Tag: Career

  • Berkeley Suspends Lecturer for Pro-Palestinian Comments

    Berkeley Suspends Lecturer for Pro-Palestinian Comments

    lucentius/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    The University of California, Berkeley, suspended lecturer Peyrin Kao without pay for the spring semester because he made pro-Palestinian political comments during class. 

    Kao, a lecturer in the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department, participated in a 38-day hunger strike this fall to protest the use of technology in what he called Israel’s genocide in Gaza. He allegedly told students during class that he was undergoing a “starvation diet” and directed them to his website to learn more about why he was striking. 

    Also, last spring, Kao allegedly made “off-topic” remarks including about “the conflict in Israel and Gaza, an expression of solidarity with a protest happening outside the classroom, Google’s business dealings with Israel, UC’s investment in companies that themselves invest in companies that ‘supply bombs,’ and calls for solidarity with those in Gaza and to ‘Free Palestine,’” executive vice chancellor and provost Benjamin Hermalin wrote in his letter recommending that Kao be suspended. 

    Hermalin ultimately determined that Kao violated a Board of Regents policy requiring that instructors only discuss content relevant to the course in session during class time. With his comments and actions, Kao “misused the classroom for the purpose of political advocacy,” Hermalin wrote. Kao will be suspended for six months, starting Jan. 1. 

    “Mr. Kao drew attention to his hunger strike in class and informed the students how they could find out why he was engaging in it. In addition, the visible physical toll it presumably was taking and the adverse consequences it may have had on the quality of his instruction all represent a form of advocacy, albeit nonverbal,” Hermalin wrote. “In that sense, his actions are no different from those of an instructor who repeatedly wore a t-shirt when teaching that had on it a very visible political symbol or a picture of a political candidate.”

    Kao denied any wrongdoing and plans to appeal the decision. 

    “The timing of my punishment raises serious questions about whether it was a politically motivated decision by the university to appease the Trump administration. My suspension is the latest in a long line of faculty and students disciplined for taking a stance against occupation and genocide in Palestine,” Kao said in a statement distributed by the San Francisco Bay Area Council on American-Islamic Relations, which also denounced Kao’s suspension. “The university is trying to make an example out of me and suppress any conversation about Palestine, because those conversations would expose the university’s investment in genocide. I will not be deterred by this unconstitutional attack on free speech, and I intend to continue exercising my First Amendment right to advocate for a free Palestine.” 

    Berkeley officials declined to answer Inside Higher Ed’s questions about Kao’s suspension.

    “The university does not comment on confidential personnel matters,” a spokesperson wrote in an email. “Speaking generally regarding free speech policy, the university will always take a viewpoint-neutral approach when it comes to supporting freedom of expression and actions that align with policy.”

    Source link

  • Over 1 Million Digital Badges on Offer in the U.S.

    Over 1 Million Digital Badges on Offer in the U.S.

    The number of unique credentials available in the U.S. has hit a whopping 1.8 million, with digital badges making up more than a million of those offerings, according to the latest report from Credential Engine.

    The report, released Tuesday, is the fifth in a series tracking the ever-growing variety of credentials and providers cropping up across the country. Much has changed since the last “Counting Credentials” report came out in 2022. Credential Engine, a nonprofit dedicated to charting the credentialing landscape, improved its data collection and analysis strategies to remove duplicate programs from data samples and include more badge programs, allowing for more accurate counts and estimates, the new report noted.

    Researchers found that 134,491 credential providers—including colleges and universities, online course providers, nonacademic organizations, industry associations, and state governments—are producing 1,850,034 credentials, up from the 1,076,358 they counted in 2022. The report also found that education institutions, federal and state governments, and employers spend $2.34 trillion annually on these programs.

    Credential Engine identified 1,022,028 badges and 486,352 certificates among the total. Degrees, by comparison, made up a smaller fraction of the credentials tallied this year: 264,099 programs. The number of secondary school diplomas and occupational licenses followed behind at 52,948 and 14,331, respectively. Certifications, which require an exam and tend to expire, reached 6,892. And the organization found 3,384 microcredentials, defined by the report as any program offered by a massive open online course provider that embraces the label.

    Scott Cheney, CEO of Credential Engine, said the standout finding to him is “there’s a lot of digital badging being done,” a trend he finds “really exciting.” He believes digital badges, which recognize specific skills and achievements for display online, allow workers to better showcase their learning at a more granular level. For example, badges, whether offered by academic or nonacademic providers, can recognize skill sets ranging from emotional intelligence to mastery of a coding language, or even completion of a class or work project.

    Badges are “being used to recognize smaller and smaller learning activity and skill attainment,” Cheney said. “We’re really seeing a moment when we’re able to actually count all learning,” which helps job applicants “tell their story.”

    He said the digital format not only makes it easier for learners to keep track of everything they’ve achieved but also simplifies sharing that information with employers.

    A companion report, released with the credential count, suggests innovations like digital wallets and learning and employment records, which can house collections of digital credentials, are making badges more shareable and verifiable for employers.

    “The technology is there,” Cheney said.

    He also believes the ascent of skills-based hiring is driving the trend. More than half of states have adopted policies to encourage hiring according to skills, not degrees, and a slew of employers have embraced the approach. He’d like to see more employers with these goals use digital credentials to assess what candidates bring to the table.

    Because of these recent developments, “all of a sudden, we need ways to actually unpack the skills that you have in a traditional degree or certificate or certification” and to offer ways to learn and prove mastery of “a single skill,” he said.

    Though the report doesn’t delve into it, he noted that traditional higher education institutions are increasingly interested in offering nondegree credentials, which he believes is “healthy for them and their relationship with their students” as demand for such programs ramps up.

    But Cheney also understands colleges’ trepidation about entering a nondegree credential landscape that’s crowded, “very chaotic” and “difficult to navigate.” He acknowledged that some academics have healthy concerns about the quality of proliferating nondegree credentials as nonacademic credential providers grow their offerings at fast clip. The trend “does cry out for … a greater need to have reliable outcome data and impact data,” he said. Members of the committee engaged in the negotiated rule-making process for Workforce Pell, a new federal financial aid option for short-term job training programs, are wrestling with such questions about how to ensure credentials’ quality this week.

    Nondegree credentials aren’t “going to be right for every institution, and that’s OK, too,” Cheney said. “We need some that are still going to be very traditional … because the economy needs that as well.” At the same time, higher ed institutions “need to recognize where the marketplace is, where the zeitgeist is in the country and what employers need and what students are calling out for.”

    Source link

  • Clemson President Announces Sudden Retirement

    Clemson President Announces Sudden Retirement

    sbrogan/E+/Getty Images

    Clemson University president Jim Clements is retiring at the end of the month, bringing an abrupt end to his 12-year tenure at the helm of the public institution in South Carolina.

    He cited “health and family” as his reasons for stepping down just over a year after he signed a five-year contract extension.

    “Clemson has been my home and passion, yet my greatest love is for my wife, Beth, and our children and grandchildren. Life moves quickly, and I don’t want to miss what truly matters—the major milestones and the quiet, everyday joys,” Clements wrote in a Tuesday message announcing his retirement. “Those are the moments I want to experience and hold close.”

    Clements joined Clemson in 2013 after nearly five years as president of West Virginia University.

    He cited a record number of applications and Clemson’s attainment of Research-1 status under the Carnegie classification system, achieved in 2013, among his accomplishments. Board of Trustees chair Kim Wilkerson also said in her own message that under Clements’s leadership, “Clemson achieved record enrollment and graduation rates, expanded research initiatives and secured historic philanthropic support.”

    More recently, however, Clements courted controversy after the university fired three employees for allegedly making inappropriate remarks about the death of Charlie Kirk. The university appeared to claim in a social media post related to the firings that First Amendment rights do not “extend to speech that incites harm or undermines the dignity of others.”

    Clemson also shut down faculty and staff affinity groups intended to advise leaders on how to support Black, Latino, LGBTQ+ students, veterans and others in September. At the time, Clemson officials claimed, “The commissions have successfully fulfilled their important charge.”

    Now Clemson is expected to name an interim president at an emergency board meeting Wednesday. Provost Bob Jones, who was planning to retire, is expected to be named to the interim role and to “serve until a successor is named,” according to Wilkerson’s statement.

    Source link

  • Facing Criticism, Weber State Says It Will Be “More Nuanced”

    Facing Criticism, Weber State Says It Will Be “More Nuanced”

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | masa44/iStock/Getty Images | rawpixel

    After multiple censorship controversies over the past two months, Weber State University has announced a “revised approach” to how it enforces a sweeping anti–diversity, equity and inclusion law that the Utah Legislature passed in 2024. But it remains unclear exactly how it will change its actions.

    “With help from the Utah Commissioner of Higher Education, Weber State is currently reviewing our existing guidance, and where appropriate, will revise that guidance to be more nuanced in its understanding of where and how learning happens on our campuses,” interim president Leslie Durham wrote in a message to campus Friday. The Salt Lake Tribune reported earlier on the announcement.

    The goal, Durham wrote, “is to uphold the letter and spirit of the law, but also to ensure we remain fiercely committed to free speech, academic freedom, and fostering an environment where everyone at WSU feels welcome to express their thoughts, engage different viewpoints, and learn from one another.” She said that “we are learning from early and well-intentioned efforts at working within this new framework.”

    The university didn’t provide an interview or answer multiple written questions Tuesday. Richard Price, a political science professor, told Inside Higher Ed in an email, “As far as I know, faculty played no role in the creation of the existing approach and I doubt faculty will play a role in this process.”

    The Weber State controversies illustrate how universities have differed in implementing the anti-DEI laws that many red states have passed, and in navigating the Trump administration’s various anti-DEI orders and guidance that impact the whole nation. Shortly after Trump retook the White House, the American Association of University Professors issued a statement saying that “under no circumstances should an institution go further than the law demands.” Since then, state and federal government attacks on diversity programs and restrictions on speech have continued and universities have struggled with how to respond.

    Kristen Shahverdian, director of PEN America’s campus free speech program, has decried what she called “Weber State’s overreach.” But she told Inside Higher Ed Tuesday, “There’s a lot of confusion in how to interpret these bills that are vague and, in some cases, sloppily written.”

    Weber State made national headlines in October for censoring a conference ironically titled, Redacted: Navigating the Complexities of Censorship. A few days before the conference was to start, an official at the public institution ordered a student presenter to remove all references to DEI from their slides.

    Organizers ended up canceling the event after faculty pulled out in protest. The uncertified employee union held a teach-in instead, but it was also censored.

    That wasn’t the end of Weber State’s speech restrictions. Late last month, Apache writer Darcie Little Badger announced on Bluesky she was withdrawing as keynote speaker at the university’s annual Native Symposium because the university sent her a list of 10 prohibited words and concepts, including “bias,” “oppression” and “racial privilege.”

    “I will not humor this censorship,” Little Badger wrote. “It does a disservice to the stories I’m discussing & the audience, who deserve unfettered access to information & conversation.”

    ‘Prohibited Discriminatory Practices’

    Little Badger said the move seemed “to be the university‘s extreme attempt to comply with HB 261,” the same 2024 anti-DEI law the institution cited to censor the censorship conference. House Bill 261 bans Utah’s public colleges and universities from engaging in “prohibited discriminatory practices,” which lawmakers defined in a long list.

    That list includes affirmative action, consideration of “personal identity characteristics” in state financial aid decisions, anything “referred to or named” DEI and programs asserting that “meritocracy is inherently racist or sexist” or that an individual, by virtue of their “personal identity characteristics, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other individuals with the same personal identity characteristics.”

    The catalog of what constitutes “prohibited discriminatory practices” echoes the laws banning “divisive concepts” passed by other red states, which appear to borrow language from an anti-DEI executive order Trump signed in his first term.

    HB 261 explicitly says it doesn’t restrict academic research or “academic course teaching in the classroom.” The canceled censorship conference was sponsored by the university’s Student Access and Success division, and the Native Symposium was advertised on the university’s Student Success Center website, so neither might have been deemed “academic.”

    Shahverdian, of PEN America, stressed the difficulty in interpreting such laws.

    “How would a guest speaker be able to know if they’re engaging in any of these prohibited concepts?” she said, adding that it puts them in an “impossible position.”

    But Shahverdian said it’s good that Weber State is, as she put it, “acknowledging that they have not been implementing the law correctly.” In a country where fear is driving university officials to overcomply and leading to canceled speaking engagements, she noted that Little Badger’s refusal to go along appears to have elicited change.

    “In this moment, where we’re seeing so much censorship, it is a nugget of hope,” Shahverdian said.

    Source link

  • Martin University to “Pause” Operations

    Martin University to “Pause” Operations

    Martin University plans to wind down operations at the end of the current semester.

    College officials are calling the move a “pause,” stopping short of calling it a closure. They attribute the pause to financial challenges, declining enrollment and the lack of an endowment.

    “The Board has announced a pause in operations at the end of the semester. No final decision has been made regarding permanent closure. Discussions continue about how to carry forward Martin’s mission,” Martin spokesperson Keona Williams wrote to Inside Higher Ed by email.

    While the official language indicates a pause, it appears unlikely Martin will resume operations given its financial challenges and historical precedent, which shows that institutions are rarely resurrected after ceasing operations. Some, such as Knoxville College, have bucked that trend; the historically Black Tennessee college suspended operations in 2015, reopened in 2018 and is working to regain accreditation.

    Given Martin’s financial woes, Board of Trustees chairman Joseph Perkins noted in a news release that the private university needed “more community support,” especially for “first-generation college students who are fighting courageously to make a better life for their families.” Martin is seeking donations to continue operations through December. The college’s president Sean L. Huddleston stepped down late last month.

    Should Martin close, Indiana will lose its only predominantly Black institution.

    The decision to pause operations comes as Martin has teetered on the brink of closure for years and received warnings in its last three publicly available audits warning that it could go out of business due to significant financial challenges in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic.

    “The University has seen enrollment declines during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the enrollment has stabilized, it has not returned to the pre-pandemic levels the University once saw. The University has incurred additional liabilities during the year due to the results of additional borrowings deemed necessary by management and the Board of Trustees for operations, including the use of restricted funding for operational needs,” auditors wrote.

    Its latest available audit also noted that Martin “experienced a significant cyber-attack that resulted in extensive corruption of the University’s records that required significant resources for operations and recreation of the University’s records,” which “has taken a significant amount of time and effort due to significant turnover and instability in the finance and operation teams.”

    As noted by auditors, enrollment has also plunged in recent years.

    Martin had nearly 1,000 students in fall 2010, but by fall 2023, its head count was at just 223 students, according to federal enrollment data.

    Martin was founded in Indianapolis in 1977 to “serve low-income, minority, and adult learners,” and the majority of its students are Black, female and over 25, according to its website. The university was named in honor of civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. and St. Martin de Porres, a Peruvian saint who worked to achieve racial harmony in the 16th and 17th centuries.

    Source link

  • Okla. Instructor Put On Leave for “Viewpoint Discrimination”

    Okla. Instructor Put On Leave for “Viewpoint Discrimination”

    The University of Oklahoma put a lecturer on administrative leave last week for allegedly exercising “viewpoint discrimination” five days after a different instructor was placed on leave for alleged religious discrimination.

    Kelli Alvarez, an assistant teaching professor focused on race and ethnicity in literature and film, allegedly encouraged students to miss her English composition class to attend a protest in support of Mel Curth, a graduate teaching assistant in the psychology department who was removed from teaching after a student filed a religious discrimination complaint against her. Alvarez said she would excuse the absences of students who attended the protest. But according to university officials, she did not extend the same offer to students who intended to miss class that day to “express a counter-viewpoint.”

    “Immediately upon learning of the situation, the Director of First-Year Composition told students in class today and by email that the lecturer’s actions were inappropriate and wrong, and that the university classroom exists to teach students how to think, not what to think. The Director further stated that any student, regardless of viewpoint, would be excused if absent from class today to attend the protest without penalty, and that the lecturer had been replaced, effective immediately, for the remainder of the semester,” officials wrote in a statement Friday. “Classroom instructors have a special obligation to ensure that the classroom is never used to grant preferential treatment based on personal political beliefs, nor to pressure students to adopt particular political or ideological views.”

    Spokespeople for the University of Oklahoma did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment. An X post by the University of Oklahoma chapter of Turning Point USA, a conservative student group founded by the late Charlie Kirk, said that the chapter president, a student in Alvarez’s class, had asked to miss class in order to counterprotest.

    “Kalib Magana, student in professor Alavarez’s [sic] class and TPUSA OU president, asking to counter-protest was denied the same option unless a large, documented group could be organized,” the chapter wrote. “Kalib filed a report with The University of Oklahoma’s Equity Office for ‘discrimination of a viewpoint’ and freedom of speech violations Friday morning.”

    Hundreds of students, faculty, staff and community members rallied Friday in support of Curth, who is on leave after giving a junior psychology student, Samantha Fulnecky, a zero on a reaction essay assignment. In her explanation about the grade, Curth said that Fulnecky did not answer the assignment’s questions, that her essay contradicted itself and that it “heavily uses personal ideology over empirical evidence in a scientific class, and is at times offensive.” A second teaching assistant for the course concurred with Curth’s grade.

    Fulnecky fought back, appealing to the president of the university and the governor of Oklahoma, arguing that she was unfairly given a failing grade because her essay cited the Bible and discussed her religious beliefs. Though university officials said the grading dispute was settled last week, Curth was put on leave pending investigation after Fulnecky filed a formal religious discrimination complaint.

    The university’s TPUSA chapter helped whip the story into a social media storm. The news caught fire, offering something for everyone to comment on. Supplied with the full essay, assignment instructions and rubric, academics online debated how they would have scored Fulnecky’s essay. Others blasted her writing skills. Conservatives, including Fulnecky’s mother, used the story to fuel a narrative of persecution against Christian students by “woke” academics. “Individuals who identify as trans should be automatically disqualified from holding any position as teacher or professor,” one X user commented, which Samantha Fulnecky’s mother, lawyer and conservative radio commentator Kristi Fulnecky, reposted.

    Liberal commenters pointed to the incident as another example of genderqueer faculty being unfairly maligned and doxed. “Mel Curth should be reinstated,” a user wrote on Bluesky. “I’m sorry, but religious freedom does not mean you as a student get to write out a genocidal screed wishing for your teachers death & eternal torture.”

    During a meeting Thursday, the University of Oklahoma Graduate Student Senate passed a resolution calling for greater transparency and protection for graduate teaching assistants on leave and under investigation. The resolution also said that Curth was justified in giving Fulnecky a zero on the assignment and called on the university to publicly apologize to the professor for failing to protect her from the bullying and harassment the case has incited.

    The Oklahoma University chapter of the American Association of University Professors made a similar call to administrators, KOKH reported. “Disturbingly, OU has not made a public statement stating that it vigorously defends instructors, including transgender instructors, from harassment, discrimination, and even reported death threats,” the chapter told KOKH in a statement.

    Source link

  • Survey Warns of Student Debt “Default Cliff”

    Survey Warns of Student Debt “Default Cliff”

    A new survey of federal student loan borrowers by the Institute for College Access and Success, a nonprofit focused on college affordability, found that about a fifth of borrowers are currently in either delinquency or default.

    “These findings bring even greater urgency to ongoing concerns about a looming ‘default cliff,’ where an unprecedented number of borrowers struggle so much to repay their loans that they default on their payments in droves,” Michele Zampini, TICAS’s associate vice president for federal policy and advocacy, wrote in a blog post.

    The Department of Education itself acknowledged a potential default cliff in an August data release, Zampini noted, writing that, although no new borrowers had defaulted since payments were paused in March 2020, many delinquent borrowers were in danger of defaulting after that pause ended.

    Zampini also wrote that student loan default “comes with severe and punitive consequences.”

    Just over half of respondents (52 percent) said their debt has negatively affected their ability to save for retirement, and 45 percent said the same about their ability to find and afford housing. Slightly fewer participants said that their student loan debt was “worth it”—41 percent—than said it wasn’t, at 48 percent. Advanced degree holders were more likely to consider their debt “worth it” than those with an associate or bachelor’s degree, as were male borrowers compared to female borrowers.

    Source link

  • ED Designates 23% of Colleges “Lower Earnings”

    ED Designates 23% of Colleges “Lower Earnings”

    First-time undergraduates applying for federal student aid will now receive a warning if they indicate interest in an institution where graduates don’t earn more than an adult with a high school diploma.

    The new earnings indicator on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid is aimed at ensuring students have more information about their postsecondary options, Education Department officials said in a news release Monday. Consumer protection advocates generally praised the department’s move, while institutional groups criticized it.

    About 23 percent of the nearly 5,900 institutions in the department’s database will be labeled as “lower earnings.” Those colleges enroll fewer than 3 percent of undergraduates and receive about $2 billion in federal student aid annually. That’s a fraction of the more than $100 billion in federal aid that’s doled out each year. The department pulled from publicly available data to generate the label, and program-level data is available online on the College Scorecard.

    This warning comes after years of debates over how to give students more information about the outcomes at institutions and specific programs. An Obama-era effort was scuttled after higher ed groups and institutions pushed back. However, a new rule drafted by the Biden administration will eventually provide more program-level data on earnings, which consumer protection advocates say will help to steer students away from those that don’t pay off.

    “This new indicator will help students and families better understand how their choices could translate into real-world outcomes, and it will be provided at a crucial moment in the college decision-making process,” Education Under Secretary Nicholas Kent wrote in a blog post. “This indicator is designed to inform—not limit—student choices. It’s one additional resource students can use—alongside factors like cost, mission, location, and personal interests—to identify the path that best aligns with their goals.”

    Most of the 1,365 institutions flagged for lower earnings are for-profits and beauty schools. A few on the list are community colleges and historically Black colleges and universities.

    The association that represents cosmetology schools didn’t respond to a request for comment Monday. However, the group has fought efforts to tie financial aid eligibility to students’ earnings, arguing in part that the underlying data is inaccurate.

    The left-leaning think tank New America released a report critical of the industry earlier this year, calling it “predatory.” Meanwhile, Michelle Dimino, director of the education program at Third Way, a left-of-center think tank, expects the lower-earnings list to add to the scrutiny on beauty schools.

    “Well over half [on the list] were [beauty schools and cosmetology institutes],” Dimino said. “That continues to really raise the temperature around that industry and some of the questions about return on investment and supply and demand in that space, how they might think about licensing and other requirements to be able to appropriately calibrate their costs with their outputs.”

    Institutional representatives said Monday afternoon that while they support greater transparency, they are concerned about the department’s methods to create the designation, such as which students are included in the calculations and how the earnings metric doesn’t take into account regional variations and differences in earnings for specific fields.

    “This is a blunt tool for a nuanced process that has enormous potential for creating misleading outcomes,” said Jon Fansmith, senior vice president for government relations and national engagement at the American Council on Education. “Much more care, time and attention should have gone into it, and it would be all the better for it if ED had done that. Regardless of their motivations, there are good reasons to question the process and how useful it will actually be. “

    Fansmith added that if the department is flagging low performers, it should also highlight high performers.

    In the release, Kent’s blog post and other online information about the earnings flag, the department made clear that it’s not taking a “position on the underlying value of educational services provided by any institution of higher education.”

    Jordan Wicker, senior vice president of legislative and regulatory affairs at Career Education Colleges and Universities, which represents the for-profit sector, said in a statement that he appreciates that the earnings indicator applies to all institutions.

    “CECU believes disclosures like this can be improved by including non-completer earnings data, which the College Scorecard currently lacks,” he said. “Similarly, CECU is consistent in its critique of the dataset for the comparison group age 25-34, as well as accounting for regional variations in earnings. We share the Department’s commitment to transparency and will work with them to ensure that the most accurate disclosures are provided to help students select the school that best fits their needs and wishes.”

    First-year undergraduates will see the label on their FAFSA Submission Summary. From there, they can click to receive more detailed earnings information on the institutions they selected. Students can then opt to remove a flagged institution.

    Even students who have already submitted their FAFSA can see whether any of their chosen schools have been flagged. In his blog post, Kent said the notices have “no impact on FAFSA completion, submission, or eligibility for aid.”

    Starting next July, all college programs will have to show their graduates make more than the average adult with only a high school diploma in order to access federal student aid. The department is still working through the specifics of how that test, known as Do No Harm, will work.

    To Dimino of Third Way, the launch of the indicator is a sign of growing momentum toward greater transparency and more information about earnings.

    Dimino particularly likes the department’s decision to tell students about the earnings data after they complete the FAFSA. She thinks disclosure at that step will help ensure students actually see the information and can use it as they consider their options. She is interested in learning more about how students act on the data and whether they decide against sending the lower-earnings institutions their aid application.

    Students lack awareness about available earnings data or where to find it, according to Inside Higher Ed’s 2025 Student Voice survey, conducted in August. About 11 percent of students said they don’t know where to find postgraduation outcomes information and an additional 8 percent said they “know nothing” about postgraduation outcomes. Just 12 percent said they knew detailed outcome data for their program.

    Michael Itzkowitz, founder of higher education research and policy firm HEA Group, said the earnings indicator is “a step in the right direction for transparency.”

    “Students today primarily attend college to secure better employment opportunities, and they deserve to know up front whether an institution simply isn’t delivering on that promise,” he said. “Most institutions deliver on the promise of economic prosperity but, unfortunately, some do not.”

    Source link

  • AI Can Help With Viewpoint Diversity Challenges (opinion)

    AI Can Help With Viewpoint Diversity Challenges (opinion)

    Viewpoint diversity and artificial intelligence are two of the most widely discussed challenges facing higher education today. What if we could address these two simultaneously, employing AI to create productive intellectual friction across different political and philosophical positions?

    Consider taking this approach: Whom do you ardently disagree with, philosophically or morally, but view as smart and rigorous in their analysis and arguments? I can think of one of my high school heroes, Ayn Rand, whose The Fountainhead I initially regarded as a powerful affirmation of creativity and innovation without knowing much about her deeper political ideology. This summer, I decided to read her collection of essays on capitalism, which I suspected I would disagree with at a fundamental level. Then I looked to AI. Could I engage Ayn Rand’s ideas through a large language model that would “disagree” with me, allowing me to experience intellectual friction with less at stake personally?

    I began my conversation with the chatbot Claude 3.5, asking it to play the role of Ayn Rand, by addressing her core argument: Capitalism is the only moral system because it honors the rights and liberty of every person to reap the benefits of their own creativity and effort without being coerced to give up some of what they have produced to “benefit” society. Here is how it went.

    Me: In your version of capitalism, how do humans/societies decide to produce something bigger than anyone could do alone? What if sending someone to the moon could never be coordinated through independent, voluntary contracts and instead requires some larger entity, like a government, to coordinate and incentivize? If democratic citizens vote to have the government organize a mission to the moon, why is that coercive?

    *Adjusting her glasses with a stern expression* (Stage cues provided by the bot)

    Rand bot: Your question reveals the very philosophical premises I reject. You speak of “democratic citizens” voting to achieve something “greater together”—but greater for whom? By what right do these citizens vote to expropriate the wealth of others for their collective fantasy?

    The fact that some men dream of reaching the moon does not give them the moral right to force others to fund their dream. If reaching the moon is truly valuable, let those who see that value risk their own capital, form their own companies and make voluntary contracts. Look at what private enterprises like SpaceX have achieved through voluntary cooperation and the profit motive!

    You present a false dichotomy between individual rights and large-scale achievement. The greatest achievements in human history—from the transcontinental railroad to the electric light—came from private individuals working through voluntary contracts, not government force. Even when multiple parties were involved, they chose to cooperate for mutual benefit.

    The moment you accept that it’s acceptable to violate individual rights for some “greater good,” you’ve accepted the premise of every dictator and looter in history. There is no such thing as a “right” to violate rights. A group’s desire, no matter how noble-sounding, does not trump an individual’s right to the product of their own effort.

    *Takes drag from cigarette* (more stage cues …)

    Would you care to explain why you believe some men have the right to enslave others for their collective goals?

    I was fully engaged at this point, and I wanted to expose her rigid thinking, so I raised the stakes.

    Me: Would you agree that public health might require a “collective response”? Let’s say that individuals acting independently have no incentive to invest in clean water, vaccines or databases that collect public health data. Is it better to allow millions of people to die from the spread of disease in the name of maximum individual freedom, or to have the government coordinate action to provide public health benefits to everyone?

    Rand bot: *Tapping cigarette ash with visible irritation*

    Your premise rests on the most dangerous of all moral fallacies— that the mere existence of a problem justifies the use of force to solve it. You speak of “public health” as if it were some mystical collective entity that supersedes individual rights. There is no such thing as “public health”—there are only individual human beings, each with the right to make their own decisions about their health and well-being.

    This back-and-forth went on for more than an hour, covering topics like innovation, market failures and unequal access to basic resources. I was worn out, so I closed the conversation.

    Me: I am arguing that humans can create mixed economic and political systems and that those systems can muddle along—imperfectly—and people may live with those compromises because they still have freedom while affording greater opportunity to their fellow citizens. You believe in an inevitable slide toward destruction and loss of freedom. I don’t see that slide happening in much of the democratic world. So compromise is possible. So I think we can work with this hybrid system—improve, find the right balance, and continue to advance a more perfect union.

    And then, “Ayn Rand” made her final summation:

    Rand bot: You want me to acknowledge that reality has not matched my darkest predictions. That humans have found ways to maintain significant freedom and progress despite what I see as moral compromise. And you argue that evidence matters—that decades of relative prosperity and innovation under mixed systems deserve consideration.

    I cannot and will not concede the fundamental moral principle: that force is force, whether applied by a dictator or a democratic majority. Your “muddling along” is built on a fundamental contradiction that I believe must eventually resolve itself—either toward freedom or toward force …

    I was impressed that the bot could articulate Rand’s core arguments, impersonate her direct writing and speaking style, question my own logic, provide specific examples, “reason” beyond the time and place of her original writing, and offer creative analogies (when pressed to explain the economic success of today’s welfare capitalism, she responded, “You are celebrating reaching the 2nd floor while I am pointing out that we could have built a skyscraper”). This was one of the most intellectually engaging 90 minutes I have spent in a long time.

    I wanted to check my reactions against the wisdom and judgment of one of our philosophy professors at Hamilton College, so I sent the entire exchange to him. He noted that the AI bot argued like a robot and relied too heavily on rhetoric rather than sound argumentation. Ultimately, the problem, as he sees it, is that “an AI Bot will never be able to genuinely distinguish between debating with the intent of ‘winning’ an argument and debating with the intent of arriving at a deeper understanding of the subject matter at hand.” It is also worth pointing out that debating across a screen, with AI or with friends and strangers, is partly why we are having so much trouble talking to each other in the first place.

    AI is not a substitute for what we learn in our philosophy classes. But there is something powerful about practicing our ideas with people across time and place—debating race with James Baldwin, asking Leonardo da Vinci to think about how we reconcile innovation with destruction.

    One of our faculty members worked with our technology team to create an AI agent based on thousands of documents and writings from our nation’s founders. At the end of this class on the founding of America, the students debated with “Alexander Hamilton” about the role of the central government, inherited wealth and his views on war. Perhaps the answers were a bit robotic, but they were based on Hamilton’s documented thoughts, and as our language models get better, the richness of the discussion and debate will grow exponentially.

    The best classes and teachers maximize learning by bringing opposing ideas into conversation. But we know that college students, faculty and many others in America find it very difficult to engage opposing views, especially those we find fundamentally objectionable. Ultimately, this must happen on a human-to-human level with skilled educators and facilitators. But can we also use AI to help us practice how we engage with difference, better formulate our arguments and ask deeper and more complex questions?

    AI can be part of the solution to our challenge of engaging with ideas we disagree with. If you disagree, try your argument with an AI bot first, and then let’s talk.

    Steven Tepper is president of Hamilton College.

    Source link

  • Closing Equity Gaps in CTE Programs for Black Students

    Closing Equity Gaps in CTE Programs for Black Students

    Black students enroll in career and technical education programs at rates on par with their peers, but studies suggest they’re overrepresented in service-oriented fields that lead to lower-wage jobs, and less likely to participate in CTE courses in potentially lucrative STEM fields.

    A new research brief, released last week by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, delved into such inequities and explored possible solutions based on qualitative interviews with Black program staff, current and former CTE students, members of workforce development organizations, training providers, researchers, and other CTE experts. The authors argue those voices are especially critical when federal legislation funding the programs—the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act, or Perkins V—is poised for reauthorization in fiscal year 2026.

    The report pointed out that in the 2022–23 academic year, Black students made up about 13 percent of high school students and about 15 percent of college students in CTE programs. But a 2020 analysis of CTE data in 40 states by Hechinger Report and the Associated Press found that Black students were less likely than their white peers to enroll in courses focused on science, technology, engineering, math and information technology, and more likely to take classes in fields such as hospitality and human services.

    A 2021 report by the Urban Institute also found that compared to their white peers, Black students in CTE courses had significantly lower grade point averages, lower rates of earning credentials or degrees at their first colleges, and a lower likelihood of finding a job in a related field. On average, Black participants in these programs earned more than $8,200 less than white students six years after starting CTE programs, controlling for the highest degree attained and sector of study. Earnings gaps worsened for Black students in online CTE programs; Black students who enrolled in those earned less than half of what their white peers did, despite having started in the same program in the same year, eventually earning the same degrees.

    “These disparities are major barriers to increasing the earning potential of Black workers and learners and to narrowing the racial wealth divide,” Joint Center president Dedrick Asante-Muhammad said in a news release.

    Lessons Learned

    In interviews with the Joint Center, Black CTE experts shared insights into some of the challenges of providing more equitable CTE programs.

    Some emphasized that Black CTE teachers, and technical instructors in general, are hard to recruit and retain because they can make better salaries working industry jobs in their fields, leaving students without mentors who look like them. In general, the experts raised concerns about CTE instructors lacking professional development, including on culturally responsive teaching.

    The research brief also suggested that Black communities don’t always trust CTE programs because historically, schools funneled Black students into low-quality technical programs. CTE programs hold a stigma for some potential students who still view them as pathways for students of color considered unlikely to attend college rather than a viable career step that doesn’t preclude higher education, the brief said.

    Experts also noted that while Perkins V funds require states to submit a local needs assessment, which involves reviewing enrollment and performance data for CTE students, data collection varies across states and gaps in data too often serve students poorly. For example, the mandatory accountability measures for Perkins V funds require data on CTE concentrators—high school students who finished at least two courses in the same CTE program—but that doesn’t include college students or students who dabble in CTE but don’t qualify as a concentrator.

    Co-author of the brief and Joint Center workforce policy director Kayla Elliott also acknowledged that the Trump administration’s recent decision to shift management of CTE programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor creates new uncertainty for the programs.

    “This raises real concerns for the program’s effectiveness and the efficiency of support services for state administrators,” she said in the release. “Some states have already reported waiting months for their Perkins funding with little communication or support from the administration.”

    But CTE experts also said Perkins V funding is flexible in ways that can help support Black students. For example, states can use up to 15 percent of the federal funds to drive innovation and implement new programs. States can also combine Perkins V funding with other funding sources, like the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, which can help states better align CTE programs and workforce development programs. The funds can also be used for career exploration activities to introduce Black students to these programs.

    The research brief offered recommendations to improve Black student access and outcomes in CTE, including increasing federal funding during the next reauthorization; improving retention and recruitment strategies for Black CTE teachers, including by raising instructor wages; and enhancing data collection standards. The authors also suggested CTE programs better align with workforce development efforts at the state level and do more engagement and outreach to help Black families better understand how these programs can lead to high-earning technical careers.

    Source link