Blog

FIRE statement on Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton upholding age verification for adult content

Today, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to uphold Texas’s age-verification law for sites featuring adult content. The decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton effectively reverses decades of Supreme Court precedent that protects the free speech rights of adults to access information without jumping over government age-verification hurdles.

FIRE filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that free expression “requires vigilant protection, and the First Amendment doesn’t permit short cuts.” FIRE believes that the government’s efforts to restrict adults’ access to constitutionally protected information must be carefully tailored, and that Texas’ law failed to do so.

The following statement can be attributed to FIRE Chief Counsel Bob Corn-Revere.

Today’s ruling limits American adults’ access to only that speech which is fit for children — unless they show their papers first.

After today, adults in the State of Texas must upload sensitive information to access speech that the First Amendment fully protects for them. This wrongheaded, invasive result overturns a generation of precedent and sacrifices anonymity and privacy in the process.

Data breaches are inevitable. How many will it take before we understand the threat today’s ruling presents?

Americans will live to regret the day we let the government condition access to protected speech on proof of our identity. FIRE will fight nationwide to ensure that this erosion of our rights goes no further.

Source link

June 27, 2025
Layoffs at Southern New Hampshire University

Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU), long hailed as a leader in online education and a symbol of institutional reinvention, laid off approximately 60 employees on June 27, 2025. The move came without warning to staff, according to an anonymous source close to the situation.

Employees reportedly received a generic email from Lisa Marsh Ryerson, SNHU’s newly installed president, delivering the news of their termination. There was no video call, no face-to-face meeting, and no meaningful explanation beyond the cold language of corporate HR.

“There was no sincerity,” the source said. “No real communication. Just a robotic email. No opportunity for questions, no acknowledgment of people’s service.”

The layoffs have sent shockwaves through the university’s workforce—many of whom had believed that SNHU’s image as a student-centered and employee-friendly institution translated into job security. That assumption, it appears, was misplaced.

SNHU, which once garnered praise from the Obama administration for its innovative online learning model, has undergone significant changes in recent years. Under the leadership of former president Paul LeBlanc, the university expanded its online programs rapidly and became one of the largest nonprofit providers of online degrees in the United States. But as the market for online education becomes increasingly competitive and enrollment pressures mount across the country, even big players like SNHU appear to be tightening their belts.

What’s striking about this latest round of cuts is not just the numbers—but the tone. At a university that prides itself on personalization and student engagement, employees describe the layoff process as abrupt, impersonal, and dehumanizing.

“They preach empathy to students,” the source noted. “But when it came to their own staff, there was none.”

It’s unclear which departments or roles were affected. SNHU has yet to issue a public statement, and no mention of the layoffs could be found on the university’s website or social media accounts at the time of publication.

The layoffs at SNHU follow broader trends in the higher education sector, where institutions—both public and private—are increasingly resorting to staff reductions amid enrollment declines, demographic shifts, and uncertain funding landscapes. But even in this context, the lack of transparency and empathy stands out.

The Higher Education Inquirer will continue to monitor developments at Southern New Hampshire University and invites current and former employees to share their experiences confidentially.

Source link

June 27, 2025
Higher Education Inquirer : Remembering Bill Moyers (1934-2025)

In a media landscape often dominated by soundbites, spin, and sensationalism, Bill Moyers was a rare voice of clarity, compassion, and conscience. With his passing, America has lost not only a gifted journalist and public intellectual but also one of its most courageous truth-tellers.

For more than half a century, Moyers stood at the intersection of journalism, politics, and public education—unyielding in his pursuit of justice and understanding. From his early days as White House Press Secretary under President Lyndon Johnson to his groundbreaking work with PBS, Moyers embodied the spirit of democratic inquiry: probing deeply, listening intently, and speaking boldly. He held the powerful to account, but always with the dignity and decency that defined his Texan roots and Baptist upbringing.

Bill Moyers never saw journalism as a career; he saw it as a calling. His programs—Now with Bill Moyers, Bill Moyers Journal, and Moyers & Company—were sanctuaries for critical thought and inconvenient truths. He gave voice to the voiceless: whistleblowers, teachers, laborers, poets, and prophets. In a time when the corporate capture of media narrowed the spectrum of acceptable opinion, Moyers stretched it wide—amplifying progressive theologians, investigative reporters, civil rights leaders, and scholars ignored by commercial networks.

His love of learning, and his belief in public education as a democratic cornerstone, made him a champion of educators and lifelong learners. He understood that education is not merely about credentials or career preparation, but about cultivating the moral imagination. That insight animated his long relationship with public broadcasting, where he insisted that television could—and should—educate, illuminate, and elevate.

Bill Moyers also saw through the fog of power. He knew how elite institutions—government, media, universities, and corporations—could align to manufacture consent and mystify the public. And yet he maintained hope. Not a naive optimism, but a deep belief in people’s capacity to awaken, organize, and transform society. As he once said, “Democracy is not a lie, it is a leap of faith. But you need to keep leaping.”

In a moment when American higher education faces crises of affordability, access, and meaning—when trust in journalism is frayed, and when truth itself feels embattled—Bill Moyers’ legacy reminds us that integrity matters. So does context, complexity, and compassion.

His loss is personal for those of us at the Higher Education Inquirer. Many of us were shaped by his work, inspired by his commitment to investigative rigor and human dignity. His interviews with thinkers like Howard Zinn, Cornel West, Barbara Ehrenreich, and Joseph Campbell helped expand the public’s moral and intellectual horizons—precisely what higher education should strive to do.

In remembering Bill Moyers, we are called to do more than mourn. We are called to follow his example: to ask harder questions, to listen more deeply, to speak more clearly, and to stand, always, with the people who are too often ignored or maligned.

Rest in power, Bill Moyers. Your words lit candles in the darkness. May we carry that light forward.

Source link

June 27, 2025
Ideology, Outcomes, and a Shift in Higher Ed Oversight

In a bold move that could upend the structure of higher education oversight in the United States, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced the creation of the Commission for Public Higher Education (CPHE)—a multi-state effort to challenge what he and his allies call the “activist-controlled accreditation monopoly.” The CPHE includes six Republican-led states: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.

Positioned as a new accrediting entity with a focus on “student outcomes, transparency, and ideological independence,” the CPHE represents a growing backlash against traditional regional accreditors like the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). According to DeSantis and CPHE proponents, these longstanding organizations have prioritized diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and other perceived progressive mandates over academic quality, workforce readiness, and measurable outcomes.

The Political Context

Governor DeSantis has made higher education a central battleground in his broader cultural agenda, particularly since his administration launched efforts to eliminate DEI offices, weaken tenure protections, and reshape public university boards. The CPHE fits neatly into that larger campaign—what DeSantis calls “reclaiming higher education.”

“We’re breaking the stranglehold of the accreditation cartel,” DeSantis said in Boca Raton. “Florida is leading the way in building an education system based on results, not ideology.”

The effort is being coordinated with support from public university systems across the South, including the University of South Carolina and the University Systems of Georgia and Texas. University of South Carolina Board Chair Thad Westbrook praised the new accreditor’s “outcomes-based” framework, stating it will “benefit students while making accreditation more efficient.”

A Threat to the Federal Gatekeeping System?

Accreditation in the U.S. plays a crucial gatekeeping role: it determines whether institutions are eligible to receive federal student aid, including Pell Grants and federally backed student loans. For CPHE to have any real impact, it must eventually be recognized by the U.S. Department of Education.

That recognition is far from guaranteed. The process requires years of documentation, reviews, and approvals—and federal education officials may view CPHE’s openly political roots as problematic. Critics argue the consortium is more about ideological conformity than educational quality.

Risks and Ramifications

While the CPHE claims to offer a “rigorous” and “transparent” alternative to traditional accreditation, skeptics—including some education policy analysts and faculty advocates—warn that the real motive is political control over higher education institutions. By tying accreditation to a specific ideological framework, opponents fear that academic freedom, faculty governance, and research independence could be undermined.

There are also practical concerns. Should CPHE institutions lose recognition by federal agencies or face lawsuits over inconsistent standards, students could suffer the consequences—especially those relying on financial aid or seeking degrees with recognized accreditation.

Moreover, CPHE’s narrow focus on “student outcomes” often means post-graduate earnings or job placement, metrics that oversimplify complex educational goals and ignore broader social and civic benefits of higher education.

A Test of Federalism in Higher Ed

This development marks an escalation in the state-federal tug-of-war over higher education. With the U.S. Supreme Court increasingly supportive of state autonomy, and with Congress gridlocked, states like Florida are testing how far they can go in reshaping public education under a conservative vision.

The CPHE may become a flashpoint in the national debate over what public universities are for—and who gets to decide. Whether this initiative results in meaningful improvement or becomes another chapter in the politicization of higher education remains to be seen.

Source link

June 27, 2025
Welfare reforms will hit disabled students hard

As political funding decisions continue to pose threats to both the welfare of disabled people and the higher education sector as a whole, disabled students find themselves caught up in a crossfire of financial cuts.

This was the subject of many coffee-break conversations at this year’s National Association of Disability Practitioners Conference, at which growing concerns around the financial viability of supporting disabled students effectively were shared by a number of specialist staff across the sector.

As a practitioner, and as a disabled student myself, it’s hard to shake the feeling that current support mechanisms are stretched to their limits. Without urgent investment and reform, it’s disabled students who will continue to bear the brunt.

Earlier in the year, Jim Dickinson flagged the potential fallout for disabled students arising from reforms to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) proposed in the government’s Pathways to Work Green Paper.

With over 100 Labour MPs signing an amendment opposing the changes, if rumours about the government’s compromise are to be believed, new students will soon lose out on some of the support that many existing disabled students are entitled to.

In the months since the reforms were first proposed, I’ve heard from a number of disabled students who shared serious concerns about what these cuts mean for their wellbeing, autonomy, and academic futures.

“Without PIP, I would have to drop out.”

That’s what Alex*, a disabled student at the University of Brighton, told me. Alex currently uses their PIP to cover a number of health related costs, from “feeding tube equipment that isn’t covered by the NHS, mobility equipment and repairs, and [support to cover] additional travel costs to get to [their] appointments.”

Sadly, yet unsurprisingly, considerations of dropping-out of university are not uncommon. Recent data within the Advance HE Student Academic Experience Survey revealed that disabled students are almost twice as likely to have considered quitting, with 83 per cent of disabled students reporting challenges related to the cost-of-living.

In my day-job, I often encounter the mistaken assumption that Disabled Students’ Allowance has the ability to fill all of the financial gaps that disabled students may face throughout their studies. DSA can act as a vital source of support for study-related costs, but it is not designed to replace social security.

For many disabled students, Personal Independence Payment is a lifeline for maintaining independence whilst at university. But with persistent delays and restrictions on DSA support and the proposal to restrict PIP even further for young people, many students like Alex are at risk of starting their studies without access to either.

“I can’t work alongside my course with my health issues…”

In my own context, full-time students are expected to commit around 50 hours per week to their studies to meet the notional learning hours set by the SCQF. Yet, in the midst of the ongoing cost-of-living crisis, an estimated 68 per cent of undergraduates now work paid jobs alongside full-time study, exposing a continued disconnect between policy expectations and the lived reality of students today. A balancing act of work and study is unsustainable for many, and for disabled students, the pressures are even greater.

Abi* reflected this in her conversation with me: “I can’t work alongside my course with my health issues […] as student finance is so little, I use my PIP to stay afloat every month,” she says. “I wouldn’t be able to have my car, with my carer driving me – which is the only way I can get out of the house.”

At last check, Scope estimated that disabled households require an additional £1067 per month to meet basic living costs, as a result of the many financial barriers associated with existing as a disabled person in a society that is not constructed to compensate for a wide variety of access needs. Whilst PIP is not intended as an out-of-work benefit, many disabled students rely on it to fill the gaps left by inadequate financial support. Abi’s experience reflects the additional strain placed on disabled students by the “disability price tag”.

Accessible accommodation is “more expensive than most private rentals…”

Systemic barriers were emphasised by a number of the students I spoke with. For Daisy* securing accessible housing has been a particular challenge financially.

Reflecting on her own living situation, she said: “I live in a very inaccessible city and can only live in university halls,” “it’s more expensive than most private rentals, but there’s no alternative.”

Back in Brighton, Alex* shared similar concerns: “my only option is to live in university accommodation, which costs significantly more on average than most house shares in my city.”

These accounts reflect a wider set of structural barriers that have a direct impact on the disabled student experience. Recent data from Disabled Students UK highlighted that affordable, accessible housing is often scarce, with 46 per cent of disabled students reporting that they’ve ended up paying more for housing that met their access needs.

And housing can’t be considered in isolation – it’s tied to the broader context of inaccessible transport, barriers to timely healthcare, inadequate personal care support, and the high costs associated with assistive equipment.

When these basic needs go unmet, it becomes significantly harder for disabled students to engage with university life: academically, socially, and beyond. Abi shared this concern, expressing fears that the removal of PIP would prevent her from having a wider student experience: “without my PIP, I wouldn’t be able to do anything extracurricular.”

If disabled students can’t afford to live independently, how can they fully participate in university life, let alone thrive outside of it?

“Why can’t they see how hard I’m trying to find work?”

That’s the question Katie* posed to me when we spoke. Preparing to undertake a PhD in Newcastle, Katie found the transition from university into work daunting and unsupported. “There’s still an expectation that you get your degree, then get a job,” she said. “But there’s very little recognition of how much harder that is for disabled graduates.”

A recent report from the Shaw Trust highlighted the persistence of the disability employment gap amongst graduates, emphasising that the gap is not about a lack of aspiration, it’s about structural and systemic barriers.

Katie’s experience reflects a broader trend – while much of the discourse centres around “employability” and economic outcomes, little is said about the lack of disability-informed careers support or the inflexibility of most graduate job opportunities. “Trying to find ‘disability confident’ employers reduces the job pool even further,” she adds. “Half of the jobs which could be hybrid or online aren’t. And trying to find a flexible job that allows time for medical appointments? Nearly impossible.”

But it isn’t just about work…

These conversations emphasise access to equitable higher education risks being eroded by benefit restrictions, ongoing delays to DSA support, and widespread cuts to university funding.

While higher education institutions have made important strides in recent years, through the development of Disabled Student Commitment, and an increased focus on compliance with the Equality Act, service cuts across the sector threaten to undermine that progress.

According to our research at Disabled Students UK, only 38 per cent of disabled students currently feel that their support needs have been met by their institution. As public funding continues to shrink, many universities are being forced to reassess spending, with many opting to restructure services and streamline provision. But if disabled students are sidelined in these processes, the consequences will be stark.

In a climate of compounding cuts, institutions must take care to ensure that the interests of disabled students are not excluded from decision-making or deprioritised in budget reviews. Otherwise, we risk further entrenching inequity within a sector that prides itself on widening participation.

At the heart of all of this is one clear message – disabled students are not asking for luxury. They’re seeking the basic conditions needed to study, participate, and succeed. If we cannot meet even the baseline needs of disabled students, at both an institutional and state level, then we need to seriously question what kind of higher education system we are building, and who it’s truly for.

Disabled Students UK’s Annual Disabled Student Survey, the largest survey into HE accessibility and the disabled student experience in the UK, is open for responses until the end of July.

Source link

June 27, 2025
Researchers “Cautiously Optimistic” NIH Will Restore Grants

Months after individual researchers, advocacy groups and a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general filed two lawsuits against the National Institutes of Health for terminating hundreds of active research grants misaligned with the Trump administration’s ideologies, some scientists are hopeful that the agency will soon restore the grants and allow them to resume their research.

Last week, a federal judge in Massachusetts ordered the NIH to restore the roughly 900 grants named in the lawsuits, including many focused on studying vaccine hesitancy, LGBTQ+ health and diversity, equity and inclusion in the medical field. U.S. District Judge William Young, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, ruled the terminations void and unlawful, stating during a hearing that in all his years on the bench he’d “never seen” discrimination by the government to this extent.

Although Science reported Thursday morning that the NIH has internally communicated plans to restore those grants “as soon as practicable”—and also cease further grant terminations—researchers say they still don’t know when they can expect to get the money they were promised.

“Since the ruling, we are really encouraged,” said Heidi Moseson, a plaintiff in one of the cases and a senior researcher at Ibis Reproductive Health. “But we haven’t heard anything from the NIH about our grants being reinstated, and we don’t have a window into what that process looks like.”

Back in March, Moseson received a letter from the agency terminating her grant, which was aimed at improving the accuracy of data collected in sexual and reproductive health research for all people, including those who identify as transgender and gender diverse. The award “no longer effectuates agency priorities,” the letter said. “Research programs based on gender identity are often unscientific, have little identifiable return on investment, and do nothing to enhance the health of many Americans.”

The NIH did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment on its specific plans for restoring the terminated grants.

Appeal Anxiety

Moseson said each week that goes by with the grant on pause “is another week where people are not being appropriately screened into clinical care and research that would be relevant for their bodies, leading to missed preventative care or, conversely, unnecessary preventive care.”

While her team is ready to resume their research as soon as the NIH restores the funding in accordance with the judge’s ruling, she’s bracing for further disruptions ahead, depending on what happens with the appeals process.

On Monday, the NIH filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. It also filed a motion to stay the judge’s order to restore the grants while pending the appeal, but Young denied that motion on Tuesday, noting that a stay “would cause irreparable harm to the plaintiffs.”

“This is a case in equity concerning health research already bought and paid for by the Congress of the United States through funds appropriated for expenditure and properly allocated during this fiscal year,” the judge wrote. “Even a day’s delay further destroys the unmistakable legislative purpose from its accomplishment.”

The following day, Michelle Bulls, a senior NIH official who oversees extramural funding, told staffers in an email that the agency must restore funding for the hundreds of projects identified by the plaintiffs, Science reported. “Please proceed with taking action on this request as part of the first phase of our compliance with the court’s judgment,” Bulls wrote, noting that “additional information is forthcoming.”

Noam Ross, executive director at rOpenSci, a nonprofit that supports reproducible open research, and co-founder of the website Grant Watch, which is tracking grant terminations, put out a call for information on LinkedIn Wednesday about any grants the NIH has restored. But he told Inside Higher Ed Thursday afternoon that he has yet to receive any verified reports of restored NIH grants.

Shalini Goel Agarwal, counsel for Protect Democracy, a nonprofit focused on combating perceived authoritarian threats, and one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said Thursday morning that she also had not yet heard of any researchers getting grant money the NIH previously terminated.

Though it’s not clear what could come of the government’s effort to appeal Young’s ruling, “at this moment the judge’s order is in effect and the NIH should be returning money to the researchers whose grants were terminated,” she said. “NIH should right now be undoing the effects of its directives.”

‘Cautiously Optimistic’

Katie Edwards, a social work professor at the University of Michigan and a plaintiff in one of the cases, said that as of Thursday afternoon, she had yet to receive any communication from the NIH about its plans to restore her numerous multiyear grants.

Edwards, whose research focuses on Indigenous and LGBTQ+ youth, said that delaying the grants much longer will undermine the research she’s already started, to the detriment of public health research.

“For some of our studies, it’s just a matter of weeks before they’ll be really hard if not impossible to restart. I’m feeling a lot of anxiety,” she said. “We’re in a waiting phase, but I’m trying to be cautiously optimistic.”

Despite the uncertainty of what’s ahead, she did get some reassuring news from the NIH on Thursday. The agency notified her that it approved her bid for a new three-year, $710,000 grant to develop and evaluate a self-defense program for adult women survivors of sexual violence. Like many other applications for new grants, the application had been in limbo for months. “So something (good??) is going on there!” she said in an email.

Other cases moving through the courts also look promising for federally funded researchers eager to get their grants restored.

On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Rita Lin ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities had also unlawfully terminated grants that had already been awarded to researchers in the University of California’s 10-campus system. The judge, a Biden appointee, ordered the government to restore them, adding that she is weighing extending the order to 13 other federal agencies, including the NIH.

“Many of the cases that are making their way through the courts share claims that are being made about the illegality of the federal government’s actions,” said Olga Akselrod, counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union and a lawyer representing the plaintiffs in one of the suits against the NIH. “Any time we have a win in one of these cases it’s an important statement of the applicable law, and that’s relevant for all of the cases that are proceeding.”

Source link

June 27, 2025
Trump Admin. Cuts NIH’s Springer Nature Subscriptions

Citing an unnamed source, Axios reported this week that the Trump administration has cut “about $20 million in grants covering subscriptions” with Springer Nature, which publishes more than 3,000 journals, including the prestigious Nature.

The article didn’t specify which agency cut these subscriptions. Axios reported that Springer Nature “has long received payments for subscriptions from National Institutes of Health and other agencies.” The NIH originally told Inside Higher Ed in an email Thursday that it “has not terminated any contracts with Springer Nature.” But the Department of Health and Human Services, which includes NIH, sent a new statement Thursday evening.

“All NIH staff currently have full access to Springer Nature journals through the NIH Library—and that access will continue uninterrupted,” the NIH wrote in the initial email. “NIH is not, in any way, limiting access to scientific publications. On the contrary, the agency actively encourages the use of these resources to advance scientific discovery and promote transparency and replicability in research.”

But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote in a statement that “all contracts with Springer Nature are terminated or no longer active. Precious taxpayer dollars should be not be [sic] used on unused subscriptions to junk science.”

A National Science Foundation spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed in an email that “NSF has not canceled subscriptions to Springer or Nature publishing journals.”

In a statement, a Springer Nature spokesperson said, “We are proud of our track record in communicating U.S. research to the rest of the world for over a century and continue to have good relationships with U.S. federal agencies.”

The spokesperson wrote, “We don’t comment on individual contracts, but across our U.S. business there is no material change to our customers or their spend.”

The White House didn’t provide comment to Inside Higher Ed.

Source link

June 27, 2025
DOJ Sues Minnesota Over In-State Tuition for Noncitizens

The U.S. Department of Justice sued Minnesota lawmakers Wednesday over the state’s policy allowing in-state tuition benefits for undocumented students.

The lawsuit names Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison and the state’s Office of Higher Education as defendants. It claims Minnesota is violating federal law and discriminating against U.S. citizens by permitting noncitizens who grew up in the state to pay in-state tuition rates. Under the Minnesota Dream Act, signed into law in 2013, undocumented students have to meet various criteria to qualify, including spending three years at and graduating from a Minnesota high school.

The suit also takes issue with the state’s North Star Promise Program, a free college program launched last year for Minnesotans who meet certain requirements, including undocumented students who live in the state.

The lawsuit comes after the Justice Department successfully sued Texas over the same issue earlier in June. Texas swiftly sided with the federal government, and within hours, its two-decade-old law allowing in-state tuition for undocumented students became moot. The DOJ also sued Kentucky politicians over its in-state tuition policy last week. The lawsuits cite President Donald Trump’s May executive order that called for a crackdown on cities and states with laws that benefit undocumented immigrants, including those that offer in-state tuition benefits.

“No state can be allowed to treat Americans like second-class citizens in their own country by offering financial benefits to illegal aliens,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a news release. “The Department of Justice just won on this exact issue in Texas, and we look forward to taking this fight to Minnesota in order to protect the rights of American citizens first.”

Source link

June 27, 2025
Universities “At Risk of Overassessing” in Response to AI

The number of assessments set by universities is steadily rising, but there are worries this could result in student burnout and prove counteractive if implemented without centering learning.

A recent report by the U.K.-based Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi) and Advance HE found that assessments at U.K. institutions have risen to 5.8 summative assignments and 4.1 formative assignments per semester in 2025, compared to five summative assessments and 2.5 formative assessments in 2020.

Josh Freeman, policy manager at Hepi and co-author of the report, said the advent of AI is “reducing the accuracy of assessments as a measure of students’ performance,” prompting universities to re-evaluate their examination methods.

“It’s possible that course organizers are assessing students more to improve the confidence they have in their assessments,” he said.

“It’s also possible that, as they redo assessment models, which may have remained the same for a long time, they are switching to alternative models of assessment—for example, those that assess students on an ongoing basis, rather than simply once at the end of the year.”

However, rising numbers of exams risks universities “overassessing” students, he added, as “students now face an intense battle over their time,” noting that the number of hours that students spend studying has fallen.

“[Many are making] sacrifices around social activities, sports and societies. These ‘extra’ activities are the first to go when students are squeezed and would probably be cut further if the academic elements of university become more demanding.”

Some 68 percent of students in the U.K. are now undertaking part-time work during term time, a record high, largely in response to cost-of-living pressures.

Michael Draper, a professor in legal education at Swansea University and chair of the university’s academic regulations and student cases board, said that some universities have begun supplementing assessments with “some form of in-person assessment” to counteract AI “credibility concerns.” But “that of course does lead to perhaps overassessment or more assessments than were in place before.”

“Students have got so many competing claims on their time, not just in relation to work, but care responsibilities and work responsibilities, that you run the risk of student burnout,” he continued.

“That is not a position you actually want to be in. You want to make sure that students have got a fair opportunity to work consistently and get the best grade possible. You want students to have a chance to reflect upon their feedback and then to demonstrate that in other assessments, but if they’re being continuously assessed, it’s very difficult to have that reflection time.”

However, Thomas Lancaster, principal teaching fellow in the Department of Computing at Imperial College London, speculated that a rise in the number of exams could be a sign that assessments are being “split into smaller stages,” with more continuous feedback throughout the process, which could also simultaneously have benefits for counteracting AI use.

“This is something I’ve long recommended in response to contract cheating, where it’s good practice to see the process, not just the final product. So I do hope that the revised assessment schedules are being put in place to benefit the students, rather than purely as a response to AI.”

While breaking assessments down could prove beneficial to student learning, Drew Whitworth, reader at the Manchester Institute of Education, questioned, “How does one count what constitutes ‘separate’ assessments?”

“If a grade is given partway through this process … this is actually quite helpful for students, answering the question ‘How am I doing?’ and giving them a pragmatic reason to show [their work and that they are working] in the first place.

“But does this count as a separate assessment or just part of a dialogue taking place that helps students develop better work in response to a single assessment?”

Source link

June 27, 2025
Wayne State Launches Prison Education Program

Wayne State University will offer incarcerated people the opportunity to enroll in a bachelor’s of sociology starting this fall.

Wayne State University

With the reinstatement of Pell Grant eligibility for incarcerated individuals in 2023, more colleges have launched or restarted prison education programs. Wayne State University in Michigan will join their ranks this fall, offering a bachelor’s degree to incarcerated individuals for the first time.

Twenty-five students will join the inaugural cohort in August, and the university is forging ahead with program plans despite looming Pell Grant cuts.

What’s the need: Twenty-five percent of formerly incarcerated people have no high school diploma, and 20 percent have only a high school diploma, compared to the 91 percent of Americans who have attained at least that credential. “We know that today’s workforce, much of it requires a college education, so it’s almost a necessary criterion to earn a living wage in today’s society,” said Michelle Jacobs, a professor of sociology and Wayne State’s Prison Education Program lead.

While many incarcerated individuals express an interest in postsecondary education, college often gets placed on the back burner after they leave prison as they focus on more pressing challenges, such as meeting basic needs and providing for themselves, Jacobs said. Higher education–in–prison programs help students get a head start on reclaiming their lives after they are released.

The initiative also ties into Wayne State president Kimberly Andrews Espy’s Prosperity Agenda for the Detroit area, which includes supporting economic mobility for students, improving the health of urban neighborhoods and fostering innovation in the local economy.

Individuals who participate in postsecondary education programs while in prison are 48 percent less likely to be reincarcerated than those who don’t, and they are more likely to get a job after their release. Research also shows that education-in-prison programs not only benefit the individual but also increase safety in prison settings and can improve families’ socioeconomic mobility.

“One of our goals for the program is to empower families in low-income communities that have been disproportionately impacted [by mass incarceration],” Jacobs said.

How it works: Wayne State’s Prison Education Program will enroll 25 incarcerated men at the Macomb Correctional Facility in Lenox, Mich., about 35 miles northeast of the university.

To be considered, applicants have to be at least five years from their earliest release date, giving them time to finish the program, and they must complete an essay outlining why they want to participate.

All courses will be delivered in person and the university will provide any school supplies or resources the students need for their coursework, including pens, paper and dictionaries. Students have to complete paper applications and FAFSA forms, so staff will assist with that process.

Program participants will complete a degree in sociology, as well as a range of general education courses, similar to their on-campus peers. Students can also opt in to an entrepreneurship and innovation minor.

Both programs are designed to support the unique experiences of incarcerated people, Jacobs said.

“I’m extremely biased towards sociology, and I think that benefits everyone,” Jacobs said. “I think that incarcerated individuals can benefit so much, not only in terms of understanding the broader structures that have impacted their own realities, but also on that interactional level … I think that’ll be really helpful for them as they’re navigating their lives postrelease.”

Faculty members from across the university will serve as instructors.

Facing headwinds: Since beginning the project, Wayne State has encountered various challenges.

The initial plan was to use donor funding to kick off the program, but officials had to pivot to relying on Pell dollars and money from the Michigan Department of Corrections to cover student tuition. Then, reorganization at the federal Department of Education and a lack of staff stalled approval of the program. Changes to the Pell Grant may further impede the program’s future.

Despite the obstacles, Jacobs and her team are pushing on.

“Once we started working on it, I couldn’t let it go,” Jacobs said. “I deeply believe in the transformative power of education, and I also deeply believe that there is an amazing among of talent and wit and love and humor and expertise already in carceral settings … I just made a decision that we will forge ahead regardless of what is happening at the federal level—while, of course, paying attention to it.”

Wayne State staff received advice and support in establishing the program from the Michigan Consortium for Higher Education in Prison. “It’s very collaborative instead of competitive, which is unique for academic spaces, and I appreciate it so much,” Jacobs said.

Next steps: Jacobs and her team are currently reviewing student applications to select the inaugural cohort, with plans to enroll another cohort in fall 2026.

Before classes start this August, participating faculty and students will both complete an orientation. The faculty orientation will provide instructors with professional development that helps prepare them to teach inside a prison, supported by a student organization on campus focused on criminal justice reform.

Students will be given college-readiness support, as well as access to academic and support resources similar to those offered on campus.

If your student success program has a unique feature or twist, we’d like to know about it. Click here to submit.

Source link

June 27, 2025