Blog

  • Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (John Perkins Interview with Marc Beckman)

    Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (John Perkins Interview with Marc Beckman)

    John Perkins is THE economic hitman. A conman. Perkins arranged meetings with world leaders specifically to create debt traps. Death economies. When the world leaders failed to comply, it was made clear that Perkins had serious force behind him. He calls them his jackals: the CIA.

    John Perkins was a chief economist who leveraged the World Bank, the United Nations, and the IMF to extract valuable resources around the globe in regions like the Middle East and South America. His actions expanded wealth inequality. And as a result, there was an assassination attempt on Jon’s life. The United States has been exploiting various regions of the world for decades. Now China is following and setting debt traps across Africa, the Middle East, Russia, and beyond.

    In this episode, Marc dives deep into the life and experiences of John Perkins, the renowned author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman. John shares his eye-opening journey as a former chief economist and self-described “economic hitman,” revealing how he orchestrated debt traps to exploit nations globally. From negotiating billion-dollar deals to witnessing the devastating consequences of these actions, Perkins paints a haunting picture of the “death economy” and its enduring legacy.

    The conversation also explores China’s adoption of similar strategies, modern-day debt traps, and the technological evolution of economic warfare, including AI and drones. Perkins introduces his transformative vision of a “life economy,” offering hope for a sustainable and equitable future.

    Source link

  • Beech-side views: Here’s looking at EU!

    Beech-side views: Here’s looking at EU!

    In February 2025, five years after the UK formally left the EU, Sir Keir Starmer became the first UK Prime Minister since Brexit to head to Brussels to join a meeting of EU leaders. The trip was packaged as part of a “reset” in relations between the UK and the EU, albeit caveated with promises that the UK government is not seeking to re-join the EU’s single market or customs union, nor sign up to the principle of freedom of movement.

    With President Donald Trump back in the White House and war ongoing in Ukraine, closer cooperation between the UK and EU in areas of security and defence will be vital to maintain pressure on Russia and bring about peace on the continent. Enhancing trade between the UK and EU will also be a key ambition shared by both parties, given the looming threat of American tariffs and the need to secure economic growth.

    Youth mobility

    The process of resetting the UK-EU relationship by the spring is one to watch for the UK’s higher education sector. This is because, while the EU has the power to ease restrictions on UK businesses to improve British trade prospects, the UK also has something that many in the EU want in return: namely the power to reinstate a youth mobility scheme between the UK and the EU.

    At its most ambitious, such a scheme could allow young people from the UK and Europe the freedom to travel across countries to study and work as was the norm before Brexit. A curtailed version could at least see mobility enacted for shorter, time-limited placements. Either way, UK universities could find themselves becoming an important bargaining chip in any future renegotiations.

    Bargaining power

    Given the demand for a return of youth mobility is greater in the EU-27 than it is in Britain, UK ministers understandably remain cautious about giving the green light to this idea too soon. The recent gains of the populist Reform UK party in public popularity polls will likely also enhance this nervousness. Moreover, with the policy in clear breach of the UK Government’s own ‘red line’ on freedom of movement, British officials are playing down the prospect of any return to youth mobility between the two powers.

    UK universities could find themselves becoming an important bargaining chip in any future renegotiations

    Yet, as anybody who has ever been involved in some sort of negotiation knows, the key to a good outcome is not showing your own hand too early in the process. Doing so may significantly weaken your bargaining power and ability to leverage the situation in your own favour. The possibility of the UK offering a youth mobility concession to European leaders to secure more lucrative trading conditions and pump-prime economic growth may not, therefore, be completely off the table.

    Risky business

    In the past, the UK higher education sector would have been first to welcome the return to Britain of a youth mobility scheme such as Erasmus+. However, the current financial troubles facing the sector are likely to dampen university managers’ enthusiasm for any measures that would see EU students once again regarded as ‘home’ students, thereby capping the fees they pay.

    The introduction of youth mobility measures would provide a welcome boost to the diversity of UK student populations by making it easier for those from less privileged backgrounds in Europe to study in Britain. However, with universities now focusing on their bottom line rather than the size and shape of their student intakes, any concessions that could reduce the revenue-generating potential of EU students could destabilise universities’ finances at a time when every penny counts.

    Balancing act

    The big question facing the higher education sector, then, is whether there is a proposal the UK government could make involving UK-EU student mobility that reconciles universities’ search for greater diversity on campus and enhanced prospects for their students with their need for extra income.

    As it stands, the future of UK and EU students rests in the back pocket of the UK Prime Minister. Whether he pulls a student mobility scheme out as a trump card to get a beneficial deal for the British economy depends on the messages UK universities send to ministers and officials over the coming months.

    Not enough noise about potential changes to the status of EU students could leave universities exposed without a financial compensation package from Treasury to cover any headline fee changes that a new youth mobility programme would incur. Yet, too much noise would also risk negative headlines around the world that international students are nothing more than lucrative cash flows for hard-up institutions.

    The political reset ahead represents a balancing act for UK higher education. The key is whether we can find a solution that opens up UK universities and their students’ prospects further to the outside world while stabilising them financially so they can continue to transform lives for generations to come.

    The post Beech-side views: Here’s looking at EU! appeared first on The PIE News.

    Source link

  • Affirmative Action, DEI Dead? Ask Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, And RFK Jr.

    Affirmative Action, DEI Dead? Ask Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, And RFK Jr.

    I feel for Nan Zhong, a Chinese American who is suing the University of California because they rejected his son, Stanley, a child prodigy hired by Google at age 18.Emil Guillermo

    They think we live in a land of meritocracy where affirmative action is dead. Well, it depends on who’s boss. Zhong has accused the UC system and the U.S. Department of Education of discrimination against Asian American applicants, the third of its kind in recent weeks, according to AsAm News.

    Earlier this month, the Students Against Racial Discrimination sued the UC system over its holistic approach to admissions. Another group, The Equal Protection Project sued four Pennsylvania state universities for discrimination against Asians. If you thought the Harvard case which used Asians Americans to end affirmative action last year settled things, you’re wrong.

    Some Asian Americans apparently will keep suing until their kid gets in. No lawyer would take Zhong’s case, so he used AI to file his suit. It’s worth it to Zhong to press on because as he puts it, he’s “really p—sed off.”

    But Zhong’s anger helps exposed how legal discrimination exists and how it’s allowed to happen. And there’s nothing to do about it. Not when it’s dictated from the top.

    TRUMP’S PERSONAL “DEI” LANDSCAPE

    For example, I don’t know any Asian Americans or Native Hawaiians cheering Tulsi Gabbard’s rise to Director of National Intelligence. Maybe Kash Patel—the guy who wants to run the FBI.  Like Gabbard, Patel and let’s include RFK Jr.—the wormhead, former dope addict, and anti-vax mercenary who has now been confirmed to run the Department of Health and Human Services– are all allied. They are three peas in a pod, three objectively unqualified people, who have risen to the top, not because of merit, but because of allegiance to one man, Donald Trump.

    The records of Gabbard, Patel and RFK Jr have all been exposed and are not stellar. Gabbard has never worked for an intelligence agency and is considered by some conservative legislators a dupe for how she has dealt with Russia and Syrian leaders. Would you share secrets with the U.S. with Gabbard at the helm of intelligence?

    Patel has ties to key Jan. 6 figures. He’s been an original denier that Trump lost the 2020 election. But if you think those are partisan issues, then what about just the idea of managing an agency like the FBI. He doesn’t have a resume to match any of the previous FBI directors.

    And then there’s RFK Jr Let’s just say the worm in his brain qualifies him for a disability, mental and physical. If you put aside the controversial issues like vaccinating his kids, but publicly being anti-vax in situations where people have died, just go with his management experience. Has he ever led anything that qualifies him to run an organization with 13 supporting agencies, 80,000 employees, and a budget around $1.7 trillion in mandatory funding, and $130.7 billion in discretionary funding.

    Is he the guy you choose on merit? The answer to RFK Jr is no. As it is for Gabbard and Patel. And the fact is they wouldn’t be hires in a traditional DEI world either, because there are way more qualified people of color to fill the positions. But in this era, they are hires in Trump’s made to order “DEI.” Trump’s pets. They get in when congressional decision makers fold fearing losing their elected positions from candidates funded by the richest man in the world, Elon Musk.

    And this is the model of meritocracy at the federal level that trickles down to higher ed and in private practice? It essentially says what the boss wants goes. It’s more than “who you know.” You have to get to the top person’s approval and give them your undivided loyalty. To the man, not the constitution. And then your owned. It’s antithetical to diversity, equity and inclusion, AND merit. It works well for Trump, but nobody else.

    Look at Pete Hegseth, the former Fox weekend anchor, now Sec. of Defense, now negotiating away Ukraine’s rights as he seeks Trump-Putin’s vision of an end to war. Trump has a younger more telegenic man standing in for him. And the world is a lot worse off. And that’s where we are in these Trump times. It’s sobering. But so is the fact the Harvard case that went all the way to the Supreme Court really didn’t end disputes in higher ed over who gets into the best schools.

    The Asian “winners” weren’t winners after all, in their quest for meritocracy. They were used of course, by the anti-affirmative action folks. Duped. They only want want’s fair. Unfortunately, they were betrayed. I join them in bristling at the headlines about Gabbard and RFK Jr. Meritocracy?

    And I wish Zhong good luck with his suit against UC. At least his son, Stanley, without a degree, has that great job with Google.

    Emil Guillermo is an award-winning journalist, commentator, and adjunct professor. 

     

    Source link

  • Ed Secretary Nominee Signals Major Shake-Up for DEI, Civil Rights

    Ed Secretary Nominee Signals Major Shake-Up for DEI, Civil Rights

    In a Senate confirmation hearing that has sent ripples through the higher education community, Education Secretary nominee Linda McMahon acknowledgedLinda McMahon President Trump’s directive to potentially dissolve the Department of Education, while facing pointed questions about diversity initiatives and civil rights protections in education.

    During last Thursday’s hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), McMahon addressed concerns about the administration’s stance on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in educational institutions. When pressed by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) about Trump’s executive order banning DEI programs, McMahon stopped short of providing clear guidance on the future of student cultural organizations and ethnicity-based clubs on campuses.

    The hearing revealed mounting concerns about student data privacy and program funding. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) highlighted that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has already gained access to “highly sensitive student data” and has begun withholding congressionally approved funding meant to support schools and students.

    Democratic senators expressed particular concern about the potential dismantling of the Education Department and its impact on civil rights enforcement and disability services in higher education. When questioned about relocating the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to the Department of Health and Human Services, McMahon defended the potential move by citing declining performance scores despite nearly a trillion dollars in spending since the department’s establishment in 1980.

    McMahon did make several commitments during the hearing, including a pledge to maintain the Pell Grant program, which provides crucial financial aid to millions of college students. She also addressed the issue of antisemitism on college campuses, though specific plans for addressing this concern were not detailed.

    The hearing, which was interrupted multiple times by protesters advocating for public schools and trans students’ rights, highlighted the complex challenges facing the department. McMahon acknowledged that any significant changes to the department’s structure would require congressional approval, despite the president’s stated desire to eliminate it through executive action.

    While McMahon is expected to be confirmed by the GOP-controlled Senate, her hearing has raised significant questions about the future of federal oversight of higher education, particularly regarding civil rights enforcement and diversity initiatives. The HELP panel is scheduled to vote on advancing her nomination to the full Senate floor next Thursday.

    “It’s always difficult to downsize, it’s always difficult to restructure and reorganize in any department,” McMahon said during the hearing, addressing concerns about recent administrative leaves and firings at the department. “I think people should always be treated with respect.”

    For the higher education community, the hearing left several crucial questions unanswered, particularly regarding the future of diversity programs and civil rights protections. Sen. Murphy’s exchange about student cultural organizations highlighted the uncertainty facing many campus groups: “That’s pretty chilling. I think schools all around the country are going to hear that,” he noted after McMahon’s noncommittal response about the permissibility of ethnicity-based student clubs under the new DEI restrictions.

    Source link

  • Aritra Ghosal, OneStep Global – The PIE News

    Aritra Ghosal, OneStep Global – The PIE News

    Introduce yourself in three words or phrases.

    Perseverant, ambitious, and empathetic. 

    What do you like most about your job?

    The team, the work, and the people I get to interact with on a daily basis. 

    Best work trip/Worst work trip?

    My best work trip was my first visit to Ireland. My worst work trip, on the other hand, was when I had to travel by car from Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh to another city – it was a terrible experience.

    If you could learn a language instantly, which would you pick and why?

    I want to learn Spanish. Latin America is a place I really want to visit because I am a big football fan! So I want to learn the language. 

    What makes you get up in the morning?

    My daughter makes me get up in the morning. 

    Champion/cheerleader which we should all follow and why?

    There are many icons we can look up to, but perseverance stands out as a key quality – someone who keeps coming back despite multiple defeats. For example, Sourav Ganguly, who, despite being dropped from the Indian cricket team several times, made remarkable comebacks and proved critics wrong. 

    Best international ed conference and why

    I think The PIE conferences are genuinely good, especially The PIE Live Europe. Conferences like the ones by EAIE are a bit too big [in my opinion]. 

    Worst conference food/beverage experience?

    Many of these European conferences, not the British ones, have terrible food.

    Book or podcast recommendation for others in the sector?

    I think Atomic Habits is one good book that I have read and is useful for the sector. But I also think reading the works of someone like Oscar Wilde will give you a lot of life lessons. 

    People keep talking about self help books but reading Wilde, Ruskin Bond, etc, is far better. My suggestion is to read some classics. 

    Describe a project or initiative you’re currently working on that excites you.

    I think our plans to open a new office in Vietnam is definitely exciting and we are also looking at doing some transnational education activity in Sri Lanka, wherein we will take some of our partner universities to the country. 

    What are the major factors behind your decision to open a new office in Vietnam, and how will this enhance its presence in the broader Southeast Asian region?

    OneStep Global‘s decision to establish a presence in Vietnam is part of a strategy to strengthen our footprint in Southeast Asia. Alongside Vietnam, we are also planning to open an office in Indonesia.

    Similar to our approach in the Middle East, we will establish our own entity with fully operational offices in cities like Hanoi and Jakarta. 

    Southeast Asia presents a significant opportunity to help universities find sustainable solutions that align with their strategic goals in the region.

    Source link

  • A California community college begins to heal: The Key

    A California community college begins to heal: The Key

    The No. 1 lesson about disaster relief Ryan Cornner would give college presidents is: do scenario training. 

    The president of Glendale Community College said he and his team were working on emergency preparedness training with new managers when the L.A. wildfires started. 

    “We were actually planning a tabletop exercise for spring, and boy, did we get a tabletop exercise. It was just real,” Cornner said in the latest episode of The Key, Inside Higher Ed’s news and analysis podcast. 

    GCC serves 24,000 students from its campus about five miles from where the Eaton fire burned. Dozens of the college’s students and employees lost their homes, and many more were displaced for more than a week. GCC has expanded its efforts to provide access to basic needs for its students and has recognized that its part-time adjunct faculty need the most support. 

    While providing food and housing support or giving students laptops has been a general principle of the community college system, Cornner says a new need in this emergency is coming from employees. 

    “As an employer, we think that the real focus is making sure that the workplace has what it needs and making sure people feel supported in their work. But when someone has just lost their home, it brings an added element of ‘what should we do as a community?’”

    Inside Higher Ed reported on GCC’s immediate emergency response in January and wanted to reach out to the institution again to check in on its recovery. 

    Cornner said institutions can support their communities by investing in the future workforce of first responders and by providing a safe campus for secondary school students whose schools were destroyed in the fires.

    Listen to this episode of The Key here, and click here to find out more about The Key.

    Source link

  • Few students protest Trump’s executive orders on campus

    Few students protest Trump’s executive orders on campus

    As President Donald Trump churned out more than 80 executive orders over the past three weeks, sending the higher education community into a panic, some students were surprised to see a lack of campus protests—even at institutions traditionally rife with activism.

    “I haven’t seen a whole lot, which is kind of uncharacteristic of our campus,” said Alana Parker, a student at American University in Washington, D.C. Though she’s heard of certain student political groups protesting on Capitol Hill, things have been quiet on campus.

    “I don’t really know why that is, because, in my opinion, there should be more of an outcry. But from my perspective, I think people feel really disenfranchised and like there’s nothing we can do,” she said.

    It’s a stark contrast from two semesters ago, when AU was one of dozens of campuses that made national news after pro-Palestinian students set up encampments in opposition to their universities’ investments in companies with ties to Israel.

    Students and faculty at AU—and on campuses across the nation—also protested in 2017 after Trump prohibited individuals from seven majority-Muslim nations from entering the United States, according to a news report from the time.

    Angus Johnston, a historian of student protest movements and a professor at Hostos Community College, said that he’s not entirely surprised that campuses seem relatively calm. Over the past 20 years, institutions have grown less and less permissive of student protests, culminating in a harsh crackdown on pro-Palestinian protests in spring 2024—in some cases involving police arrests. Since then, many campuses have introduced new—or enforced existing—rules restricting when, where and how students can demonstrate.

    Aron Ali-McClory, a national co-chair of the Young Democratic Socialists of America, said that universities’ restrictions on free speech are “100 percent a factor” in why there aren’t many protests happening on campuses right now.

    But they noted that the YDSA is mobilizing, just in different ways. Many campus chapters are currently focused on campaigning for their institutions to become “sanctuary campuses,” in the vein of sanctuary cities, municipalities that do not comply with federal immigration laws. Ali-McClory said the chapters involved in that movement are currently distributing petitions, informing their peers about the movement and handing out “know your rights” materials that aim to inform immigrants of how to handle conversations and interactions with immigration officers.

    “Looking at what our YDSA chapters are doing across the country, we’re seeing people pivoting to meet the moment on their campus. A lot of that looks less like, ‘Let’s go out and do a protest’ and more, ‘How do we make material gains when the cards are stacked against us?’” they said.

    Parker, the AU student, has also chosen to make her voice heard in a different way. An editor of the student newspaper, The Eagle, she and her colleagues penned a staff editorial calling on the university to speak out against Trump’s executive orders, particularly those targeting immigrants and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. She said the article seemed to be effective: A few days after its publication, the institution sent an email to the campus community, signed by President Jonathan Alger, outlining resources available for immigrant students and employees.

    Alger also addressed DEI, writing, “As we continue fostering an inclusive and welcoming community, we are working with teams across campus to determine the impacts on our inclusive excellence strategy and programs.”

    ‘A Powerful Force’

    A handful of campuses have seen protests, primarily in response to their institutions taking steps to comply with Trump’s executive orders by shuttering DEI offices or removing DEI-related language and resources from webpages, for example.

    At Missouri State University, students staged a protest after administrators announced they would close the Office of Inclusive Engagement and end other DEI programs “in response to changes nationwide and anticipated actions regarding DEI at the state level.”

    According to the student newspaper, The Standard, 50 students gathered outside the main administrative building on Jan. 31 to call for the removal of the university’s president and to advocate for the passage of two bills that would require Missouri schools to teach about Black history and “the dehumanization of marginalized groups.”

    At Stanford University, a group of about 15 students participated in a chalking event, writing messages of dissent, like “DEI makes Stanford Stanford,” on bike paths around White Plaza, a central outdoor area on campus.

    “Here at Stanford, the important thing to me was that my leaders at my school knew that there would be people who would resist anything that they did to cave to Trump,” said freshman Turner Van Slyke, who organized the demonstration. “I think those leaders just knowing that there’s going to be resistance can be a powerful force for maintaining decency against Trump.”

    Various other student news sources have reported that students at their institutions have joined outside groups in protesting at their state capitols, hoping to register their objections to Trump’s orders with governors and state representatives.

    Johnston noted that more protests may erupt elsewhere as students begin to see the ways that the executive orders are impacting their campuses more directly.

    “There’s a lot of stuff that is happening now that is essentially a hand grenade or a time bomb that’s going to explode in days or weeks or months,” he said. “To a large extent, I think this stuff is not having direct impact on a lot of [students] as of yet. Some stuff may be beginning to percolate down to the campus level. But a lot of this is real stuff that is happening, but the effects of it are not being felt directly by students just yet.”

    Source link

  • What legacy does Yale-NUS College leave in Singapore?

    What legacy does Yale-NUS College leave in Singapore?

    When Wee Yang Soh was considering his degree options, he felt his choices were limited. The Singaporean had been offered a place to study chemistry at the National University of Singapore (NUS), but he was wary of accepting.

    In his experience, school had felt like he was simply being “trained” to pass exams. “I didn’t want my university education to be like that,” he said. Soh liked the idea of liberal arts education but couldn’t afford the hefty tuition fees charged by the U.S. colleges offering those programs.

    So when, in 2011, NUS announced it would be opening a liberal arts college—the first of its kind in Singapore—in partnership with Yale University, Soh jumped at the chance to apply. He was part of the inaugural cohort of students enrolled at the college, graduating in 2017.

    Four years later, NUS suddenly declared that it would no longer be continuing the partnership, with plans to close the college once all existing students had graduated.

    While Yale-NUS College is not the only international partnership in Singapore that has come to an abrupt halt—having helped develop Singapore University of Technology and Design’s curriculum, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was shown the door in 2017—it is among the most talked about. This unexpected announcement drew just as much attention, if not more, as the opening of the college had, with rumors swirling about the reasons for the decision.

    Today, as the college enters its final semester before shutting its doors for good, can liberal arts live on in Singapore? And are international partnerships off the table in a country increasingly embroiled in debates about national identity?

    Singapore’s government first began discussing the prospect of a liberal arts college in 2008. Policymakers saw the establishment of one as having multiple benefits—reducing the number of local students going abroad, diversifying pathways within the country’s higher education system and contributing to Singapore’s ambition to become an international education hub.

    So when Yale-NUS College opened in 2013, it seemed like the perfect fit. Unfortunately, this synergy didn’t last.

    “The context changed,” said Jason Tan, associate professor at Nanyang Technological University’s National Institute of Education. “For one thing, there’s no longer any official talk about establishing Singapore as an international education hub.”

    Although Singapore launched the Global Schoolhouse Project in 2002, an initiative that aimed to recruit 150,000 international students by 2015, by the mid-2010s, the numbers remained far below targets and talk of the scheme quieted as public debates around immigration heated up.

    Writing in the academic journal Daedalus in 2024, Pericles Lewis, the founding president of the college, suggested that things had gone a step further: “Singapore has not been immune to the forces of populism and nationalism that have affected most parts of the world,” he wrote.

    For a college in which international students represented about 40 percent of the student population, this was a problem.

    Throughout the college’s life, the governing party “showed itself to be highly sensitive to complaints about benefits reaped by foreigners, and to concerns of middle-class Singaporeans about the accessibility of higher education,” Lewis wrote.

    The institution also became central to debates about academic freedom in Singapore, with the last-minute cancellation of a course focused on protest generating backlash. To some, the college was a site of rare political activism and freedom in Singapore, which was both welcomed and feared, depending on your point of view.

    However, Linda Lim, professor emerita at the University of Michigan, argued that the college had little impact on the state of academic freedom in Singapore more widely.

    “From the beginning it was understood and even explicitly acknowledged that Yale-NUS College would practice and experience academic freedom only within the college walls and premises,” she said.

    “Yale may have flattered itself, or argued to mollify dubious faculty in New Haven, that Yale-NUS College would help advance academic freedom in Singapore—a naïve and neo-colonialist attitude.”

    Moreover, Soh believed claims of heightened student activism at the college were exaggerated, with intense media attention fueling public ire towards the institution.

    “From the first year, the Singaporean public and the government were already pretty afraid that politically motivated actions on campus would pose a problem for Singapore,” he said. “And they kept a very close eye on the college activities, to the point where it felt like a self-fulfilling prophecy.”

    At times, small incidents on campus, such as disagreements over new course curricula, made national news, he said. This “reinforced the idea that the students were political or dangerous and all of that stuff, when, really, everything that happened in college felt, at least to me, incredibly mundane and incredibly small and silly.”

    NUS College, a U.S.-style undergraduate honors college for NUS students, was established in 2022 in place of Yale-NUS College. While this new institution offers a residential experience, small class sizes and some shared curricula, it is a far cry from a traditional liberal arts college.

    Today in Singapore, “there’s more focus on interdisciplinary learning,” said Tan. “Across all of our universities, in one form or another, there’s this concern about future economic needs.

    “The future problems will require all those buzzwords—critical thinkers and flexible, adaptable people and people who possess this interdisciplinary pool of knowledge and so on.

    “That trend has pretty much superseded the excitement over having a liberal arts education for our undergrads.”

    For Lim, the closure of Yale-NUS College was a “cautionary tale” for international higher education institutions “who think they can be a beacon of light in authoritarian countries by collaborating with autocratic governments.”

    The college’s chief legacy, she continued, “is the quality of the students it educated and graduated.”

    Soh is currently undertaking a Ph.D. in the U.S. and credited the college and his professors for inspiring him to do so.

    “I hope to teach in the future as a professor,” he said. “I want my students to be able to treat education as not a stepping-stone to grades or to credentials, but as a way to reformulate how we think about and relate to this crazy world that we live in today.

    “I think the legacy lives on in me, but I can’t say that it lives on in Singapore or in NUS for sure. But I hope it does.”

    Source link

  • Education Department mulls using AI chat bot for FAFSA help

    Education Department mulls using AI chat bot for FAFSA help

    The Education Department is considering terminating its contracts for thousands of call center employees hired to answer families’ questions about federal student aid, and may replace them with an artificial intelligence–powered chat bot, The New York Times reported Thursday.

    Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency apparently suggested the move, the Times reported, as part of a broader effort to reduce federal spending—which has already led to dozens if not hundreds of layoffs at the Education Department and the cancellation of hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts at the Institute for Education Sciences.

    The call centers employ 1,625 people who answer more than 15,000 calls per day, according to an Education Department report. The department greatly increased staffing at their call centers after last year’s bungled launch of the new FAFSA led to an overwhelming influx of calls. 

    Last September, a Government Accountability Office investigation found that in the first five months of the rollout, three-quarters of calls went unanswered. Last summer, the department hired 700 new agents to staff the lines and had planned to add another 225 after the launch of the 2024–25 FAFSA in November.

    One of the helplines DOGE is closely scrutinizing, according to the Times, is operated by the consulting firm Accenture. Accenture also operates the studentaid.gov website, which houses the online platform for the Free Application for Federal Student Aid. The department’s contract with the firm expires Feb. 19. According to sources in the Education Department who spoke with Inside Higher Ed, the department is considering significant reductions to its Accenture contract ahead of its renewal.

    Source link

  • Education Department lays off civil servants

    Education Department lays off civil servants

    The U.S. Department of Education laid off some civil servants on Wednesday, Politico reported, citing multiple people familiar with the matter. 

    It’s not yet clear how many employees were affected, but they worked for a range of offices within the department, from civil rights to federal student aid. Earlier that day, a federal judge approved the Trump administration’s plan to offer buyouts to vast swaths of the federal workforce. 

    The move is the latest personnel disruption at the agency. Earlier this month, dozens of employees were put on administrative leave after attending a diversity, equity and inclusion training during the first Trump administration.

    Many of the terminated department employees were still in their probationary period, according to Politico, meaning they’d been on the job for less than a year and lacked full civil service protections, though nonprobationary employees were also affected. On Thursday, the Associated Press reported that the Trump administration had ordered all federal agencies to terminate their probationary employees, part of a broader effort to reduce the federal workforce.

    Source link