Blog

  • Speaking Out on Social Media with Dr. Monica Cox, author of Never Defeated

    Speaking Out on Social Media with Dr. Monica Cox, author of Never Defeated

    Introducing Dr. Monica Cox, professor and change maker for equity in the workplace

    Jennifer: I’m so excited to feature Dr. Monica Cox, a professor, author, and change maker. Monica, thanks so much for coming today to talk about your new book Never Defeated: Nine Lessons from the Workplace Front Lines. I wanted to be sure to get that right.

    Monica: It’s okay. That’s fine. It’s very long. So you did a great job. Thank you. So great to be here and to meet you in person, kind of.

    Jennifer: Yeah. I know we’ve been connected on social media for a while and I’ve been following your amazing work, but I’m so excited to introduce you to The Social Academic community. Would you mind telling people a little bit about yourself?

    Monica: Sure, sure. So I am of course Dr. Monica Cox. I am an academic and a professor, an engineering education professor. I’m also a former administrator and I am an entrepreneur who is the CEO and founder of STEMinent, LLC, which offers a variety of offerings that have an umbrella of helping people to emerge whole and bold and strong in the workplace, or whichever environment they so choose. So that’s me in a nutshell.

    Jennifer: Bold and strong. I love it. I love it.

    Monica: Yeah, thank you.

    Writing Never Defeated

    Jennifer: Tell me, What prompted you to write Never Defeated? This is such a powerful book. What, what made you know that it had to be out in the world?

    Monica: Okay, so there’s the business answer and then there’s kind of the other heart related answer.

    Jennifer: Yeah.

    Monica: So I would say from a business perspective, I have a Stop Playing Diversity brand, which is based on just my commitment to authentic diversity, equity, and inclusion. And the quick part of that story is that when I was hired in my most recent organization, I told them not to hire me if they were playing diversity. And of course, they didn’t know what that meant. But over time I realized that a lot of the things that I needed to be successful in that workplace as a black woman administrator just, they weren’t there. And I decided to trademark Stop Playing Diversity, and that meant that I wanted to have guides coaching the business arm, and I wanted to write a series of books. So Never Defeated is one of the books that I’m gonna write as part of the Stop Playing Diversity brand and the trademark for the business. Amazing. So, like I said, that’s the business part.

    Stop Playing Diversity Podcast: Starting the Conversation That Should Be Happening But Isn't with Dr. Monica

    Monica: The personal part is that I went through hell at work. It was a mess. And there’s a quote in the book where I talk about a blueprint and I wished I had a blueprint before I started this experience. But I always said, sometimes you have to be the blueprint. And as I was learning and documenting what was going on, I would look at tweets and kind of just record the tweets. And I wrote essays based on the things that were resonating with people on social media. So that is the heart part of this, where it’s my story where it also is informed from the voices of people who’ve gone through situations very similar to mine. And as you know about social media, there was also the upheaval with Twitter/X. And I thought, if it goes away, what about all of that information, all of those conversations. And this book is kind of the way for me to almost take ownership, to take back some of the valuable conversations and resources that came out of a really good time for me on social media. That was the long story.

    Jennifer: Ohh! And a beautiful one that really touched my heart. So I hear what you mean when you say the heart side of, of your reasons for writing this very important book. Never Defeated is so powerful because it reads as authentic, it reads like you’re talking to me. And I think that’s what made me pick it up and not put it down until I finished.

    Monica: Thank you.

    Jennifer: I mean, I was like walking around the house with it, trying to make sure that I got all of these words in because, you know, sometimes when we see things on Twitter, it does make a meaningful difference in our lives. But seeing all of it at once, like being able to read your words, it just, it was, it was quite meaningful for me. I really appreciated it. Yeah.

    Monica: Thank you. And I’ll say something really quickly about it, even this morning, my husband was telling me that someone was reading it and the words were powerful. So I thank you for this. It is still kind of difficult for me to process all of it because I’m also healing as I share what I’ve talked about. So it’s not easy for me to just be like, let me read this every day now. No, that was my life and I lived it. And it was just a moment. And there’s just an element about that that I wanna put about the book too, where it felt like I was sharing a piece of myself and it’s just that it’s all compact, but that was really my life with the death of, you know, my parents and so many real things that have impacted me. So, so even now I feel a little emotional talking about it because it was that real to me as a person.

    Subscribe to The Social Academic blog.

    The form above subscribes you to new posts published on The Social Academic blog.
    Want emails from Jennifer about building your online presence? Subscribe to her email list.
    Looking for the podcast? Subscribe on Spotify.
    Prefer to watch videos? Subscribe on YouTube.

    Speaking out on social media in an anti-DEI age

    Jennifer: Oh, I hear you. I hear you. And I really appreciate that maybe despite the emotional weight of writing the book and sharing, like you, you still put it out there in the world and you still write your tweets, even though, I mean, I, I guess I wonder, is there some fear when you’re talking about, you know, things that happen that are maybe not talked about in the room, like, but like you are saying it on Twitter. And so I’m wondering what are your feelings about that? Was it different when you were writing the book?

    Monica: So, when I talk about the tweets, this seems very spiritual and some people may not get this, but I will, I will be asleep. And when I wake up I hear like, it’s almost like the words come to me. And so I’m writing them because it’s like, this is what I’m supposed to say for the day. And sometimes it’s punchy, but it is almost like you, you and I talking right now. I just know that there’s a thought that has formed. And so that’s what that is. I don’t feel the fear. When I write things that are so truthful because it is just as clear as to me that that’s what I’m supposed to say.

    Jennifer: It’s like already formed in your mind when you’re going to say, I get that. ’cause it’s a poet. That’s how I write poetry. It’s not how I write social media posts, but it is how I write poetry. And so I really, I hear you when you say like, the feelings that, like, that happens when you’re writing it in your head and then it’s out there and you’re like, but I’ve already, it’s already there. It, it exists.

    Monica: Exactly. And sometimes I’ll even, I have my phone next to me and I’ll write something as a note. And so that’s something too, like I’ll wake up at 3:00 AM and that’s one thing, the part about the book is that I had a book consultant, a developmental kind of editor.

    Jennifer: Wonderful.

    Monica: Thank you. And at first I was not going to write stories. Hmm. The first draft was very much practical, and that was it. And she pushed me to include more of myself in the book. And I did not think that I was ready to do that because there are some stories people didn’t know about. And I knew that I would be very vulnerable sharing, for example, how I contacted the president of my university when there were things happening after the murder of George Floyd. And you know, kind of what happened, like I’m whistle blowing on myself. To say, this is what I did with other people during this time. And one thing that people have really complimented me on, and I was very careful about is making sure that I, I was very truthful with my stories without naming names.

    Jennifer: Yes.

    Monica: So if people do not know where I work, you would not know. And my developmental editor, even by the time she looked at it, she’s like, I don’t even know where you work. So I realized that that’s an immense skill to be able to tell so much. And I do that on social media as well. So, so much without fully telling you what’s up.

    Jennifer: Yeah.

    Monica: And that also is something I would say that I have to tread carefully with from a legal perspective. Yeah. Because I was so involved in a legal case for three years where I had to decide, am I going to remove myself completely from social media? Am I not going to write? Am I gonna shut down my voice? Or am I going to figure out how to still share my truths without incriminating myself without telling too much? It was, it is a slippery slope to do this work. And I’ll say it’s very strategic, very deliberate. And I hope that’s what you see even as I’m like teetering right there. But nah, I, I know how to say it.

    Jennifer: I’m curious when you say that you really had, you approached a point in which you had to make a decision whether to remove yourself from social media or to stay, what helped you make that decision?

    Monica: Well, it’s the motivation for me actually being on social media. Once I was an administrator, I said it in my book that it was kind of like an archive for me, but I got to a point in my organization where it became very dangerous for me to be there because of the lack of equity work that they were doing. But also I could tell that I was being set up to be this scapegoat. And I wasn’t going to be that person, I was going to fight. So I had an attorney who I worked with at the time, and two of the things that he mentioned about social media usage is that it’s archived. And I mean, it’s an archived record, of course, of what happens. And he said, you have to tell the truth. Like in, in a court of law, it would be like the timestamps and is what you’re saying true. So I used it very strategically and I always said, because it literally got to a point where I was being harassed because of some stuff. I said, if anything, God forbid ever happened to me, then my husband, maybe my legal team, the people around me could look at what I wrote on social media and have that as evidence of what I was going through. So I was hiding in plain sight.

    Jennifer: Yeah.

    Monica: And people didn’t understand. What, why does she do this every day? Because I want people to know what happened on say, you know, Monday, February 17th. You know, people would say, “Oh, it’s too much. Why would a department chair do that?” Because I was concerned.

    Jennifer: Yeah, you’re protecting yourself. That’s interesting.

    Monica: Absolutely. Yeah.

    Jennnifer: People tend to have fear when it comes to social media, but you actually found some protection in it in the sense that it was a documented record.

    Monica: Absolutely.

    Jennifer: I’m wondering, for listeners who may be experiencing something similar on their university campuses, what kind of documentation do you recommend that they practice?

    Monica: Well, I would say social media could be good, but you don’t even have to use your real name. You know, so some type of pseudonym or something. And I mean, of course if it ever came to the point where people needed to know that was you, you could say it was you. But that’s one way that you can use it. Another way. I mean, it’s email. When I was a department chair, I used to think about this all the time. There are some like basics. When you have a meeting with someone, you wanna make sure that things are clear. So you can send an email afterward. One of the things that people need to be careful of is having conversations on the phone, because that’s not really documentation.

    Jennifer: Right.

    Monica: You need it to be written. You need the summary to be written. And one thing that I even learned through my organization is that I would send things and people would not respond. But when it was time for me to compile information, you know, I could have, you know, five examples for of like, when I did contact people, like, “Hey, I told you I was in distress on this date. I told you that I was having this issue with an employee.” And I think that’s going to be one of the big things that we do strategically moving forward to protect ourselves, particularly in an anti-DEI age. People are going to avoid, they’re going to want to walk that fine line, but if we are in distress, we need to put that out there in writing that this is unacceptable. I am being treated this way and this is how I move forward. And I think one other quick thing I’ll say, the reason this is, this is very vital is because I’ve also learned through my experience that the policies are not in place to protect certain issues like microaggressions. There is no law against someone microaggressing you. There is no law in place against workplace bullying. So when you are experiencing situations that make you feel that your life is in danger, or in the case of, I don’t know if you saw Dr. Bonnie, Dr. Antoinette Bonnie, her full  name is Candia-Bailey, she ended her life. You know, we need to tell our stories in ways that sometimes are cries for help, but are sometimes those records after we have left an organization to say, this is what happened on this day. This is my voice. These are the people who knew, you know, et cetera. Sorry I went off. That was long, but.

    Jennifer: No, Thank you for sharing that much about all this. I, and I think that I have wanted to ask this kind of question before, sometimes I’ve had guests on my show that have experienced some bullying on social media and other things. I know I had Dr. Carlotta Berry, who came and talked about it. But you’ve been through the kind of legal battle and something that’s public. And you’ve written about it in ways that I feel like people will really hear what you’re saying and it, they’ll take it in and they’ll start practicing some of those things themselves. Like, I want to help inspire change with this conversation. And so I really appreciate you being open and authentic about that.

    Monica: Oh, thank you. Of course.

    Subscribe to The Social Academic blog.

    The form above subscribes you to new posts published on The Social Academic blog.
    Want emails from Jennifer about building your online presence? Subscribe to her email list.
    Looking for the podcast? Subscribe on Spotify.
    Prefer to watch videos? Subscribe on YouTube.

    Social media presence and growth, How it’s changed for academics

    Jennnifer: Now, when I think about your time on social media, like it’s been so impactful for your thinking and, and your thought leadership and what you share with people. But how has it changed over time? Like, you’ve been on social media for a while, right?

    Monica: I have. I think Twitter was documented. I think I started in 2010. So how has it changed? I think people are actually talking, which is funny to me. You know, academics were not talking back in the day. I think there’s still some fields where people just kind of post their accolades, but now people are having more conversations. I also think when it comes to marginalized communities, people are bold, bolder about talking about the issues that are going on in their personal lives. So they’re showing more of themselves. They’re also talking about problems that they experience. I see a lot more political statements.

    Jennifer: Yes.

    Monica: You know, even religious statements, displeasure with things. And I wonder if it’s like the younger generation that’s coming in, but I feel they just have less fear when it comes to displaying themselves. And just talking about. I’m southern and you know, I come from this more subdued, maybe cultural environment. But I mean, there are people who drop in their pics in tight dresses. They’re kissing up on folks, you know, they’re just like grown and sexy. And I think we need to see people who are just beautiful in every form, who are thoughtful and funny. And so that’s what I see. I see people who are human more and not afraid to be human. And that’s good.

    Jennifer: Hmm. What about for yourself? Do you feel like you’ve leaned more into that over time? Or have you always shown up and been authentic?

    Monica: You know what? I think that all of this connects back to our disciplines because I said I’m an academic. And so as an academic in a STEM discipline, it’s got its own culture. Engineering has its own culture. I’m in engineering education. So that’s got its own culture. So it’s like nested cultures. And I would say my culture is very, very, very conservative in how they move. And this was like the running joke of me on social media where everybody would say like, “Oh my gosh, I can’t believe Monica said this. Like, is she off?” And one of my friends even said in my community, she said she didn’t wanna look at my social media because she’s like, she’s gonna get fired for saying stuff. 

    Jennifer: She was scared for you. 

    Monica: That’s what she said. And that also speaks to that culture. So how have I changed? I have gotten out of the fear of my community and I have connected so much broader, like my platform, I think across all of my social media. And I probably have repetitive followers as well. But it’s about 75,000 people. 

    Jennnifer: Wow. 

    Monica: And you know, I started with a handful.. And the noise of my community is so quiet, it’s so quiet now in terms of what they think, because I see the impact of my work.  I see the feedback that I get, like people who are leaving careers because of a book, because of a tweet, people who are sharing their stories because of things that I’ve said. And I’ll even give this as like a testimonial. I knew that. I know there’s something to it. I started a newsletter on LinkedIn in December, and I only have maybe like 13 editions. ’cause it’s biweekly. And I am up to, I wanna say like 8,500 subscribers right now. 

    Jennifer: Wow. Back from December. Since December!? 

    Monica: And I had maybe 700 in the first day. So there is something that is happening that is bigger than what I am. So that’s it. It’s the boldness, it’s the, I don’t care what my academic community says about me, because I know that what’s happening is more impactful and bigger than what’s in their box.

    The Accomplice Academy with Dr. Monica

    Jennifer: Hm. Ooh. Tell me a little bit about the Accomplice Academy. I wanna make sure that people who are listening can join if they’re a good fit for it. 

    Monica: Absolutely. So it is a really intimate group right now of people who want to be equity accomplices. And what I mean by that is people who we have, we focus on three areas. One is, I talk about like the level of risk. You know, as an accomplice, you’re gonna understand that what you’re doing is high risk. And so I engage through a subscription service, a monthly subscription service, where we talk about what it’s like to take those risks and how people can do this and protect themselves in the process. The second area that’s kind of connected back to being an accomplice is like looking at the level of change. And so I really focus on systemic change. So if you are in an organization, how are we making sure that we are offering sustainable solutions for people to remain safe and for equity to be real? And the third part is really having people focus on others instead of themselves. Many times when you see people who are allies, you know, they’ll, some of them will wear it like a banner and be like, “I’m an ally, I’m an ally. Come to me!” But I often tell people, you’re not an ally if I don’t say that you’re an ally. And it’s this space where sometimes as an accomplice, we do the work and people don’t even know that we do the work. But that’s what it means to do it. And I, I brought up the example in the book about, you know, going to the president of the University, of my university and saying, this is what’s happening in our organization. Please look at these statements from our engineering students. Look at the statements from our engineering faculty and staff, and take that into consideration when you hire the next leader of this organization. So, like I said, even though I shared what I did at the time, it wasn’t that people knew it. And as I told you, my developmental editor was like, you need to share stories. And I was like, okay, I’m finally gonna tell people that I was an equity accomplice in my institution at a very dangerous level, at a pretty high level. And I knew that the consequences could have been a lot worse if the leader was not committed to racial equity. That was a lot. So those examples, that’s what The Accomplice Academy is. It’s like doing the work and having the support to talk about it in a safe space. And I would say a couple of my most active people, one is an LGBTQ plus advocate who is a burnout coach, and another is a professor in a state where they have anti-DEI laws now. And you know, we really talk about this, what does this look like in your roles as a coach or as faculty. So thank you for mentioning that.

    Subscribe to The Social Academic blog.

    The form above subscribes you to new posts published on The Social Academic blog.
    Want emails from Jennifer about building your online presence? Subscribe to her email list.
    Looking for the podcast? Subscribe on Spotify.
    Prefer to watch videos? Subscribe on YouTube.

    How to be a better accomplice on social media

    Jennifer: That is amazing. It sounds like a group where real change can happen, not just change within ourselves, but change in our communities. That sounds so cool. Thank you. Oh, I’m curious, since we were just talking about being a good accomplice and, and how being an ally is really about making sure that other people feel that we’re good allies, not just ourselves. What’s one way that we could be better accomplices or allies on social media?

    Monica: Man, there are a lot of ways. I think one is like amplifying statements that I think are very courageous. You know, so if there is someone who is saying something that the world needs to hear, and if they could be, you know, criticized for it, or if they’re in a vulnerable position by saying that, I think that the very public way that we show support sends messages to organizations that we are aligned with that person. Another is actually putting real content out. You know, being brave, being courageous and saying, you know, this is what systemic change looks like. Or here are some examples. So, so tips. You know, I think social media is a wonderful place to educate. And if we have handbooks, if we have resources that have helped us, if we have contacts, you know, other books, this is the prime place for audiences to see how to do the work really well. So sharing is another piece, but I think being authentic, like once you’re there, and I feel like this gets to like the risk part, but once you are on there, it’s about being that consistent voice so people know that you are trustworthy, that they can rely on you, that you are that person who is for the cause. And so consistency. I feel like that’s an internal thing, you know, for you to, for someone to be courageous, there’s a difference between the theory and action of it. And that’s what I mean. Like my inner circle of accomplices is so small right now because anyone can post just a good statement. But it’s the translation of that statement into action, under pressure that shows me if you are really an accomplice, because it can come with negative impacts on your livelihood.

    Jennifer: Yeah.

    Monica: And that can include a job. Maybe you lose an opportunity because you’re too dogmatic or because you know, you’ve said something that is really pushing the envelope. But from a business perspective, I often tell people, anyone who reads what you present and they’re turned off wasn’t someone you probably needed to connect to in the first place, because you are gonna have a lot more issues down the road. And that’s what I say even about doing equity work. You know, if someone’s like, “Oh, can you tone it down? Can you do whatever,” guess what? I’m not the consultant for you. Go to the one who’s going to help you to clear things and make sure everything is measured in your organization because that’s what you’re looking for. You’re not really ready for the accomplice level. That’s the work that I’m proposing.

    Jennifer: Ooh, that’s really helpful. And I think it also helps people know whether they should join the Accomplice Academy. Like, are you, are you really ready to, to do the work and to take action in your organization? Oh, that’s fascinating. Absolutely. Oh, I love that. Okay. Well, I wanna show the book again.

    Be sure to pick up your copy of Never Defeated by Dr. Monica Cox. Monica, it’s been amazing chatting with you today. Is there anything you’d like to share before we wrap up?

    Monica’s new romance novel!

    Monica: You know, just, I’m also an author. I write fiction. Yes. I have one that’s dropping this week.

    Jennifer: I’m gonna get it. I’ll say I love romance books. I do.

    Monica: Thank you. Thank you. Because you know what, that’s a taboo. So we can talk about that.

    You know, we talk about authenticity, people like, what are you doing? Are you out there writing smut? What’s happening? And I’m like, my people love each other. Okay. They love, they love on each other. They love each other. So I will say that, and the thing that I will also mention is that I put social justice things in my book as well. So even in the one that’s coming up, and I’ll say this really quickly. My protagonist did not earn tenure, but she was involved in a domestic abuse situation. And we have an issue where she goes to Alabama and because of their laws, she can’t be an unwed mother and keep her job. 

    Jennnifer: Oh wow. 

    Monica: Yeah, with STEM students because of donors. And so that sounds very familiar. The arranged marriage part of my romance is when, spoiler alert, her principal boss doesn’t want to lose this amazing teacher. And so, they kind of like each other anyway. 

    Jennifer: Oh, That sounds great. 

    Monica: It’s this whole social justice thing that’s embedded in romance and how they have to move forward. So I’m just putting that teaser out there to say, it’s not just smut, although you get it, but it’s the lessons behind how women of color have to move professionally and personally to be successful and to be whole, bold and strong. Same thing.

    Jennifer: I so appreciate that. As a survivor of domestic violence, myself, I found love. I found romance. Like I can’t wait to read this book. It’s, it’s, yeah, it’s on my reading list. I’m very excited. Okay.

    Pick up your copy of Never Defeated by Dr. Monica Cox and connect with her on social media.

    Thank you so much for listening to this episode of The Social Academic.

    Subscribe to The Social Academic blog.

    The form above subscribes you to new posts published on The Social Academic blog.
    Want emails from Jennifer about building your online presence? Subscribe to her email list.
    Looking for the podcast? Subscribe on Spotify.
    Prefer to watch videos? Subscribe on YouTube.

    Bio for Dr. Monica Cox

    Monica F. Cox, Ph.D., is an unstoppable force who has made it her mission to disrupt and trailblaze her way through the world. Her unapologetic approach to life has made her a change agent and leader who is unafraid to make people uncomfortable. Despite facing personal and professional adversity, Monica was raised by her educator parents to persist and pursue her dreams.

    As a 2020 Fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), Distinguished Professor of Engineering, and former department chair at The Ohio State University, Dr. Cox is no stranger to conflict. Her unwavering dedication to advocating for people and women of color has transformed the fabric of her department and the larger organization.

    Dr. Cox’s research focuses on the infusion of equity in STEM education and the empirical exploration of women of color in the workplace. With over 130 publications, a presidential award for research, and approximately $20 million in led and collaborated multidisciplinary projects, she is a true expert in her field.

    Authors Guides and Advice Articles Interviews Online Presence How To’s Professor Interviews Social Media How To’s The Social Academic Women in Academia

    Source link

  • CUPA-HR Welcomes a New Board of Directors for 2024-25 – CUPA-HR

    CUPA-HR Welcomes a New Board of Directors for 2024-25 – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 26, 2024

    As we prepare for a new year at CUPA-HR, we want to take a moment to introduce our board of directors for 2024-25 and to thank those who have served on the board over the past year. The board, which guides the association’s strategic priorities, is an incredible team of higher ed HR leaders who are dedicated to supporting and advancing the higher ed HR profession.

    2024-25 Board Members

    The chair of CUPA-HR’s board of directors for 2024-25 is Robyn Salvo, associate vice president for human resources at Monmouth University. Robyn has worked in HR for over 20 years, with the last 18 in higher ed at Monmouth University. In her current role, she leads an HR team in providing advice and guidance to the university covering all aspects of human resources, from talent management and compensation to benefits and compliance. Robyn has been a member of the CUPA-HR national board since 2020 and previously served as president of the CUPA-HR New Jersey Chapter.

    Also serving on this year’s board are:

    Executive Committee Members

    • Amanda Bailey, Chair-elect – Vice President for Human Resources at Boston University
    • Jami Painter, Past Chair – Senior Associate Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer at the University of Illinois System
    • Kelli Shuman, Treasurer – Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Chief Human Resources Officer at Elon University
    • Andy Brantley, Ex-Officio – President and Chief Executive Officer at CUPA-HR

    Regional Directors

    • Melanie DeSantis, Eastern Region – Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Chief Human Resources Officer at Franklin & Marshall College
    • Connie Putland, Midwest Region – Chief Human Resources Officer at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
    • Ale Kennedy, Southern Region – Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Chief Human Resources Officer at Clemson University
    • Clarity White, Western Region – Human Resources Supervisor at the University of California, Berkeley

    At-Large Directors

    • Jazzmine N. Clarke-Glover – Vice President of Workplace Culture and Inclusion (Chief Human Resources Officer, Chief Diversity Officer, Title IX Coordinator) at Wagner College
    • Christine Lovely – Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer at Cornell University
    • Josh Mackey – Vice President of Human Resources at Northern Arizona University
    • Helena A. Rodrigues – Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer at the University of Arizona
    • Eugene Whitlock – Chief People and Culture Officer and Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources at the University of California, Berkeley
    • Lynne Adams – Chief Human Resources Officer and Associate Vice President, Human Resources at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County
    • Maureen Binder – Associate Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer at the University of Central Florida
    • Clint Eury – Program Director, Human Resources Strategic Partnerships and Communications at the University of Maryland, College Park
    • David Zajchowski – Human Resources Director at Rollins College

    Thank you!

    We also want to celebrate the outstanding leaders who are rolling off the board. They have invested countless hours of their time and energy in leading our profession and our association, and we are so grateful for their wisdom and guidance.

    • Jay Stephens, Past Chair – Vice President of People and Culture at the University of Montana
    • Kristi Yowell – Chief People and Culture Officer and Associate Vice President for Human Resources at Loyola University Maryland
    • Heather Hart – Vice Chancellor of Human Resources and Strategic Operations at Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana-Lafayette
    • El pagnier Kay (EK) Hudson – Senior Vice President, Human Resources at Florida International University

    We couldn’t accomplish our mission without our leaders. Thank you for your dedication and commitment!

    CUPA-HR’s 2023-24 Board of Directors



    Source link

  • Medical College Admission Data, 2023

    Medical College Admission Data, 2023

    This is a reboot of a visualization I did in 2018, which I found fascinating, but which didn’t get much traffic at the time, and thus, I’ve not refreshed it.  But I still find it compelling and instructive.

    Each year, the Association of American Medical Colleges publishes a lot of data about admission to medical colleges in the US. But frankly, it’s a mess, and takes a lot of effort to clean up and visualize: Each link is a separate spreadsheet, and each spreadsheet has spacer rows and merged cells and lots of stuff that needs to be scrubbed (carefully) before analyzing and visualizing.  So, if you use this work in a professional capacity, I’d appreciate your support for my time, software and hosting costs at this link. As a reminder, I don’t accept contributions from high school counselors, students, or parents who are using the site.  (And if you know anyone at AAMC, tell them raw data would be much appreciated).

    There are seven views here, some of which combine several data sets.  Use the tabs across the top to access the views.

    The first three tabs show similar data, broken out three ways: By undergraduate major, by ethnicity, and by gender for applicants and matriculants. Don’t be afraid to use the filters to get what you want; you won’t break anything, and there is a reset button at the bottom.

    The top chart on these three views shows Total MCAT scores for applicants (blue) and matriculants (purple).  The middle chart shows your choice of GPA, using the filter at the top: Science, Non-Science, and Overall.  And the bottom chart shows sub-scores on the MCAT, again, based on the filter you choose.  Hover over a bar for details. 

    Total MCAT scores range from 472 to 578 with 500 being the mid-score, and each of the four sections–Biological and Biochemical Foundations of Living Systems; Chemical and Physical Foundations of Biological Systems; Psychological, Social, and Biological Foundations of Behavior; and Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills–is scored from a low of 118 to a high of 132, with a midpoint of 125. Read about them here, whence I shamelessly stole this information.

    The fourth tab shows which undergraduate institutions sent applications to US Medical Schools in what quantity, based on student ethnicity.  Note that the data are not complete, but rather a compilation of five different reports, for colleges sending applications from at least 100 White students, 50 Asian students, 15 African-American students, 10 Hispanic students, or five Native American/Alaska Native students.  A college can be on one list but not another: For instance, the University of Oklahoma is #1 for Native students, but not on the list of institutions sending at least 50 Asian students.

    When you hover over the bars, you can see that institution in larger context, like this:

    The fifth tab gets into the nitty-gritty, and show the distribution of applicants and admits by GPA and MCAT ranges (top two charts), as well as the admission rate (bottom), showing the success of being admitted to at least one medical college.

    The sixth and seventh tabs are simple summaries by first-generation status, and gender over time.

    There is an awful lot of data here, and again, if you have any sway with the AAMC, tell them I’d sign my life away to get raw data in one big file.  As always, let me know what you see here.

    Source link

  • Taking Steps Toward Equity on Juneteenth – CUPA-HR

    Taking Steps Toward Equity on Juneteenth – CUPA-HR

    by Julie Burrell | June 18, 2024

    Juneteenth commemorates the end of slavery in the United States and is now recognized as a federal holiday — Juneteenth National Independence Day. Observing Juneteenth’s historical significance is a meaningful step in understanding American history. But for its history to mean something in our present moment, its lessons must be translated into tangible action. CUPA-HR offers the following resources, tools and research data to help confront and change racial inequities in the higher ed workforce.

    Racial Composition and Compensation  

    Lingering historical inequities remain in higher ed’s current-day compensation, hiring and promotion practices. Juneteenth is a reminder that we need urgent solutions to these persistent inequities. Here’s a snapshot of the composition and pay for people of color in the higher ed workforce:

    • Progress in both representation and pay has been sluggish for people of color, according to our data on administrators, faculty, professionals and staff collected in CUPA-HR’s signature surveys. Our interactive graphics track gender and racial composition as well as pay of administrators, faculty, professional and staff roles. (Read the executive summary.)
    • Women of color have consistently been paid inequitably, with Black women paid 76 cents on the dollar in our most recent data.

    CUPA-HR research also digs down into sectors of the higher ed workforce in terms of composition and pay. Recent research reports include:

    • The Higher Education Financial Aid Workforce: Pay, Representation, Pay Equity, and Retention (read now)
    • Representation and Pay Equity in Higher Education Faculty: A Review and Call to Action (read now)
    • Higher Ed Administrators: Trends in Diversity and Pay Equity From 2002 to 2022 (read now)
    • The Higher Ed Admissions Workforce: Pay, Diversity, Equity, and Years in Position (read now)

    Fostering Inclusion

    Long-term solutions to a more representative and equitably compensated workforce include adopting inclusive hiring and retention strategies, analyzing and auditing both compensation and promotion practices, and enacting policies that support your employees’ well-being. In these resources, we offer best practices and data-driven recommendations for a more equitable future.



    Source link

  • Congress Introduces Legislation on Employee Classification of Student-Athletes – CUPA-HR

    Congress Introduces Legislation on Employee Classification of Student-Athletes – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 18, 2024

    On June 13, the House Education and Workforce Committee voted to advance H.R. 8534, the Protecting Student Athletes’ Economic Freedom Act. The bill would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees under federal and state labor laws and regulations due to their participation in intercollegiate athletics.

    The bill was introduced on May 23 by Rep. Bob Good (R-VA) and 10 House Republicans. If enacted, the bill would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees at institutions of higher education, athletic conferences or athletic associations (such as the NCAA). In effect, the legislation would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees under federal labor laws, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), as well as state laws and regulations determining employment classification.

    Throughout the Biden administration’s first term, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued significant guidance and decisions with respect to the classification of student-athletes as employees. In September 2021, the NLRB’s general counsel issued a memorandum asserting the agency’s position that student-athletes are considered employees under the NLRA. The memorandum was followed by an NLRB complaint filed against the University of Southern California, the Pac-12 Conference and the NCAA for allegedly misclassifying USC’s men’s football and men’s and women’s basketball players as student-athletes rather than employees. Additionally, in March 2024, the Dartmouth College men’s basketball team voted in favor of joining the Service Employees International Union, after a regional NLRB director determined that players on the team are employees under the NLRA using the board’s general counsel memorandum.

    The bill passed out of committee by a partisan vote of 23-16, only gaining support from Republicans on the committee. The bill now awaits a full House vote, where Republicans can pass the bill with a simple majority. The fate of the bill is more uncertain in the Senate, as it is unlikely that it will gain enough support from Democrats to bypass the 60-vote filibuster. CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of any updates relating to this bill and employee classification of student-athletes generally.



    Source link

  • As Effective Date for Biden FLSA Overtime Rule Nears, Opposition Mounts – CUPA-HR

    As Effective Date for Biden FLSA Overtime Rule Nears, Opposition Mounts – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 18, 2024

    On July 1, the first phase of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)’s new overtime rule goes into effect. The initial phase of the rule will require employers to pay most white-collar employees a salary of at least $43,888. If employers fail to do so, those employees will be entitled to overtime pay under federal law. As the rule’s effective date approaches, opposition has mounted, with plaintiffs filing three lawsuits challenging the rule, including one filed by the state of Texas requesting that the court delay the July 1 effective date. Additionally, several Republican members of the U.S. House and Senate have introduced a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution aimed at blocking the rule.

    Background

    On April 23, 2024, DOL issued a final rule to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime regulations. The FLSA requires employers to pay employees at least the minimum wage (currently $7.25) for each hour worked and 1.5 times the employee’s regular rate of pay for any hours worked over 40 in one week. However, the FLSA contains various exemptions to these overtime pay requirements, including one for white-collar employees. White-collar employees are considered “exempt” if they satisfy a three-part test: (1) the employee must be paid on a salary basis (that is, paid the same amount each week regardless of hours worked), (2) the employee’s salary must meet a minimum threshold (currently $35,568) established by DOL, and (3) the employee’s primary duties must be consistent with being an executive, administrative or professional employee. The final rule will increase the minimum salary threshold from $35,568 to $43,888 on July 1, 2024, and then to $58,656 on January 1, 2025. Thereafter, the rule requires automatic increases to the threshold every three years based on a set formula.

    Lawsuits

    On May 23, a group of 13 local and national associations and Texas businesses filed the first lawsuit in federal court in Texas challenging DOL’s rule. The suit claims that the salary threshold that goes into effect on January 1, 2025, is so high it will result in more than 4 million individuals being denied exempt status, even though these individuals could be reasonably classified as exempt based on their duties, and in doing so, the rule violates both the statutory language of the FLSA and prior court decisions. The suit also challenges the automatic updates.

    On June 3, two additional lawsuits challenging the overtime final rule were filed by a software company in Texas, as well as the state of Texas itself. In both lawsuits, the plaintiffs make arguments similar to those in the lawsuit filed in May, stating that DOL lacks authority to implement the changes provided in the final rule. The state of Texas also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) that seeks to block the final rule from going into effect on July 1.

    While it may take the courts several months to issue decisions on the validity of the rule, the judge could decide whether to grant the state of Texas’s motion for a TRO before the July 1 effective date. The TRO would block the rule from going into effect until the court decides whether or not the rule is valid. More updates will be provided via CUPA-HR Washington Insider Alert emails as decisions are released.

    Congressional Review Act Resolution

    On June 3, Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN) introduced CRA resolutions in the House and Senate to block the overtime final rule from going into effect. Unlike traditional legislation, CRAs require only a simple majority in both chambers to pass (as compared to the usual 60-vote threshold to bypass a filibuster needed in the Senate).

    Though House Republicans have the majority, it is unclear if and when the CRA will be brought to the floor for a vote, given the minimal concern with the July 1 effective date from the business community. In the Democrat-controlled Senate, the path for a floor vote seems even more uncertain as Senate Democrats do not appear to support the efforts to overturn the final rule. As such, it seems unlikely that Congress will pass the CRA to overturn the final rule this session.

    CUPA-HR continues to monitor for and keep members apprised of any major updates relating to the FLSA overtime regulations.



    Source link

  • Federal Judges Block Title IX Rule in 10 States – CUPA-HR

    Federal Judges Block Title IX Rule in 10 States – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 17, 2024

    Updates:
    On June 17, a federal judge in the Eastern District Court of Kentucky issued a second preliminary injunction against the Title IX rule, blocking the final rule from taking effect on August 1 in Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia.

    On June 24, the Biden administration filed a notice of appeal for the preliminary injunction granted in the Western District Court of Louisiana to block the Title IX final rule from going into effect on August 1, 2024. The appeal will be filed in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The preliminary injunction remains in effect until the 5th Circuit Court issues a decision. CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of any updates on this appeal as well as the status of the second preliminary injunction granted in the Eastern District Court of Kentucky.

    On July 2, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court of Kansas issued a third preliminary injunction to block the Biden administration’s Title IX rule from taking effect on August 1. The preliminary injunction applies to four states: Alaska, Kansas, Utah and Wyoming. The preliminary injunction also applies to schools where members of the Young America’s Foundation, Female Athletes United, and Moms for Liberty attend, even if the state in which the school is located is not challenging the rule or is not included in another preliminary injunction. The Title IX rule is now blocked from being enforced beginning on August 1 in a total of 14 states, as well as over 360 institutions in 24 states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico that are not suing the Biden administration over the Title IX rule.

    On July 11, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives passed a Congressional Review Act resolution to block the Department of Education from implementing and enforcing its Title IX final rule. The vote is largely symbolic as the Democrat-controlled Senate is unlikely to take up the measure and President Biden would veto the resolution if it ended up on his desk.

    On July 11, a federal judge in the Northern District Court of Texas granted a fourth preliminary injunction to block the Title IX final rule from taking effect on August 1 in the state of Texas. The Title IX final rule is now blocked from taking effect in 15 states.

    On July 24, a federal judge from the Eastern District Court of Missouri issued another preliminary injunction to block the Title IX rule from taking effect in six more states. The states included in this decision were Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The Title IX final rule is now blocked from taking effect on August 1 in a total of 21 states.

    On July 31, a federal judge in the Western District Court of Oklahoma granted a preliminary injunction to block the Title IX final rule from taking effect on August 1. Additionally, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a preliminary injunction in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, overturning a lower court’s previous decision to deny the preliminary injunction in those states. There are 26 states in which the Title IX rule is now blocked from taking effect on August 1.

    On June 13, a federal judge in the Western District Court of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction on the Department of Education (ED)’s recent Title IX final rule. The order blocks the final rule from taking effect on August 1 in Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana and Idaho until a final decision has been issued by the judge on a lawsuit challenging the validity of the final rule.

    ED’s Final Rule and Subsequent Lawsuits

    In April, ED released its highly anticipated final rule to amend the Title IX regulations. Notably, the final rule expands protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy or related conditions. Soon after it was published, several lawsuits were filed by states and advocacy groups challenging ED’s decision to expand Title IX protections to include gender identity and sexual orientation. 

    Judge’s Order

    In the order to grant a preliminary injunction, the federal judge asserted that the Title IX rulemaking is “contrary to law” and “exceeds statutory authority,” especially with the expanded protections for transgender students. Specifically, the judge explained that Congress intended to protect biological women from discrimination when enacting Title IX, and that “enacting the changes in the final rule would subvert the original purpose of Title IX.”

    As a result, ED is blocked from enforcing the final rule in the four states listed in the order, and the final rule will not take effect on August 1 in those four states until further orders are issued by the court.* The judge will now consider the lawsuit challenging the final rule and decide to either uphold or strike down the rule. A final decision may take months or a year or more to be released, as any decision is likely to be appealed to a higher court. In the meantime, CUPA-HR encourages HR leaders in the states impacted by this preliminary to work with their institution’s general counsel on best practices for navigating Title IX compliance.

    CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of additional updates on the legal challenges against the Title IX final rule.

    * Over two dozen states have joined lawsuits challenging the Title IX final rule. Though the order in this blog post applies only to Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana and Idaho, decisions for the additional lawsuits could result in similar injunctions for other states.



    Source link

  • HR and the Courts — June 2024 – CUPA-HR

    HR and the Courts — June 2024 – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 12, 2024

    Each month, CUPA-HR General Counsel Ira Shepard provides an overview of several labor and employment law cases and regulatory actions with implications for the higher ed workplace. Here’s the latest from Ira.

    Judge Halts Academic Workers’ Strike at Several University of California Campuses

    The University of California has taken legal action against United Auto Workers Local 4811, which represents some 48,000 academic workers and graduate students across UC’s multiple campuses. The lawsuit requested an injunction to end the rolling strike at six campuses, which the university contended is in violation of the applicable no-strike contractual provisions. The judge granted the university’s request for a temporary restraining order on June 7, 2024. The order will halt the strike until the judge conducts a hearing over whether to grant a permanent injunction enforcing the no-strike provisions of the applicable labor contract (Regents of the University of California v. UAW Local 4811 (Cal Sup Court, No. 30-2024-01403666-CU-MC-CXC, 6/7/24)).

    This case followed the university’s complaint to the California Public Employment Relations Board alleging that the union had violated the applicable no-strike provisions. The board filed a complaint against the union, arguing it failed to give the university “adequate advance notice” and “failed and refused to meet and confer in good faith,” but declined the university’s request to seek a court order halting the strike.

    Following its exhaustion of all remedies at the state board, the university filed its own state court complaint, seeking to end the strike. The complaint accused picketers of blocking entrances to university property, including hospitals, and illegally occupying buildings. The university argued that the breach of contract endangers lifesaving research at hundreds of laboratories across many campuses. The UAW claimed that the no-strike clause is inapplicable because the university violated state law by calling in police to break up pro-Palestinian encampments on several campuses and allegedly changed workplace rules in response to the protests. The proceedings will continue with a full hearing over whether to convert the restraining order into a permanent injunction further barring the strike activity.

    University of Florida Recruit Sues Over Claimed $13.85 Million NIL Deal — NCAA Proposes Settlement of NIL Class Action

    A former football recruit has sued the University of Florida’s football coach and boosters, alleging they recruited him with the promise of $13.85 million in name, image and likeness payments and then reneged. The complaint, filed in federal district court in Florida, alleges fraud, tortious interference and other claims. The plaintiff alleges that, after the NIL offer, he rejected other lucrative offers only to have the Florida offer “decrease drastically” (Rashada v. Hathcock (N.D. Fla., 3:24-cv-00219, complaint 5/21/24)).

    The plaintiff alleges that, as a 19-year-old college-bound athlete, he was persuaded by a network of university officials and donors to flip on his commitment to the University of Miami, but they never came through on the NIL promises. After the deal never materialized, the plaintiff went to the University of Arizona instead and ultimately transferred to the University of Georgia.

    Separately, the NCAA and the Power Five conferences have proposed a nearly $2.8 billion settlement of the class action claim against them relating to their former ban on NIL payments to student-athletes. If the settlement is approved, the NCAA also agrees that it would no longer attempt to regulate NIL payments, which would be solely up to each college and university to determine and administer (In Re College Athlete NIL Litigation (N.D. Cal., No., 4:20-cv-03919)).

    Court of Appeals to Review Whether Discharge for Refusal to Take Anti-Discrimination Training Is Itself Discriminatory

    The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (covering Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin) will decide whether to affirm a federal trial court’s dismissal of a discrimination claim brought by a White employee. The employee claimed he was discharged in violation of federal and state anti-discrimination laws for his refusal to take the employer’s mandatory anti-discrimination training, which he claimed was discriminatory. The plaintiff claimed the training was inherently biased against White employees, after admitting he had no knowledge of the contents of the training (Vavra v. Honeywell International Inc. (Case No. 23-02823, oral arg sched 5/21/24)).

    The trial court concluded that the plaintiff’s internal emails to the company’s president, which accused the company of “race baiting,” were protected communications. The court further concluded that the plaintiff was not terminated for the communications, but rather because of his refusal to take mandatory anti-discrimination training that was not itself discriminatory. The employer’s diversity, equity and inclusion and law departments had properly vetted the training and concluded it was intended to foster an inclusive work environment.

    U.S. Supreme Court Rejects White Professor’s Claims of Race and Sex Discrimination Filed Against HBCU

    The Supreme Court turned down a request for certiorari and declined to hear a White law school professor’s claim that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had erroneously dismissed her claim of race and sex discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. The law professor had claimed that the appeals court erroneously dismissed her claims that she and other female professors were treated poorly in violation of Title VII and the Equal Pay Act and that she was forced to resign from Texas Southern University, a historically Black institution. The court denied the professor’s two petitions for it to hear her case without issuing an opinion (Sacks v. Texas Southern University (Case Nos. 23-891 & 23-1031, Cert denied 5/13/24)).

    The plaintiff asked the Supreme Court to adopt a “totality of circumstances” standard in determining whether her claims of years of “alleged” harassment and continuing violations justified her conclusion that she felt compelled to resign. The plaintiff also complained that the lower court had denied her the right to receive female wage data while requiring her to identify male comparators to make her Equal Pay Act claims. The Supreme Court denied the professor’s request to be heard in the absence of a response from the university, which had waived its right to respond to the professor’s petitions.

    In Employment Law Matter, U.S. Supreme Court Rules Federal Courts Can No Longer Dismiss Federal Lawsuits Subject to Mandatory Arbitration

    The U.S. Supreme Court resolved a split among federal appellate courts on whether, under the Federal Arbitration Act, federal trial courts can dismiss rather than stay a lawsuit that is covered by the terms of a mandatory arbitration agreement pending the outcome of arbitration. The 1st, 5th, 8th and 9th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have previously allowed dismissal while the 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 7th, 10th and 11th have ruled that the case must be stayed pending the outcome of the arbitration.

    The case involved a group of drivers who claimed they were misclassified as independent contractors rather than employees entitled to minimum wage, overtime and paid sick leave under federal and state laws. Both sides agreed that the dispute was subject to a mandatory arbitration agreement. The 9th Circuit ruled the case should be dismissed. The Supreme Court reversed, concluding that the specific provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act require the courts to stay the action while it is referred to arbitration, pending the outcome of the arbitration (Smith v. Spizzirri (US No, 22-1218, 5/16/24)).

    Texas Sues EEOC Over Guidance Protecting LGBTQIA+ Employees From Sex Harassment Relating to Their Choice of Pronouns and Bathrooms Consistent With Gender Identity

    The Texas attorney general has filed suit in federal court seeking to block enforcement of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s recent guidance aimed at shielding LGBTQIA+ employees who seek to use pronouns and bathrooms consistent with their gender identity. The Texas suit alleges that the most recent EEOC guidance goes beyond the statutory limits of Title VII just as the prior EEOC workplace guidance, which was vacated in Texas federal court, did (The State of Texas v. EEOC (N/D. Tex., 2:21-CV-194-Z, Complaint, filed 5/21/24)).

    Separately, a coalition of 18 Republican attorneys general have also filed suit, seeking to block this EEOC guidance and alleging the same legal overreach by the EEOC.



    Source link

  • Top Hat Announces the 2024 Shannen’s Dream Scholarship Recipients

    Top Hat Announces the 2024 Shannen’s Dream Scholarship Recipients

    TORONTO – June 7, 2024 – Top Hat, the leader in student engagement solutions for higher education, is proud to announce that four exceptional First Nations students have been awarded this year’s Shannen’s Dream Scholarship. Launched in 2022 by the First Nations Child & Family Caring Society with the support of Top Hat and the Collure Family of Richmond Hill, ON, each recipient will receive $10,000 to support their pursuit of a post-secondary education. 

    “We are truly inspired by this year’s Shannen’s Dream Scholarship recipients, both in terms of their academic achievements and as volunteers and agents of change within their communities,” said Maggie Leen, CEO of Top Hat. “As future leaders, doctors, scientists, and educators, they exemplify what’s possible when dedicated individuals have access to the benefits of higher education.”

    The Scholarship is named in honor of Shannen Koostachin, a courageous young leader from Attawapiskat First Nation who inspired a national movement to establish safe and comfortable schools for First Nations students. What makes the Shannen’s Dream Scholarship particularly special is the ‘pay-it-forward’ component, which requires recipients to make a measurable contribution to the Shannen’s Dream campaign or related First Nations initiative. 

    “Our scholarship recipients are honoring Shannen’s legacy through their leadership, their community contributions and their academic achievements,” said Cindy Blackstock, Executive Director of the Caring Society. “We are grateful to Top Hat and the Collure Family for their support and for sharing our conviction that a more equitable and just society rests on ensuring First Nations students are able to pursue their dreams of a high quality education.”

    Meet the 2024 Shannen’s Dream Scholarship Recipients

    Aleria McKay was raised on Six Nations of the Grand River and is completing her Bachelor of Education at York’s Waaban Indigenous Teacher Education Program. A poet, playwright and educator, this fall she will start her Masters of Fine Arts in Creative Writing at the University of British Columbia. 

    Jaimey Jacobs is Ojibwe and a band member of the Walpole Island First Nation. A first year medical student at the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry at Western University, Jaimey is a passionate advocate for Indigenous healthcare and supporting Indigenous youth in navigating educational opportunities within the healthcare profession. 

    Rainbird Daniels is Plains Cree, Yankton Sioux, and Dakota from the Sturgeon Lake First Nation. She is pursuing a degree in Psychology at York University in Toronto where she also serves as the President of the Indigenous Student Association. As an Indigenous Languages Specialist at the Centre for Indigenous Knowledge and Languages, she is deeply committed to promoting cultural awareness and advancing human rights.

    Taylor Nicholls is from the Wahnapitae First Nation and is pursuing a Master’s of Science in Biology at Laurentian University. Her thesis involves assessing various environmental contaminants in fish the Wahnapitae First Nation relies on as a traditional food source. Taylor is an ardent environmentalist whose research involves weaving Western science, citizen science, and traditional ecological knowledge.

    About Shannen’s Dream Scholarship

    The Shannen’s Dream Scholarship was established to assist First Nations youth with the financial burdens of post-secondary education. The scholarship honors Shannen Koostachin, whose advocacy for safe and comfortable schools for First Nations students ignited a nationwide movement. This scholarship aims to continue her legacy by empowering First Nations students to achieve their educational aspirations. To learn more, please visit  www.fncaringsociety.com.

    About Top Hat

    As the leader in student engagement solutions for higher education, Top Hat enables educators to employ evidence-based teaching practices through interactive content, tools, and activities in in-person, online and hybrid classroom environments. Thousands of faculty at 750 leading North American colleges and universities use Top Hat to create meaningful, engaging and accessible learning experiences for students before, during, and after class. To learn more, please visit tophat.com.

    Source link

  • How to IPEDS, Part II

    How to IPEDS, Part II

    This will be the second part of a series of blogposts about how to use IPEDS, The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System of the federal government. If you’re just starting, I highly recommend you go to the first post to bring yourself up to speed on the basics.  If you don’t, some of this might not make sense.

    In that post, I covered several of the ways you can extract simple tables of data for a single year or a single institution; or summary data, including fairly basic and interactive charts when you’re looking for something simple.  In this one, I’ll go over how to extract custom data over multiple years, and then walk you through the frustrating process of making sense of the output.  Warning: I get a bit cranky about this, because the data formats are largely unchanged since I started doing this perhaps 20 years ago, and they create far more work for the end user than they should.

    The last post covered the options in italics.  This one will cover the options in bold.

    Data Explorer
    Publications and Products
    Data Trends
    Look Up an Institution
    Statistical Tables
    Data Feedback Report
    Summary Tables


    Custom Data Files
    Compare Institutions
    Complete Data Files
    Access Database

    Custom Data files is a fairly easy way to get the data you want for a single year.  In this example, I’ve used EZ Group to select all institutions (again, larger selections are better because it’s easy to remove but harder to add), and clicked “Institutions” and then the “Select All” button.  It looks like this. 

    Click the “Continue” tab, and choose “csv” as your download option.

    Click on the file that you just downloaded to open it (it should open with Excel), and you’ll see something like this (not all columns are displayed due to space constraints.)

    If you want to do this for multiple years, you can go back, change the year, and repeat the download and then stack the files.  The real advantage of this approach is that the data in the columns come in as labels: That is, the size categories are listed as “Under 1,000” or “5,000-9,999” for instance.  That means, especially with large files, you don’t have to translate codes, where “Under 1,000” is listed as 1, and “1,000 to 5,000” is listed as 2, etc.  This keeps you from doing multiple LOOKUP functions in Excel that are a part of other formats.

    If you are going to do a lot of work in IPEDS, I highly recommend you use this method to create one giant file of institutional characteristics to import into an Access Database, and use it to merge that with data from statistical downloads (like endowments, admissions, financial aid, etc.)  There are a couple of reasons for this: It’s too easy to overlook or skip a variable you want to include in your subsequent downloads, but more important, IPEDS only allows 250 variables in a single file, so this can save you 70 or 100 or 150 spots in the future.

    You’ll notice that there are also options to download this data in STATA, SPSS, or SAS, which are statistical programs.  Those require downloading a csv file, a script for the software, and then editing the script to point to your file, running it and saving the output.  With the Custom Data Files option, that’s a bit superfluous.

    Despite the confusion and difficult work arounds that are native to the Compare Institutions option, it’s the one I use most often.  Warning: This is not for people who do not have Sitzfleisch. Even the best data cleaning tools are stymied by some of the quirks in IPEDS.
    So let’s go back to our institutional selections, and select all in the IPEDS universe.  If you want to start with things like Carnegie Classifications because you ignored my earlier advice, we can do that, and then we’ll look at Fall Enrollment over time.  Let’s start with the former.  I’d recommend selecting it for one year, unless you want to look at how those classifications have changed over time.  We do that like this.

    Then (and this is where it gets tricky), we’ll start specifying enrollment variables.  Let’s say we want to look at how enrollment has changed over a span of time, so we’ll use Fall, 2022 and Fall, 2012.  You have a lot of options, but only these options (IPEDS really should allow you to query the database in the ways you want, but that’s another story.)

    Let’s do the first option: By Gender, Status, and level.  We’ll have the chance to look at men and women (IPEDS has reported gender as binary as its policy, not mine), full- or part-time, status, and graduate or undergraduate level.

    Here’s how that selection is done.

     
    When you approve that, this is what you see.  Note that this selection creates 17 variables in your data output: One for the Carnegie Classification, and 16 for the enrollment data.  If you added another year, you’d add eight more, and so on.  If you got more granular on the enrollment data, it would increase those counts as well.

    Approve the selections (these are the ones I use, but you can change them.  I highly recommend including UnitID unless you’re doing a short, quick analysis).  

    You will get a ZIP file, with the raw data and the value labels.  In this case, the only values that need to be translated into labels are the Carnegie Classifications.  That translator table looks like this.  If you are proficient in Excel, it’s not hard to use a VLOOKUP or XLOOKUP function to translate those values into labels, but it’s still, IMHO, a quirk leftover from days when it made sense to keep file size as small as possible.

    The actual data file looks like this, and it’s probably the thing that makes a lot of people decide to never do IPEDS again.  The first column contains the ID number, the second contains the name, the third contains the numeric value of the Carnegie classification, and the fourth?  Well, the fourth variable is a tricky one, as it’s actually four variables rolled into one: Year, level (in this case undergraduate), gender, and status (in this case, full-time.) 

    For this to be most useful, the data should look like this, with one row for every discrete combination of characteristics:

    And that’s the hard part:  I use a Tableau Data Restructuring Tool, Excel tools like Flash Fill (if you don’t know it, you have to check it out), Excel Add-ins, Kutools for Excel, EasyMorph and Able Bits.  I’ve used Tableau Prep, but frankly find it confusing and often frustrating. 

    Getting your data into this format not only makes it easier to visualize in Tableau, but it also helps you create better pivot tables for the spreadsheet lovers in your office.

    There are two other options in IPEDS, the Access Database and Complete Files.

    Complete Files is easy, because you can download with one click the complete survey (admissions, financial aid, degrees awarded, etc.)  But again, you get those pesky codes you need to translate, and no translator files or even the ability to translate variable names.  It’s a major pain.  If you’re going to go this route, I’d recommend the SPSS, STATA, or SAS options, where the script will translate and output the file for you.  Another (IMHO) unnecessary step.  IPEDS could make this much easier.

    And, to top it off, if you download the enrollment file, for instance, the values are not discreet.  You’ll have one column for total, which is the sum of men and women separately.  That same total will roll up full- and part-time.  It will roll up grads and undergrads.  You have to be very careful to break them apart and not double count everything.

    Finally, I’ve tried and failed several times to make sense of the full Access Data Base option. It’s huge, it’s clunky, it’s in code, and it duplicates values: In short, it’s the worst of all available options, in a  harder-to-use format.  Enter at your own risk.

    I hope these two posts have been helpful to you as you think about navigating IPEDS.  And I hope someone at IPEDS reads this and realizes how much modernization could be brought to these important data.

    Source link