Tag: Education

  • The Great American University Shakedown

    The Great American University Shakedown

    With each new resolution agreement, it becomes clearer that the Trump administration intends to base the government’s relationship with higher education on extortion. In its recently cut deal, Northwestern University will pay the Treasury $75 million in exchange for about $800 million in congressionally approved research funding it had already secured. NU now joins Columbia on the list of institutions that have paid fees to the federal government—Columbia’s deal included a $200 million payment to the Treasury over three years.

    In the grand scheme of things, $75 million is chump change for Northwestern. It’s a fraction of the research funding that was at risk and barely makes a dent in the institution’s $14.3 billion endowment. It’s less than two months’ worth of the up to $40 million the institution said it was paying every month to supplement lost research funding. The payment was, according to interim president Henry Bienen, “the best and most certain method to restore our federal funding, both now and in the future.”

    Part of that is likely true. Litigation would have taken years and cost many more millions. But nothing in the agreement precludes the government from leveraging federal research funding to extract certain political wins from the university again. The government didn’t even need evidence Northwestern violated any federal laws to revoke its federal funding. Officials offered no conclusions from the three investigations into antisemitism on campus the Departments of Education, Justice and Health and Human Services launched. With the punitive withholding of federal funds, the institution is being punished before it’s proven guilty. As Andrew Gillen, a scholar at the Cato Institute put it, “Much like the Queen in Alice in Wonderland who said, ‘Sentence first—verdict afterwards.’”

    Before this administration, rarely did OCR investigations require institutions to pay money to the government. The resolutions focused mainly on training and improving processes at the university in question. By contrast, the agreements the Trump administration has reached with elite, research-focused universities harm the institution as well as the country. Northwestern, Columbia, Brown and others might have their funding back, but they’re now weighed down by even greater compliance burdens.

    Northwestern has to report admissions data on every student who applies, is admitted and enrolls; socialize international students on the norms of campus life; and make sure nobody is wearing a face mask to conceal their identity. After cutting more than 400 jobs in July, Northwestern now has fewer people around campus to take over additional reporting duty. This is how the administration wants our leading research institutions to spend their time. And while U.S. institutions process paperwork and fight to have funding restored, China sprints ahead in artificial intelligence, robotics and innovation.

    Precedent for paying fines in government settlements exists for other sectors, but those partly fund solutions to problems. Purdue Pharma, for example, paid local and state governments to fund opioid treatment, prevention and recovery services. In its multibillion-dollar settlement with the U.S. government over cheating on emissions tests, Volkswagen paid billions of dollars to fund clean energy initiatives and electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Even Columbia in its settlement agreed to pay an additional $21 million to compensate employees who may have experienced antisemitism on campus after Oct. 7, 2023. Northwestern’s millions simply disappear into Treasury’s coffers and do nothing to combat antisemitism in higher ed.

    NU won’t be the last institution the government attempts to force into a settlement. This summer it demanded UCLA, a public institution, pay $1.2 billion as part of a settlement to unfreeze millions in research funds. Harvard’s heated legal battle for its funding rages on, and research funds remain frozen for Duke and Princeton.

    These resolutions are a strong indicator of how the administration wants its relationship with research institutions to be—politically self-serving, one-sided and fear-based. Institutions could choose to fight, but mounting expensive legal battles without millions of research dollars isn’t really a choice at all. The agreements might be an offer universities can’t refuse.

    Source link

  • Hartwick, Duquesne, Iowa State and More

    Hartwick, Duquesne, Iowa State and More

    Laurel Bongiorno, vice president for academic affairs and provost at Hartwick College in New York, has been named president of Hartwick, effective July 1, 2026.

    David Cook, president of North Dakota State University, has been appointed president of Iowa State University, effective March 1, 2026.

    David Dausey, provost of Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, will become president of the institution on July 1, 2026.

    Terence Finley, vice president and chief operating officer at Harris-Stowe State University in St. Louis, has been selected president of Corning Community College, part of the State University of New York system, effective Jan. 2, 2026.

    Jennifer Glowienka, co–interim president of Carroll College in Montana, has been named president of the college, effective July 1, 2026.

    Alan LaFave, president of Valley City State University in North Dakota, has been appointed president of Northern State University in South Dakota, starting in January.

    Carolyn Noll Sorg, vice president for enrollment and marketing at John Carroll University in Ohio, has been appointed president of the university, effective June 1, 2026.

    Jamilyn Penn, vice president of student services at Highline College in Washington, has been named acting president of the institution, effective immediately.

    John Schol, retired bishop of the United Methodists in Greater New Jersey, has been selected as president of Centenary University, effective Dec. 1.

    Michael Spagna, interim president of California State Polytechnic University, Humboldt, has been appointed president of Sonoma State University, also part of the CSU system, effective Jan. 20, 2026.

    Susan Stuebner, interim president of Simpson College in Iowa, has been named the university’s permanent president, effective immediately.

    Gregory Tomso, who most recently served as vice president of academic engagement and student affairs for the University of West Florida, will become president of St. Cloud State University, part of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, effective Jan. 5, 2026.

    Mary Ann Villarreal, vice president for institutional excellence at the American Association of Colleges and Universities, has been appointed interim president of California State University, Dominguez Hills, effective Jan. 1, 2026.

    David Whitlock, interim president of Southeastern Oklahoma State University, has been appointed permanent president of the institution, effective immediately.

    Source link

  • Tribal Colleges Brace for Shift to Interior Department

    Tribal Colleges Brace for Shift to Interior Department

    As the U.S. Department of the Interior prepares to take on a greater role in administering federal funding for tribal colleges, institutional leaders fear financial uncertainty and losing long-standing trust with the Education Department.

    The grant program is one of dozens the Education Department reshuffled to other federal agencies late last month in yet another effort by Secretary Linda McMahon to trim down its duties and ultimately dismantle the department. Through an interagency agreement, the Department of the Interior will now manage tribal colleges’ Title III funding, while ED retains oversight and policymaking responsibilities, according to an Education Department announcement.

    Trump administration officials argue the move makes sense. The Department of the Interior, home to the Bureau of Indian Education, already oversees tribal K–12 schools and two tribal higher ed institutions, Haskell Indian Nations University in Kansas and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute in New Mexico. The Department of the Interior also already administers higher education scholarships for Native students and other grant funding for tribal colleges.

    Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in the announcement that his department will assume administrative responsibilities “for enhancing Indian education programs, streamlining operations, and refocusing efforts to better serve Native youth and adults across the nation.”

    The American Indian Higher Education Consortium said in a statement that it’s monitoring the policy shift and plans to work closely with the Department of the Interior “to ensure stability and continuity” for institutions and their students.

    “AIHEC will continue to advocate for approaches that uphold the federal government’s trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations and protect the vital role of TCUs in advancing Tribal sovereignty and student success,” the statement read.

    Concerns and Questions

    Despite reassurances, tribal college leaders are leery of the upcoming change.

    Stephen Schoonmaker, president of Tohono O’odham Community College in Arizona, said he understands the logic of the shift, given tribal colleges already have a strong relationship with the Bureau of Indian Education.

    But the department also proposed cutting more than 80 percent of tribal colleges’ funding earlier this year, from roughly $127 million last year to about $22 million this year.

    Congress didn’t approve the cut, but the proposal “was an existential threat to tribal colleges,” Schoonmaker said.

    He believes institutions like his are safest when they have grants coming from multiple federal agencies. That way, if one agency cuts funding, there are still federal dollars flowing in from elsewhere.

    “Putting everything under one basket that could be just cut all at once is not reassuring,” he said.

    Even though he’s had positive experiences working with the BIE, he said he’s jarred by the uncertainty.

    “With this administration, there is a propensity to shuffle things around and make a flurry of proposals, some of which get headway, some of which get dropped almost immediately,” Schoonmaker said, “and it makes it challenging to plan, to ensure for our students and for our employees and for our communities that we serve that the way we’ve been structured, the way that the trust and treaty obligations work … will continue to be honored.”

    The administration hasn’t shared a transition plan with tribal college leaders, adding to their worries, said Chris Caldwell, president of the College of Menominee Nation in Wisconsin.

    According to Caldwell, tribal college leaders are most concerned about the future of the funding mechanisms and support that has historically come from the Department of Education. “We want to make sure that those are retained or even increased,” Caldwell said.

    He also questions how much the BIE will listen to tribal college leaders in its decision-making. For example, its proposal to slash tribal college funding came shortly after a listening session with institutional leaders, he said.

    At the same time, he’s buoyed by the fact that bipartisan support not only saved colleges from proposed cuts, but it increased their funding; the Education Department funneled a historic one-time tranche of funds to tribal colleges, redirected from grants for other minority-serving institutions, earlier this year. Contributions from philanthropist MacKenzie Scott, including a $10 million gift to the College of Menominee Nation, have also offered some extra stability.

    “I have been on roller coasters, but never a roller coaster like this,” Caldwell said. But “I think that strong bipartisan support bodes well for us, even in the midst of this restructuring.”

    Twyla Baker, president of Nueta Hidatsa Sahnish College in North Dakota, said what’s most concerning to her is that the interagency agreement came as a “total surprise.”

    “Tribes, tribal nations, tribal educators should have known about this,” she said. They “should have had input on this well before any type of moves should have been made, before any type of interagency agreements should have been signed … Consultation should have happened and needs to happen quickly if we’re going to continue on this path.”

    She also has her doubts about ED shifting responsibilities over to the Department of the Interior. She said tribal college leaders have worked to develop expertise within the Education Department about their institutions and now it feels like that effort was for naught.

    “You’re kind of pulling the rug out from under us,” she said. “And that structure, the regularity of how business is done, is going to be dismantled. You can’t just shove it over to somebody else’s responsibility and expect it to work well.”

    She worries the transition could affect students if services and resource allocation are interrupted.

    “That type of interruption can be pretty untenable for small schools in rural areas, which is what a lot of us are.”

    Whatever happens, Baker said the transition is “a diversion of energy that didn’t necessarily have to happen where we could have been just focusing on our missions.”

    A Fraught Past

    The Bureau of Indian Education has come under fire in the past for its negligent oversight of K–12 schools and the two higher ed institutions in its care.

    Members of Congress held a heated hearing last year in which many accused the Bureau of Indian Education of responding slowly or inadequately to student and employee complaints at Haskell Indian Nations University, including reports of sexual assault. Some Kansas lawmakers even proposed removing Haskell from federal control.

    The BIE has also historically drawn criticism for poor academic outcomes, limited reporting, inadequate technology and deferred maintenance backlogs at its K–12 schools, ProPublica reported. A 2014 report by Sally Jewell, interior secretary under President Barack Obama, and former Education Secretary Arne Duncan called the BIE a “stain on our Nation’s history.” The report denounced the agency for producing “generations of American Indians who are poorly educated” and promised to undertake reforms.

    (Tony Dearman, director of the Bureau of Indian Education since 2016, told ProPublica that the BIE has undergone changes since then, including a more direct process to inspect school buildings, make major purchases and enter into contracts.)

    In a statement to Inside Higher Ed, the Department of the Interior described its new responsibilities toward tribal colleges as an “opportunity to better serve Native youth” and emphasized plans to solicit tribal college leaders’ input during the transition.

    “As we move forward with efforts to improve the coordination and delivery of Native American education programs, the Bureau of Indian Education will continue to engage closely with tribes and education partners to ensure their perspectives inform our work,” the statement read.

    “We value the input we receive from tribes and stakeholders, and we remain dedicated to building a future where Native students have the tools, support, and opportunities they need to thrive for generations to come.”

    Source link

  • Cost Is Graduate Enrollment “Gatekeeper”

    Cost Is Graduate Enrollment “Gatekeeper”

    Many graduate programs face funding cuts, enrollment declines and uncertain futures, but a new report describes cost of attendance as the “ultimate gatekeeper” to enrollment.

    Between Aug. 20 and Sept. 8, 2025, the enrollment management consulting firm EAB surveyed 8,106 current and prospective graduate and adult learners about their motivations, financial concerns, program search methods and program preferences.

    The findings, published Thursday in EAB’s 2025 Adult Learner Survey, show that cost ranked as the most important factor in enrollment decisions, surpassing program accreditation, which was last year’s top factor.

    The majority of prospective students (60 percent) said they would eliminate a program from consideration if they perceived it to be “too expensive.” Although data from the National Center for Education Statistics shows that the average annual cost of graduate school is more than $20,000, EAB’s survey found that 39 percent of learners believe anything more than $10,000 is too expensive; 62 percent said they wouldn’t be willing to pay more than $20,000 a year for graduate school.

    “The hopes and expectations of today’s adult learners are colliding with a financial aid system in a period of significant transition,” Val Fox, a senior director and principal in EAB’s adult learner recruitment division, said in a news release. “Federal aid sources are shrinking, and students with low credit scores may not qualify for private loans. This mismatch will make it even harder to sustain enrollment at a time when institutions need domestic adult learners more than ever.”

    Learners’ heightened concerns about cost come as graduate programs also grapple with new federal policies—including caps on graduate student loans, cuts to research funding and visa restrictions for international students—that are making it even harder for institutions to balance their budgets and attract new students.

    At the same time, however, graduate students and adult learners increasingly rely on outside funding. Scholarships were the most commonly cited funding source (52 percent), followed by financial aid, loans or grants, though both categories fell several percentage points compared to last year. Meanwhile, the report found that 25 percent of respondents cited personal or household income as one of their top five funding sources this year, compared to more than 40 percent last year.

    “Success for U.S. graduate schools in 2026 will depend heavily on their ability to adapt recruiting strategies to accommodate policy shifts and evolving student priorities,” Fox said. “Schools need to communicate costs clearly, especially on digital channels, and align their value propositions to individual student interests through hyperpersonalized marketing.”

    Source link

  • FTC Claims the ABA Is a Monopoly

    FTC Claims the ABA Is a Monopoly

    The Federal Trade Commission accused the American Bar Association of having a “monopoly on the accreditation of American law schools” in a letter to the Texas Supreme Court at a time when the state is considering minimizing the ABA’s oversight of legal education.

    In April, the Texas Supreme Court announced it was looking into eliminating ABA requirements for licensure. Justices wrote in a tentative opinion in the fall that the ABA “should no longer have the final say on whether a law school’s graduates are eligible to sit for the Texas bar exam and become licensed to practice law.” It also invited the public to comment on a proposal to potentially undercut the ABA as an accreditor for Texas law schools.

    FTC officials Clarke Edwards and Daniel Guarnera signaled support for potentially moving away from ABA accreditation in a nine-page letter submitted to the Texas Supreme Court on Monday. In addition to claiming the ABA was a monopoly, they argued it had “rigid and costly requirements” and that it mandates “every law school follow an expensive, elitist model of legal education.”

    The two FTC officials also accused the ABA of driving up the costs of law school.

    “The ABA’s standards for accreditation appear to go far beyond what is reasonably necessary to assure adequate preparation for the practice of law in Texas, increasing the cost of a legal education. The current rule therefore likely causes Texas to forgo admitting many potentially qualified lawyers who could provide needed legal services to the Texas public,” they wrote.

    Monday’s letter reflects rhetoric from President Donald Trump and his allies who have taken aim at accreditors in recent years. Trump blasted the ABA in an April executive order, accusing it of discrimination for its diversity, equity and inclusion standards. (The ABA suspended DEI standards for accreditation in February, before the executive order.)

    The ABA did not respond to a request for comment from Inside Higher Ed.

    Source link

  • House Republicans Accuse Truman Scholarship of Liberal Bias

    House Republicans Accuse Truman Scholarship of Liberal Bias

    House Republicans held a hearing Wednesday broadcasting long-standing conservative allegations of a left-wing bias in the small, prestigious Truman Scholarship program. Witnesses called by the GOP said the winners disproportionately espouse causes such as promoting racial justice and fighting climate change—and wind up working for Democrats and left-leaning organizations—while few recipients profess interest in conservative aims.

    But rather than counter the allegations, Democrats and their invited witness largely called the proceedings a distraction from the issue of college unaffordability, which they accused the GOP of exacerbating.

    The Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development hearing reflected a trend in conservative criticism of higher ed: allegations of favoritism toward liberals and left-leaning thought within very exclusive programs, including certain Ivy League institutions. The Trump administration’s sweeping research funding cuts for particular universities—and the congressional grillings of university presidents during antisemitism hearings before Trump retook the White House—have targeted institutions that only a fraction of Americans attend.

    “The Truman Scholarship represents an appropriation of $3 million a year, and directly impacts just 50 to 60 students annually,” said Democratic witness Ashley Harrington, senior policy counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. “The cuts to the higher education safety net made in the One Big Beautiful Bill are of far greater consequence to the millions of Americans who have never even heard of the Truman Scholarship.”

    “I hope today’s conversation can shift toward making our entire higher education system more affordable and accessible for all students,” Harrington said, “instead of having a narrow, partisan dialogue about the very few who receive this elite scholarship.”

    Republicans and their witnesses—one from a conservative-leaning media outlet and two from conservative-leaning think tanks—didn’t take her up on that invitation. Jennifer Kabbany, editor in chief of The College Fix, said her outlet has been researching liberal bias in the Truman Scholarship for 10 years and argued that its recipients hold a lot of sway.

    “They’re lobbying, they’re working for lawmakers, they’re consulting, they’re working for very influential, liberal-leaning law firms,” Kabbany said. “And so they’re having a big influence on our nation’s conversation and what legislation is brought forth. This isn’t just a $3 million scholarship—this is the direction of our country.”

    The scholarship, which provides junior undergraduates up to $30,000 for a “public service–related” graduate degree, was founded as a memorial to the namesake Democratic president. Congress passed legislation creating it in 1974, and Republican president Gerald Ford signed the bill into law the next year.

    Lawmakers didn’t invite anyone from the Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation to testify. Rep. Burgess Owens, the Utah Republican who chairs the subcommittee, told Inside Higher Ed he didn’t know why no one from the foundation appeared. Audra McGeorge, communications director for the Education and Workforce Committee, said the full committee chooses witnesses.

    “We provided an opportunity for the Truman Scholarship program to respond to the Committee’s concerns” outlined in a letter last year citing a report on the program from the American Enterprise Institute, McGeorge said. “Since they chose not to engage with us on those issues, we did not see a productive path in repeating the outreach. So we sought out researchers who have examined this issue fairly.”

    The minority Democratic party gets to choose only one witness. Raiyana Malone, a spokesperson for the committee’s Democrats, said, “We really wanted to focus on the Big Ugly Bill cuts to higher education,” so they chose Harrington.

    The report from AEI, a conservative-leaning think tank, said that, of the 182 Truman winners between 2021 and 2023, just six espoused interest in a traditionally “conservative-leaning” cause. While numerous winners cited an interest in topics such as immigrants’ rights or racial justice, none professed interest in protecting the rights of the unborn or defending the Second Amendment, the report said.

    Frederick Hess, AEI’s director of education policy studies and co-author of the report, said the Truman Foundation began hiding past news releases and reduced the amount of biographical information on its website to prevent the replication of such studies. In an email, Tara Yglesias, the foundation’s deputy executive secretary, said its 2025 scholar listing had returned to a format used in the early 2000s partly because “scholars, particularly those working in national security and similar areas, had made requests that we not post their biographical information publicly. Additionally, significant staff time was required to keep the biographies current, even for the short time they were visible.”

    Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, an Oregon Democrat, criticized the fact that the report’s other author, Joe Pitts, didn’t disclose in the report that he was a failed applicant for the scholarship. Bonamici called Pitts “disgruntled,” which Pitts rebutted on X.

    The scholarship foundation didn’t provide Inside Higher Ed an interview Wednesday or answer some specific emailed questions. Terry Babcock-Lumish, its executive secretary, wrote in an email that while no one from the foundation was invited to testify, “We welcome Members of Congress’s assistance in raising awareness of our opportunity and hope they will encourage the colleges and universities in their districts to nominate qualified candidates.” She said it’s “a merit-based scholarship program committed to identifying aspiring leaders throughout the United States, regardless of ideology.”

    “Unless candidates apply, we cannot select them,” she wrote.

    While the Republican witnesses shared their specific issues with the program’s recruitment and selection process—including not seeking out candidates from traditionally conservative campuses—they and the Republican subcommittee members also traced the alleged liberal bias to the left-leaning nature of academe in general.

    “On the campus level, those that are deciding who gets put to the regional committees, I mean, they’re professors,” said Kabbany, of The College Fix. “And we all know, 30 to one, professors are liberals, so they’re obviously going to advance candidates who have beliefs and pet causes that they love … It’s really systemic.”

    A few Republicans, including Owens, said Congress should end the program.

    “The Truman committee and this entire process is anti-conservative,” Owens said in his closing remarks. He said, “This has been a pipeline for Democrats, no question about it … I don’t think it’s fixable.”

    Rep. Mark Harris, a North Carolina Republican, said, “It’s deeply ironic to me that taxpayers who also never attended college, just like [President] Truman himself, are now forced to fund elite postgraduate degrees for a handpicked few. In my opinion, the federal government has no business running a scholarship program at all.” (According to the Truman Library, Harry S. Truman attended a business college for one year before dropping out to help with his father’s business.)

    Two Republicans—current New York gubernatorial candidate Elise Stefanik and Rep. Randy Fine, a staunchly pro-Israel Florida Republican who has said, “We have a Muslim problem in America”—accused the program of fostering antisemitism. “This, to me, is beyond liberal bias,” Fine said. “This is a flat-out embrace of Muslim terror and [represents] the fact that U.S. taxpayer dollars are being used to fund terrorists.”

    Fine, who is Jewish, said, “I have zero desire to reform the Truman fellowship. I’m not interested in borrowing $3 million from my children and grandchildren to give it to people who would like to kill them, so I believe we should shut down the program.” (Fine also made a point to say he wasn’t asking questions of Adam Kissel, a Republican witness, because of Kissel’s connection to the Heritage Foundation, which many conservatives accuse of tolerating antisemitism.)

    Stefanik, who is on the scholarship foundation’s board, cited a 2025 Truman scholar who “publicly espoused support for Hamas,” adding, “We need to address this rise in antisemitism with some of the recipients.”

    Eva Frazier, the Truman recipient whom Stefanik has publicly named in the past, told Inside Higher Ed in an email, “Congresswoman Stefanik’s comments followed a long pattern of politicians attempting to scare students into silence for speaking out about the Palestinian cause, but we refuse to be intimidated by such attacks.”

    Rep. Tim Walberg, a Michigan Republican and chair of the Education and Workforce Committee, said the alleged Truman Scholarship issues are “illustrative of so much that goes on.”

    “We’re seeing a bias in opposition to the American idea,” he said. “That isn’t liberal or conservative—it’s American.”

    Source link

  • Federal Aid Conference Delayed, University Employees Lament

    Federal Aid Conference Delayed, University Employees Lament

    The Education Department and its Office of Federal Student Aid typically hold a conference the first week of December each year.

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Caiaimage/Chris Ryan/iStock/Getty Images

    Each year during the first week of December, the Department of Education has historically hosted the Federal Student Aid Training Conference to provide university administrators with updated education on regulations and technical systems. That hasn’t happened this year.

    Now, many financial aid experts are expressing their frustrations on social media, attributing the lapse to the Trump administration’s major reductions in force and calling it a shortsighted mistake.

    “There is no conference. That’s what happens when you fire many of the staff who organized and conducted the training,” Byron Scott, a retired FSA staff member, wrote on LinkedIn. “Perhaps in ‘returning’ this Department of Education function to the states—where [it] never was—the Department forgot to tell the states about this new responsibility.”

    Department officials have neither announced the event’s cancellation nor clarified whether and when it might take place. The conference website, where logistical information is traditionally posted, only says, “Information coming soon.”

    One senior department official who spoke with Inside Higher Ed on the condition of anonymity said the conference is slated to occur in person in March.

    “The announcement was queued up but the shutdown got in the way,” the source wrote in a text message. “I think the plan [will be released] in the coming days.”

    An Education Department spokesperson did not respond to questions about the March date but blamed any delay on the government shutdown.

    “The Democrats shut down the government for 43 days, and as you can imagine, planning a conference is not an exempted activity,” the spokesperson said. “We’ll have more updates on this in the coming weeks.”

    If the conference is eventually held in person, it would be the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in 2020.

    The senior department official said they hope that “returning the conference to in-person will make the wait worth it.”

    But Heidi Kovalick, director of financial aid at Rowan University, responded to Scott’s LinkedIn post saying that right now is “a critical time.”

    Financial aid officers have a lot to adapt to; the One Big Beautiful Bill Act mandated major changes to the student loan system, and the department issued regulations outlining new standards for Public Service Loan Forgiveness, among other significant shifts since Trump took office.

    “Fin[ancial] aid administrators really need to hear from the experts,” Kovalick wrote. “Of course as others have mentioned, [it’s] kind of hard when they have been forced out. We miss you all.”

    Regardless of whether staffing shortages or the government shutdown played a role in the delay, Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, said one of her greatest concerns is the tight timeline financial aid officers will face if the department does reschedule the conference for spring.

    “Truthfully, March is pretty soon—three months away. Institutional budgets are tight. People are going to have to book flights and hotels, and you know that that can be expensive,” she said. Still, the NASFAA president applauded the department for its effort to return the conference to an in-person event.

    “The last few were virtual, which had mixed reviews. The sessions had to be prerecorded. They weren’t always as timely. And there wasn’t an opportunity for interaction. But those are all the things that financial aid professionals prioritize,” she said. “If March is when they can do it, well, we’ll be happy to see it in March.”

    Source link

  • 21 Higher Education Marketing Conferences for 2026

    21 Higher Education Marketing Conferences for 2026

    Higher Ed Marketing Conferences Foster Connection and Innovation

    The higher education marketing landscape continues to evolve at a rapid pace, driven by emerging technologies, shifting student expectations, and ever-changing digital platforms. For marketing professionals in the higher ed space, staying informed and inspired is more important than ever.

    Higher education marketing conferences provide a great way to keep up with the latest trends, tools, and strategies shaping the industry. From fresh approaches in academic thought leadership and generative engine optimization (GEO) to foundational breakthroughs in online growth enablement and centralized marketing strategies, the opportunities to innovate are endless.

    Attending higher ed marketing conferences like the ones below can help your institution’s marketing team stay ahead of the curve, while connecting with other professionals who are driving the future of education marketing.

    1. SXSW EDU

    The South by Southwest Education conference brings together professionals from all education categories to discuss industry trends ranging from technology to global collaboration. The higher education track explores developments impacting universities, community colleges, and nontraditional learning forums, and sessions on continuing education and convergence are also available.

    When: March 9-12, 2026

    Where: Austin, TX, at the Hilton Austin and other downtown locations

    Website: https://sxswedu.com/ 

    2. NAGAP Graduate Enrollment Management Summit

    The Graduate Enrollment Management (GEM) Summit is tailored for professionals involved in graduate admissions and enrollment management. Hosted by NAGAP, The Association for Graduate Enrollment Management, the 2026 summit offers dynamic speakers and numerous educational sessions designed to provide new approaches and creative strategies across various topics in the higher education field. Attendees can also connect with fellow NAGAP members to share useful tips and exchange ideas.

    When: April 8-11, 2026

    Where: Baltimore, MD, at the Marriott Baltimore Waterfront

    Website: https://www.nagap.org/annual-summit 

    3. ASU+GSV Summit

    Hosted by GSV Summit and Bett/Hyve, in partnership with Arizona State University, the ASU+GSV Summit covers educational technology topics across all learning categories.

    Archer Education will be attending this higher ed conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: April 12-15, 2026

    Where: San Diego, CA, at the Manchester Grand Hyatt

    Website: https://asugsvsummit.com/ 

    4. UPCEA Annual Conference

    Hosted by the University Professional and Continuing Education Association (UPCEA), this conference focuses on professional and online education. It features engaging keynote speakers, high-energy concurrent sessions, and ample networking opportunities. The 2026 conference will address topics such as access, policy, diversity, quality, and technology.

    Archer Education will be attending and exhibiting at this higher ed conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: April 15-17, 2026

    Where: New Orleans, LA, at the Hilton New Orleans Riverside

    Website: https://conferences.upcea.edu/annual2026/ 

    5. Adobe Summit

    The Adobe Summit is one of the largest digital experience conferences, offering more than 250 sessions and hands-on labs across specialized tracks. Attendees can connect with other digital marketers and learn about cutting-edge digital marketing tools and trends. 

    When: April 19-22, 2026

    Where: Las Vegas, NV, at The Venetian Convention and Expo Center, and online

    Website: https://business.adobe.com/summit

    6. AACRAO Annual Meeting

    The American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) will hold its 111th annual meeting to advance higher education. This event offers opportunities for networking, discussing challenges in higher education, and collaborating on meaningful solutions. 

    When: April 19-22, 2026

    Where: New Orleans, LA, at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center

    Website: https://www.aacrao.org/events-training/meetings/annual-meeting

    7. SMX Advanced

    SMX Advanced is a premier conference designed for experienced search marketers seeking advanced search engine optimization (SEO) and search engine marketing (SEM) tactics. The 2026 event offers cutting-edge sessions, live Q&A, and networking opportunities with industry leaders. 

    When: June 3-5, 2026

    Where: Boston, MA, at the Westin Boston Seaport District

    Website: https://searchengineland.com/smx/advanced 

    8. Slate Summit

    Slate Summit features more than 100 sessions targeting topics relevant to higher ed admissions, student success, and advancement professionals. 

    Archer Education will be attending this higher ed conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: June 24-26, 2026

    Where: Nashville, TN, at the Music City Center

    Website: https://technolutions.com/slatesummit2026 

    9. eduWeb Summit

    The eduWeb Summit is a leading higher education conference focused on supporting marketing, enrollment, advancement, and digital teams from global colleges and universities. The 2026 Summit offers master classes, workshops, and speakers addressing current challenges faced by attendees. Topics covered include enrollment growth, analytics, and the student journey.

    When: July 14-16, 2026

    Where: Orlando, FL, at the Drury Plaza Hotel Orlando

    Website: https://www.eduwebsummit.com/

    10. UPCEA Summit for Online Leadership and Administration (SOLAR)

    UPCEA’s Summit for Online Leadership and Administration (SOLAR) conference is designed to gather educational leaders, professionals, and innovators to discuss digital learning and higher learning strategy. Topics include governance, policy, compliance, technology, and growth.

    Archer will be attending and exhibiting at this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: July 29-31, 2026

    Where: Boston, MA, at the Westin Boston Seaport District

    Website: https://conferences.upcea.edu/SOLAR26/ 

    11. Digital Collegium Annual Conference

    The Digital Collegium (formerly HighEdWeb) Annual Conference is tailored for higher education professionals interested in exploring the role of digital media within their organizations. The 2026 conference will feature diverse learning sessions, providing valuable professional development opportunities for developers, marketers, designers, and strategists. 

    When: October 18-21, 2026

    Where: Pittsburgh, PA, and Online

    Website: https://events.digicol.org/digicol26 

    12. VidCon

    VidCon is a premier convention where digital culture takes center stage, bringing together the world’s leading digital creators, platform innovators, and their fans. The event offers various tracks tailored for community members, creators, and industry professionals, providing insights into the latest trends in online video and digital content creation.

    When: June 25-27, 2026

    Where: Anaheim, CA, at the Anaheim Convention Center

    Website: https://www.vidcon.com/anaheim/

    13. EDUCAUSE Annual Conference

    The EDUCAUSE Annual Conference brings together industry professionals to network and discuss recent trends in higher ed technology. Participants can also engage in online sessions.

    Archer will be attending and exhibiting at this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: September 29-October 2, 2026 (in person); October 14/15, 2026 (online)

    Where: Denver, CO, and online

    Website: https://events.educause.edu/annual-conference/2026 

    14. Content Marketing World

    Content Marketing World is the largest content marketing conference, offering sessions and workshops on content strategy, storytelling, and ROI. Attendees gain insights from industry leaders to enhance their content marketing efforts.

    When: October 5-7, 2026

    Where: Denver, CO

    Website: https://www.contentmarketingworld.com/

    15. NACAC Conference

    The National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC) Conference includes more than 100 sessions on topics relevant to admissions counseling professionals, such as best practices and market research. 

    Archer will be attending and exhibiting at this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: October 8-10, 2026

    Where: Minneapolis, MN, at the Minneapolis Convention Center

    Website: https://nacacconference.org 

    16. WCET Annual Conference

    WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET) is an extension of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). The WCET Annual Conference brings together higher education leaders and professionals to discuss educational technology and distance learning trends.

    Archer will be attending this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: October 14-16, 2026

    Where: Minneapolis, MN, at the Marriott Minneapolis City Center

    Website: https://wcet.wiche.edu/events/wcet-2026/ 

    17. AACRAO Conference for Strategic Enrollment Management

    The AACRAO Conference on Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) brings together enrollment teams from universities, community colleges, and other learning agencies to discuss issues including enrollment declines, knowledge gaps, and financial aid strategies. 

    Archer will be attending and exhibiting at this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: November 1-4, 2026

    Where: Baltimore, MD, at the Marriott Baltimore Waterfront

    Website: https://www.aacrao.org/events-training/meetings/sem-conference 

    18. P3-EDU

    Hosted by Georgia Tech, P3-EDU brings together higher education leaders to discuss topics ranging from public-private partnerships to government regulations.

    Archer will be attending this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: November 2-4, 2026

    Where: Atlanta, GA, at the Georgia Tech Hotel and Conference Center

    Website: https://p3edu.com/ 

    19. AMA Symposium for the Marketing of Higher Education

    The American Marketing Association (AMA) Symposium for the Marketing of Higher Education is a premier event dedicated to advancing the field of higher education marketing. The 2026 Symposium offers a peer-reviewed program designed to help marketers refine strategies, strengthen institutional reputations, and ensure long-term financial health. Attendees will have the opportunity to engage with peers, share insights, and learn from industry leaders.

    Archer will be attending and exhibiting at this conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: November 8-11, 2026

    Where: Aurora, CO, at the Gaylord Rockies Resort and Convention Center

    Website: https://www.ama.org/events/conference/2026-ama-symposium-for-the-marketing-of-higher-education/ 

    20. OLC Accelerate

    OLC Accelerate, presented by the Online Learning Consortium (OLC), is devoted to driving quality online learning, advancing best practice guidance, and accelerating innovation in learning for academic leaders, educators, administrators, digital learning professionals, and organizations around the world. Topics include blended learning, research, student engagement, and technology platforms.

    When: November 16-19, 2026

    Where: Orlando, FL

    Website: https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/conferences

    21. UPCEA MEMS Conference

    The UPCEA Marketing, Enrollment Management, and Student Success (MEMS) Conference is the premier event for leaders and practitioners responsible for online and professional continuing education marketing and enrollment management. Attendees of the 2026 conference can expect engaging keynote speakers, insightful sessions, and ample networking opportunities.

    Archer will be attending and exhibiting at this higher ed marketing conference! Remember to stop by and say hello.

    When: November 30-December 2, 2026

    Where: Orlando, FL, at Disney’s Coronado Springs Resort

    Website: https://upcea.edu/events/#upcoming 

    Benefits of Attending Higher Education Marketing Conferences

    While some of these higher ed marketing conferences may be costly to attend, the value each event provides can be worth every penny if they help you improve your strategies and performance. 

    Learning About Changes in Marketing for Higher Education

    Higher education has seen drastic changes in the last few years, and it hasn’t been easy to keep up. Two examples are the shifts in the use of artificial intelligence and the different types of students seeking higher education. With new students and new expectations, higher ed professionals have a lot to digest and reimagine. Conferences provide an opportunity to get a wide variety of insights from an open group of people looking to learn, grow, and push the field forward. 

    Innovation and Optimization: Digital Marketing for Higher Education

    To keep your finger on the pulse of higher ed marketing trends, you probably read newsletters and follow thought leaders on social media. But nothing compares to real-life communication and collaboration, especially when it comes to emerging technologies. Outside of the higher ed marketing realm, the digital world is also evolving at an intense speed. With new technology comes new strategies and vice versa. While these new ideas and ways of accomplishing them will eventually become widespread, conferences are where a lot of firsts and big reveals happen, giving attendees a competitive edge.

    Networking With Higher Ed Marketing Peers

    The key to playing a role in pushing the higher ed marketing field forward is connecting with others in the community. Having a set time and place to imagine the future of higher ed with professionals as passionate as you are is a privilege that leads to true collective growth. Some of the most important benefits of attending a higher education marketing conference are getting inspired by leaders, connecting with like-minded colleagues, and building what could be lifelong professional relationships. You never know when a professional connection will pay off, and these conferences are the perfect place to create them. 

    Let Us Know Which Higher Ed Marketing Conferences You’re Attending!

    Archer Education partners with dozens of institutions to help them overcome enrollment challenges using tech-enabled, personalized enrollment marketing and management solutions. We encourage all of our clients to use higher education marketing conference opportunities to find ways to supplement their existing strategies. If you’ll be at any of the conferences Archer is attending, drop us a line and let’s schedule a time to chat!

    Source link

  • ED’s Problematic “Professional Degree” Definition (opinion)

    ED’s Problematic “Professional Degree” Definition (opinion)

    In early November, following extensive debate by the RISE negotiated rule-making committee, the U.S. Department of Education proposed a definition of “professional degree” for federal student aid that could deter talented students from pursuing health-care careers. The proposed rule, stemming from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, would leave students in many fields critical for our future health-care workforce subject to a $20,500-per-year federal student loan cap.

    Physician assistant/associate programs stand to be strongly affected. These programs are intensive, highly structured and clinically immersive. Students complete rigorous professional-level coursework while rotating through multiple clinical sites to gain hands-on experience. Unlike in many graduate programs, PA students cannot work during their studies, as clinical rotations are full-time and often require travel across multiple locations. Within this context, federal student aid is not optional; it is the lifeline that allows students to stay in their programs and complete the training they have worked for years to achieve. Without it, some students will have no choice but to abandon the profession entirely.

    The financial gap under the department’s proposal is striking. Tuition alone —not including expenses like housing, food and other needs—for PA programs often exceeds $90,000 for the duration of the program due to the unique costs associated with health professional education, such as simulation technology and clinical placement expenses. Under the department’s proposal, federal student aid would only cover a fraction of this amount. For students without access to private resources, the gap will likely be insurmountable.

    These challenges are not hypothetical. A student accepted into a PA program may face a choice to take on crippling private debt or leave the career track entirely. Students in nurse practitioner, physical therapy and occupational therapy programs face the same reality. Each of these programs combines intense academic and clinical requirements, preparing graduates for immediate entry into practice. Federal policy must recognize this reality if it hopes to support the next generation of health-care professionals.

    The consequences extend far beyond individual students. PA students, along with other health professions students, are essential to addressing workforce shortages, especially in rural and underserved areas. Every student forced to forgo pursuing a PA program due to financial barriers represents a future provider absent from the health-care system. At a time when demand for care is rising, federal policy that fails to recognize these students risks worsening shortages and limiting access to care for patients who need it most.

    The Department of Education has the opportunity to correct this in the final rule. Explicitly including PA students, along with nurse practitioners, physical therapists, occupational therapists and other professions that meet the statutory criteria for professional degrees would ensure that aid reaches students fully committed to intensive, licensure-preparing programs. Recognition will reduce financial stress, allow students to focus on becoming high-quality health-care providers and maintain the pipeline of skilled professionals critical to patient care.

    Including PA and other health professions students in the department’s final rule is both necessary and prudent. It allows students to complete programs they cannot otherwise afford, protects the future health-care workforce and ensures that communities continue to have access to vital services. The Department of Education can achieve clarity, fairness and meaningful impact by explicitly recognizing these professional students.

    Sara Fletcher is chief executive officer of the PA Education Association.

    Source link

  • Make Faculty Writing Support Easier to Find (opinion)

    Make Faculty Writing Support Easier to Find (opinion)

    Faculty writing has never been more crucial. In an era of heightened competition for grants, promotion pressures and demands for public engagement, writing is the vehicle through which faculty share their expertise, secure funding and advance their careers. Research shows that successful academic writers aren’t necessarily better writers—they’re better-supported writers. They have systems, communities and resources that support their productivity and help sustain engagement with writing as their needs change across their roles, responsibilities and careers.

    Faculty writers are seeking support for their writing. Where do they go when they need it? Many are unsure.

    Support for faculty writing on campus is often decentralized or may vary from year to year, making it difficult to find or accessible only to those with the advantage of an informed mentor. Support for faculty writing might be offered in any number of campus locations: centers for teaching and learning, provosts’ offices, offices for faculty advancement, writing centers or academic support centers, research centers for grant writing, graduate student support centers, or individual departments. Writing support may be outsourced through institutional memberships to organizations such as the NCFDD or the Textbook and Academic Authors Association, which offers webinars, writing programs and templates for downloading.

    Department chairs and campus administrators may want to support faculty writers but aren’t sure where to begin. Or if there is a problem, it’s considered an individual faculty problem and not one that calls for a campus response.

    Perhaps there’s an underlying assumption that faculty should already know how to write and shouldn’t need support to meet basic job expectations, like publishing a certain number of articles before tenure. Establishing a faculty writing space or central resource hub might be seen as suggesting they need remedial help—much like the stigma writing centers face as places where “bad” students are sent.

    Yet today’s faculty are expected to write across more genres than ever before: grant proposals, peer-reviewed articles, public-facing pieces, social media content and policy briefs. Each involves different skills and audiences. The faculty member who can craft a compelling journal article may struggle with a foundation proposal or an op-ed. Writing support isn’t remedial—it’s strategic professional development.

    The current moment also presents unique challenges. Post-pandemic isolation has disrupted the informal networks that previously supported faculty writing. Budget constraints mean fewer resources for individual faculty development, making shared writing support more essential. New faculty arrive on campus without the professional development resources or mentor networks that previous generations took for granted, while midcareer faculty face mounting pressure to produce more with less support.

    We can do better in our support of faculty writers. If you want to help, here are ways to do better, or to get started.

    • Gather resources. Even though writing support might be available, it may not be widely known, or up-to-date, and it may be dispersed across many different units or offices on campus. Create a centralized web page gathering information for all campus resources for faculty writing. The entity that hosts the site will be different for each campus. For some, it’s the provost’s office. For others, it’s a writing or teaching center. List the resources—where faculty can go for support—and help faculty navigate the resources by providing descriptions (not just links), categories (i.e., “find a writing group”) and contact information. Collaborate with faculty to curate a list of recommended books, podcasts and writing spaces they have found helpful.
    • Make faculty writing visible. What if faculty writing support were as central to campus as student writing support? A teaching center could include a workshop on writing about teaching; the provost’s office or campus research center could offer workshops on developing institutional review board protocols. Consider reserving dedicated spaces for faculty to gather and write (such as a faculty writing room) or schedule specific writing times/days in a university writing center or campus coffee shop. Give them a name (Writing Wednesdays, Motivating Mondays). Writers can plan for these meet-ups and write in the company of others, in public rather than isolated in individual offices.
    • Organize a virtual workshop watch session and follow-up discussions. Gather faculty for a workshop watch session. After the workshop, help participants continue to discuss what they learned and how they’ll apply it through group check-ins or follow-up meetings. Try NCFDD’s core curriculum webinar “Every Semester Needs a Plan,” The Professor Is In’s “Art of Productivity,” or join a London Writers’ Salon Writers’ Hour, and talk about everyone’s work after the writing session.
    • Identify a faculty cohort to support for a year. Supporting all faculty writers with diluted support is often ineffective. Instead, focus on associate professors one year, new faculty writers the next and clinical faculty writers the next. Help them connect and be resources for each other throughout the year through writing retreats and writing groups. Build a campus writing community one cohort at a time.
    • Collaborate with campus partners. Combine campus resources to support writers. Could the library offer a meeting space? Two departments co-convene a writing group? Campus units could take turns hosting a daylong writing space once a month, helping writers learn about different spaces and writers across campus.
    • Start a writing support library. This can be virtual or in a central location on campus. Partner with the library to keep track of which books are in circulation or in high demand. Consider developing a workshop or writing group around in-demand books.
    • Ask faculty what they need and listen and respond. If we don’t ask faculty what they need, we won’t know. What some faculty need now may be different than what they needed last fall.
    • Support connectors. Every campus has them—the person or department that is a go-to for troubleshooting faculty questions and connecting them to writing resources. Amplify their reach, and support the faculty relationships and networks they’ve already established. Support the person or people who will curate that library, update the resource list, collaborate with campus partners and serve as a faculty writer point of contact.

    What’s next? Start by mapping what already exists on your campus. Create one central hub where faculty can find all writing-related resources. Make faculty writing as visible and supported as student writing. It’s OK to start small: Try one of these strategies we’ve shared and notice what happens. And remember—supporting faculty writers isn’t about fixing deficiencies. It’s about recognizing that writing is central to faculty success and deserves the same institutional attention we give to other essential job functions. Faculty are an invaluable resource in our campus ecosystems. Let’s lower the barrier to them finding the support they need to write well. When they thrive, so do our institutions.

    Jennifer Ahern-Dodson is an associate professor of the practice in writing studies at Duke University, where she directs the Faculty Write Program.

    Christine Tulley is a professor of English at the University of Findlay and president of Defend, Publish & Lead, a faculty development organization.

    Source link