Tag: Events

  • Five Things to Know About McMahon’s Plan to Break Up ED

    Five Things to Know About McMahon’s Plan to Break Up ED

    Dozens of the Education Department’s programs were scattered across Washington D.C. last week, but a few core components remain at the Lyndon B. Johnson Building on Maryland Avenue: the offices for civil rights, special education and federal student aid (FSA).

    These three offices, particularly FSA, oversee some of the department’s most direct services to taxpayers—including the Pell grant, federal student loans, discrimination complaints and individualized education programs for students with disabilities—so moving them would likely be more complicated and controversial.

    Since President Trump first took office, some of the more vocal pushback to his plan for shutting down the department has come from the parents, families and advocacy groups who depend on these offices. But other programs at ED, including those in the Office of Postsecondary Education, were outsourced to other agencies Tuesday through a series of six interagency agreements as part of a broader effort to diminish the department. And even though the three offices were spared in this latest round of dismantling, they may not be safe in the long run.

    President Trump has talked about moving FSA to the Small Business Association and sending special education to the Department of Health and Human Services. Plus, as the Department of Justice has become increasingly involved in education issues, several experts anticipate OCR could be relocated there.

    A senior department official told reporters last week that ED is “still exploring the best plan” for those offices and the programs they oversee.

    In the meantime, here’s a rundown of what we know about Trump’s latest effort to dismantle ED.

    Why is ED Doing This?

    The Trump administration has been clear from the start: its “final mission” is to shut down the department. Officials touted this latest action as a key step toward that goal.

    Even though ED is still going to oversee the programs, this move is a way for Trump officials to show they don’t need the department itself to ensure “the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely,” as stated in Trump’s executive order.

    don’t delete this space/it’s for the chart

    Education Secretary Linda McMahon told department staff last week that it’s all part of an effort to “streamline bureaucracy” and “return power to the states.” But she acknowledged that the agreements are a temporary solution and that Congress will need to sign off eventually.

    Further, she told staff that it’s important to explain to the American public that, in the long run, shutting down the department doesn’t mean getting rid of all its programs.

    “So it is important how we message that,” McMahon said, citing survey data that showed the majority of Americans opposed shutting down the department but that changed when they learned the programs would remain. “Because honestly, folks, and I’m not trying to sugarcoat this, in the end of this the goal will be to have Congressional votes to close the Department of Education.”

    This move comes after years of conservatives lambasting the department for being too woke. They, like McMahon, have said reducing the federal role in education will be a way to protect students’ and parents’ rights.

    “Each of us in this room has a chance to be part of history,” McMahon said.

    What’s Actually Changing?

    Many higher education policy analysts say not much. Aside from outsourcing dozens of grant programs and adding extra steps to the award allocation process, little is expected to change (at least directly). Still, higher ed experts are divided on whether the funding system can survive such a transition.

    Congress will still decide how much money is available and what it should go toward. And the Department of Education will still receive funding, post grant applications and set guidelines for the competitions. But now, rather than that money going directly from ED to institutions, it will be funneled through four other agencies: the Departments of Health, Interior, Labor, and State, which will then dole out the money to colleges and universities.

    These agencies, particularly the Department of Labor and its Employment and Training Administration, will now be the ones to actually run the competition, decide who wins and allocate the funds. When colleges have questions about drawing down federal dollars or staying in compliance with department policies, it won’t be ED they contact.

    don’t delete // space for chart

    Why the Department of Labor?

    Most of the higher education grant programs are heading to the Department of Labor, including TRIO, programs supporting historically Black colleges and universities and the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education.

    This shift follows a growing push across the country to better align higher education with workforce demands. Some, including the Trump administration argue that it makes sense to move college grant programs to the Department of Labor, where the mission is improving “the welfare of the wage earners” and “advanc[ing] opportunities for profitable employment.”

    Nineteen higher ed programs at moving to the Labor Department.

    Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

    One senior department official told reporters that if education is about creating the workers of tomorrow then “nowhere is it better housed than at the Department of Labor [which] thinks about this night and day.” In fact, the department has already integrated its Office of Career Technical and Adult Education with Labor and a handful of states have merged their departments of education and workforce. (During President Trump’s first term, officials briefly proposed merging Education and Labor, though that idea didn’t move forward.)

    But critics fear that Labor won’t be able to effectively oversee grants for short-term, technical training programs, let alone broader initiatives focused on college access, equity and student success. Largely, they worry that the plan could sow confusion, weaken accountability measures and eventually lead to the consolidation of programs that are similar but not duplicative and intentionally separate.

    Angela Hanks, a Democrat who previously served as ETA’s acting assistant secretary, said in a social media post that “it’s hard to describe” the “nonsensical” nature of what Trump and McMahon are doing and compared the transfer of power to “having a frog carry a camel on its back.”

    Currently, Hanks said, the main youth-focused program at Labor serves about 130,000 students while TRIO alone serves about 870,000. The office would also take on even larger programs like Title I funding for low-income kids at K-12 schools, which serve up to 26 million students.

    What’s in the Fine Print?

    The interagency agreements do appear to maintain the operation of existing programs for now, but critics argue details both large and small in the text that add bureaucracy and confusion to the process rather than reducing it.

    For example, while the seven grant programs for minority-serving institutions are still expected to continue, various parts are being sent off to different agencies. Four grants that involve Alaskan-, Native American–, Asian American– and Pacific Islander–serving institutions will be housed at the Department of Interior. Labor will oversee the remaining three, which support HBCUs as well as predominantly Black- and Hispanic-serving institutions.

    Federal policy restricts some institutions from receiving multiple awards across different grant designations despite being eligible, but spreading out various MSI grants could still create complications. Historically, when deciding which grant program is the best fit or clarifying compliance standards, institutions could go to one office for the answers. Now, they may have to contact multiple different staffers.

    Multiple higher ed experts have also expressed the concern that rather than cutting grant funds, which only Congress can do, the Trump administration may try to consolidate programs that are similar but not identical.

    For example, CCAMPIS, a program focused on subsidizing child care for student parents, is being moved to HHS, which already oversees the Community Services and Child Care and Development Block Grants. These programs target a broader swath of low-income individuals and families, so college access advocates fear that if the funding pots are merged, it could pull grant dollars away from the student parents they were intended for.

    Language describing such efforts to “integrate” programs appears in the announcement’s news release, as well as in the fact sheets and agreements. But legal experts say that’s what Congress was trying to avoid by creating ED, and they expect the agreements to face court challenges.

    “The Department’s actions will expand federal involvement, rather than streamline it,” said Josie Eskow Skinner, a former general counsel attorney at ED who is now a partner at Sligo Law Group. “As a result of these agreements, states will now have to deal with the potentially conflicting or duplicative demands of multiple federal agencies with no central point of coordination or technical assistance.”

    How Does It Align With Project 2025?

    In a hearing held by the House Education and Workforce Committee the day after McMahon announced the interagency agreements, Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, an Oregon Democrat, said the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 “laid the groundwork for this illegal move of this program and shutting down the Department of Education.”

    Project 2025, a sweeping 900-page manual, outlines a multitude of recommended changes across nearly all sectors of the federal government, including how to shut down ED. Following last week’s decision, the Trump administration has made several of the suggested changes including moving career education and postsecondary programs to Labor and transferring tribal college programs to the Interior Department. (Lindsey Burke, who now serves as ED’s deputy chief of staff for policy and programs, authored the manual’s education chapter.)

    Still remaining on the Project 2025 to-do list include moving the Office for Civil Rights to the Department of Justice and giving Treasury control of federal student aid.

    Trump has repeatedly denied involvement with the project, even though actions in the first few months closely follow the project’s recommendations.

    But there’s one key way McMahon’s actions so far differ from Project 2025—she’s not making funding cuts or eliminating programs. Project 2025 recommends doing so through an act of Congress.

    Source link

  • Don’t Underestimate Value of a Human Network (opinion)

    Don’t Underestimate Value of a Human Network (opinion)

    This week is Thanksgiving in the United States, a time when many of us come together with family and friends to express gratitude for the positive things in our lives. The holiday season can also be a challenging time for those who are far from family and grappling with the prevalent loneliness of our modern era.

    Perhaps worse than missing the company of others over the holidays is being with family who hold different views and beliefs from your own. The fact is, though, that when we come together with a large, diverse group of people at events we are bound to find a variety of viewpoints and personalities in the room.

    People are complex and messy, and engaging with them is often a lot of work. Sometimes it seems easier to just not deal with them at all and “focus on ourselves” instead. Similarly, the vast amount of information available online often leads many graduate students and postdocs to think they can effectively engage in professional development, explore career options and navigate their next step on their own. Indeed, there are many amazing online tools and resources to help with a lot of this but only by engaging other people in conversation can we fully come to understand how various practices, experiences and occupations apply to us as unique beings in the world. Generic advice is fine, but it can only be tailored through genuine dialogue with another person, though some believe they can find it in a machine.

    Generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology has accelerated since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022 and now many people lean on AI chatbots for advice and even companionship. The problem with this approach is that AI chatbots are, at least currently, quite sycophantic and don’t, by default, challenge a user’s worldview. Rather, they can reinforce one’s current beliefs and biases. Furthermore, since we as humans have a tendency to anthropomorphize things, we perceive the output of AI chatbots as “human” and think we are getting the type of “social” relationship and advice we need from a bot without all the friction of dealing with another human being in real life. So, while outsourcing your problems to a chatbot may feel easy, it cannot fully support you as you navigate your life and career. Furthermore, generative AI has made the job application, screening and interview process incredibly impersonal and ineffective. One recent piece in The Atlantic put it simply (if harshly): “The Job Market is Hell.”

    What is the solution to this sad state of affairs?

    I am here to remind readers of the importance of engaging with real, human people to help you navigate your professional development, job search and life. Despite the fear of being rejected, making small talk or hearing things that may challenge you, engaging with other people will help you learn about professional roles available to you, discover unexpected opportunities, build critical interpersonal skills and, in the process, understand yourself (and how you relate with others) better.

    For graduate students and postdocs today, it’s easy to feel isolated or spend too much time in your own head focusing on your perceived faults and deficiencies. You need to remember, though, that you are doing hard things, including leading research projects seeking to investigate questions no one else has reported on before. But as you journey through your academic career and into your next step professionally, I encourage you to embrace the fact that true strength and resilience lies in our connections—with colleagues, mentors, friends and the communities we build.

    Networks enrich your perspectives, foster resilience and can help you find not only jobs, but joy and fulfillment along the way. Take intentional steps to build and lean on your community during your time as an academic and beyond. Invest time, gratitude and openness in your relationships. Because when you navigate life’s challenges with others by your side, you don’t just survive—you thrive.

    Practical Tips for Building and Leveraging Networks

    For graduate students and postdocs, here are some action steps to foster meaningful networks to help you professionally and personally:

    Tip 1: Seek Diverse Connections

    Attend seminars, departmental events, professional conferences and interest groups—both within and outside your field.

    Join and engage in online forums, LinkedIn groups and professional organizations that interest you. Create a career advisory group.

    Tip 2: Practice Gratitude and Generosity

    Thank peers and mentors regularly—showing appreciation strengthens relationships, opens doors and creates goodwill.

    Offer help, such as reviewing your peers’ résumés, sharing job leads or simply listening. Reciprocity is foundational to strong networks.

    Tip 3: Be Vulnerable and Authentic

    Share struggles and setbacks. Vulnerability invites others to connect, offer advice and foster mutual support.

    Be honest about your goals; don’t feel pressured to follow predefined paths set by others or by societal norms.

    Tip 4: Leverage Formal Resources

    Enroll in career design workshops or online courses, such as Stanford University’s “Designing Your Career.”

    Utilize university career centers, alumni networks and faculty advisers for information and introductions.

    Tip 5: Make Reflection a Habit

    Set aside time weekly or monthly to review progress, map goals and consider input from your network.

    Use journaling or guided exercises to deepen self-insight and identify what you want from relationships and careers.

    Tip 6: Cultivate Eulogy Virtues

    Focus not just on professional “résumé virtues,” but also on “eulogy virtues”—kindness, honesty, courage and the quality of relationships formed.

    These provide lasting meaning and fuel deep, authentic connections that persist beyond job titles and paychecks.

    Strategies for Overcoming Isolation

    Graduate students and postdocs are at particular risk for isolation and burnout, given the demands of research and the often-solitary nature of scholarship. Community is a proven antidote. Consider forming small groups with fellow students and postdocs to share resources, celebrate milestones and troubleshoot professional challenges together. Regular meetings can foster motivation and accountability. These can be as simple as monthly coffee chats to something more structured such as regular writing or job search support groups. And, while online communities are not a perfect substitute for support, postdocs can leverage Future PI Slack and graduate students can use their own Slack community for help and advice. You can also lean on your networks for emotional support and practical help, especially during stressful periods or setbacks.

    Another practical piece of advice to build your network and connections is volunteer engagement. This could mean volunteering in a professional organization, committees at your institution or in your local community. Working together with others on shared projects in this manner helps build connections without the challenges many have with engaging others at purely social events. In addition, volunteering can help you develop leadership, communication and management skills that can become excellent résumé material.

    Networking to Launch Your Career

    Through the process of engaging with more people through an expanded network you also open yourself up to serendipity and opportunities that could enhance your overall training and career. Career theorists call this “planned happenstance.” The idea is simple: By putting yourself in community with others—attending talks, joining professional groups, volunteering for committees—you increase the odds that unexpected opportunities will cross your path. You meet people who do work you hadn’t considered, learn about opportunities before they’re posted and hear about initiatives that need someone with your skills earlier than most.

    When I was a postdoc at Vanderbilt University, I volunteered for the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA), starting small by writing for their online newsletter (The POSTDOCket), and also became increasingly involved in the Vanderbilt Postdoctoral Association (VPA). These experiences were helpful as I transitioned to working in postdoctoral affairs as a higher education administrator after my postdoc. Writing for The POSTDOCket as a postdoc allowed me to interview administrators and leaders in postdoctoral affairs, in the process learning about working in the space. My leadership in VPA showed I understood some of the needs of the postdoctoral community and could organize programming to support postdocs. I have become increasingly involved in the NPA over the past six years, culminating in being chair of our Board of Directors in 2025. This work has allowed me to increase my national visibility and has resulted in invites to speak to postdocs at different institutions, the opportunity to serve on a National Academies Roundtable, and I believe helped me land my current role at Virginia Tech.

    I share all this to reiterate that in uncertain job markets, it’s tempting to focus on polishing résumés or applying to ever more positions online. Those things can matter—but they’re not enough. Opportunities often come through both expanding your network and engaging with people and activities we care about. They can present themselves to you via your network long before they appear in writing and they often can’t be fully anticipated when you initially engage with these “extracurricular activities.” A good first step to open yourself up to possibilities is to get involved in communities outside your direct school or work responsibilities. Doing so will improve your sense of purpose, help you build key transferrable skills, increase your connections and aid in your transition to your next role.

    Your training and career should not be a solitary climb, but rather a collaborative, evolving process of growth and discovery. A strong community and network are critical to your longterm wellbeing and success. And, in a world where setbacks and uncertainty are inevitable, connection is the constant that turns possibility into progress.

    Chris Smith is Virginia Tech’s postdoctoral affairs program administrator. He serves on the National Postdoctoral Association’s Board of Directors and is a member of the Graduate Career Consortium—an organization providing a national voice for graduate-level career and professional development leaders.

    Source link

  • DOJ Sues California Over In-State Tuition for Noncitizens

    DOJ Sues California Over In-State Tuition for Noncitizens

    The U.S. Department of Justice sued the state of California on Thursday, challenging a state law that allows undocumented students to pay in-state tuition rates. The lawsuit also targets the California Dream Act, which offers state financial aid to undocumented students who meet certain requirements.

    The complaint, filed in the Eastern District of California, targets the state, Governor Gavin Newsom, state attorney general Rob Bonta, the University of California Board of Regents, the California State University Board of Trustees and the California Community Colleges’ Board of Governors.

    “California is illegally discriminating against American students and families by offering exclusive tuition benefits for non-citizens,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement.

    California marks the sixth state the federal government has sued over such policies, but unlike some of the others, California plans to fight back. The state is home to more than 102,000 undocumented students, who have been permitted to pay in-state tuition rates since 2001 if they met certain requirements. Undocumented students have also been allowed to access state financial aid for more than a decade, according to the Higher Education Immigration Portal.

    Newsom has repeatedly pushed back on the Trump administration’s policies, including immigration crackdowns. The DOJ filed another lawsuit against the state on Monday, after Newsom signed a bill banning face coverings for federal immigration agents. The DOJ also recently sued Newsom and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber over the state’s redistricting plan.

    Bondi said in her statement that the DOJ will “continue bringing litigation against California until the state ceases its flagrant disregard for federal law.”

    But Newsom isn’t backing down.

    “The DOJ has now filed three meritless, politically motivated lawsuits against California in a single week,” Marissa Saldivar, a spokesperson for the governor’s office, said in a statement to Inside Higher Ed. “Good luck, Trump. We’ll see you in court.”

    By contrast, Texas and Oklahoma, faced with similar lawsuits this summer, swiftly sided with the DOJ, quashing in-state tuition benefits for their undocumented students. The Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education also agreed to stop offering in-state tuition to noncitizens in September, a few months after the DOJ sued, but the legal battle is ongoing. A judge recently allowed a group of Kentucky undocumented students, represented by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, to intervene in the case. Legal fights in Minnesota and Illinois have also continued as the states defend their in-state tuition policies against DOJ challenges.

    The government argues that such laws violate a federal statutory provision that says undocumented people can’t receive higher ed benefits unless citizens are also eligible. The DOJ has asserted that states can’t permit undocumented students in a state to pay lower tuition rates while denying out-of-state citizens the same benefit. Proponents of California’s current policy argue it allows any nonresident who meets certain requirements—including spending three years in a California high school—to access in-state tuition, not just undocumented students.

    Rachel Zaentz, a spokesperson for the University of California system, said system leaders believe they’ve acted within the law.

    “For decades, the University of California has followed applicable state and federal laws regarding eligibility for in-state tuition, financial aid, and scholarships,” Zaentz said in a statement sent to Inside Higher Ed. “While we will, of course, comply with the law as determined by the courts, we believe our policies and practices are consistent with current legal standards.”

    California Community Colleges Chancellor Sonya Christian said in a similar memo that the system “will follow all legal obligations and fully participate in the judicial process alongside our state partners” but “statutes referenced in the lawsuit have been in place for many years and have been implemented in accordance with long-standing legal guidance.”

    “Although we cannot comment on ongoing litigation, our commitment remains unchanged: we will continue to ensure that all students who qualify under state law have access to an affordable, high-quality education,” Christian said. “We will also continue to comply fully with all current federal and state requirements.”

    Iliana Perez, executive director of the advocacy organization Immigrants Rising, called the latest lawsuit an “an affront to the decades of hard-fought student-led advocacy for equitable access to postsecondary education.” She also noted the challenge comes just a week before college applications are due at public four-year institutions in the state.

    “This challenge is a callous attempt to have students second-guess their dreams,” Perez said in a statement. “We have one message for this Administration; we will not be deterred!”

    Source link

  • Is Canada Still Among the Big 4 Overseas Student Recruiters?

    Is Canada Still Among the Big 4 Overseas Student Recruiters?

    A dramatic decline in international student numbers in Canada shows how internationalization globally is “evolving,” with the concept of the “big four” recruitment destinations seen as increasingly outdated.

    The country is on track to issue about 80,000 new study permits this year, way below the cap of 437,000 its federal government set for 2025.

    This has not stopped the cap being reduced even more, with the budget announced earlier this month confirming that it will be set at 155,000 next year—although the country could struggle to reach even this revised figure on the latest projections.

    Although the other members of the “big four”—the U.S., the U.K. and Australia—have also enacted policies that have brought down numbers, the fall in Canada has far surpassed anything happening elsewhere.

    Lil Bremermann-Richard, chief executive of Oxford International, said it shows how the country has moved to an “evolving” strategy that is more focused on aligning with housing and labor market capacity.

    “The government is moving toward a more managed, sustainable approach to welcoming international students rather than the rapid growth of recent years,” Bremermann-Richard said. “We’ll likely see a shift away from a clearly defined big four toward a broader group of preferred destinations as more countries expand their international education capacity and appeal.”

    The vast majority (82 percent) of Canadian universities reported fewer overseas undergraduate students this year, according to a new survey from NAFSA, Oxford Test of English and Studyportals published on Nov. 19. This was significantly more than in the U.S. (48 percent) and the U.K. (39 percent).

    Restrictive government policies were the biggest obstacle for 90 percent of Canadian institutions—compared with 85 percent in the U.S., 51 percent in the U.K. and just 19 percent across Asia.

    This was clearly having a knock-on effect on the university finances, with 60 percent of institutions anticipating budget cuts and half expecting staffing reductions in the next year.

    Canada still had close to a million international students in total when data was published earlier this year, compared with just under 500,000 in Germany, a country that has been rapidly increasing its overseas enrollments and could one day challenge the big four.

    Vincenzo Raimo, an independent international higher education consultant and visiting fellow at the University of Reading, said Canada was not leaving the international student recruitment business but that the business itself was changing.

    The idea of a big four is increasingly outdated in a more multipolar world where intra-regional mobility in Asia continues to increase and countries such as South Korea, Japan and Taiwan expand, he added.

    “Global student mobility is becoming far more distributed, as students seek value, safety, poststudy opportunities and predictability.”

    Alex Usher, president of Higher Education Strategy Associates, said many international students were not coming to Canada for an education but for a chance to immigrate.

    “No other country will give them that opportunity, and so no other country will benefit,” Usher said. “That’s a market that’s just going to dry up and blow away.”

    Master’s and Ph.D. students at public universities in Canada have recently been exempted from the study permit cap, showing that the government could be open to making changes.

    Janet Ilieva, founder of the Education Insight consultancy, said the budget’s policies to attract international doctoral students and postdoctoral fellows indicated a “clear shift towards attracting top talent.”

    Globally, the restrictions being implemented by the larger anglophone markets are prompting a redistribution, rather than a shrinkage, of global demand for international education, she added.

    “Inward-looking policies, coupled with geopolitical instability, rising economic uncertainty and regional conflicts, are increasing duty-of-care concerns,” she said. “This is nudging students toward studying in safer, closer locations.”

    Recent figures also showed that Canadian universities have just seven international branch campuses abroad—fewer than Ireland, Germany and the Netherlands, and well behind the U.S. (97), the U.K. (51) and others.

    Usher said this indicated that Canadian universities, and the governments that fund them, were “not very adventurous.”

    “During the boom times when international students were falling over themselves to come to Canada, there was no need for institutions to seek out extra cost and extra risk to teach international students.

    “I suspect we will [see more branch campuses in the future], but we have little tradition of doing so and we’re starting from way behind. A switch like that takes time.”

    Source link

  • More Work-Life Balance in Academe Would Help Reduce the Fear of Retirement

    More Work-Life Balance in Academe Would Help Reduce the Fear of Retirement

    To the editor:

    I’m not quite sure why you felt the need to publish the self-indulgent “Teaching as a Sacred Life” by Joe P. Dunn (Nov. 19, 2025).

    It’s great that Joe is inspired by his teaching and is so passionate about it. Of course, most faculty who chose teaching are (or were) so inspired. So what merits the article? I guess that Joe is still teaching at age 80.

    Yes, some people view retirement as a goal because they don’t like their jobs. But many faculty view their profession as a vocation, so why would they retire? One reason is because of diminished effectiveness. Ossified approaches, diminished cognitive capacity and so on are the unhappy, but inevitable, results of aging. The person experiencing these declines is generally not the best at noticing them, as they creep in so slowly that they’re most visible to outsiders or when accurately comparing to yourself from long ago. (A septuagenarian Galileo, when completing Two New Sciences, his seminal 1638 work in mechanics, was disheartened to find that it was hard for him to follow his own notes and thoughts from several decades earlier.)

    Another reason to retire is to give the next generation a chance. Joe talks about the plentiful faculty jobs when he was young. There are many reasons why they’re no longer plentiful, but one of them is that there is no longer a mandatory retirement age. It was legal until 1993 for there to be a mandatory retirement age for tenured faculty (later than the general 1986 ban on mandatory retirement because lawmakers felt there were several valid arguments for a mandatory retirement age for tenured professors).

    Many academics pour so much into their work that they don’t develop a strong identity outside of their job. They end up like Joe, not sure what they would even do in retirement. A broader push for a better work-life balance in higher education could go a long way toward helping people develop their complete selves, and would reduce the fear of retirement among academics. Plus, there are always positions emeriti that allow you to keep your hand in the intellectual world of higher ed without continuing to draw a paycheck that you no longer need and someone else does.

    Speaking of viewing teaching as sacred, clergy retire. Heck, we’ve even had a pope retire. Faculty can figure it out too.

    David Syphers is a physics professor at Eastern Washington University. He is writing in a personal capacity.

    Source link

  • Notes on the Complete College America Conference

    Notes on the Complete College America Conference

    Having returned to the community college world after a two-year sojourn, I wasn’t sure what to expect at my first large-scale higher ed–themed conference. That was especially true given that the conference in question, Complete College America’s Next, was new to me and included both two-year and four-year schools. It was in Baltimore, so it wasn’t a rough drive.

    It was gratifying to see that I hadn’t been entirely forgotten. Thanks to everyone who took a moment to yell “Matt!” from behind as I wandered the hallways. I needed that.

    I attended as part of a delegation from Westmoreland, which is in its second year with CCA. In that role, I tried to glean whatever insights I could to bring back to campus. Some highlights:

    • At a panel on using course scheduling as a retention tool, I came away with one insight, one statistic and one phrase. The insight was that schedule optimization works best at scale; the smaller the scale, the less room to move. That’s especially true at multicampus or multilocation institutions. As the rep from Ad Astra put it, “It’s not helpful to offer things partway.”

    That’s a real challenge when you’re trying to be within driving distance of a lot of people in a sparsely populated area. The statistic was that the major jump in retention occurs among students who take at least 18 credits per year. Lower than that and retention drops precipitously; higher than that and the gains are incremental. Eighteen seems to be the magic number. Finally, someone (my notes fail me) termed some students whose courses were at inaccessible times or locations “unintentionally part-time.” I think the same could be said of many workers; there’s something there.

    • A panel on the impact of academic policies on student retention brought home to me how much context matters. The presenters, Daphne Holland and Debbie Connor, were both from Coastal Carolina University. As they tell it, CCU is a four-year public institution that’s mostly residential, rapidly growing and chock-full of full-time, out-of-state students. I stayed anyway, on the theory that students are students and the struggles are largely the same everywhere.

    And that seemed true at first; they mentioned that the most common reason for students leaving is finances. From there, they outlined changes to their academic probation policy, including an intermediate status called “academic advisory” for students who are passing, but not by much. (Students on advisory are required to check in with success coaches a few times per semester.) When I asked how changes to an academic policy would affect finances, they responded that the finances in question were HOPE scholarships that would be lost below a certain GPA. Alas, though interesting, it wasn’t as relevant to my world as I had hoped.

    • Naturally, I attended the panel on higher ed reporters. That one was more of a personal interest. It was great to finally meet Scott Carlson from The Chronicle and Johanna Alonso from IHE. I hadn’t known of Kirk Carapezza, who hosts the College Uncovered podcast, but immediately added it to my podcast feed.
    • Chike Aguh gave the afternoon keynote, focusing on higher ed and the future of work. The talk was largely about AI and the need to prepare students for the world as it’s taking shape. (The theme of “AI is changing everything, get over it” pervaded the conference—AI skepticism was regarded as passé, if not self-indulgent.)

    He noted that in America, “we treat college like marriage,” acting as if the initial choice is irrevocable and life-determining. That’s not true in the community college world, but I have seen 17-year-olds look at a college decision that way. Instead, he proposed a “war college of technology,” in which professionals would take an education break every five years or so to get up to speed on the latest technology. Politically, I suspect that’s dead on arrival, but a version of that could be a useful way to package continuing ed.

    • I was much more engaged by the panel on Scalable Student Success Strategies in a Shifting Political Landscape. Carrie Hodge, from CCA, and Julia Raufman, from the Community College Research Center, led a delicate but necessary discussion on ways to improve student success when certain words, resources and tactics have been ruled out of bounds by the current political climate. I’ll respect the sensitivity of the discussion by leaving it at that, other than to thank Hodge and Raufman for a badly needed conversation.
    • Finally, the panel on workforce pathways in Texas had a similar alternate-universe feel to the earlier CCU panel. In the case of Texas, Daniel Perez and Shawnda Floyd reported that the performance funding system to which community colleges are subjected is not zero-sum. In other words, if everybody does better, everybody gets more funding. The colleges aren’t competing with each other, so they don’t have to divert resources to competing with each other.

    You could hear gasps in the room, including my own. Floyd, from Dallas College, reported that they use philanthropic funding to cover the cost of tests for industry certifications for both students and instructors, which struck me as an excellent idea. In response to a question about reducing the benefits of higher education to income, Perez agreed that they go far beyond that but cautioned against “going down the rabbit hole of positive externalities” with legislators. In the short term, he’s obviously right about that, but it’s still disheartening.

    Of course, as with many conferences, many of the highlights came from hallway conversations. Reconnecting with old friends and former colleagues is good for the soul.

    Even when my immediate reaction to hearing about programs in some places was a variation on “must be nice …” it’s still useful to be reminded that some of the dilemmas we face aren’t inevitable. If 2025 has taught us anything, it’s that the old adage about change happening first slowly and then all at once is true. The key is to push the change in the right direction. Kudos to CCA for doing exactly that.

    Source link

  • Advice to a Younger Scientist (opinion)

    Advice to a Younger Scientist (opinion)

    “For a man to conquer himself is the first and noblest of all victories.” —Plato

    In the first week of my postdoctoral fellowship, David B. Sacks, my lifelong mentor and senior investigator in the Department of Laboratory Medicine at the National Institutes of Health, handed me a book by Peter Medawar, who received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1960, and encouraged me to read it attentively. The book, Advice to a Young Scientist, carried a weight beyond its physical form. I chose the title of this piece as a tribute to that book. Although I am still not far along in my career, I believe I have gathered insights worth sharing with the next generation of scientists.

    Practical Strategies for Scientific Growth

    From the very first year of your graduate studies, I encourage you to maintain a list of grants and scholarships for which you can apply. If you are an international scholar, gather concrete information on your eligibility. This list should evolve alongside your career, marking opportunities with specific eligibility timelines: those available one to three years into graduate school, one to three years postgraduation, less than five years postdegree and early-career grants (within 10 years). Knowing the deadlines and criteria early on ensures that you do not miss crucial opportunities. Many international scholars, myself included, discover too late that they are ineligible for certain grants. By tracking these opportunities, you can plan more effectively and maximize your chances.

    Learn to pitch your ideas early. Selling your ideas—convincing others of their importance in clear, communicative language—is a skill that spans all facets of life and career. Begin developing this muscle from the outset.

    Dedicate part of your routine to familiarizing yourself with new technologies and scientific resources. Record the tools and platforms you encounter, such as, in my field, antibody databases, protein-protein interaction networks and pathway analysis tools. Regularly updating and reviewing this resource library ensures you stay at the cutting edge of scientific advancements. However, not every technique or technology that is new and more complex is necessarily better. Do not disregard a technique solely based on the fact that it is older. Often, established methods are more robust, reproducible and cost-effective, making them invaluable in various contexts.

    Documentation is a cornerstone of scientific work. A western blot from 10 years ago may suddenly become relevant to a new project, fitting perfectly into an emerging story. Therefore, write detailed protocols and notes as if someone decades from now might need to understand and replicate your data. Keep records not just for your immediate understanding, but instead in a universal, comprehensive format that anyone can follow.

    Every published paper should be accompanied by a thesis-style archive containing all primary raw data and complete supplementary materials. Raw data includes, as applicable, unprocessed high-resolution images, instrument output files, original spreadsheets, code/notebooks, protocols and metadata. Organize this material with a table of contents and clear instructions. You should inventory every reagent you use, noting lot numbers, storage conditions and supplier details. While modern online platforms facilitate some of this, it is vital to maintain meticulous personal records. Seek feedback, observe best practices from others and refine your documentation habits over time.

    The Power of Waiting

    I understand the pressure many of you feel to advance your career quickly, secure your next position swiftly and carefully plan the path ahead. As an immigrant scientist, I am keenly aware that the range of choices often narrows and sometimes the options available are dictated more by circumstance than by preference. For those who are supporting families, the urgency intensifies, as the stipend of a graduate student or postdoc scarcely permits long periods of indecision.

    Given the unpredictable nature of an academic career, fostering a diverse network and developing a wide-ranging skill set early on can create opportunities and provide stability over time. I recall a piece of wisdom shared by Mehdi Nematbakhsh, a professor at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, where I earned my M.D. degree. He often said, “One should place oneself in a position to have several choices; that is the way of the wise to choose.”

    This advice resonated deeply with me. The ability to choose from multiple paths reflects the time and energy invested in cultivating possibilities aligned with your ultimate goal. It is akin to planting a couple of dozen seeds in the hope that a handful will sprout into flourishing leaves.

    Resilience in the Face of Uncertainty

    Scientific inquiry is inherently unpredictable. There are days when experiments yield no results, hypotheses crumble and the seemingly linear path forward transforms into a maze of uncertainties. For younger scientists, this unpredictability can breed frustration or self-doubt. It is crucial to remember that every failed experiment is not a step backward but an essential part of the learning process.

    My mentor David B. Sacks often reminded me that even the most accomplished scientists navigate failure more frequently than success. What distinguishes them is resilience—the readiness to rise, recalibrate and move forward. This is the mark of a scientist who is not only committed to their craft but also grounded in the understanding that discovery rarely follows a predictable timeline.

    Enduring the Marathon

    Life as a scientist is not a series of discrete tasks with periods of relief in between; it is more akin to running a lifelong marathon. Achievements like earning a Ph.D. or securing a promotion are milestones, but they mark the beginning of broader journeys rather than the end of a certain task. Similar to the life of a clinician, the life of a scientist requires a sustained commitment over time. It does not necessarily get easier, though confidence grows with experience.

    This journey requires developing lifelong habits: reading to update your reservoir of knowledge, maintaining daily discipline and nurturing sustainable practices that align with our core values—for instance, if you value rigor, keep complete lab notebooks and version-controlled code; if you value openness, share data and protocols; if you value mentorship, hold regular one-on-ones and set clear authorship expectations. If you approach science as a long-distance run, the importance of building sustainable habits becomes clear. Like the slow but steady turtle in the old story, consistent, sustainable effort over time is key to long-term success and fulfillment.

    Working With Time

    We are confined in time and space; maturity reflects itself in learning how to navigate within those limits. Over the long run, excess stress narrows vision and compels shallow decisions, while excess ease invites drift and missed chances. As the Tao Te Ching counsels, be like water: Progress comes from steady pressure and well-timed yielding—press when the channel narrows, eddy when the current runs muddy.

    The aim is pacing, not grinding; let stress sharpen, not scald; let rest restore, not stall. Inspired by Oliver Burkeman’s Four Thousand Weeks, treat time management as a humane practice rather than a perfectionist project. Plan enough to choose your moments, but do not let schedules become a source of anxiety. Flow through time, steer deliberately and let attention—not urgency—set the rhythm of your work.

    The Art of Carrying the Unknown

    Being able to face and carry the unknown with you is an essential skill. Contemplating what is not known or what is surprisingly different from what we predict is a critical process. Enduring this state allows the time needed for the unknown to unveil itself.

    If this capacity is not developed, and we rush or force to overcome it, we risk introducing biases or even the seeds of misconduct. This does not mean avoiding action to better understand the phenomenon; rather, it means cultivating an internal acceptance of the state of “we do not know” and leaving it there when no concrete light is visible. Balancing what we know and hypothesize with detachment from these ideas leaves room for the unknown to unfold, a balance critical to genuine scientific discovery.

    The Art of Extracting the Essence

    A crucial yet often overlooked skill in science is the ability to extract the essence from information—whether it is a paper, a talk or experimental data. This deep insight enables you to find the key piece of information that holds the essence of the knowledge presented. It takes time to develop the discipline required to avoid distraction from extraneous details and focus on what truly matters.

    Make this focus a regular practice with everything you encounter, and apply it rigorously when designing experiments. An experiment crafted with the essence of your research question in mind will bring you closer to the answers you seek.

    Mentorship and Building Networks

    No scientist reaches their destination alone. The mentors we encounter along the way shape not only our scientific trajectory but also our professional character. My mentors’ influence extended far beyond technical guidance; they imparted values of integrity, perseverance and humility. I urge younger scientists to seek mentors who inspire not just technical proficiency but personal growth. A true mentor will spend time guiding you beyond formal settings, offering valuable advice after journal clubs or during informal conversations.

    High-quality mentors are rare. You should seek at least two mentors. The first should be a junior mentor who is at the stage you aspire to reach in four to five years. Science evolves rapidly, and a junior mentor can provide practical, up-to-date advice for navigating your field. The other should be a senior mentor, someone you wish to emulate in 20 years. These mentors serve as guiding stars, offering long-term vision and perspective that may differ from your current viewpoint. Their guidance can help keep you aligned with your broader goals. A small deviation in your path may seem inconsequential in a few months, but it could lead to significant divergence over decades.

    In addition to finding mentors, dedicate time to cultivating long-lasting networks. These connections will evolve as your career progresses. Nurture personal relationships with colleagues beyond the confines of science. At times, this involves writing at least 50 personalized New Year emails. These relationships become the threads that weave a strong scientific community, enriching personal and professional lives.

    Conclusion and Closing Reflections

    Science is neither a solitary pursuit nor a race to an arbitrary finish line. It is a journey marked by moments of doubt, resilience and occasional triumph. To the younger scientists reading this, I encourage you to embrace the uncertainties, cultivate patience, and trust in the seeds you plant today. The landscape of science is ever-evolving, and your contributions, no matter how incremental they may seem, hold the potential to shape the future.

    As Medawar reminds us, the young scientist’s best ally is time, but time must not be wasted. Choose your path with care, but do not fear the unknown. The waiting, the failures and the quiet moments of reflection are as much a part of the scientific endeavor as the discoveries themselves.

    Samar Sayedyahossein is a former scientist at National Institutes of Health and a research scientist at Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The author extends gratitude to her mentors—Mahmoud Bina Motlagh, Lady Malhotra and David B. Sacks—for their wisdom and support, as well as to her colleagues for the valuable feedback they provided on the draft of this article.

    Source link

  • Communicate How Your Campus Connects Education to Careers

    Communicate How Your Campus Connects Education to Careers

    Higher ed, government and workforce leaders are discussing employability skills and work-based learning more than they ever have (at least, in my lifetime). So are students. Recent research shines a light on where and how students contemplate the connection between college and careers (particularly the increasingly influential role of social media) and what they expect. Marketers can leverage these consumer insights to influence both product and positioning to develop, implement and communicate work-integrated learning experience to meet student and workforce needs.

    Students Get Career, College and Life Advice From Social Media

    Seventy percent of young adults use social media to learn about careers, and it’s the top tool young adults use for self-discovery, despite a lack of encouragement from most adults and career navigators/counselors. Students talk about workforce skills when they talk to each other online about going to college—about 20 percent of these posts are about skills needed for jobs. They believe transferable skills are valuable to keep their career options open, particularly for those who don’t know what they want to do in their future careers. Specifically, they talk about:

    • Relationship-building skills like networking, persuasive speaking and small group leadership
    • Basic math and writing skills
    • Study skills
    • Interview skills

    Forums are advice-seeking and experience-sharing platforms, and when students talk about needing workforce skills, they receive encouraging advice. Suggestions include using extra courses, academic services and resources to gain employability skills to help them find a job after graduation. Students are also encouraged to develop practical critical thinking and social skills because, in the words of those giving advice, “a degree doesn’t guarantee success.”

    When students think about preparing for a job, they prioritize internships. In an analysis of over 600,000 forum conversations about college admissions Campus Sonar conducted to inform Jeff Selingo’s book Dream School: Finding The College That’s Right for You, internships were the most common form of workforce training discussed. When students make their college decision, they consider whether a campus provides them greater access to internship opportunities. Sometimes students interpret a rural campus as one without internship opportunities (which isn’t exactly true), and students consider if the campus gives them access to a connected network to find future internships and jobs. Another consideration is the value of an institution’s reputation with employers or intern hiring managers.

    However, these conversations revealed that students don’t really know what happens in an internship or how to get one. So they use online forums to seek advice on obtaining an internship, leveraging it, securing a job after graduation and exploring alternative careers outside their major.

    This is a storytelling opportunity for campuses. Specifically, to bridge the gap between current or recent interns and prospective and first-year students. Students who completed internships don’t have the chance to tell the students coming behind them what it’s like or how it helped them. This transition point is an excellent chance to engage recent interns to share their experiences directly with students or prospects to provide motivation and guidance in the peer-to-peer form students want. Using social media—the place where young people are seeking this advice—is crucial.

    Students Need to Understand the Connection Between Curriculum, Skill Building and Careers

    When considering college, students are already thinking about what comes next. Over 10 years of social listening research examining how students talk about college admissions, 62 percent of conversations focused on the postgraduation path. But when the connections between a college’s curriculum, employability skills and careers aren’t clear, students think the burden is on them to build the skills and chart their path.

    This was particularly clear in Campus Sonar’s 2024 Rebuilding Public Trust in Higher Education social intelligence study, which found that 45 percent of peer-to-peer conversations about the value of college included cautionary advice that students may be on their own to make crucial connections between curriculum, skill building and careers.

    Many colleges struggle to communicate these connections effectively. Here are two doing an excellent job.

    • Kettering University in Flint, Mich. For 100 years, Kettering has focused on work-integrated learning with a curriculum that rotates students between the classroom and co-op work placements in 12-week intervals. Ninety-eight percent of their students are employed after graduation, and the ongoing integration of students in the workforce produces valuable student feedback, enabling curriculum shifts to keep up with ever-changing employer needs.

    Kettering is historically focused on STEM, but the university recently launched the School of Foundational Studies, traditionally known as liberal arts. The core curriculum emphasizes a connected, human-centered approach and integrates a STEM focus with early professional development and ethical decision-making, preparing students to navigate complexity with intellectual agility. We know the liberal arts prepares students for the workforce, but Kettering is shifting the narrative and dropping the misunderstood phrase to put relevance and impact like ethical decision-making and intellectual agility front and center.

    • Moravian University is another example. The medium-size, private, religiously affiliated institution created Elevate as part of its undergraduate experience. It’s a career readiness digital badging system to help students clearly see the pathways for developing and demonstrating skills in communication, critical thinking leadership and more. Elevate is part of Moravian’s distinctive and branded undergraduate student experience, which is a four-year pathway to a “successful future and a career you love.” The Elevate experience goes year by year and explains how students scaffold their experiences, learnings and badges and the support they get along the way.

    Career navigation is a prevailing concept in this space right now and is critical in empowering students to truly navigate their own careers rather than expect the university to take them from A to B. Students need to become their own career navigator and be confident upon graduation that they have the navigation skills. Integrated curricula like those I’ve highlighted here achieve that outcome.

    Not all campuses are equipped to develop a work-integrated curriculum independently, meaning the product offered to students may not yet be at the place where it can be positioned in a way that meets the current needs. An ecosystem of partners has developed over the last decade to help and is highlighted at workforce-focused higher ed events such as the Horizons Summit, SXSW EDU and ASU+GSV Summit.

    For example, Riipen connects educators, learners and employers (particularly small businesses) to integrate short-term, paid projects into coursework—including remote work opportunities. Education at Work connects students to résumé-building, paying jobs at top national employers like Intuit and Discover to build durable skills and unlock career pathways within the organization. A strong relationship with your provost or career services office will ensure the marketing team is aware of the “product features” that are evolving on your campus to connect classroom to career.

    Take Action

    • Tell as many individual stories as you can to help students see themselves in your graduates, develop a sense of belonging and trust outcomes achieved by a peer. Tell the types of stories (or empower students/alumni to tell their own) that would be offered as positive anecdotes in social media (e.g., TikTok, Reddit). Recognizing that resources are finite and stories from “someone like me” are nearly always more influential than polished marketing content, social listening bridges the gap to identify and amplify stories students and alumni already share.
    • Include program-level excellence in your brand narrative to more specifically connect curriculum and programming to careers. Support your claims with data (e.g., job placement, salaries, top employers), but don’t rely solely on statistics—always connect the data to stories.
    • Emphasize support structures and peer-to-peer connections such as experiential learning programs, career services opportunities, paid internship support, peer internship mentoring, etc., so students don’t feel like they’re on their own to navigate their career path.

    Source link

  • DEI Orthodoxy Doesn’t Belong in NACE Competencies (opinion)

    DEI Orthodoxy Doesn’t Belong in NACE Competencies (opinion)

    If you’re not a supporter of the progressive DEI agenda, you’re not career ready. That’s one of the messages that the National Association of Colleges and Employers, America’s leading professional association for career placement, is sending to students.

    First established in 1956, NACE boasts a current membership of more than 17,000 dues-paying career services and recruitment professionals. Career counselors and others in higher education often cite NACE’s eight career readiness competencies to help students prepare for the job market and workplace.

    I was planning to use the NACE competencies this semester in a class on how liberal arts education equips students for the professional world and was dismayed to find that partisan criteria had crept into this valuable resource. The list includes—alongside things like teamwork, effective communication and technological proficiency—a competency called Equity & Inclusion. According to NACE, this means that a prospective professional will “engage in anti-oppressive practices that actively challenge the systems, structures, and policies of racism and inequity.”

    If you’re fully career ready, the group says, you will not merely “keep an open mind to diverse ideas and new ways of thinking.” You will also “advocate for inclusion, equitable practices, justice, and empowerment for historically marginalized communities” and will “address systems of privilege that limit opportunities” for members of those communities. In other words, you will subscribe to the view that American society is characterized by systemic racism and will work to break down America’s allegedly racist structure.

    NACE defines “equity” in this light: “Whereas equality means providing the same to all, equity means recognizing that we do not all start from the same place and must acknowledge and make adjustments to imbalances.”

    While these beliefs and attitudes might make someone a good fit at one of a diminishing number of “woke” corporations, they have little to do with career readiness in the ordinary sense of the term. Rather, the language NACE employs in its official materials implies a commitment to an ideological agenda that the organization has mixed into its definition of professional competence. NACE could be teaching students how to navigate the political diversity that characterizes most workplaces. Instead, through its influence in the college career counseling world, it is teaching them that acceptance of progressive orthodoxy on disputed questions of racial justice is a prerequisite for professional employment.

    NACE also does a disservice to students by signaling that workplace political engagement is universally valued by employers. In fact, many companies discourage it, and with good reason. In most work environments, political advocacy is more likely to cause tension and division than it is to foster cooperation and trust.

    As a college teacher and administrator, I’m especially troubled by the fact that NACE is conveying to students that their education should lead them to adopt a certain viewpoint on some of the most contentious political issues. The relationship between equity and equality, for example, is something that should be studied, discussed and debated in college, not taught as authoritative moral and political dogma.

    More generally, the way NACE talks about diversity, equity and inclusion ignores—or perhaps disdains—the political disagreement that is a normal and natural part of life in a democratic society, including the workplace. The organization undermines its professed commitment to open-mindedness when it implies that all open-minded people must be capital-P Progressives on issues such as systemic racism and equitable hiring practices. Like many institutions in recent years, NACE appears to have given in to pressure from activist members and embraced the “antiracist” worldview, sidelining the principles of openness and neutrality that are, or ought to be, hallmarks of professionalism.

    Notably, NACE indicates on its website that its equity and inclusion standard is under review. The organization cites recent “federal Executive Orders and subsequent guidance, as well as court decisions and regulatory changes, [that] may create legal risks that either preclude or discourage campuses and employers from using it.” This is encouraging. Better still would be for NACE to free itself from the ideological commitments that make its materials legally and politically risky in the first place. Let’s hope this venerable organization will get out of the business of DEI advocacy and focus on its core purposes of connecting students with employers and preparing students for professional life.

    Andrew J. Bove is the associate director for academic advising in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at Villanova University.

    Source link

  • Total NSF, NIH Funding Didn’t Plunge in Fiscal 2025

    Total NSF, NIH Funding Didn’t Plunge in Fiscal 2025

    An analysis found that NSF grant funding remained about level in the recently ended fiscal year.

    The National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health doled out about as much total grant funding in the recently ended fiscal year as they did the year before, despite the Trump administration’s “unprecedented” earlier slowdown of federal science funding, Science reported Wednesday.

    According to the journal’s analysis, “NSF committed approximately $8.17 billion to grants, fellowships, and other funding mechanisms in the 2025 fiscal year”—which ended Sept. 30—“about the same as in 2024.” It found that NIH spending also remained level.

    But both federal research funding agencies still reduced the number of new grants they awarded, Science reported. It wrote that NSF funded about 8,800 new research project grants, down from 11,000 in 2024, adding that an anonymous NSF staffer said this “was one of several changes designed to reduce the agency’s future financial obligations, in case Trump’s proposed budget cut is realized.” The analysis also found that the agency reduced from 2,600 to 1,100 “the number of new continuing grants, and ‘forward funded’ a number of existing continuing grants.”

    NSF declined to confirm or deny Science’s figures. NIH spokespeople didn’t return Inside Higher Ed’s requests for comment Thursday.

    Congress has yet to decide how much to fund NSF in the current fiscal year; most of the federal government is currently funded by a continuing resolution that expires Jan. 30, and the government could shut down again if lawmakers don’t pass appropriations bills by then. But Republicans from both chambers have indicated they don’t plan to cut $5 billion from NSF, as Trump has requested; in July, Senate appropriators put forth a cut of only $16 million, while the suggestion in the House was to slash the NSF budget by $2 billion.

    Source link