Tag: college

  • Austin Community College Joins Fight Against DOJ and Texas

    Austin Community College Joins Fight Against DOJ and Texas

    Civil rights groups have been piling on to intervene in the recent Texas court case that ended in-state tuition for noncitizens living in the state. Now Austin Community College and a Texas undocumented student are joining the effort to defend the now-defunct law.

    College officials worry they’ll lose students and revenue if undocumented students’ tuition prices suddenly skyrocket. Austin Community College is the first Texas college to try to join the lawsuit.

    The Texas Dream Act, which allowed noncitizens who grew up in the state to benefit from in-state tuition, was overturned last month after the Department of Justice sued Texas over the law. The state didn’t fight back and instead sided with the DOJ mere hours after the legal challenge. A week later, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, a Latino civil rights organization, filed a motion on behalf of a group of Texas undocumented students to intervene in the lawsuit. The group argued the swift resolution of the DOJ’s legal challenge denied those affected any chance to weigh in, so the students should become intervenors, or a party to the case, and have their day in court.

    Other groups quickly followed MALDEF’s lead. Since last week, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, the Texas Civil Rights Project, Democracy Forward and the National Immigration Law Center have joined the fight, representing the activist group La Unión del Pueblo Entero, the Austin Community College District’s Board of Trustees and Oscar Silva, a student at University of North Texas. The groups filed emergency motions on their behalf to intervene in the lawsuit and get relief from the judgment that killed the law. If these legal efforts are successful, a case so quickly open and shut by Texas and the DOJ could be reopened.

    Austin Community College board chair Sean Hassan said in a news release from the Texas ACLU chapter that college officials deserved to have their say on the policy shift.

    “Employers and taxpayers are looking to community colleges to produce a sufficient number of highly skilled graduates to meet workforce needs,” Hassan said. “If legislation or court decisions will impact our ability to meet these expectations, we should have a seat at the table to help shape responsible solutions. The action by our board asks the court to ensure our voice is heard.”

    Calculating the Costs

    In court filings, Austin Community College leaders argue that the institution will lose revenue because of the abrupt end of the Texas Dream Act. They estimated that about 440 students will see their tuition rates quadruple, and as a result, hundreds of students will stop out and prospective students will avoid enrolling in the first place. College leaders also argued in the motion to intervene that the need for scholarships will rise, putting extra financial pressure on the community college.

    They cited other potential costs as well, including setting up new processes to identify and notify noncitizen students of tuition rate changes and ramping up public relations efforts so the college can continue to “market itself as an accessible, inclusive, and affordable institution for all Texas high school graduates,” despite the policy change.

    “The loss of these students will have a cascading effect on campus life, academic programs, and student support services,” Austin Community College chancellor Russell Lowery-Hart said, according to court filings.

    The motion also detailed how Silva, the student, would likely have to withdraw from his joint bachelor’s and master’s program at the University of North Texas if he lost his in-state tuition benefits. He was expected to graduate next spring. Silva has lived in Texas since the age of 1 and attended Texas K–12 schools.

    “The Texas Dream Act means everything to me,” Silva said in the ACLU of Texas news release. “This law has made my education possible. Without it, college would’ve been out of reach for me as a first-generation college student.”

    The motion comes after Wynn Rosser, commissioner of higher education for the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, sent out a June 18 memo directing colleges and universities to determine which of their students are undocumented and need to be charged higher tuition starting this fall.

    Trouble Over Timelines

    Texas, the DOJ and civil rights groups have since been haggling over how fast the U.S. District Court should move in response to the new motions.

    The civil rights groups want a decision soon. But, in a joint submission to the court on June 30, the Trump administration and Texas argued emergency motions were uncalled-for and the legal proceedings shouldn’t be expedited, though they acknowledged the intervenors raised issues “which merit response.”

    “Expediting responses to intervenors’ motions would only serve [to] put the United States and Texas at a disadvantage, having to brief and respond to intervenors’ myriad of arguments in a drastically shorter timeframe than would otherwise be necessary, and would do nothing to help intervenors expedite any potential relief,” the response read.

    But the civil rights groups representing Austin Community College and other intervenors weren’t having it. On July 1, they asked that the court deny the request.

    The attorneys argued that the state and the federal government moved quickly to resolve the DOJ’s lawsuit and end the Texas Dream Act, but “when asked to respond on an expedited basis to the consequences of their actions and the imminent harm raised” by the motions, “the parties balk, insisting that the court should postpone its consideration of these motions until well past the point when the looming harms become irreversible.”

    That same day, Judge Reed O’Connor gave the Trump administration and Texas until July 14 to respond to the motion to intervene, which aligns with their requested timeline. He also delayed briefings on the motions to stay the judgement and for relief until he rules on the motion to intervene.

    As this fight plays out in Texas, the DOJ is targeting other states that offer in-state tuition benefits to undocumented students. Last month the Trump administration filed similar lawsuits in Kentucky and Minnesota, which have yet to be resolved.

    Source link

  • College Athletics Enters Uncharted Territory July 1

    College Athletics Enters Uncharted Territory July 1

    After years of court battles, a federal judge ushered in a new era for college athletics earlier this month when she approved a settlement in the House v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit, effectively ending the century-old model of student athletes as amateurs.

    Now students will be able to earn money for their athletic performance at colleges that opt in to the practice known as revenue-sharing, in which institutions share with players the money made off their teams. Former Division I athletes from the recent past will also share a $2.8 billion settlement to compensate for the financial opportunities they were denied due to now-defunct NCAA rules that prevented them from cashing in on name, image, and likeness deals.

    Although the NCAA status quo was undone in an instant, many campus leaders had been planning for months, anticipating the outcome of the ruling.

    The era of paid college athletes officially begins July 1. With it comes questions about how the landscape will evolve and concerns about equity issues, as well as what the fallout of the settlement may mean for nonrevenue sports.

    A State of Transition

    Experts view revenue-sharing as the most consequential part of the settlement.

    Institutions that opt in to revenue sharing will have up to $20.5 million to spread among their athletes. The lion’s share of that is expected to flow to football, the top revenue-earning sport, followed by men’s basketball, with the second-highest distribution amounts. The annual revenue-sharing cap will increase gradually to $32 million over the course of a decade.

    Jason Montgomery, a partner at the law firm Husch Blackwell, said that one commonly discussed formula would see 75 percent of revenue disbursed to an institution’s football team, followed by 15 percent to men’s basketball, 5 percent to women’s basketball, and the remainder spread across all other sports. But he noted institutions can adjust that formula as they see fit.

    At institutions that don’t have a football team, the bulk of the revenue will likely be directed to men’s basketball. And some universities that have top basketball programs are tweaking the formula to direct more money to hoops; the University of Houston, for example, may opt for a formula that directs 23 to 25 percent of revenue to men’s basketball, local media reported.

    The back-pay provision is also heavily tilted toward football, which has already prompted an appeal on Title IX grounds, with plaintiffs alleging women are being shorted on damages. The suit, brought by eight former college athletes who competed in soccer, track and volleyball, argues that female athletes are being deprived of more than $1 billion in past damages.

    Financial Models

    For those opting in to revenue-sharing, a major question looms: Where will the money come from?

    Sean Frazier, athletic director at Northern Illinois University and president of the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics, said financial models will vary by institution.

    “You’re going to see a lot more of that innovative way to revenue-share by getting this money from external sources that are not specific to the universities themselves,” Frazier said.

    Some colleges are leaning on boosters and TV deals to bankroll revenue-sharing, while others are taking different approaches. Earlier this month, the Florida Board of Governors approved the use of auxiliary funds to pay student athletes, which could flow from college bookstores, student housing, dining, parking fees and other income streams. (That measure is intended to be temporary as colleges develop long-term plans.)

    In addition to increasing revenues, colleges are looking for ways to cut costs. Montgomery said one way colleges can do that is by eliminating non-revenue-earning sports—such as swimming and track and field—which some institutions have done, though that move has also been accompanied by other financial challenges for the sector.

    Colleges that opt in to the revenue-sharing model don’t have to pay the maximum amount unless they choose to. That could yield scenarios where less resourced institutions pay much less than the $20.5 million cap.

    While experts say there is no firm data point yet on how many colleges have opted in to revenue sharing, those numbers are likely to be just a fraction of the NCAA’s member institutions. As of last summer, that number stood at 1,085 institutions, with 355 at the Division I level.

    “The vast majority of colleges are not going to be part of this revenue-share,” said Michael McCann, a professor at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law.

    Opportunities for Innovation

    Frazier compared college athletics in the aftermath of the House settlement to flying a plane while building it. He expects colleges will adjust their approaches as they go.

    “It is clunky right now because of the fact that we do not have certain guardrails yet finalized as we go into this. That’s why it’s going to be a little bit of a wait-and-see on some things,” he said.

    He urged patience for those trying to navigate the new landscape.

    “I would caution [college] leaders to not jump to trends, to not jump to any situation as a quick fix,” Frazier said. “There’s no silver bullet to be able to manage this. We’re going to have to go through a cycle to really understand what the impacts of the House settlement mean.”

    McCann expects that colleges will largely pay football players, as they have signaled. Where the money flows, he said, will depend on institutional priorities. If an athletic department is focused on keeping up with rival football teams and landing on television, revenue-sharing money will be invested in football. But he thinks leaders should consider investing in other areas, including women’s sports—which have boomed in recent years, judging from the record viewership for women’s basketball.

    “I see an opportunity for schools that opt in to revenue-share to not follow the script of spending most of the money on football players,” McCann said. “I could see some presidents being innovative and saying, ‘Let’s use that money primarily on women’s basketball; let’s try to create a top women’s basketball team, or softball.’ There are opportunities to distribute money in ways that I think are a lot more innovative than simply trying to catch up with all the other football schools.”

    The Professional Era

    To many experts, this moment amounts to the professionalization of college athletics.

    “If this isn’t pay to play, I don’t know what is,” Montgomery said.

    To Montgomery’s point, some colleges have hired general managers and other personnel with professional sports experience. Last year Stanford University tapped former star quarterback Andrew Luck, who spent seven years in the NFL, to return to his alma mater as general manager of the football program. Similarly, in March the University of California, Berkeley, hired former NFL player and head coach Ron Rivera as general manager of its football program.

    Noting that trend, McCann suggested such programs are “operating as quasi pro teams.”

    Federal Legislation?

    For years, observers have speculated that Congress might get involved in college athletics. President Donald Trump has raised the possibility of his own involvement as well; in May, he proposed establishing a presidential commission on college sports before backing off the idea.

    However, many experts don’t expect federal legislation to emerge.

    “It’s a long shot that Congress intervenes,” Montgomery said, arguing that college athletics is not a priority for lawmakers at the moment. At most, he said Congress might codify the House settlement through federal legislation.

    McCann agrees. While he believes “there will be bills introduced, and there will be press conferences and a lot of media coverage,” he doesn’t think such efforts will be fruitful.

    But Frazier, who describes himself as an optimist by nature, is hopeful that federal legislation could come to pass in the near future, and he stressed the importance of being part of those talks.

    “I think at the end of the day, we need to help [Trump], we need to help the federal government understand what will work,” he said. “Because we have a perception issue that college athletics can’t govern itself. We’ve created that perception as an industry, and what we need to do is take it back. What we need to do is to show the folks that have doubted us, that [think] we’ve lost control, that there is control, and the only way you can do that is with experience, leadership and execution.”

    Source link

  • A Harvard College Has a Plan B for International Students

    A Harvard College Has a Plan B for International Students

    The Harvard Kennedy School announced a contingency plan for its international students Tuesday in the event that the Trump administration successfully bars the university from enrolling foreign students, according to The Boston Globe.

    The Kennedy School, Harvard’s postgraduate college of government, public policy and international affairs, said that both incoming and returning students could study remotely, and returning students would be given the option to finish their degree at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. 

    “We are announcing these contingency plans now to alleviate the uncertainty many students feel, but we will not officially launch these programs unless there is sufficient demand from students who are unable to come to the United States,” Kennedy School dean Jeremy Weinstein wrote in an email Tuesday.

    Harvard needs the approval of its accreditor, the New England Commission of Higher Education, to allow students to complete their degrees online, and current students who want to study in Toronto would have to apply for a Canadian visa next month.  

    The Kennedy School is the first college at the university to release its formal contingency plan; others are working on developing their own. HKS is particularly vulnerable to a foreign student ban: 59 percent of its students are international, compared to 24 percent of Harvard’s total student population.

    Harvard is currently suing the Trump administration over multiple attempts to ban its foreign student population, including by revoking the university’s Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification and issuing an executive proclamation. Last Friday, a federal judge granted Harvard a preliminary injunction in one of its court challenges. 

    Even if the Trump administration’s efforts targeting Harvard specifically are struck down by the courts, other moves—such as revoking Chinese students’ visas en masse or banning nonimmigrant visa holders from a dozen countries—could prevent some of the Kennedy School’s current and incoming students from attending.

    Source link

  • Teaching at a Small Private College? Take our Advice – Faculty Focus

    Teaching at a Small Private College? Take our Advice – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • The College Planning Playbook: What Works According to Students

    The College Planning Playbook: What Works According to Students

    What Works (and What Gets Ignored) According to Real Students

    If you work in enrollment or financial aid, you’ve probably asked yourself: What actually helps students figure out college, and what just adds to the pile? For the 2025 E-Expectations survey, we went straight to the source—nearly 1,600 high school students themselves—and the answers are refreshingly straightforward. Spoiler: it’s not about the fanciest new tech, and it’s also not about drowning them in glossy brochures. When it comes to their “college planning playbook,” teenagers are looking for clear, actionable guidance that helps them make a huge life decision without losing their sanity (or their savings).

    Here’s what we learned from our latest survey, and how you can use it to actually move the needle.

    Students aren’t just window shopping

    Forget the idea that students are passively leafing through mailers. Today’s applicants are strategic: they use whatever gets them closer to a decision and tune out the rest. When we asked, “Which resources have you used and how helpful were they?” the results were clear.

    The top five: What really works

    1. School emails still rule: Those emails you labor over? They’re not just spam fodder. Nearly 90% of students say they’re helpful, and just as many actually read them. The catch? Short, relevant, and timely messages work best. If you’re still sending email blasts that sound like a commercial, rethink your approach.

    2. The official college website remains the king: When in doubt, students go straight to the source. Nine out of ten use college websites to research schools, making them the most-used tool, and 88% percent find them genuinely helpful. Students want the facts—what programs exist, what dorms look like, what deadlines are looming. If your website buries the basics, you’re losing them.

    3. Nothing beats boots on the ground: Visiting campus is still the gold standard for gut checks. Eighty-eight percent say in-person visits are helpful, but only 80% manage to take one (travel and cost are real barriers). When they do, it’s a game-changer.

    4. College planning websites make life easier: Think of these as digital guidance counselors. They’re used by 82% of students, and 85% say they’re helpful. The draw? Easy side-by-side comparisons and less spreadsheet chaos.

    5. College fairs still pack a punch: They may be old school but they are effective: 80% of students attend college fairs, and 85% get helpful info they couldn’t find online. Sometimes, a face-to-face conversation is what tips the scale.

    Mind the gap: Underused but powerful

    There are plenty of tools out there, but some of the most helpful ones are flying under the radar. Here’s where colleges can do better:

    Virtual tours and VR experiences: Students who use them love them (84% helpful), but only 77% have tried. Virtual can’t replace a campus tour, but it’s the next best thing—especially for out-of-state or lower-income students.

    Online student communities: Authentic peer advice matters, but only 77% know about these platforms (even though 84% find them helpful).

    Financial aid calculators: Nothing is scarier than the price tag, but only 81% use these tools, even though 85% say they’re helpful.

    Live chats and chatbots: Quick answers, real-time help, yet only about 70% of students use them. Visibility is the issue, not usefulness.

    And let’s talk about personalized texts and live messages from admissions counselors: students crave direct, real-time communication, but only 77% have gotten it, even though 84% rate it as helpful.

    What enrollment pros should actually do

    So what’s the actionable playbook? Here’s what our data says:

    • Promote your virtual stuff: Highlight virtual tours, student communities, and interactive platforms, especially for students who can’t visit in person.
    • Show the path to a job: Put career outcomes front and center. Students want to see how your programs connect to real-world gigs.
    • Make digital tools impossible to miss: If you have a chatbot or live chat, make it obvious. Don’t bury these features on your website.
    • Lead with affordability: Share scholarship calculators and cost tools early and often. Don’t make families hunt for them.
    • Invest in personal touch: The more tailored your outreach (think texts, quick emails, not just form letters), the better.
    • Make campus visits happen: Subsidize travel, host regional visit days, or beef up your virtual experiences for those who can’t make the trip.

    The bottom line

    Read the 2025 E-Expectations Report

    Students don’t want a firehose of information. They want a GPS. The best colleges aren’t the ones with the flashiest websites or the most emails—they’re the ones who help students navigate from “I have no clue” to “I’ve got this.” Our job isn’t just to provide facts. It’s to be the trusted co-pilot on a student’s most important road trip.

    Want the full breakdown, including more data and actionable insights?

    Read the 2025 E-Expectations Trend Report to get a comprehensive experience of what students expect and experience when searching for colleges. If you’re serious about helping students (and your own enrollment goals), you’ll want to see everything we uncovered!

    Source link

  • A Setback for Maine’s Free Community College Program

    A Setback for Maine’s Free Community College Program

    The Maine Legislature’s budget-writing committee voted last week in favor of ending the state’s free college program, to the great disappointment of community college leaders.

    The move by Democrats on the Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee contradicts Governor Janet Mills’s proposal earlier this year to make the program a permanent fixture. The free college program, which Mills initially put forward, went into effect in 2022 to support students affected by the pandemic. It originally covered two years of community college tuition for anyone who graduated high school between 2020 and 2023, after other forms of aid were applied. Though created with one-time funding, the program enjoyed strong bipartisan support and was extended in 2023 to include the Classes of 2024 and 2025. Students have a certain amount of time to enroll; for example, 2025 graduates have to start college no later than the 2027–28 academic year to take advantage of the program.

    Since the program began, Maine’s community college enrollment has surged—enrollment of all degree-seeking students in the system jumped from 11,308 in 2022 to 14,278 in 2024. A total of 17,826 students have participated in the program since it started, according to data from the Maine Community College System. Many hoped, and expected, the program would continue.

    But the Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee’s proposal would give the community college system $20 million over two years to help current participants finish their studies before winding down the program for good, Maine Public Radio reported. The recommendation comes as Maine faces a lean budget year, with federal funding for the state hard to predict. President Donald Trump threatened to cut Maine’s federal funds after a tense exchange with Mills in February over his executive order barring transgender athletes from competing on the teams that match their gender identity.

    Maine representative Michael Brennan said at the committee meeting last week, “We’ve had to make hard decisions about what we think we can afford and not afford,” though he called the free college program “tremendously successful.”

    Senator Peggy Rotundo, co-chair of the Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee, emphasized in a statement to Inside Higher Ed that state lawmakers are honoring their commitment to fund students who graduated in 2025 and expected to receive the program’s support. She implied the program could still be made permanent in the future.

    “When considering what comes next, our focus is on ensuring this program’s long-term sustainability,” she wrote. “The Appropriations and Financial Affairs Committee is seeking additional data and evaluation from the community college system to inform a responsible, future-focused approach. In a tough budget year, we have a duty to balance expanding opportunity with fiscal responsibility—and that means looking ahead to build a durable model that can serve Maine students for years to come.”

    The decision to nix the program isn’t set in stone—the state budget still needs to make its way through the state House and Senate and finally to the governor’s desk. But state legislators indicated they plan to wrap up the budget by today.

    David Daigler, president of the Maine Community College System, wrote a letter to the system’s Board of Trustees on Saturday expressing “deep disappointment” over the committee’s vote. He told the board it’s “highly unlikely” there will be any major changes to funding for the free college program at this point.

    “Ultimately, the committee’s vote reflects the state’s challenging financial situation, which made it hard to get support even though Free College is a very popular, effective program that directly benefits Maine families, students, and employers,” Daigler said in the letter. “You can be certain that we will build on the momentum of this program to emerge stronger, wiser, and re-dedicated to providing an affordable, accessible education to Mainers looking to improve their lives.”

    In February, Daigler and community college staff members advocated for the program before the committee. Multiple students also spoke out in support, some arguing they wouldn’t have attended college without the program.

    Brianna Michaud, a health-science student at Southern Maine Community College, told the budget-writing committee she considered not going to college because, despite her working two jobs, her family couldn’t afford it. Then she heard about the free college program.

    “As a first-generation college student who’s entirely responsible for paying off their education, the Maine free college scholarship is the reason why I’m able to put my hard work and dedication toward fulfilling my purpose in life, which is to help others,” said Michaud, who plans on becoming a pediatric occupational therapist.

    Payson Avery, a student representative at Southern Maine, said he graduated high school in 2020, during the height of the pandemic, and didn’t know what to do. He felt like his grades senior year didn’t show his potential. After two years, while working at a restaurant, he decided to take the state up on its free college offer. Now he has plans to attend the University of Maine at Farmington to major in education, he told the committee.

    “Without this program, I’m not sure I would have been able to make it to this point,” he said.

    Source link

  • A New Tool to Improve College Cost Transparency

    A New Tool to Improve College Cost Transparency

    Phillip Levine, an economics professor at Wellesley College, has been studying college financial aid and students’ higher ed spending habits for more than a decade. When his children first started applying to college about 15 years ago, he was amazed by how difficult it was to get a clear answer on how much it was really going to cost them—and he was a trained economist.

    Imagine, he thought, how the average family felt reading through interminable webpages and offer letters explaining the detailed price breakdowns, differences in tuition and fees, added expected costs, and loans versus grants. Then he tried to imagine how parents who’d never gone to college might feel.

    Since then, Levine has worked on a number of college cost transparency initiatives. His most recent project is the Instant Net Price Estimator, a streamlined digital tool that he hopes will make it easier for colleges to break through the noise and deliver a clear estimate to families.

    As public skepticism about the value of a postsecondary degree grows and $100,000 sticker prices make front-page news, colleges are in the market for a simple way to let families know that their degrees can be affordable. Washington University in St. Louis became the first institution to adopt the tool and served as a kind of pilot program this application cycle. Interest from colleges has grown swiftly: This fall, an additional 19 institutions will introduce Levine’s calculator on their websites, and he anticipates that number will triple next academic year.

    Levine spoke with Inside Higher Ed about his new tool, how low-income students get stuck in the financial aid “funnel” and how colleges can be better communicators in a time of widespread public distrust of higher ed. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

    Q: Walk me through the genesis of this idea. What were you hoping to achieve?

    A: I don’t think it’s a state secret that college pricing is complicated. If you go to any college website and look at the financial aid webpage, there’s tons of stuff there trying to explain how much they charge, but they overshoot it in terms of what people are looking for. You’re taking a high school kid and their family and giving them a Ph.D.-level course in financial aid. Not surprisingly, they don’t usually get it.

    I think about the admissions process like a funnel: You give me a little information, I’ll give you a basic answer that’s pretty imprecise. You give me more information, I’ll give you a better answer that’s a little more precise. You can keep going down the process until eventually, you know, ultimately you fill out the FAFSA or the CSS Profile.

    To maximize access, that funnel needs to have a very wide mouth at the top; in financial aid language, what that means is you need to communicate extremely quickly to as wide an audience as possible that college is not $100,000. It doesn’t even matter exactly what it is. But if you can’t get people off of the ledge at the $100,000 number—the mainstream media puts out stories all the time that college costs a million dollars a year, so their perception is that it’s extremely expensive. All you want them to do at the beginning stages is to be like, “Hey, maybe this is something I can afford.” Then you need to lead them through the rest of the funnel.

    Phillip Levine

    Ultimately, the financial aid process really is complicated because we have this concept of what a family can afford to pay, and there’s no right answer to that question, but we have all these complicated formulas that are trying to find it anyway. Over time, colleges have been trying to do a better job of getting past that point, just not very successfully. What I’ve been working on for the last 10 or 15 years is to make an easier entry point, and this tool is even higher up the funnel than what I’ve been working on in the past.

    It takes three seconds to get a sense of what college is going to cost you, and in particular to get you over that hurdle that it’s probably not $100,000. My goal is within a matter of literally a few seconds to give people a sense that college is very unlikely to be as expensive as they fear. And then you can start having a more substantive conversation. Otherwise, you close the door on the poor kids, way before they’re into the process.

    Q: Colleges have been trying to do this kind of thing on their own for a while. What makes your tool an improvement on institutional efforts?

    A: Colleges understand that this is a problem. But to be quite honest, the only people who actually understand the way the financial aid system works are the people in the financial aid office, and they don’t speak English, so to speak. It’s an unbelievably complicated process, very complex, and now they have to explain it to a regular person, and they can’t do that. It’s not their fault; they try, they’re just not successful. There’s a handful of people in the admissions office who understand it, too, but not many. And once you get past those two audiences, nobody else at the college understands it, including the public affairs people.

    I got started on this because when my kids were looking at colleges, I just wanted to know whether I was eligible for any financial aid, yeah. And I realized how unbelievably hard it was to figure it out. Back then [around 2010] it was actually impossible to figure out. Things have evolved a lot since then.

    Q: Like you said, there are other tools out there now. What makes this one different?

    A: I’m just trying to push it to the next stage of development. I’m an economist; I can speak geek as well as anyone. But as I started doing this, I’m learning more and more about how you sell a product, which is basically what you’re doing with college cost. I’m realizing how little time you have to communicate a message.

    I’m in a weird position, because I’m doing the research on the pricing issues, and I’m developing the tools. It was in one of the Brookings [Institution] papers I wrote when these ideas were just kind of coming together and we were thinking about how you do the graphics. And it just kind of came together that we can visually display this information in a simulator, what I really refer to as a simple game. So I thought, if I can do it for a Brookings paper, why can’t I do this for a school or a family? And about that time, Washington University [in St. Louis] came to me looking for assistance on some other issues, and I pitched this to them, and they bought into it. So they paid for the development, and it’s been up and running there since December. If you go to most schools’ webpages, including my own, there’s stuff there, but you gotta read forever. And you know as well as I do that nobody reads that much anymore.

    That’s what I’m trying to accomplish with this: just get the ball rolling with something that speaks to where students are.

    A chart showing price

    A demo version of Levine’s Instant Net Price Estimator, which can be customized to fit colleges’ specific needs and profiles.

    Screenshot from myintuition.org

    Q: I assume the calculator doesn’t factor in things like merit aid?

    A: You want it as simple as possible. So you just slide your input and it essentially just tells you what the average cost is going to be for you based on income, and tells you the range, which may be very broad. At Washington University, they don’t give a lot of merit aid, so, like, it would not be a big deal there, but at schools that do a lot of merit aid, that range could also include merit. They can factor that into the calculator.

    But mainly, you just want the light bulb to go off of, “Oh, maybe I can afford this.” And then maybe they’re willing to go spend some time reading instead of getting scared off right from the start. Their initial instinct is, there’s no way I can afford to go to Washington University. And it’s the school’s job in terms of marketing to communicate to people. The problem, in my mind, is that the door is closed so early for so many people that you need to be able to just let them get through that first door in the process. There’s still a lot of hurdles you have to get through after that, yeah, but if you don’t make it through the first one, you don’t even approach any of the others.

    Q: There’s been legislation introduced at the federal level and passed in many states to mandate that colleges take certain steps toward cost transparency. Do you think there’s a good understanding of what that takes among policymakers?

    A: Clearly, policymakers have figured out that transparency is an issue, and they’re right. But their intentions are often better than their proposals. The net price calculator law [a federal law mandating institutions include a price calculator on their websites by 2011], for instance, was very well intended. But it’s easy to see the big picture problem; to then come up with a solution that actually works, you have to have a little bit more inside baseball. The net price calculator law is a perfect example. It was so well intended, they completely had the right idea, and they blew it. I obviously don’t know all of the details of all the different state laws, but I’ve seen proposals, and generally I look at them and go, right idea, wrong solution.

    Q: Have there been any good policy solutions?

    A: The College Cost Transparency Initiative. It’s much better if the schools can fix this problem on their own, because they know what they’re doing. It’s a tiny step, and you have to already apply and get accepted before you get your letter. And then it tells you, in a more clear way than it used to. It’s lower on the funnel, really at the bottom. But it’s a good step.

    [Levine later clarified that he sat on the technical advisory committee for the CCTI.]

    Q: Has there been a lot of interest in your instant price calculator from other colleges? And what kinds of colleges seem to be most invested in these transparency efforts?

    A: Nineteen more colleges will roll it out in the fall. It’s a small range right now, from relatively wealthy to very wealthy. I think at the very high end of higher ed, the Ivies and such, where they have a lot of money to spend on financial aid, they’re trying to increase access in a very direct way. It is good for them to enroll more lower-income students from a public relations perspective. And I think every school wants to do the right thing. But as you stray from the very top of the spectrum, there’s also an interest in simply increasing enrollment, where they don’t want to be turning away students because they think they can’t afford it when they can. They’re just looking for more students, especially because there’s fewer kids. So the ability to open the door to as many kids as possible at this moment has appeal.

    Source link

  • National Junior College Athletic Association Head Coaches Reveal Athletic Equity is Present

    National Junior College Athletic Association Head Coaches Reveal Athletic Equity is Present

    Dr. Riann MullisImagine going through a typical work week without a colleague or coworker inserting an analogy or anecdote from sports into the conversation. Regardless of the reason, from comparison to training, or overcoming adversity, “Collegiate athletics have been a part of the American culture since the 1800s” (Lewis, 2013). Sports significantly influence colleges and universities nationwide, acting as a driving force for institutional culture. The National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA) is no stranger to cultivating a positive environment for student-athletes. The association has been providing student-athletes with opportunities to compete in collegiate athletics since 1938 (NJCAA, 2025). Community college athletics traditionally have not received the majority of attention from national media; however, discussion is crucial at this foundational level, especially for the more than 45,000 NJCAA student-athletes pursuing academic and athletic opportunities each year.

    Mainstream media’s focus on ticket sales, influential athletes, and comparisons of athletic experience have contributed to a heightened sense of awareness of athletics at all levels. A significant change for athletics occurred more than 50 years when President Richard Nixon signed Title IX of the Education Amendment (Title IX) into law in 1972 (Valentin, 1997). “Implementing Title IX requires institutions to provide equal athletic opportunities for members of both sexes and to accommodate students’ athletic interests and abilities effectively” (U.S. Department of Education [USDE], 2020b).

    Dr. Jennifer SpielvogelDr. Jennifer Spielvogel The ability to conceptualize the similarities and differences of sports becomes critical to recognize what is considered fair opportunities and experiences for student-athletes. This informs the concept of athletic equity. Though major progress has been made since the enactment of this law, questions remain as to what equity looks like in athletics (Jensen, 2022).

    In a recently published study, “The Assessment of Athletic Equity by Head Men’s and Women’s Coaches in the National Junior College Athletic Association”, (Mullis, 2024) head coaches from a variety of NJCAA sports at Division I (DI) and Division II (DII) institutions were surveyed and interviewed to glean their opinions pertaining to implementation and best practices of athletic equity. Questions focused on observations, opportunities, and experiences.

    The NJCAA head coaches’ opinions about athletic equity initially focused on facilities, scholarships, and travel provided for teams. They were asked to assess the level of agreement on a 4-point Likert (1932) scale ranging from 4 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree) and the mean (M) was calculated for each question. The head coaches assessed facility equity (M = 2.8), scholarship equity (M = 2.8) and travel equity (M = 3.2) at prominent levels, indicating equity is present. The survey data also were disaggregated by team, with no significant differences found from head coaches of men’s and women’s teams in any sport. Further, the coaches agreed that equity is present for all teams at their institutions.

    In the study, head coaches also rank ordered the importance of six distinct coaching roles: advisor, advocate, fundraiser, leader, mentor, and role model. All 192 survey respondents were consistent in ranking leader as the most significant role. The coaches were confident about their relationships and impact on the student-athletes. Most impressively, when interviewed, none of the coaches mentioned wins and losses. Rather, their focus, shared with enthusiasm, highlighted the importance of each of their identified roles and their overwhelming responsibility to advance athletic equity through fair experiences and opportunities for their student-athletes.

    Collectively, the head coaches conveyed enhanced advocacy accountability for their athletes and teams. Case in point, when coaches were asked in the interviews if they had a responsibility to advocate for athletic equity, an NJCAA DII women’s basketball coach confidently expressed:

    Yes. Absolutely. If I do not advocate for my kids [women’s basketball student-athletes], who is going to do that? That is my job. My goal is to make sure they are getting the same treatment the same opportunities that every other sport, whether it be male or female, is getting on campus.

    With similar conviction, when posed the question if he considered himself responsible for advocating for athletic equity, a DII softball coach sharply stated, “No question.” In the interviews many coaches indicated that campus athletic directors and presidents should be involved and aware of athletic needs. From their perspective, there is a need for effective collaboration and communication, as the administration’s decisions can significantly impact the advancement of athletic equity.

    The assessments and opinions from NJCAA DI and DII head coaches offer a never-before-seen insight into athletic equity implementation at the NJCAA level. Continuing the conversations around the best practices of athletic equity through the voice of the coaches is imperative for the future of collegiate athletics. Implementing progressive ideas such as campus forums, shared documentation, and open discussion around the student-athlete and how to best provide equitable experiences for everyone involved will lead to the continuation of athletic equity at the two-year college level.

    Dr. Riann Mullis serves as Athletic Director and Title IX Coordinator at Neosho County Community College (KS).

    Dr. Jennifer Spielvogel serves as Professor of Practice, Community College Leadership Program, Department of Educational Leadership, at Kansas State University.

    The Roueche Center Forum is co-edited by Drs. John E. Roueche and Margaretta B. Mathis of the John E. Roueche Center for Community College Leadership, Department of Educational Leadership, College of Education, Kansas State University.

    References: 

    Jensen, M. (2022, June 23). What would starting Title IX from scratch look like? Philadelphia Inquirer. https://www.inquirer.com/college- sports/title-ix-anniversary-polls-issues 20220623.html 

    Lewis, G. (2013). The beginning of organized sport. American Quarterly, 22(2), 222–229. https://history.msu.edu/hst329/files/2015/05/ LewisGuy-TheBeginning.pdf 

    Likert, R (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Retrieved May 4, 2025 from https://archive.org/details/likert-1932/ page/14/mode/2up

    Mullis, R. (2024). The assessment of athletic equity by head Men’s and Women’s coaches in the national junior college athletic association (Order No. 31489530). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ Kansas State University; ProQuest One Academic. (3097398397). Retrieved from https://er.lib.k-state.edu/ login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations- theses/assessment-athletic-equity- head-men-s-women/docview/3097398397/ se-2

    National Junior College Athletic Association. (2025). About. History. Retrieved May 4, 2025 from https://www.njcaa.org/about/history/ index 

    U.S. Department of Education. (2020b). Intercollegiate athletics policy: Three part test – part three. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/ list/ocr/docs/title9-qa-20100420.html 

    Valentin, I. (1997). Title IX: A brief history. 25 years of Title IX. WEEA Digest. Women’s Educational Equity Act Resource Center at EDC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED414271

     

    Source link

  • North Carolina’s Guilford College scrambles for cash to keep its accreditation

    North Carolina’s Guilford College scrambles for cash to keep its accreditation

    Dive Brief:

    • Guilford College is scrambling to raise cash and balance its budget amid an anticipated decline in enrollment revenue. The college needs to provide a balanced fiscal 2026 budget by December in order to remain accredited.
    • Describing the institution as “between the proverbial rock and a hard place,” Acting President Jean Bordewich said this week in a community message that the institution’s fiscal 2026 budget will “almost certainly” need cost cuts to meet a projected revenue dip. 
    • Bordewich also listed recent wins for the private North Carolina college, including fundraising progress and a June conservation agreement with the Piedmont Land Conservancy worth some $8.5 million.

    Dive Insight:

    Come December, Guilford will have been on probation with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges for two years due to financial issues. That’s the maximum time allowed for an institution to be on probation with good cause, per the accreditor’s policy. 

    To stay accredited, the historically Quaker college must show it has the financial resources and ability to manage them to sustain its mission. That in part will require Guilford to submit a balanced budget for fiscal year 2026 to SACSCOC. Accreditation loss would mean Guilford would no longer be eligible to receive federal student aid funds.

    “Progress is being made, but we must plan for multiple contingencies,” Bordewich said this week. “Balancing the cash and accrual budgets is non-negotiable.”

    Given that, the college has been on the hunt for cash. The “For the Good of Guilford” fundraising campaign, launched in March, aims to raise $5 million in unrestricted cash to support the college’s operations. The college so far has raised just under $3.8 million toward the $5 million goal. But that still leaves some $1.2 million to go. 

    The same day Bordewich issued her message, Wess Daniels, director of Guilford’s Friends Center and Quaker Studies, published a plea to alumni, noting that their donations were “needed now more than ever.”

    Daniels drew a parallel between today’s “crisis” and a similar episode of financial distress for the college in 1918. 

    “Guilford’s current crisis mirrors 1918 in striking ways,” Daniels wrote. “Once again, the college faces financial uncertainty. Once again, we ask: Who gave us Guilford College? And more importantly: Who will ensure it continues?”

    Along with fundraising, Guilford’s agreement with Piedmont Land Conservancy is set to bring cash into its coffers. Under the memorandum of understanding, the college would retain ownership of 120 acres of land known as the Guilford Woods, while the conservation organization will purchase the development rights once it raises $8.5 million. 

    “The land will be permanently protected, Guilford College will receive vital financial support for its programs, and the public will gain official access to pristine green space in a rapidly growing part of Greensboro,” Mary Magrinat, incoming president of the conservancy, said in a statement. Bordewich described the land as one of the few large privately owned hardwood forests in Greensboro. 

    The proceeds from the agreement will likely be available by 2028, the college has said.

    Founded by North Carolina Quakers in 1837, Guilford has suffered from declining enrollment in recent years along with many other private liberal arts colleges. Between 2018 and 2023, fall headcount declined 23.4% to 1,208 students. And that number is down 57.3% from 2010. 

    With the shrinking student body has come financial struggle. In fiscal 2024, the college reported a total operating deficit of $2.4 million.

    As it tries to rein in its budget, the college is working toward a strategy to recruit students with less tuition discounting and to ramp up its adult education programs — which once reached 1,300 students but have diminished to serve just 50 — among other efforts. 

    In her message this week, Bordewich noted “positive news” in that the college is expecting a $2 million surplus for its fiscal year 2025 cash operating budget.

    Source link

  • Corruption, Fraud and Scandal at Los Angeles Community College District, Part 2 (LACCD Whistleblower)

    Corruption, Fraud and Scandal at Los Angeles Community College District, Part 2 (LACCD Whistleblower)

    [Editor’s note: The first installment of Corruption, Fraud and Scandal at Los Angeles Community College District is here.]

    “HR has been weaponized against our faculty for speaking out and complaining about
    discrimination.” This was a public comment made by Los Angeles Community College District
    Academic Senate President Angela Echeverri at the March 2025 Meeting of the LACCD Board
    of Trustees.

    Echeverri’s remarks were not isolated either and were echoed by Deborah Harrington (California
    Community Colleges’ Success Network Executive Director), “Our HR leadership is not living up
    to the standards that we deserve. Our members remain quite frustrated.” More reporting can be
    read in Pierce College student newspaper ‘The RoundUp’ and LACCD Youtube Live-Streamed
    meetings.

    These accusations come three years after longtime administrator Annie G. Reed (Annie Goldman
    Reed) left her position as Omsbudsman/Associate Dean of Students at Los Angeles Valley
    College was promoted to Interim Dean of Employee and Labor Relations collecting an annual
    salary of $284,935.00 in pay and benefits in 2022 according to Transparent California last year of
    reporting.

    A survey of public records including news articles, lawsuits, accreditation complaints, and emails
    to show that Annie G. Reed has a long history of this sort of behavior across multiple LACCD
    campuses – going back to the 2000s. 

    In an October 27, 2010 article ‘Grade Grievances Give Students Voice’ by Lucas Thompson in
    ‘The Los Angeles Valley Star’ Annie G. Reed is quoted as cautioning students against using their
    rights to challenge unfair grades stating, “It’s worthwhile if a student really thinks they have the
    proof to forward with the process . . . It’s their right to, [but] we don’t encourage frivolous
    [cases], because that’s a waste of college resources.” 

    The article further quoted disgraced ex-College President Sue Carleo who left the institution in
    2013, with the College finances in the red and on Warning Status with the Accreditation
    Commission of Junior and Community Colleges. Carleo warned that students should simply
    view mis-grading as “Human Error.” (https://archive.org/details/cavgchm_002210/mode/2up?
    q=Annie+Reed+LAVC)

    When the ACJCC placed Los Angeles Valley College on Accreditation Warning it cited multiple
    standards violations and specifically;

    College Recommendation 5:

    To fully meet the Standards, the college should ensure that records of complaints are
    routinely maintained as required by the Policy on Student and Public Complaints Against
    Institutions
    (Standards II.B.2, II.B.2.c, II.B.3.a, II.B.4)

    This came after Annie G. Reed failed to have student records or complaints available for
    inspection to the visiting Accreditation Team.

     Three years later Reed was again in hot water when a student filed an Accreditation Complaint in
    June 2016, specifically documenting multiple faculty members in the Los Angeles Valley
    College Media Arts Department engaging in fraud and deceptive practices – supported by sixty
    pages of documentation.

    The complaint further stated that Reed refused to facilitate student complaints as was her role
    and threatened action for ‘disrupting the peace of the campus’ by making complaints. This was
    followed by a second accreditation complaint by another student regarding the same issues and a
    student Facebook Group discussing issues.

    Reed’s response was to suspend the first student running a smear campaign that he was potential
    active shooter citing the complaints he brought, suspend a thirty-year old single mother in the
    Facebook Group for Academic dishonesty after she forgot to have a college transcript from when
    she was eighteen-years old sent to LAVC, and then threatened the second student who brought an
    Accreditation Complaint for vandalizing school property.

    [Below: Text exchange between LACCD students alleging that administrator Annie Reed created a smear campaign against them.]

    Student 1 was suspended for a year (though not expelled by the Board of Trustees after
    investigation) a semester short of graduating. Student 1 would have earned six associate degrees
    and eight occupational certificates. Student 2, was ordered to pay a substantial amount of
    financial aid back to the college as “restitution.” Several months later, she was subjected to a
    reversal of hours by LAVC Grant Director Dan Watanabe in the Media Arts Department, for a
    campus job she worked and ordered to pay back several thousand dollars. Student 3 ended up
    going to Los Angeles City College to take final classes needed to graduate and was nearly
    refused graduation by Department Chair Eric Swelstad.

    These actions also happened right before and after LAVC Media Arts Faculty Eric Swelstad,
    Chad Sustin, Adrian Castillo, Dan Watanabe, and LAVC President Erika Endrijonas lobbied the
    LACCD Board of Trustees to approve construction of a new Media Arts Building that was later
    reported by The Los Angeles Times to be a massive racketeering scheme – Aug 4, 2022, Teresa
    Watanabe, ‘Corruption and fraud beset long-delayed L.A. Valley college theater project, lawsuit
    alleges.’ (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-08-04/corruption-alleged-in-long
    delayed-la-valley-college-theater-project) 

    These actions mirrored the treatment of a student who sued LAVC’s Media Arts Department in
    2009, alleging the same type of fraud and misconduct by nearly all the same Department Faculty.

    Enrique Caraveo vs Los Angeles Valley College, Eric Swelstad, Joseph D’Accurso, Arantxia
    Rodriguez, Dennis J. Reed among others. Filing Date: 05/18/2009 (https://unicourt.com/case/ca
    la2-enrique-caraveo-vs-los-angeles-valley-college-et-al-621337)

    In that case, Caraveo stated:

    46. When plaintiff complained about the above referenced matters, Swelstad and other Valley
    College officials retaliated against plaintiff by refusing to grant him a Certificate and creating a
    hostile learning environment for him in class.

    47. On or around June 2007 plaintiff satisfied the requirements to get a Cinema Arts Production
    Certificate (“Certificate”) at Valley College.

    54. On or about October 2008, Swelstad denied plaintiff the certificate via a letter even though
    plaintiff has fulfilled the requirements to get the Certificate.

    55. On or about October 13, 2008, plaintiff notified Delahoussaye and Reed that plaintiff had
    fulfilled all requirements for the Certificate and that they should take care of the matter as soon
    as possible. On or about October 13, 2008, Yasmin Delahoussaye and Dennis Reed denied
    request.”

    Dennis Reed, was at the time the Dean over the Media Arts Department and the husband of
    Annie G. Reed. Dennis Reed was later profiled in LAist Magazine on April 27, 2016 article ‘Jerk
    Driver Who Ran Cyclists Off Glendale Road Charged With Assault, Lying To Police’ (https://
    laist.com/news/justice-delivered-almost)

     More to the point – Dennis Reed also oversaw a grant program at Los Angeles Valley College
    Media Arts Department known as IDEAS – Institute for Developing Entertainment Arts and
    Studies at LAVC. The Grant was run by Dan Watanabe. (https://archive.org/details/
    cavgchm_002241/mode/2up?q=Annie+Reed+LAVC)

     Watanabe was also named in the Accreditation Complaint for Wage Theft, Improper use of funds
    and fraud in the successor grant ICT Doing What Matters, due to the college receiving Grant
    Money but immediately eliminating the curriculum the grant application said they would provide
    and like Caraveo’s complaint not providing in class training or labs. The complaints to
    Accreditation and the LACCD Personnel Commission by students also questioned the legitimacy
    of a number of professional experts, including Robert Reber – who was listed as both a ‘student
    worker’ and ‘professional expert’ in 2008. Student 1 further provided evidence to both that Dan
    Watanabe had asked him to falsify his resume claiming fictitious jobs and cited an employee in
    the LAVC Payroll office as being behind it (that employee immediately denied it and Student 1
    refused).

    Dennis Reed had also spent years lobbying for the approval of the VACC building –
    unsuccessfully.

    In short, Annie G. Reed’s retaliation and cover-up in 2016, may have been to help realize her
    husband’s failed building project as well as preemptively shutdown any investigations or audits
    that might trigger further scrutiny regarding how the IDEAS Grant was administered under his
    time as area Dean.

    Reed’s behavior of covering up abusive behavior towards members of the LACCD Community
    was also not limited to retaliation against students.

    In 2017, then LACCD Board President Andra Hoffman accused former Board President Scott
    Svonkin of abusive behavior and demanded sanctions. According to an article in the Los Angeles
    Daily News, ‘LA Community College board postpones sanction hearing vote against former
    4
    president’ August 28, 2017, Annie G. Reed again inserted herself into the matter to cover-up for
    Svonkin.

    “The allegations do not strike me as related to governing and seem best suited for mediation,”
    said Annie Reed, a district employee for 22 years and a representative of Teamsters Local 911. “I
    don’t ever recall a time, or a place, where he has treated his colleagues poorly.”

    Others disagreed, including two former women board members who did not speak at the
    downtown meeting.

    They said Hoffman’s critics — who they said weren’t present during the abuse — had a tendency
    to blame the victim, while ignoring Svonkin’s allegedly brusque treatment of employees.”
    (https://www.dailynews.com/2017/07/13/la-community-college-board-postpones-sanction
    hearing-vote-against-former-president/)

    Her behavior is further documented in a series of lawsuits against the LACCD District. 

    Filed October 03, 2024 Dr. Christiana Baskaran (Plaintiff), Linda Silva; Dr. Ruth Dela Cruz,
    Dr. Adriana Portugal, vs LACCD (including defendant Annie Reed). (https://trellis.law/doc/
    219882998/complaint-filed-by-dr-christiana-baskaran-plaintiff-linda-silva-plaintiff-dr-ruth-dela
    cruz-plaintiff-et-al-as-to-los-angeles-community-college-district-defendant-board-trustees-los
    angeles-community-college-district-defendant-los-angeles-c)

    “[other defendants] Annie Reed to discriminate against female faculty and staff, refused to
    investigate immediately or to take preventative action. Then Defendants and EMPLOYER
    DEFENDANTS retaliated against PLAINTIFFS and others to try and prevent them from
    complaining to authorities. When PLAINTIFFS opposed these illegal practices, they continued
    to retaliate against them.”

    24. As set forth herein, ALL Defendants were officers, agents. Defendants and directly or
    indirectly used or attempt to use their official authority or influence for the purpose of
    intimidating, threatening, coercing, commanding, or attempting to intimidate, threaten, coerce, or
    command PLAINTIFF and others for the purpose of interfering with the right of that person to
    disclose to an official agent matters within the scope of this article. EMPLOYER
    DEFENDANTS aided and abetted MARY GALLAGHER, ARMANDO RIVERA-FIGUEROA,
    ANN HAMILTON, JAMES LANCASTER, JOCELYN SIMPSON, JIM LANCASTER, ANNIE
    REED and Victoria Friedman District Complaince Officer, Genie-Sarceda-Magruder Interim
    Director Office for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Rick Von Kolen to violate this statute.

    28. . . .Dr Hamilton admitted to other illegal activity such as planting drugs on employees to
    destroy their reputation and get them fired. Dr Silva filed a grievance against Dean Hamilton to
    try and get her to stop the illegal activity, the union did nothing. 

    32. Ms. Silva complained to Human Resources filed a title IX complaint, made a report to the
    police and was retaliated against.

    Filed October 19, 2023 Sara Adams, An Individual VS California Institute of Technology,
    California Corporation. (https://trellis.law/case/23stcv25556/sara-adams-an-individual-vs
    california-institute-technology-california-corporation)

    “21. On April 7, 2023, Mr. Wu continued to report the pay disparity to Annie Reed, Upon
    information and belief, Annie Reed is Caltech’s Employee and Organizational Development
    Consultant (Human Resources Department). 

    22. Annie Reed spoke about the report of pay disparity to Ofelia Velazquez-Perez, Caltech’s
    Senior Director, Total Rewards and Director of Employee and Organizational Development
    (Employee Relations).”

    Filed March 08, 2021, Mitra Hoshiar, an individual, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Community
    College District, (https://trellis.law/case/21stcv08950/mitra-hoshiar-vs-los-angeles-community
    college-district-an-unknown-entity)

    “28. On December 3, 2015, PLAINTIFF then filed a discrimination complaint against Sheri
    Berger (“Berger”), VP of Academic Affairs, and Fernando Oleas (“Oleas”), Pierce Union
    President. During PLAINTIFF meeting with Dean Barbara Anderson (“Anderson”) at
    Anderson’s office on June 10, 2015, Berger and Oleas stopped by and started making remarks of
    PLAINTIFF’s accent for reading the graduates’ names on the ceremony with a non-American
    accent.

    29. Thereafter, On December 11, 2015, in meeting with Dean Annie Reed in conjunction with the
    non-collegiality investigation Walsh, Union Grievance Rep and Oleas stopped by at
    PLAINTIFF’s office in order to prevent PLAINTIFF from Union Representation. They made
    PLAINTIFF to Barbara Anderson, whom was PLANTIFF’s chosen union rep and request for
    Anderson to not join the meeting because Walsh and Oleas had to choose who could be the union
    representation in the meeting.

    30. Based on what had transpired on December 11, 2015, on December 14, 2015, Plaintiff filed a
    Whistleblower/Retaliation Complaint at the District’s Complaint at the District’s Compliance
    Office against Walsh, Oleas, and McKeever (department and union delegate), and other members
    of her department. No action was taken by the Compliance Office.

    Annie G. Reed’s, current interim Dean of Labor and Employee Relations, has been involved in
    covering up wrongdoing in the Los Angeles Community College District for decades. Her targets
    have involved employees, students, faculty, and even a trustee. And so far has never been held
    accountable.

    Multiple stories were published on newswire IndyBay, the news outlet branch of the San
    Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center between 2023 and 2024. They were then
    scrubbed (along with other stories) over the weekend of May 18, 2025.

    Recently, newly appointed Chancellor, Dr. Alberto J. Roman has been alerted to Ms. Reed’s
    disturbing history – it remains to be seen whether he will take corrective action, or continue to
    6
    keep around the same problematic individuals that resulted in his predecessor’s resignation after
    a vote of no-confidence by the LACCD Academic Senate.

    (To be continued…) 

    Source link