovation that are hallmarks of U.S. higher education and that form the foundation of the profound societal impact and global prominence of the sector.

Today, this governance model faces significant disruption. At both public and private institutions, trustees are being encouraged by policy-driven think tanks to serve as ideological agents and interfere with management rather than act as true fiduciaries. This violation of institutional autonomy is destabilizing and harmful to governance, yielding fractured boards, diminished presidential authority, politicized decision-making, academic censorship and loss of public trust.

Boards must take this warning very seriously and take a hard look at whether their decisions reflect independent judgment aligned with the institution’s mission or, instead, the influence of external agendas. If governance fails, academic freedom is compromised, academic quality is weakened, public trust is eroded and the promise of U.S. higher education and its role in a democracy will disappear.

To guide boards in upholding institutional autonomy and mission stewardship, the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges recently launched the Govern NOW initiative with support from a Mellon Foundation grant. As part of this initiative, AGB developed a models of governance comparison and checklist for governance integrity. These tools help board members distinguish between effective governance and ideologically driven overreach and provide a framework to assess their practices and recommit to their fiduciary responsibilities.

This is especially critical due to growing misinformation about the role of trustees. Without a true understanding of their responsibilities, they might act independently of board consensus, undermine governance norms, overstep management boundaries and pursue ideological agendas. These actions not only weaken governance by harming board cohesion and culture but also threaten the institutional stability and mission that trustees are charged to uphold.

This moment is not about partisan politics. It is about leadership and whether we will allow institutional governance to be hijacked by ideological conflict. At stake is the integrity of the governance system that has been the foundation on which the strength and distinction of U.S. higher education has been built.

To every trustee, I implore you to look inward. Ask whether your board is governing with independence and as stewards of mission and public trust. Use the tools AGB developed to evaluate your culture and boundaries. Engage in real dialogue with your president. Lead together with courage and clarity to secure higher education’s promise.

Ross Mugler is board chair and acting president and CEO of the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

Source link

July 17, 2025
Ten Things I Learned at DETcon 2025
- By Rob Carthy, Director of International Development, Northumbria University.
Attending Duolingo’s inaugural DETcon London, I anticipated a day focused on the evolving landscape of language testing. What I experienced was a candid, and at times controversial, conversation about the geopolitical, political, and technological pressures facing UK higher education. Duolingo may have been the convenor, but the themes of the day went to the heart of the sector’s future.

Here are ten of my key takeaways from a thought-provoking day.

1. Crisis is the New Business-as-Usual

“Since I started, we’ve faced crisis after crisis.” These words from Katja Lamping, Director of Student Recruitment at UCL, resonated deeply. From the pandemic to the fall of Kabul, Ukraine, and Gaza, the past five years have demanded a level of institutional reactivity we’ve never seen before. The clear message was that this isn’t a blip. As former Home and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw bluntly put it, the first rule of preparing for uncertainty is to “expect that the unexpected is going to happen.” For university leaders, strategic planning now looks less like a road map and more like training for a cross-country race in the dark.

2. Agility is Now a Core Competency

The flip side of constant crisis is the need for agile solutions. We heard how the Duolingo English Test (DET) became a vital tool during the pandemic because it was accessible when physical test centres were not. This story is symbolic of a wider truth: our traditional processes and partnerships can be brittle. To keep our doors open to global talent, we must build resilience and responsiveness into our operations, from admissions to student support.

3. The Political Headwinds are Strengthening

Jack Straw’s portrayal of the government’s immigration white paper was sobering. He spoke of a view that some university business models are “not sustainable.” And highlighted the view in Westminster that the student visa route was being used as a “racket” for asylum claims. I might have disagreed with him – many in the room did – but this is a view held by many and is a reality we must face.

Straw, and later in the day Rory Stewart, said the mood in Westminster is hardening regardless of who is in power. This government wants to bring down immigration. It’s often said Brits don’t mean students, but the stark reality is the government wants to get numbers down, and students are one, if not the easiest, lever they can pull. We must be on the front foot, demonstrating our commitment to robust compliance and ethical recruitment, and articulating the immense value international students bring—a value HEPI’s own research has quantified at a net £37.4 billion for the 2021/22 cohort alone.

4. Technology Can Deliver Both Access and Integrity

A powerful message came from Duolingo’s CEO and co-founder, Luis Von Ahn, who shared his personal story of growing up in Guatemala and seeing how English proficiency could transform a person’s life, yet how prohibitive the cost of testing was. His core argument was that technology should be a democratising force. But most compellingly, he tackled the security question head-on. He argued that far from being less secure, an AI-powered test can offer greater integrity than a traditional test centre. The ability to use AI to monitor hundreds of behaviours simultaneously—from eye-gaze to keystroke patterns—in addition to human proctors, presented a powerful case that a digital-first approach doesn’t have to mean a compromise on security; it could, in fact, mean the opposite.

5. The Biggest Risk of AI Might Be Inaction

In a fascinating session on technology, Dr. Laura Gilbert OBE of the Tony Blair Institute offered a powerful counter-narrative to the usual fears around AI. She argued that the biggest risk might be “not doing it at all.” While we worry about academic integrity, we risk missing the opportunity to use AI to solve our biggest challenges, from relieving the administrative burden in admissions to revolutionising personalised learning. Her point that technology like AI is essential to sustaining public services like the NHS has direct parallels with the financial challenges in our own sector.

6. Trust in Technology Must Be Earned

Dr. Gilbert was clear: you cannot just demand trust in AI. It must be earned through what she called “radical transparency.” For universities adopting tools like the DET for high-stakes admissions, this is a critical lesson. We must demand evidence from our tech partners that their tools are secure, equitable, and have been rigorously evaluated for bias. Publishing that evidence, as Duolingo was highlighted as a good example, should become the industry standard.

A crucial warning from Dr. Gilbert was that if left to market forces, AI will inevitably make the advantage more advantaged, worsening societal inequality. For a sector committed to widening participation, this is a profound challenge. As we adopt AI, we must actively and consciously steer it towards closing, not widening, access gaps. The goal of using technology to reach students from previously untapped regions is a noble one, but it requires a constant and active focus on equity.

7. AI Isn’t Just A Buzzword

It’s a transformative force in assessment, personalisation and inclusion. I was struck by Duolingo’s mission-led approach, especially its ability to deliver high-quality, low-cost English testing to learners across the globe, including refugee and displaced students. Innovations like adaptive testing, AI-driven speaking practice, and real-time fraud detection redefine what “secure” and “authentic” assessment looks like. The session challenged my assumptions about test integrity and proved that democratisation doesn’t mean compromise. The balance between rigour and compassion resonated strongly—proof that access and excellence can coexist. At Northumbria, we’re increasingly mindful of our role in enabling fairer pathways into UK higher education. The Duolingo English Test is no longer a disruptor—it’s fast becoming a vital enabler that we should all be paying attention to.

8. Is it a Brave New World?

Rory Stewart’s session offered a powerful analysis of our turbulent times, contrasting the post-1989 era of liberal democracy and globalisation with our current “shadow world” of populism, protectionism, and a retreat from a rules-based international order. Stewart highlighted key shifts, including China’s rise without democratisation, the 2008 financial crisis, and the chaotic impact of social media and failed interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Stewart warned that global trends, like Trump’s attacks on US universities, could easily manifest in the UK, emphasizing that “what happens in the US can come here”. These attacks include significant funding cuts and threats to academic freedom over perceived ideological biases. This serves as a stark reminder for UK higher education to remain vigilant against similar political pressures.

9. A Little Can Go A Long Way

The session on the carbon cost of testing made me sit up. John Crick from the International Education Sustainability Group (IESG) revealed that switching from test centre-based exams to online alternatives can cut carbon emissions by up to 98%. The equivalent of planting a Sherwood Forest of trees every year. The analysis showed that the biggest environmental impact comes from travel to test centres, especially in regions without local provision. What struck me was how easily we overlook this area in our sustainability strategies. IESG’s meticulous modelling gives us a much-needed baseline to challenge assumptions and examine the unintended carbon consequences of our English language policies. It’s a conversation starter—but one we in international education need to have now if we’re serious about meeting climate goals.

10. Our Soft Power is Precious, But Not Guaranteed

The conference ended with a discussion on the UK’s soft power and the launch of Duolingo’s Welcome Project, which seeks to provide a place for students displaced by the turmoil in the US with opportunities in the UK.

While our leading universities remain beacons of global influence, the day’s discussions made it clear this cannot be taken for granted. A domestic political narrative focused on clamping down on immigration, combined with financial models that are visibly creaking, risks tarnishing one of the UK’s greatest exports. We must collectively find a way to reconcile the need for control and sustainability with the projection of being an open, welcoming, and world-leading destination for education.

Rob Carthy is the Director of International Development at Northumbria University, where he leads the university’s international student recruitment strategies. He is focused on developing a sustainable and diverse international community in Newcastle upon Tyne. Find him on LinkedIn.
Source link
July 17, 2025
A government climate website teachers rely on is in peril

For the last 15 years, science teacher Jeff Grant has used information on climate change from the federal website Climate.gov to create lesson plans, prepare students for Advanced Placement tests and educate fellow teachers. Now, Grant says, he is “grabbing what [he] can” from the site run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Program Office, amid concerns that the Trump administration is mothballing it as part of a broader effort to undermine climate science and education.

“It’s just one more thing stifling science education,” said Grant, who teaches at Downers Grove North High School in the Chicago suburbs.

Since early May, all 10 editorial contributors to Climate.gov have lost their jobs, and the organization that produces its education resources will soon run out of money. On June 24, the site’s homepage was redirected to NOAA.gov, a change NOAA said was made to comply with an earlier executive order on “restoring gold standard science.” Those steps follow many others the president has made to dismantle federal efforts to fight climate change, which his administration refers to as the “new green scam.”

Former employees of Climate.gov and other educators say they fear that the site, which will no longer produce new content, could be transformed into a platform for disinformation.

“It will make it harder for teachers to do a good job in educating their students about climate change,” said Glenn Branch, deputy director of the nonprofit National Center for Science Education. “Previously, they could rely on the federal government to provide free, up-to-date, accurate resources on climate change that were aimed at helping educators in particular, and they won’t be able to do so if some of these more dire predictions come to pass.”

Such concerns have some foundation. For example, Covid.gov, which during the Biden administration offered health information and access to Covid-19 tests, has been revamped to promote the controversial theory that the coronavirus was created in a lab. The administration has also moved aggressively to delete from government sites other terms that are currently out of favor, such as references to transgender people that were once on the National Park Service website of the Stonewall National Memorial, honoring a major milestone in the fight for LGBTQ+ rights.

Kim Doster, director of NOAA’s office of communications, declined to answer specific questions but shared a version of the statement posted on the NOAA website when Climate.gov was transferred. “In compliance with Executive Order 14303, Restoring Gold Standard Science, NOAA is relocating all research products from Climate.gov to NOAA.gov in an effort to centralize and consolidate resources,” it says.

Related: Want to read more about how climate change is shaping education? Subscribe to our free newsletter.

Climate.gov, founded in 2010 to support earth science instruction in schools, had become a go-to site for educators and the general public for news and information about temperature, sea level rise and other indicators of global warming.

For many educators, it has served a particularly key role. Because its resources are free, they are vital in schools that lack resources and funding, teachers and experts say.

Rebecca Lindsey, Climate.gov’s lead editor and writer, was one of several hundred NOAA probationary employees fired in February, then rehired and put on administrative leave, before being terminated again in March. The rest of the content production team — which included a meteorologist, a graphic artist and data visualizers — lost their jobs in mid-May. Only the site’s two web developers still have their jobs.

A screenshot of the Sea Level Rise Viewer, an interactive NOAA that’s listed as a resource on Climate.gov, a government climate website. Credit: NOAA Office for Coastal Management

Lindsey said she worries that the government “intended to keep the site up and use it to spread climate misinformation, because they were keeping the web developers and getting rid of the content team.”

In addition, the Climate Literacy and Energy Awareness Network, the official content provider for the education section of the site, has not received the latest installment of its three-year grant and expects its funds to run out in August.

“We won’t have funding to provide updates, fix hyperlinks and make sure that new resources are being added, or help teachers manage or address or use the resources,” said Anne Gold, CLEAN’s principal investigator. “It’s going to start deteriorating in quality.”

CLEAN, whose website is hosted by Carleton College, is now searching for other sources of money to continue its work, Gold said.

With the June 24 change redirecting visitors from Climate.gov to NOAA.gov/climate, the website for the first time falls under the purview of a political appointee: Doster. Its previous leader, David Herring, is a science writer and educator.

Melissa Lau, an AP environmental science teacher in Piedmont, Oklahoma, said the relocated site was “really difficult to navigate.”

As someone who lives in Tornado Alley, Lau said, she frequented CLEAN and NOAA sites to show her students localized, real-time data on storm seasons. She said she is concerned that teachers won’t have time to track down information that was shifted in the website’s move and, as a result, may opt not to teach climate change.

The executive order on “restoring gold standard science” that appears to have triggered the shift gives political appointees the authority to decide what science information needs to be modified to align with its tenets.

While the disclaimer posted to NOAA.gov seems to imply that Climate.gov did not meet this requirement, educators and researchers said that the site and its CLEAN education resources were the epitome of a gold standard.

“I want to stress that the reason why CLEAN is considered the gold standard is because we have such high standards for scientific accuracy, classroom readiness and maintenance,” Gold said. “We all know that knowledge is power, and power gives hope. … [Losing funding] is going to be a huge loss to classrooms and to students and the next generation.”

Related: One state mandates teaching climate change in almost all subjects — even PE

This is only the latest attack by the Trump administration on education around climate change. This month, the U.S. Global Change Research Program’s website, GlobalChange.gov, was shut down by the administration, after the program was defunded in April. The website once hosted an extensive climate literacy guide, along with all five iterations of the National Climate Assessment — a congressionally required report that informed the public about the effects and risks of climate change, along with local, actionable responses.

The Department of Commerce, which oversees NOAA, has cut other federal funding for climate research, including at Princeton University, arguing that these climate grant awards promoted “exaggerated and implausible climate threats, contributing to a phenomenon known as ‘climate anxiety,’ which has increased significantly among America’s youth.”

Studies, though, suggest that if young people have a greater understanding of why weather is changing and how to take action, they are less likely to feel anxious.

“The more you know [about climate change], the more it’s not a scary monster in the closet,” said Lauren Madden, professor of elementary science education at the College of New Jersey. “It’s a thing you can react to.” She added, “We’re going to have more storms, we’re going to have more fires, we’re going to have more droughts. There are things we can do to help slow this. … I think that quells anxiety, that doesn’t spark it.”

And climate education has broad public support — about 3 in 4 registered voters say schools should teach children about global warming, according to a 2024 report from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. Similarly, 77 percent of Americans regard it as very or somewhat important for elementary and secondary school students to learn about climate change, according to a 2019 study. And all but five states have adopted science standards that incorporate at least some instruction on climate change.

Yet few teachers have received training on climate change. There is also not much professional development for climate educators, and textbooks tend to downplay the effects of climate change.

As a result, many science teachers rely on federal tools and embed them in their curriculum. They are worried that the information will no longer be relevant, or disappear entirely, according to Lori Henrickson, former climate integration specialist for Washington state’s education department. Henrickson, who lost her job this June as the result of state budget cuts, was in charge of integrating climate education across content areas in the state, from language arts to physical education.

The .gov top-level domain connotes credibility and accessibility, according to Branch: “It is also easier for teachers facing or fearing climate change denial backlash to cite a reliable, free source from the federal government.”

Related: How Trump is disrupting efforts by schools and colleges to combat climate change

With Climate.gov’s future uncertain, educators are looking to other resources, like university websites and tools from other countries.

“I’m sure there will continue to be tools, and there will be enough people who will be willing to pay to access them,” Madden said. But, she added, “they probably won’t be as comprehensive, and it won’t feel like it’s a democratic process. It’ll feel like: If you or your employer are willing to chip in for it, then you’ll have access.”

Madden, along with many other educators, frequently used the Environmental Protection Agency’s environmental justice toolkit, but the site was taken down earlier this year.

“I feel like with all the federal websites, I’m constantly checking to see what’s still up and what’s not,” Madden said.

Bertha Vazquez, education director for the Center of Inquiry, an organization that works to preserve science and critical thinking, said she worried that the disappearance of climate information could leave U.S. students behind.

“The future of the American economy is not in oil, the future of the American economy is in solar and wind and geothermal. And if we’re going to keep up with the international economy, we need to go in that direction,” she said. But while the U.S. should be leading the way in scientific discovery, Vazquez said, such work will now be left to other countries.

Lau said she felt helpless and frustrated about Climate.gov’s shutdown and about the “attack on American science in general.”

“I don’t know what to do. I can contact my legislators, but my legislators from my state are not going to be really open to my concerns,” she said. “If students next year are asking me questions about [science research and funding], I have to tell them, ‘I do not know,’ and just have to leave it at that.”

Contact editor Caroline Preston at 212-870-8965, via Signal at CarolineP.83 or on email at [email protected].

This story about the government climate website was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger climate and education newsletter.

The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

Join us today.

Source link

July 17, 2025
Epstein, Donald Trump and Sexual Blackmail Networks w/ Nick Bryant (The Chris Hedges Report)

Despite a strong desire from the public to get to the bottom of the Jeffrey Epstein case, which saw the trafficking and sexual exploitation of thousands of young girls, the cabal associated with Epstein continues its conspiracy to suppress the ugly truth of the ruling class.

Source link

July 17, 2025
5 Top Strategies Your University Needs NOW
Institutions need to optimize their website content for AI-powered search results.

Search is dramatically evolving—and fast. Generative AI (Gen AI), especially Large Language Models (LLMs), are completely reshaping how information is processed, synthesized, and delivered. This changes how prospective students are influenced and impacts your institution’s visibility.

For today’s prospective college students, “search” is far more than a simple tool to find the best university; it’s what they do first to find the information they need during all stages of their college journey. In a world overflowing with options, your university’s visibility and prominence in these evolving search results can be the deciding factor in whether you’re even on a student’s radar.

I’ve recently had several conversations with university leaders, and one thing is clear: maximizing discoverability in this new, AI-powered era is top of mind. This blog is a direct result of those conversations and aims to cut through the noise to explain the why, what, and how of AI-driven student search.

The WHY: Generative AI-Powered Search

Generative AI (Gen AI) is the powerful application of machine learning that is transforming how information is created, compiled, and presented. Gen AI’s ability to create, summarize, and discover new information is precisely why it has become so crucial to modern online searching.

At the core are LLMs like ChatGPT and Gemini that are trained on massive amounts of data to understand and generate human-like language. These models enable students to ask complex, conversational questions like: “Which MBA program is best if I’m working full-time and want to study online?”

LLMs understand the intent behind that question—not just the words. That’s a huge leap from traditional keyword-based search. And the Gen AI is pulling from a vast range of sources, summarizing information, and delivering fast, context-rich answers with relevant links.

The WHAT: AI is Transforming Student Search

1. The rise of conversational search

Search is no longer just about typing in a few keywords and scrolling through results. Today’s prospective students are asking real questions, using full sentences, and expecting immediate, tailored answers whether it’s on Gemini, Siri, or ChatGPT.

In 2025, over 20% of the global population is already using voice search like Siri and Alexa. Many of these searches are like natural conversations—they’re specific, urgent, and detailed. That means your website content needs to be structured to answer these questions directly and naturally.

Your content needs to do more than just match keywords; it needs to thoroughly and thoughtfully answer the actual questions behind what students ask the Gen AI tool. Otherwise, your university could remain hidden from the Gen AI tools students use most.

2. Google AI overviews and AI mode: A new front page

Google’s AI Overviews (AIOs) are fundamentally changing the Search Engine Results Page (SERP) and content visibility by providing AI-generated summaries at the top. Instead of showing multiple blue links, AIOs serve up AI-generated summaries right at the top—pulling from multiple sources and citing them directly. If your content is cited in the summary, your visibility increases. If not, you might be left out entirely.

Soon, these summaries will be able to have paid ads in them. As part of the release in Google Marketing Live 2025, ads will appear directly within these AI Overviews, creating new high-visibility placements that are essential for maintaining paid visibility. You need to start planning to include AIO ads as part of your paid media strategy. Visibility is no longer about just bidding on keywords—it’s about being where the AI puts attention.

3. The accuracy challenge with LLMs

LLMs, which are also the technology powering AI Overviews, are powerful, but not perfect. They generate answers quickly, but if they lack real-time data, they can “hallucinate” or produce outdated info. Think of it this way—while your institutional content can become part of an AI’s knowledge base, the accuracy and strength of the AI’s responses are heavily dependent on your website’s structure for AI discoverability and the completeness and timeliness of your content on key pages like academic programs, faculty profiles, research archives, financial aid and student success stories.

However, students do not just take the face value of a summary. They want to dive deeper. Interestingly, AI assistants often pull from forums like Reddit or Quora. That’s a signal: clarity, authenticity, and helpfulness now compete with traditional authority. If your content sounds genuinely human and directly answers real student questions, it’s more likely to be cited by these tools and trusted by prospective students.
Talk with our digital marketing and enrollment experts

RNL works with colleges and universities across the country to ensure their digital marketing is optimized and filling their academic programs. Reach out today for a complimentary consultation to discuss:

Search engine optimization

Digital marketing

Lead generation

Digital engagement throughout the enrollment funnel

Request now
The HOW: Strategic Content for the AI Era

We are firmly in the age of Search + Chat. For universities’ content creators and marketing teams, this means adapting your strategy to a hybrid model where optimizing for both traditional search engines and AI citations is crucial. It’s no longer about ranking high on Google; it’s about being part of the conversation students are having with AI.

Just as prompt engineers craft inputs for LLMs, your content needs to “prompt” search AI effectively. This means creating well-structured, meaningful content that makes it easy for AI to understand and cite your information. This adds a layer of sophistication to content optimization, moving us toward what some call Generative Engine Optimization (GEO). Think of it as SEO, reimagined for an AI-first search environment.

Top 5 GEO Strategies You Can Focus on Now

1. Topic-focused content

Move beyond program name focus to cover broader topics comprehensively, addressing full student intent. For example, instead of just “Best Online MBA,” create content around “Which MBA program is the best while balancing a full-time job?” or “career paths in business analytics” or “balancing graduate studies with work.” This helps AI understand the full context, making your university’s degree program’s content relevant for diverse student queries.

2. Answer-focused structure

Use short, digestible sections with clear, question-based headings. For example, “When are the application deadlines for fall 2025?” or “How do I schedule a campus tour?” Include plain-text facts and data-driven claims (e.g., graduate employment rates, program rankings, faculty research impact). Content with specific data is 40% more likely to appear in LLM responses.

3. Build authority (E-E-A-T)

AI models favor content that signals Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trust. For universities, this means transparently displaying faculty qualifications, publishing original research, program rankings, and highlighting alumni success, through testimonials. Strong E-E-A-T signals trustworthiness to AI, crucial for students making significant educational decisions. This isn’t just for humans, it’s how AI decides your credibility.

4. Structured data and schema markup to speak AI’s language

Think of schema markup as a universal translator for your website. It’s code you add to your pages that tells AI models and search engines what specific pieces of information mean, not just what they say. For example:
- You can mark up your academic programs as “Courses,” detailing credit hours, learning outcomes, and faculty.
- Your events (like campus tours or info sessions) can be identified as “Events” with dates, times, and locations.
- Faculty profiles can be marked as “Persons,” highlighting their name, title, department, and research interests.
- Testimonials can be flagged as “Reviews,” complete with star ratings and reviewer names.
Why this matters: When AI understands the precise context of your content, it can extract accurate information more effectively. This dramatically boosts your visibility in AI Overviews, rich snippets, and voice search.

5. AI crawler accessibility

For AI models to learn from your website, they first need to be able to “read” it. This means ensuring your university’s websites and program pages are fully accessible to AI crawlers.
- Check your robots.txt file: This file tells web crawlers (including those used by AI) which parts of your site they can and cannot access. Make sure it’s not inadvertently blocking important academic programs, admissions details, or faculty research sections.
- Handle JavaScript-heavy elements: Many modern university sites use JavaScript for interactive elements like program finders, application portals, or dynamic course catalogs. If not set up correctly, AI crawlers might not “see” the content generated by this JavaScript. Consider Server-Side Rendering (SSR) or Static Site Generation (SSG) to ensure this critical content is visible to crawlers.
If AI crawlers can’t access your academic program content, it won’t be discoverable by AI- powered search.

Final Thoughts: Show Up Where It Counts

The AI-driven evolution of student search isn’t a distant prediction—it’s happening now. My conversations with campus partners consistently confirms this: AI isn’t replacing traditional student search, but profoundly reshaping how students search, find, trust, and act on information.

The smartest path forward isn’t choosing between Google and AI chat tools. It’s using both. This is a powerful convergence where AI assistants deliver fast, personalized insights, while Google Search provides foundational depth, structure and authority.

Ask yourself: Is your content part of that journey? Is it fresh, factual, and findableAI and traditional search? For higher ed marketing and enrollment management professionals seeking to make a lasting impact, the answer is clear: Be the answer in both places.

At RNL, we’re committed to helping universities stay discoverable throughout the entire funnel—from awareness to inquiry to application and enrollment. We care deeply about the student journey too, and we know how critical it is for students to find the right-fit institutions at the right time. That’s why we stay agile—continuously evolving our strategies to meet students where they are and help institutions show up early, stay relevant, and convert when it counts.
Talk with our digital marketing and enrollment experts

RNL works with colleges and universities across the country to ensure their digital marketing is optimized and filling their academic programs. Reach out today for a complimentary consultation to discuss:

Search engine optimization

Digital marketing

Lead generation

Digital engagement throughout the enrollment funnel

Request now
Source link
July 17, 2025
UCAS applications and offer making by June deadline, 2025

The UCAS 30 June application deadline is the last point an applicant can apply outside of clearing.

Though most applications (particularly from UK 18 year olds) happen by the January deadline, the June figures allow for a complete analysis of application behaviour in the UCAS main scheme.

The number of 18 year old UK applicants has reached a record high of 328,390 (up 2.2 per cent on last year) – with the total number of applicants at 665,070 (up 1.3 per cent on last year).

Application rates

As always it is salutary to compare the often-pushed narrative that young people are being tempted away from expensive/poor-value/woke (delete as per your personal preference) higher education with the actuality that numbers are rising. You could even be tempted to imagine what the application rates might be like in a sector with a realistic student maintenance offer.

I mention application rates because this is what declinist commentators will seize on. For UK domiciled 18 year old applicants, the application rate is 41.20 – down from 41.80 per cent last year. This fall is visible across most measures of deprivation: in England, for example, every IMD quintile but quintile 5 (the least disadvantaged) sees a falling application rate.

[Full screen]

In part, this could be a function of another year where the dominance of higher tariff providers in driving applications has increased: higher tariff providers disproportionately inspire applications from (and recruit) better off young people.

This chart shows the number of applications to each of three tariff groups. For UK 18 year olds the default is fast becoming an application to a high tariff provider. We don’t (unfortunately) get application numbers by deprivation and tariff group.

[Full screen]

These number of placed students is likely to rise too: UCAS and Ofqual have suggested that there are 28,000 places available in Clearing this year.

Offer rates

One innovation in this year’s release is information on offer rates – the proportion of applications that result in an offer being made. We get three years of data, which demonstrate that offer rates are rising across the sector – and that (as you may expect) high tariff providers are less likely to make offers than lower tariff providers. The growth among high tariff providers is driven both by rising application numbers and a rising offer rate.

[Full screen]

For believers of the other recruitment myth (that universities load up on international students and are less keen to take even very able home students) we get a timely corrective. It turns out that 98.5 per cent of UK 18 year old applicants have an offer, compared with 89.7 per cent of international students.

[Full screen]

Subjects

Finally, it’s always fascinating to look at applications by subject area – a plot by CAH1 groups shows a sharp rise in the popularity of business, subjects allied to medicine, engineering, and law: with an intriguing drop in applications to computing subjects. There may be a generative AI effect on computing applications – the rise of “vibe coding” and other uses of agents in software development may mean that the attraction of learning to programme computers properly may be waning.

That’s the best explanation I have – and it is curious that law (a domain where predictions of AI tools eating entry level roles are ten a penny) doesn’t appear to be experiencing a similar phenomenon.

[Full screen]

Source link

July 16, 2025
Making the most of degree apprenticeships requires collaboration across the whole of the UK

Less than a decade after their introduction, degree apprenticeships have become a significant feature of higher education provision across the United Kingdom. Despite this shared initiative, institutions in England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland continue to operate largely independently, creating a fragmented UK landscape that limits collective learning and improvement.

This separation has resulted in a fragmented landscape that undermines opportunities for mutual learning and improvement. The absence of sustained dialogue means each nation continues to trial and refine its own approach in relative isolation, an approach that leaves apprentices short-changed.

If we want better outcomes for everyone involved, we need to stop running four parallel experiments and start talking to one another.

As a consortium of educational leaders committed to work-based higher education across the UK, we’ve collectively observed a concerning trend during our extensive engagement with employers, universities, and apprentices: the persistent siloing of knowledge and practice between our four nations. While Scotland has established its graduate apprenticeships program, England has developed its degree apprenticeships framework, and both Wales and Northern Ireland have implemented their own distinct approaches. Despite facing remarkably similar implementation challenges, there remains a troubling lack of systematic knowledge-sharing and collaborative learning across these national boundaries.

Enhanced cross-border collaboration could lead to better outcomes for institutions, apprentices, and employers alike, preventing duplication of efforts and fostering collective improvements based on shared experiences.

Diverse approaches

Each UK nation has developed its distinct approach to integrating apprenticeships within higher education, despite common policy objectives and implementation challenges.

In 2024, the Labour government announced the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill, paving the way for the establishment of Skills England. Previously employers defined apprenticeship standards, with apprentices required to dedicate at least 20 per cent of their training time away from the workplace, concluding with an end-point assessment. The new legislation gives the government powers to bypass employer groups to design and approve standards and apprenticeship assessment plans in a move argued to make the skills system more “agile” to employer needs and allow Skills England to become central to Labour’s five missions.

In Scotland, graduate apprenticeships managed by Skills Development Scotland similarly prioritise employer involvement. However, Scotland employs a more centrally controlled skills system, directly influencing university offerings through funded apprenticeship places. This approach is further reinforced by the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill – introduced in February 2025 – which centralises responsibility for the delivery and funding of apprenticeships within the Scottish Funding Council. By consolidating these responsibilities, the bill aims to enhance system efficiency, transparency, and alignment with the Scottish labour market, thereby facilitating improved outcomes for learners and employers.

Wales introduced a novel structure by establishing the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research (Medr), a single governing body overseeing the entire tertiary education sector, including apprenticeships. This model represents a significant structural departure from other nations.

Northern Ireland’s strategy aligns apprenticeships with broader economic ambitions, specifically targeting a transformation to a “10X economy” by 2030. Apprenticeships play a pivotal role in this ambitious economic development strategy, not merely seen as educational pathways, but as strategic instruments for workforce development and sectoral transformation.

Shared challenges, isolated solutions

Despite the distinct policy approaches, institutions in each nation encounter remarkably similar operational difficulties. Institutions consistently face challenges integrating workplace experiences within academic curricula, navigating multiple regulatory frameworks, and establishing comprehensive support mechanisms for apprentices. These recurring issues highlight a fundamental inefficiency: duplicated efforts across borders without coordinated learning.

For instance, Middlesex University’s Sustainable Degree Apprenticeships report identifies common struggles across the UK, particularly with managing supernumerary positions for nursing apprentices and reconciling workplace assessments with academic expectations.

The widespread nature of these issues emphasises the potential value of a collective, cross-border approach to sharing effective strategies and solutions.

Exemplifying untapped collaborative potential is the University of the West of Scotland’s (UWS) approach to graduate apprenticeships. UWS’ graduate apprenticeship business management programme has introduced dedicated “link tutors” who act as a consistent point of contact for both apprentices and employers. These tutors navigate the complex relationship between universities and employers, support apprentices in managing the demands of full-time work alongside academic study and help ensure alignment between on-the-job experience and academic outcomes. For apprentices who have struggled in more traditional learning environments, this targeted, consistent support has been especially impactful.

The UWS example points to a broader truth – that the success of degree apprenticeships depends not just on academic content or employer engagement, but on the quality of the relationships built around the apprentice. UWS link tutors demonstrate what is possible when those relationships are given structure and sustained attention. However, without mechanisms for knowledge-sharing across the UK, such practices risk becoming isolated successes rather than the foundation for a more consistent and effective system.

Barriers to effective collaboration

The persistence of fragmentation across the UK is not accidental but reinforced by several systemic barriers. Firstly, the varied regulatory and quality assurance frameworks across each nation create natural divisions. These distinct regulations complicate collaborative efforts and reinforce separation.

Competition among institutions for apprenticeships and employer partnerships further discourages cooperation. Institutions often perceive cross-border collaboration as potentially undermining competitive advantage, despite potential long-term benefits for shared knowledge. Divergent policy frameworks across the four nations intensifies these tensions. Employers operating across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland face significant challenges navigating the inconsistent apprenticeship standards, funding mechanisms, and regulatory requirements, thereby limiting the scale and effectiveness of apprenticeship programs and potentially undermining broader national objectives of skills development and economic growth.

Additionally, frequent policy shifts undermine the stability required for effective collaborative planning. Institutions, wary of unpredictable policy changes, prefer short-term, autonomous strategies rather than investing in potentially unstable cross-border collaborations.

And the absence of structured platforms for meaningful cross-border exchange remains a significant barrier. Resource constraints, particularly in staff workloads and budgetary limitations frequently hinder the capacity of institutions to engage in sustained, meaningful dialogue with counterparts in other UK regions. This lack of institutional infrastructure and resourcing limits the development of collaborative practices essential for a cohesive UK-wide degree apprenticeship ecosystem.

The imperative for collaborative platforms

Addressing these barriers requires deliberate action to create structured, cross-border collaborative forums. Recent informal discussions among apprenticeship providers across the UK indicate widespread acknowledgment of these missed collaborative opportunities. Academics frequently express frustration about facing common challenges without access to shared resources or systematic opportunities to learn from peers in other parts of the UK. This is despite frequent calls from the sector.

What is lacking is a coordinated infrastructure that supports regular exchange of pedagogical models, assessment strategies, and institutional policies. Cross-nation working groups, joint practitioner networks, and shared digital platforms could help bridge this divide. These would not only allow for the exchange of effective practice but also aid in the development of more consistent approaches that benefit apprentices and employers alike.

The challenge is not a lack of innovation, but a lack of connection. Many institutions already possess effective, well-tested solutions to the very problems others are still grappling with. Without formal channels to communicate these solutions, valuable knowledge remains isolated and difficult to access. If higher education institutions across the UK are to realise the full potential of degree apprenticeships, they must find ways to turn informal acknowledgement into formal collaboration.

The benefits of greater cross-border collaboration are substantial. Institutions could significantly improve the quality of apprenticeship programmes by collectively addressing shared challenges. Enhanced efficiency could reduce duplication of effort, allowing institutions to focus resources more strategically and effectively.

Moreover, apprentices themselves stand to gain significantly. Improved programme coherence, stemming from collective learning, could ensure apprentices receive uniformly high-quality education and training, irrespective of their geographic location.

Employers – essential stakeholders in apprenticeship programmes – would similarly benefit from improved programme consistency and quality. Collaborative cross-border dialogue could help standardise employer expectations and streamline their participation across multiple jurisdictions.

A collective future

Degree apprenticeships represent a substantial collective investment aimed at reshaping higher education and addressing key skills shortages within the UK economy. Apprentices at the heart of this initiative deserve integrated, high-quality experiences informed by the best practices and shared knowledge of institutions across the entire UK.

Institutions and policymakers must therefore commit to overcoming existing fragmentation by prioritising structured cross-border collaboration. This approach not only maximises the effectiveness of the significant resources already committed but also establishes a more coherent, effective educational framework for future apprentices.

Ultimately, collaboration among UK higher education institutions represents not only good educational practice but a strategic imperative, ensuring that apprenticeships fully realise their potential as transformative educational opportunities.

Our apprentices deserve better than four parallel experiments. They deserve the best of what all four nations have learned. It’s time we started talking to each other.

Source link

July 16, 2025