Between 1997 and 2025, the proportion of women serving on community college boards grew from 33 percent to 47 percent.
Maricopa County Community College District
New data shows that community college trustees have become more reflective of the diverse student bodies they serve over the past three decades.
That’s one of the big takeaways from a report the Association of Community College Trustees published last week in partnership with the Center for the Study of Community Colleges, which shows that the proportion of women serving on community college boards is on the rise. Between 1997 and 2025, female representation on the boards grew from 33 percent to 47 percent, with the biggest increases coming in the past seven years. During the same time frame, the proportion of nonwhite trustees grew from roughly 12 percent to 27 percent.
Association of Community College Trustees/Center for the Study of Community Colleges
While disparities remain, that breakdown is now closer to mirroring the diversity of community college students. In 2025, 57 percent of students were women and 58 percent identified as people of color, according to data from the American Association of Community Colleges.
The report, “Community College Trusteeship in 2025: A Commitment to Serve,” draws on surveys of more than 2,000 community college trustees and 40 qualitative interviews with trustees, building on similar reports from 1997 and 2018. The study demonstrates that trustees “have a pulse on their communities’ needs, a deep commitment to the community college mission of open access to high-quality higher education for all people, and the kind of visionary thinking needed to keep their institutions thriving,” ACCT president and CEO Jee Hang Lee said in a news release.
That’s in part because community college governing boards are also more likely now to have members who attended a community college.
In 2025, 64 percent of trustees attended a community college and 27 percent previously worked at one, according to the report. In 1997, only 51 percent of trustees had been community college students and 22 percent had been employees. Today’s trustees also are also showcasing the earning potential of community college graduates: 71 percent of trustees who attended a two-year college made at least $100,000 a year in 2025, while 31 percent made close to $200,000, according to the report.
Association of Community College Trustees/Center for the Study of Community Colleges
In an interview, one such trustee said that attending a community college first allowed them to continue on to a university “to get my education at a reasonable cost and also to improve my life and my business.”
For many trustees, those firsthand experiences with the community college system have also translated into enthusiasm for higher education governance work. “I was a nontraditional college student,” one said in an interview for the report. “I went back to school with three kids in tow and got my bachelor’s and my master’s, and it’s just something that I believe in.”
That’s a common trajectory for community college trustees.
Among trustees who were once community college students, 83 percent have a bachelor’s or higher degree, and 54 percent have a graduate or professional degree. And over all, trustees have become even more educated over the past 28 years. Although the vast majority of trustees have long held a college degree, the proportion with a bachelor’s degree rose from 84 percent to 86 percent between 1997 and 2025; the proportion with a graduate or professional degree rose from 50 percent to 59 percent.
But other aspects of community college governance haven’t changed as much since the 1990s, the report shows.
In 2025, trustees spent an average of five hours a week on board duties—hardly any change from 1997. Similarly, trustees identified funding, access and affordability as top challenges in 1997, 2018 and in 2025. This year, however, 63 percent of trustees also cited enrollment as a top issue, “likely stemming from the fact that most states have begun to experience the anticipated enrollment cliff,” the report noted.
Community college trustees have also maintained high levels of trust in and support for their college leaders. In 2025, 94 percent of respondents indicated a “somewhat or very strong level of trust” between boards and presidents, while 96 reported somewhat or very strong levels of support—numbers that have hardly changed since 1997.
Association of Community College Trustees/Center for the Study of Community Colleges
And that’s an essential aspect of effective governance, one trustee said in an interview.
“The demands [on] a college president are huge, and [it’s a] difficult job, which is one reason [that] when you get somebody, you’ve got to support them,” they said. “You hire somebody and then you get out of their way and let them do what you hired them to do. That is so important.”
Colleges and universities sit on a large wealth of data, ranging from student attendance and interactions with learning management systems to employment and earnings data for graduates. But uniting legacy systems and having responsive data remains a wicked problem for many institutions.
This year, Central New Mexico Community College is deploying a new AI-powered predictive analytics tool, CampusLens, part of CampusWorks, to improve data visibility in student retention, early alerts and career outcomes.
In the latest episode of Voices of Student Success, host Ashley Mowreader speaks with Tracy Hartzler, president of Central New Mexico Community College, to discuss the risks with taking on new tools, the college’s approach to change management and the need for more responsive data.
An edited version of the podcast appears below.
Q: Can you introduce yourself, your role and your institution?
Tracy Hartzler, President of Central New Mexico Community College
A: My name is Tracy Hartzler. I’m president of Central New Mexico Community College. We’re located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. We serve three counties around us, and our population is about 900,000 residents in our area, so it’s about half the state of New Mexico who lives in our service area, but it’s an incredibly diverse area.
We have a significant population of Hispanic, Latino students. We have a large population of Indigenous students, as well. We are the largest undergraduate institution in the state, and that’s distinct because we only issue or grant certificates and associate degrees. We are not a bachelor’s degree–granting institution, so our focus really is on those students who are seeking entry into college—whether that’s our dual credit students who are still in high school—but also those who are returning for upskilling. They’ve already earned their bachelor’s degree or degrees, and they’re coming back for some hands-on or applied skills, or those who are getting back into education and training because they’re looking for greater financial stability.
Like so many other colleges, we know we want to learn from others, and so we’re really proud that we work with many of our other colleges across the state of New Mexico, but we certainly engage in conversations with leaders and schools who participate in American Association of Community Colleges who are part of the global community college leader network.
But we’re really pleased and we’ve been really pushed by our peers who are members of the Alliance for Innovation and Transformation—group of higher education institutions, there’s about 60 of us—with some other thought partners to really help us think how we can best leverage technology and change our processes and deliver better education and training for our students and better serve our employers.
We also are relying on lessons learned from those outside of higher education, so whether it’s in hospitality, healthcare, manufacturing and others. So while we know we have great work to do in New Mexico, and we are incredibly fortunate to work with strong partners who tell us what they want and how we can best serve them, we certainly look to other schools and other organizations to help us make those transitions faster so we can better serve our community.
Q: From my vantage point, it seems community colleges are often some of the most nimble when it comes to learning from other institutions.
A: Absolutely. You know, it’s great to be scrappy. I think we and here at CNM, we certainly punch above our weight. We are excited to take on new challenges. We are, frankly, fortunate to be able to move faster. So, if something doesn’t work, we can pivot away from it entirely or continue to revise it. And frankly, the urgency to do so is really placed on us by our employer partners, our community partners and our students. They really are pressing us to be responsive to them because they don’t have time to waste, and they certainly don’t have resources to waste. So, we really step in. And again, I don’t think CNM is unique in that we all respond to the need as quickly and as best we can.
Q: We’re talking today about a new AI-powered predictive analytics tool that you all implemented. Historically, what has been the college’s retention and persistence strategy? What are some of the challenges you have seen when supporting students?
A: Before the pandemic, we were able to and we were participating in a lot of futures work: What do students need? What do they need now? What do employers need in the future? Which, at that time, seemed so far off, and so we were already on a journey again, whether it was working with AFIT or others to help us better identify what we needed to do and how we needed to change to better meet our student and our employer needs.
We knew that that would include certainly technology and leveraging technology, but we also knew it would mean changing how we do things, how we schedule, how we use the data in our systems. And we also knew we have a tremendous amount of information. We have a lot of data, but like so many other places, it’s in seven legacy systems. And we have over 100 applications that help our data systems talk to each other, to generate reports that our staff use, and it’s incredibly challenging to wrangle this data in a way that is useful, that helps us drive and drive change again.
Most of the data is legacy data. It’s what happened last year, and how do we think that’s going to improve? What are we doing now to then improve performance a year ahead, and then we hope that what we do over the next year meets the need, but it takes us too long to really react.
So, we were looking for ways to take the assets we have—which includes our incredible faculty and a number of our leaders and our office of data strategy and some of our contractors, like CampusWorks and consultants—to help us wrangle this data in a way that helps us be data informed in a time-sensitive way.
We had a lot of processes in place that were helping us to do that. A lot of our steps were manual and creating reports, and it really slowed down what our frontline advisers and navigators and employment advisers really were able to do, because we were requiring them to do so much manipulation with the data then to be able to identify what they should do once they got this great report.
So, we were looking for ways to leverage technology. And again, the pandemic happens. We’re increasingly dependent on our systems, using them to greater degrees than we had before, including our learning management system. We are also undertaking a transition conversion from our old student information system to a new student information systemin Workday. We’re making all these changes and upgrading technology, and frankly, AI is coming along that’s really dramatically changing how we work, or could change how we work. We’re trying to figure out a better way to wrangle all these opportunities.
We were so excited to learn about CampusWorks and their product, CampusLens, because we think that tool will help us leapfrog, not only the tool but the experts that that CampusWorks brings to the table to help us to analyze data and develop tools that will help our frontline staff much more quickly and easily identify how they can help students. To register from class A to B, to help them identify all the predictors that say, if the student’s missing one assignment or they haven’t attended class, here are the automatic prompts for you as an adviser or navigator—or if you choose to automate that process you can. But really, how can we help individuals—our employees—still help and better connect with students to keep them on the track of success?
It certainly can also help us schedule, help our faculty and all of our associate deans who do incredible jobs trying to figure out ways to schedule our incredible programming to be most effective for students. Some of this information that we’ve had in different places, when it comes together in a product like CampusLens, will help us generate these tools so that we can we can more quickly assess our situation and better adapt, test, try and iterate ways to better, like I said, schedule classes, schedule our work-based experiences, help our employers predict the number of graduates who are going to come out of our programs at any given time.
When we have employers come to us with dramatic needs, you know, they need 1,000 technicians over three years, well, what do we need to do to scale and ramp up our programming to meet that need?
I’m excited that we have a tool that will help us do that, instead of the army of staff and technical staff that I would have to try to find to help us do that in an efficient way. That’s why a product and a team, a quality, curious and an innovative team at CampusWorks to help us work through some of these projects.
Q: How does the tool work logistically? What are you excited about when it comes to the capabilities of CampusWorks and CampusLens?
A: It helps us better, frankly, use staff time to keep students and others on the right track—on the track that they’ve chosen, by the way.
What is most exciting, at least for us with CampusLens, is their Career Lens. So all institutions, all community colleges, are focused on many phrases, but all go to the federal emphasis, or your statewide emphasis on return on investment. What is the value that a learner gets from your program that can be defined a lot of ways. It could be defined by wages, wages a year out, it could be defined for many years out from completing a certificate or degree. It looks at what’s your job in a particular program. We know the federal government, whether when they’re leading the rules around rule-making for Workforce Pell, we know that those regulations are going to help us require that we analyze our programs for results. Will these programs allow students to be eligible for federal assistance?
We know that we can use all of this data and CampusLens is going to be able to help us identify which programs are eligible for Workforce Pell, what are the wages? It’ll help us report out the successes of our programs, or, frankly, identify those programs where wages are not at the median level. What do we need to do, then, to repackage or reschedule or build up some of our programs to meet the wage requirements that we want individuals to accomplish, to achieve and earn, but also that will meet some of our federal standards?
So, I’m really excited about the workforce component of this, which is really what we’re all looking for. All of us [higher education leaders] want, I’d say, a silver bullet when it comes to unifying this data and being able to tell the story and being able to design programming is responsive and frankly to be able to tell our stakeholders, whether they’re legislators or federal government agencies giving us funding for workforce training, what are the outcomes? That’s so important that we’re able to show and tell the story with really valuable data? And I’m excited that CampusLens allows us to achieve that.
Q: How have you all been thinking about AI as a tool on campus, what are those conversation looking like with your staff and employees?
A: I want to start with our governing board. CNM is governed by a seven-member elected governing board, and our governing board represents geographic areas in our community. They are focused on how we are best serving our students, our employers and our community members and what does that mean for technology? Is the college investing in programming and the right tools? Are we getting the greatest benefit from the tools we’ve purchased? That also includes the question of, how are our faculty and staff using the tools to better help our learners?
We talked about retention and persistence and how we use data, but it takes training and professional development to be able to use the tools to the greatest advantage. And of course, this is all in service to our learners and our employers. So it starts with our leadership, and then it flows through.
I don’t think we’re any different than a lot of other colleges. We’ve looked at our policies, and we’ve built on our existing academic integrity policies around AI use, and we have faculty policies on how they describe and expect use, or have authorized use, if you will, approved use, embedded use of AI in their coursework, in their programs. We have policies in place.
We also have done some pilot work. We’ve created a fund for individuals to come to a group around data, frankly, out of our data governance team and our IT team to be able to pitch ideas for three-month sprints or pilots, and they report back. What was the result? What did we learn? Is it something we should scale
I will say many of those pilots are both on the business side or the operation side of the college, but also on the student and teaching and learning side. So that’s really interesting. We look forward to some of those first official pilots coming forward in the next month or so.
What I’m most excited about, though, is the systemic use of AI across the institution. I appreciate the pilots get us excited and interested. It gets people familiar with tools as they evolve and change. But how do we embed AI into our systems work? That’s why I’m excited about CampusLens.
You can only have so many pilots and scale up pilots, and you can read how many articles that tell you and advice pieces from Gartner to McKinsey to whatever source you may choose that help you try to identify how to scale up pilots. But I wanted something that was going to help us leapfrog that, and frankly, CampusLens allows us to do that with a multi-year co-development opportunity to help us focus on the student journey, but really in a systemic way, look at all of our data sources and our use and all of even our new systems like Workday that help us to leverage a tool that sits above our data sources. We’ll learn the operational side of this as we go on. But I’m really focused on students, and this was the easiest way to take a risk at a systemic change with a trusted partner who has incredible expertise, as we’ve known for years, and our relationship with them to help us take that leap, to help us implement a system-wide approach to using AI and how that can change and enhance all the human work that we do with our students.
It’s not necessarily about eliminating the human touch to what we do. It’s about helping our advisers and our navigators and our faculty members and our intern placement officers, helping them do their work more successfully, always evaluated by student satisfaction, student placement, employer satisfaction and the like.
I appreciate pilots, there’s a great role for them. And I really appreciate that we are able to take a systemic swing at this work.
Q: You used the work risk earlier applied to taking on this system, what do you consider the risks or challenges of this process?
A: There’s always a risk in the investment you’re making initially and the ongoing risk. The risk is not only the contract for the service, hiring the expertise and hiring a partner who’s been affiliated and connected to higher education for decades, who understands students, understands institutional requirements and for compliance and integrity and data governance and permissible uses. Working with a partner that has that basic understanding is critical. That mitigates your risk immediately.
The financial risk is always: Are we chasing AI attachments to every system we have, or are we helping to right size those to be able to leverage a holistic or a system-wide, comprehensive AI-aided business analytics or business intelligence tool? That’s a very different approach then again, enhancing all of the six legacy systems I have, plus using one system or one tool to be able to do that intelligence work. That’s a risk, and that’s something different that we’ve had to navigate.
I don’t underestimate the time and challenge and excitement of staff in using technology, that can be seen as a risk. There’s a real temptation, and I see it almost daily, to just lift what we do currently in our old systems and shift it to a new system and just be satisfied with going faster or generating a nicer looking report. It’s not what we wanted and that is so not what we can do in higher ed. We are called to be more innovative and to really use our information differently. And this tool will allow us to do that in terms of really getting to the intelligence side of predictive analytics.
That’s always seen as almost a holy grail for us, and to see that it’s within reach now, that’s worth the risk for us. We’ll be able to see the analytics and the predictive analytics that we were at one time working on a project, and we thought we might get there in two or three years. The fact that I can probably do this by the end of this academic year is really important for us. And by the way, not just see some results at the end of this academic year, but know that it’s going to be iterative and evolve, so that we’re going to continue to see growth and change and adaptation and be a part of that shaping is really important to us.
I think I mean the risk is time, resources, and security, and we face those all the time. But I will dare say the risk is also not doing anything. If we aren’t moving in this direction, you are risking putting resources, and particularly too much money and technologies that you still have to reconcile in some way. You risk, frankly, burning out your staff by adding another dashboard they’ve got to learn instead of one that’s much more comprehensive. You’re still going to have them look at 10 different screens to come up with all the information they need to advise one student. So, you don’t want to burn out your staff. You actually need them to be more efficient and effective and spend time with the student in a different way.
The risks of not taking a step like this are substantial, because the world will continue. Students will still demand more, and they always demand more to make their work easier, which means our work can be a little bit harder, and employers are expecting us to be responsive. So if you don’t act and take certain risks, you’re either irrelevant or your students are unprepared for the world that they’re going to be entering, and we just don’t have time for that. That’s just not an option.
Q: I appreciated your comment on the risks of using a new tool to do the exact same thing. We know that faculty and staff are often crunched for time and ensuring that we’re creating new systems that are evolutionary and actually creating efficiencies for everyone involved is important.
A: Yeah, and that’s scary. It does mean that we will be changing how we work. It means we will be removing some of the guesswork of whether our efforts will work. We can see whether, if I move certain levers in a student journey, does this really make the difference? Does it really move the needle, not only for that student, but maybe very similarly situated students?
It’s really important. This will change how we work. We’ll be asking our employees, my colleagues, to think differently and do their work differently, because they’ll have more information available to them with suggestions on how to act, so they don’t have to always consider and frankly, reinvent the wheel. That’s really important, but I don’t underestimate what that change looks like, because when you have expertise in old systems or even evolving systems, and that expertise can be threatened or seem to be threatened, then we have to navigate that, and again, always make sure we’re serving our students and doing it the best way we can.
This technology, the tools, the guidance and the continued evolution will, I think, go a long way toward mitigating that fear. When I brought this option for CampusLens to my team, I made sure my team kicked the tires. This wasn’t a president’s folly. It was sincere, deliberate vetting by many individuals across the college to say, is this the right approach? What are our questions? What are our fears? What’s my role? Will it really better serve our students, and what does that look like with professional development? How do I use this team of experts that I’m not used to working with? How are they going to integrate and challenge us and help us do our work? So there were a number of challenges in the five or six months that it took us to ascertain whether this is the right approach for us, and I appreciate that it’s a collaborative effort, and that that is continuing as we talk about change management and the work that we have to test the tool and move it out in the college.
Q: Where are you all at in this change process? What are you looking forward to as the next step?
A: We’re still early in our stages of implementing CampusLens. Much of what we hope for centers arounds adoption and effectiveness and we really hope for a long-term operational integration. Again, my interest is not only in pilots, but in helping us make systemic change and better leveraging all the legacy data sources that we have.
What we are hoping to see in the next 12 months would be how we move from tracking legacy data and focusing on what has happened to helping us think about what is likely to happen based on the data we see. So again, shift in mindset from always reporting out past data, old data, lagging data to what do we think will happen? And then how do we change behavior to improve what we think will happen or change the trajectory, if that’s what we want to do? I think it’s really important for our community, for us to continue to test the model, the tool and the logic, so it’s going to continue to be refined. I know that as we go through over time, we will continue to improve, refine, revise the model so that it better reflects what our community here in Central New Mexico needs and what our students need.
We’re early in the stages. What I’ve seen so far is exciting, and it’s what we wanted to accomplish, and this tool is going to help us accomplish it, I think, sooner, and to be able to test our work sooner.
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Reaction to the U.S. Department of Education’s announcement this week that it is shifting management of a handful of programs to other federal agencies ranged from celebration to condemnation.
The moves fulfill “a promise made and a promise kept to put students first and return education to the states,” said Rep. Burgess Owens, R-Utah, on X on Tuesday.
Jeanne Allen, founder and CEO of the Center for Education Reform, applauded the federal education management shifts in a Tuesday statement. “It won’t be seamless, and it won’t succeed unless the new agencies clearly communicate with states, communities, and parents about their new flexibility — how funds can be better spent, and how to avoid getting snared in fresh compliance traps. But shifting power closer to communities is the right direction.”
But opponents say the transfers will create more burdens and inefficiencies.
MomsRising, a grassroots organization focused on economic security and anti-discrimination practices against women and moms, called the moves “reckless, harmful, and unlawful” in a Wednesday statement.
“Further dismantling the Department of Education will undermine learning opportunities for children in every state, harming families and undermining our workforce, our economy, and our country as a whole for generations to come,” MomsRising said.
Although management of special education, civil rights enforcement and federal student aid is not moving out of the Education Department, the agency is still exploring the best options for the structure of those activities, a senior department official said during a press call on Tuesday.
The six new interagency agreements will help “break up the federal education bureaucracy, ensure efficient delivery of funded programs, activities, and move closer to fulfilling the President’s promise to return education to the states,” the Education Department said in a Tuesday statement.
Management of career and technical education moved out of the Education Department to the U.S. Department of Labor earlier this year. CTE and K-12 administrative organizations had voiced reservations, saying they feared CTE would lose its education and career exploration focus and that programming would be driven solely by workforce needs.
Spreading education responsibilities across agencies
Interagency agreements and other cross-agency collaborations have been used by the Education Department in the past, under both Democratic and Republican administrations. These practices typically have broad support, because they address alignment on specific programs between two or more agencies through shared funding and programming.
Tuesday’s announcement was significant for the large-scale movement of certain core programs out of the agency. Included in the new partnerships is an IAA with the U.S. Department of Labor to handle the management of about $28 billion in K-12 funding for low-income school districts, homeless youth, migrant students, academic support, afterschool programs, districts receiving Impact Aid, as well as other activities.
This partnership, the Education Department said, would streamline the administration of K-12 programs and align education programs with DOL’s workforce programs to improve the nation’s education and workforce systems.
Denise Forte, president and CEO of EdTrust, a nonprofit that seeks to eliminate economic and racial barriers in schools, said in a Tuesday statement that the changes will exacerbate hardships faced by underserved students.
“These new directives only serve to further distance students — particularly students of color, those from low-income backgrounds, students with disabilities, and multilingual learners — from educational opportunities,” Forte said. “The other agencies that are now charged with protecting students’ educational civil rights simply do not have the relationships, expertise, or staff capacity to do so.”
On the flip side, the America First Policy Institute applauded the changes in a Thursday statement, saying the move would “preserve program service levels and responsiveness while reducing costs and giving states more flexibility to meet the needs of students and families.”
While many organizations and individuals praised or criticized the shift in management, several others said they want more details about logistics and exactly what would change.
For example, would the education secretary need to call the labor secretary if a decision needs to be made? And what agency would be tapped by staff seeking policy or procedure clarifications? This scenario was brought up by Braden Goetz — senior policy advisor at the Center on Education and Labor at New America and a previous director of the policy and research team in the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education at the Education Department — during a Wednesday House Education and Workforce subcommittee hearing on CTE.
Goetz predicted that state officials in North Dakota, which passed a public charter school bill this year, will now need to seek clarity from the Labor Department on understanding Education Department regulations for charter schools.
“Good luck to them,” Goetz said.
The senior Education Department official on Tuesday’s press call said more details about operations and staffing for the IAAs will be better known in the coming weeks or months.
Texas faces a widening gap between high school completion and college readiness. Educators are already doing important and demanding work, but closing this gap will require systemic solutions, thoughtful policy, and sustained support to match their efforts.
A recent American Institutes for Research report shows that just 56.8 percent of Texas’ graduating seniors met a college-readiness standard. Furthermore, 27 percent of rural students attend high schools that don’t offer Advanced Placement (AP) courses. This highlights a significant gap in preparedness and accessibility.
Among them was Saki Milton, mathematics teacher and founder of The GEMS Camp, a nonprofit serving minority girls in male-dominated studies. She stressed the importance of accessible, rigorous coursework. “If you went somewhere where there’s not a lot of AP offerings or college readiness courses … you’re just not going to be ready. That’s a fact.”
Additional roundtable participants reminded us that academics alone aren’t enough. Students struggle considerably with crucial soft skills such as communication, time management, and active listening. Many aspiring college-bound students experience feelings of isolation–a disconnect between their lived experiences and a college-ready mentality, often due to the lack of emotional support.
Says Milton, “How do we teach students to build community for themselves and navigate these institutions, because that’s a huge part? Content and rigor are one thing, but a college’s overall system is another. Emphasizing how to build that local community is huge!”
“Kids going to college are quitting because they don’t have the emotional support once they get there,” says Karen Medina, director of Out of School Time Programs at Jubilee Park. “They’re not being connected to resources or networking groups that can help them transition to college. They might be used to handling their own schedule and homework, but then they’re like, ‘Who do I go to?’ That’s a lot of the disconnection.”
David Shallenberger, vice president of advancement at the Boys & Girls Club of Greater Dallas, indicates that the pandemic contributed to that soft skills deficit. “Many students struggled to participate meaningfully in virtual learning, leaving them isolated and without opportunities for authentic interaction. Those young learners are now in high school and will likely struggle to transition to higher education.”
Purposeful intervention
These challenges–academic and soft skills gaps–require purposeful intervention.
Through targeted grants, more than 35,000 North Texas middle and high school students can access college readiness tools. Nonprofit leaders are integrating year-round academic and mentorship support to prepare students academically and emotionally.
Latoyia Greyer of the Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Tarrant County introduced a summer program with accompanying scholarship opportunities. The organization is elevating students’ skills through interview practice. Like ours, her vision is to instill confidence in learners.
Greyer isn’t alone. At the Perot Museum of Nature and Science, Development Officer Elizabeth Card uses the grant to advance college readiness by strengthening its high school internship program. She aims to spark students’ curiosity, introduce rewarding career pathways, and foster a passion for STEM. She also plans to bolster core soft skills through student interactions with museum guests and hands-on biology experiments.
These collaborative efforts have clarified the message: We can do extraordinary things by partnering. Impactful and sustainable progress in education cannot occur in a vacuum. Grant programs such as the AP Success Grant strengthen learning and build equity, and our partners are the driving force toward changing student outcomes.
The readiness gap continues to impact Texas students, leaving them at a disadvantage as they transition to college. School districts alone cannot solve this challenge; progress requires active collaboration with nonprofits, businesses, and community stakeholders. The path forward is clear–partnerships have the power to drive meaningful change and positively impact our communities.
Jeffrey A. Elliott, UWorld
Jeffrey A. Elliott is COO at UWorld.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Home » Careers in Healthcare » Training Future Physicians and Serving Communities: How Osteopathic Medical Schools Make an Impact
Across America, communities are struggling with a critical shortage of doctors. One Pennsylvania city, working with osteopathic medical schools, may have found a solution.
In Scranton, PA, an innovative partnership is offering a multifaceted approach where it’s needed most, providing quality care to underserved patients, training the next generation of physicians, and supporting the regional healthcare workforce.
Last summer, nine passionate medical students from two osteopathic colleges helped launch the Northeast Pennsylvania Clinical Education Consortium (NEPCEC). Today, that effort has grown into a powerful partnership between three osteopathic medical schools, the City of Scranton, Lackawanna College, and local healthcare organizations.
“It’s been a pleasure to work with our partnering physicians and healthcare providers to help build an osteopathic physician training network in Northeastern Pennsylvania,” said Frank Kolucki, M.D., Commonwealth Health System physician & NEPCEC medical director. “The students…have been eagerly engaged in their training and have brought an excitement and enthusiasm that is very refreshing and exciting to witness.”
NEPCEC offers something rare: a clear path from clinical training to residency in underserved areas, where new doctors, especially family-practice doctors with community ties, are urgently needed. Through this program, students from the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine (PCOM), Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine, and New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine are gaining hands-on experience.
“We have long seen the value of purposeful community partnerships at Lackawanna College, and the NEPCEC is an opportunity that continues to be a natural fit for us, our students, and the community,” said Dr. Jill Murray, president and chief innovation officer of Lackawanna College. “This program has established a clear pathway for our osteopathic medical students to learn, grow, and build relationships within our community that will help them establish a strong footing for future careers in our region.”
“One of the first things I noticed about Scranton was its small-town atmosphere, where people are always ready to lend a helping hand,” said Camryn Butera, third-year PCOM student rotating in Scranton. “I’ve seen healthcare staff consistently go above and beyond for their patients. Every attending physician has taken the time to work with me one-on-one, not only to teach their specialty but also to offer mentorship, life advice, and even recommendations for great local spots. When I first arrived, I was admittedly nervous about moving from a big city to a smaller town, but Scranton has truly offered the best of both worlds.”
Expanding access to community-based care
This kind of community-based clinical education is central to osteopathic medical training. A key part of that training happens outside major hospitals, in places like Scranton, that most resemble where the average American receives their healthcare, and where doctors are often in short supply.
“This program provided the opportunity to participate actively in primary patient care, reemphasizing my passion and commitment to becoming a family physician,” said C. Veronica Ruiz, fourth-year PCOM student, Scranton Core Clinical Campus. “I am very grateful to the outstanding healthcare teams for allowing me a safe space to learn and grow as a future family doctor.”
Programs like NEPCEC are a win-win. Students get high-quality training, and communities get the physicians they so urgently need. We believe that clinical education partnerships like these have the potential to meet challenges nationwide.
The impact is growing. We are working with Congress to pass the Community Training, Education, and Access for Medical Students (Community TEAMS) Act, H.R. 3885, legislation that would expand programs like the NEPCEC, giving more medical students the chance to train where they’re most needed and help close the gap in healthcare access, bringing the osteopathic philosophy of whole-person, community-based care to more patients across the country.
As Thu Thu Htet, “T”, was nearing graduation at her high school in Burma, she knew she wanted to go abroad to study engineering. She wanted to study at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York State, but didn’t want to spend tens of thousands of dollars a year in tuition, since international students don’t qualify for federal aid.
Instead, she decided to start her higher education journey at Monroe Community College, also in Rochester, where tuition is cheaper. T, now in her second semester, has made friends with dozens of other international students at MCC, who have helped her feel less lonely being so far away from family.
“There are times where I don’t feel like I fit in. Or I feel alone sometimes. The most important thing is the friends that you have,” she said.
International student enrolments have surged at US community colleges ever since the pandemic, including this fall. As community colleges host more international students, administrators are looking for ways to make them feel welcome on campuses where most students are local commuters.
One way international students at MCC can find support is through campus life. T serves as the president of the Global Union – a student-run club for international students, immigrant students, and anyone interested in learning about other cultures. Through her role, she greets new students, helps them to overcome challenges, and organises events to help them showcase their cultures.
“Sometimes, you need to be around people that have the same feeling as yours. When we are in the same club with immigrants, refugees, or other international students, we feel like we fit in with each other,” T said.
An unexpected increase
Because of President Trump’s policies, analysts predicted a 15% drop in total international students at American colleges and universities this fall. Experts warned that the Trump administration’s near month-long pause on visa interviews, travel bans, and war against many of the nation’s most prestigious universities would harm enrolment.
Instead, this fall’s international student enrolment across all degree programs, including OPT, grew by 0.8%, according to the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) data that the Department of Homeland Security publishes.
Community colleges have helped to move the needle. For associate degree programs, international student enrolment increased by 9.1%, with community colleges welcoming nearly 5,500 more students than last year. Meanwhile, enrolment shrunk slightly for master’s programs and hardly changed for bachelor’s programs.
Rather than choosing not to study in the US this fall, it seems like students are choosing different kinds of degrees or schools. That’s according to Chris Glass, director of Boston College’s higher education program, who recently analysed the latest SEVIS data.
“If we’re to take this data at face value, the system is far more resilient than the tumultuous headlines would suggest,” Glass previously told The PIE News .
Based on his analysis, the over 9% growth of international students at community colleges may not be a fluke. Glass argues that international students gravitate toward schools with less political spotlight, more affordable tuition, and access to opportunities after graduation. Community colleges check all of those boxes.
MCC is hosting more international students now than before the pandemic. This fall, the campus’ international student body grew by 35%, hosting 120 students from over 30 countries.
MCC’s international recruiting efforts for soccer, baseball, and other sports has helped to draw students from across continents, said Carly O’Keefe, MCC’s assistant director of global education and international services. The current men’s and women’s soccer team roster has a combined 34 international students.
In addition, unlike many other community colleges, MCC has dorms. For T, attending a college with on-campus dorms was critical, since she had no family or friends in Rochester to live with.
O’Keefe said international students at MCC bring ideas and culture from across the globe, enriching a campus where most students are local. Some local students – limited by jobs, financial constraints, or family obligations – have never traveled overseas.
“They’re able to make friendships with people from other countries that they maybe would have never connected with otherwise,” she said.
Finding a community through campus life
The wall of the Global Union office is decorated with dozens of paintings of hot air balloons containing flags, created by students to represent their countries. Colourful cloth flags and souvenirs from across the world fill the room.
“At the time when I saw the Korean flag, I was so proud,” said Onyu Cha, a first-semester international student from South Korea studying nursing.
Hot air balloon paintings at Global Union office. Photo: MCC Global Union
Onyu made friends with other Koreans through campus life and through her sister, who also lives in Rochester. Recently, she and other Korean students went to her sister’s house to cook food for the holiday of Chuseok, a mid-autumn harvest festival often referred to as Korean Thanksgiving.
Through her role as the vice-president of the Global Union, Onyu has got to learn about the cultures of other students. Currently, the club is planning for an event to celebrate holidays from across the world, all on one day. That’s similar to last year’s Global Fusion Festival – an event in the campus atrium to celebrate the cultures of all MCC students. It featured African drummers, Ukrainian dancers, and food from across the globe.
Judichael Razafintsalama – a student from Madagascar who graduated from MCC last May – said serving as the Global Union president allowed him to support his fellow international students.
Having international students on campus at a community college can be really enriching to a local community
Dr. Melissa Whatley, William & Mary
The summer before starting his first year at MCC, Razafintsalama landed in Rochester around 2am. When he got to his dorm, he realised he had no food. The vending machines were empty, the campus’ food services were closed, and he hadn’t set up rideshare on his phone. To get groceries, he walked two hours to a Walmart and back, carrying four bags while jet lagged.
Now, international students come together to help the Office of Global Education provide packages of canned food, granola bars and utensils for incoming international students.
“We even helped two of our students move into their apartment and make sure that everything is settled after going through what I went through,” Razafintsalama said.
Razafintsalama said he’s had the chance to teach others at MCC about his country and his culture. Most students he encountered had never met anyone from Madagascar, the island nation off the southeastern coast of Africa.
“They usually attach it to the cartoon movie,” he said. “It’s great because I can see that people are interested in my country and to see what it actually is like.”
Supporting international students’ social and housing needs is critical to making them feel welcome, said Dr. Melissa Whatley, an assistant professor of higher education at William & Mary University. Her research group recently released a report on international education at community colleges, finding that 82% hosted international students.
Whatley hopes that these colleges are providing international students with campus life opportunities and, if they don’t have dorms, are helping students to find housing.
“Having international students on campus at a community college can be really enriching to a local community, to the extent that the community is equipped to welcome them,” she said.
Concerns over travel ban
Currently, the US hosts over 1.2 million international students or recent graduates, according to SEVIS data. The dataset doesn’t distinguish between students and graduates working temporarily through Optional Practical Training (OPT). More in-depth statistics will become available once the Institute of International Education publishes its annual report later in November.
However, because of President Trump’s travel ban, some prospective international students have been restricted from studying in the US. That includes Burmese students who didn’t secure a visa before June 9.
MCC has seen an uptick in Burmese students ever since a civil war broke out in the country, interrupting higher education for many students. The war began in 2021 when military forces toppled the country’s democratically elected government. Last spring, MCC still hosted more students from Burma than from any other country, O’Keefe said.
Now, Burma is among the 12 countries included in Trump’s travel ban, impacting all immigrant and non-immigrant visas. Seven more countries are under a partial travel ban that impacts international student visas.
As for international enrolments at MCC? “We’ll see how the trends change over the next few semesters. I would be surprised to see such a significant level of continued growth but we can hope things at least stay stable,” O’Keefe said in an email.
The takeaway from this fall’s enrolment data is that students’ perceptions take a long time to change, said Gerardo Blanco, academic director of the Centre for International Higher Education at Boston College. He previously told The PIE that the 0.8% international student increase revealed in SEVIS records came as a surprise, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be a decline in coming years.
“I hope the takeaway message is not that the US is invincible, in that even hostile policies towards international students cannot change perceptions,” he said.
California has established significant goals for postsecondary attainment, with the stated aim of having 70 percent of working-age adults hold a credential of value by 2035. To meet this goal, the state has invested time and resources into the community college system and upward transfer processes, seeking to create affordable and accessible pathways in and through higher education.
A recently published report by the Public Policy Institute of California Higher Education Center found that a large share of community college students are applying to and enrolling in state universities to complete a bachelor’s degree, but equity gaps persist among certain demographic groups.
The data highlights the importance of focusing on early benchmarks of academic progress—including credit completion rates, GPA and the stated goal of transfer—to help students succeed in making the transition to a four-year university. The report also underscores that some transfer students are willing to pay more and travel farther to attend a more selective institution.
The background: California’s public higher education system is the largest and most diverse in the country, the report authors note. The California Community College system includes 116 institutions enrolling over 2.1 million students, and the California State University system consists of 22 institutions educating nearly half a million students. Within the state, the system is the top destination for upward transfer, with 58 percent of community college students going on to enroll at a CSU campus.
Over the past decade, the two college systems have partnered to streamline transfer opportunities. One innovation is the associate degree for transfer (A.D.T.), a group of 40 academic pathways that guarantee admission to students who complete 60 credits toward a bachelor’s degree in a specific major. Another is the CSU Transfer Planner, which provides insights for students to navigate transferable credits, degree programs and campus requirements for transfer.
The report looks at student demographic information, academic progress and participation in transfer pathways such as A.D.T. to identify success indicators in the transfer pipeline.
Methodology
Researchers analyzed data from the CSU Application and Admission Dashboard and longitudinal student-level data from fall 2018 and fall 2023.
In the sample, 48 percent of transfer applicants were Latino, 26 percent white, 15 percent Asian and 4.5 percent Black. A majority were 24 years old or younger, and 75 percent received a California Promise Grant or a Pell Grant while in community college.
The data: The average student spends nine semesters at a community college before applying to a CSU institution, researchers found.
Students are required to complete 60 credits to transfer with junior-level standing, but the median student completed 71.5 credits. Only half of applicants had earned an A.D.T. before applying, and 22 percent earned a local associate degree, meaning about 30 percent of students applied for transfer without a credential.
Students who were 25 or older, Black or financial aid recipients were less likely to meet early milestones and therefore less likely to transfer. Conversely, students with high GPAs were more likely to transfer.
The data also indicated a gap between students eligible for admission at a CSU and those who actually applied. One in five students who completed an A.D.T. never applied to CSU despite having guaranteed admission. Of those, 43 percent enrolled at a different university, many in the University of California system.
In total, 87 percent of A.D.T. recipients declared a transfer goal while at community college, but approximately 20 percent of them didn’t continue on to a bachelor’s degree program.
A majority (92 percent) of all transfers were eventually admitted to at least one CSU, and 63 percent of all transfers enrolled. Three in 10 applied more than once, and almost half of them (47 percent) had their application denied the first time.
“It is possible that these students were initially rejected from the campus of their choice (or to all campuses), took more community college classes, and then gained admission,” researchers wrote. On the flip side, a large share of those whose transfer applications were rejected applied only once (88 percent), and to only one campus (61 percent).
Admissions data also revealed the importance of academic benchmarks early in the student’s community college career. Admission rates for students who took transfer-level math or English in their first year were higher compared to their peers who did not; similarly, students who earned 24 transferable credits were more likely to gain admission to a CSU. Unsurprisingly, students who stated a transfer goal, completed the A.D.T. or had a GPA of 3.25 or higher also had high admittance rates.
One trend researchers noted is that students who were admitted to a CSU but chose to enroll at a different institution were more likely to select a college that was farther away or more expensive, indicating that cost and proximity are not deciding factors. Transfers also enrolled at more selective colleges compared to their peers who opted to enroll at CSU, though some students selected universities with lower graduation rates than CSU.
Over all, transfer students had high graduation rates. Among the incoming fall 2020 cohort, 76 percent graduated with their bachelor’s degree in four years, and 69 percent completed it in three years. About 19 percent of students left the CSU system without graduating three years after enrolling, and these students were more likely to be Black, Latino, male or older or have financial need.
Recommendations: Based on their findings, researchers identified three opportunities for improvement:
Invest in the student’s first year. Interventions including dual enrollment, corequisite English and math courses, proactive advising, and flexible scheduling can promote early momentum and academic success for community college students.
Collect additional data on enrollment decisions. While system data showed that some students opt out of a four-year degree program, researchers emphasized the need for student voices to understand why those admitted would not enroll at CSU. Researchers also noted a need for campus-specific data, “because there is high variation across individual CSUs in both acceptance and enrollment rates.”
Create space at selective campuses and in high-demand majors. “Some of the students who were never admitted to CSU were competitive applicants, but they applied to the most in-demand campuses,” the authors wrote. To increase capacity for these students, researchers suggest flexible course scheduling options, co-locating campuses or expanding online degree programs.
Dr. Alycia MarshallCommunity College of PhiladelphiaThe Community College of Philadelphia Board of Trustees has announced the appointment of Dr. Alycia Marshall as the institution’s new president. Marshall’s selection comes after the Board’s decision to remove Dr. Donald “Guy” Generals from the presidency.
“As Chair of the Board of Trustees, I am proud to officially welcome Dr. Alycia Marshall as the seventh president of Community College of Philadelphia,” said Harold T. Epps. “After a nationwide search, it has become evident that Dr. Marshall demonstrates the clear vision and outstanding leadership needed to guide our institution forward. I look forward to continuing to work with Dr. Marshall and to the positive impact she will have on our students, faculty, staff, and the broader community.”
Marshall has been serving as interim president since Generals’ departure from the college in April. Prior to the interim appointment, she held the position of Provost and Vice President for Academic and Student Success, where she oversaw Academic Affairs, Workforce Development, and Student Support and Engagement.
“I congratulate Dr. Alycia Marshall on her appointment as President of the Community College of Philadelphia,” said Cherelle Parker, Mayor of Philadelphia. “CCP is a beacon of hope and economic opportunity for our students and for everyone seeking to advance their pathways to better lives. The Parker Administration supports CCP, Dr. Marshall, and the Board in its mission.”
Marshall brings extensive higher education experience to the presidency. She began her career at Anne Arundel Community College (AACC) in Maryland, where she served as a tenured Full Professor of Mathematics, Department Chair of Mathematics, and Associate Vice President for Learning and Academic Affairs. She holds a Ph.D. in Mathematics Education from the University of Maryland College Park, a Master of Arts degree in Teaching from Bowie State University, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Mathematics from the University of Maryland Baltimore County.
“Community College of Philadelphia truly feels like home,” said Marshall. “Every day, I witness the extraordinary dedication of our faculty and staff who work tirelessly to ensure our students are supported, challenged, and inspired to succeed. While my time as interim president has deepened my connections with the college community and our external partners, it is my foundation as an educator that will continue to guide me. I am deeply honored to serve as president of The City’s College—a beacon of access, opportunity, and transformation—as we move forward together.”
More than 32,000 California community college students who earned transfer degrees never applied to California State University despite guaranteed admission, according to a new report that highlights critical gaps in the state’s higher education pipeline.
Marisol Cuellar MejiaThe Public Policy Institute of California study reveals that 21 percent of Associate Degree for Transfer recipients between 2018-19 and 2022-23 failed to apply to CSU. Most concerning, more than half of these students — 32,500 individuals — appear to have abandoned their pursuit of a bachelor’s degree altogether.
The findings come as California races to meet an ambitious goal of 40 percent baccalaureate completion among working-age residents by 2030, a target that depends heavily on improving transfer rates from community colleges.
“When the transfer pathway works, it works,” said Marisol Cuellar Mejia, co-author of the report. “The challenge lies in ensuring that more California community college students are able to get to the point of applying.”
The report identifies another significant loss point: nearly 63,000 students who were admitted to CSU but chose not to enroll never appeared at any four-year institution. This group represents what researchers call “the most immediate opportunity for enrollment gains” at the state university system.
Despite these gaps, the study found high success rates for students who complete the transfer process. Among community college applicants to CSU, 92 percent are eventually admitted to at least one campus, and 76 percent of fall 2020 transfer students graduated by spring 2024. Transfer applications and enrollment remain below pre-pandemic levels. Fall 2024 saw 50,259 new transfer students enroll at CSU, a 6 percent increase from the prior year but still 17 percent below the 2020 peak of 60,529 students. Applications are down 16.4 percent from 2020 levels.
The decline has not affected campuses equally. San Diego State, Cal State Los Angeles, and San Francisco State continued enrollment drops through fall 2024, with the latter two campuses seeing transfer enrollment more than 30 percent below 2020 peaks.
Meanwhile, five campuses — Fresno State, Fullerton, Sonoma State, Monterey Bay, and Chico State — have surpassed their 2020 transfer enrollment numbers. The report notes that CSU is the leading destination for California community college transfers, receiving about 58 percent of students who successfully transfer to four-year institutions. Another 17 percent transfer to University of California campuses, while 25 percent go to private or out-of-state schools.
The study found that the typical CSU applicant spends nine terms enrolled in the community college system before applying. However, students who reach key academic milestones during their first year can apply sooner. Three in ten applicants apply in more than one term, and almost half of these students had all applications denied initially but were admitted later. Among admitted students, 69 percent chose to enroll at CSU.
The California Community Colleges system serves more than 2.1 million students, with most expressing intent to transfer. However, only one in five actually transfers within four years of initial enrollment, meaning even modest improvements could substantially boost four-year college enrollment statewide.
CSU recently committed to increasing transfer enrollment by 15 percent over the next three years as part of its systemwide strategic plan. The move comes as high school graduate numbers are expected to plateau or decline, limiting the pool of first-time freshmen and making community college transfers increasingly important for maintaining enrollment.
Recently published data from the educational consulting group EAB shows that first-year students at two-year colleges want help connecting with peers on campus; nearly half reported dissatisfaction with their social lives since starting college. The report outlines ways to create engagement and other priorities for community college students.
Community college in context: First- to second-year retention is the greatest predictor of completion for students enrolled in a two-year degree program, according to data from the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.
Community colleges are among the most diverse higher ed institutions, with students more likely to be working adults, parents and first-generation learners compared to their four-year peers.
The EAB data identifies key trends in first-year community college students’ experiences and how institutions can improve their retention.
Methodology
EAB’s survey included responses from over 12,600 first-year college students, including 1,531 enrolled in community colleges. The survey was fielded in February and March 2024.
The data: When asked to name the most disappointing elements of their college experience so far, students indicated they felt disconnected from the campus community. Forty-two percent of respondents said their social life was a top disappointment, followed by not making friends or meeting new people. An additional 35 percent of students said they felt as though they didn’t belong.
This mirrors results from a 2025 survey conducted by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab, which found that only 20 percent of two-year students rated their sense of social belonging at college as above average or excellent, with the greatest share of respondents indicating they have an average sense of belonging (49 percent). By comparison, 29 percent of four-year students said they had an above average or excellent sense of belonging.
EAB’s report recommends that two-year colleges create small interventions to support students’ desire for community, including arranging drop-in events, hobby groups or peer mentorship programs. Making clubs easier to join through flexible meeting times or virtual meetings can also accommodate learners’ busy schedules, according to the report.
One-third of respondents to EAB’s survey said they were disappointed by classes and academics, and one in five students said faculty had disappointed them.
EAB’s community college survey also found that 32 percent of respondents had experienced bias or exclusion in some capacity since starting college, with the greatest share of respondents saying they faced criticism for their physical appearance or for the high school they attended. The results indicate a need for mechanisms for students to report harassment and connect with mental health supports, according to EAB’s report.
When asked what a “safe campus” means to them, the greatest share of community college respondents selected sufficient support for mental health and wellness (67 percent) and low or no property crime (67 percent). A similar number indicated that low incidence of sexual assault was key to creating a safe campus environment (66 percent).
Mental health concerns are one of the top reasons students of all backgrounds leave higher education, but community college students are even more vulnerable because they can be less financially secure or have fewer resources to address poor mental health.
However, community college counseling centers often have smaller staffs and serve only a fraction of their enrolled students; 2025 data from the Association for University and College Counseling Center Directors found that only 5 percent of all community college students receive support from their counseling center.
When asked what best represents the value of higher education, successful job placement after graduation was the top choice among community college students (44 percent), followed by availability of scholarships (42 percent). Internships, co-ops and active learning experiences (33 percent) were less important than generous financial aid awards (38 percent) and moderate tuition prices.
