Blog

  • DOGE temporarily blocked from accessing Education Department student aid data

    DOGE temporarily blocked from accessing Education Department student aid data

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

    UPDATE: Feb. 12, 2025: The U.S. Department of Education on Tuesday agreed to temporarily block staffers of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, from accessing student aid information and other data systems until at least Feb. 17. 

    On that date, a federal judge overseeing the case is expected to rule on a student group’s request for a temporary restraining order to block the agency from sharing sensitive data with DOGE. 

    Dive Brief: 

    •  A group representing University of California students filed a lawsuit Friday to block the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency from accessing federal financial aid data.  
    • The University of California Student Association cited reports that DOGE members gained access to federal student loan data, which includes information such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, account information and driver’s license numbers. 
    • The complaint accuses the U.S. Department of Education of violating federal privacy laws and regulations by granting DOGE staffers access to the data. “The scale of intrusion into individuals’ privacy is enormous and unprecedented,” the lawsuit says. 

    Dive Insight: 

    President Donald Trump created DOGE through executive order on the first day of his second term, tasking the team, led by Tesla co-founder and Trump adviser Musk, with rooting out what the new administration deems as government waste. 

    DOGE has since accessed the data of several government agencies, sparking concerns that its staffers are violating privacy laws and overstepping the executive branch’s power. With the new lawsuit, the University of California Student Association joins the growing chorus of groups that say DOGE is flouting federal statutes. 

    One of those groups — 19 state attorneys general — scored a victory over the weekend. On Saturday, a federal judge temporarily blocked DOGE from accessing the Treasury Department’s payments and data system, which disburses Social Security benefits, tax returns and federal employee salaries. 

    The University of California Student Association has likewise asked the judge to temporarily block the Education Department from sharing sensitive data with DOGE staffers and to retrieve any information that has already been transferred to them. 

    The group argues that the Education Department is violating the Privacy Act of 1974, which says that government agencies may not disclose an individual’s data “to any person, or to another agency,” without their consent, except in limited circumstances. The Internal Revenue Code has similar protections for personal information. 

    “None of the targeted exceptions in these laws allows individuals associated with DOGE, or anyone else, to obtain or access students’ personal information, except for specific purposes — purposes not implicated here,” the lawsuit says. 

    The Washington Post reported on Feb. 3 that some DOGE team members had in fact gained access to “multiple sensitive internal systems,” including federal financial aid data, as part of larger plans to carry out Trump’s goal to eventually eliminate the Education Department. 

    “ED did not publicly announce this new policy — what is known is based on media reporting — or attempt to justify it,” Friday’s lawsuit says. “Rather, ED secretly decided to allow individuals with no role in the federal student aid program to root around millions of students’ sensitive records.”

    In response to the Post’s Feb. 3 reporting, Musk on the same day posted on X that Trump “will succeed” in dismantling the agency. 

    Later that week, the Post reported that DOGE staffers were feeding sensitive Education Departmentdata into artificial intelligence software to analyze the agency’s spending. 

    The moves have also attracted lawmakers’ attention. Virginia Rep. Bobby Scott, the top-ranking Democrat on the House’s education committee, asked the Government Accountability Office on Friday to probe the security of information technology systems at the Education Department’s and several other agencies. 

    An Education Department spokesperson said Monday that the agency does not comment on pending litigation. 

    Source link

  • Walden University President Michael Betz Cashing In

    Walden University President Michael Betz Cashing In

    Walden University President Michael Betz has sold $380,000 worth of Adtalem shares. Walden is one of America’s largest robocolleges, proving online education to tens of thousands of folks in psychology, social work, nursing, education, business, and criminal justice each year.  

    Adtalem, formerly known as DeVry Education, is Walden’s parent company.  Adtalem also owns the Chamberlain College of Nursing and medical schools in the Carribean.  Walden and Adtalem have been profitable despite mediocre results for worker/consumers, a disproportionate number are women and people of color.  

    In 2024, Walden settled a case for $28M that claimed the school systematically deceived black and female students.   

    Source link

  • ‘Self-inflicted wound’: Widespread alarm as Trump administration slashes NIH funding

    ‘Self-inflicted wound’: Widespread alarm as Trump administration slashes NIH funding

    UPDATE: Feb. 11, 2025: A federal judge late Monday barred the National Institutes of Health from enforcing massive cuts to grant funding for researchers’ indirect costs, a move widely decried by universities and other research institutions. 

    U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley issued restraining orders in two separate cases filed earlier Monday against NIH, including one by 22 state attorneys general and another by the Association of American Medical Colleges and other groups. A third lawsuit — brought by the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, the American Council on Education and the Association of American Universities — was also filed late Monday. 

    Regarding the AAMC case, Kelley wrote that plaintiffs would “sustain immediate and irreparable injury” without a restraining order against the NIH funding cap. Along with restraining orders, Kelley required NIH to provide biweekly status reports confirming regular disbursements.

    Dive Brief:

    • A coalition of 22 attorneys general filed a lawsuit in federal court on Monday seeking to block the National Institutes of Health’s newly announced research funding cuts.
    • NIH announced Friday it would cut roughly $4 billion a year worth of funding for indirect research costs such as administration and facilities — by capping reimbursement for these expenses at 15% for current and new grants. 
    • Research institutions have previously negotiated individual indirect cost rates, with an average of 27% to 28%, NIH said. Organizations, universities and researchers quickly raised alarms about the cuts, warning they could hurt important medical research and the economy.

    Dive Insight:

    NIH framed its unilateral decision to cut indirect costs as bringing them in line with practices at nonprofits such as the Gates Foundation, which caps indirect costs at 10% for higher education institutions, and the Rockefeller Foundation, which sets a 15% ceiling for colleges and universities.

    In a Friday memo outlining the new policy, the agency said the new cap would “allow grant recipients a reasonable and realistic recovery of indirect costs while helping NIH ensure that grant funds are, to the maximum extent possible, spent on furthering its mission.”

    The same day, the agency flagged on the social media platform X the “old” indirect cost rates negotiated by Harvard University, Yale University and Johns Hopkins University — which are all between 63.7% and 69% — as well as those institutions’ endowments ranging from $13 billion to $53 billion. 

    NIH noted that of the $35 billion it spent on grants in fiscal 2023 to universities, medical schools and other research institutions, about $26 billion went to direct research and $9 billion went to overhead in the form of indirect costs. 

    Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, described NIH’s move as an illegal violation of an appropriations bill that prohibits modifications to NIH’s indirect cost funding. Murray also said that the move will shift costs onto states rather than reducing them.

    In their lawsuit, the attorneys general argued, “Without relief from NIH’s action, these institutions’ cutting-edge work to cure and treat human disease will grind to a halt.” 

    They pointed to the legislation flagged by Murray that protected indirect reimbursements: During President Donald Trump’s first term, his administration in 2017 included a 10% cap in its budget proposal, but Congress responded the next year with an appropriations provision prohibiting NIH from modifying reimbursement rates, the lawsuit said.

    Filed in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, the 59-page lawsuit — brought overwhelmingly by Democrat-led states — seeks both preliminary and permanent injunctions blocking NIH from enforcing the rate cap. 

    Many in the higher education sector reacted with dismay over NIH’s move.

    The decision “sabotages the decades-long partnership that has ensured U.S. global leadership in life-saving medical research,” American Council on Education President Ted Mitchell said in a statement on Friday. 

    “This decision is short-sighted, naive, and dangerous,” Mitchell added. “It is a self-inflicted wound that, if not reversed, will have dire consequences on U.S. jobs, global competitiveness, and the future growth of a skilled workforce.”

    Mark Becker, president of the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, described NIH’s policy change as a “direct and massive cut to lifesaving medical research.” 

    “NIH slashing the reimbursement of research costs will slow and limit medical breakthroughs that cure cancer and address chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease,” Becker said in a statement. APLU noted that funded indirect costs include patient safety, research security and hazardous waste disposal. 

    Jeremy Day, director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Comprehensive Neuroscience Center, said on social media that NIH’s cut would “cripple research infrastructure at hundreds of US institutions, and threatens to end our global superiority in scientific research.” 

    Meanwhile, institutions are grappling with what it means for their research programs going forward. The University of Michigan, for instance, said in a statement that NIH’s indirect cost funding supports development and maintenance of its laboratories as well as information technology and administrative support for regulatory compliance. 

    “This change would result in a significant decrease in the amount that U-M receives from the federal government to conduct vital research,” the university said. 

    Others echoed the warning. In a statement, the University of Wisconsin-Madison said NIH’s directive would “significantly disrupt vital research activity and delay lifesaving discoveries and cures.”

    “Indirect costs contribute to everything from utilities charges to building out the laboratories where science is done, to infrastructure for clinical trials of new medicines and treatments,” the university said.

    Source link

  • Trump Previews Elon Musk’s Next DOGE Targets (Forbes Breaking News)

    Trump Previews Elon Musk’s Next DOGE Targets (Forbes Breaking News)

    The Higher Education Inquirer continues to document the DOGE takeover of the US Department of Education. 

    While some Democratic officials in Congress have protested this action by DOGE, there has been little resistance otherwise. 

    DOGE consists of Elon Musk and several young men who have been tasked to reduce the federal budget by at least $1 Trillion. The US Senate has oversight of the Department of Education through the HELP (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions) Committee, but Republicans, who are led by President Trump, control the Senate, and appear to be supporting these aggressive measures. 

    While Mr. Musk has claimed that the Department of Education no longer exists, its website is still operating. 

    DOGE also promotes the buying and selling of cryptocurrency.  

    Source link

  • Retrenchment Watch Newsletter | HESA

    Retrenchment Watch Newsletter | HESA

    This is the first edition of Retrenchment Watch, a new initiative tracking how Canadian post-secondary institutions are reacting to current financial challenges. The Retrenchment Watch monitors the most recent developments, highlighting key trends and institutional responses across the country. Future editions will provide ongoing updates, analysis, and institutional case studies to help sector leaders navigate this challenging period. Updates to the website will be made weekly with summary emails flowing in a biweekly schedule.

    The Impact of Declining International Enrollments

    International students have played a critical role in the financial stability of Canadian post-secondary institutions. Over the past decade, many universities and colleges have relied heavily on international tuition revenue, amidst rising costs, frozen domestic tuition, and stagnant funding from provincial governments. 

    The federal immigration policy changes of 2024—including caps on the number of applications for international study permits that will be processed by IRCC—have caused a steep drop in new international student enrollments across the country.

    Comparison of Study Permit Applications Processed by IRCC, by Month (2023 vs. 2024)

    Source: IRCC Data, “Source Countries – Applications Processed by IRCC for New Study Permit Applications (in Persons) by Month, from January 2022 to December 2024”

    However, the impact of the government’s announcements has reduced the numbers of international students who are actually being enrolled much further than the caps themselves would imply. ApplyBoard is projecting that only 280,000 study permits were approved in 2024, as opposed to 515,880 in 2023, a 45% drop in international student numbers.

    This matches what we are hearing about dramatic falls in international student numbers across the country. However, the drops are much greater at certain institutions. For example, Okanagan College has seen a 50% decline in new international student enrollment, with expectations of a further 70% in the winter term. Thompson Rivers University reported a 50% drop in new undergraduate international enrollments and a 75% drop in post-baccalaureate diploma students. These declines are forcing institutions to make difficult financial decisions to remain operational.

    Budget Deficits

    The enrollment shortfall has translated into substantial budget deficits at many institutions. Universities and colleges across Canada are now facing difficult financial realities, with some implementing drastic cost-cutting measures.

    • York University has the largest projected deficit, at $142 million, and is implementing cost-cutting measures to reduce spending by $130 million over three years.
    • Sheridan College is projecting a $112 million loss in revenue due to falling international student numbers. 
    • University of Waterloo estimates a $75 million deficit.
    • Algonquin College is projecting a $32 million deficit for 2024-25, which is expected to rise to nearly $100 million by 2026-27.
    • Carleton University is projecting a $38 million deficit for 2024-25, expected to reach $70 million by 2025-26.
    • Memorial University reported a $9.5 million revenue loss.

    While these numbers may seem alarming, they don’t tell the full story. Public details on institutional budgets and cuts remain limited and inconsistent. Some institutions report projected deficits, others focus on lost revenue, and many omit details on where cuts will actually fall. Job loss estimates vary widely, and program cuts are often announced without specifying which programs are affected.

    In the coming weeks, we’ll be diving deeper into institutional budgets to provide a clearer picture of what these figures really mean and how they will shape the sector in the years ahead.

    Program Suspensions and Faculty/Staff Layoffs

    To manage financial constraints, many institutions are suspending programs and reducing staff. The impact is particularly severe for smaller colleges and those heavily reliant on international students.

    • Sheridan College is suspending 40 programs and reviewing 27 others, with an estimated 700 layoffs.
    • Fleming College has suspended 29 programs, possibly increasing to 42, due to a $38 million revenue shortfall.
    • Centennial College is suspending 49 programs after experiencing a 43% drop in international student enrollment.
    • St. Lawrence College is cutting 55 programs—approximately 40% of its offerings.
    • Seneca Polytechnic has temporarily closed its Markham campus, which primarily served international students.
    • Fanshawe College is cutting 18 programs this semester.
    • Public-private partnership campuses, set up primarily by Ontario colleges in the Greater Toronto Area, are being wound down.

    Hiring freezes have become common, with institutions like McGill University, Dalhousie University, the University of Waterloo and the University of Alberta pausing recruitment efforts to manage budget shortfalls. A number of institutions, such as Conestoga College and Carleton University, have introduced programs to incentivize voluntary retirement, in the hope that they can reduce salary expenditures without widespread compulsory layoffs.

    However, layoffs are occurring across the sector. Mohawk College has cut 65 full-time administrative staff, amounting to 20% of its administrative workforce. Simon Fraser University has eliminated 85 staff and faculty positions. University of Windsor has already issued layoff notices to 15 employees and is warning of further cuts.

    We know that large, but so far uncounted, numbers of contract instructors are not being rehired as their contracts expire. For example, Okanagan College has canceled 11 part-time term faculty contracts, with up to 80 more positions at risk. Western University is introducing enrollment thresholds to determine whether a course will be offered, with minimum class sizes ranging from 50 for first-year courses to 15 for fourth-year courses. These thresholds imply that contract instructors teaching courses which do not meet the cap are unlikely to have their contracts renewed.

    We will be updating a list of institutional responses on the Retrenchment Watch as they are announced.

    The Recovery Project 

    In response to the widespread retrenchment across Canadian higher education, HESA has launched the Recovery Project. 

    The financial challenges facing Canadian higher education are unprecedented, but they are not insurmountable. Most institutions have survived similar experiences in the past. The HESA Recovery Project helps Canadian colleges, polytechnics, and universities navigate financial challenges by providing insights and facilitating peer learning and collaborative action. Through monthly reports and virtual meetings, leaders gain evidence-based strategies on budget decisions, maintaining morale, and academic redesign. Drawing from interviews with veterans of past periods of retrenchment and case studies of institutions that have successfully come through major cuts, the project delivers actionable guidance. Reports and discussions begin this month, with future topics shaped by member needs to ensure timely, relevant support for institutions adapting to financial pressures. For more information, contact Tiffany MacLennan at [email protected].

    Looking Ahead

    The Retrenchment Watch will continue to monitor and analyze developments across the sector, providing timely updates and insights. The next editions will cover new announcements, policy shifts, and institutional adaptations that arise in response to ongoing financial pressures. 

    For more details, you can visit the Retrenchment Watch webpage. Have something you want to share with us about cuts at your institution? Reach out to us. 

    Source link

  • After FIRE lawsuit, California community colleges will not enforce DEI mandate in classroom

    After FIRE lawsuit, California community colleges will not enforce DEI mandate in classroom

    FRESNO, Feb. 10, 2025 — After a lawsuit from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression challenged regulations mandating the evaluation of professors based on their commitment to “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” (DEIA), the California Community Colleges system and a community college district attested in court that the regulations do not require community college professors to teach and endorse the state’s pro-DEIA views in the classroom.

    In March 2023, the California Community College system amended its tenure and employee review guidelines to “include diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility standards in the evaluation and tenure review of district employees.” The new regulations stated that faculty members “shall employ teaching, learning, and professional practices that reflect DEIA and anti-racist principles” and mandated they “promote and incorporate culturally affirming DEIA and anti-racist principles.”

    That August, FIRE filed suit against California Community Colleges and the State Center Community College District on behalf of six Fresno-area community college professors who oppose the highly politicized concepts of “DEIA” (more often called “DEI”) and “anti-racism” and thus did not want to incorporate them into their teaching.

    Forced to defend the regulations in court, the state chancellor and district quickly disclaimed any intention to use the state guidelines or the district’s faculty contract to police what professors teach in the classroom or to punish them for their criticism of DEI. 

    Specifically, the Chancellor’s Office “disavowed any intent or ability to take any action against Plaintiffs” for their classroom teaching. The district likewise confirmed that none of the plaintiffs’ “proposed future actions” for their courses violate the rules or the faculty contract. It added that plaintiffs are not “prohibited from presenting” their “viewpoints or perspectives in the classrooms” and will not “be disciplined, terminated, or otherwise punished for doing so.” 

    In particular, the Defendants denied they would punish Plaintiffs for any of their proposed speech, including “assigning certain literary works, such as Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letters from Birmingham Jail,” using “methodologies and course materials in their classroom” intended to encourage debate and discussion about the merits of DEI viewpoints, criticizing concepts like “anti-racism,” or supporting a color-blind approach to race in their self-evaluations. 

    On Jan. 28, U.S. District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff relied on those assurances to hold as a legal matter that because of the college officials’ disavowals, the professors had not suffered a harm sufficient to challenge the regulations’ constitutionality. In dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Sherriff emphasized that neither the DEI Rules nor the faculty contract “mandate what professors teach or how any DEIA principles should be implemented.”

    “FIRE filed suit to prevent California’s community colleges from evaluating our faculty clients on the basis of their classroom commitment to a political ideology, and that’s exactly the result we’ve achieved,” said FIRE attorney Daniel Ortner. “As a result of our suit, the state and the district promised a federal judge they won’t interfere with our clients’ academic freedom and free speech rights. The classroom is for discussion and exploration, not a top-down mandate about what ideas must take priority. We’ll make sure it stays that way.”

    “FIRE will be watching like a hawk to ensure that the state chancellor and district live up to their word,” said FIRE attorney Zach Silver. “If they force any professors to parrot the state’s DEI views, or punish them for criticizing the state’s position, we’ll be ready to stand up for their rights.”

    COURTESY PHOTOS OF PLAINTIFFS FOR MEDIA USE

    Despite unobjectionable-sounding labels, “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and “anti-racism” frameworks often encompass political topics and ideology that are contested and controversial. The glossary of DEI terms put out by California Community Colleges, for example, stated that “persons that say they are ‘not a racist’ are in denial,” while denouncing “colorblindness” as a concept for “perpetuat[ing] existing racial inequities.”

    DEI requirements are also highly controversial within academia. FIRE’s most recent faculty survey indicated that half of faculty think it is “rarely” or “never” justifiable for universities to make faculty candidates submit statements pledging commitment to DEI before being considered for a job (50%) or to be considered for tenure or promotion (52%).

    Since FIRE filed its lawsuit in 2023, many top universities and university systems have voluntarily moved away from mandatory DEI, including Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the University of Arizona system. Most recently, the University of Michigan dropped the use of diversity statements in hiring and firing in December 2024 following a viral New York Times article that detailed how the school’s DEI practices stifled academic freedom and discourse at the school.

    FIRE sued on behalf of six professors, James Druley, David Richardson, Linda de Morales, and Loren Palsgaard of Madera Community College, Bill Blanken of Reedley College, and Michael Stannard of Clovis Community College. (Professors Stannard and Druley withdrew from the case in 2024 upon retiring from teaching.)

    “Wherever you stand on the debate over DEI, the important thing is there is a debate in the first place,” said Palsgaard. “I’m happy that thanks to our lawsuit, we know that debate will continue in California, both inside and outside the classroom.”

    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE recognizes that colleges and universities play a vital role in preserving free thought within a free society. To this end, we place a special emphasis on defending the individual rights of students and faculty members on our nation’s campuses, including freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience.

    CONTACT:

    Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, FIRE: 215-717-3473; [email protected]

    Source link

  • Legacy Admissions Hit Historic Low as More States Ban Practice at U.S. Colleges

    Legacy Admissions Hit Historic Low as More States Ban Practice at U.S. Colleges

    Legacy preferences in college admissions have plummeted to their lowest recorded level, with just 24% of four-year colleges still considering family alumni status in admissions decisions, according to a comprehensive new report from Education Reform Now. The dramatic decline signals a potential end to a controversial practice that critics have long condemned as perpetuating inequality in higher education.

    The report, authored by James Murphy, director of Career Pathways and Postsecondary Policy, found that 420 institutions continue to provide admissions advantages to children of alumni, marking a sharp decline from previous years. The practice has seen particularly steep drops since 2015, when nearly half of all four-year colleges considered legacy status. Between 2022 and 2023 alone, 92 colleges abandoned legacy preferences, representing an 18% decrease that coincided with the Supreme Court’s landmark decision to ban race-conscious admissions.

    This decline stems from both voluntary institutional decisions and new state legislation. In 2024, California, Illinois, Maryland and Virginia joined Colorado in restricting legacy admissions through state laws. The report indicates that 86% of colleges that ended legacy consideration did so voluntarily, while 14% were required by state legislation. Several more states are expected to introduce similar legislation in 2025.

    Legacy preferences remain most entrenched at selective private institutions, particularly in the Northeast. More than half of colleges that admit 25% or fewer applicants still provide advantages to alumni children. The practice is now rare at public institutions, with just 11% still considering legacy status. In 24 states, no public colleges provide legacy preferences at all. New York stands out as having the highest concentration of colleges maintaining legacy admissions, with one in seven U.S. institutions still using the practice located in the Empire State.

    The report challenges several common defenses of legacy admissions, including arguments that they help build campus community or are necessary for fundraising. It cites evidence that 76% of colleges successfully foster campus communities without legacy preferences, and questions whether wealthy institutions with multi-billion dollar endowments truly need to “trade admissions advantages for money.”

    The analysis also addresses claims that ending legacy admissions could hurt diversity, particularly following the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling. The report argues that legacy preferences disproportionately benefit white and wealthy applicants, citing research showing that Asian American applicants face significantly lower odds of admission compared to white applicants with similar qualifications at selective institutions. According to one study, Asian American applicants had 28% lower odds of attending elite schools than white applicants with similar academic and extracurricular qualifications.

    The report suggests that Congress could potentially impose additional endowment taxes on universities that maintain legacy preferences while offering reduced penalties to institutions that increase enrollment of Pell Grant recipients, community college transfers, and veterans. This approach would create financial incentives for institutions to abandon the practice.

    “The shame of belonging to this group of colleges that think children of alumni have somehow earned an extra advantage in admissions is likely to push more colleges to drop the practice,” Murphy writes. “This is not a club that most colleges belong to or will want to belong to.”

    The report also criticizes the Common Application for potentially enabling legacy admissions by requiring all applicants to identify where their parents earned bachelor’s degrees, even though this information is irrelevant for more than three-quarters of colleges. The report suggests that removing this question would be a significant step toward making college admissions more equitable.

    “Ultimately, the reason to eliminate legacy preferences is not to achieve some other goal,” the report concludes. “The reason to get rid of them is that they are profoundly unfair and make a mockery of merit. Legacy preferences award some of the most advantaged students an additional advantage in the college admissions process on the basis of ancestry alone.”

    Source link

  • The Student Assistant Supports Learning and Teaching

    The Student Assistant Supports Learning and Teaching

    Reading Time: 3 minutes

    AI is becoming a bigger part of our daily lives, and students are already using it to support their learning. In fact, from our studies, 90% of faculty feel GenAI is going to play an increasingly important role in higher ed.

    Embracing AI responsibly, with thoughtful innovation, can help students take charge of their educational journey. So, we turn to the insights and expertise of you and your students — to develop AI tools that support and empower learners, while maintaining ethical practices, accuracy and a focus on the human side of education.

    Training the Student Assistant together

    Since we introduced the Student Assistant in August 2024, we continue to ensure that faculty, alongside students, play a central role in helping to train it.

    Students work directly with the tool, having conversations. Instructors review these exchanges to ensure the Student Assistant is guiding students through a collaborative, critical thinking process —helping them find answers on their own, rather than directly providing them.

    “I was extremely impressed with the training and evaluation process. The onboarding process was great, and the efforts taken by Cengage to ensure parity in the evaluation process was a good-faith sign of the quality and accuracy of the Student Assistant.” — Dr. Loretta S. Smith, Professor of Management, Arkansas Tech University

    Supporting students through our trusted sources

    The Student Assistant uses only Cengage-authored course materials — it does not search the web.

    By leveraging content aligned directly with instructor’s chosen textbook , the Student Assistant provides reliable, real-time guidance that helps students bridge knowledge gaps — without ever relying on external sources that may lack credibility.

    Unlike tools that rely on potentially unreliable web sources, the Student Assistant ensures that every piece of guidance aligns with course objectives and instructor expectations.

    Here’s how:

    • It uses assigned Cengage textbooks, eBooks and resources, ensuring accuracy and relevance for every interaction
    • The Student Assistant avoids pulling content from the web, eliminating the risks of misinformation or content misalignment
    • It does not store or share student responses, keeping information private and secure

    By staying within our ecosystem, the Student Assistant fosters academic integrity and ensures students are empowered to learn with autonomy and confidence.

    “The Student Assistant is user friendly and adaptive. The bot responded appropriately and in ways that prompt students to deepen their understanding without giving away the answer.” – Lois Mcwhorter, Department Chair for the Hutton School of Business at the University of Cumberlands

    Personalizing the learning journey

    56% of faculty cited personalization as a top use case for GenAI to help enhance the learning experience.

    The Student Assistant enhances student outcomes by offering a personalized educational experience. It provides students with tailored resources that meet their unique learning needs right when they need them. With personalized, encouraging feedback and opportunities to connect with key concepts in new ways, students gain a deeper understanding of their coursework. This helps them close learning gaps independently and find the answers on their own, empowering them to take ownership of their education.

    “What surprised me most about using the Student Assistant was how quickly it adapted and adjusted to feedback. While the Student Assistant helped support students with their specific questions or tasks, it did so in a way that allowed for a connection. It was not simply a bot that pointed you to the correct answer in the textbook; it assisted students similar to how a professor or instructor would help a student.” — Dr. Stephanie Thacker, Associate Professor of Business for the Hutton School of Business at the University of the Cumberlands

    Helping students work through the challenges

    The Student Assistant is available 24/7 to help students practice concepts without the need to wait for feedback, enabling independent learning before seeking instructor support.

    With just-in-time feedback, students can receive guidance tailored to their course, helping them work through challenges on their own schedule. By guiding students to discover answers on their own, rather than providing them outright, the Student Assistant encourages critical thinking and deeper engagement.

    “Often students will come to me because they are confused, but they don’t necessarily know what they are confused about. I have been incredibly impressed with the Student Assistants’ ability to help guide students to better understand where they are struggling. This will not only benefit the student but has the potential to help me be a better teacher, enable more critical thinking and foster more engaging classroom discussion.” — Professor Noreen Templin, Department Chair and Professor of Economics at Butler Community College

    Want to start using the Student Assistant for your courses?

    The Student Assistant, embedded in MindTap, is available in beta with select titles , such as “Management,” “Human Psychology” and “Principles of Economics” — with even more coming this fall. Find the full list of titles that currently feature the Student Assistant, plus learn more about the tool and AI at Cengage right here.

    Source link

  • Case Study: Florida Policy Opening Enrollment for At-Risk Students

    Case Study: Florida Policy Opening Enrollment for At-Risk Students

    Title: The Role of State Policy in Supporting Students Experiencing Homelessness and Former Foster Youth in Higher Education

    Authors: Carrie E. Henderson and Katie Grissom

    Source: The Urban Institute

    Paying for a college degree is already a difficult, complex process for many students involving a variety of sources of financial aid and payment. For students with a history of foster care or housing instability, this task becomes even more challenging given the lack of financial and social support they experience growing up.

    To properly support these students, policymakers and higher education administrators need to create educational environments that go beyond teaching and learning to prioritize access to essential resources and socioeconomic conditions that can provide stability in students’ lives. State policy can provide critical opportunities to open pathways for students and address the personal, emotional, and logistical challenges that students face. A new report from the Urban Institute explores how the Florida state legislature took steps to enhance access to postsecondary education for homeless students and former foster youth and how it affected higher education attainment.

    Key findings include:

    New state policies expanded tuition and fee exemptions: In 2022, the Florida legislature created policies that expanded the eligibility for tuition and fee exemptions to match the federal definition of homeless children and youth and include students who had been involved in shelter, dependency, or termination of parental rights proceedings.

    Increase in tuition and fee exemptions rose since implementation: The data Florida collected showed an upward trend in the use of the homelessness fee exemption in both the Florida College System (FCS) and the State University System (SUS) between 2021-22 and 2023-24. In the FCS in 2023-24, the number of exemptions increased by 103 percent since 2021-22, from 689 to 1,396. SUS institutions experienced more incremental growth, as homelessness exemptions increased from 344 in 2021-22 to 432 in 2023–24, a 26 percent increase.

    Tuition and fee exemptions can reduce the financial burden of postsecondary education, making it more affordable and attainable for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. However, policymakers considering exemptions and subsidies should include dedicated funding to help institutions of higher education implement these services effectively. Without additional funding, colleges and universities lack the supplemental resources to implement policies feasibly. Furthermore, policymakers should listen to and work with administrators to fund holistic wraparound services that impact students’ ability to enroll, persist, and succeed in higher education.

    To read the full report from the Urban Institute, click here.

    —Austin Freeman

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Sri Lankan students set their sights on Indian universities

    Sri Lankan students set their sights on Indian universities

    Discussions at the New Delhi event centered on India’s growing appeal as a destination for international students and a key partner for global institutions seeking to enhance their internationalisation strategies.

    “In our recent visit to Sri Lanka, we saw over 3,000 students express interest to study in Indian universities due to them being affordable and providing high-quality education,” shared Pankaj Mittal, secretary general, Association of Indian Universities. 

    “Earlier, students from Sri Lanka were only looking at the US, UK, and Europe but that’s not affordable for them anymore, which is why they are focusing on India.”

    Mittal stated that this phenomenon indicates a future where “India will prosper and become the destination where international students and educators will see potential.”

    According to the Study in India portal, over 72,000 international students studied in India for the academic year 2024/25.

    The rise in international students, especially from South Asia and Africa, has prompted the Ministry of Home Affairs to announce specialised visas dubbed the ‘e-student visa’ and ‘e-student-x visa.’

    Additionally, a ‘G-20 talent visa’ has been announced for scientists, researchers, faculty members, and scholar academicians from G20 countries. 

    Elsewhere, reports suggest that IIT Madras is considering establishing a branch campus in Sri Lanka, joining other IITs in their plans for international expansion.

    While international universities are making headlines concerning their expansion plans in India, Mittal highlighted that Indian universities are equally excited to collaborate with institutions abroad but need to find the right partners. 

    We are now handholding Indian universities to help them find the right partners and guide them on which areas they can collaborate in.
    Pankaj Mittal, AIU

    “After the National Education Policy came into the picture, Indian universities are looking forward to more collaborations with international universities,” said Mittal. 

    “The only issue right now is that we need to help Indian universities, especially public ones, with capacity building. We are now handholding Indian universities to help them find the right partners and guide them on which areas they can collaborate in.”

    Through its initiative ‘The Indian Network for Internationalisation of Higher Education’, which has 1,064 member Indian and international universities, AIU is helping Indian and international institutions advance their internationalisation strategies in India. 

    With a 17,000-strong student population, including over 210 international students, private institutions like UPES are partnering with top institutions across the world but want the benefits to be more ‘reciprocal’. 

    “Since the NEP, there have been a slew of regulations that are coming at a fast pace which are also overwhelming for us as Indian institutions,” said Ram Sharma, vice-chancellor, UPES. 

    “As an Indian institution we are pretty clear that we want the best for our students, which is why we have made it a policy to partner with the world’s top 100 universities, such as King’s College London, Edinburgh University, the University of Queensland, and more.”

    Though joint and dual degrees are becoming major attractions in partnerships between Indian and international institutions, Sharma believes it’s not creating the same excitement among Indian students as expected. 

    “Except for our partnership with the University of Queensland, many of our partnerships have participation of less than ten students,” said Sharma. 

    “So now we are talking about a campus on campus model, wherein we can partner with a well-established existing institution and experiment with other models in light of increasing TNE interest.”

    According to Rohit Kumar, director, international recruitment, partnerships, and mobility, University of York, a ‘culture of innovation’ that can benefit both Indian and international students can only be brought about by cross-disciplinary collaboration between the Indian education sector, international universities, and the Indian government.

    “Dedicated funding streams are needed to strengthen research capabilities between institutions, while international universities entering India must actively engage with industry,” said Kumar. 

    Source link