Tag: effect

  • 11 numbers that capture the Trump effect on education

    11 numbers that capture the Trump effect on education

    by Sarah Butrymowicz, The Hechinger Report
    December 18, 2025

    About 1.5 million people teach on college campuses in the United States, and nearly 4 million teachers work in its public elementary and secondary schools. More than 15 million undergraduates attend U.S. colleges and universities. There are more than 50 million school-age children across the country.   

    They all have one thing in common: Federal education policy affects their lives. 

    President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon say they want to close the Department of Education and return control of education to the states. At the same time, however, they have aggressively, and rapidly, wielded federal power over schools. 

    Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education. 

    Here’s a look at some key data points from the first year of Trump’s second term that represent the outsized effect this presidency has had on the nation’s educational institutions and the people within them.

    — 15 —

    Number of executive orders Trump signed that exclusively address colleges or schools 

    In 2017, the first year of his first term, Trump signed two executive orders related to education. This year, he signed three times that number on just a single day in April.

    Among his most notable executive orders was one early in his term requiring the Department of Education to begin dismantling itself. He also established an Artificial Intelligence Education Task Force and asked cabinet members to provide him with a plan to end “radical indoctrination” in schools. Other executive orders have addressed school discipline, transgender athletes, registered apprenticeships and foreign influence on college campuses. 

    Another set of executive orders indirectly affected schools. For instance, the Department of Education interpreted an order about undocumented immigrants to require limiting access to some adult and career and technical education programs. And separately, in a presidential memorandum, Trump ordered universities to begin reporting the race of their applicants and admitted students, not just those who enroll in the fall. 

    — 26 —

    Number of investigations into K-12 transgender policies announced by the Education Department

    At the K-12 level, the administration has given no issue more attention than policies that govern which bathrooms, locker rooms and sports teams transgender students can access. In all, the department has announced at least 26 such investigations, including into six state education agencies and three statewide athletic associations. 

    By comparison, the Trump administration announced eight investigations into antisemitism at elementary and secondary schools and four cases of alleged racial discrimination that hurts white teachers or students. 

    In higher education, it’s the inverse: Just five investigations into transgender issues have been announced, while dozens of cases of antisemitism and racial discrimination are being investigated. 

    — 50+ —

    Number of education-specific lawsuits filed against the Trump administration

    It’s not unusual for presidential administrations to be sued: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton brags about suing the Biden administration 100 times. But the first year of Trump’s second term has been marked by unprecedented legal activity related to his administration’s education actions, according to a review of court documents and other lawsuit trackers. Trump, McMahon and the Department of Education have been sued over efforts to fire employees and dismantle the department, freeze funding and cancel grants, and end diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.

    The administration’s track record defending itself in court has been mixed, but it scored a major victory when the Supreme Court allowed its March layoffs of hundreds of Education Department staffers. However, courts have blocked some efforts to ban diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, forced the federal government to pay out some once-frozen grants and allowed Harvard to continue enrolling foreign students. 

    — 1,950 —

    Number of employees who left the Department of Education in the spring

    When Trump took office, the Education Department had more than 4,100 employees. Soon after, those numbers started dropping. In the first seven weeks of the new administration, 572 staffers voluntarily resigned. In March, 1,378 more employees were let go. Many offices were decimated without a clear plan for how or if their work would continue. 

    The National Center for Education Statistics, for example, went from about 100 staffers to three. That office is responsible for collecting data on the nation’s schools and colleges and administering the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Or take the Office for Civil Rights, which is in charge of investigating complaints about civil rights violations, including sexual harassment, racial discrimination and failure to provide an adequate education to students with disabilities. Seven of its 11 regional offices were shuttered and, in all, it lost nearly half its staff. (In December, some of those staffers were temporarily called back to help reduce a backlog of cases.) 

    The administration notified another 466 employees they were being let go during the government shutdown in October. Those positions were reinstated, however, as part of a congressional deal to reopen the government. The department also launched a plan to move large swathes of its work to other agencies, including the departments of Labor, State and Health and Human Services. 

    The Education Department did not respond to several requests for information about how many people are working at the agency now.

    — 5 — 

    Number of regional Head Start offices closed

    As part of the administration’s sweeping reductions in force, five out of 10 regional Head Start offices were abruptly closed and all employees fired in April. The offices, all in blue states, help oversee the free child care services provided by local early education programs for low-income children. In all, the five offices had been responsible for oversight of 318,000 — or 44 percent — of Head Start slots. 

    That wasn’t the only upheaval Head Start programs faced this year. At the end of January, the Trump administration directed agencies to temporarily freeze federal funding for thousands of financial assistance programs, including Head Start. Soon after, the White House said the program was exempt, and later it withdrew the order altogether. (A federal judge eventually ruled the entire directive was illegal.) But dozens of centers serving more than 20,000 children reported weeks-long delays in accessing federal money, with some forced to close temporarily. Then, during the government shutdown in the fall, centers serving 9,000 kids had to close their doors, some for several weeks, according to tracking by the First Five Years Fund.

    — 17% — 

    Decline in new international student enrollment in fall 2025

    The Trump administration’s attacks on foreign students with political views it disliked made international headlines this spring, as it targeted students protesting the Israel-Hamas war for deportation and announced plans to scour the social media accounts of new visa applicants. It also imposed travel restrictions and delayed some processing of student visas. The result is a slower pipeline of new foreign students coming to the United States, according to data from the Institute of International Education.

    The decrease in new international students was driven by graduate students, whose enrollment declined most sharply. But because most returning students stuck with their U.S. education plans, the overall number of foreign students (including those engaged in jobs related to future or past higher education enrollment) ticked down just 1 percent. Still, that’s a big deal for colleges and universities: Graduate students make up the lionʼs share of international enrollment and are a major source of revenue for many colleges. International students typically do not get financial aid, paying full price to attend. 

    — $1,700 —

    Maximum tax break an individual can get for donating to school choice scholarships

    Trump’s signature legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, was a major win for school choice advocates: It created a new federal school voucher program. The law sets up tax credit scholarships — vouchers — families can use to pay for private school tuition, tutoring or other educational expenses. Parents will also be able to use the money to cover homeschooling costs. Starting in 2027, individuals can get a tax credit of up to $1,700 for donations to nonprofits that provide the scholarships. Those nonprofits, in turn, will be in charge of handing out the money. 

    States must opt in if they want schools within their respective borders to be able to participate. At least three states so far have said they will decline, but more than 20 others have already established their own tax credit scholarship programs and are expected to sign up when the federal option becomes available. 

    — 6,353 —

    Number of complaints the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights dismissed between mid-March and mid-September

    In one six-month stretch, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights dismissed more than 6,000 complaints without an investigation, according to a September court filing. By contrast, the Biden administration did the same with 2,527 cases in its final three months. 

    The Trump administration has said in court filings it is following longstanding policies for dismissing cases. Former employees and advocates counter that the jump in dismissals suggests student and parent complaints are not being adequately probed, and that layoffs are affecting an agency that has long struggled to keep up with its caseload. 

    The rate at which the Trump administration reaches a final resolution in the cases it does investigate has significantly slowed. Between mid-March and mid-September, OCR resolved 581 complaints through mediated settlements, voluntary agreements or technical assistance. Another 138 were resolved after an investigation did not find evidence of violations. Those numbers are roughly the same as the last three months of the Biden administration (595 and 119 respectively).

    — $153 million —

    Amount of grant money the administration is spending to promote civics education 

    The Education Department said in September it gave more than $153 million to 85 grantees to work on civics education. That’s a major increase: Since this grant program launched in 2017, just 38 grants worth about $75 million had been awarded in all. 

    Promoting patriotic education is one of McMahon’s goals. “Patriotic education presents American history in a way that is accurate, honest, and inspiring,” her agency said in a September announcement prioritizing discretionary spending on this issue. “It emphasizes a unifying and uplifting portrayal of the nation’s founding ideals.” 

    McMahon also started the America 250 Civics Education Coalition, in preparation for next year’s anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The coalition is made up largely of conservative organizations including Turning Point USA, Moms for Liberty, Hillsdale College and Priests for Life. 

    — $5.8 billion —

    Minimum amount of federal research funding cut or frozen

    Federal research dollars, many of which flow to colleges and universities, were cut way back this year. It’s difficult to calculate exactly how much was lost; this money comes from many agencies and some remains mired in legal battles. The website Grant Witness, run by a group of researchers, tracks canceled or frozen grants. Its data shows that more than $5.1 billion in National Institutes of Health money that had yet to be spent was earmarked for colleges or universities, as was nearly $700 million from the National Science Foundation. (Some of that funding may have been restored.)

    Those agencies were two of the largest sources of federal grants to higher education, but not the only ones. More than $425 million in National Endowment for the Humanities grants, many of which are awarded to colleges, were canceled. (Those cuts were later found to be unlawful.) The Department of Agriculture canceled tens of millions of dollars in higher education research funding, and the Environmental Protection Agency also terminated such grants. 

    The picture doesn’t look better for year two of Trump’s term: The White House has proposed cutting all federal research funding by a third — a decrease of more than $33 billion from 2025. 

    — 0 —

    Number of colleges that have signed the Trump ‘Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education’

    The Trump administration has been aggressive in trying to bend higher education to its will. In October, officials reached out to nine universities, including some of the country’s most selective institutions, with a deal. The schools could be first in line for federal money if they agreed to a litany of demands including: 

    • Publishing standardized test scores for admitted students by race, sex and ethnicity
    • Capping foreign student enrollment at 15 percent
    • Prohibiting transgender females from using women’s locker rooms and bathrooms 
    • Freezing tuition for five years

    So far, none have accepted the offer, with seven universities rejecting it outright. The University of Texas at Austin and Vanderbilt University did not publicly rebuke the compact, but did not sign it. New College of Florida, which was not one of the nine, said it would sign if given the chance. Other universities signed separate agreements with the administration to unfreeze federal money. Columbia University, for example, paid $221 million and accepted a host of conditions to regain access to billions of federal dollars. 

    Contact investigations editor Sarah Butrymowicz at [email protected] or on Signal: @sbutry.04.

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

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/11-numbers-that-capture-the-trump-effect-on-education/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

    <img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=113911&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/11-numbers-that-capture-the-trump-effect-on-education/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • “Happiness Effect” of Higher Ed “Fades in Richer Places”

    “Happiness Effect” of Higher Ed “Fades in Richer Places”

    In recent decades, the extra money that graduates earn has been touted as a good reason to attend university. But that has recently come under scrutiny with evidence suggesting the graduate premium has fallen.

    And now two separate papers have found that another supposed benefit of higher education—increased lifetime happiness—is also not quite as straightforward as thought.

    A new study, which analyzed data from 36 countries, reveals that both higher education graduates and the rest of the population experience a steady increase in well-being as a country’s social and economic prosperity gradually improves.

    However, the well-being gains associated with higher education were found to “level off” when a country becomes more economically developed.

    Therefore, the paper argues that graduates in countries with lower GDP per capita experience greater relative gains in terms of economic security, social mobility, higher social status and life satisfaction—leading to a higher sense of well-being.

    In contrast, the “happiness advantage” of a university degree in countries with a higher GDP per capita is less pronounced.

    The paper suggests that stress and dissatisfaction can be caused by rising expectations, increased competition and a “relentless emphasis on achievement,” particularly among highly educated individuals.

    “Highly educated individuals in more prosperous countries are generally much happier than their counterparts in less prosperous countries, although they may be less happy than less educated individuals within their own country,” writes author Samitha Udayanga, a doctoral candidate at the University of Bremen.

    This suggests that the happiness derived from higher education tends to weaken in wealthier countries, he adds.

    A separate study published in June found that the level of happiness associated with completing college has quadrupled since the mid-1970s.

    The study of over 35,000 people in the U.S. showed that higher education has shifted over this time from contributing to happiness through occupations to improving wages.

    The “happiness return” of higher education increased over the 45 years of the study and remains higher than the happiness linked to not studying for a degree.

    But the researchers discovered it “nosedived” in 2021–22 during the COVID-19 pandemic. And satisfaction linked to postgraduate degrees has stalled since the 2000s.

    “University graduates in contemporary America have a certain chance of gaining monetary rewards [by] bypassing occupations, resulting in a relatively higher probability of feeling happy,” they said. “Meanwhile, the same mechanism rarely operates for advanced degree holders, whose happiness largely depends on their occupational attainment.”

    The paper concludes that the overall happiness premium for higher education at both the undergraduate and postgraduate level may “vanish once their economic rewards become less pronounced.”

    Source link

  • New COPPA Rule to take effect in June

    New COPPA Rule to take effect in June

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Updates to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule are to take effect on June 23, but companies have until April 22, 2026, to fully comply, according to the amended final rule published by the Federal Trade Commission earlier this week.
    • It remained unclear for months when — or if — the expanded COPPA Rule would go into effect after the FTC announced the finalized changes in January, just four days before President Donald Trump would be inaugurated.  
    • Though the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act itself does not explicitly mention schools, the updated rule will impact how K-12 leaders interact with ed tech companies, according to student data privacy experts.

    Dive Insight:

    COPPA is a 26-year-old federal law that gives parents control over the data that websites can collect from children ages 13 or younger. Its regulations and enforcement are overseen by the FTC, which is required by law to review the COPPA Rule every five years.  

    One of the key changes in the latest COPPA Rule is that companies must obtain parental consent before using children’s data for targeted advertising or disclosing their information to third parties, according to the April 22 notice published in the Federal Register. However, school districts are still allowed to give consent to ed tech companies in lieu of parental consent as long as that data is solely used for educational purposes and not commercially. 

    Schools should expect to see more transparency from ed tech companies, given that they are required under the new COPPA Rule to provide a direct notice to parents — or in this case school districts — about how they plan to collect and use children’s data upon receiving consent.

    The new rule also states that companies must put limits on retaining children’s data and cannot hold onto it indefinitely. Though the FTC did not specify a duration, it said companies can retain data “for only as long as is reasonably necessary to fulfill the specific purpose(s) for which the information was collected.”

    In another update, companies collecting children’s data have to bolster cybersecurity plans by, for instance, conducting annual risk assessments and implementing safeguards to protect children’s sensitive information. 

    The FTC also expanded its definition of any collected “personal information” to include biometric data such as facial recognition or fingerprints. Online contact information and government-issued IDs like Social Security numbers are also now considered personal information. 

    The updates come as companies increasingly try to profit off children’s data, the FTC said when announcing the finalized changes to the COPPA Rule in January.

    The new requirements also come as ed tech companies like PowerSchool have been targeted this year by cybersecurity incidents that have led to mass breaches of sensitive student data.

    Source link

  • The Effect of Employer Understanding and Engagement on Non-Degree Credentials

    The Effect of Employer Understanding and Engagement on Non-Degree Credentials

    The Effect of Employer Understanding and Engagement on Non-Degree Credentials Report

    Home >The Effect of Employer Understanding and Engagement on Non-Degree Credentials

    HoMore than 500 employers share their perceptions

    As the workforce evolves, many employers are considering the relevance and use of alternative credentials for upskilling or reskilling employees. This reimagining of workforce education provides an opportunity for higher ed leaders to partner with employers on microcredential programs that drive a funnel of enrollments.

    Collegis teamed up with UPCEA to survey more than 500 employers about their perceptions of microcredentials and interest in partnering with colleges and universities on these non-degree programs.

    Download the report to receive insights on:

    What incentivizes employers to work with higher ed institutions

    Employer valuation of alternative credentials

    Employer use of alternative credentials in lieu of degrees in the hiring process

    Download Now

    MktoForms2.loadForm(“//087-TII-060.mktoweb.com”, “087-TII-060”, 1548);

    Additional Resources

    Transform Challenges Into Opportunities 

    Facing challenges in enrollment, retention, or tech integration? Seeking growth in new markets? Our strategic insights pave a clear path for overcoming obstacles and driving success in higher education.

    Unlock the transformative potential within your institution – partner with us to turn today’s roadblocks into tomorrow’s achievements. Let’s chat.

    MktoForms2.loadForm(“//087-TII-060.mktoweb.com”, “087-TII-060″, 1022);

    // START Analytics scripts //////////////////////////////////
    function readCookie(name) {
    name += ‘=’;
    for (var ca = document.cookie.split(/;s*/), i = ca.length – 1; i >= 0; i–)
    if (!ca[i].indexOf(name)) return ca[i].replace(name, ”);
    }

    function PrepareCookieForRead() {
    var d = new Date();
    d.setTime(d.getTime() + 1800000);
    var expires = “expires=” + d.toGMTString();
    document.cookie = “idSession=1; ” + expires + “; path=/”;
    }

    function PlaceAnalyticsCookieValuesIntoForm() {
    PrepareCookieForRead();
    document.getElementsByName(“gAClientId”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_clientId”);
    document.getElementsByName(“gacampaign”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_campaign”);
    document.getElementsByName(“gasource”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_source”);
    document.getElementsByName(“gamedium”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_medium”);
    document.getElementsByName(“gacontent”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_content”);
    document.getElementsByName(“gaterm”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_term”);
    document.getElementsByName(“gagclid”)[0].value = readCookie(“ga_gclid”);
    }

    document.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”, function(){
    window.setTimeout(function(){
    PlaceAnalyticsCookieValuesIntoForm()
    }, 750);
    });

    // END Analytics Scripts //////////////////////////////////

    The post The Effect of Employer Understanding and Engagement on Non-Degree Credentials appeared first on Collegis Education.

    Source link

  • Effect of Institutional Autonomy on Academic Freedom in Higher Education Institutions in Ghana

    Effect of Institutional Autonomy on Academic Freedom in Higher Education Institutions in Ghana

    By Mohammed Bashiru and Professor Cai Yonghong

    Introduction

    The idea of institutional autonomy in higher education institutions (HEIs) naturally comes up when discussing academic freedom. These two ideas are connected, and the simplest way to define how they relate to one another is that they are intertwined through several procedures and agreements that link people, institutions, the state, and civil society. Academic freedom and institutional autonomy cannot be compared, but they also cannot be separated and the loss of one diminishes the other. Protecting academic freedom and institutional autonomy is viewed by academics as a crucial requirement for a successful HEI. For instance, institutional autonomy and academic freedom are widely acknowledged as essential for the optimization of university operations in most African nations.

    How does institutional autonomy influence academic freedom in higher education institutions in Ghana?

    In some countries, universities have been subject to government control, with appointments and administrative positions influenced by political interests, leading to violations of academic autonomy and freedom. Autonomy is a crucial element in safeguarding academic freedom, which requires universities to uphold the academic freedom of their community and for the state to respect the right to science of the broader community. Universities offer the necessary space for the exercise of academic freedom, and thus, institutional autonomy is necessary for its preservation. The violation of institutional autonomy undermines not only academic freedom but also the pillars of self-governance, tenure, and individual rights and freedoms of academics and students. Universities should be self-governed by an academic community to uphold academic freedom, which allows for unrestricted advancement of scientific knowledge through critical thinking, without external limitations.

    How does corporate governance affect the relationship between institutional autonomy and academic freedom?

    Corporate governance mechanisms, such as board diversity, board independence, transparency, and accountability, can ensure that the interests of various stakeholders, including students, faculty, and the government, are represented and balanced. The incorporation of corporate governance into academia introduces a set of values and priorities that can restrict the traditional autonomy and academic freedom that define a self-governing profession. This growing tension has led to concerns about the erosion of academia’s self-governance, with calls for policies that safeguard academic independence and uphold the values of intellectual freedom and collaboration that are foundational to higher education institutions. Nonetheless, promoting efficient corporate governance, higher education institutions can help safeguard academic freedom and institutional autonomy, despite external pressures.

    Is there a significant difference between the perceptions of males and females regarding institutional autonomy, academic freedom, and their relationship?

    The appointment process for university staff varies across countries, but it is essential that non-academic factors such as gender, ethnicity, or interests do not influence the selection of qualified individuals who are necessary for the institution’s quality. Unfortunately, studies indicate that women are often underrepresented in leadership positions and decision-making processes related to academic freedom and institutional autonomy. This underrepresentation can perpetuate biases and lead to a lack of diversity in decision-making. One solution to address these disparities is to examine gender as a factor of difference to identify areas for improvement and promote gender equality in decision-making processes. By promoting diversity and inclusivity, academic institutions can create a more equitable environment that protects institutional autonomy and promotes academic freedom for everyone, regardless of their gender.

    Methodology and Conceptual framework

    The quantitative and predictive nature of the investigation necessitated the use of an explanatory research design. Because it enabled the us to establish a clear causal relationship between the exogenous and endogenous latent variables, the explanatory study design was chosen. The simple random sample technique was utilised to collect data from an online survey administered to 128 academicians from chosen Ghanaian universities.

    The conceptual framework, explaining the interrelationships among the constructs in the context of the study is presented. The formulation of the conceptual model was influenced by the nature of proposed research questions backed by the supporting theories purported in the context of the study.

    Conclusions and Implications

    Institutional autonomy significantly predicts academic freedom at a strong level within higher education institutions in Ghana. Corporate governance can restrict academic freedom when its directed to yield immediate financial or marketable benefits but in this study it plays a key role in transmitting the effect of institutional autonomy. Additionally, there is a significant difference in perception between females and males concerning the institutional autonomy – academic freedom predictive relationship. Practically, higher education institutions, particularly in Ghana, should strive to maintain a level of autonomy while also ensuring that academic freedom is respected and protected. This can be achieved through decentralized governance structures that allow for greater participation of academics in decision-making processes. Institutions should actively engage stakeholders, including academics, in discussions and decisions related to institutional autonomy and academic freedom. This will ensure that diverse perspectives are considered in policy development.

    This blog is based on an article published in Policy Reviews in Higher Education (online 02 January 2025) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23322969.2024.2444609

    Bashiru Mohammed is a final year PhD student at the faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University. He also holds Masters in Higher education and students’ affairs from the same university. His research interest includes School management and administration, TVET education and skills development.

    Professor Cai Yonghong is a professor at Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University. She has published many articles and presided over several domestic and international educational projects and written several government consultant reports. Her research interest includes teacher innovation, teacher expertise, teacher’s salary, and school management.

    References

    AAU, (2001). ‘Declaration on the African University in the Third Millennium’.

    Akpan, K. P., & Amadi, G. (2017). University autonomy and academic freedom in Nigeria: A theoretical overview. International Journal of Academic Research and Development,

    Altbach, P. G. (2001). Academic freedom: International realities and challenges. Higher Education,

    Aslam, S., & Joshith, V. (2019). Higher Education Commission of India Act 2018: A Critical Analysis of the Policy in the Context of Institutional Autonomy.

    Becker, J. M., Cheah, J. H., Gholamzade, R., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2023). PLS-SEM’s most wanted guidance.

    Hair, J., Hollingsworth, C. L., Randolph, A. B., & Chong, A. Y. L. (2017). An updated and expanded
    assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Industrial management & data
    systems,

    Lippa, R. A. (2005). Gender, nature, and nurture. Routledge.

    Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2016). CSR governance and departmental organization: A typology of best practices. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.

    Neave, G. (2005). The supermarketed university: Reform, vision and ambiguity in British higher education. Perspectives:.

    Nicol, D. (1972) Academic Freedom and Social Responsibility: The Tasks of Universities in a Changing World, Stephen Kertesz (Ed), Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press.

    Nokkala, T., & Bacevic, J. (2014). University autonomy, agenda setting and the construction of agency: The case of the European university association in the European higher education area..

    Olsen, J. P. (2007). The institutional dynamics of the European university Springer Netherlands.

    Tricker, R. I. (2015). Corporate governance: Principles, policies, and practices. Oxford University Press, USA.

    Zikmund, W.G., Babin, B.J., Carr, J.C. & Griffin, M. (2012). Business Research Methods. Boston: Cengage Learning.

    Zulu, C (2016) ‘Gender equity and equality in higher education leadership: What’s social justice and substantive equality got to do with it?’ A paper presented at the inaugural lecture, North West University, South Africa

    Author: SRHE News Blog

    An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

    Source link

  • Hiding in plain sight? A simple statistical effect may largely explain the ethnicity degree awarding gap

    Hiding in plain sight? A simple statistical effect may largely explain the ethnicity degree awarding gap

    • By Sean Brophy (@seanbrofee), Senior Lecturer at the Centre for Decent Work and Productivity, Manchester Metropolitan University.

    A persistent challenge in UK higher education is the ethnicity degree awarding gap – the difference between White and ethnic minority students receiving top degrees (firsts or 2:1s). The Office for Students (OfS) aims to entirely eliminate this gap by 2030/31, but what if most of this gap reflects success in widening participation rather than systemic barriers?

    Between 2005/6 and 2021/22, university participation grew 21% faster for Asian students and 17% faster for Black students compared to White students. This remarkable success in widening access might paradoxically explain one of the UK’s most persistent higher education challenges.

    Figure 1 presents ethnicity gaps over time compared to a White baseline (the grey line constant at zero). The data for 2021/22 shows significant gaps: 21 percentage points for Black students, 9 for Asian students, and 4 for Mixed ethnicity students compared to their White peers. Traditional explanations focus on structural barriers, cultural differences, and potential discrimination, and much of the awarding gap remains unexplained after adjusting for prior attainment and background characteristics. However, a simpler explanation might be hiding in plain sight: the gap may also reflect a statistical effect created by varying participation rates across ethnic groups.

    Ethnicity Degree Awarding Gap (2014/15 – 2021/22)

    Figure 1. Source: HESA

    Here is the key insight: ethnic minority groups now participate in higher education at remarkably higher rates than White students, which likely then drives some of the observed ethnicity awarding gaps. Figure 2 presents the over-representation of ethnic groups in UK higher education relative to the White reference group (again, the constant grey line). The participation gap has grown substantially – Asian students were 22 percentage points more likely to attend university than White students in 2021/22, with Black students 18 points higher.

    Over-representation of ethnic groups in HE compared to White baseline (2005/6-2021/22)

    Figure 2. Source: UCAS End Of Cycle Report 2022

    This difference in participation rates creates an important statistical effect, what economists call ‘compositional effects’. When a much larger proportion of any group enters university, that group may naturally include a broader range of academic ability. Think of it like this: if mainly the top third of White students attend university, but nearly half of ethnic minority students do, we would expect to see differences in degree outcomes – even with completely fair teaching and assessment.

    This principle can be illustrated using stylized ability-participation curves for representative ethnic groups in Figure 3. These curves show the theoretical distribution of academic ability for Asian, Black, and White groups, with the red shaded area representing the proportion of students from each group accepted into higher education in 2021/22. It would be surprising if there was no degree awarding gap under these conditions!

    Stylized ability-participation curves by ethnic group

    This hypothesis suggests the degree awarding gap might largely reflect the success of widening participation policies. Compositional effects like these are difficult to control for in studies, and it is noteworthy that, to date, no studies on the ethnicity awarding gap have adequately controlled for these effects (including one of my recent studies).

    While this theory may offer a compelling statistical explanation, future research pursuing this line of inquiry needs to go beyond simply controlling for prior achievement. We need to examine both how individual attainment evolves from early education to university, using richer measures than previous studies, and how the expansion of university participation has changed the composition of student ability over time. This analysis must also account for differences within broad ethnic categories (British Indian students, for example, show different patterns from other Asian groups) and consider how university and subject choices vary across groups.

    My argument is not that compositional effects explain everything — rather, understanding their magnitude is crucial for correctly attributing how much of the gap is driven by traditional explanations, such as prior attainment, background characteristics, structural barriers, or discrimination. Only with this fuller picture can we properly target resources and interventions where they’re most needed.

    If this hypothesis is proven correct, however, it underscores why the current policy focus on entirely eliminating gaps through teaching quality or support services, while well-intentioned, may be misguided. If gaps are the statistically inevitable result of differing participation patterns among ethnic groups, then institutional interventions cannot entirely eliminate them. This doesn’t mean universities shouldn’t strive to support all students effectively – but it does require us to fundamentally rethink how we measure and address educational disparities.

    Rather than treating all gaps as problems to be eliminated, we should:

    1. Fund research which better accounts for these compositional effects.
    2. Develop benchmarks that account for participation rates when measuring degree outcomes.
    3. Contextualize the success of widening participation with acknowledging awarding gaps as an inevitable statistical consequence.
    4. Focus resources on early academic support for students from all backgrounds who might need additional help, particularly in early childhood.
    5. Explore barriers in other post-16 or post-18 pathways that may be contributing to the over-representation of some groups in higher education.

    Source link

  • Title IX Rule Goes Into Effect in 24 States – CUPA-HR

    Title IX Rule Goes Into Effect in 24 States – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | August 1, 2024

    On August 1, the Biden administration’s Title IX final rule goes into effect, implementing new requirements for compliance with Title IX for institutions of higher education. However, ongoing legal challenges have blocked the rule from taking effect in 26 states, as well as at certain institutions in states that have not sued the Department of Education (ED).

    Background

    On April 19, ED released the text of the highly anticipated Title IX final rule. The final rule expands protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy or related conditions, and it implements new training requirements for employees and grievance procedures for handling reported cases of sex-based discrimination, including sexual harassment. To provide members with an overview of the final rule, CUPA-HR held a webinar in April, which was recorded and can be accessed for free.

    Lawsuits

    Shortly after the rule was published, over 20 Republican-led states and advocacy groups filed lawsuits challenging the final rule. The lawsuits sought to block ED from implementing and enforcing the final rule, though most of them homed in on concerns with expanding Title IX protections to transgender individuals through the expanded protections against discrimination based on an individual’s gender identity.

    From mid-June through the end of July, federal judges across the country granted preliminary injunctions to the states and advocacy groups challenging the rule, meaning the Department of Education is blocked from enforcing the new Title IX rule on the August 1 effective date. All 26 states that sued ED for the Title IX rule were ultimately granted injunctive relief. Additionally, a decision from the U.S. District Court of Kansas expanded the preliminary injunction to include schools attended by members of the Young America’s Foundation, Female Athletes United, and Moms for Liberty. This means that ED cannot enforce the new Title IX rule at certain schools in the 24 states that didn’t challenge the rule, as well as Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico.

    The Biden administration has appealed to the Supreme Court on the decisions granting the preliminary injunctions. In its emergency request, the administration is asking the court to limit the scope of the preliminary injunction to only block provisions related to gender identity. It argued that the lower court’s decisions to grant preliminary injunctions were based on concerns with the expanded protections for transgender students, and it hopes that other provisions like the new grievance procedures and training requirements can go into effect. A decision from the Supreme Court on the emergency request has not yet been issued.

    Looking Ahead

    Though ED is blocked from enforcing the new Title IX rule in 26 states, litigation continues in the lower courts where decisions have been issued on whether to strike down the rule. If the rule is struck down, the Biden administration is likely to appeal the decision, though it is unknown whether a decision will be released before the election and potential change in administration. CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of additional updates to the legal challenges against the Title IX final rule.

     



    Source link