Tag: citing

  • more international students citing quality and reputation as key factors in decision making

    more international students citing quality and reputation as key factors in decision making

    As the global education landscape evolves, understanding what motivates international students has never been more critical. NCUK’s annual student survey series, Transforming Student Futures, provides essential insights into the aspirations of approximately 1,000 international students from 88 countries participating in NCUK’s in-country pathway programmes worldwide.

    The latest findings reveal clear patterns in student priorities that demand attention from educators, policymakers, and universities. 

    Maintaining quality and reputation is key

    Quality of education stands as the decisive factor for international students, with 69.9% of respondents selecting it as their primary motivation for pursuing overseas qualifications, up from 58% in 2024. Career-focused motivations follow closely, with over half of students (56.4%) motivated by career development opportunities, including increased employability and monetary benefits.
     
    This emphasis on educational excellence is particularly pronounced among students from Nigeria, Pakistan, Myanmar, and Peru, where quality ranks as the top motivation. In Kenya, quality shares the top position with career development, while in Ghana, it ties with gaining new knowledge as the primary driver.

    Interestingly, students from China present a unique pattern, with gaining new knowledge emerging as their main motivation rather than quality alone, suggesting different educational priorities for NCUK students across source markets.

    The rise of TNE and changing learning preferences

    Traditional learning models continue to dominate student preferences, with 66% favouring fully on-campus learning experiences. However, the survey indicates growing consideration for online provision as an increasingly viable alternative, reflecting evolving attitudes toward flexible education delivery.
     
    The year-on-year increases in demand for full online learning (up from 10% to 22%), full on-campus learning at a local institution in the students home country (up from 16% to 32%) and full on-campus learning but half taught at a branch campus in the student’s home country and half taught at a main campus overseas (up from 14% to 20%) all  signal a move toward flexibility.

    This shift aligns with the recent growth of TNE, and NCUK’s in-country model and diverse qualification offerings cater to this demand, enabling students to access global education without relocating immediately.

    Is it worth us considering whether, as a sector, we sometimes place too much emphasis on policy change?

    The high confidence level in NCUK pathways – with 94% of students believing these programs will enhance their career prospects (a 5% year-on-year increase) – demonstrates strong programme satisfaction and perceived value among participants.
     
    Policy changes: The US coming up Trumps but overall, NCUK students unaffected by policy changes

    In 2025, 52% of respondents expressed concern about UK visa restrictions, up from 38% in 2024, reflecting recent tightening of post-study work policies. Conversely, the USA saw a 12% rise in positive sentiment (to 29%) due to perceived stability in immigration rules, while Australia’s appeal dipped 8% (to 22%) amid cost-of-living concerns.
     
    These shifts highlight a nuanced landscape: students from Ghana and Pakistan are more deterred by UK policy changes, while Nigerian students remain optimistic about the USA. However, the overall message here is that NCUK students’ decision making does not seem significantly influenced by policy changes, with 80% of respondents choosing the UK as their preferred destination, despite the above findings.

    Is it worth us considering whether, as a sector, we sometimes place too much emphasis on policy change?

    Implications for the future
     
    The emphasis on quality demands continued investment in academic excellence and institutional reputation to meet rising student expectations, particularly in competitive source markets like Nigeria. And further, expanding TNE and hybrid learning options will cater to students seeking quality education with flexibility, reducing reliance on traditional study-abroad models.

    NCUK’s in-country pathway programmes demonstrate strong alignment with student needs and aspirations, offering the academic preparation, university access to high-ranking institutions, and career development support that international students prioritise. As the education sector continues to evolve, maintaining focus on quality, flexibility, and comprehensive student support will remain essential for meeting the diverse and changing needs of international students.

    About the author: Andy Howells is the Chief Marketing Officer for NCUK, a leading global pathway provider. He has worked in higher education for over 15 years in senior marketing and student recruitment roles at Royal Holloway, University of London, the University of Southampton and most recently, Universities UK International (UUKi).

    Andy has won several awards, including ‘Best Issues and Crisis Campaign’ at the PR Week Global awards in 2022 for UUKi’s We Are Together campaign, and ‘Marketing Campaign of the Year’ at the PIEoneer Awards in 2023 for UUKi’s Twin for Hope campaign. In 2023, Andy led the relaunch of the UK higher education sectors, #WeAreInternational campaign.

    Andy is a father of two young children and his claim to fame is delivering his second child himself, in his car, in a supermarket car park during the first weeks of Covid lockdowns! 

    Source link

  • U of Utah Plans to Ax 81 Offerings, Citing New State Law

    U of Utah Plans to Ax 81 Offerings, Citing New State Law

    The University of Utah is cutting 81 offerings in response to state budget reductions and a new law.

    Aaron M. Sprecher/Getty Images

    The University of Utah plans to eliminate 81 academic programs and minors—a step that administrators attribute to a new state law that called for “strategic reinvestment” after lawmakers slashed funding to public colleges and universities.

    The Republican-controlled Utah Legislature passed House Bill 265 this spring. Lawmakers cut 10 percent of institutions’ state-funded instructional budgets, but the law said they could earn back the money by cutting programs and positions and instead funding “strategic reinvestment.” Institutions’ reinvestment plans must be based on enrollment, completion rates, job placement, wages, program-level costs and local and statewide workforce demands.

    Other Utah universities detailed their planned cuts in the spring, but this is the first glimpse at how the state’s flagship will respond to the new law.

    The planned cuts at the University of Utah include Ph.D.s in chemical physics, physiology, experimental pathology and in theater; master’s degrees in ballet, modern dance, marketing, audiology and applied mechanics; bachelor’s degrees in chemistry teaching, Russian teaching and German teaching; certificates in public administration, veterans’ studies and computational bioimaging; various minors; and more.

    Richard Preiss, president of the university’s Academic Senate, said his body’s Executive Committee reviewed the list of programs. He said that, except for one that the committee persuaded the administration to remove from the list, none had graduated more than one student in the past eight years, according to the university’s data. But a university spokesperson said that “some had zero or one, but some had up to a dozen students. Our threshold to identify inactive or low-enrollment courses was 15.”

    Preiss said that while the selection process was accelerated, faculty had enough time to give meaningful input.

    “These were relatively easy cuts to make and they were relatively painless,” Preiss said. “I anticipate that more painful ones are on the horizon.”

    Source link

  • Purdue Cuts Off Student Paper Citing Institutional Neutrality

    Purdue Cuts Off Student Paper Citing Institutional Neutrality

    Purdue University has ended a long-standing partnership with its independent student newspaper, The Purdue Exponent, and will no longer distribute papers, give student journalists free parking passes or allow them to use the word “Purdue” for commercial purposes.

    The Purdue Student Publishing Foundation board (PSPF), the nonprofit group that oversees The Exponent—the largest collegiate newspaper in Indiana—said the changes came without warning.

    On May 30, PSPF received an email from Purdue’s Office of Legal Counsel notifying the group that their contract had expired more than a decade ago and the university would not participate in newspaper distribution or give the students exclusive access to newspaper racks on campus.

    In addition, the message said, the university will not enter into a new contract for facility use with the paper to remain consistent with the administration’s stated policy on institutional neutrality.

    According to a statement from the university, it is not consistent “with principles of freedom of expression, institutional neutrality and fairness to provide the services and accommodations described in the letter to one media organization but not others.”

    The Exponent is the only student newspaper, though Purdue also has two student news channels, FastTrack News and BoilerTV.

    Legal counsel also asked The Exponent to keep “Purdue” off the masthead and out of the paper’s URL because “The Foundation should not associate its own speech with the University.” PSPF says it has a trademark on “The Purdue Exponent” until 2029.

    PSPF and Purdue have held distribution agreements since 1975, in which Exponent staff would drop papers off at various locations across campus and staff would then place them on newspaper racks.

    In 2014, the Exponent delivered the university a new contract to renew the agreement for the next five years, according to paper staff. The contract was never signed, but the terms of the agreement continued until Monday, June 2.

    Now, The Exponent is permitted to distribute papers themselves and have nonexclusive access to newspaper stands on campus, according to the university; students said they don’t have early access to many of the buildings the way staff do.

    “Purdue’s moves are unacceptable and represent not only a distortion of trademark law but a betrayal of the university’s First Amendment obligations to uphold free expression,” Dominic Coletti, a student press program officer for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, told The Exponent. “Breaking long-standing practice to hinder student journalism is not a sign of institutional neutrality; it is a sign of institutional cowardice.”



    Source link

  • Lawmakers and judge push back on Education Department’s gutting, citing inefficiency

    Lawmakers and judge push back on Education Department’s gutting, citing inefficiency

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

    The Trump administration’s decision to gut federal programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education and lay off half of the agency’s staff in an attempt to increase its efficiency has been met with resistance from lawmakers and, most recently, a federal judge whose court order brought efforts to close the department to an abrupt halt. 

    In an update required by a May 22 court order, the Education Department posted on its website that it has notified its employees of the court-ordered reversal of the reduction in force that left the agency with only about 2,183 out of 4,133 employees. The department on May 27 acknowledged its being compelled by the order in State of New York v. McMahon “to restore the Department to the status quo such that it is able to carry out its statutory functions.” 

    U.S. District Judge Myong Joun, in temporarily reversing the reduction in force, said gutting the department would lead to “irreparable harm that will result from financial uncertainty and delay, impeded access to vital knowledge on which students and educators rely, and loss of essential services for America’s most vulnerable student populations.” 

    “This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the Department’s employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the Department becomes a shell of itself,” Joun said in his decision.

    The Education Department appealed Joun’s ruling the same day it was issued. The agency did not respond to K-12 Dive’s request for comment. 

    Delays in distributing grant funds

    The decision came on the heels of a May 16 letter sent by Democratic lawmakers to U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon. They claimed the Education Department was delayed in distributing grant funding for the 2025-26 school year. The delay gives states and districts less time to allocate funds meant to help students experiencing homelessness and other underserved students the grants are meant to help, they said.

    “States and school districts are best able to plan to most effectively use federal funds with advance knowledge of expected funding, as Congress intends by providing funds on a forward-funded basis,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut in the letter. 

    Murray is vice chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, of which Baldwin is also a member. DeLauro is ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee. 

    “We believe you need to immediately change course and work in partnership with states and school districts to help them effectively use federal funds,” the lawmakers wrote in their reprimand of the department’s delay.

    By the lawmakers’ count, the department took three times as long under this administration to distribute Title I-A grants than under the Biden administration. Whereas the former administration took two weeks to distribute the funds after the appropriate law was signed in 2024, the current administration took more than 50 days after the enactment of the 2025 appropriations law to distribute Title I-A funds. The program provides $18.4 billion by formula to more than 80% of the nation’s school districts. 

    The department also delayed applications for the Rural Education Achievement Program, which funds more than 6,000 rural school districts. It opened applications to REAP’s Small, Rural Schools Assistance program nearly two months later than the Biden administration, and gave districts half the time to apply — just 30 days compared to 60 in FY 2024.  

    AASA, The School Superintendents Association, said it was aware of this delay. “We understand this release date is significantly later than usual coupled with a shortened application window, so it is important to ensure all eligible districts are aware of this change,” the association said in a May 7 post, prior to the application’s release on May 14. The deadline for program applications is June 13. 

    These delays in funding distribution and last week’s letter from Democrats come as the department bumped funding for charter schools by $60 million this month. 

    Source link

  • Lawsuit challenges Trump ICE raid policy, citing LAUSD activity

    Lawsuit challenges Trump ICE raid policy, citing LAUSD activity

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

    The Trump administration’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy allowing ICE raids on school grounds and other sensitive locations was challenged in a lawsuit filed this week on behalf of an Oregon-based Latinx organization and faith groups from other states. 

    The lawsuit cites ICE activity at two Los Angeles elementary schools last month, as well as parents’ fears of sending their children to school in other locations across the country. 

    “Teachers cited attendance rates have dropped in half and school administrators saw an influx of parents picking their children up from school in the middle of the day after hearing reports that immigration officials were in the area,” said the lawsuit filed April 28 by the Justice Action Center and the Innovation Law Lab. It was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District Court of Oregon’s Eugene Division.

    The two organizations filed on behalf of Oregon’s farmworker union Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste, whose members say they are “afraid to send their children to school,” per the draft complaint. The farmworker union’s members, especially those who are mothers, say their livelihood depends on sending their children to school during the day while they work. 

    “They now must choose between facing the risk of immigration detention or staying at home with their children and forfeiting their income,” the lawsuit said. One of the members of the union said her children were “afraid of ICE showing up and separating their family.” 

    The lawsuit challenges a Department of Homeland Security directive, issued one day after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, that undid three decades of DHS policy that prevented ICE from raiding sensitive locations like schools, hospitals and churches. 

    “Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” a DHS spokesperson said in a January statement on the order. “The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense.”

    When asked for comment on the lawsuit, an ICE spokesperson said the agency does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation. 

    Monday’s lawsuit and others filed against the directive say the change in policy is impacting students’ learning and districts’ ability to carry out their jobs. 

    A lawsuit filed in February by Denver Public Schools said the DHS order “gives federal agents virtually unchecked authority to enforce immigration laws in formerly protected areas, including schools.” It sought a temporary restraining order prohibiting ICE and Customs and Border Protection from enforcing the policy. 

    According to the American Immigration Council, over 4 million U.S. citizen children under 18 years of age lived with at least one undocumented parent as of 2018. A 2010 study cited by the council found that immigration-related parental arrests led to children experiencing at least four adverse behavioral changes in the six months following the incidents.

    Another study cited by the organization, conducted in 2020, found that school districts in communities with a large number of deportations saw worsened educational outcomes for Latino students.

    Source link