Tag: Heres

  • California Schools Now Offer Free Preschool for 4-Year-Olds. Here’s What They Learn – The 74

    California Schools Now Offer Free Preschool for 4-Year-Olds. Here’s What They Learn – The 74


    Join our zero2eight Substack community for more discussion about the latest news in early care and education. Sign up now.

    Every 4-year-old in California can now go to school for free in their local districts. The new grade is called transitional kindergarten — or TK — and it’s part of the state’s effort to expand universal preschool.

    In 2021, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state legislature moved to expand transitional kindergarten in a $2.7 billion plan so that all 4-year-olds could attend by the 2025-26 school year. (Prior to this, TK was only available for kids who missed the kindergarten age cutoff by a few months). While it’s not mandatory for students to attend, districts must offer them as an alternative to private preschool.

    As a free option, it can save parents a lot of money. Parents also must weigh how sending their kids into a school-based environment compares to a preschool they might already know and like, as well as other needs like all-day care, and how much play their child does.

    One big question we’ve heard: What do kids actually do and learn in a TK classroom? Educators say it’s intended to emphasize play, but what does that mean?

    A social skill students can learn in transitional kindergarten is how to take turns on the playground. (Mariana Dale/LAist)

    To help parents get a better sense of this new grade as they make their decisions, LAist reporters spent the day in three different classrooms across the Southland. Here are five things we saw children do.

    Get used to the structure and routines of school

    For many students, transitional kindergarten is their first introduction to a formal school preschool setting. Crystal Ramirez sent her 4-year-old to TK at Marguerita Elementary School in Alhambra, so he could get used to the rhythm and rigors of school.

    “I didn’t wanna put him straight into kindergarten when he was five, six, so he at least knows a routine, already,” she said. “Now, as soon as he sees that we’re in school, he loves it.”

    TK students, like other elementary school students, follow a schedule: morning bell, recess, lunch, second recess and dismissal. They’re also learning how to listen to instructions or stand in a line. Some are learning to go to the cafeteria for lunch.

    “ I wanna make sure that their first experience in a public school setting is one that is joyful, where they feel loved, where they feel welcomed, where they get to really transition nicely into like the rigor of the school,” said Lauren Bush, a TK teacher at Lucille Smith Elementary in Lawndale.

    Claudia Ralston, a TK teacher at Marguerita Elementary, said it can be hard for young kids to get up early and leave their moms and dads. But seven weeks in, many of her students have learned their routines already. She helps with the morning transitions by turning on soft instrumental music in the classroom, and allowing them free play until they regroup on the mat to discuss the day.

    “They’re four years old. I want them to feel safe at school, know that this is a special place for learning and that they play,” she said.

    Learn how to socialize and communicate

    In TK, social-emotional learning is a big part of the curriculum. That’s a fancy word, but it just means they’re learning how to be in touch with their emotions

    At Price Elementary in Downey, the teacher has her kids give an affirmation: “I am safe. I am kind. I matter. I make good choices. I can do hard things. All of my problems have solutions!” (They also have these sentences on classroom wall signs.)

    The children also learn how to interact with their peers. In some schools, there are no assigned desks so the kids can learn how to share the space.

    “ They’re able to problem solve. They’re able to use communication to get their needs, regulating their emotions. They do better than students who come in without this experience,” said Cristal Moore, principal at Lucille Smith Elementary.

    On the playground, a student named Ava told teacher assistant Lizbeth Orozco that another student pushed her.

    “How did that make you feel?” Orozco asked.

    “Mad!”

    Orozco encouraged Ava to express her feelings to her classmate.

    “ We give them options of how to solve a problem and then they go in and solve it themselves,” Orozco said. “If they need extra help, they always come back and we can help them.”

    Arguing over toys can be a common occurrence in a TK classroom. At Price Elementary in Downey, educators help kids work through a solution. On a recent morning, one 4-year-old used two tongs to pick up paper shapes in a sensory bin, leaving another kid upset.

    “What’s the rule about sharing?” asked Alexandria Pellegrino, a teacher who gives extra support for one TK classroom.

    The boy handed over a tong to his peer. “Thank you so much for being a good friend,” Pellegrino said.

    “[It’s]  about being kind friends and making friends and using our manners. So we do build that foundation at the beginning of the year,” said Samantha Elliot, the classroom’s lead instructor.

    At the end of the day in Alvarez’s Lawndale TK class, she counts up the stars next to each student’s name earned throughout the day — earned for positive behavior like being kind, solving problems, trying something challenging, or showing effort in other ways. Ten stars earns a small prize from the treasure chest.

    “If we don’t get something today are we going to get mad?” Alvarez asked the class.

    “No!” they responded.

    “I’m not going to cry!” one boy piped up, followed by his classmate and a “Me too!” from another student.

    “That’s [a] positive attitude,” Alvarez said. “Because tomorrow you can get more stars!”

    Get exposed to numbers, shapes, letters

    In Elliot’s TK class, students use their own little lightsabers to trace letters in the air.

    “They’re learning the letter, the sound, and then a little action to go with it. They’re wiggling and moving and they’re also learning those letter sounds and they don’t really realize, so it’s incorporating instruction,” she said.

    There’s no mandated curriculum in TK, but instruction is supposed to align with the state’s Preschool/Transitional Kindergarten Learning Foundations. “Kindergarten is basically where the state standards go and kick in. There are standards in TK, but it’s a little bit different,” said Tom Kohout, principal at Marguerita Elementary.

    Students might put playdough into letter molds, or the teacher might pull out toys from a bag that all start with a letter “E.” Kids will play with little plastic toys that connect — or “manipulatives” — that can help them recognize numbers and patterns.

    “It’s play with a purpose,” Ralston said. “They’re just being introduced to the numbers, the colors, writing. But again, we’re not doing worksheets.”

    Build fine motor skills

    Molding pretend cakes with kinetic sand. Connecting small LEGO bricks. Cutting playdough. It might not seem like much, but children this age are still learning how to use their bodies.

    “Tearing paper is really hard and it’s a really amazing fine motor skill for them because the same muscles you use to tear paper are the same muscles that you use to hold a pen or a pencil,” said Lauren Bush, a TK teacher at Lucille Smith Elementary in Lawndale.

    “You see kids playing with dinosaurs. I see kids sorting by color, doing visual, you know, eye hand coordination and visual discrimination. I see them using their fine motor skills,” she said.

    At lunch, kids learn how to open up a milk carton or open a packaged muffin. At PE, they learn to balance on a block or walk in a straight line — learning spatial awareness.

    “They’re learning how to run, stop, things like that and playing because their bodies are so young,” said Principal Kohout.

    Learn independence

    For some kids, it might be the first time where mom and dad aren’t there to help carry their backpacks or help them go to the bathroom. TK is meant to help focus on their independence, though aides can help.

    TK classrooms are also usually set up with play centers, so kids can have the choice to explore on their own.

    “ I want them to be independent, to be able to solve their problems, you know, with assistance,” Ralston said.

    Samantha Elliot, the TK teacher in Downey, says she encourages kids to talk to their teammates first to figure out an activity before going to a teacher.

    “It’s just gaining the confidence and building that independence from basically the start of the school year,” she said.

    Parent Crystal Ramirez has already noticed a change in her 4-year-old this year since starting school. “ [He’s] socializing a little bit more, talking a little bit more, trying to express himself as well.”


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • Managing Change Is a Skill; Here’s How to Teach It (opinion)

    Managing Change Is a Skill; Here’s How to Teach It (opinion)

    In every sector, including higher education, change has become the defining condition of professional life. Budgets shift, opportunities change, teams reorganize and expectations evolve faster than most of us can keep up. Students, postdocs and seasoned professionals alike are being asked to adapt constantly, often without ever being taught how to do it.

    As directors of career centers, our job is to spot the skills tomorrow’s leaders will need and to design ways to help them build those skills now. At the top of that list is the ability to navigate change and to help others do the same. It’s not a “nice-to-have” skill anymore; it’s part of how one leads, collaborates and makes their own work sustainable.

    We’ve been discussing how to help trainees and professional colleagues negotiate change for a long time. Naledi developed the Straight A’s for Change Management framework through National Science Foundation–funded work focused on training biomedical professionals in people management and managing-up skills. Dinuka has used this approach in his own leadership practice and integrated its lessons into his work supporting trainees and professionals. Together, we wanted to share what this looks like in real life.

    What’s often missing in professional skill development isn’t the outcome; it’s the process. The Straight A’s for Change Management framework offers exactly that. Built on four steps—acknowledge and accept, assess, address, and appreciate achievement—it helps people build agency: the capacity to act skillfully even when they can’t control external events.

    Acknowledge and Accept

    Step one is to acknowledge reality and then accept what it means to and for you.

    Many people we work with, from first-year students to senior leaders, stop short of even this first step. They can acknowledge the problem—funding has been cut, hiring has slowed or their people are struggling with change—but they don’t take the harder step of acceptance.

    Acceptance means internalizing that your long-standing plan or approach may no longer be viable and that you will need to adjust your goals or strategies. It can also mean accepting that you might need support or community beyond your institution to help hold this heavy truth. But this is the inflection point where agency begins: not wishing conditions were different, but accepting the need for you to think and act differently, too.

    For a postdoc, acceptance might mean recognizing that a principal investigator’s funding constraints could shorten the timeline of their project. That realization could prompt them to seek alternative support, accelerate a job search or pivot their research scope. For a student, acceptance might mean realizing that since their adviser’s experience is limited to academic careers, they will need to proactively seek additional mentorship to position themselves for biotech careers.

    For Dinuka, acceptance came during a period of leadership transition. The role he had taken on had quietly shifted beneath him—new expectations, new reporting lines and values that no longer aligned with what drew him to the work in the first place. He agonized over whether to stay and adapt or to acknowledge that something essential had changed. The moment he admitted that reality, uncomfortable as it was, he could finally see a path forward. Acceptance meant reclaiming his agency.

    Reflection Prompts:

    • What change in your environment are you resisting acknowledging?
    • What might acceptance make possible that resistance is currently blocking?
    • Who can help you process this shift with honesty and perspective?

    Assess the Change

    Once you’ve acknowledged and accepted a situation, the next step is to assess it strategically. This is where you shift from emotional reaction to analytical clarity.

    A useful tool here is a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats). Ask yourself:

    • Strengths: What are your skills? Where can you leverage them in this situation?
    • Weaknesses: Where are you vulnerable?
    • Opportunities: What new directions might this open?
    • Threats: What could block your goals?

    Answering these questions encourages balance. Some start with weaknesses and threats; others begin with strengths and opportunities. What matters is that you consider all four dimensions.

    It’s also helpful to share your SWOT with a mentor or trusted colleague. Instead of laying out your situation and asking, “What should I do?” you can say, “Here’s how I’m assessing my situation. Can you help me identify what I might be missing?” Tools like a SWOT provide structure for both your reflection and your conversations with those who support you.

    When Dinuka reached this stage, he turned to trusted mentors, colleagues and family members to triangulate perspectives. His SWOT involved asking, what strengths could he draw on if he stayed? Where were the risks if he left? What opportunities might emerge if he stepped away? What threats might come from doing so? Speaking these questions aloud prevented him from getting stuck in his own echo chamber and restored clarity. Assessment gave his uncertainty a shape.

    Reflection Prompts:

    • How fully have you mapped the situation you’re in—emotionally and strategically?
    • Which perspective (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) do you tend to overemphasize or neglect?
    • Who could provide an outside view to help you see what you might be missing (trusted mentors, colleagues, friends or family members)?

    Address the Change

    To address change is to use what you’ve learned to respond skillfully.

    Sometimes it starts by envisioning your best possible outcome six to 12 months out and working backward from there. Other times it means short-term triage, only figuring out the next logical step rather than solving everything at once. That might mean updating your CV, signing up for job boards or reaching out to a mentor.

    One postdoc Naledi worked with wanted to keep his career options open. In response, he began carving out one hour a week to set up informational interviews with alumni in biotech and communication careers, learning which skills were in demand. With that insight, he added a side project that strengthened his technical skills, focused on service and leadership opportunities to communicate science, and kept his network apprised of his progress.

    In Dinuka’s case, addressing the change meant testing what was still possible before making a decision. He clarified expectations with new leadership, re-aligned priorities and gave the situation space to evolve. When it became clear that the trajectory no longer matched his values or goals, he made the intentional choice to step away. That decision, though difficult, came from a place of calm rather than crisis.

    Addressing change when the future is unclear means shifting from awareness to iterative forward motion, using your definition of integrity as your compass.

    Reflection Prompts:

    • What is one small, concrete step you can take this week to move forward?
    • If you imagine the best version of this situation a year from now, what would need to happen between now and then?
    • How can you act with integrity even when you can’t control outcomes?

    Appreciate Achievements

    The final step, often overlooked, is to appreciate achievements. Many wait for a situation to resolve before celebrating. But change often unfolds over a long arc, and there may never be a moment when everything “returns to normal.”

    That means recognizing that even small wins are a big deal. Did you talk to a friend to process your situation? Celebrate. Did you update your CV? Celebrate. Did you gain greater clarity about your direction? Celebrate!

    Shifting from celebrating only outcomes (a publication, a job offer, a raise) to also celebrating progress, milestones and effort helps sustain momentum and motivation.

    When Dinuka finally left that role, he felt grounded. He appreciated the mentors who guided him, the colleagues who supported him and the lessons learned in difficulty. He celebrated not the exit itself, but the growth that came with it. That sense of gratitude transformed what could have been resentment into renewal.

    Appreciating achievements is not self-indulgent; it is strategic. It focuses attention on what you have accomplished despite uncertainty, which builds confidence to keep going.

    Reflection Prompts:

    • What progress have you made in the past month that you haven’t acknowledged?
    • Whom can you thank or recognize for supporting your journey through change?
    • How do you remind yourself that growth often looks like struggle before success?

    Why Straight A’s Matter

    Taken together, the A’s—acknowledge and accept, assess, address and appreciate achievement—form a road map for agency. We may not control personal setbacks, professional disappointments, shifting organizational priorities, unfair practices or political turbulence. But with every new challenge, we can start responding intentionally, identifying where we can still move.

    Our experiences reinforced that agency is learned through practice. The Straight A’s provide both structure and language for something many of us attempt intuitively: turning uncertainty into direction. The framework accepts complexity and teaches us to meet it with clarity and integrity.

    By practicing the Straight A’s, we build the muscles of agency and leadership. If we teach the next generation of leaders these approaches as part of their training and development, they will be prepared to lead skillfully in a world where the only constant is change.

    Naledi Saul is director of the Office of Career and Professional Development at the University of California, San Francisco, She coaches and frequently presents on people management and managing-up skills for higher education and biomedical audiences.

    Dinuka Gunaratne (he/him) has worked across several postsecondary institutions in Canada and the U.S. and is a member of several organizational boards, including Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada, CERIC—Advancing Career Development in Canada, and the leadership team of the Administrators in Graduate and Professional Student Services knowledge community with NASPA: Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education.

    They are both members of the Graduate Career Consortium, an organization that provides an international voice for graduate-level career and professional development leaders.

    Source link

  • The Supreme Court should strike down Colorado’s ban on ‘conversion therapy.’ Here’s why.

    The Supreme Court should strike down Colorado’s ban on ‘conversion therapy.’ Here’s why.

    Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar, a First Amendment challenge to Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy” — that is, counseling intended to change their gender identity or attraction to someone of the same sex. The case has attracted widespread attention because conversion therapy is deeply controversial. But the Court’s decision is poised to have significant consequences far beyond the practice — so to protect free expression, the Court should find the law unconstitutional.  

    That’s because Chiles hinges on one of the central questions in First Amendment jurisprudence: When do words become functionally indistinguishable from conduct? 

    The First Amendment broadly protects speech, including expressive actions like holding a sign or marching in a protest. But conduct — assault, for example, or drunk driving — is fair game for the government to regulate and/or criminalize. When speech is inextricably linked to certain conduct, it may lose First Amendment protection. 

    The classic example is incitement — speech intended to and likely to result in imminent lawless action. Because the words are so closely tied to the immediate crime that’s all but certain to result, incitement isn’t protected by the First Amendment. That’s a high bar to meet, because we Americans value freedom of speech and are rightly wary of government control. 

    In defense of fiery words

    In the wake of political violence, calls to criminalize rhetoric are growing louder. But Brandenburg v. Ohio set the bar — and it’s a high one.


    Read More

    But deciding exactly where to draw the line between speech and conduct can be sharply contested — as in Kaley Chiles’ case. 

    Conversion therapy has a long, painful history. For many years, being anything other than “straight” was socially taboo and widely criminalized; until 1974, homosexuality was listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Attempts to “cure” people of their sexuality or gender identity were widespread and took a variety of forms, including the use of electric shocks or chemicals. Now, groups like the American Psychiatric Association, the American Counseling Association, and the American Medical Association oppose conversion therapy, linking it to negative mental health outcomes and even suicide. And today Colorado is one of 27 states that ban counselors from engaging in conversion therapy with minors. 

    But let’s say some conversion therapy doesn’t include shock treatments, medicine, or any physical conduct. Suppose instead it consists solely of a counselor and a client talking to each other. It would still be prohibited by Colorado’s law, which bans counselors from any practice that “attempts or purports to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.” And the prohibition includes situations where individuals seek out such advice.

    That’s why Kaley Chiles, a counselor in Colorado, filed a First Amendment challenge to the law in September 2022. Chiles alleged the law prevented her from providing “licensed, ethical, and professional counseling that honors her clients’ autonomy and right to self-determination,” explaining that “speech is the only tool” she uses in her counseling. Consequently, she argued, banning her speech-only counseling violates the First Amendment.

    A federal district court disagreed. Rejecting Chiles’ challenge, the district court held the ban was a “public health law” that “regulates professional conduct rather than speech.” In other words, Chiles’ conversation was more than just talk, but rather treatment, and thus the law’s impact on Chiles’ ability to communicate with clients was “incidental to the professional conduct it regulates.” 

    Talk therapy is speech. And when the government prohibits speech because it doesn’t like the views being expressed, it violates the First Amendment.

    Chiles appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, arguing the district court got it wrong by treating her counseling as “medical treatment” instead of “a client-directed conversation consisting entirely of speech.” But the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court. It concluded that Colorado’s law “does not regulate expression,” but rather “the provision of a therapeutic modality — carried out through use of verbal language — by a licensed practitioner authorized by Colorado to care for patients.” 

    Can a College that Protects Free Speech be ‘Gay-Friendly’?

    There’s no need to sacrifice free speech for a campus to be accepting of LGBT students.


    Read More

    So Chiles sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. She asked the Court to resolve the split between the circuit courts of appeal — with the Ninth and now Tenth Circuits treating conversion therapy bans as permissible regulations of professional speech, and the Eleventh Circuit on the other side. (A 2014 Third Circuit case involving New Jersey’s ban on conversion therapy rejected the “counter-intuitive conclusion” that a counselor’s talk therapy with clients constitutes “conduct.”) 

    At base, Chiles asked the Court to separate regulable conduct from protected speech. The Court agreed to hear her case — and at oral argument last week, the justices focused on exactly that question.

    In response to a question from Justice Jackson, for example, exploring what differentiates Chiles from “a medical professional who has exactly the same goals, exactly the same interests, and would just be prescribing medication for that rather than her talking with the client,” James Campbell, Chiles’ counsel, replied: “Because this involves a conversation,” not conduct. If the “treatment” at issue “consists only of speech, then it doesn’t trigger the speech-incidental-to-conduct doctrine.” 

    Campbell emphasized that Chiles’ therapy is different from medical practices involving conduct, characterizing her interactions with clients as “an ongoing, active dialogue where she’s helping them to explore their goals, and that absolutely has to be protected by the First Amendment.” That’s an important point. And it’s worth emphasizing that Chiles’ clients seek out her help; there’s no deception involved. As Chiles put it in her complaint, she “sits down with her clients and talks to them about their goals, objectives, religious or spiritual beliefs, values, desires, and identity to help them (1) explore and understand their feelings and (2) formulate methods of counseling that will most benefit them.”

    When Justice Kagan and Chief Justice Roberts pressed Campbell on the same point, he readily granted that if Chiles’ practice involved more than talk therapy — “administering drugs, performing procedures, conducting examinations” — the analysis would be different. If Chiles’ speech was “describing how to take the medication,” for example, it would properly be considered incidental to the conduct of prescribing medication. 

    But Colorado’s law regulates Chiles’ speech — and as some justices noted, it does so on the basis of viewpoint. Treating speech differently on the basis of viewpoint is anathema to the First Amendment, which bars the government from placing a thumb on the scale in favor of certain beliefs while punishing others. 

    In an exchange with Shannon Stevenson, Colorado’s solicitor general, Justice Alito argued the law applies unequally, sketching out a hypothetical to illustrate his point: 

    So, in the first situation, an adolescent male comes to a licensed therapist and says he’s attracted to other males, but he feels uneasy and guilty with those feelings, he wants to end or lessen them, and he asks for the therapist’s help in doing so. 

    The other situation is a similar adolescent male comes to a licensed therapist, says he’s attracted to other males, feels uneasy and guilty about those feelings, and he wants the therapist’s help so he will feel comfortable as a gay young man. 

    It seems to me . . . your statute dictates opposite results in those two situations based on the view — based on the viewpoint expressed. One viewpoint is the viewpoint that a minor should be able to obtain talk therapy to overcome same-sex attraction if that’s what he — or he or she wants. And the other is the viewpoint that the minor should not be able to obtain talk therapy to overcome same-sex attraction even if that is what he or she wants.

    “Looks like blatant viewpoint discrimination,” concluded the justice. 

    Justice Kagan echoed Justice Alito’s concern. “If a doctor says, I know you identify as gay and I’m going to help you accept that, and another doctor says, I know you identify as gay and I’m going to help you to change that, and one of those is permissible and the other is not,” she suggested, “that seems like viewpoint discrimination in the way we would normally understand viewpoint discrimination.” 

    Relatedly, Justice Barrett and Justice Gorsuch pressed Stevenson on whether other states could pass a “mirror image” law that, as Justice Gorsuch put it, “prohibits any attempt to affirm changes of gender identity or sexual orientation.” In response to questioning from Justice Gorsuch, Stevenson conceded that under Colorado’s position, a state in the 1970s would not have violated the First Amendment by passing a law prohibiting a “regulated licensed professional from affirming homosexuality.” And Justice Barrett asked whether a state could simply “pick a side” after Stevenson argued Colorado’s law should receive less judicial scrutiny than a hypothetical mirror image law would receive. “Counsel, it’s pretty important that I think about how this would apply to cases down the road,” said Justice Barrett. 

    No gay rights without free expression

    FIRE’s latest rankings show alarming support for censorship among LGBT students. But as Kirchick explains, there would be no LGBT rights without free speech.


    Read More

    Justice Barrett’s focus on the possible ramifications of the Court’s ruling is apt, because Chiles’ case raises an even bigger question than whether bans on conversion therapy are constitutional. It asks the Court to draw a clearer line delineating conduct and speech in the professional context. That’s important, because both Colorado’s law and the lower courts’ rulings blur that line in ways that are ripe for abuse. 

    To be sure, attempts to recast protected speech as punishable conduct are evergreen, and this is not unfamiliar territory for the Supreme Court. Back in 2018, the Court warned that “regulating the content of professionals’ speech ‘pose[s] the inherent risk that the Government seeks not to advance a legitimate regulatory goal, but to suppress unpopular ideas or information.’” And some lower courts have rightly rejected exactly government attempts to do just that. 

    In 2002, for example, the Ninth Circuit blocked enforcement of a federal government policy threatening doctors who discussed medical marijuana with their patients with the loss of the ability to prescribe drugs. As the Ninth Circuit noted, doctors “must be able to speak frankly and openly to patients,” and restrictions on their ability to do so “strike at core First Amendment interests of doctors and patients.” 

    And just two years ago, a federal district court ruled a California law that defined “unprofessional conduct” for doctors to include efforts to “disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19” to be likely unconstitutional. The court found the law’s terms were impermissibly vague — noting, for example, that the state was unable to demonstrate that “‘scientific consensus’ has any established technical meaning.”  

    But if the Supreme Court upholds Colorado’s law, these rulings could be in doubt. A win for Colorado would embolden government actors to impose broad viewpoint-based restrictions on a wide variety of professional speech disguised as regulations on “conduct.”

    Your right to talk freely with your counselor or your doctor shouldn’t depend on what state you’re in.

    That possibility should worry everyone, no matter your views on conversion therapy. As several justices pointed out during oral argument, this government power could just as easily be wielded in ways that proponents of conversion therapy bans would find objectionable. As Reason senior editor Elizabeth Nolan Brown noted, a ruling upholding Colorado’s law would “pave the way for talk therapy restrictions based on conservative views of sexuality and gender, too.” 

    She’s right. It’s too easy to imagine a red-and-blue patchwork of state bans barring counselors from either conversion therapy, on one side, or gender affirmation, on the other. Same for conversations about abortion — or vaccines, or marijuana, or assisted suicide, or any number of culture war flashpoints. But your right to talk freely with your counselor or your doctor shouldn’t depend on what state you’re in. The government shouldn’t be able to rule some subjects out of bounds, impeding professionals’ ability to meet a client’s individual needs. 

    It’s important to remember that new, viewpoint-based laws aren’t necessary for imposing consequences against professionals who harm their clients. That’s what licensure, standards of care, and malpractice suits are for. If a professional in Colorado or California engages in professional misconduct, they may properly be punished.

    But talk therapy is speech. And when the government prohibits speech because it doesn’t like the views being expressed, it violates the First Amendment. The Court should strike down Colorado’s law.

    Source link

  • Graduate apprenticeships are failing to scale in Scotland – here’s why

    Graduate apprenticeships are failing to scale in Scotland – here’s why

    This HEPI blog was authored by Elaine Jackson, Lecturer in Business and Management at the University of the West of Scotland.

    Imagine earning a full salary while studying for your degree, graduating debt-free, and having a guaranteed job at the end. This isn’t fantasy, it’s exactly what graduate apprenticeships offer. Yet these programmes represent just 8% of Scotland’s university intake, despite employers desperately needing skilled workers in the very sectors where apprenticeships thrive.

    The story of what’s possible starts with people like Donna. Through her graduate apprenticeship with a Local Authority, she delivered a project that secured £280,000 in funding and earned recognition as a nominee for the 2025 Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) excellence awards. Her success demonstrates the transformative potential of combining work and study but it also highlights a troubling question: if graduate apprenticeships work so well, why aren’t there more of them?

    Graduate apprenticeships (GAs), also known as Degree Apprenticeships (DAs) in the UK, represent a specific model of work-based learning where the apprentice is an employee who is simultaneously studying for a full undergraduate or master’s degree. These programmes typically last three to six years, with apprentices spending approximately 20% of their time studying and 80% working.

    The scale challenge reveals a deeper problem

    The numbers reveal a stark reality. Since these programmes launched in 2017, only 37,000 Scots have enrolled in Foundation and Graduate Apprenticeships combined across all years combined. To put that in perspective, 16,340 Scottish 18-year-olds accepted traditional university places in just 2024 alone. Graduate apprenticeships are growing alongside regular university degrees, offering an alternative pathway rather than replacing traditional routes, but they’re growing far too slowly.

    This slow growth becomes even more puzzling when we consider the demand. Skills Development Scotland reports that social work faces a 9.3% vacancy rate, while engineering, digital technology, healthcare, and business management show similar patterns of unmet need. These are exactly the sectors where graduate apprenticeships are proving most successful, yet only 1,378 new opportunities are projected for 2024-25 across all Scottish universities.

    So, what would realistic growth look like? Based on current university capacity, documented employer partnerships, and persistent skills shortages, Scotland could reasonably support 2,000-2,500 new apprentices each year, nearly doubling current numbers. This figure accounts for genuine employer capacity to provide meaningful workplace learning, not just any company willing to take on apprentices. It represents growth that the system could absorb without compromising quality.

    But three fundamental barriers prevent this expansion from happening and understanding them reveals why good intentions alone aren’t enough to scale successful programmes.

    Why growth remains elusive: Three critical barriers

    The first barrier is financial, and it’s more complex than simply needing more money. Graduate apprenticeships cost significantly more to deliver than traditional degrees, yet they’re funded as if they were the same thing. Think about how a typical university lecture works: one professor teaches 200 students in a hall, students complete assignments independently, and most learning happens through individual study. Now consider how apprenticeships work: Glasgow Caledonian University provides one-to-one mentoring and three-way liaison between each student, their employer, and university staff throughout the entire programme. Class sizes on these programmes are typically 15-35 students, not 200, and every apprentice needs dedicated support to balance work and study successfully.

    This intensive approach works, apprentices like Donna achieve remarkable outcomes. But it is expensive. Evidence from England’s apprenticeship system shows funding ranges from £1,500 to £27,000 depending on complexity, with degree-level programmes requiring the higher amounts. Yet Scottish universities, already facing a £4,000 to £7,000 funding gap per student, receive the same amount whether they’re delivering a large lecture or providing intensive one-to-one support. This creates a perverse incentive: the better the apprenticeship programme, the more money the university loses.

    The second barrier involves employer readiness, and here Scotland faces a fundamental difference from countries where apprenticeships work at scale. In Germany and Switzerland, companies must meet standardised quality criteria before they can take on apprentices. They need qualified supervisors, structured learning programmes, and formal assessment processes. This ensures every apprentice receives genuine training, not just a work placement.

    Scotland takes a different approach: any employer can participate without meeting specific training standards. While this sounds more flexible, it creates wildly inconsistent experiences. Some employers, like those partnering with the University of the West of Scotland, provide excellent mentoring and career development. Others treat apprentices more like temporary staff, offering limited learning opportunities. This inconsistency doesn’t just harm individual apprentices, it undermines confidence in the entire system, making other employers hesitant to participate and students uncertain about programme quality.

    The third barrier is bureaucratic complexity that would frustrate even the most determined institutions. Universities wanting to create new apprenticeship programmes must navigate approval processes across Skills Development Scotland, degree-awarding bodies, and professional accreditation requirements. The Scottish Funding Council’s guidance spans multiple pages covering compliance requirements across 14 different subject areas. When universities are already struggling financially, investing scarce resources in complex approval processes for programmes that may not even cover their costs becomes increasingly difficult to justify.

    These barriers explain why graduate apprenticeships remain promising but small-scale, despite clear demand from both employers and students. Early evidence suggests positive retention outcomes among graduate apprentice cohorts, though comprehensive longitudinal data is still emerging given the programmes’ recent introduction. This contrasts with broader patterns where Scotland faces challenges retaining skilled graduates, particularly in STEM fields where migration to other regions for career opportunities remains a persistent concern.

    The investment case

    The solutions are straightforward, though not simple to implement. First, funding must reflect delivery reality. Universities need premium funding of 125-135% of standard degree rates to cover the intensive support that makes apprenticeships effective. Given that Scottish universities already receive £2,020 less per student than English institutions, this investment would address both general underfunding and apprenticeship-specific costs.

    Second, Scotland should build employer capacity systematically rather than simply recruiting more participants. This means developing quality standards for workplace learning, supporting successful employers to mentor others, and focusing on sustainable growth rather than rapid expansion that compromises quality.

    Third, approval processes need streamlining. Rather than navigating multiple agencies with overlapping requirements, universities should face consolidated processes that maintain quality while reducing bureaucratic barriers to innovation.

    The investment required, approximately £20-35 million annually to reach 2,000-2,500 starts, is significant but justified. Graduate apprenticeships address multiple policy priorities simultaneously: reducing student debt, developing skills where shortages are most acute, and retaining talent in Scotland rather than losing graduates to other regions.

    Funding viability: A realistic investment in Scotland’s economic future

    The question of funding viability deserves a data-driven response. The proposed £20-35 million annual investment represents just 0.03-0.06% of Scotland’s £59.7 billion public budget—smaller than typical annual budget variations. Scotland already invests £185 million annually in apprenticeships, making this 11-19% increase both modest and strategically targeted.

    A phased expansion demonstrates fiscal responsibility while addressing urgent skills gaps. Starting with £15 million (expanding from 1,200 to 1,500 graduate apprentices), scaling to £25 million by year three (2,000 apprentices), and reaching £35 million by year five (2,500 apprentices) aligns expansion with demonstrated employer capacity while allowing quality oversight.

    This investment timeline is economically viable because Scotland’s economy is projected to achieve 1.7% growth by 2027. Based on Scottish Fiscal Commission projections of economic growth averaging 1.5% over the implementation period, the apprenticeship investment would represent less than 1% of projected economic expansion—a sustainable allocation that directly addresses the 9.3% vacancy rate in social work and similar shortages across engineering and digital sectors.

    International benchmarking supports this scale. England’s apprenticeship system spends £1,500-27,000 per apprentice depending on complexity, with degree-level programmes requiring higher investments. Scotland’s proposed £14,000-20,000 per graduate apprentice (including university premium funding) sits within this proven range while delivering superior outcomes through integrated workplace learning.

    The return on investment is compelling: each graduate apprentice avoids approximately £15,000 in student debt compared to the Scottish average, while earning during their studies and contributing immediately to productivity. Graduate apprentices also avoid the debt burden that affects traditional students, providing a genuine alternative to debt-financed higher education.

    Rather than adopting loan models that would undermine the fundamental “earn while learning” proposition, Scotland should view this as infrastructure investment—comparable to the £150 million being invested in offshore wind manufacturing. Both create sustainable employment, address skills shortages, and position Scotland competitively in growth sectors. Analysis of successful apprenticeship systems consistently shows that sustainable models rely on public investment rather than employer or student financing.

    The choice is strategic, not fiscal. Scotland can afford this investment; the question is whether it can afford not to make it when facing documented skills shortages in sectors critical to economic growth and the net-zero transition.

    Conclusion

    The choice facing Scottish policymakers is ultimately about ambition and fiscal realism. The evidence shows what works, the economic case is compelling, and the investment is demonstrably affordable through phased implementation. Scotland can accept that graduate apprenticeships remain a valuable but limited option, or it can make a modest, strategic investment to unlock their transformative potential for addressing skills shortages and retaining talent. Now it’s time to scale what works.

    Source link

  • Ohio enacted a law to regulate online program managers. Here’s what it does.

    Ohio enacted a law to regulate online program managers. Here’s what it does.

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

    In June, Ohio became the second state to regulate how colleges can use third-party vendors to help launch and operate their online degree programs. 

    Under a new law, both public and private colleges in Ohio must disclose on their websites for their online programs when they are using vendors to help run those offerings. Staff who work for these vendors, known as online program managers, must also identify themselves when talking to students. And it requires colleges to report OPM contracts annually to the state’s higher education chancellor. 

    The law, part of a larger state budget bill, additionally prohibits OPMs from making decisions about or disbursing student financial aid. 

    “Ohio’s law is a step in the right direction,” said Amber Villalobos, a fellow at The Century Foundation, a left-leaning think tank. “It’s great to see transparency laws because students will know who’s running their program, who’s teaching their programs.”

    The new law is the latest sign that states may take on a greater role in regulating OPM contracts, heeding calls by consumer advocates for stronger government oversight. 

    However, Villalobos said Ohio lawmakers could have improved the legislation by barring colleges from entering agreements that give OPMs a cut of tuition revenue for each student they recruit into an online program. Minnesota, the first state to pass a law regulating OPMs in 2024, prohibited its public colleges from striking tuition-share deals with these companies if they provide marketing or recruiting services. 

    U.S. law bars colleges that receive federal funding from giving incentive-based compensation to companies that recruit students into their programs. However, in 2011, federal guidance created an exception for colleges that enter tuition-share agreements with OPMs for recruiting services — but only if they are part of a larger bundle of services, such as curricular design and help with clinical placements. 

    But these deals have led to OPMs using misleading recruitment and marketing practices to enroll students and fill seats, Villalobos said. 

    “When tuition-sharing is used for marketing or recruiting purposes we’ve seen issues like predatory recruitment,” she said. 

    OPMs under scrutiny

    OPMs help colleges quickly set up and market online programs, said Phil Hill, an ed tech consultant. That’s important since launching a successful online program catering to nontraditional working adults can be challenging for colleges that typically enroll 18- to 24-year-olds, Hill said. 

    “It gives them a way to operate in the online space based on what students expect, but do it right away,” Hill said.

    However, OPM contracts have been subject to lawsuits and federal scrutiny in recent years. 

    In Ohio, for instance, legislators passed the new state law following Eastern Gateway Community College’s closure in 2024 after it offered tuition-free online college programs with an OPM. 

    After the college began working with the for-profit company Student Resource Center, its enrollment soared from just 3,182 students in fall 2014 to 45,173 enrollees by the fall 2021, according to federal data. Former employees of the college accused the relationship of turning the college into an education mill, Inside Higher Ed reported at the time. 

    By early 2022, the rapid enrollment growth and the college’s relationship with the Student Resource Center had attracted the attention of the U.S. Department of Education. 

    The federal agency alleged that year that the college’s free college initiative illegally charged students with Pell Grants more than those without. In response, the Education Department placed the college on Heightened Cash Monitoring 2 status, which forced the institution to pay its students’ federal financial aid out of pocket before seeking reimbursement from the agency. 

    In 2023, Eastern Gateway reached a deal with the Education Department to end its free college program. Its board of trustees voted to shutter the institution the following year.

    Source link

  • Is Your Idea Op-Ed Ready? Here’s a Test to Find Out

    Is Your Idea Op-Ed Ready? Here’s a Test to Find Out

    You have expert insights—plenty of them. You give impromptu lectures in office hours, debate podcast guests midrun and readily join boisterous debates over dinner. Maybe you’re even drafting a book that builds a careful case from your expert point of view. But when it comes time to write your own op-ed? That sharp idea can start to feel too complex, too niche or—let’s be honest—too wordy for 800 words aimed at a general audience.

    That’s not a failing; it’s a feature of your training. Academics are trained to distill ideas for their peers, not for nonspecialists. You argue carefully, if not compactly. You cite meticulously, not conversationally. But public writing demands something different—skills to illuminate complex concepts in a way that an intelligent lay reader can follow, feel and act on.

    Before you spend an afternoon translating your expert insight into an 800-word article you pitch to a newspaper or magazine, run your idea through this op-ed readiness test. It won’t replace compelling writing, but it may help determine whether your idea is ready to leave the seminar room and live, persuasively, on the opinion page.

    1. Who cares? It’s a tough question, but not a cynical one. Just because something fascinates you doesn’t mean that it matters to the broader public. That’s not a judgment of your topic. It’s a reminder to find the resonance. What’s at stake beyond your personal experience or corner of the discipline? You don’t have to write about what’s already dominating headlines. In fact, if your idea surfaces something overlooked or offers a fresh lens, it may be exactly what public discourse needs. Urgency is not always about volume; it’s often about insight.

    So ask yourself: Who, beyond academia, might find your idea clarifying, challenging or useful? Who might see their own experience differently—or see someone else’s for the first time? Who, if they read what you have to say, might think differently about something that affects their life, work, vote or values? If your answer is, “Well, maybe more people should care,” you might be onto something. But part of your task is to show them why.

    1. Why now—or why always? Editors love a good news hook. If your idea connects to a breaking story, an upcoming decision or a public debate gaining steam, then run with it. But run fast. In journalism, “timely” means submitting within hours or a day or two, not weeks. If something is happening right now and you have a fresh angle, start writing.

    Of course, not every op-ed needs a news peg. If your idea speaks to an enduring question or a slow-burning issue—and does so with clarity, urgency or surprising insight—it still has a shot. Just know that in an editor’s crowded inbox, a time peg can help your piece stand out. An “evergreen” op-ed may need to work harder and land stronger to compete.

    1. Can you make your case by paragraph two? You don’t have to dumb down your argument, but you do have to speed it up. Public readers and their editors have strong opinions about long, slow windups. Spoiler: They don’t like them.

    Try writing a working headline for your piece that’s under 60 characters. Then distill your argument in one or two crisp, compelling sentences—no acronyms, no jargon and no “hence” or “thus.” (Also, no “as Foucault reminds us.”) These sentences should appear early, ideally by the end of paragraph two. At first, this mandate can feel reductive. But being concise isn’t a betrayal of complexity. It’s a tool for focus. You’re not flattening your idea; you’re making it easy to find. If your piece needs detailed footnotes or a literature review, it’s probably not (yet) an op-ed.

    1. What’s the aha? Your op-ed should offer insight that readers haven’t already heard several times this week. If your takeaway is “what you’ve heard, but with citations,” then it may still need sharpening. Some of the best pieces offer a twist such as an unexpected data point, an odd-but-illuminating comparison or a perspective that flips conventional wisdom on its head. You’re trying to make an intelligent reader think, “I hadn’t thought of that.”
    2. Are you writing to connect—or to impress? You’re not writing to prove you’ve done the reading; you’re writing to help someone else think differently. Your op-ed should feel like an intelligent conversation over coffee, not a cautious explanation in a lecture hall. You don’t have to be breezy or punchy (unless that’s your style), but you should sound like a real person with a distinct voice. This isn’t about being casual for its own sake. It’s about being readable.

    If your draft feels like it could be suitable for peer review, try loosening the syntax. Ask yourself: How would I say this to a smart friend who doesn’t share my training? Readers want active verbs, not hedges. When you write like someone who wants to be understood—not just cited—you don’t dilute your thinking; you make it land.

    1. Will a reader remember it tomorrow? A good op-ed doesn’t just inform, it lingers. It leaves a mark, even a small one, on a reader’s thinking. That might come from a vivid image, a well-turned phrase or a question that unsettles something they thought they knew. If your argument is technically sound but leaves no lasting impression, it’s worth asking: What do I know that will stay with the reader? What might echo later, in a moment of uncertainty, over a dinner-table debate or in a voting booth?

    If your idea for an op-ed makes it through these six questions, chances are it’s ready to leave the seminar room. From there, it’s all about shaping the piece—tightening the structure, sharpening the language and leading with your point. An op-ed doesn’t need to say everything you know on your topic. It just needs to make one point well, in a way that readers will remember.

    Not every idea belongs on the op-ed page—but yours might. Ask the questions, trust your instincts and, when you’re ready, write it, shape it and send it.

    And if you’d like more help along the way, sign up for my monthly newsletter. You’ll get notice of each new article in “The Public Scholar,” plus practical writing tips, behind-the-scenes insights from my work and inspiration from other academics finding their voice in public spaces. Your expertise is hard-won. What might happen if you shared what you know more broadly?

    Susan D’Agostino is a mathematician whose stories have published in The Atlantic, BBC, Scientific American, The Washington Post, Wired, The Financial Times, Quanta and other leading publications. Her next book, How Math Will Save Your Life, will be published by W. W. Norton. Sign up for Susan’s free monthly newsletter here.

    Source link

  • UK universities are trapped in a box. Here’s what that means in practice

    UK universities are trapped in a box. Here’s what that means in practice

    • This guest blog has been kindly written by Professor Diana Beech, Director of the new public policy institute – the Finsbury Institute – and Assistant Vice-President of Policy and Government Affairs at City St George’s, University of London. Diana is one of the two authors of the latest HEPI debate paper (Debate Paper 40) and she writes here about the piece came about…

    Explaining the challenges facing UK universities today is not easy. The pace of change is rapid, the policy pressures are competing and the landscape is shaped by complex interplays between funding, regulation, mounting costs and increasing expectations.

    This makes the job of university governors particularly taxing. Many governors come from other sectors and industries, bringing valuable external experience, but often without a deep knowledge of higher education per se. As an independent governor myself – at the University of Worcester where I am also Vice-Chair of the Board – but with a background and experience in higher education policy, I’ve long felt a responsibility to help my fellow governors across the sector make sense of it all. That’s why I created a visual tool I call the ‘HE Box’.

    The original ‘HE Box’

    At first, the ‘HE Box’ was simple. It was a two-dimensional model created to depict a sector squeezed on all sides. It illustrated the four immediate pressures that were boxing universities in. These comprise:

    • The resource wall: Domestic per-student funding has been declining in real terms across the UK, meaning the money received no longer covers the basic costs of delivery.
    • The cost wall: Institutions are facing rising and often hidden operational costs – some a result of government policy changes, others responding to changing student expectations – but the net result is pressure on already constrained resource.
    • The regulatory floor: Instead of supportive foundations, universities face growing, disproportionate, disjointed – and sometimes even politicised – regulatory demands.
    • The international lid: Changes to visa and immigration terms and post-study work entitlements are threatening the continued flow of overseas students into UK universities.

    Although basic, this 2D box helped me to explain to university governors on my ‘board roadshow’ the main tension that has been growing in the sector of late – namely universities being forced to do more with less, with little relief or flexibility from any direction.

    The moving box

    Over the past year, the ‘HE Box’ has shifted in response to various policy changes. In England, for example, the one-off domestic fee increase granted by the Education Secretary should be offering some financial breathing room for providers from September 2025. Yet, any relief from the announcement was short-lived, with the hike in employers’ National Insurance contributions in April 2025 more than offsetting the gains in the scheduled domestic undergraduate fee rises.

    Similarly, the regulatory floor in England should have also seen some easing last year with the promise to ‘reset’ the Office for Students’ approach to regulation following the House of Lords’ report and Independent Public Bodies Review. Yet this, too, has been recently undercut by the UK Government’s Immigration White Paper, which pledged to reduce the post-study work rights of international graduates from UK universities from two years to 18 months. Gains on one side of the box have therefore been quickly reversed by pressures from another.

    Expanding the box

    Short-term pressures are, however, not the whole picture of the challenges facing UK universities. After presenting my original 2D model to the Council of City St George’s, University of London, shortly before joining in April 2025, Professor André Spicer helped evolve it into a more comprehensive 3D box – adding two more sides of long-term challenges to the ‘HE Box’ based on his own thinking on the sector’s predicament. These two new sides focus on:

    • Demographic shifts: The UK’s domestic 18-year-old population is projected to shrink over the next decade. Meanwhile, key overseas markets like China and India are experiencing major population changes of their own, as a result of declining birth rates or societal shifts related to the education of women.
    • Alternative pathways: From apprenticeships to online micro-credentials, viable alternatives to traditional university degrees are growing fast. In an age of scepticism about value for money and returns on investment, universities must work harder than ever to prove their worth for individuals and for wider society.

    Why the ‘HE Box’ matters

    The six sides of the ‘HE Box’ capture the full range of pressures currently squeezing the sector, both immediate and existential. Our latest report outlines these pressures in more detail and suggests how university governors, senior leadership teams and policymakers, together, can help universities break free from this dire ‘boxed-in’ situation.

    Of course, the sides of the ‘HE Box’ will shift again as policies evolve. But the 3D model as it stands today offers a practical framework to:

    • help new governors quickly grasp the policy landscape;
    • support better decision-making under pressure; and
    • push for a stronger, more strategic relationship between universities and governments right across the UK.

    The challenges for the UK’s higher education sector are real, but their outcomes are not inevitable. With clearer thinking and a shared understanding of the constraints, it is my sincere hope that we can start to find our way out of the ‘HE Box’ together.

    Source link

  • Here’s to 10 years! And many more.

    Here’s to 10 years! And many more.

    As News Decoder celebrates its 10th birthday, the need for young people to appreciate different perspectives and be globally aware is more pressing than ever.

    Source link

  • The reconciliation bill cleared the House. Here’s how it would change higher ed.

    The reconciliation bill cleared the House. Here’s how it would change higher ed.

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

    House Republicans on Thursday narrowly passed a massive tax and spending bill that, if signed into law, would add new financial pressures on U.S. colleges and students while extending the tax cuts instituted in 2017. 

    Backed by President Donald Trump and dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” the proposal includes provisions for dramatically increasing the endowment tax, a risk-sharing policy that would put colleges on the hook for unpaid student loans, and changes to the federal student aid program that critics say would reduce access to higher education. 

    It also includes work requirements to the Medicaid health insurance program, changes to which could impact university hospitals and leave many college students without health insurance.

    The bill is headed to the Senate after it passed the House by one vote, with every Democrat and two Republicans voting against it. Three other Republicans either abstained or did not participate in the vote. 

    The Senate, held by Republicans with a 53-person majority, is widely expected to add changes to the bill.

    Since lawmakers passed the legislation as part of the reconciliation process — a rule allowing the Senate to approve spending-related policies with a simple majority — Republicans can avoid a filibuster that would take 60 votes to break.  

    In a Wednesday letter to House leaders, American Council on Education President Ted Mitchell wrote that the higher ed policy changes would have “a historic and negative impact on the ability of current and future students to access postsecondary education, as well as on colleges and universities striving to carry out their vital educational and research missions.”

    Here is a look at some of the major higher ed provisions:

    Endowment tax

    Today, the richest private colleges — the few dozen with at least 500 students and at least $500,000 endowment assets per student — pay an endowment excise tax set at 1.4%.

    Wednesday’s bill would implement a graduated rate structure, with levels starting at 1.4%, and rising to 7%, 14% and 21% depending on endowment assets per student. Under that tiered system, the wealthiest college would be taxed the same as the current corporate income rate. 

    When House Republicans advanced the endowment tax proposal earlier this month, they decried “woke, elite universities that operate more like major corporations.”

    The lowest tax bracket targets colleges whose endowments are valued between $500,000 and $749,999 per student.

    Endowment taxes would rise to 21% for the nation’s wealthiest private colleges

    Excise tax tiers for private colleges based on endowment funds per student

    Industry experts and insiders worry the tax could hurt colleges’ long-term missions and diminish the resources they rely on to recruit lower-income students. 

    In a statement Thursday, Kara Freeman, president and CEO of the National Association of College and University Business Officers, pointed to research by her organization and Commonfund finding that nearly half of endowment spending went toward student aid in fiscal 2024. 

    “This scholarship tax takes funds away from students and makes it less possible for colleges to support them,” Freeman said. 

    Colleges spend the largest share of endowment funds on student financial aid

    Endowment spending distribution by function in fiscal 2024

    Financial aid changes

    The bill eliminates federal subsidized loans for undergraduates and Direct Plus loans for graduate students beginning on July 1, 2026.

    It also limits Parent Plus Loans, capping how much parents can borrow and only allowing them to take out loans if their dependent student has already taken out the maximum in unsubsidized loans. 

    The bill sets an overall lifetime student loan limit of $200,000 for any single borrower across all federal loan types.

    Additionally, it raises the course hours for the full-time student designation needed to receive the maximum Pell Grant from 24 to 30 per academic year, and it changes the formula for Pell eligibility.

    ACE’s Mitchell called the proposed changes to Pell Grants “crippling,” saying some 700,000 students could lose eligibility under the bill. 

    Regarding changes to federal student funding writ large, Mitchell described them as “deep cuts and damaging changes to important federal student aid programs” that would limit access to education. 

    The bill also cuts several student loan repayment programs, consolidating a “litany” of repayment plans into two, according to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.

    Source link

  • Working-class students feel alienated from their creative arts degrees – here’s how to help

    Working-class students feel alienated from their creative arts degrees – here’s how to help

    Social class inclusivity is a problem in UK higher education.

    Research demonstrates that working-class students report being less likely to apply to university than their middle-class peers – and when working class people do enter higher education they may face discrimination and social exclusion. This is exacerbated in creative arts subjects.

    We interviewed students currently studying creative arts subjects at a Russell Group university to hear more about their experiences of social class inclusivity. Speaking to ten undergraduate and eight postgraduate students studying a range of creative fields including music, drama and film, we found that working-class students find it difficult to attend class, are disadvantaged in terms of accessing the cultural resources needed to succeed on their course, and feel excluded from social life on campus.

    Economic disadvantage presents a considerable barrier to students completing arts subjects at university. To be inclusive, university staff may have to adjust teaching and learning. We would like to make the case for those working in higher education to consider what classed assumptions are made about students in our institutions and accordingly reassess our expectations of those studying the creative arts.

    Many of the disadvantages or challenges that working-class students face are connected to wider structural inequalities that are deeply entrenched in our society. At the same time, there are still meaningful interventions that staff can make to support working-class students. We suggest four ways in which university staff can make their practice more inclusive to working-class students.

    Discuss working-class stories as present and live

    Universities are middle-class spaces. In creative arts subjects, students often make work referring to their class identity. This can be at odds in institutions where middle-class experience is the “norm”.

    Class diversity must be present within teaching. More working-class mentorship and role models would help students to feel like they belonged at university – including visiting working-class creatives. Our participants also advocated for contemporary working-class experience in the curriculum, in academic texts, and in the artworks discussed.

    Staff must maintain a supportive and safe space when discussing issues pertaining to social class. Staff should also recognise that not everyone wants to talk about their background or experience. Additionally, staff must be aware of social class-based stereotyping that might exist in other students’ creative work, and be prepared to intervene when necessary if (often unintended) prejudices around work, class, accent, or lifestyle emerge.

    Adapt teaching to the multiple demands on working-class students’ time

    More and more students are undertaking part-time work alongside their studies. It is difficult to devise our curricula for only those students who can commit all their time to studying, when significant numbers are balancing their studies with multiple part-time, temporary and precarious jobs, or with care responsibilities.

    Working-class and carer students may be commuting considerable distances to engage with their studies. This is creating a two-tier system of engagement, and many of the students we interviewed felt that teaching and learning on their courses was not flexible enough to support their participation. The same issues are present when students try to engage in extracurricular and cultural activities.

    Working-class students asked for more online resources and access to course materials immediately at the start of modules, alongside concerns over early starts and late finishes and travel costs. They wanted permission to speak to staff about part-time work without feeling like they were “doing something wrong” or not taking their studies seriously. The normalisation of working alongside studying is something that staff may have to accept and work with, rather than try to push against.

    Early intervention is important

    The early stages of the student’s degree are a key time when social class difference and disadvantage is felt, with high levels of anxiety around finance and budgeting in comparison to more affluent peers.

    Working-class students asked for the university to provide information to support their transition into economic independence. Examples include advice on budgeting, lists of free resources, inexpensive alternatives and free access to cultural resources.

    Peer support plays a huge role in the transition to higher education. Working-class peer support groups and mentorship are as significant interventions to help.

    Adjust assumptions and reassess expectations

    University staff can make a difference to the experience of working-class students through simple adjustments of the assumptions we make.

    Interviewees believed staff made assumptions about what creative arts students should know, or the kind of experiences they should have had prior to university. These assumptions corresponded with a more middle-class experience, for example knowledge of university life, or access to (and the ability to afford) cultural resources or engagement with extra-curricular activities. Participants were particularly frustrated by assumptions from staff that students could afford to pay for learning resources not available in the library.

    Extra work is also needed to ensure that working-class or other marginalised students feel comfortable and entitled to ask for help from staff.

    Because many students now must work alongside studying, students may have less time to complete their work outside of class. Stronger steers on the amount of time to complete activities and prioritisation of reading, and the removal of blame for those struggling to balance time constraints of working whilst studying can all be effective.

    Working-class creatives

    Class inclusivity means students feel like they belong on their course, alongside having the financial security to take the time and space to study.

    This is particularly important in the creative arts because the more time and space students have to engage with their course or with extracurricular activities like arts societies, the more working-class stories will be represented in the creative work they make. Creative arts subjects must better support working-class students to engage fully with their studies – and not to be disadvantaged by financial pressure, lack of resource, or through feeling like they don’t belong on their course.

    Source link