Tag: Higher

  • Scholar warns of chilling speech in higher ed after NYU canceled her presentation

    Scholar warns of chilling speech in higher ed after NYU canceled her presentation

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

    A prominent public health scholar warned of self-censorship and the chilling of free speech in higher education after New York University administrators in March abruptly canceled her presentation over what she described as concerns that certain material could be perceived as antisemitic and anti-government. 

    Joanne Liu — a physician, professor at McGill University and former head of the international humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders — said in an op-ed with French newspaper Le Devoir that she had been invited to speak at NYU nearly a year ago on challenges in humanitarian work. 

    Before the presentation, and after Liu uploaded it to a university platform, a representative at the private university’s health unit reached out to her with concerns from leadership, Liu said in recent media interviews. 

    Those concerns centered largely on a slide containing a table from the Aid Worker Security Database showing heavy casualties among humanitarian workers in Gaza amid Israel’s ongoing war with Hamas. The administrator shared concerns with Liu that the slide could be viewed as antisemitic, Liu said in her op-ed and media interviews. 

    Statistics from the database show 163 aid worker fatalities in Gaza in 2023, more than in all other global conflicts combined. The deaths were largely caused by airstrikes, according to AWSD. 

    In her account, Liu, who completed a medical fellowship at NYU in 1996, was told that the leadership didn’t understand why she discussed only the victims in Gaza.

    Those leaders at NYU also raised issues with other slides referencing the Trump administration’s cuts to international aid, as well as a photo included in the presentation of President Donald Trump’s heated Oval Office meeting in February with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, according to Liu. Administrators worried those might be considered anti-government, Liu said. 

    Liu offered to remove or alter the slides, ultimately offering to take out material that prompted concerns but leave a general slide about humanitarian war casualties. 

    “As long as I can keep the key, overarching message, I am fine. I can manage that,” Liu recalled in an interview Tuesday with the progressive media outlet Democracy Now! 

    Hours later, the NYU administrator informed Liu her presentation was canceled. 

    “I was stunned,” Liu told Democracy Now!, adding that her colleagues had expressed excitement over her talk ahead of it. 

    In her Le Devoir op-ed, Liu pointed to the Trump administration’s move to cancel $400 million in research grants and contracts at Columbia University on allegations that it allowed antisemitism to spread on campus, which led to major concessions by the Ivy League institution to the administration. Liu also pointed to other universities that the government has targeted.

    In a Saturday interview with Canada’s CTV News, she noted a sense of vulnerability and fear among universities. “They are so scared that something could happen to their funds that they preventively over-self-censor themselves,” she said.

    She discussed similar themes of chilled speech in the Trump era with Democracy Now! 

    “I truly and strongly believe that universities are the temple of knowledge, but, as well, of plurality of ideas,” she said. “And if we do not allow that, we are basically killing the essence of what university is about.”

    A spokesperson for NYU’s health unit did not respond to Higher Ed Dive’s questions about who made the final decision to cancel Liu’s presentation or the reasons behind it. 

    “Guest speakers at our institution are given clear guidelines at the outset,” the spokesperson said. “Per our policy we cannot host speakers who don’t comply. In this case we did fully compensate this guest for her travel and time.”

    Source link

  • Researchers, Higher Ed Union Fight NIH Grant Terminations

    Researchers, Higher Ed Union Fight NIH Grant Terminations

    Brittany Charlton (right), a plaintiff in the lawsuit and founding director of the LGBTQ Health Center of Excellence at Harvard University, has lost multiple NIH grants amid the Trump administration’s ideological overhaul of the agency.

    Suzanne Kreiter/The Boston Globe/Getty Images

    Individual university researchers, a public health advocacy organization and a union representing more than 120,000 higher education workers are suing the National Institutes of Health after the agency terminated more than $2.4 billion in grants it claims support “non-scientific” projects that “no longer” effectuate agency priorities.

    “Plaintiffs and their members are facing the loss of jobs, staff, and income. Patients enrolled in NIH studies led by Plaintiffs face abrupt cancellations of treatment in which they have invested months of time with no explanation or plan for how to mitigate the harm,” according to a complaint of the lawsuit filed Wednesday afternoon. “As a result of Defendants’ Directives scientific advancement will be delayed, treatments will go undiscovered, human health will be compromised, and lives will be lost.”

    It’s the latest in a mounting series of legal challenges against the Trump administration’s blitz of executive actions aimed at rooting out so-called gender ideology; diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives; and alleged waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer funds. Some of those lawsuits have already resulted in federal judges ordering injunctions and restoration of canceled grants.

    But this is one of the first to directly challenge the NIH’s grant cancellations; more legal challenges are expected.

    The lawsuit was filed by the American Public Health Association; the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers and NIH-funded medical researchers from Harvard University; the Universities of Michigan and New Mexico; and the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which have all lost their grants. The American Civil Liberties Union is representing the plaintiffs.

    A NIH spokesperson said that the agency doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

    ‘Erosion of Scientific Freedom’

    The plaintiffs want the Massachusetts district court to declare the actions of the NIH “unlawful,” restore funding for at least the plaintiffs’ terminated grants and prevent the agency “from terminating any grants based on allegedly no longer effectuating agency priorities, or withholding review of applications.”

    The majority of the terminated grants focused on topics related to vaccine hesitancy, climate change, diversifying the biomedical research workforce, “countries of concern” (including China and South Africa), and the health of women, racial minorities and members of the LGBTQ+ community, according to the lawsuit.

    One of the plaintiffs, Brittany Charlton, who is the founding director of Harvard University’s LGBTQ Health Center of Excellence, has had five NIH grants terminated since President Donald Trump took office in January and launched a crusade to root out so-called gender ideology and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

    Charlton said in an email to Inside Higher Ed that she’s lost nearly $6 million in NIH grants as a result of the agency’s directives, signifying “a potential end to my academic career.”

    But her motivation for signing on to the lawsuit extends beyond concern for her own livelihood.

    “This isn’t just a fight for my professional survival but a stand against the erosion of scientific freedom,” Charlton said. “[The grant cancellations set] a worrying precedent where scientific inquiry becomes vulnerable to political rhetoric. The concern here is not merely academic; it affects the very foundation of public health policy and the health of vulnerable communities.”

    Another plaintiff, Katie Edwards, a social work professor at the University of Michigan who researches violence prevention in minority communities, has had six NIH grants pulled this year. And a third plaintiff, Nicole Maphis, a first-generation college student and postdoctoral fellow at the University of New Mexico’s School of Medicine who researches the link between alcohol use and Alzheimer’s, is no longer in consideration for an NIH grant designed to help underrepresented researchers become faculty members.

    ‘Arbitrary and Capricious’

    The lawsuit argues that NIH didn’t have the authority to cancel those or any of the other grants the agency claims no longer effectuate agency priorities. That’s because the “no longer effectuates agency priorities” regulatory language the NIH has cited to justify its termination of particular grants won’t go into effect until October.

    Additionally, canceling the grants disregards “Congress’s express mandate that NIH fund research to address health equity and health disparities, include diverse populations in its studies, improve efforts to study the health of gender and sexual minorities, and enhance diversity in the bio-medical research profession,” according to the complaint.

    The lawsuit also says that the government violated numerous aspects of the Administrative Procedure Act—including a provision prohibiting agency action considered “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law”—when it terminated the grants. It further asserts that the agency usurped Congress’s “exclusive power over federal spending” and violated the Fifth Amendment by offering “vague” justifications for terminating grants, including involvement with “transgender issues,” “DEI” or “amorphous equity objectives.”

    “Defendants have failed to develop any guidelines, definitions, or explanations to avoid arbitrary and capricious decision-making in determining the parameters of the agency’s prohibitions against research with some connection to DEI, gender, and other topics that fail Defendants’ ideological conformity screen,” the suit alleges.

    That leaves grantees “unsure, for example, which areas of study they can pursue, which populations they can focus on as study subjects, what they might argue to appeal grant terminations, and what the demographics of study participants must be” and “makes it impossible to determine how to reconfigure future research to stay within the bounds of NIH’s newest ‘priorities.’”

    Source link

  • Do More with Less: 7 Strategic Advantages of Shared Services in Higher Education

    Do More with Less: 7 Strategic Advantages of Shared Services in Higher Education

    College administrators wear many hats to ensure their institutions thrive. Stakeholders expect them to be visionaries, budget stewards, tech experts, and student champions. However, wearing too many hats can hinder the ability to meet more strategic and forward-thinking institutional demands, effectively diluting leadership capacity and outcomes. 

    How can administrators remove some of those hats without losing control or spending more? 

    How can they guide their institutions to achieve better outcomes with fewer resources?  

    At the 2024 Collegis Education Summit, keynote speaker Dr. John Smith-Coppes, president of Joyce University, shared his advice for achieving higher ed excellence amid market paradigms, shifting learner expectations, and capacity constraints.

    “Embrace your institutional superpower and then partner for expertise. You have to know what you are really good at, but also where you might need help. Having the bravery to objectively look at the brutal facts can take you from good to great. Keep this in mind: Your institution is perfectly designed to get the outcomes it’s getting.”

    -Dr. John Smith-Coppes, President of Joyce University

    Dr. Smith-Coppes is right. If you’re not getting the results you want, you have to shine a light on the operation and consider what adjustments or changes will better position your institution for desired outcomes.

    To echo Dr. Smith-Coppes and answer the earlier questions, working with a strategic partner who has deep expertise in higher education shared services and can manage certain responsibilities more efficiently can get your institution closer to turning aspiration into reality. A true partnership is not about simply outsourcing tasks. Rather, it’s a strategic way to gain access to specialized knowledge, proven methodologies, and scalable resources, all while enabling administrators to focus on their core areas of expertise.

    Mounting challenges facing higher ed leaders

    When I talk to administrators, the conversation inevitably turns to the challenge of doing more with less. They consistently grapple with four key issues:

    • Budget Cuts: Funding is uncertain or shrinking, forcing them to rethink the allocation of resources.
    • Advancing Technology: Technology is rapidly evolving, leaving administrators to scramble after the next advancement or emerging capability.
    • Socioeconomic Pressures: With some questioning the value of postsecondary education, relevant programs with affordable tuition have never been more critical.
    • Employee Turnover: Retaining top talent is difficult, leaving critical gaps.

    But none of these issues surprise us. On the contrary, Collegis Education has partnered with numerous public and private institutions of varying sizes and levels of brand recognition to address these challenges, uncovering advantageous pathways toward more sustainable and fruitful operations.

    The results speak for themselves. Administrators gain more time to leverage their core strengths to elevate their institution’s mission and educational outcomes while actualizing a variety of clear benefits. Here is what Collegis Education continues to deliver for our shared-service partners.

    Seven ways shared services in higher education deliver results

    Institutions that leverage shared services experience benefits in a variety of key areas. Explore some of the most significant advantages:

    1. Improved financial stability

    Predictability and optimization are the key words here. With our solutions for technology management, enrollment management, and student services, institutions know exactly what to budget every year. At the same time, we find cost savings by getting a better return on technology investments, strategically decommissioning redundancies, and renegotiating contracts.

    2. Enhanced operational efficiency

    Is there a better way to reach an institution’s goals more efficiently? More often than not, the answer is yes. We help bring these opportunities to the surface by fully assessing the school’s infrastructure, technology, processes, and other operating procedures. This assessment denotes areas of excellence and points of failure as well as identifies where lag or waste exists. With these insights, we can identify and prioritize emerging opportunities to drive improvement. All this informs a multiyear roadmap that guides higher ed leaders on how to thoughtfully implement changes that engage key stakeholders to accelerate the change management cycle.

    3. Objective perspective & best practices

    We bring a unique perspective to our recommendations based on our work with other schools while protecting each school’s anonymity and uniqueness. This helps give you a baseline of how your school performs when compared to similar ones. Are you leading or lagging? As an unbiased third party, we offer fresh ideas backed by the knowledge of the results they have produced. It’s a great way to eliminate the “but this is how we’ve always done it” objection and gain buy-in from internal staff.

    4. Risk mitigation & accountability

    There’s rarely a higher ed situation we haven’t already dealt with at another institution. Our partners benefit from this experience, allowing them to proactively avoid operational and technical risks. They also benefit tremendously from having a partner who holds themselves accountable to quantifiable outcomes measured by agreed-upon service level agreements (SLAs). Together, these provide a lot of peace of mind when it comes to issues like cybersecurity, compliance, disaster recovery, and business continuity.

    5. Specialized expertise without the overhead

    Hiring and retaining experienced staff is challenging enough. Finding people with skill sets to leverage evolving technology capabilities like artificial intelligence (AI) is a whole other story. That’s why our partners rely on Collegis to provide the expertise that’s hard to find. We’re software-agnostic and implement solutions that are in the school’s best interest from a financial, operational, and strategic perspective without the need for full-time employees to manage them.

    6. Data-enabled decision making with full transparency

    Data at most institutions is stored in siloes, with limited stewardship and governance over its quality and consistency. However, many of the “data” solutions in the market today are complicated and difficult to implement and support.

    This is why we built Connected Core, a scalable higher education industry cloud solution that integrates siloed data sets, systems, and applications to enable institutional intelligence. This proven approach and methodology for collecting, connecting, and activating institutional data eliminates data doubt and gives leaders the confidence to make quickly make strategic decisions with confidence.

    7. Focus on core mission & educational outcomes

    By outsourcing some functions, administrators can redirect resources and energy to what truly matters: student success. By reducing the number of hats they wear, leaders can instead focus on using the tools they have on hand to manage strategic initiatives that drive institutional growth.

    Strategic delegation to yield better outcomes

    Some leaders fear losing control through outsourcing, and rightfully so. Too many vendors tout “partnership” when, in fact, they are trying to build an unhealthy dependency that is not mutually beneficial.

    That’s just not us. It fundamentally goes against our values and who we are as a company.

    Our partnerships are built on collaboration and shared governance. Institutions set priorities, and all actions follow clear assessments, implementation plans, and progress reviews. Our partners gain greater control over technology, enrollment, and budgets. Control isn’t lost, but visibility and accountability are gained.

    Shared-services models allow administrators to confidently offload specific responsibilities. Leveraging external expertise amplifies your internal strengths and empowers your leaders to focus on building and maintaining a thriving campus community.

    But the first step is starting the conversation with the right partner.

    Innovation Starts Here

    Higher ed is evolving — don’t get left behind. Explore how Collegis can help your institution thrive.

    Source link

  • Will GenAI narrow or widen the digital divide in higher education?

    Will GenAI narrow or widen the digital divide in higher education?

    by Lei Fang and Xue Zhou

    This blog is based on our recent publication: Zhou, X, Fang, L, & Rajaram, K (2025) ‘Exploring the digital divide among students of diverse demographic backgrounds: a survey of UK undergraduates’ Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 8(1).

    Introduction – the widening digital divide

    Our recent study (Zhou et al, 2025) surveyed 595 undergraduate students across the UK to examine the evolving digital divide across all forms of digital technologies. Although higher education is expected to narrow this divide and build students’ digital confidence, our findings revealed the opposite. We found that the gap in digital confidence and skills between widening participation (WP) and non-WP students widened progressively throughout the undergraduate journey. While students reported peak confidence in Year 2, this was followed by a notable decline in Year 3, when the digital divide became most pronounced. This drop coincides with a critical period when students begin applying their digital skills in real-world contexts, such as job applications and final-year projects.

    Based on our study (Zhou et al, 2025), while universities offer a wide range of support such as laptop loans, free access to remote systems, extracurricular digital skills training, and targeted funding to WP students, WP students often do not make use of these resources. The core issue lies not in the absence of support, but in its uptake. WP students are often excluded from the peer networks and digital communities where emerging technologies are introduced, shared, and discussed. From a Connectivist perspective (Siemens, 2005), this lack of connection to digital, social, and institutional networks limits their awareness, confidence, and ability to engage meaningfully with available digital tools.

    Building on these findings, this blog asks a timely question: as Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) becomes embedded in higher education, will it help bridge this divide or deepen it further?

    GenAI may widen the digital divide — without proper strategies

    While the digital divide in higher education is already well-documented in relation to general technologies, the emergence of GenAI introduces new risks that may further widen this gap (Cachat-Rosset & Klarsfeld, 2023). This matters because students who are GenAI-literate often experience better academic performance (Sun & Zhou, 2024), making the divide not just about access but also about academic outcomes.

    Unlike traditional digital tools, GenAI often demands more advanced infrastructure — including powerful devices, high-speed internet, and in many cases, paid subscriptions to unlock full functionality. WP students, who already face barriers to accessing basic digital infrastructure, are likely to be disproportionately excluded. This divide is not only student-level but also institutional. A few well-funded universities are able to subscribe to GenAI platforms such as ChatGPT, invest in specialised GenAI tools, and secure campus-wide licenses. In contrast, many institutions, particularly those under financial pressure, cannot afford such investments. These disparities risk creating a new cross-sector digital divide, where students’ access to emerging technologies depends not only on their background, but also on the resources of the university they attend.

    In addition, the adoption of GenAI currently occurs primarily through informal channels via peers, online communities, or individual experimentation rather than structured teaching (Shailendra et al, 2024). WP students, who may lack access to these digital and social learning networks (Krstić et al, 2021), are therefore less likely to become aware of new GenAI tools, let alone develop the confidence and skills to use them effectively. Even when they do engage with GenAI, students may experience uncertainty, confusion, or fear about using it appropriately especially in the absence of clear guidance around academic integrity, ethical use, or institutional policy. This ambiguity can lead to increased anxiety and stress, contributing to wider concerns around mental health in GenAI learning environments.

    Another concern is the risk of impersonal learning environments (Berei & Pusztai, 2022). When GenAI are implemented without inclusive design, the experience can feel detached and isolating, particularly for WP students, who often already feel marginalised. While GenAI tools may streamline administrative and learning processes, they can also weaken the sense of connection and belonging that is essential for student engagement and success.

    GenAI can narrow the divide — with the right strategies

    Although WP students are often excluded from digital networks, which Connectivism highlights as essential for learning (Goldie, 2016), GenAI, if used thoughtfully, can help reconnect them by offering personalised support, reducing geographic barriers, and expanding access to educational resources.

    To achieve this, we propose five key strategies:

    • Invest in infrastructure and access: Universities must ensure that all students have the tools to participate in the AI-enabled classroom including access to devices, core software, and free versions of widely used GenAI platforms. While there is a growing variety of GenAI tools on the market, institutions facing financial pressures must prioritise tools that are both widely used and demonstrably effective. The goal is not to adopt everything, but to ensure that all students have equitable access to the essentials.
    • Rethink training with inclusion in mind: GenAI literacy training must go beyond traditional models. It should reflect Equality, Diversity and Inclusion principles recognising the different starting points students bring and offering flexible, practical formats. Micro-credentials on platforms like LinkedIn Learning or university-branded short courses can provide just-in-time, accessible learning opportunities. These resources are available anytime and from anywhere, enabling students who were previously excluded such as those in rural or under-resourced areas to access learning on their own terms.
    • Build digital communities and peer networks: Social connection is a key enabler of learning (Siemens, 2005). Institutions should foster GenAI learning communities where students can exchange ideas, offer peer support, and normalise experimentation. Mental readiness is just as important as technical skill and being part of a supportive network can reduce anxiety and stigma around GenAI use.
    • Design inclusive GenAI policies and ensure ongoing evaluation: Institutions must establish clear, inclusive policies around GenAI use that balance innovation with ethics (Schofield & Zhang, 2024). These policies should be communicated transparently and reviewed regularly, informed by diverse student feedback and ongoing evaluation of impact.
    • Adopt a human-centred approach to GenAI integration: Following UNESCO’s human-centred approach to AI in education (UNESCO, 2024; 2025), GenAI should be used to enhance, not replace the human elements of teaching and learning. While GenAI can support personalisation and reduce administrative burdens, the presence of academic and pastoral staff remains essential. By freeing staff from routine tasks, GenAI can enable them to focus more fully on this high-impact, relational work, such as mentoring, guidance, and personalised support that WP students often benefit from most.

    Conclusion

    Generative AI alone will not determine the future of equity in higher education, our actions will. Without intentional, inclusive strategies, GenAI risks amplifying existing digital inequalities, further disadvantaging WP students. However, by proactively addressing access barriers, delivering inclusive and flexible training, building supportive digital communities, embedding ethical policies, and preserving meaningful human interaction, GenAI can become a powerful tool for inclusion. The digital divide doesn’t close itself; institutions must embed equity into every stage of GenAI adoption. The time to act is not once systems are already in place, it is now.

    Dr Lei Fang is a Senior Lecturer in Digital Transformation at Queen Mary University of London. Her research interests include AI literacy, digital technology adoption, the application of AI in higher education, and risk management. [email protected]

    Professor Xue Zhou is a Professor in AI in Business Education at the University of Leicester. Her research interests fall in the areas of digital literacy, digital technology adoption, cross-cultural adjustment and online professionalism. [email protected]

    Author: SRHE News Blog

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

    Source link

  • March Brought Another Round of Job and Program Cuts

    March Brought Another Round of Job and Program Cuts

    March brought layoffs, buyouts and the elimination of multiple academic programs as universities sought to plug budget holes wrought by sector challenges and state budget issues.

    While many universities have announced hiring freezes and other moves due to the uncertainty of federal funding under Trump, the cuts below are not directly tied to the administration’s efforts to slash budgets and shrink the government. Instead, they are linked largely to dwindling enrollment or the loss of state funding.

    University of Dayton

    Officials at the private, Catholic research institution in Ohio announced cuts last month that affect 65 employees; 45 faculty members will not have their contracts renewed and 20 staff positions have been eliminated, The Dayton Daily News reported.

    Affected employees will reportedly be offered severance packages.

    Total cuts are projected to save the university $25 million over three years, the newspaper reported. Officials at the university said the moves were “focused on financial sustainability,” noting that while Dayton does not currently have a budget deficit, the change better positions it for the future.

    Wagner College

    The private liberal arts college in New York is looking to phase out as many as 21 programs in an effort to reverse recent enrollment declines, The Staten Island Advance reported.

    The changes reportedly could affect up to 40 full-time faculty members.

    Less popular academic programs—including anthropology, chemistry, English, history, math, modern languages, sociology, philosophy and physics—are among those that may be wound down. Officials told the newspaper that the process will be completed over the next 12 to 18 months.

    Kent State University

    Up to 30 administrative positions and nine majors are being eliminated at the public university in Ohio as part of a phased academic realignment that was approved by the board last month, WKYC reported. Kent State will also shrink the number of academic colleges from 10 to nine.

    The changes are part of a phased plan to be completed in 2028.

    The plans cites two goals: “First to strengthen academic affairs by reorganizing and realigning our academic units so that we are more cost efficient and therefore sustainable, and second, to ensure that we are providing the most in-demand, up-to-date and relevant academic programs and services for our learners,” executive vice president and provost Melody Tankersley said in an announcement last month following approval of the restructuring plan by Kent State’s board.

    Lakeland Community College

    Facing a $2 million budget deficit, the public two-year college in Ohio is laying off 10 faculty members and not replacing 14 professors set to retire, Ideastream Public Media reported.

    Another eight faculty members who will retire next year will also not be replaced.

    Between the cuts and retirements, Lakeland expects to save $2.3 million this year and another $800,000 next year. It will reinvest $225,000 in three faculty positions in manufacturing, welding and electrical engineering as it prioritizes workforce development.

    Lakeland also plans to close an unspecified number of low-enrollment programs.

    St. Norbert College

    The private, Catholic college in Wisconsin announced plans last month to lay off 27 professors and cut more than a dozen programs to address its budget deficit, Wisconsin Public Radio reported.

    Cuts will shave an estimated $5 million off the $12 million budget deficit. Of the 27 affected faculty members, 21 are set to lose their jobs in May, and the remaining six will be let go in 2026.

    Averett University

    Grappling with financial pressures, the small, private institution in Virginia announced plans last month to eliminate 15 jobs as part of cost-cutting measures, The Chatham Star-Tribune reported.

    Additionally, Cardinal News reported this week that Averett listed its equestrian center for sale.

    The university has navigated steep financial issues since last summer, when officials discovered a financial shortfall brought about by unauthorized withdrawals from the endowment by a former employee. While they said there was no evidence of embezzlement or misuse of the funds, the fiscal mismanagement prompted Averett to take a series of ongoing measures to fix its finances.

    Oklahoma State University

    Fallout continues at Oklahoma State, where the university laid off 12 Innovation Foundation employees after a recent audit uncovered financial missteps there, Oklahoma Voice reported.

    Affected staffers will not receive severance but will remain employed through June 1.

    In February, Oklahoma State president Kayse Shrum stepped down abruptly amid a review of improper transfers of legislatively appropriated funds. An audit later found that $41 million in state appropriations “were not properly restricted and in some instances were co-mingled with other funds” in violation of state laws and policies. In one instance, $11.5 million intended for other programs had been directed without board approval to OSU’s Innovation Foundation instead.

    St. Joseph’s University

    Officials offered buyouts to some faculty and staff last month as the private Jesuit university seeks to close a budget deficit following recent mergers, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

    St. Joseph’s absorbed the University of the Sciences in 2022 and added Pennsylvania College of Health Sciences in 2023, which officials told the newspaper left them with a “small deficit.” President Cheryl McConnell did not specify a dollar figure in an interview with the Inquirer.

    She added that there was no specific target number for buyouts, but when asked about potential layoffs, McConnell said it “depends on the nature of voluntary separation plan results.”

    Utah State University

    Voluntary buyouts are on the table and layoffs could be on the horizon at the public university following $17.3 million in budget cuts from the State Legislature, The Cache Valley Daily reported.

    Those cuts were spread across two years, with the university taking a $12.5 million hit this year. However, USU could restore that money through the state’s strategic reinvestment initiative, which allows universities to regain funding if leaders can identify areas for cuts and shift resources toward strategic initiatives favored by the state.

    Weber State University

    Elsewhere in Utah, Weber State is also grappling with budget issues imposed by the state.

    With anticipated budget cuts of $6.7 million due to the same strategic realignment initiative, Weber State is also offering voluntary separation incentives to employees, Deseret News reported. The university also plans to restructure some academic programs, including the College of Education.

    Budget changes in Utah will also affect the other six state institutions, but not all have made their plans public yet.

    Source link

  • Innovation, Collaboration During Challenging Times

    Innovation, Collaboration During Challenging Times

    I just returned from the UPCEA annual conference held in Denver. A record attendance of some 1,300 administrators, faculty and staff from member institutions gathered to share policies, practices, innovations and knowledge in advancing the mission of higher education in 2025. It was a thriving and exciting environment of energy and enthusiasm in seeking solutions to challenges that confront us today and into the future.

    Recent policy shifts regarding the federal funding of grants provided by the institutes and foundations that support university research were on the minds of most who attended. These topics provided the undercurrent of discussions in many of the sessions. The spirit was one of supporting each other in advancing their initiatives despite the prospect of cuts in federal support. The confluence of the demographic enrollment cliff of college-bound students due to the drop in births during the previous recession of 2007–09 and additional promised cuts in funding from federal and many state sources created an environment for collaboration on solving shared challenges rivaled only by that of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    A number of the sessions addressed innovations with cost savings, efficiencies and effectiveness gains that can be realized by thoughtfully introducing artificial intelligence into supporting many aspects of the higher education mission. The potential savings are significant if AI can take over duties of positions that become vacant or instances where staff are better utilized by shifting their efforts elsewhere.

    Most Popular

    By fall 2025, readily available AI tools will be able to serve in course development, delivery and assessment:

    • Conceive, design, create online (even self-paced) courses
    • Adapt and update class materials with emerging concepts, societal situations and news context
    • Lead and assess class discussions—stimulate deeper thought and engagement
    • Assess course assignments with personalized recommendations to fill in the gaps in knowledge
    • Provide one-on-one counseling on academic matters and referrals for personal challenges
    • Create a summative assessment of course outcomes and initiate revisions for improvement
    • Generate a deep-thinking report for administrators and committees to consider

    By this fall, readily available AI tools will be able to serve in curriculum development, marketing and student onboarding:

    • Survey specified fields for addition or expansion of degree and certificate programs
    • Recommend detailed curriculum for new programs and suggest tuition/fees
    • Create marketing plans after developing a report on demand and competitors in the program area
    • Develop, track, implement and adapt marketing budget
    • Prepare and support student advising to optimize retention and completion
    • Prepare updated and revised plans for spring 2026

    By fall 2025, develop optimal staff allocation and review process:

    • Assess performance evaluations, recommend additional interviews as appropriate
    • Develop, refine and utilize departmental/college priority list to respond to revenue and enrollment trends for the year
    • Match staff skills with desired outcomes
    • Monitor productivity and accomplishments for each employee
    • Make recommendations for further efficiencies, having AI perform some tasks such as accounting and data analysis previously done by humans
    • Be responsive to employee aspirations and areas of greatest interest
    • Review and prepare updated and revised plans for spring 2026

    These tasks and many more can be accomplished by AI tools that can be acquired at modest costs. Of course, they must be carefully reviewed by human administrators to ensure fairness and accuracy are maintained.

    I learned from a number of those attending the UPCEA conference that, in these relatively early stages of AI implementation, many employees harbor fears of AI. Concerns center around human job security. While there are many tasks that AI can more efficiently and effectively perform than humans, most current jobs include aspects that are best performed by humans. So, in most cases, the use of AI will be in a role of augmentation of human work to make it more expedient and save time for other new tasks the human employees can best perform.

    This presents the need for upskilling to enable human staff to make the efficiencies possible by learning to work best with AI. Interestingly, in most cases experts say this will not require computer coding or other such skills. Rather, this will require personnel to understand the capabilities of AI in order to tap these skills to advance the goals of the unit and university. Positions in which humans and AI are coworkers will require excellent communication skills, organizational skills, critical thinking and creative thinking. AI performs well at analytical, synthetical, predictive and creative tasks, among others. It is adept at taking on leadership and managerial roles that recognize the unit and institutional priorities as well as employee preferences and abilities.

    How then can we best prepare our staff for optimizing their working relations with the new AI coworkers? I believe this begins with personal experience with AI tools. We all should become comfortable with conducting basic searches using a variety of chat bots. Learning to compose a proper prompt is the cornerstone of communicating with AI.

    The next step is to use a handful of the readily available deep-research tools to generate a report on a topic that is relevant to the staff member’s work. Compare and contrast those reports for quality, accuracy and the substance of cited material. Perform the research iteratively to improve or refine results. This Medium post offers a good summary of leading deep-research engines and best applications, although it was released in February and may be dated due to the Gemini version 2.5 Pro released on March 26. This new version by Google is topping many of the current ratings charts.

    In sum, we are facing changes of an unprecedented scale with the disruption of long-standing policies, funding sources and a shrinking incoming student pool. Fortunately, these changes are coming at the same time as AI is maturing into a dependable tool that can take on some of the slack that will come from not filling vacancies. However, to meet that need we must begin to provide training to our current and incoming employees to ensure that they can make the most of AI tools we will provide.

    Together, through the collaborative support of UPCEA and other associations, we in higher education will endure these challenges as we did those posed by the COVID pandemic.

    Source link

  • Wellesley Surpasses $100K Sticker Price

    Wellesley Surpasses $100K Sticker Price

    Wellesley College in Massachusetts has become the first U.S. institution to top $100,000 per year.

    Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe/Getty Images

    Wellesley College appears to be the first higher ed institution in the nation to hit the $100,000 annual sticker price.

    The cost to attend the all-women’s college this coming fall will be $100,541, as Boston Business Journal first reported. That includes direct costs of $92,440—which covers undergraduate tuition, housing, fees and meals—plus indirect costs, such as books, personal expenses, travel, transportation, and optional health insurance. Wellesley now appears to be the most expensive college in the country.

    Various other universities have approached the six-figure mark for undergraduate tuition and indirect costs in recent years but managed to remain below it. When Inside Higher Ed explored this issue last year, it appeared that Vanderbilt University might be the first to cross the threshold, with estimated costs for undergraduate students in certain programs, such as engineering, hitting almost $98,000. Others at or over the $90,000 line include the University of Chicago, the University of Southern California, Washington University in St. Louis and Tufts University, and a handful of other highly selective, private institutions.

    Wellesley spokesperson Stacey Schmeidel wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed Tuesday that the college “meets 100% of the calculated need for all students” and is “committed to making a Wellesley education accessible to all.” Additionally, she noted that “loans are eliminated for students with total parent income less than $100,000 and calculated family contribution of less than $28,000. The average indebtedness of our 2023 graduates is $18,500, well below the national average.”

    She added that indirect costs vary by student and “the majority” do not pay sticker price.

    Schmeidel also wrote that more than 50 percent of students decline the optional health insurance, which, at $4,051, is the most expensive item on the list of indirect costs. Of those who do opt in, nearly half receive institutional grants to cover the entire cost, she noted.

    Despite the potential sticker shock, Wellesley’s website plugs an education that is “more affordable than you think.” Wellesley has a financial aid budget of more than $84 million, according to its website.

    That is also the case at many other well-endowed colleges where, regardless of the listed price, most students don’t pay the full amount. Tuition discounting has soared in recent years and remains well over 50 percent across the U.S. A recent study of 325 private nonprofit colleges conducted by the National Association of College and University Business Officers pegged the average tuition discount rate for first-time, full-time students at 56 percent, and 52 percent for all undergraduate students. Both numbers are all-time highs.

    While public concerns about higher education have often focused on college costs, debt and the return on investment, Wellesley and its high-priced peers are outliers in terms of cost. A recent College Board analysis found that in the 2024–25 academic year, the average sticker price was $43,350 for private nonprofit four-year institutions, $30,780 for out-of-state students attending public universities, and $11,610 for in-state students at public universities.

    Bryan Alexander, a senior scholar at Georgetown University who has been writing about college costs nearing the $100,000 mark since 2018, correctly predicted in 2023 that Wellesley would be one of the first institutions to reach six figures by the 2026–27 academic year.

    Asked what he thought about his prediction coming to pass, Alexander responded with multiple questions.

    “Will this pricing make the college more desirable, as a luxury good? Or will it drive away would-be students from sticker shock?” he wrote by email. “How many universities, scared of [the Trump administration], will make such a price hike to raise funds when grants are cut?”

    He also pondered what it might mean for public perception, writing, “Wellesley is a small liberal arts college, but some universities are also playing this pricing game. Will [small liberal arts colleges] become seen as too pricey, or will all of higher ed get tarred with this brush?”

    Source link

  • Cornell Student Who Faced Deportation Leaves the Country

    Cornell Student Who Faced Deportation Leaves the Country

    Momodou Taal, the Cornell University graduate student who said his institution effectively tried to deport him in the fall over his pro-Palestine activism, announced Monday he’s leaving the U.S. of his own accord under threat from the Trump administration.

    “I have lost faith I could walk the streets without being abducted,” Taal wrote on X. He added that “we are facing a government that has no respect for the judiciary or for the rule of the law.”

    On March 15, Taal, his professor and another Cornell Ph.D. student sued President Trump, the Department of Homeland Security and Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem, challenging executive orders that empowered immigration officials to deport noncitizens they deem national security threats. Immigration officers have targeted multiple international students suspected of participating in pro-Palestine protests. Taal is a U.K. and Gambian citizen.

    A few days after he sued, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents visited Taal in what Homeland Security acknowledged “was an attempt to detain him,” he said in a court filing. The State Department had revoked Taal’s visa, according to the lawsuit.

    Now his lawyers have dismissed the case. “Trump did not want me to have my day in court and sent ICE agents to my home,” Taal wrote on X.

    In an email to Inside Higher Ed Tuesday, an unnamed “senior” Homeland Security official called it “a privilege to be granted a visa to live and study” in the U.S.

    “When you advocate for violence and terrorism, that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country,” the official said. “We are pleased to confirm that this Cornell University terrorist sympathizer heeded Secretary Noem’s advice to self-deport.”

    When asked for specifics on when Taal sympathized with terrorism, Homeland Security pointed to where Taal referenced in his Monday post the “Zionist genocide,” and wrote, “Long live the student intifada!” In his post, Taal wrote that the “repression of Palestinian solidarity is now being used to wage a wholesale attack on any form of expression that challenges oppressive and exploitative relations in the US.”

    Taal added, “If you have been led to think that your safety is only guaranteed by state kidnap, repression, deportation, the slaughter of children, and the suppression of the global majority, then let Gaza’s shards of glass be your mirror.”

    Source link

  • U of Washington Research Coordinators, Consultants Unionize

    U of Washington Research Coordinators, Consultants Unionize

    More than 700 University of Washington research coordinators and consultants have unionized, joining already organized research scientists and engineers there to create a bargaining unit more than 2,000 members strong, the union announced.

    UAW 4121 said in a news release Tuesday that research coordinators and consultants are largely health-care professionals focused on research.

    “They are responsible for running clinical trials, liaising with patients and scientists, and ensuring that research results are grounded in rigorous science,” the release said. “Despite the critical role they play at the university, many report job insecurity, a lack of transparency around career advancement and workload, low compensation relative to cost of living, and more as their reasons for forming a union.”

    “The University of Washington recognizes and respects the right of employees to organize,” university spokesperson Victor Balta wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed. “UW values the research coordinators and consultants who help make vital work possible and we look forward to negotiating in good faith their inclusion into the existing UAW 4121 bargaining unit of research scientists and research engineers.”

    Mike Sellars, executive director of Washington State’s Public Employment Relations Commission, said his agency certified the unionization of the research coordinators and consultants Thursday. Nearly 400 employees submitted cards in favor of unionizing. A union spokesperson said cards were collected over the past year.

    Mike Miller, director of UAW Region 6, said in the news release, “As workers and workers rights’ are under assault by the Trump administration, it’s never been more important to have the rights and protections of a union.”

    Source link

  • 15 Must-Have Features of a Cloud Based LMS in Higher Education

    15 Must-Have Features of a Cloud Based LMS in Higher Education

    Higher education in 2025 will be about customized, data-driven, flexible learning opportunities rather than only classrooms and textbooks. These days, a cloud-based LMS system is not a luxury; rather, it is a must for universities trying to keep competitive, increase student involvement, and raise results.

    But among hundreds of sites available, how do you choose the best one? Supported by statistics and meant to enable institutions to flourish, let us explore the 15 must-have characteristics of a modern customisable LMS for universities.

     

    The 15 Must-Have Features for a Higher Education Learning Management System (LMS) in 2025

     

     

    1. Support for blended learning

    There is nowhere hybrid learning is headed. 73% of students, according to studies, would rather combine in-person and online instruction. To provide an immersive, adaptable experience, your LMS should easily combine digital materials with conventional classrooms.

     

    2. Learning with self- pace

    Students pick things up at varying rates. According to the Research Institute of America, a self-paced learning environment allows students to direct their development, therefore enhancing retention between 25 and 60%. Bonus—also Designed in-house tests and checkpoints help pupils stay on target.

     

    3. Tools for collaborative learning

    Better still is learning when done jointly. Especially crucial for Gen Z students, 85% of which favor group projects, peer assessments, and shared workspaces, platforms with these features promote involvement.

     

    4. Accessible mobile-friendly

    A mobile-optimized LMS is absolutely essential given students spend five to six hours every day on smartphones. Make sure students can access materials, turn in homework, and interact with peers—anywhere, at any moment.

     

    5. Evaluations driven by AI

    Why use outdated tasks? Student results are improved by adaptive examinations and performance-based assignments in modern LMSs. Pre-quiz adaptive study increased pass rates by 20%, according to research.

    Adjustive learning enhances academic performance in 59% and student engagement in 36%, according to study. Teachers can better identify knowledge gaps and personalize instruction to individual students by using these new technologies.​

     

    6. Adaptable evaluations

    There is no one-size-fits-all solution here. A strong learning management system should enable you to create customized tests and assignments that highlight each student’s unique advantages and disadvantages.

     

    7. Integration of course schedules

    Ensure professors and students stay on course. By automatically tracking missed lessons, impending tasks, and class progress, integrated schedules eliminate administrative burdens.

     

    8. More complex content administration

    Today’s content can be in many different formats, from YouTube videos to PDFs. There should be a variety of content types supported by your LMS so that teachers can design dynamic, multimedia-rich courses.

     

    9. Messaging boards and discussion notes

    In online courses, fifty-eight percent of students say they feel disconnected. Built-in forums and messaging tools help to build community and enable faculty and student real-time cooperation.

     

    10. Student tracking for development

    Track engaged and non-involved students in a jiffy! Detailed data on material availability, completion rates, and time spent per module let teachers act early to support difficult students.

     

    11. Performance Studies

    Performance goes beyond just marks. Dashboards displaying trends in student progress should be part of a strong LMS, therefore stressing areas needing work and increasing retention rates.

     

    12. Gamification

    Engagement leaps when education feels like a game. Leaderboards, badges, and awards on LMS systems help to increase student involvement by up to 89% hence transforming learning from a passive to an active process.

     

    13. Instantaneous reporting

    Give up searching frantically for information. Crucially for certification and institutional planning, your LMS should create fast, exportable reports on student performance, course progress, and engagement.

     

    14. Complete branding and customizing

    Why then do you look like everyone else? From logos to unique workflows, a top-notch LMS should represent the character of your university thereby guaranteeing a customized experience for staff and students.

     

    15. Distance learning support

    With 74% of students saying they would enroll in online programs even post-pandemic, distance learning support is here to stay. Remote classes are something a modern LMS has to support so that students from wherever may get top-notch instruction.

     

    The Impact of Predictive Analytics on Student Engagement

    Predictive analytics is changing higher education. According to a 2024 EDUCAUSE research, 76% of predictive analytics-using universities said their student results have improved Using data insights—tracking behavior, engagement, and performance—an LMS helps staff members intervene before students lag behind.

     

    predictive-analytics

     

    How to Choose the Right LMS for Your Institution

    Selecting an LMS goes beyond just filling up boxes. This brief checklist can help you make decisions:

    Scalability: Can your institution help it to flourish?

    Customizability: Does it fit your particular requirements? Customizing

    Integration: Will it flow naturally with your current systems?

    Support: Does the provider give consistent, continuous assistance?

    Analytics: Can it instantly monitor student involvement and performance?

    A cloud-based, customized LMS is about enabling student success rather than only course administration. Your institution can design an interesting, future-ready learning environment with the appropriate features, data insights, and flexibility.

    All set to change your college’s instruction? Start with a platform meant for future success—that of the students.

     

    Future-Ready Learning Begins with the Correct LMS

    Higher education in 2025 is about empowering student success with flexible, data-driven learning opportunities rather than about course management. More than just a platform, the appropriate cloud-based LMS solution transforms engagement, performance, and institutional growth.

    Ready to future-proof your university using a customisable LMS for those that satisfy all the necessary requirements? Discover how Creatrix Campus LMS enables organizations like yours to provide smarter, more connected learning—built for tomorrow, now. Connect with us now!

    Source link