Tag: Education

  • Federal Education Cuts and Trump DEI Demands Leave States, Teachers in Limbo – The 74

    Federal Education Cuts and Trump DEI Demands Leave States, Teachers in Limbo – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Early this month, the U.S. Department of Education issued an ultimatum to K-12 public schools and state education agencies: Certify that you are not engaging in discrimination under the banner of diversity, equity and inclusion, or risk losing federal funding — including billions in support for low-income students.

    The backlash was immediate. Some states with Democratic governors refused to comply, arguing that the directive lacks legal basis, fails to clearly define what constitutes “illegal DEI practices,” and threatens vital equity-based initiatives in their schools.

    After lawsuits from the National Education Association teachers union and the American Civil Liberties Union, the Department of Education agreed to delay enforcement until after April 24.

    But states across the country, both liberal- and conservative-led, are worried about losing other aid: the pandemic-era money that in some cases they’ve already spent or committed to spending.

    The Department of Education has long played a critical role in distributing federal funds to states for K-12 education, including Title I grants to boost staffing in schools with high percentages of low-income students, and emergency relief like that provided during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Conservative-led states — particularly Mississippi, South Dakota and Arkansas — rely the most heavily on these funds to sustain services in high-need districts.

    The 15 states with the highest percentage of their K-12 budget coming from federal funding in fiscal year 2022 — the latest year with data available from the National Center for Education Statistics — voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election. Similarly, 10 of the 15 states receiving the highest amounts of Title I funding in fiscal year 2024 also voted for Trump.

    Mississippi and Kentucky have sent letters to the Department of Education expressing concern over halted pandemic aid.

    The clash over federal funding comes even as the future of the Department of Education is murky, given President Donald Trump’s pledge to dismantle the department.

    DEI-related cuts

    In letters to the Department of Education, state officials and superintendents in Illinois, New York and Wisconsin pushed back against the DEI directive.

    New York officials said they would not provide additional certification beyond what the state already has done, asserting that there “are no federal or State laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.” Illinois Superintendent Tony Sanders wrote that he was concerned that the Department of Education was changing the conditions of federal funding without a formal administrative process. Wisconsin Superintendent Jill Underly questioned the legality of the order.

    New York State Department of Education Counsel and Deputy Commissioner Daniel Morton-Bentley noted that the federal department’s current stance on DEI starkly contrasts with its position during Trump’s first term, when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos supported such efforts.

    Colorado and California also confirmed they would not comply with the Department of Education’s order.

    While some states with liberal leaders are gearing up for legal battles and possible revocation of funding, conservative-led states such as Florida have embraced the federal directive as part of a broader push to reshape public education.

    In Florida, anti-DEI laws have been in place dating back to 2023. In fact, many school districts and the state education department say they plan to follow the federal department’s directives, noting the similar state laws.

    Pandemic aid cancellations

    In March, the Department of Education abruptly rescinded previously approved extensions of pandemic-era aid, ending access to funds months ahead of the original March 2026 deadline.

    When the Massachusetts governor’s office voiced concern over that decision, the federal department’s reply on social media was blunt: “COVID is over.

    Sixteen mostly Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Education and Secretary Linda McMahon, challenging the abrupt rescission of previously approved extensions for spending COVID-19 education relief funds.

    But backlash against abrupt federal cuts to education has not been limited to blue states.

    Mississippi’s Department of Education warned the cuts would jeopardize more than $137 million in already obligated funds, slated for literacy initiatives, mental health services and infrastructure repairs. “The impact of this sudden reversal is detrimental to Mississippi students,” state Superintendent Lance Evans wrote in a letter to McMahon.

    The letter also outlines the state’s repeated — but unsuccessful — efforts to draw down millions in approved funds since February.

    Shanderia Minor, a spokesperson for the Mississippi education department, told Stateline the agency is awaiting next steps and direction about the funds and federal directives.

    In Kentucky, state Education Commissioner Robbie Fletcher told districts — which stand to lose tens of millions in pandemic aid — that abrupt federal changes leave them “in a difficult position,” with schools already having committed funds to teacher training and facility upgrades.

    According to Kentucky Department of Education spokesperson Jennifer Ginn, the state has about $18 million in unspent pandemic aid funds left to distribute to districts. And districts have about $38 million in unspent funds, for a total $56 million that could be lost.

    Lauren Farrow, a former Florida public school teacher, told Stateline that schools that receive Title I money are already underfunded — and the federal threat only widens the gap.

    “Florida is pouring billions into education — but where is it going? Because we’re not seeing it in schools, especially not in Title I schools,” said Farrow. “I taught five minutes away from a wealthier school, and we didn’t even have pencils. Teachers were buying shoes for students. Why is that still happening?”

    Effects in the classroom

    Tafshier Cosby, senior director of the Center for Organizing and Partnerships at the National Parents Union, a parents advocacy group, told Stateline that while most families don’t fully understand the various school funding systems, they feel the impact of cuts in the classroom.

    Cosby said parents are worried about the loss of support services for students with disabilities, Title I impacts, and how debates about DEI may deflect from more urgent needs like literacy and teacher support.

    “We’ve been clear: DEI isn’t the federal government’s role — it’s up to states,” she said. “But the confusion is real. And the impact could be devastating.”

    Today, as a consultant working with teachers across Florida’s Orange County Public Schools — one of the largest districts in the country — Farrow says many educators are fearful and confused about how to support their students under changing DEI laws.

    “Teachers are asking, ‘Does this mean I can’t seat a student with glasses at the front of the room anymore?’ There’s so much fear around what we’re allowed to do now.”

    “There’s no one giving teachers guidance or even basic acknowledgment. We’re just left wondering what we’re allowed to say or do — and that’s dangerous.”

    Amanda Hernández contributed to this report. Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at [email protected].

    Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: [email protected].


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Source link

  • How Harvard Is Standing Up to Trump Means Everything

    How Harvard Is Standing Up to Trump Means Everything

    When it comes to fighting the current authoritarian threats coming out of the Trump administration, it’s important to remember that the symbol is the substance.

    Frankly, this is always true of politics generally, but it’s more true and more important than ever in this moment.

    We have an object example of this principle at work presently in the different responses from Harvard and Columbia when it comes to the threats to funding and demand for control by the Trump administration.

    Columbia appeared to capitulate, forging an “agreement” to take steps sought by Trump, ostensibly to address antisemitism on campus, but this fig leaf was unconvincing, and Trump himself quickly dropped the pretense, as we all understand he has no interest in combating antisemitism and every interest in sending signals of domination and stoking fear that turns into pre-emptive compliance from other institutions.

    Columbia looked unprincipled and weak in the face of the authoritarian threat, and the internal and external backlash against Columbia has been significant.

    In contrast, once Harvard received the Trump administration demands, it crafted a careful public response, producing multiple public-facing communications meant to speak to different audiences (press, public, students, faculty, alumni) with different needs, including a letter from Harvard president Alan Garber to the university community that invoked a shared responsibility to defend the core values of the institution specifically and higher education in general.

    To be fair, the call was much easier for Harvard than Columbia for several reasons. For one, Harvard had seen what happened to Columbia, where what looked like capitulation to outsiders still proved insufficient, because, again, Trump is interested in subservience, not reaching a mutual agreement. When Trump-world figures like JD Vance and Chris Rufo say they intend to destroy higher education, we should take them seriously.

    The Trump administration demands of Harvard were also so extreme—amounting essentially to a takeover of the university—that it had no choice but to resist and take every possible step to rally others to the fight. The public thirst for an institutional response to Trump’s lawless power grabs has been so great that even the New York Times editorial board has weighed in with its approval of Harvard’s actions and the university’s explicit pledge to stand against violations of the rule of law.

    An interesting bit of information in the form of an op-ed by Columbia history professor Matthew Connelly has come out that perhaps sheds additional light on Columbia’s actions. Writing at The New York Times, Connelly laments the hapless situation his institution finds itself in, first receiving blows from Trump and then being subjected to the “circular firing squad” of those who oppose Trump signing on to a collective boycott of Columbia.

    Connelly argues that we should not view Columbia as “capitulating” to Trump because, “In fact, many of the actions the Columbia administration announced on March 21 are similar to those originally proposed last August by more than 200 faculty members.”

    In other words, in agreeing with Trump, Columbia is only doing what it was possibly going to do anyway. Connelly goes on to argue that Columbia would never give in on key principles of institutional operations, and acting Columbia University president Claire Shipman has subsequently declared that Columbia would not sign any agreement that would “require us to relinquish our independence and autonomy as an educational institution.”

    Columbia’s actions look similar to those taken by some of the big law firms that have reached vaguely worded “agreements” with Trump that have them pledging not to do “illegal DEI hiring” and to donate tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to pro bono causes favored by Trump. At Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall has gone digging into some of these agreements and found that there’s not much of specific substance to be found, the wording often so generalized and vague that it would be easy for firms to fulfill the agreements without doing anything beyond their usual patterns and practices.

    I’m not entirely unsympathetic to Connelly’s irritation or the decisions by the big law firms; they thought they could make Trump go away with a little performative minor supplication and get back to their substantive work.

    They’ve obviously misread the moment badly. I don’t know what more evidence we need to conclude that Trump intends to govern as an authoritarian. In both the cases of these law firms and Columbia University, the entire battle was over Trump being allowed to claim a symbolic victory over these institutions, to get them to be seen capitulating.

    It is strange to say that the symbolic fight is the genuine battle over principles, but this is obviously the case. Trump wants to make others fearful of standing up to his authoritarian aims, so he will simply defy the rule of law until someone forces the victims to fight. There is no choice but to test the administration’s resolve. Trump’s response on Truth Social following Harvard’s action shows a lot of bluster aimed at tearing down Harvard’s reputation with a lot of right-wing tropes, but the rhetoric shows how nonexistent his substantive case is.

    Any capitulation, real or even perceived, is a loss. Either choice will come with costs. Trump is going after Harvard’s funding and nonprofit status, and there will be significant turbulence for the university in the foreseeable future. But turbulence is not the same thing as a plane heading for the ground.

    Harvard had its legal strategy prepared before the fight even went public. Law and precedent appear to be on its side, though this is not a guarantee of success. Trump seems determined to hold back whatever money he can in his ongoing attempts at coercion.

    What we are learning is that there is no such thing as accommodating or reaching an agreement with an authoritarian project. Harvard’s stand is an important symbolic illustration of this, and because of the symbolism, it is proving to be hugely substantive.

    Let’s hope it’s only the first example of how to fight back.

    Source link

  • Supreme Court takes education cases that could challenge the separation of church and state

    Supreme Court takes education cases that could challenge the separation of church and state

    The Supreme Court over the next two weeks will hear two cases that have the potential to erode the separation of church and state and create a seismic shift in public education.

    Mahmoud v. Taylor, which goes before the court on April 22, pits Muslim, Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox families, as well as those of other faiths, against the Montgomery County school system in Maryland. The parents argue that the school system violated their First Amendment right of free exercise of religion by refusing to let them opt their children out of lessons using LGBTQ+ books. The content of the books, the parents say, goes against their religious beliefs.

    Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond, which will be argued on April 30, addresses whether the St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School should be allowed to exist as a public charter school in Oklahoma. The Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa had won approval for the charter school from the state charter board despite acknowledging that St. Isidore would participate “in the evangelizing mission of the Church.”

    The state’s attorney general, Gentner Drummond, later overruled the approval, saying the school could not be a charter because charter schools must be public and nonsectarian. The petitioners sued and ultimately appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming Drummond violated the First Amendment’s free exercise clause by prohibiting a religious entity from participating in a public program.

    Teachers unions, parents groups and organizations advocating for the separation of church and state have said that rulings in favor of the plaintiffs could open the door for all types of religious programs to become part of public schooling and give parents veto rights on what is taught. In the most extreme scenario, they say, the rulings could lead to the dismantling of public education and essentially allow public schools to be Sunday schools.

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.

    At issue in both cases is the question of whether the First Amendment rights of parents and religious institutions to the free exercise of religion can supersede the other part of the amendment, the establishment clause, which calls for the separation of church and state.

    “I think a chill wind is blowing, and public education as we know it is in extreme jeopardy of becoming religious education and ceasing to exist,” said Rachel Laser, president of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an advocacy organization that has filed an amicus brief in the St. Isidore case. “The whole idea is to have churches take control of education for American children. It’s about money and power.”

    For some conservative lawmakers, evangelical Christian groups and law firms lobbying for more religiosity in the public square, decisions in the petitioners’ favor would mean religious parents get what they have long been owed — the option of sending their children to publicly funded religious schools and the right to opt out of instruction that clashes with their religious beliefs.

    “If we win this case, it opens up school choice across the country,” said Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, an Orlando, Florida-based conservative Christian legal firm that has filed a brief supporting the petitioners in both cases. “I see school choice as a reaction to the failed system in the public schools, which is failing both in academia but also failing in the sense they are pushing ideology that undermines the parents and their relationship with their children.”

    By taking the cases, the Supreme Court once again inserts itself in ongoing culture wars in the nation, which have been elevated by presidential orders threatening to take away funding if schools push diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and state laws banning teaching on various controversial subjects. Legal scholars predict that the Supreme Court will lean toward allowing St. Isidore and the opt-outs for parents because of how the justices ruled in three cases between 2017 and 2022. In each case, the justices decided that states could not discriminate against giving funds or resources to a program because it was religious.

    Related: How Oklahoma’s superintendent set off a holy war in classrooms

    Of the two cases, St. Isidore likely could have the greatest impact because it is attempting to change the very definition of a public school, say opponents of the school’s bid for charter status. Since charter schools first started in the 1990s, they have been defined as public and nonsectarian in each of the 46 state statutes allowing them, according to officials at the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Today, charter schools operate in 44 states, Guam, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C., and serve roughly 7.6 percent of all public school students.

    “It would be a huge sea change if the court were to hold they were private entities and not public schools bound by the U.S. Constitution’s establishment clause,” said Rob Reed, the alliance’s vice president of legal affairs.

    A victory for St. Isidore could lead to religious-based programs seeping into several aspects of public schooling, said Steven Green, a professor of both law and history and religious studies at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon.

    “The ramification is that every single time a school district does some kind of contracting for any kind of service or curricular issues, you’re going to find religious providers who will make the claim, ‘You have to give me an opportunity, too,’” Green said.

    St. Isidore’s appeal to the Supreme Court is part of an increasing push by the religious right to use public funds for religious education, said Josh Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University and author of a 2024 book on school vouchers. Because of previous court decisions, several voucher programs across the country already allow parents to use public money to send their children to religious schools, he said.

    “What’s going to happen if the court says a public school can be run by a religious provider?” Cowen asked. “It almost turns 180 degrees the rule that voucher systems play by right now. Right now, they’re just taking a check. They’re not public entities.”

    The effect of a St. Isidore victory could be devastating, he added. “It would be one more slippery slope to really kicking down the wall between church and state,” Cowen said.

    Related: Inside the Christian legal campaign to return prayer to public schools

    Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing St. Isidore’s bid to become a charter, discounted the idea that a St. Isidore win would fundamentally change public schools. Like Staver, he views St. Isidore as simply providing another parental option. “We’re not asking the state to run a religious school,” Campbell said. “These are private entities that run the schools. This is a private organization participating in a publicly funded program.”

    Opponents of religious charter schools question whether St. Isidore would have to play by the same rules as public schools.

    “How are they going to handle it when there’s a teacher who has a lifestyle that doesn’t align with Catholic school teaching? They’re talking out of both sides of the mouth,” said Erika Wright, an Oklahoma parent and plaintiff in a lawsuit protesting a Bible in the classroom mandate by Oklahoma’s state superintendent of instruction. She also joined an amicus brief against St. Isidore’s formation.

    “As a taxpayer, I should not be forced to fund religious instruction, whether it’s through a religious charter school or a Bible mandate,” Wright said. “I shouldn’t be forced to fund religious indoctrination that doesn’t align with my family’s personal beliefs.”

    Notably, in the Montgomery County parents’ case going before the court, parents use similar reasoning to support their right to opt out of instruction. “A school ‘burdens’ parents’ religious beliefs when it forces their children to undergo classroom instruction about gender and sexuality at odds with their religious convictions,” the parents’ brief said.

    The school district in 2022 adopted several books with LGBTQ+ themes and characters as part of the elementary language arts curriculum. Initially, families were allowed to opt out. But then the school system reversed its policy, saying too many students were absent during the lessons and keeping track of the opt-outs was too cumbersome. The reversal led to the lawsuit.

    Historically, school districts have given limited opt-outs to parents who, for example, do not want their child to read a particular book, but the Montgomery County parents’ request is broader, said Charles C. Haynes, a First Amendment expert and senior fellow for religious liberty at the Freedom Forum in Washington, D.C. The parents are asking to exclude their children from significant parts of the curriculum for religious reasons.

    “If the court sides with the parents, I think the next day, you’re going to have parents across the country saying, ‘I want my kids to opt out of all the references to fill-in-the-blank.’ … It would change the dynamic between public schools and parents overnight,” Haynes said.

    Related: Tracking Trump: His actions to abolish the Education Department, and more

    Sarah Brannen, author of “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” one of the LGBTQ+ books Montgomery County schools adopted, sees major logistical issues if the school system loses. “Allowing parents to interfere in the minutia of the curriculum would make their already difficult jobs impossible,” she said.

    Colten Stanberry, a lawyer with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty representing the Montgomery County parents, disagreed. School systems manage to balance different student needs all the time, he said.

    A triumph for the Montgomery County families and St. Isidore would cause much more than logistical issues, said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association. It could lead to a public education system where parents can pick a school based on religious beliefs or try to change a traditional public school’s curriculum by opting out of lessons in droves.

    “For us to be a strong democracy, then we necessarily need to learn about all of us. To separate us flies in the face of why we were founded,” Pringle said.

    This story about church and state was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link

  • Data shows growing GenAI adoption in K-12

    Data shows growing GenAI adoption in K-12

    Key points:

    • K-12 GenAI adoption rates have grown–but so have concerns 
    • A new era for teachers as AI disrupts instruction
    • With AI coaching, a math platform helps students tackle tough concepts
    • For more news on GenAI, visit eSN’s AI in Education hub

    Almost 3 in 5 K-12 educators (55 percent) have positive perceptions about GenAI, despite concerns and perceived risks in its adoption, according to updated data from Cengage Group’s “AI in Education” research series, which regularly evaluates AI’s impact on education.  

    More News from eSchool News

    HVAC projects to improve indoor air quality. Tutoring programs for struggling students. Tuition support for young people who want to become teachers in their home communities.

    Our school has built up its course offerings without having to add headcount. Along the way, we’ve also gained a reputation for having a wide selection of general and advanced courses for our growing student body.

    When it comes to visual creativity, AI tools let students design posters, presentations, and digital artwork effortlessly. Students can turn their ideas into professional-quality visuals, sparking creativity and innovation.

    Ensuring that girls feel supported and empowered in STEM from an early age can lead to more balanced workplaces, economic growth, and groundbreaking discoveries.

    In my work with middle school students, I’ve seen how critical that period of development is to students’ future success. One area of focus in a middle schooler’s development is vocabulary acquisition.

    For students, the mid-year stretch is a chance to assess their learning, refine their decision-making skills, and build momentum for the opportunities ahead.

    Middle school marks the transition from late childhood to early adolescence. Developmental psychologist Erik Erikson describes the transition as a shift from the Industry vs. Inferiority stage into the Identity vs. Role Confusion stage.

    Art has a unique power in the ESL classroom–a magic that bridges cultures, ignites imagination, and breathes life into language. For English Language Learners (ELLs), it’s more than an expressive outlet.

    In the year 2025, no one should have to be convinced that protecting data privacy matters. For education institutions, it’s really that simple of a priority–and that complicated.

    Teachers are superheroes. Every day, they rise to the challenge, pouring their hearts into shaping the future. They stay late to grade papers and show up early to tutor struggling students.

    Want to share a great resource? Let us know at [email protected].

    Source link

  • Mentoring in an Era of Uncertainty for Higher Education

    Mentoring in an Era of Uncertainty for Higher Education

    More than half of college students believe professors should take on a mentoring role to support their career development, according to a 2024 Inside Higher Ed survey. And a 2023 report from the American Council on Education showed that informal and formal mentoring can broaden pathways to graduate education for students, particularly those from historically marginalized backgrounds.

    But few faculty members receive formal training on how to be an effective mentor while also balancing teaching, research and publishing responsibilities. That’s only getting more difficult as faculty navigate a changing—and increasingly uncertain—higher education landscape marked by intensifying political scrutiny, ever-shrinking budgets, increased workloads and fewer academic job prospects for their students.

    “The conditions for mentoring continue to deteriorate,” said Maria Wisdom, assistant vice provost for faculty advancement at Duke University. “At the same time, there’s never been a greater need for truly impactful mentoring, and I think there has never been a moment at which it’s clear that we need to learn to support people without having all the answers.”

    After a decade working as an English professor at Columbia College, Wisdom turned her focus to coaching early and midcareer faculty across disciplines. She also leads mentoring workshops for faculty looking to improve their mentorship of junior researchers, scholars and colleagues.

    Last month, she published How to Mentor Anyone in Academia (Princeton University Press), a practical guide aimed at demystifying what it means to be a mentor. Inside Higher Ed spoke with Wisdom about some of the advice she lays out in the book and how it may help mentors—and mentees—navigate the higher education sector’s uncertain future.

    This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

    Q: How did your experiences as a mentee and mentor shape your approach to mentoring?

    A: Looking back, the mentorship I received was only OK. Every now and then it was really helpful. But I can also think of multiple instances in my professional trajectory where things could have gone differently and better if I would have had more effective mentoring.

    Many years later, after I had left the professoriate, I was working at Duke—first as a graduate adviser and then as a certified coach, working first with grad students and then with faculty. It was through that professional training—which was a very different kind of training than what I received in my graduate education—that I was able to understand what it means to be a professional helper and how many different roles we can occupy when we’re professional helpers. And all of those roles overlap in some way with mentoring.

    That awareness helped me realize that the majority of faculty mentors just don’t have the time or bandwidth or resources to be thoughtful about those role distinctions and what it means to actually mentor somebody in a certain context at a certain time.

    Q: In the book you write about three different approaches to mentoring: mentoring with a heart, a backbone and like a coach. Can you describe the difference between those approaches and how mentors can employ all three?

    A: They’re all connected and they’re all important.

    All effective leaders need to have both backbone—which means firmness, rigor and consistency—and heart, which is empathy, understanding and kindness. A good leader balances these two things out at the same time, and rarely is a leader a natural in both areas.

    Maybe they aren’t good at giving feedback, don’t establish clear expectations at the outset of the relationship or don’t have a system of regular check-ins with their mentee. Those are all elements of backbone. Or maybe they’re not putting enough heart into it. They may set clear expectations and give regular feedback, but they’re kind of insensitive to the needs of the mentee, or they’re just not very empathetic, and so I think you need to have both.

    And that’s where coaching comes in. Coaching is a structured conversation, one in which you need to be fully present and empathetic. So that’s how I see coaching, marrying both aspects of backbone and heart.

    Q: What are some of the common misconceptions about what it takes to be an effective academic mentor? What does it take to be an effective mentor?

    A: There’s this prevailing assumption among many academics that mentoring is just something you naturally figure out how to do as you go along. Faculty either mentor the way they’ve been mentored, or they mentor in opposition to an ineffective way they were mentored. I also see too much of what I call mentor impostor syndrome in the academy, which is this faulty assumption that you can only mentor people in the same discipline as you or who follow the same career path as you.

    We tend to underestimate the power all of us have to be helpful to each other’s professional growth in ways that have nothing to do with disciplinary expertise. Those are things like active listening, cultivating empathy, basic coaching skills and doing more listening and active questioning than talking at somebody.

    We need to stop assuming that mentoring is something you’re born with and instead think of it as a set of skills, competencies and even an entire worldview that can help you be helpful to anyone. It’s not about pouring knowledge into an empty vessel. It’s about being a facilitator and creating the space to ask provocative questions that are going to help somebody remember just how talented and resourceful they are.

    Q: How does effective mentoring benefit students and higher education more broadly?

    A: Good mentorship is upending, to some extent, all these hierarchies we have in higher education, where professors are the fountain of all knowledge, holding all the power, and graduate students are more like apprentices or vessels to be filled with that knowledge. It’s charging mentees with a much greater responsibility for their own learning, growth and development.

    That may seem like a big burden to place on the shoulders of a mentee. But if a grad student learns during their degree program how to be reflective about their own professional needs, how to ask for help in a respectful and effective manner, and how to set clear goals and work toward them in small steps, they’re going to be set up for success for the rest of their career.

    Q: The higher education landscape is changing, with faculty jobs and funding becoming more scarce. How do these realities make mentoring more challenging?

    A: Often, people aren’t taking on mentoring roles because they simply feel like they don’t have enough time. Meetings are rushed, or maybe the mentor is distracted while mentees are in their office. And that’s just a microcosm of a larger deterioration of relationships across our society.

    Nobody in higher ed has the answers about what’s going to happen three months from now, let alone three years from now. But that doesn’t mean we just give up and stop supporting my junior faculty or my graduate students. We need to think about how we can help them learn and grow even in the midst of this type of environment. And that’s the kind of mentoring that my book is trying to encourage people to adopt.

    Q: How can mentors help students navigate the changing academic job market?

    A: In academia, we still tend to assume that not only are there academic jobs to be had, but that people will stay in the same career their entire 30- to 40-year career. For plenty of senior faculty, that has been their life experience, but we can’t assume anymore. Mentors aren’t doing their students any favors by preparing them for these linear, stable, nearly nonexistent career paths. Mentors need to think about how they can support people in being nimble and adaptable in the face of unpredictable change.

    We need to make our students comfortable with trying new things, taking risks, being proactive and building relationships. These are all things that will help them to weather change. Every now and then I’ll hear about a faculty member or adviser who didn’t want their student doing an internship because it had nothing to do with their dissertation and [would] make it take longer to finish the program; they see it as a distraction. But for some of those students, internships were the most valuable thing they did in graduate school, because it led directly to their first nonacademic job after graduation.

    Q: How can mentors support themselves and each other in trying to improve mentoring?

    A: Improving mentoring can’t just happen by improving one relationship at a time. We need to think about how to build cultures that support excellent, effective mentoring. Too often, mentoring is still practiced in isolation and faculty are shy to talk publicly about their mentoring experiences. That’s kind of silly, because I think you could have many faculty members in a single program all dealing with the same mentoring challenges. But because they never sit down to compare notes, they don’t even realize it.

    I talk in the book about the importance of chairs and associate deans normalizing conversations about faculty mentoring. Faculty members should ask themselves when the last time faculty, graduate student mentoring or new faculty mentoring was on the agenda over the past year.

    These conversations are rarely happening. There’s a need for mentoring mentors. And very often, they are your peers or somebody you consider a professional mentor. There’s a lot of strength in learning to build these informal networks of support.

    Mentor burnout is also a big problem. If you’re trying to mentor somebody and you’re showing up with dark circles under your eyes at every meeting, your mentee is going to assume that’s necessary for success in the academy. Faculty need to model wellness and self-care, not just in mentoring, but in just about every area of their lives.

    Q: Does your book offer any advice for mentees?

    A: Yes. This book actually grew out of a course that I taught for graduate students, which addressed how to get the most out of mentoring relationships.

    Most graduate students haven’t had the opportunity or the luxury to sit and think about what a good mentor is or how they’ll advocate to get better mentoring. At the end of every chapter, I have a little section called takeaways for mentees, including one section on how to accept and use feedback. There’s also another on how to build an informal mentoring network if you’re not getting enough from your formal mentors.

    I wrote this book for mentees as well as mentors.

    Source link

  • How Colleges Can Increase Transfer Student Success

    How Colleges Can Increase Transfer Student Success

    Upward transfer from a community college to a four-year bachelor’s degree–granting institution is a complicated process that leaves many students behind—particularly those from historically underrepresented backgrounds.

    Last month, the Community College Research Center at Columbia University’s Teachers College and the Aspen Institute College Excellence Program published the second edition of the Transfer Playbook, a guidebook for colleges and universities seeking to eliminate barriers to transfer and increase the number of students who start at a community college and complete a bachelor’s degree.

    The report details how colleges and universities can implement three evidence-based strategies that improve transfer and includes examples of institutions that are successful in this work.

    By the numbers: Previous surveys have shown that a majority (80 percent) of community college students aspire to a bachelor’s degree, but only 16 percent earn a bachelor’s degree within six years of starting college.

    Transfer rates are even lower for some student groups, including those from low-income backgrounds, adult learners and Black and Hispanic students, according to the report.

    With the cost of higher education climbing, many students consider community college an affordable route to a postsecondary credential. However, little progress has been made over the past decade in increasing transfer rates from two-year to four-year institutions, according to the report’s authors.

    “Transfer and bachelor’s attainment rates for students who start in community colleges have remained virtually unchanged since we started tracking transfer in 2015,” they write.

    The playbook identifies colleges and universities that have achieved better outcomes for various groups using some of the recommended practices. None of the institutions or partnerships exhibited all the practices. “However, we hypothesize that by combining the exemplars’ efforts into a comprehensive, idealized framework, higher education leaders and practitioners can adapt it to meet their students’ needs and achieve strong outcomes for all—and at scale,” the report says.

    Put into practice: Researchers identified a few consistent themes that set innovative institutions apart, which include:

    • Leveraging proximity. Research shows students are more likely to enroll in college based on proximity, so creating local pathways between community colleges and four-year universities can support students who want to stay in the region.
    • Providing empathy in high-stakes decisions. Missteps in course, major or transfer destination selection can have financial and opportunity costs for a student, which can impede their attainment or push them to stop out entirely. Effective colleges offer personalized support through staff or create tools that provide guidance in a timely manner.
    • Establishing universal systems and initiatives. Some programs provide strong outcomes for historically underrepresented groups but are not large enough to reach students at scale. Exemplars instead use these programs as pilots to test effective measures and then scale them.
    • Achieving support from leaders. Grassroots efforts can help move the needle, but recognition, elevation and investment by senior leadership allow work to scale in sustained ways, regardless of staffing turnover.

    According to the report, the most effective strategies for creating sustainable transfer student success at scale are:

    • Prioritizing transfer at the executive level. A key driver in systemwide change was community college and four-year presidents who understand the central role of transfer student success in their respective institutional missions and business goals. This top-down approach allows for allocation of resources, division mobilization and partnerships across colleges, which often benefit the local community and workforce. This also allows for end-to-end redesign of the transfer student experience, and establishment of systems and processes.
    • Aligning programs and pathways. Colleges that create and regularly update term-by-term, four-year maps for each degree program can promote learning and ensure students are making significant progress toward a bachelor’s degree, such as completing college-level math and English and major-related courses. These maps should also prioritize accessibility and flexibility, understanding that student needs and priorities may shift and the way they complete courses may change. Some students may need exploratory curricula to help them identify their educational and career goals, so embedding this instruction early is also paramount.
    • Tailoring advising and nonacademic supports. “Research indicates that about half of the community college students nationally who intend to transfer do not access transfer services,” the report says. Instead, institutions should put in place inevitable advising, engaging transfer students before, during and after their transition to a university. Advisers should receive professional development and training that centers the student experience and equips them to engage with individual students and their respective circumstances. Once students land at their four-year institution, creating systems and supports that uplift the transfer experience and inspire feelings of belonging is also critical.

    Researchers call out a variety of campuses for their work, including George Mason University and Northern Virginia Community College’s ADVANCE program, Tallahassee State College’s transfer pathway work, and Arizona Western College and North Arizona University’s strategy to increase bachelor’s attainment in their two-county region.

    Seeking stories from campus leaders, faculty members and staff for our Student Success focus. Share here.

    Source link

  • DHS Threatens Harvard With Loss of International Students

    DHS Threatens Harvard With Loss of International Students

    The Department of Homeland Security canceled $2.7 million in grants going to Harvard University Wednesday night and threatened to terminate its Student and Visitor Exchange Program certification, which would bar the private Massachusetts institution from enrolling international students.

    DHS’s threats came shortly after Harvard rebuffed the Trump’s administration’s demands to overhaul governance, admissions, hiring processes and more amid allegations of antisemitism and harassment tied to pro-Palestinian protests last spring. Although the Trump administration has opened a civil rights investigation into antisemitism at Harvard, that inquiry remains in process.

    Even so, the federal government has already moved to punish the university.

    The Trump administration froze $2.2 billion in research grants after Harvard rejected its initial demands, and the Internal Revenue Service is reportedly taking aim at its tax-exempt status. Now SEVP certification appears to be in the Trump administration’s crosshairs as well.

    “Harvard bending the knee to antisemitism—driven by its spineless leadership—fuels a cesspool of extremist riots and threatens our national security,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a Thursday statement. “With anti-American, pro-Hamas ideology poisoning its campus and classrooms, Harvard’s position as a top institution of higher learning is a distant memory. America demands more from universities entrusted with taxpayer dollars.”

    DHS demanded the university provide “detailed records on Harvard’s foreign student visa holders’ illegal and violent activities by April 30” or lose SEVP certification. The demand comes as the federal government has revoked visas for international students across the U.S., in some cases for political speech. (Inside Higher Ed has tracked more than 1,450 visa revocations.)

    Harvard spokesperson Jason Newton emphasized the need for due process in federal actions.

    “Harvard values the rule of law and expects all members of our community to comply with University policies and applicable legal standards,” Newton wrote. “If federal action is taken against a member of our community, we expect it will be based on clear evidence, follow established legal procedures, and respect the constitutional rights afforded to all individuals.”

    Source link

  • Judge Blocks Energy Dept. Plan to Cap Indirect Cost Rates

    Judge Blocks Energy Dept. Plan to Cap Indirect Cost Rates

    A federal judge temporarily blocked the U.S. Department of Energy’s plan to cap universities’ indirect research cost reimbursement rates, pending a hearing in the ongoing lawsuit filed by several higher education associations and universities.

    Judge Allison D. Burroughs of the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts wrote in the brief Wednesday order that the plaintiffs had shown that, without a temporary restraining order, “they will sustain immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties.”

    Plaintiffs include the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities and nine individual universities, including Brown, Cornell and Princeton Universities and the Universities of Michigan, Illinois and Rochester. They sued the DOE and department secretary Chris Wright on Monday, three days after the DOE announced its plan.

    Department spokespeople didn’t return Inside Higher Ed’s requests for comment Thursday afternoon.

    DOE’s plan is to cap the reimbursement rates at 15 percent. Energy grant recipients at colleges and universities currently have an average 30 percent indirect cost rate. The Trump administration has alleged that indirect costs are wasteful spending, although they are extensively audited.

    The DOE sends more than $2.5 billion a year to over 300 colleges and universities. Part of that money covers costs indirectly related to research that may support multiple grant-funded projects, including specialized nuclear-rated facilities, computer systems and administrative support costs.

    The department’s plan is nearly identical to a plan the National Institutes of Health announced in February, which a judge also blocked.

    Source link

  • Southwest Wisconsin Tech Wins Aspen Prize

    Southwest Wisconsin Tech Wins Aspen Prize

    The Aspen Institute announced Thursday that Southwest Wisconsin Technical College has won this year’s Aspen Prize for Community College Excellence, an honor bestowed on high-achieving community colleges that have made strides in their academic outcomes.

    The Aspen Institute commended the college for its high completion rates and wage outcomes. Southwest Wisconsin Tech’s 54 percent graduation rate exceeds the national average for community colleges by nearly 20 percentage points. The college also set a goal to reach 70 percent through various strategies, including creating career-aligned success plans for every student. Additionally, five years after graduation, alumni of Southwest Wisconsin Tech earn almost $14,000 more than new hires in the region on average.

    “Southwest Wisconsin Technical College inspires the field with how they connect every program to a good-paying job that regional employers need to fill,” Aspen Prize co-chair Tim O’Shaughnessy, CEO of Graham Holdings Company, said in a news release. “Their emphasis on work-based learning and hands-on training in every program shows how an engaging, high-quality education can change lives while strengthening a regional economy.”

    The college won $700,000 as a part of the prize. Two other institutions were recognized as finalists with distinction—San Jacinto College in Texas and South Puget Sound Community College in Washington State—for their transfer and workforce practices. Wallace State Community College–Hanceville in Alabama also earned Aspen’s Rising Star award for meaningful improvements in its student outcomes. These institutions will each receive $100,000.

    Source link