Tag: college

  • What High School Students Really Think About College

    What High School Students Really Think About College

    Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: colleges struggle to connect with their most important audience—students. Fresh data RNL’s research studies show a big disconnect between what higher education offers and what students need. A new report from the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education is waving red flags about dropping enrollment numbers and workforce gaps if colleges can’t step up their game and prove their worth.

    But what’s going on here?

    Show me the money: The cost crisis

    Here’s what keeps students up at night: money. Nearly all (93%) of prospective students are stressing about college costs (RNL & Halda, 2024). Let that sink in—we’re talking about almost every student thinking about college.

    The money story gets even more complicated:

    • 82% say they might not even apply because they’re worried about costs (RNL & ZeeMee, 2024)
    • 73% aren’t sure if their family can foot the bill (RNL & Halda, 2024)
    • Many don’t even try for financial aid because they assume they won’t qualify (RNL, Ardeo & Halda, 2024)

    “Is it worth it?”—The million-dollar question

    Students aren’t just worried about paying for college—they’re questioning whether it’s worth the investment. The stats tell us:

    • 60% wonder if college is worth the time, money, and effort
    • Only 63% see a job offer after graduation as their main goal
    • Half of students think they can make good money without a degree
      (RNL & Halda, 2024)

    Lost in the college maze

    In 2024, you’d think finding college info would be easy. Spoiler alert: it’s not. Check this out:

    • 72% say applying to college is just too hard (RNL, Ardeo & Halda, 2024)
    • 63% can’t figure out how to choose the right school (RNL & ZeeMee, 2024)
    • 53% don’t know where to get help with college planning
    • 51% are stuck at square one, not knowing where to start
      (RNL & Halda, 2024)

    Transforming the college experience: A blueprint for change

    The days of one-size-fits-all higher education are over. How can offer what students need?

    1. Simplify the journey

    Colleges must strip away the bureaucracy that scares away promising students. This means:

    • Creating a streamlined, user-friendly application process
    • Building intuitive websites that guide rather than confuse
    • Offering clear, step-by-step roadmaps to enrollment
    • Providing personalized application support based on each student’s background and needs

    2. Talk money from day one

    No more financial surprises or hidden costs. Colleges should:

    • Present total costs upfront, including living expenses and materials
    • Break down financial aid options in clear, everyday language
    • Show concrete examples of return on investment
    • Create customized financial planning tools that account for individual circumstances

    3. Show Real Results

    Students deserve to see the real impact of their investment:

    • Share detailed job placement data by major and career path
    • Report actual salary ranges for recent graduates
    • Feature diverse alumni success stories across different fields
    • Match potential career outcomes to students’ individual interests and goals

    3. Innovate the Learning Experience

    Education shouldn’t be rigid. Modern colleges must:

    • Design flexible learning paths that fit different lifestyles
    • Develop focused credential programs for specific career goals
    • Create clear pathways from certificates to full degrees
    • Offer personalized learning tracks based on student strengths and career objectives

    The future of higher education isn’t just about making things easier—it’s about making them work better for each individual student. Colleges that embrace these changes won’t just survive; they’ll thrive by truly serving their students’ needs.

    The future of higher education: A student-first revolution

    Let’s be honest: the old college playbook isn’t cutting it anymore. Students are drowning in debt, juggling full-time jobs with classes, and questioning whether a degree is worth the sacrifice. They’re not asking for less rigor—they’re asking for a system that acknowledges their reality.

    The WICHE report plainly states, “Demography need not be destiny.” But this isn’t just about numbers.

    • It’s about Darla raising two kids while pursuing her nursing degree.
    • It’s about Javier, the first in his family to consider college and has no roadmap to follow.
    • It’s about Sophia working two jobs just to afford textbooks.
    • It’s about Tyler, a baseball standout from rural Iowa whose guidance counselor is stretched too thin to help him navigate the recruiting process his parents never experienced.
    • It’s about Emma, whose well-meaning parents have taken over her college search entirely, leaving her silent and stressed about expressing her own dreams.

    These students aren’t looking for handouts. They’re looking for:

    • A system that respects their time and responsibilities
    • Clear paths that connect their education to real careers
    • Flexible options that don’t force them to choose between life and learning
    • Proof that their investment will pay off in tangible ways

    The colleges that will thrive aren’t the ones with the fanciest buildings or the most prestigious names. They’re the ones who dare to ask: “What do our students need to succeed?”

    Because here’s the truth: higher education isn’t just about preserving institutions. It’s about transforming lives. And right now, too many bright, capable students are being left behind by a system that wasn’t built for them.

    The future belongs to colleges brave enough to change. Not just with fancy words and mission statements but with real, student-centered solutions that make education accessible, achievable, and worth every dollar and hour invested.

    Reports cited in this blog—available for free download

    Source link

  • College Student Satisfaction: Reflecting on 30 Years

    College Student Satisfaction: Reflecting on 30 Years

    College students have changed greatly in 30 years, but how has student satisfaction changed?

    Think back 30 years ago to 1995. What is different for you now? Where were you and what were you doing in the mid 1990s? Perhaps you were still in school and living at home, or not even born yet. Perhaps you were in your early years of working in higher education. Take a moment to reflect on what has (and has not) changed for you in that span of time. 

    Thirty years ago, I was just starting my position at what was then Noel-Levitz. What stands out for me was that I was about to become a mom for the first time. Now my baby is grown and will be a new mom herself later this year. And I find myself being on one of the “seasoned professionals” in the company, working alongside members of my team who were still in elementary school back in 1995. 

    Thirty years ago, we were just beginning to utilize email and the internet. Now they have become the primary way we do business, communicate professionally, and discover information.  Artificial intelligence (AI) is the new technology that we are learning to embrace to improve our professional and personal lives.   

    Thirty years ago, students were arriving on our campuses, seeking an education, guidance, growth, belonging, value for their investment and ultimately a better life.  That’s still the case today.  Plus, students are navigating more technology options, they are more openly seeking mental health support, and they are living in a world full of distractions. Online learning is a reality now and continues to become more accepted as a modality, especially after the experiences of 2020. As the demographic cliff looms, colleges are expanding their focus to include lifelong learners. 

    Thirty years ago is also when the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) was launched to provide four-year and two-year institutions with a tool to better understand the priorities of their students. (In the early 2000s, we added survey instruments specifically for adult and online populations.) The data identified where the college was performing well and where it mattered for them to do better in order to retain their students to graduation. The concept of looking at satisfaction within the context of the level of importance was new back then, but in the past three decades, it has become the standard for capturing student perceptions. Since 1995, we have worked with thousands of institutions and collected data from millions of individuals, documenting what is important and where students are satisfied or dissatisfied with their experience. As we reach this 30-year milestone for the SSI, I took some time to reflect on what has changed in students’ perceptions and what has stayed the same.

    Consistent priorities

    What stood out to me as I reviewed the national data sets over the past 30 years is that what matters to students has largely stayed the same. Students continue to care about good advising, quality instruction and getting access to classes. The academic experience is highly valued by students and is the primary reason they are enrolled, now and then. 

    Another observation is that there are two areas that have been consistent priorities for improvement, especially at four-year private and public institutions:

    • Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
    • Adequate financial aid is available for most students. 

    These two items have routinely appeared as national challenges (areas of high importance and low satisfaction) over the decades, which shows that institutions continue to have opportunities to communicate value and address the financial pain points of students to make higher education accessible and affordable. 

    Campus climate is key

    One thing we have learned over the past thirty years is how students feel on campus is key to student success and retention. The research reflects the strongest links between students’ sense of belonging, feeling welcome, and enjoying their campus experience to their overall levels of satisfaction. High levels of satisfaction are linked to individual student retention and institutional graduation rates. Campuses that want to best influence students remaining enrolled are being intentional with efforts to show concern for students individually, building connections between students from day one, and continuing those activities as students progress each year. It is important for institutions to recognize that students have lots of options to receive a quality education, but the environment and the potential student “fit” is more likely to vary from location to location. What happens while a student is at the college they have selected is more impactful on them than which institution they ultimately chose. Creating welcoming environments and supporting students’ sense of belonging in the chosen college is a way for institutions to stand out and succeed in serving students. Colleges often ask, “Why do students leave?” when they could be asking, “Why do students stay?” Building positive campus cultures and expanding the “good stuff” being done for students is a way to critical way to improve student and institutional success.

    One sector where the data reflect high satisfaction scores and good consistency, especially in the past five years since the pandemic, is community colleges. Students attending their (often local) two-year institutions want to be there, with high percentages of students indicating the school is their first choice.  Community college students nationally indicate areas such as the campus staff being caring/helpful, students being made to feel welcome, and people on the campus respecting each other, as strengths (high importance and high satisfaction). These positive perceptions are also reflected with overall high levels of satisfaction and indications of a likelihood to re-enroll if the student had it to do over again. The data indicate that two-year institutions are doing a nice job of building a sense of community among primarily commuter student populations. 

    Systemic issues and pockets of improvement

    Everyone talks about “kids today,” but in reality, they have been doing that for generations. It can’t be a reason not to change and respond appropriately to the needs of current students. When we consider the priorities for improvement in higher education that have remained at the forefront, we may need to recognize that some of these areas are systemic to higher education, along with recognizing that higher education generally has not done enough to respond. There are certainly pockets of improvement at schools that have prioritized being responsive and, as a result, are seeing positive movement in student satisfaction and student retention, but that is not happening everywhere. Taking action based on student feedback is a powerful way to influence student success. The campuses that have bought into that concept are seeing the results. 

    Current student satisfaction national results

    Want to learn more about the current trends in student satisfaction?  I invite you to download the 2024 National Student Satisfaction and Priorities Report. 

    This year’s analysis takes a closer look at the national results by demographic subpopulations, primarily by class level, to get a clearer view on how to improve the student experience. Institutions have found that targeting initiatives for particular student populations can be an effective way to have the biggest impact on student satisfaction. Download your free copy today.

    Source link

  • Biden administration opened ‘new chapter’ on college financing, Kvaal says

    Biden administration opened ‘new chapter’ on college financing, Kvaal says

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

    James Kvaal is the outgoing U.S. under secretary of education. His tenure ends with the inauguration of Donald Trump on Jan. 20.

    After decades of an accelerating student debt crisis, Joe Biden is the first president to use every available tool to alleviate the burden of borrowing for college. He will be remembered for turning the page on the worst consequences of the country’s failed experiment with debt-financed college and beginning a new chapter on how to pay for higher education.

    For the past two generations, increasing reliance on student debt seemed like an easy solution to paying for college. Loan terms were set at no cost to the government, and students were expected to easily earn enough to pay the loans back following graduation.

    But it didn’t work out that way. One in three borrowers don’t graduate, leaving them with debt but no degree. Because interest piles up so fast, more than 20 million people owe more than they borrowed. Before the pandemic, more than a million people default on their college loans every year.

    Some critics say that student debt affects borrowers of all income levels equally. But hair stylists, massage therapists and other workers earning modest wages often went into debt to get the training, certificates or degrees needed for their jobs. And debt is not just a problem for the roughly 43 million people with student loans. It hurts their families and communities because it stands in the way of economic security, homeownership and potential new businesses.

    .

    James Kvaal, the U.S. under secretary of education under President Joe Biden

    Permission granted by U.S. Department of Education

     

    Others say we should eliminate student debt altogether. But until Congress and states invest in lower tuitions and larger scholarships — as President Biden has proposed — loans will remain essential for many low-income and middle-class students.

    The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated these festering problems. Nearly 3 of every 5 students lacked adequate access to food or housing during the pandemic, putting them at risk of dropping out. And most borrowers of modest means expected they couldn’t afford loan payments.

    By pausing payments and interest on federal loans, the administration saved the average borrower in repayment more than $3,800 and helped them persevere through the national emergency. President Biden also fought partisan opponents in court for up to $20,000 in one-time relief for borrowers — all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    While the pause gave borrowers a break, the U.S. Department of Education worked on long-term solutions.

    First, we focused on people who were owed forgiveness but were blocked by bureaucracy.

    For example, only 7,000 people had ever received Public Service Loan Forgiveness from the program’s creation in 2007 to when President Biden took office in 2021. Many public servants planned their careers around this benefit only to learn too late that they had the wrong type of loan or had spent years in the wrong repayment plan. Now, more than 1 million borrowers have received the relief they earned.

    We also kept promises to borrowers with permanent disabilities and those who were cheated by colleges. In total, we have approved more than 5 million people for loan relief. Many more borrowers are set to benefit in the years to come.

    I’ve heard countless stories about what this life-changing relief has meant for Americans. They say they are finally able to plan for retirement, pay off medical expenses, or even have more children.

    At the same time, not all of our efforts succeeded. Some 40 million borrowers and their families continue to feel the weight of both the Supreme Court decision to deny one-time relief and litigation hindering our ability to help borrowers experiencing hardship.

    Second, to help people with low incomes and high debts, the Biden administration created Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE — an income-driven repayment plan that could cut monthly payments in half for eligible borrowers. People making payments would finally see their balances going down, instead of up due to ballooning interest.

    SAVE served almost 8 million people before partisan lawsuits held it up, and it’s now under judicial review. The SAVE plan is similar to other repayment plans the department has created over the past 30 years, and we continue to defend it in court.

    Source link

  • Common App data shows 5% jump in first-year college applicants

    Common App data shows 5% jump in first-year college applicants

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

     Dive Brief:

    • First-year Common Applications are up 5% year over year, with over 1.2 million prospective students submitting the forms for the 2024-25 application cycle as of Jan. 1, the company said Thursday.
    • First-year applications ticked up across both institution types and student demographics, but some groups saw accelerated growth. Common App found disproportionate increases among students believed to be from low-income households and those who identified as underrepresented minorities. 
    • Applications to public institutions grew by 11% year over year, outpacing the 3% growth seen at private colleges, Thursday’s report said. 

    Dive Insight:

    Applications from prospective first-year students have steadily increased since the 2020-21 application cycle, Common App found. 

    That’s despite the challenges that have thrown aspects of college admissions into tumult, including the botched rollout of the updated Free Application for Federal Student Aid during the 2024-25 cycle and the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2023 ban on race-conscious admissions.

    Roughly 960,000 students used the Common App portal to submit over 4.8 million applications during the 2020-21 cycle. In the 2024-25 cycle, over 1.2 million users submitted just under 6.7 million applications.

    Prospective students can continue to apply to colleges through the month and beyond. But a majority of applications for the following fall semester are traditionally submitted by the end of December. 

    The number of colleges first-year prospects applied to ticked up slightly between 2020-21 and 2024-25, but remained between five and six institutions. 

    Common App found disproportionate application growth among students from low-income households. The portal does not directly collect household income from applicants, but researchers used students who were eligible for fee waivers as a proxy. Application rates for that group increased by 10%, compared to 2% for their counterparts who weren’t eligible for the waivers.

    Moreover, applications from students in ZIP codes where median incomes fall below the national average grew 9% since the 2023-24 cycle, compared to 4% growth from those in above-median income areas, Common App found.

    The company also saw more applications from minority groups underrepresented in higher education, classified by researchers as those who identify as Black or African American, Latinx, Native American or Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander.

    As of Jan. 1, 367,000 underrepresented applicants used Common App to submit first-year applications. But their numbers are growing at a faster rate than their counterparts.

    Among students in underrepresented groups, first-year applications grew by 13% since last year, compared to the 2% growth for the others. 

    Latinx and Black or African American candidates drove much of that growth, showing year-over-year increases of 13% and 12%, respectively.

    However, it appears that students are reconsidering their application materials following the 2023 Supreme Court decision. In June, separate Common App research found a decrease in the number of Asian, Black, Latinx and White students referencing race or ethnicity in their college essays.

    Thursday’s report also found more first-year students including standardized test scores in their applications, up 10% since last year. The number of applicants leaving them out remained unchanged year over year.

    “This marks the first time since the 2021–22 season that the growth rate of test score reporters has surpassed that of non-reporters, narrowing the gap between the two groups,” the report said.

    That’s despite interest slowing in highly selective colleges, the type of institutions that have historically most used standardized test scores in the admissions process.

    Applications to colleges with acceptance rates below 25% grew just 2% in 2024-25, Common App found. That’s compared to the between 8% and 9% increases seen at institutions of all other selectivity levels.

    Just 5% of the colleges on Common App required test scores in the 2024-25 application cycle, a slight uptick from the 4% that did so the previous year. 

    COVID-19 pushed many institutions with test requirements to temporarily waive this mandate, and some ultimately made the change permanent.

    But others returned to their original rules. And reversal announcements continue to trickle in, including one from the highly selective University of Miami just this past Friday. 

    Source link

  • Rise in college applications driven by minority students

    Rise in college applications driven by minority students

    The number of first-year applicants this cycle is up 5 percent over January of last year, according to a new report from Common App, and overall applications rose 7 percent.

    The growth was buoyed by a sharp uptick in underrepresented students: Latino applicants increased 13 percent, Black applicants by 12 percent and first-generation applicants by 14 percent. Asian applicants rose by 7 percent, while the number of white applicants didn’t change.

    A Common App analysis also found that the number of applicants from low-income neighborhoods increased more than those from neighborhoods above the median income level—by 9 percent, compared to 4 percent. And the number of applicants who qualify for a fee waiver is up 10 percent so far.

    Geographically, applicant trends seemed to follow broader demographic trends; they surged by 33 percent in the Southwest, with a 36 percent boost in Texas alone, while every other region remained relatively stable. The Western region saw applicants decline by 1 percent.

    In general, students are applying to about the same number of schools as last year, with only a 2 percent increase in applications per student. Public institutions have received 11 percent more applications, while private ones have received 3 percent more.

    For the first time since 2019, domestic applicant growth outpaced that of international applicants, with the former increasing by 5 percent and the latter slowing to 1 percent. Certain high-volume countries experienced steep declines: The number of applicants from Africa fell by 14 percent, and Ghana in particular saw a 36 percent decrease. Applicants from other increasingly popular source countries for international students surged; Bangladesh, for instance, saw 45 percent growth.

    The number of applicants who submitted test scores was about even with the number who didn’t. For the past four years, since test-optional policies were implemented in 2020, no-score applicants have significantly outnumbered those who submitted scores, but institutions returning to test requirements may be swinging the pendulum back.

    Source link

  • Why Personalization in College Planning Matters More Than Ever

    Why Personalization in College Planning Matters More Than Ever

    College planning has become far more complex than filling out forms and writing essays. RNL’s research reveals a striking truth: Today’s students are overwhelmed, skeptical, and craving personalized guidance more than ever before.

    The modern student’s dilemma

    Picture this: Seven out of ten high school students find navigating the college application process challenging. They’re not just intimidated by the paperwork—they’re questioning the entire value proposition of higher education. Half believe they can build a successful career without a college degree, while 60 percent wrestle with whether college is worth their time and money.

    These aren’t just statistics. They represent real students sitting at kitchen tables across the country, staring at their laptops, trying to make one of the most significant decisions of their lives.

    The financial reality check

    Money talks, and it’s speaking louder than ever in college planning. The numbers tell a sobering story: over 90 percent of high school juniors and seniors find financing their education somewhere between “somewhat difficult” and “very difficult.” Even more telling, 60 percent of juniors and 65 percent of seniors will immediately cross a college off their list based on the sticker price alone.

    But here’s where it gets interesting: Financial aid and scholarships have become the primary hook for attracting students, with 81 percent of juniors and 78 percent of seniors ranking them as crucial factors in college choice. This isn’t just about affordability—it’s about perceived value and accessibility.

    The shifting sands of student priority

    What catches a student’s attention these days? The research shows a clear hierarchy:

    • Financial aid and scholarships (63%)
    • Athletic programs (47%) if they are interested in playing sports at the college level
    • Academic programs (43%)
    • Career placement (38%)

    But getting students interested is only half the battle. Our study reveals a fascinating pattern of why initial interest fades. Cost remains the primary deal-breaker, with 57 percent of students citing it as why they lose interest in a school. However, other factors like program availability (37%) and admission concerns (24%) play significant roles, too.

    The power of late-stage decisions

    The most surprising finding is this: 66 percent of students discover and become interested in new colleges during their senior year, and 89 percent apply to these late-discovered schools. This challenges the conventional wisdom about early outreach being the only path to enrollment success.

    The personalization imperative

    Today’s students aren’t just looking for information—they’re looking for recognition. They expect colleges to:

    • Provide program-specific details tailored to their interests
    • Deliver accurate, personalized responses to their questions
    • Acknowledge their unique situations and backgrounds
    • Communicate in culturally relevant ways
    • Use their names (yes, it matters)
    • Recognize and respect their diverse identities

    Making it personal: The path forward

    For colleges and universities, the message is clear: Generic, one-size-fits-all recruitment approaches no longer cut it. The future lies in personalized admissions counseling, tailored communication campaigns, and customized campus experiences. But most importantly, institutions need to address students’ financial concerns head-on with transparent, customized information about costs, aid, and scholarships.

    The bottom line

    The college planning landscape has evolved beyond recognition. Today’s students are savvier, more skeptical, and more demanding than ever. They’re not just looking for a college—they’re looking for one that understands them, values them, and can demonstrate why their investment will pay off.

    The opportunity is enormous for institutions willing to embrace this new reality and invest in personalization. After all, in a world where 72 percent of students find applying to college difficult, being the institution that makes it easier, more precise, and more personal isn’t just good service—it’s a competitive advantage.

    The future of college recruitment isn’t about reaching more students; it’s about reaching each student in the way that matters most to them.

    Learn more about what research says about personalization

    The Importance of Personalization in College Planning: From Interest to Application

    Join me and presenters from our partners Halda for our webinar, The Importance of Personalization in College Planning: From Interest to Application. We will cover trends that may surprise you, insights that can help you increase engagement with students, and actionable strategies you can use.

    Register now to hear more about what the latest research tells us about personalization with students.

    Source link

  • Higher education postcard: Trinity College, Carmarthen

    Higher education postcard: Trinity College, Carmarthen

    It is 1848, and a spectre is haunting Europe. If you’re Karl Marx, that spectre is communism. But if you’re a member of the god-fearing gentry in west Wales, that spectre is the lack of education!

    Here’s the South Wales and Monmouthshire Training College, later Trinity College, Carmarthen, later still part of University of Wales Trinity Saint David. It was opened in 1848, following the efforts of the National Society for Promoting the Education of the Poor in the Principles of the Established Church in England and Wales (they loved a snappy title in the nineteenth century). The National Society, as it was better known, had been established in 1811 to promote a religious education, mostly via Sunday schools. And there was a counterpart – the British and Foreign School Society for the Education of the Labouring and Manufacturing Classes of Society of Every Religious Persuasion – established in 1808 and 1814, which did the same but with less religion.

    I’ve written before about how education policy in England and Wales developed slowly, and that compulsory, free education for children was a long time coming. The efforts of the National Society and the British and Foreign School Society had a big impact. And they included not only the operation of schools, but of training colleges for teachers.

    Let’s take in the report from the magnificently named Monmouthshire Merlin of Saturday 4 November 1848 to get a flavour of the excitement in Carmarthen:

    OPENING of the TRAINING COLLEGE CARMARTHEN.

    This interesting event, which was anxiously looked forward to by the clergy and members of the Church Establishment in the Principality, took place on Tuesday week. The weather was very unpropitious; heavy showers descending the whole of the morning, which greatly marred the appearance of the imposing spectacle, and no doubt hindered many distant clergymen and gentlemen, as well as a great number of the respectable inhabitants of the town, from joining in the procession. At eleven o’clock the procession moved from the Town-Hall in the following order:

    Police Constables of the Borough.

    The Mayor and Corporation.

    The Magistrates.

    The Welsh Education Committee.

    The Principal, Vice-Principal, and Master of the Training College.

    The Clergy, in their gowns.

    The Gentry and Inhabitants of the Neighbourhood. &c., &c.

    After the procession reached St. Peter’s Church, divine service was performed, and the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of St Da vid’s preached an excellent sermon, with his usual eloquence and ability, from the 12th chapter of the Romans, and the 6th, 7th, and 8th verses. The collection at the close of his lordship s eloquent appeal amounted to £ 67. 14s. 4d., a much larger sum than had ever been previously collected at St. Peters Church on any occasion. After the conclusion of the service, the procession was not re-formed; the parties departed, and proceeded towards the Training College, to partake of the cold collation which had been provided at that place. No ceremony was performed at the college, in connection with its opening, any farther than the throwing open of the doors to admit the visitors and others interested in the proceedings. The place is now ready for the reception of pupils, as the masters are in residence, and the arrangements are all complete. From the celebrity of the principal. and the salubrious situation of the college, we have no doubt that many will avail themselves of the opportunities now offered to them at this Training Institution. The building of the college is finished in the best style of workmanship, is replete with every convenience required by the pupils, and it reflects great credit on the architect and others concerned. The Model Schools are also in a state of great forwardness; and as the workmen have now been transferred from the Training College to them, it is expected they will be ready for opening in a very short time.

    Romans chapter 12 verses 6, 7 and 8, by the way, read as follows:

    6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;

    7 Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;

    8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness.

    The college did well. In 1967 there was an entrance examination for places, with tuition fees waived, and travelling expenses for successful students, as noted by the Carmarthen Journal of 26 July 1867. Note that the better students were given more money for travelling expenses; and that “all persons of good health and character” did not include women: the college first admitted women in 1957.

    The college formally changed its name to Trinity College Carmarthen in 1931, although it seems likely that the name was used informally before then. I have seen, for example, a newspaper article of 1894 referring to its as Trinity College Carmarthen; and the postcard itself is certainly earlier than the 1930s.

    Like most colleges, over time it grew, added new subjects and generally thrived. The college building expanded from that shown on the card, with other facilities and residences. In 1990 it became affiliated to the University of Wales, and became a full member college in 2004. By this time, of course, the University of Wales was in a degree of turmoil, with exits as well as entrances. Trinity gained degree awarding powers in 2008, became Trinity University College in 2009, and in 2010 merged with St David’s College – or University of Wales Lampeter – to form University of Wales Trinity Saint David.

    Its most famous alumnus is arguably Barry John, one of the great fly halves of the legendary 1970s Welsh rugby team, and the punchline to Max Boyce’s Hymns and Arias.

    The card was posted, but sadly the stamp has been removed, so the postmark is missing. It was sent to Mr Williams in the Cottage Hospital, Caernarfon. The original message in Cymraeg is below. As best as I can tell, the first part reads something like:

    The weather for pilgrims far away is very good. We will be coming home next weekend.

    (This probably isn’t entirely right.)

    And then I can’t make out the words in the second half, so no chance of a translation, however bad. Can any reader do this?

    Here’s a jigsaw for you too.

    Source link

  • New York governor proposes free community college initiative

    New York governor proposes free community college initiative

    During her State of the State address on Tuesday, New York governor Kathy Hochul announced a plan to make community college tuition-free for residents pursuing associate degrees in certain high-demand fields. 

    The program would be open to adults aged 25 to 55 pursuing degrees in nursing, teaching, technology fields and engineering. If enacted, it could take effect as early as this fall and cover tuition, fees and textbook costs for students attending State University of New York and City University of New York community colleges. Hochul also proposed the creation of new apprenticeship programs for similar high-demand jobs. 

    Currently, New York students from families making under $125,000 can attend SUNY and CUNY schools tuition-free, regardless of their degree program. For most of its nearly 200-year existence, all CUNY schools were free for New York residents to attend. That policy was abandoned after the 1976 city financial crisis.

    In recent years, a number of states have enacted free tuition initiatives targeted to midcareer adults and aimed at boosting employment in specific high-demand jobs. Massachusetts’s new MassReconnect program led to a surge in community college enrollment last year, and Michigan enacted a similar plan last summer.

    Source link

  • No speech for you: College fires professor for calling America ‘racist fascist country’ in email to students

    No speech for you: College fires professor for calling America ‘racist fascist country’ in email to students

    When tenured Millsaps College professor James Bowley sent an email sharing his opinion on the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, he didn’t anticipate it would result in his termination. But in a perfect storm of overreach and red tape, that’s exactly what happened. 

    On Nov. 6, 2024 — the day after the election — Bowley emailed the students in his “Abortion and Religions” class, canceling that day’s session to “mourn and process this racist fascist country.” With only three students in the class, Bowley got to know them quite well, including their political feelings, and knew canceling class would be best for those students. As Bowley told FIRE, “I just want to be caring and kind to my students, whom I knew would be troubled by the election.” Bowley wasn’t just trying to get out of work; he did not cancel the much larger first-year writing class session he taught that same day because he had no reason to know how those students felt about the election. 

    Two days later, Millsaps Provost Stephanie Rolph informed Bowley that he had been placed on temporary administrative leave pending review, for the bizarre offense of using his “Millsaps email account to share personal opinions with [his] students.” 

    That’s right: Millsaps didn’t take issue with Bowley canceling class (likely because they’d have to punish lots of people; professors cancel class for all sorts of reasons). The only cited reason was the use of his email to share personal opinions with students, which unsurprisingly is not an actual policy violation. That’s right: The college simply fabricated a policy violation so it could punish a professor for his speech. Frank Neville, president of the private college, has ignored hundreds of calls to reinstate Bowley, who was unable to do his job for over three months until yesterday, when he was eventually fired.

    Welcome to Millsaps, a labyrinth of academic bureaucracy where personal opinions may not be shared.

    Millsaps College president Frank Neville denied a committee recommendation and doubled down on Bowley’s leave being both justified and necessary, without explanation. (Barbara Gauntt / Clarion Ledger / USA TODAY NETWORK)

    Professor punished without due process

    Everything about Bowley’s treatment goes directly against Millsaps’ own fundamental principles of “freedom of speech and expression.” While Millsaps is a private institution not bound by the First Amendment, its commitment to free speech leads any reasonable student or faculty member to believe they are being promised expressive rights that align with the First Amendment. 

    Courts have recognized protection for a great deal of faculty speech on matters of public concern (say, a presidential election) because higher education depends on the wide exposure to robust exchanges of thoughts and ideas. But Millsaps’ actions here signal that it doesn’t take its own principles seriously and is making up its own standards for free speech and expression. That’s not okay with us — and it’s unfair to the students and faculty of Millsaps.

    Not only did FIRE request that Millsaps drop the investigation and reinstate Bowley, but so did more than 100 students, reportedly, (pretty impressive for a college of only about 600) and over 500 alumni. And when Bowley contested the provost’s decision to place him on leave, a grievance committee made up of faculty members determined that Millsaps couldn’t identify a single policy that Bowley had violated. The committee recommended that Bowley be reinstated immediately.

    FIRE remains by Bowley’s side, fighting for his return to teaching — and his right to share his opinions with students.

    The grievance committee, like FIRE, also found that Bowley was not afforded proper due process. Bowley was placed on leave before receiving a hearing and final determination. By doing so, the provost created an intermediary step in the process of dismissing a professor that exists nowhere in the handbooks — all without Bowley having any prior violations or disciplinary actions taken against him.

    But Neville seemed unfazed by the calls from the Millsaps community and unconvinced by the facts presented to him. On Jan. 10, Neville denied the grievance committee’s recommendation and doubled down on Bowley’s leave being both justified and necessary, without explanation.

    Calls to reinstate Bowley continued, this time reaching tens of thousands of people. But that still wasn’t enough. On Jan. 14, Bowley was told in a meeting that he was fired for not exercising restraint and not clarifying that his views were not that of the college’s. To be clear: The college fired Bowley for an offense – not clarifying that his views were not that of the college’s – of which he wasn’t accused. It’s no surprise that Bowley could not extricate himself from what Millsaps made into an impossible situation. 

    Ferris State cannot punish professor for comedic — and now viral — video jokingly referring to students as ‘cocksuckers’ and ‘vectors of disease’

    News

    It’s a joke, people. But violating faculty rights is not.


    Read More

    Even if the college had originally charged Bowley with not clarifying that his views were not that of the college’s, his email to his class still wouldn’t qualify. Whatever interest Millsaps may have in preventing faculty from purporting to speak on its behalf does not justify automatic punishment for simply not asserting that one isn’t speaking for the college. In fact, the Supreme Court has held that a teacher could not be punished for a letter to the editor he wrote in which he identified himself as a teacher at a certain school. Just because Bowley is identified as working at Millsaps (via his faculty email), doesn’t mean his speech is transformed into speech on behalf of the college. 

    Millsaps cannot overcome this principle just because it wants faculty to indicate whether views expressed “are individual or those of the institution.” Nothing in Bowley’s email can reasonably be interpreted as speaking on behalf of Millsaps, as it is commonly understood that when using their college email, faculty members are speaking for themselves rather than conveying that they speak for their employer. And here, Bowley was very clearly sharing an opinion – a criticism of an election outcome – that any reasonable person would understand as being his own opinion. 

    Bowley told FIRE yesterday: “I love Millsaps College and even more I love my students, but censorship by an administration by definition means that it is not education anymore; it is not a legitimate college.”

    FIRE remains by Bowley’s side, fighting for his return to teaching — and his right to share his opinions with students.

    Source link

  • Retention tied to timely completion for college students

    Retention tied to timely completion for college students

    Analysis of completion from the class entering in 2016 finds persistence is a significant factor in timely completion among associate and bachelor’s degree seekers.

    Phira Phonruewiangphing/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Over 36 million Americans have earned some college credits but have yet to complete a credential, demonstrating gaps in higher education that leave students with only part of a degree and often student loan debt.

    Colleges and universities have invested in their retention strategies to improve students’ completion and the cost of education by helping them complete a degree in a timely manner.

    Recent data from the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center found that academic outcomes in the first year and first- to second-year persistence were significant indicators of a student’s likelihood of completing a degree and doing so expeditiously.

    Survey Says 

    A 2023 Student Voice survey from Inside Higher Ed and College Pulse found 69 percent of undergraduate survey respondents (n=3,004) expected to graduate in the standard two- or four-year time frame.

    Thirteen percent of respondents said they didn’t expect to graduate in a timely manner because they planned or expected to take longer, and 3 percent said it was due to factors that they believe to be the fault of the institution.

    The background: The federal government tracks first-time degree seekers’ graduation rates in terms of six- and eight-year completion, but a typical associate or bachelor’s degree program can be categorized as two-year or four-year, respectively.

    The six-year completion rate for all college students entering two-year and four-year institutions in 2017 was 62.2 percent, with a 34-percentage-point gap between private nonprofit four-year institutions (77.5 percent) and public two-year colleges (43.4 percent).

    Timely completion is associated with lower financial burdens, due to prolonged enrollment and improved socioeconomic mobility for students, as well as optimized institutional resources for the institution. Individual challenges and institutional policies can impact students’ timely progression, including academic challenges, personal struggles, basic needs insecurity, financial instability, transfer barriers, unclear degree requirements, developmental education, registration policies or insufficient advising.

    The study evaluates early success indicators, including first-year GPA, credit completion ratios, second-year enrollment and credits earned, and how these indicators predict completion across credential types and demographic profiles.

    Methodology

    Timely completion, as defined by the report authors, is “the student having earned the credential they initially sought, at any institution, within a specific time frame,” allowing for variance between associate, credential or bachelor’s programs.

    Researchers evaluated four factors: first-year credit completion ratio, first-year credits earned, first-year grade point average and second-year enrollment. Study participants (n=307,500) included first-time, full-time starters enrolled in fall 2016 in bachelor’s degree (63 percent) or associate programs (37 percent). Data was sourced from the Postsecondary Data Partnership by the National Student Clearinghouse and therefore is not representative of the national population.

    The findings: Researchers found a majority of timely completers demonstrated early success indicators, including having a significant number of credits earned, above a 3.3 GPA and re-enrollment for a second year. Further, “Students who completed in a timely manner had higher early indicators than non-completers, regardless of race, gender, age at entry, or major field of study,” according to the report.

    Even students who took 150 percent (three years for an associate degree, six years for a bachelor’s) or 200 percent (four and eight years, respectively) of the expected time to complete had higher success indicators than their noncompleting peers.

    In their first year, students who completed a credential had higher GPAs, earned more credits and completed on average 90 percent of the credits they attempted. They were also more often enrolled in their second year—even if at another institution—compared to their peers who did not finish in a timely manner.

    First- to second-year persistence was a distinct factor of timely completion for two-year or certificate students; students who did not complete enrolled in their second year at a rate 32 percentage points lower than those who did complete. This was the most important success indicator, followed by first-year credits earned.

    For bachelor’s degree seekers, a student’s first-year GPA was the most important early success indicator, followed by second-year retention.

    A student’s field of study can also relate to their timely completion, with bachelor’s degree seekers majoring in social sciences or business more likely to complete and associate degree seekers pursuing STEM or a social science degree more likely to complete. However, the researchers utilized program of study as a demographic category, and therefore analysis cannot be made of program requirements or courses that could help or hinder student completion.

    “These findings emphasize the need for targeted, evidence-based interventions that prioritize early academic achievement, support retention, and address program-specific challenges to improve completion outcomes,” according to the report.

    Get more content like this directly to your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribe here.

    Source link