Tag: Education

  • Coppin State’s Tuition Program Led to Enrollment Boom

    Coppin State’s Tuition Program Led to Enrollment Boom

    A historically Black university in Maryland says efforts to boost enrollment and up its name recognition are paying dividends, allowing it to more than quadruple out-of-state student enrollment over the past two years.

    Coppin State University in Baltimore announced in 2023 that it would begin offering in-state tuition to any student who lived in one of the 41 U.S. states and territories without an HBCU—as well as the District of Columbia, which has two HBCUs—through a program called Expand Eagle Nation. In 2024, the first year of the program, the institution more than doubled the number of students from qualifying states to 195—up from 81 the previous fall. (Coppin’s in-state annual cost of attendance is $27,410, versus $34,474 for out-of-state students.)

    This fall, the numbers increased even more dramatically: 416 of Coppin’s incoming class of 1,000—its largest freshman class in 25 years—come from the qualifying states. Overall, Coppin’s enrollment is up 26 percent this year, including growth on the in-state side, as well. In fact, James Stewart, associate vice president for student development and achievement, said the attention Coppin has received for its Expand Eagle Nation program has raised the university’s profile among local students.

    Still, it’s been a major shift for the institution, which used to attract students primarily from within a 50-mile radius.

    “I think our students enjoy the diversity of thought from so many different regions,” said Jinawa McNeil, the university’s director of admissions. “This is really giving opportunity to students, but it’s [also] making Coppin a different environment, where you traditionally were with students that you might have went to high school with, or maybe a high school not far from you, but now you’re talking to students who are literally from states that you’ve never been to.”

    Coppin’s growth comes at a time when many institutions across the country are working to attract new populations of students ahead of the impending demographic cliff—the decline in high school graduates that is expected to begin next year. (The Maryland Higher Education Commission projected earlier this year, however, that Maryland will be one of the few states to buck the trend, projecting an 11 percent increase in high school graduates from 2024 to 2031.)

    Coppin isn’t the only institution looking to out-of-state students to boost enrollment; in an interview earlier this fall, University of Connecticut officials attributed their growth in head count to more out-of-state name recognition due to the institution’s academic programs and popular sports teams, for example.

    “Given the declining number of students in their own state, [colleges] have to chase them elsewhere,” said Gregory Price, a professor of economics at the University of New Orleans who studies the economics of HBCUs. “It’s sort of like an arms race.”

    Coppin is also capitalizing on the current popularity of HBCUs, which saw significant increases in applications and enrollments following the Supreme Court’s 2023 ban on affirmative action in admissions.

    “Everything that’s been going on politically, from affirmative action to DEI, sends a message to Black students that they don’t belong,” Henry Williams, president of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, a nonprofit that advocates for public HBCUs, told Inside Higher Ed regarding the trend last year. “At an HBCU, you’re never going to have that question, and all of the support, resources and scholarship money being taken away elsewhere are already built into the structure [at HBCUs] … there’s value in a sense of belonging.”

    Price noted that HBCUs are also often cheaper than other institutions—as is the case at Coppin, which says it’s the least expensive institution in Maryland. That’s because historically, HBCUs haven’t had large research enterprises, which saves the institutions many costs, he said; they can also attract faculty without paying salaries above market rate.

    “To the extent HBCUs have a distinct value proposition for Black students, that could be good because there aren’t many HBCUs … and that value proposition is high returns in the labor market relative to the cost of attendance,” he said. “If you can reduce the costs, you could probably stay ahead of that demographic cliff longer than other colleges can.”

    Bolstering Recruitment

    Along with offering in-state tuition to out-of-state students, Coppin officials took a slew of steps to increase their presence in the states from which they hoped to attract students. That included visiting high schools—and plastering advertisements on buses and billboards in those cities ahead of their visits, so students would hopefully already recognize the Coppin brand by the time they met an admissions official.

    The university formed transfer partnerships with community college systems in Colorado and California, and the admissions team reached out to regional organizations that help students in the college search process to ensure their staffs were aware of Coppin.

    Increasing the university’s name recognition was an important goal of the Expand Eagle Nation program, McNeil said.

    “It [used to be] a much harder recruitment sale, for lack of a better term,” she said. “We were beginning with who were as an institution, rather than saying, ‘Oh, you’ve heard about us, so let’s help you learn more.’”

    Stewart also noted that the university was prepared for the enrollment boost, having met with academic affairs staff over the past year to ensure there would be enough courses and faculty to meet the needs of all students. To house the influx, Coppin is currently constructing a new dorm, slated to open next fall; it also has six off-campus apartment facilities that Stewart said include resident assistants, just like on-campus housing, and regular shuttle access to campus.

    “We’re going to end up with a good mix where we increase our housing on campus, especially, to meet our new students, but we have options for our [upperclassmen] off campus that give them this blending of what real-life living in an urban environment is,” he said.

    One unexpected challenge that has come with implementing Expand Eagle Nation? Convincing prospective students that the offer is real.

    “They [don’t] believe it,” McNeil said. “Like, ‘What’s the trick, what’s the catch?’ They just don’t believe an institution was willing to invest that deeply, because students understand, and definitely parents of students, specifically parents that have been to college and might have some college debt. They just did not believe that this was an opportunity, because they don’t see too many opportunities like this.”

    Source link

  • Many 2025 “Genius” Fellows Affiliated with Universities

    Many 2025 “Genius” Fellows Affiliated with Universities

    ilbusca/DigitalVision Vectors/Getty Images

    Numerous academics are part of the 2025 class of MacArthur Foundation fellows announced Wednesday. This year, the foundation selected a slate of 22 “extraordinarily creative individuals” to receive the “genius award.” Each recipient will get $800,000—no-strings attached—over the next five years to “foster and enable innovative, imaginative, and ground-breaking ideas, thinking, and strategies.”

    Since the fellowship launched in 1981, fellows have included writers, scientists, artists, social scientists, humanists, teachers and entrepreneurs. While no institutional affiliation is required, the award went to the following 2025 fellows with ties to a college or university:

    • Atmospheric scientist Ángel F. Adames Corraliza, an associate professor in the Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences Department at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, for investigating the mechanisms underlying tropical weather patterns. 
    • Epidemiologist Nabarun Dasgupta, director of the Opioid Data Lab at the University of North Carolina’s Injury Prevention Research Center, for advocating for harm reduction and creating practical programs to mitigate harms from drug use, particularly opioid overdose deaths.
    • Archaeologist Kristina Douglass, associate professor of climate at Columbia University, for investigating how human societies and environments co-evolved and adapted to climate variability. 
    • Astrophysicist Kareem El-Badry, assistant professor of astronomy at the California Institute of Technology, for leveraging astronomical data sets and theoretical modeling to investigate binary star systems, black holes, neutron stars and other stellar bodies.
    • Political scientist Hahrie Han, the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Professor in the political science department at Johns Hopkins University, for employing a range of ethnographic, sociological, experimental and quantitative methods to examine organizational structures and tactics that encourage individuals to interact across lines of difference and work together for change in the public sphere.
    • Cultural anthropologist Ieva Jusionyte, the Watson Family University Professor of International Security and Anthropology at Brown University, for exploring the political and moral ambiguities of border regions, where state policies regulate historically shifting distinctions between legal and illegal practices.
    • Evolutionary biologist Toby Kiers, research chair and professor in the Ecology and Evolution Department at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, for illuminating the evolutionary mechanisms underlying cooperation between species and the role of plant-microbe mutualisms in ecosystem health. 
    • Structural biologist Jason McLellan, professor and Robert A. Welch Chair in Chemistry in the Department of Molecular Biosciences at the University of Texas at Austin, for investigating virus fusion proteins and developing new interventions to prevent infectious diseases.
    • Fiction writer Tommy Orange, faculty mentor in the creative writing program at the Institute of American Indian Arts, for capturing a diverse range of Native American experiences and lives in novels that traverse time, space and narrative perspectives.
    • Nuclear security specialist Sébastien Philippe, assistant professor in the Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics Department at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, for exposing past harms and potential future risks from building, testing and storing launch-ready nuclear weapons.
    • Interdisciplinary artist Gala Porras-Kim, visiting critic in sculpture at the Yale School of Art, for proposing new ways to make visible the layered meanings and functions of cultural artifacts held in museums and institutional collections.
    • Neurobiologist and optometrist Teresa Puthussery, associate professor in the Herbert Wertheim School of Optometry and Vision Science at the University of California, Berkeley, for exploring how neural circuits of the retina encode visual information for the primate brain.
    • Chemical engineer William Tarpeh, assistant professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering at Stanford University, for developing sustainable and practical methods to recover valuable chemical resources from wastewater.
    • Mathematician Lauren K. Williams, the Dwight Parker Robinson Professor of Mathematics at Harvard University, for elucidating unexpected connections between algebraic combinatorics and concepts in other areas of math and physics.

    Source link

  • Team Teaching Benefits Faculty and Students

    Team Teaching Benefits Faculty and Students

    Most students expect to see one professor at the front of the classroom throughout the semester. But for those attending Harvey Mudd College, a STEM-focused institution in California, it’s not unusual to have four or more faculty members teaching one course.

    At Harvey Mudd, team teaching has been a distinguishing facet of the student experience for decades; most general education STEM courses for incoming students are taught by two or more professors.

    “It’s the water we swim in,” said Kathy Van Heuvelen, associate dean of faculty. “It’s so embedded in our culture.”

    Implementing team teaching as standard practice has helped the college train early-career faculty, establish more holistic courses and ensure students are aware of the various resources and experts available to them on campus.

    What is team teaching? Also called collaborative teaching or co-teaching, team teaching involves multiple instructors leading a course, each with their own responsibilities.

    Often, team teaching involves faculty of different disciplines covering a topic or issue from multiple perspectives. At Harvey Mudd, for example, a group of faculty taught a course on California wildfires, and the content included the history of forestry, atmospheric chemistry and air pollution, as well as the social implications of fires. Sometimes that means two professors teaching side by side, but often faculty split up lessons and take turns delivering content to students.

    Team teaching is less common than solo teaching, in part because it requires more time to implement. Faculty sometimes face logistical barriers, such as aligning schedules and co-creating materials, as well as personal differences in assessment or classroom management. But when done well, the format can equip students with greater critical thinking skills and a richer understanding of content.

    Prepped for success: To help professors navigate team teaching, Harvey Mudd offers them a variety of resources. New instructors participate in a weekly lunch led by college administrators where they gather, eat and engage in professional development, Van Heuvelen said. “Our sessions have included team-teaching strategies for communicating with your team and navigating this mode of teaching.”

    Van Heuvelen also provides a team-teaching checklist for faculty each semester to help them prepare for the upcoming term, which includes items such as communication, timeline for developing materials, classroom management and other course policies.

    “It has a list of questions for the team to discuss ahead of time to try to help teams get out In front of any challenges and establish their team norms,” she said.

    The college is part of the Claremont Consortium—a group of seven higher education institutions in Claremont, Calif.—which has a Consortium Center for Teaching and Learning and provides workshops on team teaching, as well.

    Most team-taught courses are designed to feature a junior and senior faculty member, allowing the early-career professional to learn from a more experienced instructor, Van Heuvelen said.

    “For an early-career hire who maybe does not have extensive teaching experience, it is like attending a master class,” Van Heuvelen said. “There is tremendous mentoring that can go on there.”

    Newer instructors also bring fresh perspectives and ideas to the classroom, which ensures content does not get stale over time.

    Supporting student success: One of the benefits of the model is that students have a group of instructors to engage with and call on if they need academic support, Van Heuvelen said.

    “For example, when we have a team that’s teaching, we all hold common office hours, so students can go to any office hours,” Van Heuvelen said.

    Past research shows that students are often unaware of the full range of supports available to them on campus, but engaging with many professors can get students more plugged in to institutional services, or at least provide more touch points, Van Heuvelen said.

    Source link

  • Why Founder’s College Is the Answer to Declining College-Going

    Why Founder’s College Is the Answer to Declining College-Going

    In a recent Forbes column, Lumina Foundation president Jamie Merisotis reminded us that degrees must do more than certify coursework—they must create real value for students and employers. In Indiana, where Sagamore Institute’s 2040 workforce economy study and the Indiana Commission for Higher Education warn of falling college-going rates, this challenge is especially urgent.

    That is the backdrop for Butler University’s boldest experiment yet: Founder’s College, launched August 2025.

    Compressing Time, Expanding Values

    The Founder’s College model confronts a growing national conversation: does the U.S. need more pathways beyond the traditional four-year degree? Institutions across the country are piloting three-year bachelor’s options and embedded two-year credentials to align faster, more affordable education with urgent labor market shortages while maximizing current infrastructure to meet needs.

    Butler University has placed itself in this conversation with uncommon clarity. At Founder’s College, students complete a two-year associate degree in six structured semesters, front-loading the critical skills usually acquired in a student’s junior and senior years—career motivation, professional identity and workforce readiness. This compressed pathway is not cut-rate—it is deliberately sequenced with degree programs tied to Classification of Instructional Programs codes and O*NET occupational standards synced to NACE competencies, ensuring that every credential reflects real career demand in Indiana and beyond.

    Founder’s students walking down steps

    A Workforce-Aligned, Equity-Driven Blueprint

    The Indianapolis labor market, seeing a 3.1 percent GDP growth, underscores the need for this approach (Indiana University News, 2004). The monetary value of all that is produced in the state is outpacing state and national averages. At the same time, in-demand industries—especially health care, professional services, technology and advanced manufacturing—are confronting skill mismatches. Employers are offering jobs, yet Indiana’s college-going rate has slipped to historic lows, leaving pipelines partially empty (Indiana Business Research Center, 2024). The Indiana Department of Workforce Development reports wages are rising, up 4.1 percent in the metro area in 2025 according to InContext Indiana.

    Institutions like Butler University are not blind to the demographic challenges either. A declining birth rate, an aging workforce, admissions redesigns and disruptive technologies such as AI intensify the demand for midlevel, adaptable credentials to reskill workers quickly.

    Founder’s students walking a path on campus

    Here is where Founder’s College shifts the ground. It builds wraparound supports—career coaching, social workers, family inclusion and embedded apprenticeships—into the core of its structure rather than leaving them at the margins. By lowering tuition costs to nearly debt-free levels for students and building in work-integrated experiences, Founder’s College creates a system where opportunity is the design, not the exception.

    Global Research, Local Application

    Butler’s experiment does not arise in a vacuum. It mirrors and operationalizes the findings of major policy reports:

    A 2024 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report recommends expanded investment in skills and high-quality education to combat slowing productivity growth coupled by aging, digitalization and climate changes. It stresses repeatedly that the U.S. is falling behind peer nations in connecting academic programs to workplace readiness, particularly in apprenticeships and microcredentials. The Founder’s College requirement that every student engage in structured, mentored, for-credit work experience directly addresses that gap.

    The America AI Action Plan 2025 highlights the accelerating impact of artificial intelligence on the skills profile of jobs. Handshake reports increase in generative AI usage too. While OECD 2025 reminds us that there is a changing landscape requiring adaptability, complex interdisciplinary problem-solving and liberal arts and professional academic digital fluency are no longer optional. At Founder’s College, technical writing studios, digital credentialing, industry certification and technology integration prepare students to thrive in an AI-mediated workplace.

    FutureEd research from 2023 emphasizes transparency in skills attainment and the use of short-term, stackable credentials as levers of equity. By awarding credentials midjourney and maximizing learning mobility, a call from the LEARN Commission—not just at degree completion—Founder’s College signals value to students, employers and families at every step.

    Taken together, these frameworks make Founder’s College not just a local response to Indiana’s challenges, but a globally informed model tuned to the future of work.

    Founder’s College directly widens the workforce pipeline—by lowering the cost barrier, embedding workforce credentials and signaling to families that college is not just accessible, but immediately useful.

    Founder’s students in student center

    A Case Study and a Challenge

    Across the United States, demographic and migration patterns are reshaping where and how higher education demand will grow. The U.S. South, with its younger, more racially and ethnically diverse populations and steady in-migration, stands poised to lead the nation in enrollment growth through 2035. In contrast, much of the Midwest faces different headwinds: smaller cohorts of college-age students, declining K–12 enrollments and out-migration of young families.

    Rather than a simple story of winners and losers, this shift underscores the divergent opportunities that regions face. In the South, higher education systems will need to expand capacity, affordability and culturally responsive pathways that meet the aspirations of new, more diverse learners. In the Midwest, the challenge is not only to stabilize enrollment but to re-engage adults with some college, no credential and to strengthen the link between education and regional economic renewal.

    Nationally, forecasts for the next decade suggest that the future of higher education will depend on how well institutions adapt to a shrinking pool of traditional-age learners while expanding access for new groups, including working adults and first-generation students. Recruitment, funding models and program design will need to evolve accordingly.

    Using the 2020 U.S. Census as a baseline, when 43 percent of Americans identified as people of color and more than half of minors identified as nonwhite, it’s clear that the next generation of university-bound students will be more multiracial and more globally connected than ever before. Their appetite for education will be shaped by digital fluency, early exposure to STEM and environmental learning, and a social consciousness steeped in sustainability, mental health and civic responsibility.

    For Indiana, where college-going rates are at historic lows, this is more than institutional innovation. Founder’s College is therefore both a case study and a challenge.

    • To other universities: Reimagine the traditional degree in ways that speak to today’s students and employers.
    • To states: Invest in models that don’t just get more students in the door, but get them to good jobs, faster.
    • And to students themselves: Butler is showing you that higher education is within reach, aligned with your life and positions you for thriving success.

    As Merisotis wrote, the future belongs to institutions that make degrees more valuable. Indiana may have just found its vanguard.

    Source link

  • Transparency Now or Regulation Later

    Transparency Now or Regulation Later

    Doctors predicted Wayne Frederick, the president of Howard University, wouldn’t live past 8. Now he’s 54. Frederick came to the U.S. from Trinidad and Tobago with a dream of finding a cure for his disease, sickle cell anemia, but detoured into higher ed administration.

    At an event hosted by the American Council on Education at Howard University this week, Frederick said CRISPR gene editing, a technology developed in academia, made his dream a reality. Finding cures to debilitating diseases is one of “the intangible things that higher ed does to change lives,” he said.

    Higher ed has changed lives in thousands of other ways; institutions are the largest employers in 10 states; colleges have helped regenerate many of America’s Rust Belt centers. Higher education is undeniably a public good. But as concerns grow about the affordability of college, do Americans care?

    In the ACE event’s discussion about the economic impact of higher ed, Alex Ricci, president of the National Council on Higher Education Resources, pointed out that despite college’s role in local and regional economies, the debate about the value of higher ed comes down to whether one thinks the benefit to the individual is greater than to society as a whole. “Many colleges and universities see themselves as a benefit shared broadly by society. Most Americans—especially those carrying thousands of dollars in student loan debt—see it as a transaction where the individual is the primary beneficiary or victim, depending on the student’s long-term outcomes,” he said.

    Regardless of whether you think higher ed is a public or private good, institutions are losing the value debate. In recorded remarks for the discussion, Representative Burgess Owens, a Utah Republican, chairman of the House subcommittee on higher education and workforce development, said, “Higher education should be about value, not just prestige.” He also presided over the “No More Surprises: Reforming College Pricing for Students and Families” hearing last month where lawmakers examined ways to make college costs more transparent.

    The lack of transparency on the cost of college can be life-altering for students and poses existential risks for colleges. Inside Higher Ed’s 2025 student survey found that three-fourths of the 5,000 respondents encountered some surprises in the cost of their education. These surprises can derail education journeys. One in five students said that an unexpected expense of $500 to $1,000 would threaten their ability to persist. Bad surprises also harm colleges: Students say that the lack of affordability is the biggest driver of declining public trust in higher education.

    College cost transparency has been a government priority since the Obama administration, but never has public trust in higher ed been so low or institutions so vulnerable to government overreach. Republican lawmakers have seized on the problem of college affordability and cost transparency and are looking for bipartisan solutions. In May, Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, introduced the Understanding the True Cost of College Act 2025, which calls for standardization of financial aid offers so students understand in simple terms what the direct costs, indirect costs and net price of college will be. Last month the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions formally requested information from the sector on ways to improve transparency, lower costs and ensure a college degree is valuable to students.

    Some colleges sense the urgency of the moment and are taking action on affordability. More are offering free tuition to households earning as much as $200,000 a year. Last month Whitworth University made a radical decision to stop tuition discounting and decrease its annual sticker price from $54,000 to $26,900. At the same time, a recent study found that tuition discounting is on the rise among public four-year institutions. But tuition discounts create more confusion around the true cost of college.

    A reasonable question to ask is: Why are only 730 colleges members of the College Cost Transparency Initiative? If higher ed stakeholders wanted to win the value debate, they would listen to lawmakers—and students and their families—and act on affordability and cost transparency. Otherwise, policymakers will do it for them. By demonstrating their impact for individual students, colleges can make a compelling case for their broader societal value.

    Source link

  • U.S. Continues Decline in THE World University Rankings

    U.S. Continues Decline in THE World University Rankings

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | bingdian, cbarnesphotography and DNY59/iStock/Getty Images

    Even before U.S. universities lost billions of dollars in federal research funding and international students struggled to obtain visas, America’s dominance in research impact and global reputation was waning. According to the latest rankings from Times Higher Education, the U.S. has continued to cede influence to universities in Asia.

    For several years, the rankings from Inside Higher Ed’s parent company have documented a steady decline in the U.S.’s leadership in global higher education. The 2026 World University Rankings reflect that ongoing trend: Just 102 universities from the United States cracked the top 500—the lowest figure on record, down from a high of 125 in 2018. (The rankings started in 2004.)

    The downward trend is less apparent in the overall top 10, where seven U.S. institutions appear. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is the highest-ranking American institution, coming in at No. 2, just behind the top-ranked University of Oxford. According to THE, Princeton University recorded an institutional best score to tie for third.

    But institutions farther down the list have slipped. Twenty-five colleges logged their worst-ever scores while 62 dropped in the rankings, which uses 18 measures to judge institutions on five areas including teaching, research quality and international outlook.

    The 2026 rankings of more than 2,100 institutions are based on data collected from 2022 and 2023 and don’t reflect the Trump administration’s push to reshape American higher education. They don’t show what impact cuts to research funding and the crackdown on international students might have on U.S. institutions’ position on the global stage. Those changes could lead to a further decline for U.S. institutions in the rankings, though Ellie Bothwell, THE rankings editor, said what future rankings might show is hard to predict.

    “Any country that cuts research funding, that limits internationalization of higher education, would be in danger of declining in the ranking,” she said. “Those are key things that we measure. Those are important things that universities do. There’s always going to be a risk if you cut those. There’ll be a decline, but it’s all relative, so it does also depend what goes on elsewhere.”

    Looking at the overall 2026 rankings, Bothwell called the decline for the U.S. “striking,” adding that the drop reflects increased global competition. American institutions on average received lower scores on measures related to research, such as citation impact, as well as research strength and reputation.

    Meanwhile, Asian universities continue to climb the rankings. Five universities from China are now in the top 40, and 18 achieved their highest ranks ever, according to THE.

    THE’s chief global affairs officer, Phil Baty, said in a statement that the latest data suggests higher ed is moving toward a new world order with an Eastern center of gravity.

    “This year’s rankings highlight a dramatic and accelerating trend—the shift in the balance of power in research and higher education excellence from the long-established, dominant institutions of the West to rising stars of the East,” Baty said.

    He predicted that U.S. institutions and those in Western Europe would continue to lose ground to their East Asian counterparts in the rankings. “This clear trend is set to persist as research funding and international talent attraction continue to be stymied in the West,” he added.

    Source link

  • What over 5,000 transnational education students and staff told us about their digital experiences

    What over 5,000 transnational education students and staff told us about their digital experiences

    This guest blog was kindly authored by Dr Tabetha Newman, CEO and Senior Researcher at Timmus Research and Elizabeth Newall, Senior Sector Specialist at Jisc.

    Transnational education (TNE) is the delivery of UK higher education qualifications in countries other than the UK, allowing students to study for a UK degree without relocating to the UK. It can take various forms, including distance learning, overseas branch campuses, joint degrees, and partnerships with local institutions.

    In July, we asked a simple but pressing question in a HEPI blog: Who’s listening to the TNE student experience? With rising UK TNE student numbers and an increasingly competitive global education landscape, the quality of the TNE experience is central to the success of UK higher education abroad.

    Over the past three years, Jisc has been listening. Our research has focused on better understanding the digital experience of both international students (those travelling to the UK to study), and TNE students (those who study for a UK Higher Education award overseas), along with the staff who teach them. What we’ve found challenges assumptions and highlights the complexity of delivering equitable learning experiences across digital borders.

    The known challenges

    In July, Jisc published its first TNE report, drawing on HESA’s most recent international and TNE student data, and describing four digital challenges to global education delivery that UK providers and sector leaders already recognise:

    1. Connectivity and access to devices and technology.
    2. Access to digital resources such as online platforms, software, e-books and e-journals.
    3. Cultural differences in how digital is used to support teaching and learning.
    4. The digital skills of students and staff.

    These challenges are not new, but what’s been missing is a deeper understanding of how they present in real life, across different countries, contexts, and modes of delivery.

    Listening to lived experience

    This month Jisc launches its second TNE report, based on the feedback gathered in partnership with 19 UK higher education providers of over 5,000 students and staff in 51 instances of TNE in over 30 countries. Insights were gathered from all forms of teaching delivery, from fully online to classroom-based.

    The report provides the sector with vital detail on lived experiences of students and staff in relation to the four known digital challenges listed above. They reveal not just the presence of digital challenges, but the nuances of how they’re experienced, and how they shape access and engagement. The feedback also identified:

    • Differences in connectivity and access by country and global region.
    • How digital is used to support teaching and learning in different learning course contexts.
    • Digital challenges as identified by fly-in, remote and host country staff, and what additional support and training is required
    • Feedback in relation to themes such as internationalising and localising curricula, assessment, and use of GenAI.

    Rethinking Delivery

    These insights prompt a difficult but necessary question: are global learners accessing UK TNE as intended?

    The answer in many cases is no. UK qualifications retain global recognition, yet Jisc’s findings challenge us to rethink delivery: high-quality education loses impact if TNE students and staff are unable to access or engage with it as planned.

    Key issues identified include:

    • Connectivity and availability of equipment: TNE students’ ability to study online is shaped, not just by when they want to learn, but when they can connect. Access to a reliable electricity supply; availability of free Wi-Fi; small versus large screen device use; and reliance on cellular data (at personal cost) varies significantly between countries and global areas.
    • Access to digital resources and learning materials: Global digital resource access is heavily influenced by publisher and software licensing restrictions, national regulations and infrastructure gaps which vary from country to country.  Students frequently cite difficulties using online resources, and express frustration with time-limited access and high data costs.
    • Cultural differences in digital educational practice: Teaching practice differs between countries and cultures, notably in relation to expectations of independent study, feedback and collaboration. Students’ prior experience and expectations related to digital learning can vary as a result.  
    • Digital skills and capabilities: Confidence in digital skills varies by learning mode, with online or distance learners receiving the least guidance. Unclear or conflicting guidance around the use of digital tools such as AI is identified as a concern for both students and staff.

    What needs to change?

    The report doesn’t just give voice to lived experiences, it provides practical recommendations for HE providers and policymakers. These are broken into topics including:

    • Digital resource planning with global access in mind.
    • Curriculum design and delivery for diverse learning contexts.
    • Communicating clearly with TNE students.
    • Staff training and support.
    • Digital capabilities development across all modes of delivery.

    Importantly, the report responds to recent calls for greater transparency in TNE student experience data by providing a publicly accessible source of student voice – inviting the sector to engage, reflect, and act.

    Sector voices

    The response from sector leaders has been enthusiastic and deeply thoughtful.

    Griff Ryan, Head of TNE at Universities UK International, welcomed the report, commenting:

    Recent years have seen significant progress in understanding the experiences of TNE students, and this report continues that trend… With findings broken down by global region and mode of delivery, the report offers valuable guidance for universities and policymakers alike… This report is a timely and practical resource for institutions looking to strengthen their TNE offer. I’d like to thank Jisc and the 19 contributing universities for their work, and I look forward to the conversations and actions it will help to shape.

    Professor Dibyesh Anand, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Global Engagement and Employability), University of Westminster reminds us that:

    Transnational education is meant to spread the benefits and cultures of internationalised education, and to an extent, ‘democratise’ it, around the world. Yet, this important report is a sobering reminder that inequities prevent a uniform experience with TNE. Therefore, universities need to be mindful about having understanding, resources, and processes to challenge inequities, provide consistency while accepting healthy differences, and encourage an inclusive education.

    Professor David Carter, Dean of Teaching and Leaning at the University of Reading, and author of the November 2024 HEPI report The student experience of transnational education, highlights the importance of challenging our assumptions:

    This is one of the largest and most comprehensive pieces of research into the student experience of UK transnational education. Behind the responses and the insights lies a huge variety of student and staff experience. The report brings several issues into much sharper focus. For UK providers, often the biggest challenge comes with our own assumptions. Things that we take for granted in the UK can be points of difference when it comes to TNE students. This includes everything, from how students access higher education to their attitudes to learning. A core skill for academic and professional staff who work in transnational education, therefore, is adaptability combined with respect for cultural differences. The recommendations in this report provide a useful toolkit for providers to use as they seek to expand TNE provision. It shows that there are clear gains to be made if UK providers work together to address common challenges.

    What’s next?

    Jisc’s TNE digital experience research is ongoing. We’ll continue working with providers to support more equitable digital learning and teaching, and we invite you to be part of that journey.

    To stay informed, sign up to the mailing list: ji.sc/stay-informed-isdx

    Source link

  • UC Berkeley Scientist Wins Nobel Prize for Chemistry

    UC Berkeley Scientist Wins Nobel Prize for Chemistry

    A chemist from the University of California, Berkeley, was among the trio of scientists awarded the Nobel Prize for Chemistry on Wednesday.

    Omar Yaghi, the Berkeley professor; Susumu Kitagawa from Kyoto University in Japan; and Richard Robson from the University of Melbourne in Australia were recognized for their work since the 1990s to develop a new form of molecular architecture that combines metal ions and carbon-based molecules, according to a release from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which administers the Nobel Prize.

    The metal-organic frameworks can harvest water or store toxic gases. The release noted that the frameworks “may contribute to solving some of humankind’s greatest challenges.”

    The release says the frameworks are essentially “rooms” because of the large spaces that form in the structure. A Nobel committee member compared it to Hermione Granger’s magical bag in the seventh Harry Potter book, the Associated Press reported. Her small bag eventually contained a tent, books and other provisions. Likewise, the frameworks look small but can hold a lot.

    Since the trio’s discoveries, more than 100,000 metal-organic frameworks have been created, according to a news release from Berkeley.

    Source link

  • Stop Labeling Students “First-Gen” (opinion)

    Stop Labeling Students “First-Gen” (opinion)

    New policy mandates force us to rethink how best to meet what the Boyer 2030 Commission termed “the equity-excellence imperative.” One way to pursue this goal is to consider the role played by first-generation student success initiatives, which continue to enjoy broad public support. In the current climate, higher ed may be forgiven a rush to establish centers or initiatives for first-generation student success, as many colleges and universities already have. But before we get to raising funds and creating logos, let’s pause and consider new ways to think about and organize such efforts to best meet the moment.

    To put it bluntly, what business is it of ours, or anyone’s, what a student’s parents’ educational attainment happens to be? The usual answer is that we inquire because we aim to foster upward social mobility, and because we know from research that students who are the first in their families to attend college do not succeed at the same cohort rates as so-called continuing-generation students. But I emphasize cohort rates because we are not talking about a group, defined by self-awareness and interaction, but indeed a cohort, defined by impersonal and ill-defined criteria. At the level of individuals and families, first-gen discourse presumes deficits, is intrusive and can be off-putting and condescending.

    Neither of your parents (you have two, right?) earned a bachelor’s degree?

    I’d venture that most who work with first-gen students would agree that there are enduring questions about how best to define who is and is not first-generation using one of several plausible definitions. And even after four decades of promotion, I think it’s fair to say that few students arrive on campus as self-conscious “first-gens,” however defined.

    Some imagine that they qualify if they are the first of their siblings to attend college. Others wonder, understandably, if a parent’s associate degree or years of college attendance not resulting in degree attainment substitutes for an earned bachelor’s degree. A few may even think, erroneously, that they qualify if they are the first in their family to attend a particular institution.

    And then there are the overriding problems of stigma and stereotype threat. Efforts to dispel negative connotations and instill pride notwithstanding—First!—most people can smell a rat when in the presence of Rodentia. While some minoritized students may find it a useful alternative to other, more vexing labels, many students wrestle with it, as they might with any label, especially in the absence of a related scholarship or other inducement. I used to regularly tell first-gens that the land-grant university to which they had matriculated was theirs, that it was made for them and that it was nice of them to let others use it, too. But such tricks of the trade are needed only because the reality, often stark, is so contrary.

    Instead of fighting a Sisyphean battle tainted by class bias, I suggest that we acknowledge that first-gen discourse defines students by a characteristic that is out of their control and that the label is troubling when applied to individual students. Consider that we have more control over almost every other way of identifying ourselves, including our gender and sexuality! Parents, guardians and other parental authorities are as close to a given as it gets, and to define one by a given is reductionist and objectifying.

    To help underscore the stakes involved, consider this thought experiment. What if we labeled students whose parents possess earned doctorates as “dockies” and awarded them membership in the honors program? Most would recoil at even the thought of it. We assume that dockies are privileged or at least not in need of privileged access to scarce resources. We imagine them as possessed of abundant social and cultural capital and a healthy amount of regular old capital, too. Why actively reproduce privilege?

    But let us immediately observe that such assumptions are just as potentially ill-founded for individual dockies as they are for individual first-gens. Ask a Ph.D.-holding parent of a neurodiverse child, of a drug-addicted child, a child with disabilities, a child prone to perfectionism, a child of mild ambition and so forth, and they are apt to share an earful. And let us acknowledge that dockies are often given access to scarce resources such as merit-based scholarships and extra help via supportive honors programs, and for legitimate reasons. For one, these students earn such considerations by virtue of their academic achievement. They also may need them to fulfill their considerable potential.

    The key distinction, then, is between how we relate to students as individuals and what we do to make our institutional practices and campus cultures accessible and just. But before saying more about that, I acknowledge that there is an entrenched cultural assumption in play. We hold that individuals are infinitely complex and of universal value, each unique and sacred. (I mean this exactly and empirically; no rhetorical flourish or exaggeration is involved.) Individual students are not, in this view, bearers of three or four defining categories, nor should we treat them as representatives of groups. That is called stereotypical thinking, and it leads to tokenism, and neither stereotypical thinking nor tokenism have ever been good things. Students have multiple identities, as we all do, and we should not presume which of them are most salient or assume that they are immutable or invariant.

    When, however, we turn attention to institutional and cultural realities—particularly to our college and university’s policies and practices, to campus values, norms and built environment and so forth—then, yes, by all means, dust off social science and humanities textbooks and deploy concepts, data and pertinent humanistic discourses that are needed to make sense of systems, contested histories, shared meanings and the like. Here is where centers for first-generation student success have their rightful place, as hubs for institutional reform, designed to bring into existence a higher education that meets students where they are, as we say.

    First-gen centers might support research into how students experience college life and in other ways help faculty, staff, administrators and graduate students working with undergraduate students to better understand and interact with them. (Three cheers for faculty meals in residence halls!) First-gen centers might facilitate integration of high-impact practices into curricula, rendering these no-longer-nice-to-haves affordable and accessible, and help banish class biases as revealed in diffuse condescension by the college-educated and well-heeled with respect to those thus othered and belittled. Let us put an end to arcane language used for the latent purpose of policing class distinctions and eliminate barriers of entry to STEM majors, which track already underresourced students into lower-paying professions, however otherwise socially vital and personally fulfilling.

    Colleges and universities cannot meet their missions in a democratic society unless they are shorn of institutionalized discrimination rooted in white supremacy, patriarchy, what the poet Adrienne Rich called “compulsory heterosexuality,” ableism, ageism, as well as discrimination against veterans and active-duty armed service members, students whose home countries are not the United States or for whom English is not their first language, students from rural communities, students from urban communities, students from tribal communities, students from foster homes, students who are first-gen as well as students who identify with one or more of the above and then some. Our to-do list is long and varied.

    First-gen discourse is, like most student success discourse, best suited for use by administrators. It is not usually the language of educators, nor should we foist it upon students themselves. To best aid students who are the first in their families to attend college, make higher education affordable, campuses welcoming, curricula efficient and effective. Facilitate transfer student success via inter-institutional peer tutoring, and in myriad similar ways remove the fences surrounding the ol’ ball field in the DEI social imaginary. Higher education may then serve the people, one individual at a time.

    Steven P. Dandaneau is an associate professor of sociology at Colorado State University. He is a former advisory board member for the Center for First-Generation Student Success, an initiative of NASPA: Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education and the Suder Foundation, and was recognized as a First Scholars First Generation Champion in 2018.

    Source link

  • Economic Uncertainty Spurred Campus Cuts in September

    Economic Uncertainty Spurred Campus Cuts in September

    Judging from the widespread job and program cuts announced last month, higher education continues to face economic uncertainty on multiple fronts, from declining enrollment to federal funding issues.

    September saw layoffs, program cuts and other budget moves at a mix of institutions. While some of the institutions listed below are regional universities battered by declining enrollment, others are among the nation’s wealthiest; they pointed to federal research funding cuts, soaring endowment taxes and other factors as the impetus for recent cutbacks.

    Here’s a look at cost-cutting measures announced across the higher ed sector last month.

    Washington University in St. Louis

    One of the nation’s wealthiest universities is laying off hundreds of employees.

    WashU chancellor Andrew Martin announced last month that the private university had cut 316 staff positions and closed another 198 vacant roles as part of an effort to restructure or reduce budgets. He wrote that the cuts, which extend to WashU’s Medical Campus, total “more than $52 million in annual savings.”

    The chancellor cited both external and internal pressures.

    “These include the changing needs of our students, emerging technologies, and innovations in teaching and learning,” Martin wrote. “Others come from internal decisions and structures that have, over time, created ineffective processes and redundancies in the way we operate. In addition, we’re still facing significant uncertainty about potentially drastic reductions in federal research funding.”

    Uncertainty over federal research funding looms even as the university has lobbied heavily on Capitol Hill. Among individual institutions, WashU has been one of the top spenders on higher education lobbying this year, pumping $540,000 into those efforts across the first two quarters. (Third-quarter lobbying numbers are not yet available.)

    Despite a $12 billion endowment, WashU follows well-resourced peers, including Johns Hopkins, Northwestern and Stanford Universities, in enacting steep layoffs.

    Brown University

    Squeezed by a budget deficit and reeling from a battle with the Trump administration over allegations of antisemitism that included a temporary federal research funding freeze and ended with the university making concessions, Brown is laying off 48 employees and axing 55 vacant jobs.

    The cost-cutting measure comes after the Ivy League institution in Rhode Island already eliminated “approximately 90 mostly vacant positions” earlier this year, according to an announcement from senior administrators. Following the cuts, Brown is walking back freezes on hiring, travel and discretionary spending.

    Officials announced they plan to monetize “non-strategic real estate holdings” and pause “spending on plans to move the University to net-zero emissions,” among other efforts, including “prioritizing fundraising for current-use gifts that have an immediate positive budgetary impact.”

    Brown is among the nation’s wealthiest universities, with an endowment valued at $7.2 billion.

    University of Oregon

    Grappling with a budget deficit of more than $25 million, the public flagship announced plans to lay off 60 employees and close another 59 vacant positions, The Oregonian reported.

    The move comes after the university cut dozens of jobs earlier this year.

    “Through careful consultation with deans, department heads and the University Senate, we were able to substantially close our budget deficit without eliminating any degree programs,” UO senior officials wrote last month. “And while we are cutting 20 filled career faculty positions and 14 unfilled tenure track faculty positions, we are not eliminating any filled tenure track faculty positions.”

    Berklee College of Music

    College leaders cited “rising costs, a dynamic enrollment environment, and shifting national policies” in announcing the layoffs of 70 employees at the storied music school last month.

    The layoffs reportedly amount to 3 percent of the Berklee College of Music workforce and include employees on campuses in Massachusetts, New York and Spain, according to Boston.com. Of the 70 employees laid off, all were staff members and no faculty jobs were cut.

    Southern Oregon University

    After declaring financial exigency in July, officials finalized a plan at the public university in Ashland to cut $10 million in operating costs over four years, Jefferson Public Radio reported.

    The cuts will reportedly affect 70 faculty and staff jobs, though not all are currently filled. In addition to layoffs and the elimination of vacant jobs, the university also plans to scale back programs by cutting 10 majors—including chemistry and mathematics—and dropping a dozen minors.

    University of Arizona

    The public university in Tucson is cutting 43 jobs after Congress eliminated funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, The Arizona Daily Star reported.

    The program, known as SNAP-Ed for short, was removed from the federal budget earlier this year. Termination of the program cut off about $6 million in annual funds to the university to provide education-related services, faculty members told the newspaper.

    Arizona’s job cuts come as the university recently managed to zero out a $177 million deficit that administrators discovered in late 2023, which prompted sweeping cost-cutting measures.

    University of Louisiana at Lafayette

    The public university eliminated six jobs and closed the Office of Sustainability and Community Engagement last month as it navigates a $25 million deficit, The Acadiana Advocate reported.

    Other offices were restructured.

    The newspaper reported that officials have already identified $15 million in cuts to help close the deficit. Most divisions across the university will be required to reduce operational expenses by 10 percent.

    Cuyahoga Community College

    Following other public institutions in Ohio, CCC is axing 30 associate degree programs in low-enrollment areas, as mandated by Senate Bill 1, which the State Legislature passed earlier this year, Signal Cleveland reported.

    The cuts, announced last month, include a mix of programs ranging from advanced manufacturing to creative arts. Multiple apprenticeship programs are also being shut down.

    East Carolina University

    Officials at the public university in Greenville announced plans last month to cut $25 million from the budget amid declining enrollment and other factors, The Triangle Business Journal reported.

    Belt-tightening measures will be implemented over three years and will include “permanent reductions, academic program optimization, and organizational adjustments,” ECU officials announced last month. Administrators did not specify the number of potential layoffs ahead.

    Yale University

    Increased taxes and federal funding uncertainty are driving cost-cutting measures at the Ivy League university in Connecticut, where officials last month announced retirement incentives to eligible faculty as the university braces for an 8 percent tax on endowment income.

    Yale is one of the few universities with a multibillion-dollar endowment that will feel the tax at its highest level. The increase is a significant jump from the prior endowment tax of 1.4 percent.

    The university is also delaying major construction projects, among other money-saving moves.

    Source link