In the aftermath of each new outrage involving Nick Fuentes, pundits scramble to explain how a 20-something suburban Catholic kid became one of the most influential white supremacists in America. Many insist Fuentes is an anomaly, a glitch, a fringe figure who somehow slipped through the cracks of democracy and decency. But this narrative is both comforting and false.
Fuentes is not an anomaly. He is the logical product of the systems that shaped him—especially American higher education.
While institutions obsess over rankings, fundraising, and branding campaigns, they have quietly abandoned entire generations of young people to debt, alienation, status anxiety, and a digital culture that preys on male insecurity. In this vacuum, extremist networks thrive, incubating figures like Fuentes long before the public notices.
HEI warned about this trend years ago. Since 2016, the publication tracked the rise of Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA, noting how TPUSA used campus culture wars to radicalize disaffected young men. HEI saw that for-profit-style marketing, donor-driven politics, and relentless culture-war agitation were creating an ecosystem where reactionaries could build both influence and profit. Fuentes did not arise outside that ecosystem—he evolved from it, even as he later turned on Kirk as insufficiently extreme.
What fuels this pipeline? A generation of young men raised on the promise of meritocracy but delivered a reality of spiraling costs, precarious futures, and institutional betrayal. Many arrive at college campuses burdened by debt, anxious about their place in an unforgiving economy, and deeply online. They bear the psychological bruises of a culture that has replaced community with competition and replaced meaning with metrics.
This is also the demographic most vulnerable to incel ideology, a misogynistic worldview built around grievance, rejection, humiliation, and resentment. Incel communities overlap heavily with the digital spaces where Fuentes built his early audience. The mix is combustible: sexually frustrated young men who feel mocked by mainstream culture, priced out of adulthood, and invisible to institutions that once guided them. The result is a fusion of white nationalism, male resentment, Christian nationalism, ironic fascism, and livestream entertainment—perfectly tailored to a generation raised on Twitch and YouTube.
And yet the higher-education establishment insisted for years that white supremacists were primarily rural “rednecks”—poor, uneducated, easily dismissed. This stereotype blinded journalists, academics, and administrators to the reality developing right in front of them. Higher Education Inquirer knew better because we corresponded for years with Peter Simi, one of the country’s leading scholars of extremism. Simi’s research demonstrated clearly that white supremacists were not confined to rural backwaters. They were suburban, middle-class, sometimes college-educated, often tech-savvy, and deeply embedded in mainstream institutions.
Simi’s work showed that white supremacist movements have always thrived among people with something to lose, people who feel their status slipping. They recruit in fraternities, gaming communities, campus political groups, military circles, and online spaces where young men spend their most lonely hours. They build identities around grievance and belonging—needs that universities once helped students navigate but now too often ignore.
This is the world that produced Nick Fuentes.
Fuentes entered higher education during a moment of fragmentation and distrust. Tuition was skyrocketing. Campuses were polarizing. Students were increasingly treated as revenue streams rather than whole human beings. Administrators were more focused on donor relations and culture-war optics than on the psychological welfare of their students. And universities outsourced so many vital functions—to police, to lobbyists, to tech platforms—that they ceded responsibility for the very students they claimed to educate.
Into that void stepped extremist influencers who offered simple answers to complex problems, validation for resentment, and a community that cared—if only in the performative, transactional sense of internet politics.
The tragedy is not simply that Fuentes emerged. The tragedy is that the conditions to generate many more like him remain firmly in place.
American higher education created the environment: hyper-competition, abandonment of the humanities, the collapse of community, the normalization of precarity, and a relentless emphasis on personal failure over systemic dysfunction. It created the audience: anxious, isolated, indebted young men looking for meaning. And it created the blind spot: a refusal to take extremism seriously until it reaches mainstream visibility.
Fuentes is not a glitch in the system. He is the system’s mirror held up to itself.
Unless universities confront their complicity in this radicalization pipeline—economically, culturally, and psychologically—the next Nick Fuentes is already in a dorm room somewhere, streaming at 2 a.m., finding thousands of followers who feel just as betrayed as he does.
Sources
Angela Nagle, Kill All Normies: Online Culture Wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the Alt-Right (2017).
Peter Simi & Robert Futrell, American Swastika: Inside the White Power Movement’s Hidden Spaces of Hate (2010, updated 2015).
Kathleen Belew, Bring the War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America (2018).
Joan Donovan & danah boyd, “Stop the Presses? The Crisis of Misinformation” (Harvard Kennedy School).
Cynthia Miller-Idriss, Hate in the Homeland: The New Global Far Right (2020).
Michael Kimmel, Healing from Hate: How Young Men Get Into—and Out of—Violent Extremism (2018).
Whitney Phillips, “The Oxygen of Amplification: Better Practices for Reporting on Extremists.”
Brian Hughes & Cynthia Miller-Idriss, “Youth Radicalization in Digital Spaces.”
David Futrelle, We Hunted the Mammoth archive on incel ideology.
Higher Education Inquirer (2016–2024 coverage of TPUSA, Charlie Kirk, and campus extremism).
Educators tap two tech firms to create NYC Childcare Navigator, a free platform that cuts through the chaos.
A one-stop shop
Frustrated by the maze of agencies, websites, and applications families face to find childcare and possible financial support, New York City teachers said, “Enough!”
The United Federation of Teachers, the union that represents more than 200,000 educators and professionals in New York City, teamed up with two tech firms to build a better approach: NYC Childcare Navigator.
Navigator is a platform that connects New York City families to upwards of 12,000 childcare options across the five boroughs. It offers instant eligibility checks for money-saving programs, step-by-step application support, and the most comprehensive directory of childcare providers in the city — all in one free, easy-to-use website.
The union created the tool as a benefit for its own members, but it was so successful that the union opened it up to all New York City residents in October.
“We couldn’t gatekeep something that we knew so many New York City families needed,” said Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers.
Centralizing tailored childcare
The union partnered with Mirza, a city-based tech firm that builds platforms to connect low-wage workers with local, state, and federal benefits, including for childcare.
“We wanted to get meaningful benefits to parents, but there wasn’t a single place that would allow a parent to see all the options available. That felt like a big missing piece. But it also pointed toward a solution,” said Siran Cao, CEO and Co-Founder of Mirza, who said she was inspired by how her own mother navigated a new country and the impact that a few well-timed bits of financial support had on her own family.
The union then introduced Upfront, a software company that consolidates multiple sources of childcare providers into a single, centralized database. The result: parents using the NYC Childcare Navigator can see every licensed program in NYC (center, home, and school-based), searchable by zip code, child’s age, availability, languages spoken, special needs, and many other filters. For the first time, childcare providers can claim a dedicated page to share current information about their specific childcare services.
“It’s everything in a single location instead of having to make dozens of calls and scour multiple, incomplete websites,” said Levin-Robinson, who said she was motivated by how challenging it was to find care for her own children.
While generative artificial intelligence tools have proliferated in education and workplace settings, not all tools are free or accessible to students and staff, which can create equity gaps regarding who is able to participate and learn new skills. To address this gap, San Diego State University leaders created an equitable AI alliance in partnership with the University of California, San Diego, and the San Diego Community College District. Together, the institutions work to address affordability and accessibility concerns for AI solutions, as well as share best practices, resources and expertise.
In the latest episode of Voices of Student Success, host Ashley Mowreader speaks with James Frazee, San Diego State University’s chief information officer, about the alliance and SDSU’s approach to teaching AI skills to students.
An edited version of the podcast appears below.
Q: Can you give us the high-level overview: What is the Equitable AI Alliance? What does it mean to be equitable in AI spaces?
James Frazee, chief information officer at San Diego State University
A: Our goal is simple but ambitious: to make AI literacy and access available as opportunities to all of our students, and I mean every student, whether they started at a community college, a California State University like ours or at a University of California school. We want to make sure they all have that same foundation to understand and apply AI responsibly in their lives, in their careers and during their academic journey.
Through this alliance, we’re trying to align resources and expand access to institutionally supported AI tools. So when people are using the free tools, they’re not free, right? They’re paying for them with their privacy, with their intellectual property. We want to make sure that they have access, not only to the training they need to use these tools responsibly, but also to the high-quality tools that are more accurate and that have commercial data protection so that they can rest assured that their intellectual property isn’t being used to train the underlying large language models.
Q: The alliance strives to work across institutions, which is atypical in many cases in higher ed. Can you talk about that partnership and why this is important for your students?
A: The Equitable AI Alliance emerged from survey results. We have this listening infrastructure we’ve created here at San Diego State—we launched an AI survey in 2023, within months of ChatGPT going public. We really wanted to establish a baseline and determine what tools our students were using, what opinions did they have about AI and maybe, most importantly, what did they expect from us institutionally in order to help them meet the moment?
During the analysis of those survey findings, we discovered evidence of a growing digital divide. For instance, we asked students about how many devices they had. If you have a smartphone, a tablet, a desktop and a laptop, you would have four smart devices.
What we found was more devices led to people being more likely to say that AI had positively affected their education, and more devices meant that they were more likely to be paying for the paid versions of these tools. We also saw in the open-ended responses … people being concerned about fee increases as a result of AI, people being concerned about students who didn’t have access to these tools or fluency with these tools being disadvantaged.
People were saying, “The people who are using these have an unfair advantage,” right? Students were asking questions about, is everybody going to be able to afford what they need in order to keep up with AI? So that really was a key driver in forming this alliance.
Q: When it comes to consolidating those resources or making sure that students have access, what does that look like? And how do you all share?
A: The Equitable AI Alliance is really two things. First, it’s a consortium that’s all about saving time and saving money and having universities and colleges come together to really look at ways to form these partnerships to democratize access to these high-quality tools. And also to provide the training that people need. So that’s kind of the first part of it, and that’s much larger than the regional consortium.
But we have a regional consortium between our San Diego Community College District, San Diego State University and the University of California at San Diego, which is also dubbed the Equitable AI Alliance. And the mission there is to ensure that every student, no matter where they begin their journey, has access to AI literacy, to those high-quality tools and opportunities to leverage those to help them succeed, both inside and outside of the classroom.
It’s really, ultimately about responding to the workforce needs that we’re seeing. Employers today are demanding students come to them with fluency using these tools, and if they don’t have that fluency, they’re not going to get that internship or that job interview. So it’s really important. That’s where those microcredentials that we’re sharing across our institutions are really powerful, because they can put that badge on their LinkedIn profile, which may make the difference between them getting the interview or not, just having that little artifact there that demonstrates that they have some skills and knowledge can really make an impact.
Q: What is the microcredential? How are students engaging with that?
A: The microcredentials themselves are really powerful because they’re basically mini courses in our learning management system. We try and make them bite-size enough to where people actually get through them.
There are five modules. The first module is really kind of demystifying AI—this is not some dark art. We try to explain, at a high level, how does AI work?
The second module, which is arguably the most important one, is all about responsible use. The fact that these models are built on information from human beings, which is inherently biased. How to be critical consumers of that information, the environmental costs, the human costs, talking about how to cite the use of these tools in your work, both academically and professionally.
Then there’s a module on what AI can do for you. And so we have different microcredentials, a microcredential for faculty, there’s microcredentials for students. For instance, in the microcredential for students, it’s focusing on using AI to find jobs, prepare for jobs, tailor your résumé for a particular job or internship, how to do role-playing—to practice for an interview, let’s say.
And then there’s finding apps, finding generative AI tools, how to do that, because there’s different AI tools you might want to use for certain things, like maybe you want to create some sort of graphic—you might want to use Midjourney or DALL-E, or whatever it might be.
And then there’s the activities. Part of the idea with the activities, which they have to do in order to earn the badge, is that we’re designing activities that try and keep the microcredential evergreen. So for instance, when we first rolled out the microcredential, nobody had heard of DeepSeek, because it didn’t exist. So now we have an activity that has people going out and looking for the latest large language models that are emerging. Every day, there’s some new model, it seems—that is something to be aware of.
And then bringing it back to again, why it’s important for them to be able to be in the loop, pointing out the fact that these models are often very sycophantic, right? They want to tell you what they think you want to hear. And so you really have to go back and forth and ideate with the tools, which requires a little practice, a little coaching, and you have to fact-check everything. And so that’s a really big part of this idea of, what does it mean to be literate when it comes to using these tools?
Q: When it came to developing the microcredential, who were the stakeholders at the table?
A: We have a long history of engaging with faculty and providing fellowships to faculty. That’s a way for us to incentivize engagement with faculty.
That manifests itself in the form of course release. So, in other words, we provide them with reassigned time, buy them out of teaching a course, so that they can come and work with us and consult with us. We have a long history of doing that, and this goes back decades, first helping us with faculty development around moving courses online.
We wanted that to be done by faculty for faculty. Yes, we have instructional designers who are staff, but we really wanted the faculty to be driving that. We identified in 2023 our first AI faculty fellows, and we got a faculty member from information systems and a faculty member from anthropology—very different in terms of their skill sets and their orientation to research. One a qualitative ethnographic researcher, another more of a quantitative machine learning focus. Very complementary in terms of just balancing each other out.
Twenty twenty-three was the first time we had ever provided fellowships to students. We provided fellowships to two students. One was an engineering student and another was an Africana studies student. Again, very different in terms of the academic domain and the discipline they were in, but again, very balanced.
So those two AI student fellows and the two AI faculty fellows helped us design the survey instrument, get the IRB [institutional review board] approvals, launch the survey, promote the survey. I really want to give credit where credit is due: We got an incredible response rate. We’re lucky if we usually get like a 3 percent response rate from a student survey. We got a 21 percent response rate in 2023; 7,811 students responded to that survey.
The credit for that goes to Associated Students, our student government. The president of Associated Students that year ran on a platform of getting students high-paying jobs, and he knew for students to get high-paying jobs, they needed to be conversant with AI. So he helped us promote that survey, and the whole campaign was around “your voice matters.” So thanks to his help and the help of these AI student fellows, we got this incredible response from our students.
So anyway, the students and the faculty fellows helped us analyze those results and then use that data to build these microcredentials. So very much involving faculty and students and our University Senate, our library. I mean, the library knows a thing or two about information literacy, right? They absolutely have to be at the table. Our Center for Teaching and Learning, which is responsible for providing faculty with professional development on campus, they were also very involved from the very outset, so very much of a collaborative effort.
Q: I wanted to ask about culture and creating a campus culture that embraces AI. How are you all thinking about engaging stakeholders in these hard conversations and bringing different disciplines to the playing field?
A: I think it’s really important. That’s what the data has done for us. It’s really created space for these conversations, because faculty will respond to evidence. If you have data that is from their students, who they care about deeply, that creates space for these conversations.
For instance, one of the things that emerged from the survey findings was inconsistency. In the same course, maybe taught by different instructors, there would be different expectations and policies with regard to AI.
In multiple sections of Psychology 101—and that’s not a real example, I’m just using that as a fictitious example—one instructor might completely forbid the use of AI and another one might require it, and that’s stressful for students because they didn’t know what to expect.
In fact, one of the comments that really resonated with me from the survey was, and this is a verbatim quote, “Just tell us what you expect and be clear about it.” Students were getting mixed messages.
So that led to conversations with our University Senate about the need to be clear with our students. I’m happy to report, just this past May, our University Senate unanimously passed a policy that requires an AI … statement in every syllabus. That was an important step in the right direction.
The University Senate also created guidelines for the use of generative AI in assessments and deliverables. You know, it’s important that you not be prescriptive with your faculty. You need to provide them with lots of examples of language that they can use or tweak, because they own the curriculum, and knowing that you don’t have to take a one-size-fits-all approach.
Maybe one assignment, it’s restricted; in another assignment, it’s unrestricted, right? You can do that. And they’re like, “Oh yeah, I can do that.” Giving them examples of language they can use, and also encouraging them to use this as an opportunity to have a conversation with their students.
The students want more direction on how to use these tools appropriately. And I think if you race to a policy that’s all about academic misconduct, it’s frankly insulting to the students, to just assume everybody’s cheating, and then when they leave here and go into their place of business, they’re going to be expected to use these tools. So, really powerful conversations.
That’s been key here—just talking about [AI]. I mean, it’s this seismic kind of epistemic shift for our faculty and how knowledge is created, how we acquire knowledge, how we represent knowledge, how we assess knowledge. It’s a stressful time for our faculty—they need to be able to process that with other faculty, and that’s super important.
Q: It’s also important that you’re having that conversation collegewide, because if this is a career competency and students do need AI skills, it needs to happen in every classroom, or at least be addressed in every classroom.
A: That’s a really good point, Ashley. In fact, we’re launching a program this year that we’re calling the AI-ready course design workshop, and the idea for that is that we’re identifying a faculty member from every major and we are paying them—and this is super important, too: It’s really a sign of respect, in terms of acknowledging the labor required to reimagine an assignment, to weave AI into the fabric of that assignment.
The goal is to have a faculty member from every major who teaches a required course in that major at least two times. We want to make sure that they have an opportunity to do this and then refine it and do it again. They’re being paid over break this winter to reimagine an assignment that leverages AI, and it is a deliverable. They will produce a three- to five-minute introspective video where they reflect on what they did, why they did it and what were the learning outcomes, both for them and for their students.
That is great because we will have an example from every major of how you can use AI in the fabric of your teaching. And I think that’s what faculty need right now. Again, they need lots of examples, and we’re incentivizing that through this program. We already have something we call the “AI in action” video series, so we already have some examples, but we don’t have examples from every major.
For us right now, I think you’re seeing a lot of engagement from faculty in engineering and sciences. We’re concerned that our humanities faculty need to engage; we need to engage the political scientists. We need to engage the philosophers and the historians. They can’t just sit this out. They’re really going to be key players in moving this forward, to prepare our students, regardless of major, for this AI-augmented world that we’re living in.
Q: What are some of the lessons that you’ve learned that you hope higher education can learn from? How do you all hope to be a model to your peers across the sector?
A: I think key is the importance of data and using data to inform the choices you’re making, whether it’s in the classroom, whether it’s in the cabinet. I report to the president, and using data to really drive those conversations, and using that to make sure that you’re engaging all of those stakeholders.
For instance, we’re looking at the survey data. That survey that we did in 2023 and repeated in 2024, we’ve now scaled up to the entire California State University system, and that is underway right now. In fact, I was just looking at the latest response rates. We have had, as of this morning, 77,714 people responding to the survey … which is about a 15 percent response rate. We’ve got half a million students in the CSU, so it’s a big number.
I was looking at [the data] with the council of vice presidents and my colleague … the provost, and I said, “When you look at the numbers for San Diego State, we’ve had 10,682 responses from students. We’ve had 406 responses from faculty and 556 responses from staff. But relative to the students, the response rate from faculty is pretty low.” So I talked with [the provost] about sending a message out to our academic leaders—the deans and the department chairs and the school directors—encouraging their faculty to respond to the survey, so that we have a balanced perspective.
Everybody has a voice. That is certainly something that I want to encourage; this whole idea of incentivizing faculty engagement, I think, is important. I think you really need to provide that encouragement for faculty to experiment, to show off, and then to really use that as an opportunity to recognize those faculty and celebrate them. That does a couple things. One, it honors them for taking the risk to do this work. Then it might inspire another faculty [member] to build on that work, or have coffee with that person and talk about what they wish they would have known that they could advise this person on who maybe is early career and would appreciate their advice. I think that idea of incentivizing faculty engagement is another thing that I would encourage the audience to consider.
Q: What’s next for you all? Are there other cool interventions or programs that are coming out?
A: That survey data is going to do quite a few things for us. It’s going to help us to not only refine the microcredentials and the work we’re doing with the microcredentials, but it’s also going to allow us to scaffold conversations with industry and our industry partners in terms of being responsive to the competencies they’re going to need in their industry.
I think it’s something like 35 out of the top 50 AI companies are housed here in California, but they can’t find the talent they need in California, let alone the United States, so they’re having to go abroad to get the people they need to continue to innovate. So using this as an opportunity to work with our industry partners to make sure we’re preparing this workforce that they need to continue to innovate, that’s a key element of it, and then using this data also to help us get additional resources and use that data to say, “Hey, here’s a gap we’ve identified. We need to fill this gap,” and using that data to make the case for that investment.
Back-to-school season arrives every year with a mixed bag of emotions for most educators, including anticipation and excitement, but also anxiety. The opportunity to catch up with friendly colleagues and the reward of helping students connect with material also comes with concern about how best to present and communicate that material in a way that resonates with a new classroom.
An annual challenge for K-12 educators is creating a syllabus that engages students and will be used throughout the year to mutual benefit rather than tucked in a folder and forgotten about. Today’s digital transformation can be a means for educators to create a more dynamic and engaging syllabus that meets students’ and parents’ needs.
While it can be overwhelming to think about learning any new education technology, the good news about a digital syllabi is that anyone who’s sent a digital calendar invite has already done most of the technical-learning legwork. The more prescient task will be learning the best practices that engage students and enable deeper learning throughout the year.
Step one: Ditch the PDFs and print-outs
Creating a syllabus that works begins with educators stepping into the shoes of their students. K-12 classrooms are full of students who are oriented around the digital world. Where textbooks and binders were once the tools of the trade for students, laptops and iPads have largely taken over. This creates an opportunity for teachers to create more dynamic syllabi via digital calendars, rather than printed off or static PDFs with lists of dates, deadlines, and relevant details that will surely change as the year progresses. In fact, many learning management systems (LMS) already have useful calendar features for this reason. Again, teachers need only know the best way to use them. The digital format offers flexibility and connectivity that old-school syllabi simply can’t hold a candle to.
Tips for creating an effective digital syllabus
Classroom settings and imperatives can vary wildly, and so can the preferences of individual educators. Optimization in this case is in the eye of the beholder, but consider a few ideas that may wind up on your personal best practices list for building out your digital syllabus every year around this time:
Make accessing the most up-to-date version of the syllabus as frictionless as possible for students and parents. Don’t attach your syllabus as a static PDF buried in an LMS. Instead, opt-in to the calendar most LMS platforms offer for the mutual benefit of educators, students, and parents. To maximize engagement and efficiency, teachers can create a subscription calendar in addition or as an alternative to the LMS calendar. Subscription calendars create a live link between the course syllabus and students’ and/or parents’ own digital calendar ecosystem, such as Google Calendar or Outlook. Instead of logging into the LMS to check upcoming dates, assignments, or project deadlines, the information becomes more accessible as it integrates into their monthly, weekly, and daily schedules, mitigating the chance of a missed assignment or even parent-teacher conference. Students and parents only have to opt-in to these calendars once at the beginning of the academic year, but any of the inevitable changes and updates to the syllabus throughout the year are reflected immediately in their personal calendar, making it simpler and easier for educators to ensure no important date is ever missed. While few LMS offer this option within the platform, subscription calendar links are like any hyperlink–easy to share in emails, LMS message notifications, and more.
Leverage the calendar description feature. Virtually every digital calendar provides an option to include a description. This is where educators should include assignment details, such as which textbook pages to read, links to videos or course material, grading rubrics, or more.
Color-code calendar invitations for visual information processors. Support different types of information processors in the classroom by taking the time to color-code the syllabus. For example, purple for project deadlines, red for big exams, yellow for homework assignment due dates. Consistency and routine are key, especially for younger students and busy parents. Color-coding, or even the consistent naming and formatting of events and deadlines, can make a large impact on students meeting deadlines.
Encourage further classroom engagement by integrating digital syllabus “Easter eggs.” Analog syllabi often contain Easter eggs that reward students who read it all the way through. Digital syllabi can include similar engaging surprises, but they’re easy to add throughout the year. Hide extra-credit opportunities in the description of an assignment deadline or add an invitation for last-minute office hours ahead of a big quiz or exam. It could be as simple as a prompt for students to draw their favorite animal at the bottom of an assignment for an extra credit point. If students are aware that these opportunities could creep up in the calendar, it keeps them engaged and perhaps strengthens the habit of checking their classroom syllabus.
While the start of the new school year is the perfect time to introduce a digital syllabus into the classroom, it’s important for educators to keep their own bandwidth and comfortability in mind. Commit to one semester with a digital syllabus and spend time learning the basic features and note how the classroom responds. From there, layer in more advanced features or functionality that helps students without being cumbersome to manage. Over time, educators will learn what works best for them, their students and parents, and the digital syllabus will be a classroom tool that simplifies classroom management and drives more engagement year-round.
Joep Leussink, AddEvent
Joep Leussink is the Head of Growth at AddEvent, a San Francisco-based platform that provides event and calendar marketing solutions. With a proven track record in driving growth for B2B SaaS companies from Series B to post-IPO, Joep leverages his expertise in demand generation and growth marketing to make AddEvent known and accessible to everyone.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Some university systems are letting their existing faculty senates lapse while others are reshaping them to comply with SB 37.
Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | BraunS, malerapaso and vi73777/iStock/Getty Images
The University of Texas System Board of Regents voted Thursday to disband the system’s long-standing faculty senates in compliance with Senate Bill 37, the sweeping Texas higher education law that gives university boards and presidents control over faculty governing bodies.
The UT board also voted Thursday to create faculty advisory groups, which will “perform the work of faculty governance bodies”—such as reviewing degree requirements, suggesting curricular changes, coordinating campus events and revising the faculty handbook—while keeping all decision-making power in the hands of the administration.
The University of Houston system Board of Regents did the same Thursday, voting to create faculty councils that will “provide structured, meaningful avenues for faculty to help shape academic priorities, strengthen excellence and contribute to decisions that guide our future,” a university spokesperson said in a statement.
But the groups won’t give the faculty independent representation or any real power. In accordance with SB 37, the board bylaws now state, “a faculty council is advisory only and may not be delegated the final decision-making authority on any matter.”
As of June 20, any faculty governing body in Texas—whether it’s a senate, council or advisory group—may not exceed 60 members unless otherwise decided by the board, and every college or school within the university must be represented by at least two members, SB 37 dictates. The university president will appoint at least one of the representatives from each college or school within the institution, while the faculty elects the others, meaning that as many as 30 members could be chosen by the president.
The president will also choose the presiding officer, associate presiding officer and secretary for each group. Appointees may serve for six years before taking a mandatory two-year break from the group, while faculty-elected representatives may only serve for two years before the two-year break.
While the new groups are still faculty bodies, they won’t “authentically speak with the faculty voice,” said Mark Criley, a senior program officer in the department of academic freedom, tenure and governance at the American Association of University Professors. “No matter who is selected, the process by which they’re selected matters. We learned when we’re in elementary school—the teacher didn’t appoint the class president, the principal didn’t appoint them, this was one of our first exercises in representation. You choose the people who will speak for you in an institutional body.”
Across the state, college and university system boards are taking different approaches to scrapping and reshaping their faculty senates. The Alamo Colleges District Board of Trustees voted earlier this month to consolidate the faculty senates at each of the five campuses into one group of up to 35 members. Previously, the five senates comprised 114 voting members.
While the Texas State University system board gave presidents the ability to create new faculty groups, it did not approve a new faculty governing body at its Aug. 14 meeting and will let the existing senate lapse on Sept. 1, the deadline set by SB 37. Texas A&M University regents are expected to vote on their approach to the new law at their Aug. 27 board meeting, The Austin American-Statesman reported.
Even as university governing boards design their toothless, SB 37–compliant groups, two professors at the University of Houston on Monday unveiled what they’re calling the Faux Faculty Senate. “I know that people feel that faculty senates are kind of arcane … but it’s a part of civil society,” said David Mazella, an associate professor in the English Department at the University of Houston and president-elect of the faux senate. “[SB 37] is an antidemocratic bill that essentially eliminates the faculty voice in order for the state to directly control what we do.”
The faux senate is largely symbolic; it won’t replicate any of the governing functions of the now-defunct 100-member senate, Mazella said. Instead, it will serve as an off-campus meet-up for faculty to socialize and talk about ongoing issues in Texas higher education. “Even getting to a faculty cafe is really difficult, so giving people an opportunity [to talk] that is not in a university space feels really important to us,” Mazella said.
He and his co-creator, María González, also an associate professor of English at Houston, plan to start hosting events in October, though nothing concrete has been scheduled. Without support from the university, the money to host these events will come from Mazella’s and González’s own pockets. They’re looking for a space in the Houston area that’s “not too gross, but not too expensive,” said Mazella, for their first faux senate convening.
“Have you ever considered you might have ADHD?” My therapist asked me that during my second year of Ph.D. studies at Cornell University. I had just mentioned my 8-year-old nephew’s diagnosis, adding that both my brother and father had it too. She explained how attention deficit hyperactivity disorder manifests differently in women—less hyperactivity, more internal struggle—and why men and children with more recognizable symptoms are diagnosed earlier.
The diagnosis, when it finally came, illuminated a lifetime of confusion: why simple tasks felt insurmountable, why my brilliance arrived in unpredictable bursts, why I could hyperfocus for 12 hours on coding but couldn’t remember to pay rent. Then the pandemic hit. Isolated in my apartment, stripped of external structure, I watched my symptoms spiral out of control. My dissertation research stalled. My carefully constructed coping mechanisms crumbled. I wasn’t just struggling with ADHD—I was drowning in it.
I had been thinking about creating a space specifically for academics with ADHD. In a therapy group, I met another graduate student silently battling the same demons. When I shared my idea, she immediately understood its value. Together, we organized our first meeting, gathering a few friends via Zoom. Our numbers grew after I took a calculated risk during a department seminar—openly discussing my diagnosis and the unique challenges it created in academic life. Private messages trickled in from students across departments, each one a confession of silent, similar struggles.
My courage to speak openly came from an unexpected source. Months earlier, a successful visiting professor had casually mentioned getting diagnosed with ADHD after their first year on the faculty. Seeing someone in a position I aspired to reach discuss their diagnosis so matter-of-factly gave me hope. This cascade effect—from the professor to me, from me to others—became how our community grew.
Four years later, our weekly meetings continue, even as many of us have graduated and moved to new institutions. What began as a survival mechanism during isolation has evolved into a sustainable community that transcends institutional boundaries.
The Challenges of Being an Academic With ADHD
Academia presents unique challenges for individuals with ADHD that differ from those found in other professional environments. Research requires sustained focus over months or years with minimal external structure—a particularly difficult task for the ADHD brain that thrives on novelty and immediate feedback. Grant deadlines, publication timelines and research planning demand executive functioning skills that many of us struggle with, despite high intelligence and creativity.
But ADHD’s effects on academic life extend far beyond issues of executive function. Rejection sensitive dysphoria—the intense emotional response to perceived criticism—can make grant rejections and peer review feedback devastating rather than constructive. What neurotypical colleagues might process as routine academic critique can trigger profound emotional responses that interrupt work for days or weeks.
Time blindness affects how we manage projects and deadlines in significant ways. The inability to accurately perceive how much time has passed or how long tasks will take creates a pattern of either last-minute panic work or paralysis when deadlines feel abstractly distant. Poor working memory impacts our ability to hold multiple concepts in mind during writing and research, often leading to fragmented work processes that others misinterpret as lack of focus or commitment.
Many of us also struggle with auditory processing issues that make departmental meetings, lectures and conferences particularly taxing. The cognitive effort required simply to process spoken information in these settings depletes mental energy.
Traditional academic support resources rarely address these specific challenges. Time management workshops typically assume neurotypical brain functioning and don’t account for the variable attention and motivation that characterizes ADHD. Productivity advice often focuses on willpower and discipline rather than taking into account neurodivergent traits. Even when disability services are available on campus, they tend to focus on classroom accommodations rather than the holistic challenges of academic life with ADHD, particularly the unstructured aspects of research and writing that often cause the greatest difficulty.
Building Our Community
Our initial meetings were simply virtual gatherings to validate frustrations and share strategies. The pandemic actually provided an unexpected advantage—virtual meetings allowed us to participate from our most comfortable environments, pacing or fidgeting as needed.
While we first attempted a highly structured approach with designated facilitators, we quickly discovered this created more pressure than relief. What worked better was a simple pattern: rounds of updates in which each person shares recent struggles and wins, plus spontaneous advice sharing and time spent setting intentions for what we’ll accomplish next.
Creating psychological safety was paramount. We established clear confidentiality guidelines—what’s shared in the group stays in the group. Group norms evolved organically: no shame for forgetfulness, no competitiveness with one another, and a focus on solutions rather than just venting. We emphasized how ADHD traits such as hyperfocus and creative thinking can become significant strengths when properly channeled.
Starting Your Own Group
Based on our experience, here’s how to create an effective ADHD academic community:
Start small with trusted connections. Begin with three to five people you already know to establish psychological safety before expanding.
Consider independence from institutional structures. Our unofficial status meant less administrative hassle and allowed continuity as members graduated.
Implement minimal structure. Our simple meeting format provided enough structure to be productive while allowing flexibility. A rotating notetaker helped members with memory challenges revisit past discussions.
Embrace accessible, virtual options. We created a shared calendar and Slack channel for regular meetings, but also allowed members to add impromptu co-working sessions.
Share resources collaboratively. Regularly exchange tools and strategies—from productivity apps to therapist recommendations to successful accommodation requests.
Prioritize confidentiality. Some members may not have disclosed their diagnosis in their departments, making the group their only space for open discussion.
Impact Beyond Expectations
Members of our group have reported significant improvements in completing dissertations, meeting deadlines and navigating the job market with ADHD. The psychological benefits have been equally profound. Academia’s competitive nature breeds imposter syndrome, amplified for those with ADHD. When peers appear to effortlessly juggle multiple responsibilities while you struggle with basic tasks, the comparison can be crushing.
In our group, however, we found role models who shared our challenges. Watching fellow ADHD academics successfully defend dissertations or secure positions created a powerful ripple effect of inspiration. These visible successes provided concrete evidence that academic milestones were achievable with ADHD, motivating others to persevere through their own struggles.
While consistent attendance can be challenging (unsurprisingly, given our shared attention difficulties), we’ve found that maintaining a no-pressure atmosphere works better than strict accountability—members drift in and out as needed, returning without shame.
Finding Connection Through Shared Neurodiversity
What I’ve learned through this journey is that sometimes the most powerful communities form around shared neurological experiences rather than departmental affiliations. The regular connection with others who understand your specific challenges can be transformative for wellbeing, productivity and career development.
By creating these supportive micro-communities, we not only help ourselves navigate existing structures but gradually transform academic culture to better accommodate diverse cognitive styles—ultimately enriching scholarship for everyone.
If you’re an academic with ADHD, consider initiating a similar group. The effort to create connection amid the isolation of both academia and neurodivergence yields returns far beyond what we initially imagined.
Maria Akopyan is a National Science Foundation postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Evolution, Ecology and Organismal Biology at the University of California, Riverside. She uses genomic tools to study how species diverge, adapt and persist across environments through time.
Last month, Peter Hans, president of the University of North Carolina system, casually dropped a bombshell announcement that the system and others were in talks to launch a new accreditor.
“We’ve been having a number of discussions with several other major public university systems, where we’re exploring the idea of creating an accreditor that would offer sound oversight,” Hans said at a UNC system Board of Governors meeting last month, The News & Observer reported.
Since then, no additional details have emerged, though Hans teased an update to come in July.
But public records obtained by Inside Higher Ed show UNC system officials have been quietly engaged in conversations about launching a new accreditor for at least a year, including discussions with unnamed collaborators in Florida, where the effort could be headquartered. UNC officials have also spoken with officials at the U.S. Department of Education, even getting a heads-up on what an April 23 executive order from the Trump administration on accreditation would entail.
Here’s what those documents show.
‘The Florida Project’
In early April, UNC officials appeared ready to tell the world about their plans for a new accreditor that “would be publicly accountable, outcomes-based, and more efficient and effective in its reviews,” according to the draft of a statement that was never publicly released.
“We believe it is past time for the creation of a new accreditor focusedon the unique needs of public colleges and universities,” the statement said. “We have worked collaboratively over the past year to explore and develop such a cross-state partnership.”
Andrew Kelly, a senior adviser to Hans, sent a draft of the statement to other UNC officials. The statement argued that accreditors “wield enormous power, but too often have opaque and counterintuitive governance” and fail to “focus on matters that are significant to students.” He argued in the statement that the current model “creates unnecessary duplication and cost, conflicts with the authority of state governments, and does little to ensure educational quality.”
An unidentified number of state systems of higher education were supposed to sign the statement, according to the draft.
Kelly drafted the statement in response to the Trump administration’s anticipated changes to accreditation, which included streamlining the processes for ED to recognize accreditors and for institutions to switch agencies, among other changes to the system that serves as gatekeeper to federal financial aid.
But the public did not hear about the UNC system’s quiet effort to launch a new accreditor until Hans spoke up at the May board meeting.
Other emails yielded some insights into whom the UNC system might be partnering with.
Daniel Harrison, vice president for academic affairs at the UNC system, sent an email on April 23 to fellow officials recapping a call with the U.S. Department of Education and what could be expected in the coming executive order on accreditation (which was issued shortly after his email).
In that email, Harrison also pointed to potential partners in the accreditation effort.
“An update on the Florida project—we met with the new entities [sic] attorneys and made substantial progress toward determining the legal structure of the new accreditor. It is likely to be a single member Florida nonprofit corp. Florida would be the sole member, but would delegate all delegable powers to a Board of Directors made up of the participating states,” Harrison wrote.
But despite having met with potential partners, UNC considered going its own way.
In a response to Harrison, Hans asked him to convene several system officials involved with the effort to weigh the pros and cons of “joining [a] multi-state coalition” or “forming a NC entity.” Email records obtained by Inside Higher Ed don’t show what the group recommended, but remarks made by Hans at May’s meeting indicate the system opted for the coalition approach.
UNC system officials did not respond to requests for comment from Inside Higher Ed.
System leaders also appear to have discussed the effort with state legislators in private. On May 15, Hans asked senior vice president of government relations Bart Goodson to set up a meeting with Michael Lee, the Senate majority leader in the Republican-dominated Legislature. When Goodson asked about the topic, Hans replied, “accreditation update with good news.”
Lee did not respond to a request for comment from Inside Higher Ed.
Potential Partners?
Like their UNC counterparts, other public systems are staying quiet on the effort.
Inside Higher Ed contacted a dozen public university systems, all in red states, to ask if they are partnering with UNC or others in an effort to launch a new accreditor, or if they participated in such discussions. Only two replied: the Arkansas State University system and the University of Alabama system. Both noted they had not been involved in those accreditation discussions.
The State University System of Florida—which did not reply to media inquiries—is the most likely potential partner, given the details in Harrison’s email and the governor’s recent political fury with accreditors.
In 2022, Florida’s dark-red Legislature passed a law requiring state institutions to switch accreditors regularly. That move came after the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, which accredited all 40 of Florida’s public institutions, inquired about a potential conflict of interest at Florida State University, which was considering Richard Corcoran for its presidency despite his role on the Florida Board of Governors. (He now leads New College of Florida.)
SACS also raised questions about an effort by the University of Florida to prevent professors from testifying against the state in a legal case challenging voting-rights restrictions. (UF later dropped that policy amid a torrent of criticism.) Both incidents occurred in 2021.
Florida governor Ron DeSantis has been a vocal critic of the federal accreditation system.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Following the 2022 law, some institutions began the process of switching accreditors,though state officials argued that the Biden administration slowed down that effort and Florida tried unsuccessfully to get a federal judge to rule the current system of accreditation unconstitutional.
Outside of Florida, North Carolina is the only other state with a similar law. In 2023, legislators quietly slipped a provision into a state budget bill that required state institutions to change accreditors every cycle. The law was passed with no debate among North Carolina lawmakers. The change came after UNC clashed with SACS in early 2023 over shared governance.
Florida governor Ron DeSantis did not confirm to Inside Higher Ed whether the state is launching a new accreditor, but recent remarks from the GOP firebrand suggest, albeit vaguely, that something is in the works.
“For too long, academic accreditors have held our colleges and universities hostage,” DeSantis said in an emailed statement. “These accreditation cartels have worked behind the scenes to shape university behavior, embedding ideological concepts like Diversity, Equity, and Exclusion Indoctrination into the accreditation process. If you weren’t meeting politically motivated standards, like enthusiastic participation in DEI, they would hamper your accreditation and access to federal funding. In Florida, we refuse to let academic accreditation cartels hold our colleges and universities hostage to ideology at the expense of academic excellence. Stay tuned.”
Wade Maki, Faculty Assembly chair and a philosophy professor at UNC Greensboro, said he and other faculty members recently met with system officials to share their thoughts on the plan.
“We had a very open conversation with the system office and shared our hopes that we get an accreditor that is independent, that maintains the strong reputation of the UNC system and helps keep the politics out of higher ed and the curriculum, whether that’s from the politicians or the accreditors themselves,” Maki said. “We’ve seen it come from both directions over the years.”
He also thinks the narrow focus of such an accreditor could be a positive.
“My leadership team, the Faculty Assembly Executive Committee and the faculty that we’ve talked to on campuses, we see the potential benefits of trying something like this, of having an accreditor that focuses just on the accrediting of state-supported public institutions,” Maki said.
Outside observers were more critical of the UNC system’s plans.
Accreditation expert Paul Gaston III, an emeritus trustees professor at Kent State University, argued that building an accreditor composed only of public institutions would omit valuable perspectives in review processes. He argued that colleges undergoing accreditation reviews benefit from the diversity of experiences from evaluators working at a broad range of institutions.
“What would be the advantage of, in a sense, separating classes of institutions for accreditation? I think one of the strengths of accreditation has been that it brings a variety of perspectives to the evaluation of a particular institution,” Gaston said.
Then there’s the arduous process of getting a new accrediting agency up and running; gaining federal recognition, which is required, takes years. Although Trump’s executive order on accreditation promised a smoother pathway to recognition for new entrants, it does not supersede federal regulations.
“Becoming federally recognized, typically, is a five-plus-year process,” said Edward Conroy, a senior policy manager at the left-leaning think tank New America. Under current federal regulations, Conroy doesn’t expect the new accreditor to be recognized until 2030 or so.
Conroy also questioned whether the effort to create a new accreditor is about institutional quality assurance or political control.
“Everything Florida has done on accreditation over the past few years appears to be politically and ideologically driven, rather than about what is best for students and ensuring that they go to high-quality institutions and get a good education when they’re paying a lot of money for it and when taxpayers are investing a lot of money in public funding for higher education,” he said.
Conroy worries that state lawmakers in either Florida or North Carolina would require public colleges in their state to be accredited by their new accreditor. That would undermine the current requirement that colleges get to choose their own accreditor.
“It undercuts the principle of the higher education accountability triad, where states, accreditors and the Department of Education are all meant to do different things,” Conroy said. “If you have a state that becomes both, to some degree or another, the accreditor, as well as the state authorizing entity, then we’ve combined two legs of a three-legged stool.”
The United States (U.S.) remains a top choice for international students pursuing higher education, with approximately six percent of the student population consisting of international students (Open Doors Report on International Educational Exchange, 2024). This data underscores their integral role in higher education. One of the major challenges international students faces is adapting to a new educational system and culture while striving to integrate seamlessly into their new environment. Many international students bring deeply ingrained learning experiences from their home countries, which may differ significantly from those in the U.S. These differences profoundly shape their approach to education, influencing their self-esteem and academic success. This article explores these experiences, offering insights for educators on how to foster supportive and inclusive learning environments, particularly from an Asian perspective.
Personal Experience
I was an international student myself, so I can empathize with the challenges faced by the current generation of international students. While platforms like the internet and American media provide some understanding of American culture, nuances are often missed. I vividly recall the sense of isolation in the classrooms and at conferences, where engaging in conversations felt daunting. Introducing and joining conversations with others was challenging; the most I could do was to wave and acknowledge my presence. These experiences highlight the importance of creating environments where international students feel safe, supported, and included.
1. Cultural Perspectives on Authority
International students often approach interactions with educators with profound reverence, influenced by cultures that value authority and rules. This reverence may lead to reserved behavior in the classroom, hindering active participation. Rather than engaging in active discourse, they tend to listen attentively to their educators and accept their viewpoints unquestioningly, even if they conflict with their knowledge and understanding. This deference to authority may manifest as reticence, timidity, or reluctance to participate in class activities and discussions (Wan, 2021). For international students, this act of showing respect is vital, as they fear failure in the course if their communication style is perceived as disrespectful. Consequently, they do not advocate for themselves in academic settings and function best when following rules set by a person of authority.
To address this, educators can empower international students to express themselves more freely, by adopting strategies that foster a supportive and less intimidating learning environment. One approach is to adjust the tone of communication to be less stern or serious, creating a more welcoming atmosphere for dialogue. Additionally, providing alternative avenues for communication, such as writing on sticky notes or offering anonymous feedback options, can offer students a sense of safety and anonymity when expressing their thoughts. Furthermore, educators can encourage peer support by allowing students to bring a classmate along when seeking clarification or discussing concerns with educators. This approach can help alleviate feelings of intimidation and apprehension, as students may feel more comfortable and supported when engaging with professors alongside a peer. By acknowledging and accommodating cultural perspectives on authority, educators can promote inclusivity and empower international students to participate actively in their academic journey.
2. Adapting to Autonomy in the Classroom
Cultural backgrounds and language barriers contribute to international students’ hesitance to participate vocally in class. Students who come from educational backgrounds where autonomy in the classroom was not encouraged may struggle to adapt to the interactive and participatory learning environments often found in Western educational settings. Additionally, if English is not spoken as their first language, these students fear that their foreign accent may impede understanding. They quickly become sensitive to others’ evaluations and doubt their ability to communicate clearly, leading them to feel uncomfortable when speaking up in class (Hsu & Huang, 2017). Consequently, they may prefer to take on a passive observer role rather than participating actively. Moreover, international students may not perceive their personal views and experiences as significant, fearing that they may not align with the local context in the US.
Creating a safe space in the classroom for international students is crucial. These students must feel valued and have their dignity upheld. Educators must provide clear guidelines to foster participation, encouraging active engagement and the sharing of diverse perspectives. Turn-taking may not occur naturally for international students, so assigning specific roles to each group member to present their ideas can be effective. Appoint a leader who will ensure each group member’s voice is heard. Educators must also be cautious when addressing incorrect answers to prevent students from being discouraged from taking risks in responding in the future. A face-saving act plays an important role for international students when their answers are off- tangent.
3. Feedback and Revising
International students may not be familiar with the process of feedback and revising their work. These students have often been taught to get it right the first time and may not be accustomed to opportunities for revision. In some cases, they may not even receive feedback and might not understand what constructive feedback looks like.
Educators should familiarize students with feedback processes and create a supportive environment for revising work based on feedback. Help these students become accustomed to the various forms of feedback they may receive in your classroom. Emphasize that feedback is a way to help them improve their work and is not a personal attack.
4. Peer Support
International students often fear being judged by their educators if they ask questions that reveal their lack of understanding or knowledge. Additionally, there is a cultural perception among some international students that questioning authority, such as educators, may be viewed negatively. Therefore, seeking assistance from peers can feel less intimidating as peers may be perceived as more approachable and understanding of their struggles. Educators should view this reliance on peer support as a natural part of the adjustment process for international students. Allowing them time to acclimate to unfamiliar academic expectations and social dynamics will help them feel confident enough to engage directly with educators. Be accessible and supportive. Let the students know that you are approachable and happy to answer any questions no matter how simple or complex.
5. Creating a Sense of Belonging
International students often experience isolation in classrooms, making it crucial for educators to foster a sense of belonging. Cultural differences, such as the U.S. emphasis on independence versus the collectivistic nature of many Asian cultures, can make classroom interactions challenging. This unfamiliarity can lead to disengagement and alienation.
Despite appearing integrated, international students may struggle to form meaningful connections with American peers, leading to self-isolation. They often gravitate toward friends from their home country, limiting engagement in classroom discussions and peer support networks. This lack of engagement with local students can hinder their ability to form meaningful personal connections, access peer support, and fully participate in classroom discussions, all of which are essential for academic and social success.
Educators can help by designating peer mentors or teaching assistants to offer guidance. Assigning clear roles in group activities ensures inclusivity, while providing instructions and exemplars in advance helps international students prepare and participate more confidently. Allowing students to preview tasks before class gives them time to seek clarification, fostering comfort and engagement. These strategies create a more inclusive learning environment, enhancing both academic success and emotional well-being.
Conclusion
Creating a safe, supportive, and inclusive learning environment is essential for all students, including international students. Since international students may encounter cultural differences in their new learning environment, educators must implement culturally responsive support strategies. These strategies help foster an inclusive setting, enabling all students to succeed both academically and personally. By adopting these five inclusive practices in the classroom, educational experiences can be enriched for both international and domestic students, promoting a sense of belonging for everyone.
Thilagha Jagaiah is an Associate Professor of Special Education in the Education Department at the University of Hartford. She prepares pre-service teachers to develop essential teaching and assessment skills, equipping them to become highly effective licensed educators for PreK-12 students. Her research focuses on enhancing the teaching and learning of writing, with a specific emphasis on how sophisticated sentence structures can improve writing quality and how optimal trunk support can enhance engagement for students with trunk deficits in inclusive classrooms.
References
Hsu, C.-F. (Sandy), & Huang, I.-T. (Joyce). (2017). Are international students quiet in class? The influence of teacher confirmation on classroom apprehension and willingness to talk in class. Journal of International Students, 7(1), 38-52. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v7i1.244
International Students Enrollment Trends, 1948/49 – 2023/24. Open Doors Report on International Educational Exchange. Retrieved from http://www.opendoorsdata.org
Wan, Y. W. (2021). Why are they so quiet? Exploring reticent and passive East Asian ESL students in the U.S. classroom. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 11, 942-954. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2021.116073
While running for president, Donald Trump pledged to fight the Biden administration’s efforts to expand protections for transgender students. On day one of his second term in office, he got to work fulfilling that promise.
In an executive order, which is part of a broader effort to restrict the rights of transgender people, Trump declared that there are only two sexes and banned the federal funding of “gender ideology.” His supporters hailed the move as a return to common sense, while LGBTQ+ advocates saw it as an attack seeking to erase the existence of trans people.
For colleges and universities, the order raises more questions than it answers, and its immediate implications are unclear. As with other executive orders, it includes many provisions that require the Education Department to take action and issue guidance about how colleges should comply. But depending on how the department responds, the order could complicate institutions’ efforts to accommodate transgender students and eventually change how the federal government enforces Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
Susan Friedfel, a higher education attorney at Jackson Lewis, a New York City law firm that works with colleges and other employers, said more information is needed from the Education Department to determine how the order will affect higher ed institutions, especially since other federal and state laws protect LGBTQ+ students.
“We have a lot of questions,” she said. “It’s challenging because we have conflicting laws that apply to the same space.”
In the meantime, she encouraged colleges to revisit their Title IX policies to ensure they are in compliance with the 2020 regulations put in place by the first Trump administration and to think about how best to accommodate everybody.
The order is likely to face legal challenges, said Cathryn Oakley, senior director of legal policy at the Human Rights Campaign, who argues that it’s unlawful.
“It is important that people not give this executive order more credence than it deserves,” she said.
Other LGBTQ+ advocates echoed Oakley, emphasizing that executive orders don’t create or change laws.
“Discrimination based on sex, including discrimination against transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people, remains illegal, and it cannot be legalized through this executive order,” Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women’s Law Center, said in a statement.
But Republican lawmakers, conservative legal organizations and other anti-trans advocates applauded Trump’s order, saying it would protect women and girls from discrimination and ground federal law in “biological fact.”
“Blatant and deliberate attempts to redefine our sons’ and daughters’ identities by questioning biology itself has done significant harm to our children and society,” said Representative Tim Walberg, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House education committee. “[The] action by the Trump administration acknowledges the biological differences between men and women. In doing so, it is protecting women from discrimination and securing the progress women have made over the decades.”
What’s in the Order
In addition to defining “sex” and other terms, the order outlines a plan to combat “gender ideology,” which the Trump administration defines as replacing “the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity, permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa.”
Federal officials were told to remove any internal or external documents that “inculcate gender ideology” and take “any necessary steps to end the federal funding of gender ideology.” Additionally, agencies will now only use the term “sex” instead of “gender” in all applicable federal policies and documents, according to the order. The Biden administration gave people the option on passport applications to mark their gender as X rather than choose male or female. That option is now being eliminated.
On Thursday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the State Department wouldn’t process any passport applications seeking to change the applicant’s gender from male to female or requesting the X option, The Guardianreported.
Agencies are required to give an update on their efforts to implement the order in 120 days.
The Trump administration also directed the attorney general to correct the Biden administration’s “misapplication” of the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which said that LGBTQ+ individuals were protected from discrimination in the workplace on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The first Trump administration said that Bostock didn’t apply to Title IX, which bars sex-based discrimination in education settings. But the Biden administration reversed that guidance in June 2021.
The Bostock decision was key to the Biden administration’s new Title IX regulations, which clarified that the law also prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. A federal judge ruled earlier this month that the new Title IX rule was unlawful and wiped the regulations off the books.
Trump’s executive order also requires the education secretary to rescind a number of guidance documents related to the now-vacated Title IX regulations, as well as resources for supporting LGBTQ+ students. That includes the Education Department’s June 2021 Dear Colleague letter that said Title IX protects LGBTQ+ students from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
In addition, the Trump administration is rescinding a back-to-school message for transgender students from the Departments of Education, Justice and Health and Human Services that provided resources for students who experience bullying or discrimination.
‘Nothing Radical’
Kim Hermann, the executive director of the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization that sued the Biden administration over the Title IX regulations, said Trump’s order immediately restores the privacy and physical safety rights of women, so colleges that don’t comply could face federal civil rights investigations or lawsuits.
“There’s nothing radical about this executive order,” she said. “All it does is solidify Congress’s original intent when they passed the laws … Our girls and our women on college campuses are sick of their rights being eroded.”
Friedfel said the current Trump administration will likely investigate complaints from cisgender students who are uncomfortable sharing spaces with transgender students.
“That doesn’t mean that they necessarily have to do anything radically different, but recognize that there’s that risk there,” she said.
Oakley said that guidance from the department is necessary for universities to understand what’s expected of them and how the Office for Civil Rights will enforce Title IX. She doesn’t expect OCR to take discrimination against LGBTQ+ faculty, staff and students seriously.
“It’s also going to be very difficult to understand how to be in compliance when the folks who are enforcing the law are not respecting the actual case law,” she said. “So it is going to create a tremendous amount of confusion.”
It’s 2025! Now is the perfect time to reevaluate your strategies and set a fresh, bold new vision for your institution’s success. This year, education marketing will continue to evolve rapidly, and staying ahead means adapting to the latest trends, technologies, and audience expectations. Keeping this in mind as you follow the 4 stages of the marketing planning process will help you boost your school’s digital marketing campaign results.
What are the 4 stages of the marketing planning process? Follow these steps: Analyze, plan, implement, and control. The advice we’re sharing today is applicable during each of these phases.
As a school marketer or administrator, you have the opportunity to refresh your education marketing plan, making it more dynamic, personalized, and impactful. This guide will walk you through actionable steps to rethink your approach and leverage the tools that will define success in 2025. Let’s get started!
Struggling with enrollment?
Our expert digital marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students!
Evaluating 2024’s Performance to Shape 2025 Goals
How do you create a marketing plan for education? Any successful education marketing plan involves a data-driven evaluation of the previous year’s performance, an analysis of current digital marketing trends, and a targeted investigation into what your particular audience needs.
To start your school’s reimagined marketing plan, conduct an honest evaluation of the previous year’s performance. Begin by reviewing their analytics from 2024, identifying what strategies brought the most engagement, where the most valuable leads originated, and what channels seemed underutilized. Metrics such as lead-to-enrollment conversion rates, social media engagement trends, and website traffic sources can illuminate what strategies resonated most effectively with prospective students and parents.
To make this evaluation productive, a methodical approach should be applied. Your team can organize findings by categorizing successful campaigns, unexpected successes, and areas where they fell short. This allows you to use data to guide your decisions. This data-driven assessment will form a solid foundation for crafting strategies that are both visionary and practical in 2025.
Source: HEM
Example: Digital marketing audits such as the one we completed for one of our clients are an excellent way to reflect on last year’s performance and enter the new year with a data-informed plan. Our digital marketing audits include traffic insights, keyword rankings, and personalized suggestions for optimizing your school site. This provides a solid starting point to creating a marketing plan that drives results.
Reimagine How You Engage with Prospective Students
In 2025, your audience expects you to meet them where they are. To stay relevant, you need to embrace a digital-first strategy that prioritizes engagement over promotion. Emerging technologies like augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) can bring your campus to life for prospective students, offering immersive experiences that go beyond static images or videos.
Source: University of Western University
Example: This AR campus tour, complete with360º images, audio guidance, and detailed written descriptions of your campus as Western has done is a convenient, immersive way to share your school with prospects. Take full advantage of new technology when creating an education marketing plan. Though not as revolutionary as AR and VR, social media is another tool you should never neglect when creating a school marketing campaign.
Social media is where the most authentic connections happen, especially on platforms like TikTok and Instagram. But the key to standing out in 2025 will be authenticity. Think about how you can use short-form videos to showcase real student experiences, faculty achievements, or day-in-the-life snapshots. Consider hosting live Q&A sessions or interactive events to foster direct engagement. The more you humanize your institution, the stronger the connection you’ll create with your audience.
Leverage Artificial Intelligence for Smarter Marketing
Artificial intelligence (AI) has moved beyond being a buzzword—it’s now a vital part of successful marketing. This year, take advantage of AI to transform how you interact with prospective students. Predictive analytics, powered by AI, can help you understand student behavior and target your campaigns with unprecedented precision. You can predict the types of students most likely to enroll, what they care about, and how they prefer to engage with your school.
Chatbots are another way AI can streamline your communication. Today’s chatbots don’t just answer basic questions—they guide prospective students through complex processes like application submission or program selection. You can also use AI to personalize your outreach efforts, crafting content tailored to each prospect’s unique interests and behaviors. AI provides efficiency and more; it helps you create an experience that feels relevant and meaningful.
Make Accessibility and Inclusivity a Priority
Your prospective students come from diverse backgrounds and circumstances, and they expect your marketing to reflect that. In 2025, it’s more important than ever to create campaigns that are accessible to everyone. Take a close look at your website and digital content. Is it optimized for screen readers? Does it work seamlessly on mobile devices? These small adjustments can make a big difference in how inclusive your institution feels to prospective students.
Inclusivity also means speaking to the values your audience cares about. Highlighting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives on your campus can help students see themselves as part of your community. International students, in particular, will appreciate content that acknowledges their unique needs, whether it’s visa support, language resources, or cultural events. By showing that you’re committed to creating an inclusive environment, you’ll build trust and strengthen your brand.
Source: Syracuse University | Instagram
Example: Here, Syracuse University demonstrates its commitment to diversity and inclusion with a dedicated office for championing these principles. On its Instagram page dedicated to its Office of Diversity and Inclusion, Syracuse University provides updates on how it fosters acceptance and respect in meaningful, action-oriented ways.
Adapt Your SEO Strategy for the Future of Search
Search engine optimization (SEO) is evolving, and your strategy needs to keep pace. In 2025, the way people search for information is increasingly conversational. With voice search growing in popularity, you need to focus on optimizing for natural language queries. Prospective students are asking questions like, “What’s the best school for me in New York?” or “How can I study abroad in Italy?” Tailoring your content to match these queries will make it easier for them to find you.
Video SEO is also a critical area to watch. Platforms like YouTube and TikTok are now major search engines for younger audiences. By creating engaging video content and optimizing it with descriptive titles, tags, and captions, you can expand your reach significantly. Don’t forget to prioritize user experience—your website should load quickly, look great on mobile, and provide intuitive navigation.
Source: TikTok
Example: As you create your 2025 SEO strategy, don’t underestimate the importance of video SEO on platforms such as TikTok and YouTube. Your young prospects are searching for information about schools in an easy-to-digest, engaging format. This means that video platforms the perfect place for you to make your first impression on them.
Stay Ahead with Innovative Advertising Strategies
If paid advertising is part of your student recruitment strategy, now is the time to rethink how you’re using it. Interactive ads—featuring live polls, quizzes, or even augmented reality filters—can capture attention and drive engagement. Streaming platforms and connected TV are also gaining traction as advertising spaces, giving you new ways to reach prospective students and their families.
Retargeting campaigns will be even smarter in 2025, thanks to AI. Imagine delivering ads that dynamically adjust based on a prospective student’s previous interactions with your website or social media. These personalized ads feel more relevant, increasing the chances of conversion. At the same time, new privacy regulations mean you’ll need to adopt ethical, transparent practices when handling user data. Building trust with your audience will be just as important as getting their attention.
Use Data to Continuously Improve
Marketing isn’t static—it’s an ongoing process of learning and refining. This year, make data-driven decision-making the backbone of your strategy. Use your analytics tools to track key metrics like website traffic, social media engagement, and lead conversions. What’s working? What’s falling flat? By identifying education marketing trends and adjusting your approach in real time, you can ensure that your efforts are always aligned with your goals.
Predictive analytics can help you go even further by forecasting future trends and identifying areas for growth. For example, if your data shows that a specific program is generating high interest but low conversions, you can adjust your messaging to address potential concerns. The more you rely on insights, the more effective your campaigns will be.
Source: Google Analytics
Example: In 2025, analytics tools will continue to be essential for making informed decisions about your school’s digital marketing strategy. As you can see in the example above, Google Analytics provides information about traffic volume and sources, audience demographics, and user behavior for your site.
Showcase Your Brand’s Values Through Partnerships
Students in 2025 want more than just a degree—they want to join a community that aligns with their values. Highlighting your partnerships with industry leaders, alumni, and global institutions can help reinforce your school’s credibility and reach. Think about how you can collaborate with partners to launch new initiatives, co-host events, or create content that appeals to your target audience.
For international students, partnerships with schools abroad or study-abroad programs can be particularly compelling. Promoting these opportunities shows that you’re forward-thinking and globally minded, which can resonate with students looking for diverse and enriching experiences.
Source: Instagram | Ivy Campus USA
Example: Partnerships are a highly effective way to demonstrate your institution’s commitment to continuous academic enrichment for students. Here, Ivy Campus USA announces a partnership with Artal International Preparatory School that offers young students unique skills. Try forging partnerships that can provide valuable and unique learning opportunities for your prospects.
Anticipate What Students Will Want in 2025
The next generation of students expects your institution to care about issues that affect them directly such as mental health, career development, and sustainability. Incorporating these priorities into your marketing campaigns can help you stand out. Highlight your mental health resources, career placement rates, and green initiatives. Transparency is key—students and their families want clear, honest information about tuition costs, scholarships, and program outcomes.
By anticipating their needs and addressing them upfront, you can create a marketing plan that not only attracts attention but builds trust.
Create a Seamless Multi-Channel Experience
Your audience moves seamlessly between platforms, and they expect your marketing to do the same. Whether someone is exploring your website, scrolling through Instagram, or attending a virtual open house, they should encounter consistent messaging and visuals that reinforce your brand. In 2025, it’s critical to ensure that all your channels work together to provide a unified experience.
Real-time engagement will also be a game-changer. Live events—like virtual Q&A sessions or webinars—offer opportunities to connect directly with prospective students and answer their questions. By creating these interactive moments, you can leave a lasting impression and strengthen their connection to your school.
By embracing new technologies, prioritizing inclusivity, and building campaigns that reflect the values of modern students, you can create a strategy that resonates deeply and drives real results. The new year is your opportunity to reimagine what’s possible, and with the right approach, you’ll not only meet your goals but exceed them.
We’re here to help!
Struggling with enrollment?
Our expert digital marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students!
FAQ
What are the 4 stages of the marketing planning process?
Follow these steps: Analyze, plan, implement, and control.
How do you create a marketing plan for education?
Any successful education marketing plan involves a data-driven evaluation of the previous year’s performance, an analysis of current digital marketing trends, and a targeted investigation into what your particular audience needs.
